Posted on 08/27/2007 1:37:39 PM PDT by 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
No doubt you will be asking for references on the prior post. You can see from the following the spending that led to the debt.
The Economic Condition of the Federal Government in 1860
The following chart demonstrates the impact on exports and imports of Southern goods.
International Transactions and Foreign Commerce for 1857-1860
(Historical Statistics of the US, section U 187-200, pgs 885-887)
……............Value of ...Duties ….......Value of …Value of …….% of Tot.
Year ……...Imports ....Collected ….Exports …Cotton/Tobacco .Exports
1857 …334,000,000 .....63,876,000 ..279,000,000 152,000,000 ..55%
1858 ...243,000,000 …..41,790,000 …251,000,000 148,000,000 ..59%
1859 ...317,000,000 …..49,566,000 …278,000,000 182,000,000 ..65%
1860 ...336,000,000 …..53,188,000 …316,000,000 208,000,000 ..66%
Thus, it evident that just the exports of cotton and tobacco financed the purchase of the bulk of imports into the country on which tariffs were levied.
Practically the entire US Treasury, and therefore government supported Federal functions, as well as government underwritten public works for the states, were supported by the revenue from tariffs on imported goods.
………. Income of the Federal Government 1857-1860
………(Source: Historical Statistics of the US, Series Y 493-504, pg. 1114)
Total Income of the Treasury (Tariffs, public land sales)
Year …..Total Income …..Income from Tariffs
1857 ……. 68,965,000 .....63,876,000
1858 …….46,655,000 .....41,790,000
1859 …….53,486,000 .....49,566,000
1860 ………56,065,000 .....53,188,000
Federal spending for normal and basic government functions was as follows:
……………Federal Spending by Department
………….(Historical Statistics of the US, pg. 1114)
…………..Dept. of …. Dept. of …… Interest ……..Veterans’
………….The Army .....The Navy .….on public ……Compensation
Year ………(War Dept.) ……….......Debt ……….and Pensions
1857 ……….19,262,000 ..12,748,000 ….1,678,000 …….1,312,000
1858 ……….25,485,000 ..13,985,000 ….1,567,000 …….1,217,000
1859 ……….23,244,000 ..14,643,000 …..2,638,000 …….1,220,000
1860 ……….16,410,000 ..11,515,000 ….3,177,000 ……..1,103,000
Actual total spending of the US Congress far exceeded the amounts for normal and basic government operations.
………………………US Government Spending for 1857-1860
……………………….(Historical Statistics of the US, pg. 106)
…………….Total Fed. ………Total Fed Spending on Army, Navy,
Year ………….Spending ……….Interest on Public Debt., and Pensions
1857 …………. 67,796,000 .....35,400,000
1858 …………..74,185,000 .....34,300,000
1859 ………….69,071,000 .....29,700,000
1860 ………….63,131,000 .....33,100,000
Total Federal spending was not only well beyond its basic responsibilities, but also well beyond its revenue. The government began borrowing large amounts of money to meet its obligations, and had incurred the following debt just prior to the secession of the Southern states:
…………………..Public Debt of the Federal Government 1857-1860
………(Source: Historical Statistics of the US, Series Y-493-504, page 1118)
1857 …………$28,701,000
1858 ………… $44,913,000
1859 …………$58,498,000
1860 …………. $64,844,000
you're really good at parroting the DAMNyankee/LEFTIST line out of the most extreme, radical fringe of northeastern socialist academia.
free dixie,sw
NOBODY believes the NONSENSE that you post. (probably not even you.)
otoh, you provide everyone a person to poke fun at & to be the "butt" of many inside jokes about nitwits/SELF-important fools/DUMB-bunnies on FR.
free dixie,sw
MY orders right now are to head out for the long weekend, landing supplies of beer and BBQ items at home. I do not expect this to be opposed, but I'm ready to fight my way in if necessary. See you back here on Tuesday.
you should ask him about his "previous persona" on FR & WHY he DID to get PERMANENTLY BANNED.
you might also ask him WHEN he's LEAVING FR forever & returning to DU, to be with his "buddies of the DY coven", who used to be FReepers.
free dixie,sw
Non-seq:
This may help you understand the emergency as Congress understood it.
The Debt of the United States Government
On February 6, 1861, U.S. Representative Phelps, speaking to the House on this day said:
“At this moment, the outstanding debt of the United States is $69,373,000; comprising the loans authorized by the acts of 1842, 1846, 1847, 1848, 1858, and 1860, the Texas indemnity loan of 1850, together with the outstanding Treasury notes authorized by several acts. ...
“... the existing debt of the United States is nearly seventy million dollars.
“The $10,000,000 Treasury notes recently issued were negotiated, a portion at twelve per cent., and a portion at between ten and eleven. Your ten per cent treasury notes are sold in the market of New York below par; and if you authorize new loans that are not absolutely necessary, you cannot negotiate them except at ruinous rates.
“I have made a computation of the actual debt created and proposed to be created by this Congress.
” The balance of the loan authorized under act of 22nd June, 1860, is $13,978,000. If the amendment of the Senate be concurred in, that loan cannot be negotiated. I am in favor of that amendment.
“The tariff bill, which will probably become a law, authorizes the loan of $21,000,000. The Pacific railroad bill as it passed the House authorized an indebtedness of $96,000,000, and the Senate put on an additional $25,000,000.
“ In other words, the proposed indebtedness of the country is $167,000,000; making with the public debt and the loan already authorized, an aggregate of $250,351,649, With such indebtedness, how can you expect to raise a loan on favorable terms?
“I hope this amendment of the Senate will be concurred in.
The Government will then be enabled to raise the loan of $25,000,000 authorized in this bill [a bill authorizing $25,000,000 in loans], and $21,000,000 authorized in the tariff act.
“The Secretary of the Treasury has told you he will need $25,000,000 between the date of his communication and the 1st of July next, in addition to the current revenues of the country.”
It is also a fact that upon taking office, and against the advice of his cabinet, he gave Fox approval and authority to run supplies, boats, and men into the fort, regardless of Charleston reaction.
It is also a fact that in his Inaugural Address, Lincoln stated that it was his duty “to collect the duties and imposts,” but beyond that “there will be no invasion of any state.” In effect he was saying that if the seceded states failed to collect and pay the newly-doubled tariff rates, as the South Carolinians did with respect to the 1828 Tariff of Abominations, there would be an invasion.
He was true to his word.
while lincoln, the TYRANT, was "true to his word", doing so started a war that cost a MILLION American lives for NOTHING of value.
free dixie,sw
The next line referred to Anderson refusing the governor's offer and returning his thanks. I had already posted that information in post 447, although not those exact words.
Have a good weekend.
I need your help.
I have worked a year on an alternative history novel and completed it a few days ago.
If you could take a moment and let me know what this opening sentence from Chapter One tells you, I would appreciate it.
The moon was playing a cruel trick on the 18th North Carolina Infantry Regiment.
Do you, as a reader, know where you are and what is about to happen?
Thank you so much for helping me.
Stainless Banner--if you could do a Dixie Ping to this post and ask them to answer the question, I would appreciate it.
What? Anderson's and Beauregard's forces weren't confronting each other?
I'm in Texas and about to go to bed.
Sorry, carton, couldn't resist. I don't know anything about the 18th North Carolina Infantry Regiment, but looking it up suggests to me what your opening line refers to.
Meaning... I do not need to add biography and description for you to help you understand the story.
See you in the morning.
What was confrontational about the Rhoda Shannon? If Pearidge can claim that firing a warning shot at the Nashville was an act of war, what was trying to blow an unarmed schooner full of ice right out of the water?
Incorrect. You stated, "Besides, the US Treasury would default within two months of any interruption of the tariffs." My question was why didn't that happen? The tariff from the South was most certainly halted, and for a lot longer than 2 months. Congress wasn't in session again until July so you have a period of 6 months without tariff, without congressional action, and the treasury didn't default. So please address the original question and explain why it didn't.
Sir, I had to verify, but you’re referring to the shooting of Stonewall Jackson by Confederate troops.
I am...
BTTT for Dixie!
The constitution is a contract. The penalties for breaking that contract are severe. The only way states could legally leave the union is if another constitutional convention was called and some states chose not to attend.
In an April 4 communication to Washington, Lt. Foster of Fort Sumter termed the Shannon's master an ignorant man. It certainly was an ill-considered action on the part of the ship's master to ignore the warning shots.
The master of the vessel said that when she left Boston headed for Savannah with her load of ice on March 26, the story was that Fort Sumter was to be evacuated. Even Anderson at this point in April believed that the fort would be evacuated.
Anderson sent a boat to the commander of Morris Island to get permission to visit the Shannon then at anchor. The commander gave that OK and explained that his orders were to shoot at any unknown ship flying the US flag that attempted to enter the harbor. The Sumter boat visited the Shannon then returned to Morris Island to convey information about the Shannon to the Confederates. The commander of Morris Island then gave permission for the Shannon to enter the harbor, but the Shannon at this point headed on to Savannah, having entered Charleston Harbor by mistake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.