Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Happened After Appomattox
National Review Online ^ | May 16 2015 | MACKUBIN THOMAS OWENS

Posted on 05/16/2015 5:12:04 AM PDT by OttawaFreeper

The North rejoiced: The rebellion had been put down and the Union saved. But Northerners also breathed a sigh of relief. Many had feared that the Confederacy would not accept defeat, but instead would continue the struggle by means of guerrilla warfare. Indeed, Lee’s chief of artillery, E. Porter Alexander, had suggested this option before Lee’s surrender. The Confederate president, Jefferson Davis, also wished to continue the war in this manner. But Lee rejected the guerrilla option in favor of unifying the country. And General Joseph Johnston defied Davis’s orders to continue hostilities, instead surrendering his force to William Tecumseh Sherman at Durham Station in North Carolina in order to “save the people [and] spare the blood of the army.” But in reality, the war was not over. It would continue for nearly another decade and a half in the form of Reconstruction.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: americancivilwar; americanhistory; civilwar; dixie; dsj02
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161 next last
To: DiogenesLamp

No one but lost causers and liberals tell anyone that “the war was fought to end slavery”. I find it increasingly difficult to tell the difference between them.


141 posted on 05/18/2015 9:11:46 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Baltimore ken
Had the Abolitionist practiced patience, I sincerely believe the Civil War could have been avoided.

It wasn't the abolitionists who needed to practice patience. It also wasn't the abolitionists who instigated, initiated, and declared war against their own neighbors and fellow countrymen.

I am of the opinion that slavery would have died out on it’s own.

The slavocracy attempted to found their "nation" upon the perpetuation of the Particular Institution. It was their dream that owning other humans would last forever.

142 posted on 05/18/2015 9:15:26 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

” . . . perpetuation of the Particular Institution.”

So that’s what you’ve been writing about.


143 posted on 05/18/2015 9:55:07 PM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
People say that it was because there had to be SOME REASON why all those people died. Slavery was the ex post facto reason seized upon to justify the carnage.

Should we not take the southern secessionists at their word when they said that they were acting to protect their slave interests?

144 posted on 05/19/2015 9:54:29 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels." --Tom Waits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Maryland was still a slave state until the war was over.

Actually Maryland's abolition of slavery was included in the state constitution drafted in April 1864 and ratified that November. Incidentally, Maryland soldiers voting in that ratification referendum were 10 to 1 in favor of abolition.

145 posted on 05/19/2015 10:02:47 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels." --Tom Waits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Anyways, I'm surprised you didn't ask me about the letter. Wouldn't looking for it be the first thing you would do if you had heard such a story?

Okay, I'll bite. What letter?

146 posted on 05/19/2015 10:14:16 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels." --Tom Waits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
I thought to myself, "If what he is telling me is true…

It wasn't

147 posted on 05/19/2015 10:18:04 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels." --Tom Waits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
“Should we not take the southern secessionists at their word . . .”

The reason Lincoln started the war is muddled. There is evidence Lincoln started the war to preserve the union. There is also evidence that he started the war to end the peculiar institution. Lincoln was like a politician so it's difficult to know how much of what he said to believe and how much to discount.

I don't think Robert E. Lee and like-minded southerners fought for the peculiar institution. Lee freed his s****s before the war.

148 posted on 05/19/2015 11:28:11 AM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
Should we not take the southern secessionists at their word when they said that they were acting to protect their slave interests?

Acting in the belief that one is protecting one's self interests is a non remarkable position. What were the Northern interests? They were the ones who invaded.

149 posted on 05/19/2015 11:40:36 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

The Northern interests were control of and profit from Westward expansion, to include rail, resources, and assets.

Remember what came just AFTER 1865.

Monopolies.


150 posted on 05/19/2015 11:44:16 AM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
Actually Maryland's abolition of slavery was included in the state constitution drafted in April 1864 and ratified that November.

Close enough to the point. They certainly didn't abolish it around April 12, 1861.

Incidentally, Maryland soldiers voting in that ratification referendum were 10 to 1 in favor of abolition.

I daresay it would have been an uncomfortable situation for a soldier to have any other opinion at this time. It's a wonder that it was only 10 to 1.

151 posted on 05/19/2015 11:44:22 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
Okay, I'll bite. What letter?

The alleged letter which purports Lincoln informing the commander he would be attacked, to take steps to minimize loss of life, and then surrender the fort.

That is what my friend told me. That was the evidence of his claim that the crises had been engineered by a clever Lincoln. Without such a letter, on what basis could he make the claim that the crises was engineered? The letter as he described it implied a foreknowledge of events.

Why would Lincoln warn the commander unless he expected an attack? That was his argument in claiming that Lincoln cleverly manipulated them into doing it. That Lincoln knew they would.

That letter.

152 posted on 05/19/2015 11:48:59 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
It wasn't

I don't know if it was or wasn't. I'd rather believe it wasn't, because It is uncomfortable believing it was.

153 posted on 05/19/2015 11:50:51 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots
The Northern interests were control of and profit from Westward expansion, to include rail, resources, and assets.

Remember what came just AFTER 1865.

Monopolies.

It's pretty cynical to assert that the entire Federal government was motivated to invade the South at huge cost in blood and treasure to protect the interests of Northern Oligarchs expanding into the West.

It implies that the Government of 1860 was for sale. I'd rather not believe that, though the evidence for our Modern government being for sale is getting harder and harder to shake every year.

154 posted on 05/19/2015 11:55:19 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
You might want to take a look at the Novel (actually a never completed novel) that a prominent Virginia Judge and writer published after the Van Buren election in 1836, which while set in 1849 (as I remember) gives a very good picture of ante-Bellum Virginia thinking: (The Partisan Leader.)

While prophesying the War over a decade early, it may suggest some good arguments for you. It certainly attests to some of the things that the Virginia gentry considered significant in the growing apart that was taking place in the pre-conflict era.

155 posted on 05/19/2015 12:10:50 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

“It’s pretty cynical to assert . .”

Don’t go there. The only thing our puritanical northern friends ever wanted to do was go to the chapel and pray. And the only evil was in the South where people grew food and fiber and raced horses.


156 posted on 05/19/2015 12:11:42 PM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
I'm guessing that you're talking about the letter from Lincoln to Anderson on April 4. Here it is:

To Robert Anderson

[War Department] Washington, April 4, 1861 Sir: Your letter of the 1st. inst. occasions some anxiety to the President.

On the information of Capt. Fox, he had supposed you could hold out till the 15th. inst. without any great inconvenience; and had prepared an expedition to relieve you before that period.

Hoping still that you will be able to sustain yourself till the 11th. or 12th. inst. the expedition will go forward; and, finding your flag flying, will attempt to provision you, and, in case the effort is resisted, will endeavor also to reinforce you.

You will therefore hold out if possible till the arrival of the expedition.

It is not, however, the intention of the President to subject your command to any danger or hardship beyond what, in your judgement, would be usual in military life; and he has entire confidence that you will act as becomes a patriot and a soldier, under all circumstances.

Whenever, if at all, in your judgment, to save yourself and command, a capitulation becomes a necessity, you are authorized to make it. [Respectfully SIMON CAMERON.]

Nowhere does it say that Anderson WILL be attacked. The letter, incidentally, was never received by Anderson. It was intercepted by the confederates. On the same day, Robert Chew delivered the message to the Governor Pickens that read, "I am directed by the President of the United States to notify you to expect an attempt will be made to supply Fort-Sumpter with provisions only; and that, if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to throw in men, arms, or amunition, will be made, without further notice, or in case of an attack upon the Fort."

Lincoln had essentially three choices. Surrender the fort, start shooting to force their way in (and then what?) or openly declare that they were going to send supply ships, which would only maintain the status quo. The confederate choices were to either allow the resupply maintaining the status quo, or forcibly oppose it, starting a war.

I'll end with three quotes from the south:

"Mr. President, at this time it is suicide, murder, and will lose us every friend at the North. You will wantonly strike a hornet's nest which extends from mountain to ocean, and legions now quiet will swarm out and sting us to death. It is unnecessary; it puts us in the wrong; it is fatal."-- Robert Toombs, discussing Lincoln's message to Pickens with Jefferson Davis and Davis's orders to attack Sumter

"Unless you sprinkle blood in the faces of the people, Alabama will be back in the Union in ten days"--James Gilchrist to Jefferson Davis

"I will tell you, gentlemen, what will put Virginia into the Southern Confederacy in less than an hour by Shrewsbury clock--STRIKE A BLOW! The very moment that blood is shed, old Virginia ail make common cause with her sister States of the South."--Roger Pryor, to a Charleston audience a few days before the shelling of Sumter.

157 posted on 05/19/2015 12:46:52 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels." --Tom Waits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
Nowhere does it say that Anderson WILL be attacked.

No it doesn't. As a matter of fact, it does not go nearly so far as my friend had led me to believe, but I didn't know it at the time. He misrepresented quite a lot of what it said, but I couldn't check on it back then. I didn't find that letter until just a few years ago. It is not nearly the smoking gun for a theoretical Lincoln Perfidy that he seemed to believe, and I know of no other letter.

I'll end with three quotes from the south:

Robert Toombs was prophetic. It's a pity Davis heeded the words of others instead of the man who was correct. Much bloodshed might have been prevented.

158 posted on 05/19/2015 1:02:10 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Grant’s Tea Pot dome comes to mind.

Look at Lincoln’s cabinet. Oligarchs with pure lust for power, competition with Lincoln, and eyes on Western development.

Chase
Seward
Stanton

http://www.mrlincolnandfriends.org/inside.asp?pageID=7&subjectID=7

This is why I look at the Civil War as THE power play for federal-and oligarchical-control of US development. Steel magnates, rail magnates, the lot of them, came out winners. If you look, you see that the transportation-canals and rail lines-went their way only. Small farmers and resource-rich land that had been settled were almost entirely ignored.

Yes, slavery was involved. I look, however, to the Missouri Compromise as the bellweather. That vote had to foretell which way the country would go from then on, and that there would be NO MORE COMPROMISE.

New England and its magnates won, and so we have that ethos in American politics to this day.


159 posted on 05/19/2015 5:06:53 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots
Your argument is very insightful. I too have been noticing that today is a lot like it was in 1861. We still have the Northeastern portion of the Nation trying to impose their latest moral fad on the rest of us, and they always seem to have the money and power to do it.

Often US Policy appears to be just whatever helps this power block get richer.

160 posted on 05/20/2015 8:34:20 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson