A monument to SC’s black Confederate soldiers? None fought for the South, experts say

The State ^ | 12/30/18 | Jeff Wilkinson

[DoodleDawg]

Two South Carolina lawmakers want to erect a monument on the State House grounds to African-Americans who served the state as Confederate soldiers. But records show the state never accepted nor recognized armed African-American soldiers during the Civil War.

“In all my years of research, I can say I have seen no documentation of black South Carolina soldiers fighting for the Confederacy,” said Walter Edgar, who for 32 years was director of the University of South Carolina’s Institute for Southern Studies and is author of “South Carolina: A History.”

“In fact, when secession came, the state turned down free (blacks) who wanted to volunteer because they didn’t want armed persons of color,” he said.

Pension records gleaned from the S.C. Department of History and Archives show no black Confederate soldiers received payment for combat service. And of the more than 300 blacks who did receive pensions after they were allowed in 1923, all served as body servants or cooks, the records show.

Confederate law prohibited blacks from bearing arms in the war, records show, until that edict was repealed in 1865 at the very end of the conflict.

That repeal resulted in a handful of African-American units in states such as Virginia and Texas. But there were none in South Carolina, which prohibited African-Americans from carrying guns in the state’s service throughout the war for fear of insurrection, according to the archives.

[DiogenesLamp]

Strange, I cannot find a single sentence in any of those documents that tells the force to attack Charleston.

They say in several places to use force against anyone preventing them from landing the supplies. I think the words "use his entire force" are in there somewhere.

[DoodleDawg]

What is endless is your need to ignore anything that dents your world view of who did what and why.

I've seen none of that in the nonsense you post.

[DoodleDawg]

Whatever was the various Federal tariffs of the Union, 13% is both much lower and much less complicated to deal with, and it would have caused the bulk of import/export traffic to shift to the South.

OK so let me see if I get this straight. Your contention is that had the southern secession been allowed and the Confederacy become independent then all those goods destined for Northern consumers would have gone to Confederate ports because of the lower tariff? Really?

[ml/nj]

I apologize for the previously posted unreadable newspaper images. I have been paying for and using Photobucket for some time now, but they have apparently decided to self-destruct by destroying their service. Those unreadable images come from the same jpgs included below.

I'm not sure why I couldn't find more than this but right now it's enough.

To make things easier for you I have transcribed the parts that I think are important to understanding this Baltimore Plot incident. Your assorted Great Authors either don't have access to microfilm readers or they have dishonestly omitted details which reflect poorly on the Great Leader.

From NYT Feb 25, 1861

The list of names of the conspirators presented a most astonishing array of persons high in Southern confidence, and some whose fame is not confined to this country alone.

Statesmen laid the plan, Bankers endorsed it, and adventurers were to carry into effect. As they understood, Mr. Lincoln was to leave Harrisburg at 9 o'clock this morning by special train, the idea was if possible, to throw the cars from the road at some point where they would rush down a steep embankment and destroy in a moment the lives of all on board.

So authentic was the source from which the information was obtained, that Mr. Lincoln, after counseling with his friends, was compelled to make arrangements which would enable him to subvert the plans of his enemies.

... Mrs. Lincoln, seconded by Mr. Judd and Mr. Lincoln's original informant, insisted upon it and at nine o'clock Mr. Lincoln left on a special train. ... All the town with the exception of Mrs. Lincoln Col. Sumner, Mr. Judd and two reporters, who were sworn to secrecy supposed [Lincoln] to be asleep.

The telegraph wires were put beyond reach of any one who might desire to use them.

[So the conspirators couldn't possibly learn that Honest Abe wasn't on the train that his wife and son continued to ride upon. And guess what ...]

Mrs. Lincoln, while passing through Baltimore, was grossly insulted by a rabble which surrounded the car in which she was seated in company with Mrs. Capt. Hazard, Col. Sumner, Capt. Pope, Judge Davis, and Robert Lincoln.

----------

From NYT Feb 26, 1861

On the special train which left Harrisburgh promptly at nine in the morning were all who had originally composed the Presidential party, with the exception of Mr. Lincoln [and two others].

Mrs. Lincoln did not seem in the best of spirits, partially because she did not wholly approve of the course taken, of which, indeed, she was not entirely cognisant, and partially because she felt anxious concerning the fate of her husband.

...

Dr. Wallace, Mrs Lincoln's brother, who is an elderly amiable personage, with a very heavy gold headed cane, sat moodily by the stove from the early starting of the train, until the running in thereof - alternately congratulating friendly visitors on the probable safety of brother Abraham and querying as to the possible danger that might be connected in some mysterious way with the train on which we rode.

...

Reached the Baltimore depot, showed plainly what undoubtedly would have happened had Mr. Lincoln been of the party. A vast crowd - a multitude, in fact - had gathered in and about the premises. It was evident that they considered the announcement of Mr. Lincoln's presence in Washington a mere ruse, for,, their heads in at the windows, they shouted - :Trot him out," "Let's have him," "Come out, old Abe," "We'll give you hell," "You bloody Black Republicans," - and other equally po?te but more profane ejaculations. Some rude fellows entered the private apartment in which Mrs. Lincoln was sitting [with others]. As the parties composing the suite, and various correspondents, issued from the car, there was an exhibition of rude vulgarity and disregard of personal comfort that I have never seen equaled.

[It goes on.]

NYT Feb 25 1861 p1 follows

NYT Feb 26 1861 p8 follows

ML/NJ

[DiogenesLamp]

I've seen none of that in the nonsense you post.

Which is exactly what I said. You can't let anything dent your world view.

[DoodleDawg]

[So the conspirators couldn't possibly learn that Honest Abe wasn't on the train that his wife and son continued to ride upon. And guess what ...]

Your opinion is noted. However you badly overstate the situation. Yes Lincoln traveled to Baltimore in secret. And from there he went to Washington and the secrecy was off. He had been met at the station and had been seen in public throughout the morning and was known to be in town. The train with Mrs. Lincoln and family did not reach Baltimore until the afternoon of the 23rd, and the Lincoln family got off the train before it reached the Baltimore terminal. At no time was the Lincoln family in any danger, they were not used as "bait" as you seem to be implying, and none of the Lincoln biographers paint as biased picture of the trip as you do.

[Bull Snipe]

the operative words are “use force against anyone preventing the from landing supplies.” That is not an order to attach. If the authorities in Charleston had allowed Fox’s task force to resupply the fort with provisions, they would have sailed away, without firing a shot, that was their orders. Not as you say, fire on Charleston.

[x]

My sources are mostly PRIMARY sources, that is things written by people who witnessed the events.

Newspaper accounts aren't necessarily first-hand or honest. Newspapers were very partisan in those days (and today).

Some modern-day historians do a good job of combing through earlier accounts to see what's true and what isn't.

I feel the same way about current folks like DiLorenzo even though I'm not aware of any errors he might have made.

Well, go here for a start and be enlightened.

[DoodleDawg]

You can't let anything dent your world view.

No chance of that given the quality of your BS.

[Bull Snipe]

only if the Charleston authorities resisted the effort to land food at Fort Sumter.

[DiogenesLamp]

OK so let me see if I get this straight. Your contention is that had the southern secession been allowed and the Confederacy become independent then all those goods destined for Northern consumers would have gone to Confederate ports because of the lower tariff? Really?

Lemmesee. The South produced 200 million per year in export value in 1860, and the North produced something like 78 Million in export value.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that yeah, that 200 million in return import value was going to end up in Southern ports.

But not just because of the tariff. Also because of the elimination of the Navigation act of 1817 which gave the northern shipping industry a near monopoly on all shipping.

It would have made it quite profitable for European ships to carry goods around Southern port cities, and they would have done so.

Even some New Yorkers thought it would be a financial disaster for the North. (Well, for New York anyways.)

That either revenue from these duties must be collected in the ports of the rebel states, or the ports must be closed to importations from abroad. If neither of these things be done, our revenue laws are substantially repealed, the sources which supply our treasury will be dried up. We shall have no money to carry on the government, the nation will become bankrupt before the next crop of corn is ripe....allow railroad iron to be entered at Savannah with the low duty of ten percent which is all that the Southern Confederacy think of laying on imported goods, and not an ounce more would be imported at New York. The Railways would be supplied from the southern ports." New York Evening Post March 12, 1861 article "What Shall be Done for a Revenue?"

[DiogenesLamp]

The machinery and iron would have been cheaper from the United States or from Europe.

There is more here to which I would like to reply, but I have to find all the material to do so effectively. Here is a bit that I found that mentions railroad iron that I thought you should see.

"That either revenue from these duties must be collected in the ports of the rebel states, or the ports must be closed to importations from abroad. If neither of these things be done, our revenue laws are substantially repealed, the sources which supply our treasury will be dried up. We shall have no money to carry on the government, the nation will become bankrupt before the next crop of corn is ripe....allow railroad iron to be entered at Savannah with the low duty of ten percent which is all that the Southern Confederacy think of laying on imported goods, and not an ounce more would be imported at New York. The Railways would be supplied from the southern ports." New York Evening Post March 12, 1861 article "What Shall be Done for a Revenue?"

[DiogenesLamp]

the operative words are “use force against anyone preventing the from landing supplies."

If they were going to allow a resupply of the fort, they could have simply left Anderson alone in the first place. It was axiomatic that they were not going to allow the fort to be supplied or re-enforced as Winfield Scott said it would be, and it was always going to devolve down to cannons getting fired back and forth.

The Confederates clearly saw the orders as requiring a deliberate attack upon them, and so they did what any rational military commander would have done when faced with the prospect of getting attacked from two fronts at the same time. You neutralize one, hopefully before the other can began firing upon you.

The Confederates did precisely what Lincoln had hoped they would do, and he cleverly manipulated them into shooting first by making them believe they were going to be fired upon if they attempted to stop those supplies from coming in.

The really ugly thing about this was that Lincoln had cleverly stymied the mission from progressing to the firing stage by deliberately and secretly sending the command ship off to Florida. The Confederates didn't know this, and they thought that when the command ship arrived (the Powhatan under the command of Mercer) the Union warships would then attack them.

All those ships out there had orders to attack if resupply was opposed, but they wouldn't make a move till the Powhatan showed up, and it wasn't ever going to show up.

These events make it very clear that Lincoln deliberately started this war. One does not make a mistake about where one sends the command ship on a mission so critical as they claimed the Fox Mission to Sumter was.

And to order the Powhatan to be disguised and sailed under a false flag? That is skullduggery at work.

[DiogenesLamp]

No chance of that given the quality of your BS.

I think more is owed to the hardness of your head.

[Bull Snipe]

Has nothing to do with my post. In 1860, the Northern states produced 951,000 tons of Iron, and 13.7 million tons of coal. In the South, 37,000 tons of Iron and 650,000 tons of coal. If the South had been successful, that would not change the economics. The South was an agrarian society. The economic forces in the South were interested in producing cotton and tobacco. With only one large industrial operation in the South, The would have had to buy most of their rail, cotton gin machinery, ships propulsion machinery, shell plating from whom ever they could afford to buy it from. The couldn’t make it the South. They even had to import uniforms for their army, because they could not manufacture cloth in sufficient quantities to provide uniforms for their army.

[DiogenesLamp]

only if the Charleston authorities resisted the effort to land food at Fort Sumter.

A condition which was already a foregone conclusion, else why send warships and troop transport? The Star of the West was deemed adequate prior to this.

All of Lincoln's cabinet but one said it would cause a war. Major Anderson himself, upon being informed that they were putting the Fox plan into motion, also said it would trigger the war, and that his heart was not in it to see it thus commenced. (or some such words.)

[ml/nj]

Newspaper accounts aren't necessarily first-hand or honest. Newspapers were very partisan in those days (and today).

Very true about the honest part. This is either a first-hand account or a complete fabrication. Other people like Lincoln's security man Pinkerton, tend to corroborate what the NYT reported.

The NYT was decidedly pro-Lincoln. The NYT was the only paper with a reporter allowed to ride on Lincoln's train and to have access to his party. Thus the negative stuff is akin to what lawyers call an admission against interests, and should be accepted as accurate.

ML/NJ

[Bull Snipe]

Again the operative words are “ if resupply was opposed,” There was direct no order from Lincoln to “attach” Charleston., which has been your claim for a very long time. Lincoln did not order an attack on Charleston. He authorized force to be used if the authorities in Charleston resisted the mission to provide provision to the
the fort. That is not an order to attack.

[DiogenesLamp]

If the South had been successful, that would not change the economics. The South was an agrarian society. The economic forces in the South were interested in producing cotton and tobacco.

But what do you do with extra money? The South would have gained immensely from cutting out New York and the Federal government cuts of their export business, and they would have to find something to do with their profits.

They would have financed other industries, and they would have grown their population. You should read some accounts of what was going on in Charleston after December of 1860. The city was experiencing an unparalleled growth spurt, and they were going through a massive building boom. Hotels were choked with occupants, and warehouses were high in demand.

A lot of people were starting to relocate from the North in anticipation of Charleston becoming as significant of a port city as Philadelphia or New York.

When the money comes, other industries eventually come too. Specialists would have come from the North in pursuit of income derived from the trade business.

The people of the North certainly saw it as a serious financial problem for them.

"The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? Literally nothing. The transportation of cotton and its fabrics employs more than all other trade. It is very clear the South gains by this process and we lose. No, we must not let the South go." The Manchester, New Hampshire Union Democrat Feb 19 1861

.

.

"In one single blow our foreign commerce must be reduced to less than one-half what it now is. Our coastwide trade would pass into other hands. One-half of our shipping would lie idle at our wharves. We should lose our trade with the South, with all of its immense profits. Our manufactories would be in utter ruins. Let the South adopt the free-trade system, or that of a tariff for revenue, and these results would likely follow."Chicago Daily Times Dec 1860

[DiogenesLamp]

That is not an order to attack.

It is a conditional order to attack in which the condition had already been met.