New Website on the American Civil War

[The Duke]

Blacks became slaves in the north if they went up there.
Notsomuch in Fl. It was different here.
If an escaped slave made it south of St. Mary's river, they were eligible for employment and property ownership in FL.
That's how it was. There were black crackers.
There'd be like..a few blacks in a crew, but if slave hunters come around, the blacks get hid and they gotta gotta deal with 10 armed white boys.
That's how it was from my state's perspective.
You will not hear about many slave hunters catching anything in Florida.
Maybe a case of the lead ass.
That was about a decade before the Civil War, too.
I got a jar full of Minie balls and .78 triple ring lime-encrusted conicals from around that time around here someplace.
Civil War practice range.
When I was young, there was a Matthew Brady battalion picture tacked up on the cedar chest that I still have.

 

[The Duke]

Here's a song I learned when I was 8.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And you're full of shit. As is proved by your inability to respond to my posts #(333), (336), and (338).

You and your ilk provide nothing of history. You provide only bullshit one liners. You say, "You are delusional". Oh yeah, that's real deep history there. No, that is more of your bullshit.

The U.S.A. today lives a lie. And it refuses to own up to the truth. It would rather live the lie then admit it's been full of shit all these years. Tear down the statues and flags of the real patriots, the South. And teach the lie of the real rebels and traitors, the North.

Glory, glory, hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, his lies keep marching on.....

Everybody sing now, 'glory glory hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, his lies keep marching on...

Just gives me goose bumps, that Battle Hymn of the Traitors.

Quantrill

says the guy defending slavery and lying about everything

 

[ding]

you are delusional.

He's a white supremacist.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Some scholars misuse the term "revisionist" to summarily dismiss research they don't like. Serious, objective scholars know that whether or not a book is "revisionist" is often in the eyes of the beholder and does not necessarily mean the research is invalid. They also know that "orthodox" or "mainstream" versions of events that were accepted for decades as factual were later "revised" and proven false.

For example, for decades the standard/accepted version of the Little Big Horn battle was that Custer lost the battle and got nearly half of his regiment killed in the process because he recklessly and blunderingly attacked a huge Indian force. This was the version pushed by the Republicans, including President Grant, right after the battle, and it remained the orthodox/mainstream view of the battle for decades. (Custer was a prominent Democrat.)

But, since at least the 1990s, the vast majority of scholars who've written on the subject reject the anti-Custer Republican narrative and agree that Custer's plan was sound but that his two chief subordinates, Major Reno and Captain Benteen, miserably failed to carry out their orders and sabotaged Custer's chances of victory. Over the last 20 years, virtually every book written about Custer has defended his actions at the Little Big Horn and has excoriated Reno and Benteen.

Even the award-winning liberal historian T. J. Stiles strongly defends Custer's performance at the Little Big Horn in his 2015 book Custer's Trials (which, by the way, won the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for history).

 

[Quantrill]

In post #(326) I showed how Jeff Davis had sent Commissioners from the Confederate government to negotiate terms concerning the Sumter crisis. And Davis noted how the Southern Commissioners were deceived, lied to, made to wait constantly by the Lincoln and Seward duo.

Here is an example of their deceit. On March 12, 1861 the Southern Commissioners met with Seward informing him of their peaceful purposes and wanting to meet with Lincoln. They gave Seward their letter of intent, expecting a letter or reply. (Rise And Fall Of The Confederate Government, Vol. 1, Jefferson Davis, Da Capo Press, 1990, p. 230)

Instead, Seward created a memorandum, dated March 15, his written reply to the Commissioners and filed it in the 'Department of State'. But it would be twenty-seven days later, before a copy of it was given to the Southern Commissioners, on April 8th. This letter was without address or signature. (Davis, p.230) Why? Because what was being told the Commissioners from March 15 to April 8, was not the same as what was in the letter of reply. Thus with no signature Lincoln and Seward could not be charged with lying about their real intentions.

Seward promised verbally that Sumter was to be evacuated within 5 days. And during the time between March 15, and April 8, constant delays would occur concerning the evacuation which was constantly verbally expressed would happen. But the real reply which was filed on March 15, said nothing of the sort. And a copy of it was not given to the Commissioners till April 8. What it said was that the Lincoln administration does not recognize any secession or any Southern Confederacy, so it cannot meet with the Commissioners. Thus the so-called 'evacuation' promises were all lies created to buy time to prepare for a military attack upon Sumter.

"Seward not only assented but told Campbell that he could also tell them the evacuation would happen within five days. Moreover, Seward said, Campbell could assure the commissioners that there also would be no effort to change the military status of Fort Pickens, the U.S. sea fortress in the Gulf of Mexico off Pensacola, Florida." (Demon Of Unrest, Erik Larson, Crown Publishing Group, p.337-338)

Concerning the real response not given till April 8th: "This action put Seward in a dilemma. He understood that the issue of secession had turned into one of recognition and that no hint of recognition could be given....For two days he stalled, saying a reply was being prepared. Instead he created a memorandum for the files to clarify his position and protect himself from any appearance of granting recognition. Lincoln approved the document." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Alfred A. Knopf Inc. Publisher, 1997, p. 329)

You can imagine the Southern Commissioners surprise on April 8th when seeing how they were lied to.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

In post #(326) I showed how Jeff Davis had sent Commissioners from the Confederate government to negotiate terms concerning the Sumter crisis. And Davis noted how the Southern Commissioners were deceived, lied to, made to wait constantly by the Lincoln and Seward duo.

Here is an example of their deceit. On March 12, 1861 the Southern Commissioners met with Seward informing him of their peaceful purposes and wanting to meet with Lincoln. They gave Seward their letter of intent, expecting a letter or reply. (Rise And Fall Of The Confederate Government, Vol. 1, Jefferson Davis, Da Capo Press, 1990, p. 230)

Instead, Seward created a memorandum, dated March 15, his written reply to the Commissioners and filed it in the 'Department of State'. But it would be twenty-seven days later, before a copy of it was given to the Southern Commissioners, on April 8th. This letter was without address or signature. (Davis, p.230) Why? Because what was being told the Commissioners from March 15 to April 8, was not the same as what was in the letter of reply. Thus with no signature Lincoln and Seward could not be charged with lying about their real intentions.

Seward promised verbally that Sumter was to be evacuated within 5 days. And during the time between March 15, and April 8, constant delays would occur concerning the evacuation which was constantly verbally expressed would happen. But the real reply which was filed on March 15, said nothing of the sort. And a copy of it was not given to the Commissioners till April 8. What it said was that the Lincoln administration does not recognize any secession or any Southern Confederacy, so it cannot meet with the Commissioners. Thus the so-called 'evacuation' promises were all lies created to buy time to prepare for a military attack upon Sumter.

"Seward not only assented but told Campbell that he could also tell them the evacuation would happen within five days. Moreover, Seward said, Campbell could assure the commissioners that there also would be no effort to change the military status of Fort Pickens, the U.S. sea fortress in the Gulf of Mexico off Pensacola, Florida." (Demon Of Unrest, Erik Larson, Crown Publishing Group, p.337-338)

Concerning the real response not given till April 8th: "This action put Seward in a dilemma. He understood that the issue of secession had turned into one of recognition and that no hint of recognition could be given....For two days he stalled, saying a reply was being prepared. Instead he created a memorandum for the files to clarify his position and protect himself from any appearance of granting recognition. Lincoln approved the document." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Alfred A. Knopf Inc. Publisher, 1997, p. 329)

You can imagine the Southern Commissioners surprise on April 8th when seeing how they were lied to. Quantrill

Everything you say here is factual, but you are missing some key facts:

-- Lincoln was under enormous pressure from the Radicals not to evacuate Sumter. Some Radicals in the Senate were already hinting that Lincoln was too soft on secession and unwilling to do what it took to maintain the Union (i.e., use force).

-- Lincoln was not about to meet with the Confederate commissioners because that would have been de facto recognition of the Confederacy. He was still hoping that at least some of the seven Deep South states would come to their senses, realize he posed no threat to them, and return to the Union.

-- The seven Deep South states had a constitutional duty to honor the results of the 1860 election. Lincoln won that election fairly and squarely, partially because the Democrats foolishly split their votes between three candidates because so many Deep South voters, prodded by radical pro-slavery propagandists, idiotically insisted on an all-or-nothing approach regarding the extension of slavery into the western territories.

-- Davis forced Lincoln's hand on sending the naval convoy when he cut off the food supply to the Sumter garrison, a foolish, senseless move that gave the Radicals the perfect excuse to demand that a naval convoy be sent to resupply the garrison.

-- Lincoln tried to make the relief convoy as non-threatening and non-provocative as possible.

-- Davis then severely compounded his blunder by deciding to bombard and seize Sumter, a catastrophically idiotic move that played right into the Radicals' hands. What he should have done was resumed the food supply and the simply ignored the garrison. News of the attack on Sumter struck like a lightening bolt across the North, enraging Northern public opinion and making it impossible for Lincoln and other moderates to avoid using force.

 

[gipper]

Everything you say here is factual, but you are missing some key facts:

-- Lincoln was under enormous pressure from the Radicals not to evacuate Sumter. Some Radicals in the Senate were already hinting that Lincoln was too soft on secession and unwilling to do what it took to maintain the Union (i.e., use force).

-- Lincoln was not about to meet with the Confederate commissioners because that would have been de facto recognition of the Confederacy. He was still hoping that at least some of the seven Deep South states would come to their senses, realize he posed no threat to them, and return to the Union.

-- The seven Deep South states had a constitutional duty to honor the results of the 1860 election. Lincoln won that election fairly and squarely, partially because the Democrats foolishly split their votes between three candidates because so many Deep South voters, prodded by radical pro-slavery propagandists, idiotically insisted on an all-or-nothing approach regarding the extension of slavery into the western territories.

-- Davis forced Lincoln's hand on sending the naval convoy when he cut off the food supply to the Sumter garrison, a foolish, senseless move that gave the Radicals the perfect excuse to demand that a naval convoy be sent to resupply the garrison.

-- Lincoln tried to make the relief convoy as non-threatening and non-provocative as possible.

-- Davis then severely compounded his blunder by deciding to bombard and seize Sumter, a catastrophically idiotic move that played right into the Radicals' hands. What he should have done was resumed the food supply and the simply ignored the garrison. News of the attack on Sumter struck like a lightening bolt across the North, enraging Northern public opinion and making it impossible for Lincoln and other moderates to avoid using force.

Lol. Yeah Lincoln was a moderate only seeking peace. Lol. Yet he threatened in his inaugural address that the South could keep slavery forever and there would be no war, but we’ll murder you if you don’t pay the tariff. So moderate!

It was really moderate of him to invade the South because SC shelled a fort the Union lied about evacuating, in which no one was injured. Then caused a war that killed 850,000 Americans and destroyed half of it, leading to a century of racism and poverty in the south. Nice job! So considerate and moderate.

To say nothing of his stated desire to deport all blacks after the war. So moderate of him.

Nice column here showing how nicely Lincoln treated civilians in the South. I know you being a prominent historian will appreciate these historical facts.

Lincoln’s Union Army Was More Evil Than the Israeli Defense Force​

By Paul Craig Roberts
…
Until Lincoln’s invasion of the Confederate States of America, war in the civilized Western world was confined to combatants. Lincoln broke the code of civilized warfare and conducted war against the civilian population of the South. The Americans and the British followed this practice in the war against Japan and Germany. The nuclear weapons of today mean that war is total and is conducted against all of humanity. Today we have this situation in which disagreement between the elites of two countries can result in the extermination of humanity.

The documented accounts in Cisco’s book of war against Southern civilians are horrific. In Missouri, for example, the populations of entire counties were forced on the penalty of death to leave their homes, businesses and properties and be relocated in Kansas. It was the precedent for Israel’s expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine.

In New Orleans, General Benjamin Butler, one of Lincoln’s many incompetent and hate-filled political appointees who had never commanded soldiers, responded to women who complained of the mistreatment of fathers, husbands, sons, and brothers by declaring the women “to be treated as a woman of the town plying her advocation.” Butler’s invitation to his troops to rape southern women astounded the British Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, who condemned it in a speech before the British Parliament.
…
When Union soldiers appeared in a Southern town, the town could expect to be totally looted and burnt to the ground. Cisco provides example after example.

When Lincoln’s army appeared on a plantation, the black slave women were mercilessly raped for the failure of slaves to revolt against their masters, thereby supporting the South’s war effort.

Lincoln’s war against the South was a war of hate. Many Union officers and generals were indoctrinated products of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, a propaganda publication that demonized the South as a society of slave owners mistreating slaves, as Union soldiers actually did. The hatred generated by Northern abolitionists resulted in the worst war crimes in human history.

Corrupt historians busy at work feathering the official narrative have kept buried the true history of the so-called “Civil War” which was not a civil war, but an invasion of one country by another.
Lincoln’s Union Army Was More Evil Than the Israeli Defense Force - LewRockwell

 

[Quantrill]

Everything you say here is factual, but you are missing some key facts:

-- Lincoln was under enormous pressure from the Radicals not to evacuate Sumter. Some Radicals in the Senate were already hinting that Lincoln was too soft on secession and unwilling to do what it took to maintain the Union (i.e., use force).

-- Lincoln was not about to meet with the Confederate commissioners because that would have been de facto recognition of the Confederacy. He was still hoping that at least some of the seven Deep South states would come to their senses, realize he posed no threat to them, and return to the Union.

-- The seven Deep South states had a constitutional duty to honor the results of the 1860 election. Lincoln won that election fairly and squarely, partially because the Democrats foolishly split their votes between three candidates because so many Deep South voters, prodded by radical pro-slavery propagandists, idiotically insisted on an all-or-nothing approach regarding the extension of slavery into the western territories.

-- Davis forced Lincoln's hand on sending the naval convoy when he cut off the food supply to the Sumter garrison, a foolish, senseless move that gave the Radicals the perfect excuse to demand that a naval convoy be sent to resupply the garrison.

-- Lincoln tried to make the relief convoy as non-threatening and non-provocative as possible.

-- Davis then severely compounded his blunder by deciding to bombard and seize Sumter, a catastrophically idiotic move that played right into the Radicals' hands. What he should have done was resumed the food supply and the simply ignored the garrison. News of the attack on Sumter struck like a lightening bolt across the North, enraging Northern public opinion and making it impossible for Lincoln and other moderates to avoid using force.

Well, of course Lincon was under pressure, just like Buchannan was under pressure, from not just radicals in the Senate, but from the Northern population as a whole.

No one is blaming Lincoln for not meeting with the Confederate Commissioners. He and Seward are to be blamed for lying to the Commissioners to buy time for his deceptive plan for an armed Naval attack to support Sumter. Seward and Lincoln lied to buy time for their real goal which was the reinforcement of Sumter.

The deep South states did come to their senses which is why they seceded in the first place. They then came to their senses and realized you couldn't take Lincoln and his administration at their word. They would lie and manipulate to get what they wanted.

No, Davis didn't force Lincoln's hand. Lincoln's plan was for war. Once the subterfuge was plain on the part of Lincoln, there was no choice but go to war. Once the decision is made for war, you don't feed your enemies.

No, Lincoln tried to hide his reinforcement fleet to Sumter as he knew it would be provocative. Just as at the same time when he sent ships to Fort Pickens to do the exact same thing, which was to reinforce and hold the fort. Which they did with Pickens.

No, the firing on Fort Sumter played into Lincoln's hands. He wanted the South to fire the first shot so he and his lying administration would be seen as the defenders of liberty and all that is great in the Union. In other words, Lincoln started the war, which was his plan.

Your statement, 'he should have resumed the food supply and simply ignored the garrison' is stupid. I will supply Jeff Davis statements concerning it in the next post.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

"This grip had been held on the throat of South Carolina for almost four months form the period of her secession, and no forcible resistance to it had yet been made. Remonstrances and patient, persistent, and reiterated attempts at negotiation for its removal had been made with two successive administrations of the government of the United States--at first by the state of South Carolina, and by the government of the Confederate States after its formation....

"These efforts had been met, not by an open avowal of coercive purposes, but by evasion, prevarication, and perfidy...

"The protracted course of fraud and prevarication practiced by Lincoln's administration in the months from March and April has been fully exhibited. It was evident that no confidence whatever could be reposed in any pledge or promise of the federal government as then administered."

"Yet, notwithstanding all this, no resistance, other than that of pacific protest and appeals for an equitable settlement was made, until after the avowal of a purpose of coercion, and when it was known that a hostile fleet was on the way to support and enforce it. At the very moment when the Confederate commander gave the final notice to Major Anderson of his purpose to open fire upon the fort, that fleet was lying off the mouth of the harbor, and hindered from entering only by a gale of wind." (Rise And Fall Of The Confederate Government, Jefferson Davis, Vol. 1, Da Capo Press, 1990, p.251-252)

More to come later.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

During these days of deception and delay between March 12 and April 8, by the Lincoln administration, Captain Fox was sent to meet with Anderson at Fort Sumter under the ruse of peace to find out Anderson's true need for provisions and how long they would last. Governor Pickens of South Carolina gave his permission.

But this is the same Capt. Fox whose plan of reinforcing Sumter with troops and munitions by the force of a large Naval flotilla, complete with warships, had been accepted by Lincoln and was in the process of being arranged. Captain Fox is not going to learn about food supplies. He is going to seek out a place to bring his ships and land his troops, munitions, and provisions.

So, Fox meets with Anderson at Sumter. "They reached Sumter shortly after dark and were met by Anderson and some other officers. Fox handed the major some letters, then walked with him while Hartstene talked with the others. As they reached the parapet, Anderson earnestly condemned Fox's plan for sending relief. It was too late, and he agreed with Scott that nothing could get in from the sea." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Publisher, 1997, p. 341)

But Fox really wasn't interested in Anderson's opinion, he was there to gather information about how to enact his plan of reinforcing Sumter. "While Anderson talked, Fox heard oars nearby but could not see any boat coming in under cover of night, and pointed to a spot where such a landing might be attempted. Anderson showed little interest, and Fox said no more." (Klein, p. 342)

Days later, another emissary of Lincoln, Ward Lamon, met with Governor Pickens of South Carolina, and asked to meet with Anderson to help arrange for the evacuation of Sumter. Pickens said, "In a very few days after...another confidential agent, Colonel Lamon, was sent by the President [Mr. Lincoln], who informed me that he had come to try and arrange for the removal of the garrison, and, when he returned from the fort, asked if a war-vessel could not be allowed to remove them. I replied that no war-vessel could be allowed to enter the harbor on any terms. He said he believed Major Anderson preferred an ordinary steamer, and I agreed that the garrison might thus be removed. He said he hoped to return in a very few days for that purpose." (Rise And Fall Of The Confederate Government, Vol. 1, Jefferson Davis, Da Capo Press Inc., 1990, p.234-235)

Anderson at this stage is also under the impression that they will be evacuated from Sumter.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

The Southern Commissioners are still waiting for word from Seward as to when the evacuation will take place. Word had leaked out that a Naval fleet was on its way to reinforce Sumter and was printed in the press. The Commissioners heard it and thought it may be to Fort Pickens the Naval flotilla was headed. Worried, they sought Seward's word again on Sumter.

"On the 7th they asked Cambell to prod Seward again on the withdrawal from Sumter. The judge wrote Seward that same day and received an undated, unsigned note: 'Faith as to Sumter fully kept. Wait and see'." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Publisher Alfred A. Knopf, In., 1997, p.392)

With the rumor of a Naval fleet coming to Sumter and Sewards unsigned note, a new picture was emerging of what was really taking place. Charleston was on edge and preparing for an attack. Cambell sent John Pickett to Sewards home for an answer but he was told Seward was out by Fred Seward, Sewards's son. (Klein p. 392-393) Upon which, "Pickett gave Fred Seward notice that the commissioners wished an answer to their note of March 12, and said he would call at the State Department the next day at 2 p.m." (Klein, p. 392-393)

The note of March 12 asked for a recognition of the Confederacy and how to deal with the Sumter issue. To which verbally the Commissioners were told Sumter would be evacuated but nothing given them in writing. But now on April 8th, a copy of the dubious memorandum, unsigned and not addressed, but dated as March 15th, that Seward and Lincoln created and put in the State Department files, was presented to the Commissioners. This note rejected any recognition of the Confederacy. And it is this that Seward no doubt referred to when he gave to Cambell the undated and unsigned note on the 7th, 'Faith to Sumter fully kept. Wait and see'. In other words, not faith to what was verbally said, but faith toward what was written and filed on March 15th. Which was just now presented to the Commissioners.

Deception and lies characterize the Lincoln administration. And now a full Naval flotilla is on the way to Sumter, for just to deliver food, they say. And you are to believe them....why?

Quantrill

 

[gipper]

The Southern Commissioners are still waiting for word from Seward as to when the evacuation will take place. Word had leaked out that a Naval fleet was on its way to reinforce Sumter and was printed in the press. The Commissioners heard it and thought it may be to Fort Pickens the Naval flotilla was headed. Worried, they sought Seward's word again on Sumter.

"On the 7th they asked Cambell to prod Seward again on the withdrawal from Sumter. The judge wrote Seward that same day and received an undated, unsigned note: 'Faith as to Sumter fully kept. Wait and see'." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Publisher Alfred A. Knopf, In., 1997, p.392)

With the rumor of a Naval fleet coming to Sumter and Sewards unsigned note, a new picture was emerging of what was really taking place. Charleston was on edge and preparing for an attack. Cambell sent John Pickett to Sewards home for an answer but he was told Seward was out by Fred Seward, Sewards's son. (Klein p. 392-393) Upon which, "Pickett gave Fred Seward notice that the commissioners wished an answer to their note of March 12, and said he would call at the State Department the next day at 2 p.m." (Klein, p. 392-393)

The note of March 12 asked for a recognition of the Confederacy and how to deal with the Sumter issue. To which verbally the Commissioners were told Sumter would be evacuated but nothing given them in writing. But now on April 8th, a copy of the dubious memorandum, unsigned and not addressed, but dated as March 15th, that Seward and Lincoln created and put in the State Department files, was presented to the Commissioners. This note rejected any recognition of the Confederacy. And it is this that Seward no doubt referred to when he gave to Cambell the undated and unsigned note on the 7th, 'Faith to Sumter fully kept. Wait and see'. In other words, not faith to what was verbally said, but faith toward what was written and filed on March 15th. Which was just now presented to the Commissioners.

Deception and lies characterize the Lincoln administration. And now a full Naval flotilla is on the way to Sumter, for just to deliver food, they say. And you are to believe them....why?

Quantrill

It is obvious from the historical record Lincoln was purposely deceptive about evacuation of Ft Sumter and wanted to maneuver SC into firing the first shot. He succeeded.

This tactic has been used by many US Presidents since Lincoln’s deceit. Amazingly millions of Americans TODAY still believe the South started the war because they fired a few shells at Ft Sumter, in which no one was injured. And, they conclude Lincoln justified in prosecuting that war that caused so much death and destruction.

 

[mikegriffith1]

For those who might be interested, I've added an article to my Civil War site. The article is about the Republicans' misguided rejection of the Crittenden Compromise:

Choosing War: The Defeat of a Reasonable Compromise Plan that Could Have Preserved the Union without Bloodshed

The article is only four pages long. So, before anyone attacks it, they should take 5-10 minutes to read it first.

The Crittenden plan gave the Republicans most of what they said wanted regarding slavery in the territories, fugitive slave courts, and the role of federal marshals in apprehending runaway slaves. It would have banned slavery in 66% of the western territories and would have restricted slavey to the area south of the 36-30 Missouri Compromise line, most of which was unsuitable for slave labor. It would have substantially reduced the percentage of territory open to slavery under the Missouri Compromise.

But the Republicans took an all-or-nothing position slavery in the territories, even though very few slaveholders had shown any interest in relocating to the territories (there were fewer than 50 slaves in all the western territories as of 1860).

 

[RetiredGySgt]

For those who might be interested, I've added an article to my Civil War site. The article is about the Republicans' misguided rejection of the Crittenden Compromise:

Choosing War: The Defeat of a Reasonable Compromise Plan that Could Have Preserved the Union without Bloodshed

The article is only four pages long. So, before anyone attacks it, they should take 5-10 minutes to read it first.

The Crittenden plan gave the Republicans most of what they said wanted regarding slavery in the territories, fugitive slave courts, and the role of federal marshals in apprehending runaway slaves. It would have banned slavery in 66% of the western territories and would have restricted slavey to the area south of the 36-30 Missouri Compromise line, most of which was unsuitable for slave labor. It would have substantially reduced the percentage of territory open to slavery under the Missouri Compromise.

But the Republicans took an all-or-nothing position slavery in the territories, even though very few slaveholders had shown any interest in relocating to the territories (there were fewer than 50 slaves in all the western territories).

ya I mean a little slavery is better than none right? You apologists for the south openly support slavery.

 

[gipper]

For those who might be interested, I've added an article to my Civil War site. The article is about the Republicans' misguided rejection of the Crittenden Compromise:

Choosing War: The Defeat of a Reasonable Compromise Plan that Could Have Preserved the Union without Bloodshed

The article is only four pages long. So, before anyone attacks it, they should take 5-10 minutes to read it first.

The Crittenden plan gave the Republicans most of what they said wanted regarding slavery in the territories, fugitive slave courts, and the role of federal marshals in apprehending runaway slaves. It would have banned slavery in 66% of the western territories and would have restricted slavey to the area south of the 36-30 Missouri Compromise line, most of which was unsuitable for slave labor. It would have substantially reduced the percentage of territory open to slavery under the Missouri Compromise.

But the Republicans took an all-or-nothing position slavery in the territories, even though very few slaveholders had shown any interest in relocating to the territories (there were fewer than 50 slaves in all the western territories).

Thank you for posting this. It appears to be a fair and balanced explanation. However I dispute your assertions about Lincoln.

Lincoln was a good man and a great leader, but he showed overly partisan, inflexible reasoning in opposing the Crittenden Compromise. Lincoln harbored no hostile intentions toward the South. He proved this in his two inaugural addresses and in his lenient, merciful terms for readmitting the seceded states into the Union. Before the war began, he sincerely believed that any war between the North and the South would be brief, that it would end in a matter of months, and that it would result in the restoration of the Union as it was before the election. Perhaps this was why he adamantly opposed any reasonable compromise on slavery in the territories.

A good or great leader should do all he can to avoid war, particularly warring on his fellow citizens. Lincoln didn’t do this. Had he forcibly voiced his support for the Crittenden Compromise, war might have been avoided.

In addition as you must know, he made it clear in his first inaugural there would be war if the tariff wasn’t paid. Hardly the words of a leader seeking compromise and avoidance of war.

Thinking the war would be short so let’s do it, is ignorant. Anyone who has studied wars knows they often result in unexpected consequences. Lincoln surely knew this, but still chose war.

You appear to be trying to present a moderate peaceful Lincoln which is obviously inaccurate, but common to court jester historians pushing the Lincoln Myth.

 

[gipper]

ya I mean a little slavery is better than none right? You apologists for the south openly support slavery.

Yet another fifth grade government school response. Stop posting here. All you know is what you were told in grade school decades ago. I’m betting you’ve never read a book on the war, slavery, or Lincoln.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yet another fifth grade government school response. Stop posting here. All you know is what you were told in grade school decades ago. I’m betting you’ve never read a book on the war, slavery, or Lincoln.

supporting the south which left the Union over slavery means you support their position. Pretty simple concept even for a 5th grader to grasp.

 

[gipper]

supporting the south which left the Union over slavery means you support their position. Pretty simple concept even for a 5th grader to grasp.

5th grade thinking. Read book MFer!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

5th grade thinking. Read book MFer!

I have read numerous books on many wars including the Civil War, you retards and your claims are ignorant and you are openly supporting slavery.