Skip to comments.Grave found of man who bankrolled Confederates in American civil war
Posted on 08/26/2009 8:21:14 AM PDT by Nikas777
Academic uncovers lost London resting place of Charles Kuhn Prioleau, and the forgotten story of Confederate support in Britain
guardian.co.uk, Monday 10 August 2009 10.16 BST
The grave of a man who bankrolled the Confederate side in the American civil war, and ended up costing the British government £3.3m in compensation to the victorious north, has been tracked down in a patch of brambles in a London cemetery.
Charles Kuhn Prioleau, a cotton merchant born in Charleston, South Carolina, was based in Liverpool during the war, from 1861 to 1865. He disappeared from history in a bonfire of company records and correspondence after his firm went bankrupt, having sent supplies, funds, and blockade-busting ships to the Confederates.
But his mortal remains have now been traced to Kensal Green cemetery by a US academic who is gradually unearthing the almost forgotten story of Confederate support in England, which takes in the highest ranks of British politics and society.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Grave found of man who bankrolled the Communist takover of the United States in the early 21st Century. George Soros...
Well..., there was a supporter of the 10th Amendment... :-)
History and case law
The Tenth Amendment is similar to an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation: “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”
Interesting middle name he had. ;^)>
The war also transformed the Confederacy's central govt which has a result of the pressures of war reduced the sovereignty of their confederate states and attempted to centralize the war fighting effort of the states.
So in a sense, we as a nation have unfinished business regarding the true reason for the original Civil War...States’ Rights.
It was Lincoln who masked the real war in a moral struggle to end slavery but that was not what started the war. Self determination by the individual states was the true cause. That issue has yet to be resolved. Hence we are moving back to where we started. But this time, there is no moral high ground that trumps the true argument. The Federal Government will be hard pressed to defend the transgressions of our Constitution when push comes to shove.
And onward goes the march towards a one-world government... as the Bible says is coming...
Actually, one of the things that many may not have considered is that the successor to the *evil one-world government* of the Antichrist of the Bible — is — the *one-world government* and absolute ruler over all, Jesus Christ... :-)
In other words, no matter what, it’s going to be a “one-world government”...
Now you can argue state's rights means you can leave for any reason you want - a no fault divorce - if you will but that does take away the moral rectitude from the southern state's right claim somewhat.
That is an interesting tangent of thought.
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
Whoops! And thanks bamahead. My reply happened during the odd database problems we all experienced earlier this afternoon and evening.
almost a MILLION Americans DIED for his LUST for PERSONAL POWER & to make "his merry band of thugs, war profiteers & politicians" RICH.
lincoln, clinton & bho are THREE of a KIND. = DISHONEST, power-HUNGRY & willing to say/agree to/do ANYTHING to get more POWER/money. FACT.
Those 3 were/are also puppets of international banking cartels, money masters. The very people responsible for the current [attempted] takeover of this country. http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=NoneDare03&Entity=USCivilWar
fwiw, the revolution of our southern ancestors against our northeastern "masters" (the financial/social/intellectual/business ELITES) was a PEASANT REVOLT, led by a relative handful of professionals like Robert E. Lee & Thomas (Stonewall) Jackson.
that is one of the main reasons that our southern ancestors failed in their quest for FREEDOM. = peasant revolts seldom succeed. (the only one that i can think of offhand, that it can be argued that did succeed, was the Vietnamese revolution.)
had the south won, the southern "plantation aristocracy" might well have been NEXT on "the list of dixie's enemies", as they had in all too many cases collaborated with the invading DAMNyankee army. ( nature is unkind to TURNCOATS.)
So I don't buy your revisionist history as the civil war being a peasant revolt. But I do appreciate your view point and it is a valid view you provided.
furthermore, MANY northerners (including a whole regiment from NJ) and "out of country nationals" came to fight for dixie freedom, as they too knew what the war was REALLY about = throwing off the yoke of the northern ELITES from the necks of the common people.
to paraphrase an old grad school prof of mine: NOTHING in history is simple, except to simpletons.
also, sorry but REVISIONIST historiography came out of the northeastern "poison ivy league screwls" - whatever else we southrons are, it is NOT "revisionist".
I think you are being the revisionist and I did not need to capitalize whole words to say so.
BLACKS IN BLUE & GRAY by Dr Hubert C. Blackerby (late of Tuskegee University's department of history)
CROSS BORDER WARRIOR (Canadians in US service & Americans in Canadian service)
as i've told any number of people here & elsewhere: complaining about my (admittedly eccentric) typing style frequently means that "the complainer" cannot overcome my FACTS, so they complain about "style".
Sir, I discounted the notion that the Confederate cause was a peasant revolt. I consider it a revisionist theory. But with that said I do not discount it and consider it a view of the war that is note worthy.
these words are called : terms of art.
REVISIONIST is one of those "terms of art" and it is "generally understood" in scholarly works as both statist & LEFTIST/"progressive" (some would say: socialist/Marxist/communist).
any serious reading of the various documents surrounding the approval of the new Constitution will prove that NONE of the States (especially the smaller states. the "little brothers' feared, NOT without just reason, that PA,NJ,NY & VA would dominate the new union to the detriment of the other States.)would have approved the new union (which was seen as "experimental", at best, if not downright "revolutionary") if they didn't believe that they could leave the union at any time & "at their own motion".
I agree with mister Lucky. In fact when texas entered the Union it had various clauses for breaking up WITHIN the Union but NONE for breaking OUT OF the Union.
TX could have broken up into 5 States, had she chosen to AND could have reasserted her rights as a FRee & independent republic, according to many scholars in 1861 or NOW for that matter.
150 years of DAMNyankee/elitist domination does NOT change the TRUTH that the Constitution (particularly the 9th & 10th Amendments thereto) does NOT outlaw UNILATERAL secession. secession is still an option for EVERY State or group of States. furthermore, the States created the union & remain FREE to change/secede from/abolish that union at ANY time that they so choose.
This thus proves Mr. Lucky's point that no such provision or mechanism.
Why, didn't you know that to disagree the consolidation of power by the current occupant of 1600 Penna. Ave. is considered racist. Things have indeedd come full circle as even that matter has been exhumed, albeit in a modified form.
The unfortunate transition from a Federal Government to a National Government, to a Totalitarian Government yet continues, to the detriment of us all.
the BOR is written in simple/easy to understand words & it means what it says. (had any of the founders thought that the language of the BOR was NOT plain to any "reasonably literate person" of the 19th century, they would have made the words even simpler.)
fyi, the Constitution of these united States is NOT "a living document", which is subject to "perceived changes in society" by the federal/state/international courts or anyone else. it is what it IS & it means precisely what the "plain text" says.
PLEASE go read the NINTH & TENTH amendments to the BOR & then come back here & either:
a. tell everyone WHERE/WHEN that either the States and/or the people CEDED the POWERS/RIGHT of any free State or group of States to unilaterally change/secede from/reform/abolish the union
b. admit that you are in error.
"the bottom line" is that, regardless of the revisionist/statist LIES that you were propagandized with in "duh fedrul gubmint apruvd public screwls sistim", unilateral secession was in 1861 & NOW is perfectly Constitutional.
i fear that we are headed toward a FASCIST government/oligarchy, from which we southerners (and perhaps some western/midwestern states) will (again) eventually remove ourselves.
If a mechanism existed that would allow Texas to leave the Union it would have been included just like it included the possibility of a pendactic (fancy Greek word for 5 way split) break up within the Union.
I thought it was closer to 625,000 that died in the Civil War???
but to answer your question, the RIGHT of secession was understood by educated people in 1845;nobody at that time needed any further explanation as to what the Constitution said/meant. (it is the STATISTS of 2009 that need to reevaluate their heresy/FOOLishness in reading the BOR.)
the statists/DAMNyankees don't want to count civilians who were victims of atrocities/war crimes/died of "indirect causes", as it makes the DYs look BAD!!!
in point of fact, there are a LOT of documents that indicate that "enumerated protections for the RIGHTS of citizens & the POWERS of the sovereign States must be included for the State to ratify the Constitution" (VA)was one of the MAIN reasons that the AOC were ditched.
what part of the rather specific language of the 9th & 10th Amendments do you NOT understand??? (particularly the portion of the 10th that says that those rights & powers NOT CEDED to the central government REMAIN with the States & the CITIZENS of those sovereign states.)
In as much as we’re all scholars here, pwrhaps you could make more specific reference to the documents, say by naming them.
go look at the "ratification documents" of almost ANY state & you'll see that the delegates were "concerned" at best & most of the delegations of "the little brothers" were AFRAID of the potential power of NJ,NY, PA & VA.
i KNOW that you've been told endlessly that the 9th & 10th Amendments do NOT mean what the plain text plainly says, but SORRY, i'm correct on this.
furthermore, my 18 ancestors were 100% "in the right", when they fought against the hegemony of the ELITES, against the ever worsening power of the northern Leviathan & FOR liberty.
It’s never too late to call “swattie’s law” (FreeRepublic’s version of Godwin’s law).
Hey swattie - I bet you could prove your claim of “100,ooo- 150,ooo” (whatever that means!) free blacks volunteering if you got a copy of Blackerby’s book and showed us.
What do you say?
we all note that you've managed, for once, to post a comment of more than 25 words without saying something disgusting, VULGAR and/or CRUDE.
PITY that you haven't figured out that you are just a SICK joke to everyone on FR. we all wish you GONE.
they won't care how many crude/ignorant/bigoted comments that you post, as there are NO ladies or impressionable children there to offend and (like you) they HATE the southland & southerners.
Ease up on the use of seemingly random CAPITALIZATIONS.
And we notice that you didn’t address the substance of my post, which is for you to put up of shut up. Should be easy to do....unless you are lying again.
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.