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
Most likely went into Knox, Blount, and Hamilton County. Other counties there were few including in the more northern counties. Although formed before the Civil War not many if any went to Union County, Campbell, Claiborne counties. Cocke County on the mountain maybe had a small community as well but nothing like the more populated areas. Some went into Anderson County but most went into the more developed cities like Knoxville of nearby like the current Alcoa.
There was a community near where I live I'm fairly certain blacks moved into likely immediate Post Civil War but by the early 1960's had moved on. Not due to any harassment but the fact the area was too far to drive for employment and the land was too difficult to work. They had existed there living off the land.
Another indication is in the Knoxville National Cemetery itself the old one not the new one. I worked there at one time and there were quite a few USCT markers.
James Ford Rhodes gave this in his book, History of the Civil War, 1917:
“The steamer Nashville from New York [merchant steamer] and a number of merchant vessels reached the bar and awaited the result of the bombardment, giving indications to those inside of a large naval fleet off the harbor.” G. V. Fox, O. R. N., IV, 249;
Very good choice of words.
The facts are that Lincoln sent a secret naval group with armed forces, tasked to fight their way into Charleston Harbor, with last minute notice to the Governor of SC.
That information was passed on to Confederate military headquarters.
They decided to make their stand there. The same thing had happened to their ancestors in June of 1776.
The fact is that Lincoln notified Governor Pickens of his intent. The message was delivered by a personal emissary on April 8 making clear the purpose of the fleet was to land food and supplies only, and arms and munitions would be landed only if the effort was opposed. The confederate government was aware of what was in the offing long before Chew delivered the message to Pickens, and Davis ordered that any resupply of any kind be opposed. The entire question of war or peace was left in the hands of Jefferson Davis and as we know, he chose war. And got more than he bargained for.
And they would and did do it again.
The Confederate government knew that they would have to face the coming aggression somewhere.....Savannah, Florida, New Orleans?
Lincoln had demanded the continuance of the tariff revenue in his inaugural speech, and it was clear that he would have to retain the money flow. Besides, the US Treasury would default within two months of any interruption of the tariffs.
So the Treasury defaulted by June 1861? I must have missed that somehow? Can you provide the date of default?
You are in error. Read the post again.
You are in error. Read the post again.
Then President-elect Lincoln said this just a few days later:
“The words ‘coercion’ and ‘invasion’ are in great use about these days. Suppose we were simply to try if we can, and ascertain what, is the meaning of these words. Let us get, if we can, the exact definitions of these words-—not from dictionaries, but from the men who constantly repeat them-—what things they mean to express by the words.
What, then, is `coercion’? What is `invasion’? Would the marching of an army into South California, for instance, without the consent of her people, and in hostility against them, be coercion or invasion? I very frankly say, I think it would be invasion, and it would be coercion too, if the people of that country were forced to submit.”
Then just a mere eight weeks later, he instructed the Commandant of the Navy Yard in Brooklyn to outfit ships and under no circumstances communicate to the Navy Department the fact that the ships are fitting out."
He also instructed his cabinet to maintain secrecy.
On the evening of April 8, 1861, Union Lieutenant Talbot, a frequent messenger to Ft. Sumter, accompanied a State Department clerk, Robert Chew who read a note that announced that the fort would be supplied with provisions at every hazard. This dispatch read,
"I am directed by the President of the United States to notify you to expect an attempt will be made to supply Fort Sumter with provisions only, and that if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to throw in men, arms, or ammunition, will be made, without further notice, or in case of attack."
Lincoln’s note was not signed, nor did the courier carry any orders for receiving a reply from the Governor. Talbot was denied access to Major Anderson.
Lincoln did not say he would land men if opposed. Nor did he say that he would fight his way in if opposed, though those are the exact orders he gave to his fleet.
He said only that he was coming with food and that he would not land men if his ships were received. His memo to Pickens was a carefully phrased message designed to deceive and provoke.
Even if Lincoln said he was not going to land men both his manner of delivery and past experience gave Pickens more than ample reason to oppose it. The same northerners who had tried to sneak arms into Sumter three months earlier, were now sending a naval fleet to accomplish their goal of requiring the obedience of the people of South Carolina to the laws of the Union instead of the Confederacy.
.
Certainly.
A Sailor of Fortune: Personal Memoirs of Captain B.S. Osbon.
Page 118.
Am I? You said, "Besides, the US Treasury would default within two months of any interruption of the tariffs." Now if we assume the interruption date was April 13, though I doubt much in the way of tariff revenue had been collected before that, then that would mean that the treasury would default 2 months later. In June. Well did they? Default, I mean?
It appears from your source that the stopping of the Nashville took place miles west of where the shot across her bows was fired and had to do with the bombardment and the bar than the shot.
Then just a mere eight weeks later, he instructed the Commandant of the Navy Yard in Brooklyn to outfit ships and under no circumstances communicate to the Navy Department the fact that the ships are fitting out."
Lincoln's intention to hold on to property belonging to the United States was no secret. He had promised to do so in the speech at Indianapolis, in his inaugural address, and elsewhere.
Lincoln’s note was not signed, nor did the courier carry any orders for receiving a reply from the Governor.
The message was verbal, not written. Chew identified who it was from. And no, he was not authorized to accept a reply. What reply was necessary?
Lincoln did not say he would land men if opposed. Nor did he say that he would fight his way in if opposed, though those are the exact orders he gave to his fleet.
Don't you read your own posts? He said no attempt would be made to land men or munitions unless the resupply was opposed. The exact words were, "...an attempt will be made to supply Fort Sumter with provisions only, and that if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to throw in men, arms, or ammunition, will be made, without further notice, or in case of attack." It's right there.
His memo to Pickens was a carefully phrased message designed to deceive and provoke.
His message was crystal clear. Peaceful resupply is possible, reinforcement if Davis chose war. Davis chose war.
Even if Lincoln said he was not going to land men both his manner of delivery and past experience gave Pickens more than ample reason to oppose it.
But no right. Sumter was a federal post. Lincoln, as commander in chief, was well within his authority to send supplies to the garrison. If anything, the South had given him ample reason to go in with guns blazing. But he was trying to avoid a war. A war that Davis was anxious to start.
as a docent at Manassas Battlefield said on the recent anniversary of the battle:
president lincoln & his cabinet figured that calling up troops, "showing the flag" & perhaps one battle would COW the secessionists into "turning tail & returning to the union". as a result of this MIScalculation a MILLION Americans on both sides NEEDLESSLY died for NOTHING of REAL value. (emphasis: MINE)
fyi, i've never heard it said better.
free dixie,sw
Here is your data:
For year 1860, total value of imports into the United States Treasury houses was $336,000,000. (Data from the Department of the Treasury, mid year report).
When you asked me the source of the data, I gave you the source, the US Treasury Report.
President Buchanan’s Message and Documents to the 36th Congress for 1859-1860 also contain the same data.
For consistancy, what was the value of imports at US ports of entry as documented by the Customs house, less specie and re-exports in 1859?
The Treasury report gives a figure of $317,000,000.
Kettell in 1860 reported that according to the US Treasury report of 1856, page 101, it is stated that the amount of European imported goods consumed in the US in 1850 was $163,186,000. According to his data, the distribution of that amount was to the South $43,000,000; to the West $35,000,000; and to the North $85,180,000.
Referring again to the imports of 1859 of $317 million, and if they were distributed in the same proportion, then Southern consumption would be $106,000,000; for Western $63,000,000; and for the North $149,000,000. At the time that he wrote his paper, he did not yet have the 1860 census report.
Kettell then provided data from the 1850 US Census that shows that the sales of domestic manufactures (domestic imports) to the South were $146,000,000 for that year.
He then researched the manufacturing data and determined that between 1850 and 1859 that the manufacturing output had doubled, and that also the means of payment (on hand assets) for the South had increased at an even greater ratio.
His extrapolated data then is that the inter-sectional trade of 1859 was Northern manufactures sold to the South $240,000,000; imported goods sold or direct shipped to the South $106,000,000.
Based on this data, for 1859, the total value of goods shipped into the South (imported) was $346,000,000.
Another source, an Encarta article, said that the total Southern imports in 1860 were $331,000,000.
free dixie,sw
I doubt you heard it said there at all. I've learned from past experience that it's impossible to believe anything you say.
EVERYONE whose IQ is greater than their belt size KNOWS that DECEPTION, HALF-truths,"changing the subject", DIVERSIONS & outright FALSEHOODS are your "stock in trade".
you are KNOWN by almost everyone (who frequents the WBTS threads)to be a PROPAGANDIST for the MOST radical of the unionists/leftists/REVISIONISTS & nothing more than that.
otoh, you ARE intelligent/educated, so at least you KNOW the TRUTH even when you try to deny it.
free dixie,sw
Thank you. I saw that quote a while back on the US Coast Guard historical site regarding the Harriet Lane. They did not source the book, and when I called them to source it, they connected me with one of their historians who could not source it.
That’s why I asked.
Taking the Kettel figures for a moment, he says that the South consumed $43 million of the $163 million in European imports. That would indicate that they provided, at most, a fraction over 26% of the tariff revenue. Considerably short of the 83% that Benson claimed and which you said Kettel supported.
Referring again to the imports of 1859 of $317 million, and if they were distributed in the same proportion, then Southern consumption would be $106,000,000; for Western $63,000,000; and for the North $149,000,000. At the time that he wrote his paper, he did not yet have the 1860 census report.
Your math is off. I make 26% of $317 million to be closer to $82.4 million and not $106 million. And for Benson's claim to be correct, the amount of Southern imports would have to be close to $263 million.
Based on this data, for 1859, the total value of goods shipped into the South (imported) was $346,000,000.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the South did not pay tariffs on goods shipped in from the North? So those goods could not, under any circumstances, be considered imports. So those cannot be considered when trying to determine which section paid the majority of the tariff income.
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.