Guess What Folks - Secession Wasn't Treason

The Copperhead Chronicles ^ | August 2007 | Al Benson

[BnBlFlag]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Copperhead Chronicle Al Benson, Jr. Articles

Guess What Folks--Secesson Wasn't Treason by Al Benson Jr.

More and more of late I have been reading articles dealing with certain black racist groups that claim to have the best interests of average black folks at heart (they really don't). It seems these organizations can't take time to address the problems of black crime in the black community or of single-parent families in the black community in any meaningful way. It's much more lucrative for them (and it gets more press coverage) if they spend their time and resources attacking Confederate symbols. Ive come to the conclusion that they really don't give a rip for the welfare of black families. They only use that as a facade to mask their real agenda--the destruction of Southern, Christian culture.

Whenever they deal with questions pertaining to history they inevitably come down on that same old lame horse that the South was evil because they seceded from the Union--and hey--everybody knows that secession was treason anyway. Sorry folks, but that old line is nothing more than a gigantic pile of cow chips that smells real ripe in the hot August sun! And I suspect that many of them know that--they just don't want you to know it--all the better to manipulate you my dear!

It is interesting that those people never mention the fact that the New England states threatened secession three times--that's right three times--before 1860. In 1814 delegates from those New England states actually met in Hartford, Connecticut to consider seceding from the Union. Look up the Hartford Convention of 1814 on the Internet if you want a little background. Hardly anyone ever mentions the threatened secession of the New England states. Most "history" books I've seen never mention it. Secession is never discussed until 1860 when it suddenly became "treasonous" for the Southern states to do it. What about the treasonous intent of the New England states earlier? Well, you see, it's only treasonous if the South does it.

Columnist Joe Sobran, whom I enjoy, once wrote an article in which he stated that "...Jefferson was an explicit secessionist. For openers he wrote a famous secessionist document known to posterity as the Declaration of Independence." If these black racist groups are right, that must mean that Jefferson was guilty of treason, as were Washington and all these others that aided them in our secession from Great Britain. Maybe the black racists all wish they were still citizens of Great Britain. If that's the case, then as far as I know, the airlines are still booking trips to London, so nothing is stopping them.

After the War of Northern Aggression against the South was over (at least the shooting part) the abolitionist radicals in Washington decided they would try Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States as a co-conspirator in the Lincoln assassination (which would have been just great for Edwin M. Stanton) and as a traitor for leading the secessionist government in Richmond, though secession had hardly been original with Mr. Davis. However, trying Davis for treason as a secessionist was one trick the abolitionist radicals couldn't quite pull off.

Burke Davis, (no relation to Jeff Davis that I know of) in his book The Long Surrender on page 204, noted a quote by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, telling Edwin Stanton that "If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion...His (Jeff Davis') capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason." Burke Davis then continued on page 214, noting that a congressiona committee proposed a special court for Davis' trial, headed by Judge Franz Lieber. Davis wrote: "After studying more than 270,000 Confederate documents, seeking evidence against Davis, the court discouraged the War Department: 'Davis will be found not guilty,' Lieber reported 'and we shall stand there completely beaten'." What the radical Yankees and their lawyers were admitting among themselves (but quite obviously not for the historical record) was that they and Lincoln had just fought a war of aggression agains the Southern states and their people, a war that had taken or maimed the lives of over 600,000 Americans, both North and South, and they had not one shread of constitutional justification for having done so, nor had they any constitutional right to have impeded the Southern states when they chose to withdraw from a Union for which they were paying 83% of all the expenses, while getting precious little back for it, save insults from the North.

Most of us detest big government or collectivism. Yet, since the advent of the Lincoln administration we have been getting ever increasing doses of it. Lincoln was, in one sense, the "great emancipator" in that he freed the federal government from any chains the constitution had previously bound it with, so it could now roam about unfettered "seeking to devous whoseover it could." And where the Founders sought to give us "free and independent states" is anyone naive enough anymore as to think the states are still free and independent? Those who honestly still think that are prime candidates for belief in the Easter Bunny, for he is every bit as real as is the "freedom" our states experience at this point in history. Our federal government today is even worse than what our forefathers went to war against Britain to prevent. And because we have been mostly educated in their government brain laundries (public schools) most still harbor the illusion that they are "free." Well, as they say, "the brainwashed never wonder." ___________________

About the Author

Al Benson Jr.'s, [send him email] columns are to found on many online journals such as Fireeater.Org, The Sierra Times, and The Patriotist. Additionally, Mr. Benson is editor of the Copperhead Chronicle [more information] and author of the Homeschool History Series, [more information] a study of the War of Southern Independence. The Copperhead Chronicle is a quarterly newsletter written with a Christian, pro-Southern perspective.

When A New Article Is Released You Will Know It First! Sign-Up For Al Benson's FREE e-Newsletter

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Copperhead Chronicle | Homeschool History Series | Al Benson, Jr. Articles

[r9etb]

What, not the rap music station?

Hmmm. Could be. Interesting thought.

In fact, some of sw's rants might make for damned snappy Gangsta rap lyrics.

IF the LIARS, bigots & revisionists didn't post FICTION & DY propaganda, i would be happy to return to quietly discussing the war in the TM west. however, the DYs of "the coven" insist on posting foolishness/propaganda/bigotry & knowing, outright LIES about the south/the war/the lincoln MISadministration/slavery/AIs/my family/etc. that is also, sadly, FACT. pity that you seem not to be able to understand that simple concept/truth

[stand watie]

NOPE, our fight is with the LEFTISTS/DAMNyankee elitists, who choose not to just leave us alone.(being from the north just makes you a northerner. it does NOT make you a DAMNyankee.)

DAMNyankees are anti-southern bigots/south-haters, who HATE & "look down on" the southLAND & every southerner. further, DYism is a LEARNED prejudice. the DYs were not born that way, they learned to HATE. (my grandfather used to say that, "scratch a DAMNyankee & prejudice, rather than blood, will flow from the wound" AND "if the DYs were NOT so busy hating & feeling superior southerners, they would be some other sort of BIGOT".)

btw, some of us question how UNinvolved the people who "happen to live in the north" are as DYs, inasmuch as they continue to send hardly anyone except LEFTISTS/south-HATERS to the congress.

for my info, can you point me to the CONSERVATIVE voting records of even ONE recent northern senator??? (i believe you cannot.)

finally, a personal note: when i was a 2LT (long ago) a LTC (from CT) asked me one afternoon, " Are there any other johnny rebs, who are as smart as you down there?? i thought everyone from the deep south was stupid & uneducated." (that's the sort of automatic/unthinking/ignorant/paternalistic/ingrained prejudice that southerners frequently face.)

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

sorry, but your post #421 is also meaningless, silly & inconsequential.(you really should ask N-S to join the "coven";you'd fit right in.)

laughing at you.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

btw, my guess is that not more than 10-15% of northerners are DYs, bigots and/or south-HATERS, but that minority of northerners are really loudmouthed, arrogant,ignorant & MEAN-spirited.

DYs tend to cluster in the media, in academia & in "public service"; they openly HATE southerners & dixie & feel SUPERIOR to us.

free dixie,sw

[x]

Given time almost anything can happen. What's happened in Russia and South Africa in recent years is evidence of that.

But what gets me is how people make out that those who were for slavery -- sometimes very much in favor of slavery -- or indifferent to it were actually against slavery in the fullness of time because they or their children or grandchildren would "eventually" have abolished slavery.

Abolitionists and other opponents of slavery or its expansion, by contrast, get all the blame for what happened -- for making trouble and stirring things up. So we get told that Lincoln prolonged the existence of some form of slavery that those kindly Southerners would have done away with.

But really, things like slavery or segregation don't end on their own. Somebody has to take a stand against them to get things started. Whatever faults Lincoln or the abolitionists or the radical Republicans may have had they deserve more respect than they get from some people.

[stand watie]

fwiw, northern VA is what we southrons call: yankee-occupied Virginia.

fyi, the rest of the commonwealth is dixie & southern to the marrow. (furthermore, every day that passes finds more southerners of all groups becoming southron.)

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

WHEN are you DYs going to learn to "tend to your own business" & leave the southland & southerners alone??? (even a fuzzy, little, bunny will fight to the death, when faced with "a fight to survive scenario". you might think on that.)

also, i believe that there's something in The Bible about removing the LOG from you eye before trying to remove the splinter from another person's eye.

the unvarnished truth is that the southland NOW is a HALF-century or more ahead in attaining the goal of a "colorblind society", when compared to ANY northern state. for example, BOSTON,MA, this instant (according to the SCLC), has more segregated/one-race schools than AL, GA & MS, combined. further the National Headquarters of the KKK is in OHIO (we southrons are really glad of that!).

free dixie,sw

[x]

swattie, why don't you try a personal ad:

"imMaginAry fRienD seeKs REAL mAn"

But seriously, Lincoln believed some of his ancestors were Quakers, and they were -- real Friends, not imaginary ones. He also didn't attack Quaker conscientious objectors, but let them perform alternative service.

So are you going to stop saying that Lincoln "was a STONE RACIST, who hated/feared ALL "persons of colour", Jews, Quakers & anyone else who was NOT white"?

If not, could you at least work on your syntax for next time. I don't think the Jews and Quakers you're talking about were non-White persons of color.

[Syncro]

I don’t literally Laugh Out Loud, but yer post brought it out of me...LOL

I think it was the second sentence...

[x]

I can only surmise that the other delegates sat in shocked disbelief, as Madison of all people, argued for military and legal power to prevent secession.

Why? If you've got a wild enough imagination to take things this far, why does it fail you now?

Gerry mentions the dissolution of the states and the possibility of civil war and no one notices and Madison mentions disunion, and everyone is shocked?

The fact that the convention rejected Madison's wish to have the highest militia officers appointed by the federal government doesn't mean that they believed unilateral secession was a good thing.

That would be like saying that all the anti-Federalists were opposed to union, justice, domestic tranquillity, common defence, general welfare, and the blessings of liberty for themselves and their posterity because they voted against the Constitution.

You can reject one suggested means to an end without rejecting the end itself.

[Syncro]

Comeon, if yer gonna do some gangsta rap, you could at least format correctly

Like this

IF the LIARS, bigots & revisionists

Didn't post FICTION & DY propaganda

I would be happy to return to quietly discussing

the war in the TM west

however, the DYs of "the coven" insist on

posting foolishness

/propaganda/bigotry & knowing,

outright LIES

about the south

/the war/the lincoln

MISadministration/slavery/AIs/

my family/etc.

That is also, sadly, FACT. pity that you seem

not to be able to understand

that simple concept/truth

I gotta say, like Rap Music(?) I don't understand a lot of this...

[r9etb]

Comeon, if yer gonna do some gangsta rap, you could at least format correctly

I did actually start out that way, but gave it up. Turns out it was a good thing: you did a much better job than I was doing.

[r9etb]

Given time almost anything can happen. What's happened in Russia and South Africa in recent years is evidence of that.

Actually, let's suppose a bit further. If the South had won, would that really have been the end of it? I seriously doubt it. Much of the underlying cause of the war had more to do with westward expansion, and the question of whether new states and territories would be "free" or "slave" states.

A victory for the South would not have done much to stop westward expansion by either North or South, and it would undoubtedly have sharpened the conflicts over territories.

Overall, I think that even if the North had acquiesced to secession, the war would probably have started anyway, in the west. And even if the South had won, the war would have begun anew, in the west.

[cva66snipe]

Even being brought up in the south in a split region {East Tennessee} and for most of my life would have likely sided with the north I now no longer would. When I started looking more toward founders intent in my political thinking I would now support the CSA’s stand. I think it was much closer to what the founders intended for the nation even if it meant states withdrew from the Union. I think it was as such considered a states right to do so. This is not to be confused with some of the other rebellions which were local in general. But if the state assemblies passed a bill of secession and the governor signed such it should have been recognized as a lawful withdrawal form the Union.

In the case of the Civil War Smedley Butlers speech applies. For what it's worth there was some division within the south even among the Generals themselves as to the South's direction and intent. That division and some jealousy from those who had Jeff Davis's ear cost the south the war. Jeff Davis also like Lincoln became too focused on the industrialist namely the cotton industry rather than the intent of the founders and states rights. At least one CSA general told him as much was a thorn in Braggs flesh. :>}

[Colonel Kangaroo]

The first vote in Sevier was 1243 to 60 against the convention which was unusual because the vote against secession actually increased in the 2nd vote.

the plantation owners in Sevier apparently just didn't have the critical mass needed to influence the vote there as was done in the West.

[PeaRidge]

Yes, you are right about such good stuff.

The author, a newspaperman, makes it clear that the Harriet Lane did arrive during daylight on the 11th, and according to him, there were two other warships alongside.

He also makes it clear that local observers had become aware of the gathering warships. This is also confirmed in the Chestnut memoirs as well as in Confederate communications documented in the OR.

Along with this, is documented the firing of the Harriet Lane on a well known civilian steamer sometime that afternoon or evening.

He makes the claim that they were the first ship to fire a shot in the vicinity of Charleston Harbor.

With that the blockade of the harbor began, and the defenses of the harbor were activated by Jefferson Davis.

Thank you for your excellent documentation of the actions of the Union naval forces that forced the harbor defense into action.

[Non-Sequitur]

Thank you for your excellent documentation of the actions of the Union naval forces that forced the harbor defense into action.

The 'harbor defenses' were shooting at unarmed merchant ships long before then.

[stand watie]

why don't you try to be INTELLIGENT for once, rather than clueLESS & SILLY??? (your posts are those of a HATE-filled, ignorant, "empty-head", as well as a DY.)

speaking of "imaginary friends", yours wouldn't play with you. i don't blame him.(chuckle)

perhaps you belong on DU, with the other dunces (who used to be members of "the DAMNyankee coven"), who used to be FReepers.

laughing AT you.

as for lincoln, the TYRANT, having Quaker relatives, i do NOT know about that but i do KNOW that the Friends were frequently robbed/assaulted/mistreated by the "bluebellies", as the Quakers wouldn't fight back. (really BRAVE folks, those "bluebellies" were! many of them were MUCH better at fighting the defenseLESS, than they ever were at facing southern shot & steel.)

free dixie,sw

[rustbucket]

What I want to know is on what date this offer by Lincoln was tendered

I just noticed that at the top of page 195 of the Botts book, the date of April 5 is given for the meeting of Lincoln and Baldwin.

Supposedly Baldwin was a strong Union supporter. But I note that Baldwin early on became a colonel on the Confederate side (see: Col. J. B. Baldwin and Several Balwin mentions under Local/County/State Politics). The second link mentions that people accused Baldwin, who ran for and won an election, of having Union sympathies and of being (gasp!) a 'Hamiltonian' (gotta love it). Apparently his loyalty to Virginia trumped his love for the Union.

[stand watie]

well, you're easily entertained anyway.

read "x", the nitwit's, posts over several WBTS threads (especially the ones that he tries to sound intelligent) & you'll split your sides with glee.

free dixie,sw