Civil War not about slavery?!?!

[American Horse]

Ever notice how the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in areas controlled by the North? It only applied to areas controlled by the South.

Myth #8

Once again, as I said before: Lincoln considered himself honorbound to comport himself within the constitution, therefore, because only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves. No act of congress or a president could change the constitution. In the mind and honor code of Lincoln, only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves.

That brings us to the Proclamation Emancipation:

The Proclamation Emancipation only applied where a state of war still existed between rebel forces and the forces of the union; The president's oath of office forbade him asserting law as his own moral conviction. But where a state of belligerence existed, he (Lincoln) had the power as Commander In Chief to declare the slaves free. And with it's enactment, it turned the Union Army into an army of liberation wherever it advanced.

As for slavery not being the cause of the war; Lincoln was elected president of the new Republican Party which was founded by Abolitionists, which explains why seven southern states seceded immediately after he was elected and before he could take office. And the violence and dispute about slavery in Missouri and subsequently Kansas/Nebraska were catalysts for abolition and secession, needing only the election of a Republican president as a tipping point to a split.

Without that secession of the seven southern states, which was first of all because of tensions over slavery, and their claiming federal property, there would have been no war. Slavery was the seminal issue.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What's your point? The Confederate states obviously left over slavery per the OP. Lincoln wanted to save the Union in anyway possible, but that doesn't change the underlying cause of the war. The quote, while interesting, is basically irrelevant on that point.

The point is that slavery wasn't the central issue....Lincoln's ego was.

Wrong; it wasn't his ego. It was his sense of honor and duty to the constitution. He hated slavery but he comported himself within the constitution. Where he went beyond the constitution, he was acting as the commander in chief of the armed forces in an area of belligerence with rebel forces.

Nothing about the Civil War had anything to do with the Constitution, and being the Commander-in-Chief doesn't give you the authority to go beyond the Constitution.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ever notice how the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in areas controlled by the North? It only applied to areas controlled by the South.

Myth #8

Once again, as I said before: Lincoln considered himself honorbound to comport himself within the constitution, therefore, because only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves. No act of congress or a president could change the constitution. In the mind and honor code of Lincoln, only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves.

That brings us to the Proclamation Emancipation:

The Proclamation Emancipation only applied where a state of war still existed between rebel forces and the forces of the union; The president's oath of office forbade him asserting law as his own moral conviction. But where a state of belligerence existed, he (Lincoln) had the power as Commander In Chief to declare the slaves free. And with it's enactment, it turned the Union Army into an army of liberation wherever it advanced.

As for slavery not being the cause of the war; Lincoln was elected president of the new Republican Party which was founded by Abolitionists, which explains why seven southern states seceded immediately after he was elected and before he could take office. And the violence and dispute about slavery in Missouri and subsequently Kansas/Nebraska were catalysts for abolition and secession, needing only the election of a Republican president as a tipping point to a split.

Without that secession of the seven southern states, which was first of all because of tensions over slavery, and their claiming federal property, there would have been no war. Slavery was the seminal issue.

The Republican Party was founded by abolitionists? I was under the impression it was founded by former Whigs after the Whig Party collapsed to continue the Hamilton-Clay agenda. Regardless, abolitionists had little to no political power in the United States at the time, north or south, and Lincoln himself claimed not to be an abolitionist and disliked abolitionists. Lincoln opposed the expansion of slavery because he didn't want free white workers to have to compete with enslaved black people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Fought for slavery ?

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol XVI Part I, pg. 805, Lt. Col. Parkhurst's Report (Ninth Michigan Infantry) on General Forrest's attack at Murfreesboro, Tenn, July 13, 1862:

"The forces attacking my camp were the First Regiment Texas Rangers, Colonel Wharton, and a battalion of the First Georgia Rangers, Colonel Morrison, and a large number of citizens of Rutherford County, many of whom had recently taken the oath of allegiance to the United States Government. There were also many negroes attached to the Texas and Georgia troops, who were armed and equipped, and took part in the several engagements with my forces during the day."

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XIV, pg. 24, second paragraph, Colonel B. C. Christ, 50th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, official report of May 30, 1862 regarding Confederate forces opposing him at Pocotaligo, SC.,

"It is also difficult to state the force of the enemy, but it could not have been less than from 600 to 800. There were six companies of mounted riflemen, besides infantry, among which were a considerable number of colored men."

Federal Official Records: Series 2, vol 6, Part 1 (Prisoners of War) p. 17-18

...before one single Negro or mulatto was mustered into the U.S. service you had them organized in arms in Louisiana. You had Indians and half-breed Negroes and Indians organized in arms under Albert Pike, in Arkansas. Subsequently Negroes were captured on the battlefield at Antietam and delivered as prisoners of war at Aiken's Landing to the Confederate authorities, and receipted for and counted in exchange."

Federal Official Records, Vol. XIII, Chapter XXV, pg. 688

"...We are not likely to use one Negro where the rebels have used a thousand. When I left Arkansas they were still enrolling Negroes to fortify the rebellion." - September, 1862

Federal Official Records, Series 1, Volume 4, p.569, Report of Colonel John W. Phelps, First Vermont Infantry: CAMP BUTLER, Newport News, Va., August 11, 1861 –

SIR: Scouts from this post represent the enemy as having retired, they came to New Market Bridge on Wednesday, and left the next day. They-the enemy-talked of having 9,000 men. They were recalled by dispatches from Richmond. They had twenty pieces of artillery, among which was the Richmond Howitzer Battery, manned by Negroes. . . Their numbers are probably overrated; but with regard to their artillery, and its being manned in part by Negroes, I think the report is probably correct."

Federal Official Records, Series 1, vol 35, Part 1 (Olustee), Page 442-443, S.C., FLA., AND ON THE GA. COAST. Chapter XLVII - Report of Brig. Gen/ Asboth, USA:

"...when I proceeded to Milton, Fla., a distance of 9 miles, and after rebuilding the destroyed bridge on the Arcadia Creek, I came upon the enemy, about 100 strong, and consisting of Captain Goldsby's (Alabama) cavalry company and a new militia infantry company, mounted...Having received early information of the arrival of two army steamers at Bayou Mulatte, the enemy had sent his stores on seven wagons in time toward Pollard, and seemed prepared and decided to accept a fight in the camp at the upper end of the town, but fled, upon our impetuous charge, in all directions. We pursued them closely for 7 miles, and captured 4 privates of Goldsby's company and 3 colored men, mounted and armed, with 7 horses and 5 mules with equipments, and 20 Austrian rifles."

Official Records

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You folks got this history thing all wrong. One of the biggest reasons for the Civil War was because the North would not allow grits to be served in eating establishments above the Mason Dixon Line.

Hell that would cause me to fight quicker than seeing a obama bumper sticker on a car.

 

[westwall]

Ever notice how the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in areas controlled by the North? It only applied to areas controlled by the South.

Myth #8

Once again, as I said before: Lincoln considered himself honorbound to comport himself within the constitution, therefore, because only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves. No act of congress or a president could change the constitution. In the mind and honor code of Lincoln, only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves.

That brings us to the Proclamation Emancipation:

The Proclamation Emancipation only applied where a state of war still existed between rebel forces and the forces of the union; The president's oath of office forbade him asserting law as his own moral conviction. But where a state of belligerence existed, he (Lincoln) had the power as Commander In Chief to declare the slaves free. And with it's enactment, it turned the Union Army into an army of liberation wherever it advanced.

As for slavery not being the cause of the war; Lincoln was elected president of the new Republican Party which was founded by Abolitionists, which explains why seven southern states seceded immediately after he was elected and before he could take office. And the violence and dispute about slavery in Missouri and subsequently Kansas/Nebraska were catalysts for abolition and secession, needing only the election of a Republican president as a tipping point to a split.

Without that secession of the seven southern states, which was first of all because of tensions over slavery, and their claiming federal property, there would have been no war. Slavery was the seminal issue.

Lincoln was at best inept and at worse intent on war. Seward told him repeatedly that if he did the things he ended up doing there would be war. He told him repeatedly how to avoid the war and Lincoln ignored him.

 

[hortysir]

Fought for slavery ?

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol XVI Part I, pg. 805, Lt. Col. Parkhurst's Report (Ninth Michigan Infantry) on General Forrest's attack at Murfreesboro, Tenn, July 13, 1862:

"The forces attacking my camp were the First Regiment Texas Rangers, Colonel Wharton, and a battalion of the First Georgia Rangers, Colonel Morrison, and a large number of citizens of Rutherford County, many of whom had recently taken the oath of allegiance to the United States Government. There were also many negroes attached to the Texas and Georgia troops, who were armed and equipped, and took part in the several engagements with my forces during the day."

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XIV, pg. 24, second paragraph, Colonel B. C. Christ, 50th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, official report of May 30, 1862 regarding Confederate forces opposing him at Pocotaligo, SC.,

"It is also difficult to state the force of the enemy, but it could not have been less than from 600 to 800. There were six companies of mounted riflemen, besides infantry, among which were a considerable number of colored men."

Federal Official Records: Series 2, vol 6, Part 1 (Prisoners of War) p. 17-18

...before one single Negro or mulatto was mustered into the U.S. service you had them organized in arms in Louisiana. You had Indians and half-breed Negroes and Indians organized in arms under Albert Pike, in Arkansas. Subsequently Negroes were captured on the battlefield at Antietam and delivered as prisoners of war at Aiken's Landing to the Confederate authorities, and receipted for and counted in exchange."

Federal Official Records, Vol. XIII, Chapter XXV, pg. 688

"...We are not likely to use one Negro where the rebels have used a thousand. When I left Arkansas they were still enrolling Negroes to fortify the rebellion." - September, 1862

Federal Official Records, Series 1, Volume 4, p.569, Report of Colonel John W. Phelps, First Vermont Infantry: CAMP BUTLER, Newport News, Va., August 11, 1861 –

SIR: Scouts from this post represent the enemy as having retired, they came to New Market Bridge on Wednesday, and left the next day. They-the enemy-talked of having 9,000 men. They were recalled by dispatches from Richmond. They had twenty pieces of artillery, among which was the Richmond Howitzer Battery, manned by Negroes. . . Their numbers are probably overrated; but with regard to their artillery, and its being manned in part by Negroes, I think the report is probably correct."

Federal Official Records, Series 1, vol 35, Part 1 (Olustee), Page 442-443, S.C., FLA., AND ON THE GA. COAST. Chapter XLVII - Report of Brig. Gen/ Asboth, USA:

"...when I proceeded to Milton, Fla., a distance of 9 miles, and after rebuilding the destroyed bridge on the Arcadia Creek, I came upon the enemy, about 100 strong, and consisting of Captain Goldsby's (Alabama) cavalry company and a new militia infantry company, mounted...Having received early information of the arrival of two army steamers at Bayou Mulatte, the enemy had sent his stores on seven wagons in time toward Pollard, and seemed prepared and decided to accept a fight in the camp at the upper end of the town, but fled, upon our impetuous charge, in all directions. We pursued them closely for 7 miles, and captured 4 privates of Goldsby's company and 3 colored men, mounted and armed, with 7 horses and 5 mules with equipments, and 20 Austrian rifles."

Official Records

In the South the black soldiers fought along side white soldiers.
In the north they were used like pawns and sent out in the first wave.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ever notice how the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in areas controlled by the North? It only applied to areas controlled by the South.

Myth #8

Once again, as I said before: Lincoln considered himself honorbound to comport himself within the constitution, therefore, because only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves. No act of congress or a president could change the constitution. In the mind and honor code of Lincoln, only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves.

That brings us to the Proclamation Emancipation:

The Proclamation Emancipation only applied where a state of war still existed between rebel forces and the forces of the union; The president's oath of office forbade him asserting law as his own moral conviction. But where a state of belligerence existed, he (Lincoln) had the power as Commander In Chief to declare the slaves free. And with it's enactment, it turned the Union Army into an army of liberation wherever it advanced.

As for slavery not being the cause of the war; Lincoln was elected president of the new Republican Party which was founded by Abolitionists, which explains why seven southern states seceded immediately after he was elected and before he could take office. And the violence and dispute about slavery in Missouri and subsequently Kansas/Nebraska were catalysts for abolition and secession, needing only the election of a Republican president as a tipping point to a split.

Without that secession of the seven southern states, which was first of all because of tensions over slavery, and their claiming federal property, there would have been no war. Slavery was the seminal issue.

Lincoln was at best inept and at worse intent on war. Seward told him repeatedly that if he did the things he ended up doing there would be war. He told him repeatedly how to avoid the war and Lincoln ignored him.

You mean that Lincoln is at fault for the southern states that seceded after he won the Presidency? You dimwits should be happy that Lincoln did not do what he had every right to do, have every Confederate officer that had been a Union officer before the war executed for treason.

As far as being inept, President Lincoln won that war while starting a trans-continental railway, and establishing the framework of the settlement of the western states. Today the United States is what it is as a result of the actions taken by President Lincoln. He is regarded by all but a few wingnuts as one of our greatest presidents.

 

[hortysir]

How can a state, that wasn't supposed to be accountable to a centralized government in the first place, be guilty of treason?

 

[westwall]

Once again, as I said before: Lincoln considered himself honorbound to comport himself within the constitution, therefore, because only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves. No act of congress or a president could change the constitution. In the mind and honor code of Lincoln, only a constitutional amendment could free the slaves.

That brings us to the Proclamation Emancipation:

The Proclamation Emancipation only applied where a state of war still existed between rebel forces and the forces of the union; The president's oath of office forbade him asserting law as his own moral conviction. But where a state of belligerence existed, he (Lincoln) had the power as Commander In Chief to declare the slaves free. And with it's enactment, it turned the Union Army into an army of liberation wherever it advanced.

As for slavery not being the cause of the war; Lincoln was elected president of the new Republican Party which was founded by Abolitionists, which explains why seven southern states seceded immediately after he was elected and before he could take office. And the violence and dispute about slavery in Missouri and subsequently Kansas/Nebraska were catalysts for abolition and secession, needing only the election of a Republican president as a tipping point to a split.

Without that secession of the seven southern states, which was first of all because of tensions over slavery, and their claiming federal property, there would have been no war. Slavery was the seminal issue.

Lincoln was at best inept and at worse intent on war. Seward told him repeatedly that if he did the things he ended up doing there would be war. He told him repeatedly how to avoid the war and Lincoln ignored him.

You mean that Lincoln is at fault for the southern states that seceded after he won the Presidency? You dimwits should be happy that Lincoln did not do what he had every right to do, have every Confederate officer that had been a Union officer before the war executed for treason.

As far as being inept, President Lincoln won that war while starting a trans-continental railway, and establishing the framework of the settlement of the western states. Today the United States is what it is as a result of the actions taken by President Lincoln. He is regarded by all but a few wingnuts as one of our greatest presidents.

Great leaders don't cause 600,000 of their citizens to be killed in war. Think of that olfraud, more people (Americans) died in the Civil War then in the two world wars, and there were fewer people back then and the technology was nowhere near as advanced so the effect was felt by every family.

Also gthe las time I checked he wasn't working on the railroad, that was being done by railroad magnates and the hard labor of a bunch of Irish and Chinese workers. And they did it for money, imagine that.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is not safe ... to trust $800 million worth of Negroes in the hands of a power which says that we do not own the property. ... So we must get out ..." — The Daily Constitutionalist, Augusta, Ga., Dec. 1, 1860

"[Northerners] have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery. ... We, therefore, the people of South Carolina ... have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and other States of North America dissolved." — from "Declaration of the Causes of Secession"

"As long as slavery is looked upon by the North with abhorrence ... there can be no satisfactory political union between the two sections." — New Orleans Bee, Dec. 14, 1860

"Our new government is founded upon ... the great truth that the Negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race is his natural and moral condition." — Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy, March 21, 1861

Leonard Pitts: What was the Civil War about? Listen to voices of the Confederacy - baltimoresun.com

It wasn't about slavery. BUT .... why didn't you just comment on one of the many threads on this topic already here?

How many times do we have to fight this damned war, anyway?

I've already made note of the fact that there are those who know the actual facts that created the war, and there are those that choose to willfully blind themselves thinking the war was fought over slaves.

Sure thing Gunny it wasn't about slavery? Five myths about why the South seceded - The Washington Post

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lincoln was at best inept and at worse intent on war. Seward told him repeatedly that if he did the things he ended up doing there would be war. He told him repeatedly how to avoid the war and Lincoln ignored him.

You mean that Lincoln is at fault for the southern states that seceded after he won the Presidency? You dimwits should be happy that Lincoln did not do what he had every right to do, have every Confederate officer that had been a Union officer before the war executed for treason.

As far as being inept, President Lincoln won that war while starting a trans-continental railway, and establishing the framework of the settlement of the western states. Today the United States is what it is as a result of the actions taken by President Lincoln. He is regarded by all but a few wingnuts as one of our greatest presidents.

Great leaders don't cause 600,000 of their citizens to be killed in war. Think of that olfraud, more people (Americans) died in the Civil War then in the two world wars, and there were fewer people back then and the technology was nowhere near as advanced so the effect was felt by every family.

Also gthe las time I checked he wasn't working on the railroad, that was being done by railroad magnates and the hard labor of a bunch of Irish and Chinese workers. And they did it for money, imagine that.

Lincoln did not do anything to cause the Civil War. Other then be elected.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Fought for slavery ?

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol XVI Part I, pg. 805, Lt. Col. Parkhurst's Report (Ninth Michigan Infantry) on General Forrest's attack at Murfreesboro, Tenn, July 13, 1862:

"The forces attacking my camp were the First Regiment Texas Rangers, Colonel Wharton, and a battalion of the First Georgia Rangers, Colonel Morrison, and a large number of citizens of Rutherford County, many of whom had recently taken the oath of allegiance to the United States Government. There were also many negroes attached to the Texas and Georgia troops, who were armed and equipped, and took part in the several engagements with my forces during the day."

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XIV, pg. 24, second paragraph, Colonel B. C. Christ, 50th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, official report of May 30, 1862 regarding Confederate forces opposing him at Pocotaligo, SC.,

"It is also difficult to state the force of the enemy, but it could not have been less than from 600 to 800. There were six companies of mounted riflemen, besides infantry, among which were a considerable number of colored men."

Federal Official Records: Series 2, vol 6, Part 1 (Prisoners of War) p. 17-18

...before one single Negro or mulatto was mustered into the U.S. service you had them organized in arms in Louisiana. You had Indians and half-breed Negroes and Indians organized in arms under Albert Pike, in Arkansas. Subsequently Negroes were captured on the battlefield at Antietam and delivered as prisoners of war at Aiken's Landing to the Confederate authorities, and receipted for and counted in exchange."

Federal Official Records, Vol. XIII, Chapter XXV, pg. 688

"...We are not likely to use one Negro where the rebels have used a thousand. When I left Arkansas they were still enrolling Negroes to fortify the rebellion." - September, 1862

Federal Official Records, Series 1, Volume 4, p.569, Report of Colonel John W. Phelps, First Vermont Infantry: CAMP BUTLER, Newport News, Va., August 11, 1861 –

SIR: Scouts from this post represent the enemy as having retired, they came to New Market Bridge on Wednesday, and left the next day. They-the enemy-talked of having 9,000 men. They were recalled by dispatches from Richmond. They had twenty pieces of artillery, among which was the Richmond Howitzer Battery, manned by Negroes. . . Their numbers are probably overrated; but with regard to their artillery, and its being manned in part by Negroes, I think the report is probably correct."

Federal Official Records, Series 1, vol 35, Part 1 (Olustee), Page 442-443, S.C., FLA., AND ON THE GA. COAST. Chapter XLVII - Report of Brig. Gen/ Asboth, USA:

"...when I proceeded to Milton, Fla., a distance of 9 miles, and after rebuilding the destroyed bridge on the Arcadia Creek, I came upon the enemy, about 100 strong, and consisting of Captain Goldsby's (Alabama) cavalry company and a new militia infantry company, mounted...Having received early information of the arrival of two army steamers at Bayou Mulatte, the enemy had sent his stores on seven wagons in time toward Pollard, and seemed prepared and decided to accept a fight in the camp at the upper end of the town, but fled, upon our impetuous charge, in all directions. We pursued them closely for 7 miles, and captured 4 privates of Goldsby's company and 3 colored men, mounted and armed, with 7 horses and 5 mules with equipments, and 20 Austrian rifles."

Official Records

In the South the black soldiers fought along side white soldiers.
In the north they were used like pawns and sent out in the first wave.

Sad but true.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It is not safe ... to trust $800 million worth of Negroes in the hands of a power which says that we do not own the property. ... So we must get out ..." — The Daily Constitutionalist, Augusta, Ga., Dec. 1, 1860

"[Northerners] have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery. ... We, therefore, the people of South Carolina ... have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and other States of North America dissolved." — from "Declaration of the Causes of Secession"

"As long as slavery is looked upon by the North with abhorrence ... there can be no satisfactory political union between the two sections." — New Orleans Bee, Dec. 14, 1860

"Our new government is founded upon ... the great truth that the Negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race is his natural and moral condition." — Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy, March 21, 1861

Leonard Pitts: What was the Civil War about? Listen to voices of the Confederacy - baltimoresun.com

It wasn't about slavery. BUT .... why didn't you just comment on one of the many threads on this topic already here?

How many times do we have to fight this damned war, anyway?

I've already made note of the fact that there are those who know the actual facts that created the war, and there are those that choose to willfully blind themselves thinking the war was fought over slaves.

Sure thing Gunny it wasn't about slavery? Five myths about why the South seceded - The Washington Post

Sarge, I'll trade you your modern day version for some histoorical factual reason for the cause of northern agression.

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol XVI Part I, pg. 805, Lt. Col. Parkhurst's Report (Ninth Michigan Infantry) on General Forrest's attack at Murfreesboro, Tenn, July 13, 1862:

"The forces attacking my camp were the First Regiment Texas Rangers, Colonel Wharton, and a battalion of the First Georgia Rangers, Colonel Morrison, and a large number of citizens of Rutherford County, many of whom had recently taken the oath of allegiance to the United States Government. There were also many negroes attached to the Texas and Georgia troops, who were armed and equipped, and took part in the several engagements with my forces during the day."

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XIV, pg. 24, second paragraph, Colonel B. C. Christ, 50th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, official report of May 30, 1862 regarding Confederate forces opposing him at Pocotaligo, SC.,

"It is also difficult to state the force of the enemy, but it could not have been less than from 600 to 800. There were six companies of mounted riflemen, besides infantry, among which were a considerable number of colored men."

Federal Official Records: Series 2, vol 6, Part 1 (Prisoners of War) p. 17-18

...before one single Negro or mulatto was mustered into the U.S. service you had them organized in arms in Louisiana. You had Indians and half-breed Negroes and Indians organized in arms under Albert Pike, in Arkansas. Subsequently Negroes were captured on the battlefield at Antietam and delivered as prisoners of war at Aiken's Landing to the Confederate authorities, and receipted for and counted in exchange."

Federal Official Records, Vol. XIII, Chapter XXV, pg. 688

"...We are not likely to use one Negro where the rebels have used a thousand. When I left Arkansas they were still enrolling Negroes to fortify the rebellion." - September, 1862

Federal Official Records, Series 1, Volume 4, p.569, Report of Colonel John W. Phelps, First Vermont Infantry: CAMP BUTLER, Newport News, Va., August 11, 1861 –

SIR: Scouts from this post represent the enemy as having retired, they came to New Market Bridge on Wednesday, and left the next day. They-the enemy-talked of having 9,000 men. They were recalled by dispatches from Richmond. They had twenty pieces of artillery, among which was the Richmond Howitzer Battery, manned by Negroes. . . Their numbers are probably overrated; but with regard to their artillery, and its being manned in part by Negroes, I think the report is probably correct."

Federal Official Records, Series 1, vol 35, Part 1 (Olustee), Page 442-443, S.C., FLA., AND ON THE GA. COAST. Chapter XLVII - Report of Brig. Gen/ Asboth, USA:

"...when I proceeded to Milton, Fla., a distance of 9 miles, and after rebuilding the destroyed bridge on the Arcadia Creek, I came upon the enemy, about 100 strong, and consisting of Captain Goldsby's (Alabama) cavalry company and a new militia infantry company, mounted...Having received early information of the arrival of two army steamers at Bayou Mulatte, the enemy had sent his stores on seven wagons in time toward Pollard, and seemed prepared and decided to accept a fight in the camp at the upper end of the town, but fled, upon our impetuous charge, in all directions. We pursued them closely for 7 miles, and captured 4 privates of Goldsby's company and 3 colored men, mounted and armed, with 7 horses and 5 mules with equipments, and 20 Austrian rifles."

Official Records

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Fought for slavery ?

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol XVI Part I, pg. 805, Lt. Col. Parkhurst's Report (Ninth Michigan Infantry) on General Forrest's attack at Murfreesboro, Tenn, July 13, 1862:

"The forces attacking my camp were the First Regiment Texas Rangers, Colonel Wharton, and a battalion of the First Georgia Rangers, Colonel Morrison, and a large number of citizens of Rutherford County, many of whom had recently taken the oath of allegiance to the United States Government. There were also many negroes attached to the Texas and Georgia troops, who were armed and equipped, and took part in the several engagements with my forces during the day."

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XIV, pg. 24, second paragraph, Colonel B. C. Christ, 50th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, official report of May 30, 1862 regarding Confederate forces opposing him at Pocotaligo, SC.,

"It is also difficult to state the force of the enemy, but it could not have been less than from 600 to 800. There were six companies of mounted riflemen, besides infantry, among which were a considerable number of colored men."

Federal Official Records: Series 2, vol 6, Part 1 (Prisoners of War) p. 17-18

...before one single Negro or mulatto was mustered into the U.S. service you had them organized in arms in Louisiana. You had Indians and half-breed Negroes and Indians organized in arms under Albert Pike, in Arkansas. Subsequently Negroes were captured on the battlefield at Antietam and delivered as prisoners of war at Aiken's Landing to the Confederate authorities, and receipted for and counted in exchange."

Federal Official Records, Vol. XIII, Chapter XXV, pg. 688

"...We are not likely to use one Negro where the rebels have used a thousand. When I left Arkansas they were still enrolling Negroes to fortify the rebellion." - September, 1862

Federal Official Records, Series 1, Volume 4, p.569, Report of Colonel John W. Phelps, First Vermont Infantry: CAMP BUTLER, Newport News, Va., August 11, 1861 –

SIR: Scouts from this post represent the enemy as having retired, they came to New Market Bridge on Wednesday, and left the next day. They-the enemy-talked of having 9,000 men. They were recalled by dispatches from Richmond. They had twenty pieces of artillery, among which was the Richmond Howitzer Battery, manned by Negroes. . . Their numbers are probably overrated; but with regard to their artillery, and its being manned in part by Negroes, I think the report is probably correct."

Federal Official Records, Series 1, vol 35, Part 1 (Olustee), Page 442-443, S.C., FLA., AND ON THE GA. COAST. Chapter XLVII - Report of Brig. Gen/ Asboth, USA:

"...when I proceeded to Milton, Fla., a distance of 9 miles, and after rebuilding the destroyed bridge on the Arcadia Creek, I came upon the enemy, about 100 strong, and consisting of Captain Goldsby's (Alabama) cavalry company and a new militia infantry company, mounted...Having received early information of the arrival of two army steamers at Bayou Mulatte, the enemy had sent his stores on seven wagons in time toward Pollard, and seemed prepared and decided to accept a fight in the camp at the upper end of the town, but fled, upon our impetuous charge, in all directions. We pursued them closely for 7 miles, and captured 4 privates of Goldsby's company and 3 colored men, mounted and armed, with 7 horses and 5 mules with equipments, and 20 Austrian rifles."

Official Records

In the South the black soldiers fought along side white soldiers.
In the north they were used like pawns and sent out in the first wave.

Sad but true.

Another lie. There were no black SOLDIERS in the South. They were used to build breast works and other manual labor. The South only even considered black soldiers in the last couple months of their existence and even then they voted no.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In the South the black soldiers fought along side white soldiers.
In the north they were used like pawns and sent out in the first wave.

Sad but true.

Another lie. There were no black SOLDIERS in the South. They were used to build breast works and other manual labor. The South only even considered black soldiers in the last couple months of their existence and even then they voted no.

wrong sarge wrong as wrong can be So you're trying to disput offical records of the north?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Confederate States Army

Because of the controversial nature of the subject the debate over how many African Americans served in Confederate uniform, and how many of them served willingly and without coercion is contentious. One estimate by Ed Smith of American University suggests that between 60,000 and 93,000 blacks, both slave and free, served in the Confederate military in some capacity; however, the vast majority of these were likely teamsters, cooks, musicians, and hospital attendants.

"Almost fifty years before the (Civil) War, the South was already enlisting and utilizing Black manpower, including Black commissioned officers, for the defense of their respective states. Therefore, the fact that Free and slave Black Southerners served and fought for their states in the Confederacy cannot be considered an unusual instance, rather continuation of an established practice with verifiable historical precedence." - The African-American Soldier: From Crispus Attucks to Colin Powell, by Lt. Col (retired) Michael Lee Lanning, Birch Lane Press (June 1997).

https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/African_American_Military_Records

 

[paperview]

In the South the black soldiers fought along side white soldiers.
In the north they were used like pawns and sent out in the first wave.

That is one big ole steaming pile of shit right there.

 

[paperview]

In the South the black soldiers fought along side white soldiers.
In the north they were used like pawns and sent out in the first wave.

Sad but true.

Another lie. There were no black SOLDIERS in the South. They were used to build breast works and other manual labor. The South only even considered black soldiers in the last couple months of their existence and even then they voted no.

Yup.

 

[paperview]

You mean that Lincoln is at fault for the southern states that seceded after he won the Presidency? You dimwits should be happy that Lincoln did not do what he had every right to do, have every Confederate officer that had been a Union officer before the war executed for treason.

As far as being inept, President Lincoln won that war while starting a trans-continental railway, and establishing the framework of the settlement of the western states. Today the United States is what it is as a result of the actions taken by President Lincoln. He is regarded by all but a few wingnuts as one of our greatest presidents.