The Fury of The North Scorned

[timewalker]

Originally Posted by Battalion

"In any case, I think our slave property will be lost eventually"
-Jefferson Davis, February 1861, contemplating the possibilities of war or peace.

Fine, Battalion, but what is the context of this quote? If we stay in the union our slave property will be lost eventually? If we go to war we will lose our slave property eventually? What is eventually? 5 years? 10 years? 100 years?

A simple quote like this, outside of its context, tells me nothing.

[M E Wolf]

Dear Timewalker and List Members;

Reminds me of the Hatfields and McCoys. The feud started generations back and in the 1990's I believe, relatives of both sides couldn't remember how it all began and decided it was time to stop the feud.

War has a habit of changing from its origins and mid-way and to the final ending. I see this in history and the present.

I agree, situations change however; the cause of any war should remain constant but, the pattern of war world wide does not support consistancy in the 'justification' of war; even though it was a 'just'/correct war. Also, war isn't exactly simple; it is very complexed due to the volume of individuals involved and the conflicts of war, etc.

Now, as far as the 'fury' of the North Scorned; if anything would get their undergarments in a wad; would be hearing from the South that they could 'whip' the North with one hand tied behind their back or, that Northern states, etc; didn't have the 'brass balls' to respond in kind, etc. Kindergarden bully, bait and manipulation actually but, on a larger scale. Perhaps the targeting of immigrants were also a means for those groups to become riled.
"Fighting Irish" didn't come from sitting on their fists. Poking once too many times, had awaken the need to poke back. Took a little while in perfecting their punch though but; punch they did.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf

[DHPatrick]

Originally Posted by unionblue

DH,

Neither were any of us.

But perhaps, you might want to concentrate on the original title of the thread, the "Fury of the North Scorned."

Was the North scorned? Did it get angry enough (the "fury" part, I imagine) to begin an war and kill it's fellow countrymen in the tens of thousands? What was it "scorned" over?

Maybe then we will see this thread take off again.

Just a suggestion.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Unionblue

Well here goes.

I don't know that the Union felt scorned. Of course I'm no scholar in the matter. I would suspect they could not allow these States to suceed from the Union. Who was to say the politicians in charge actually represented the people. Would the people actually fight to suceed from the Union? Didn't those States include hundreds of thousands of Slaves who probably didn't have a say in the matter.

On the other hand it was a fight that had been brewing for sometime. The Northern states' economy did not normally depend on slaves. The Southern States did. Considering the time line, did either side have a real choice?

[trice]

Originally Posted by timewalker

Fine, Battalion, but what is the context of this quote? If we stay in the union our slave property will be lost eventually? If we go to war we will lose our slave property eventually? What is eventually? 5 years? 10 years? 100 years?

A simple quote like this, outside of its context, tells me nothing.

The context of the quote:
=====
From Jefferson Davis, Ex-president of the Confederate States of America by Varina Davis, Belford Company, 1890

Mr. Davis was so careworn and unhappy that when we were alone it was piteous to see him. He never gave up the hope of an adjustment and a peaceful reunion with the North until the first blood was spilled. He slept little and talked nearly all night. In one of these conversations I asked the question, how he thought the contending sections could be pacified. He said " a guarantee of our equal rights would bring the whole country back to-morrow." He then spoke of a dual presidency, but did not think the scheme practicable. He said, "In any case, I think our slave property will be lost eventually," and then went on to speak of the cordon of custom-houses which would be needful, if a com- mercial treaty of free trade could not be made, and of the immense standing army that would necessarily deplete the resources of the country if the slaves were still to be kept in bondage. He went on to say that our swamp lands, he feared, could not be cultivated by white men. They were the most fertile lands in the country, but they must, he feared, lie fallow. That rivers were bad boundaries, and must necessarily constitute ours. He wound up, generally, by saying, "Let us pray for that peace on earth and good-will to men that is needful for prosperity and happiness." This expression is copied from one of his letters at this time, and I heard the invocation many times during and before the war.

We both congratulated ourselves that he was to be in the field. I thought his genius was military, but that, as a party manager, he would not succeed. He did not know the arts of the politician, and would not practise them if understood, and he did know those of war.
=====

So what you are looking at is the recollection of his wife close to 30 years after the event. This would be from the short time after he returned home from Washington to Mississippi, and before he was selected as President of the new Confederacy.

Tim

[M E Wolf]

Dear DHPatrick;

I think firing on Ft. Sumter also had something to do with Northern undergarments being in a bunch.

In general; the citizenship seeing that Ft. Sumter was a symbol; which the act was the slap on America's cheek per se. It would be no different if someone attacked an American post today--it will get a response.

September 11th; aka 9-11; political gloves dropped off and 'all American gloves put on.' Politics took a back seat--American grit stepped up.

The same with December 7th, Pearl Harbor. Life changed and people dropped what they had been doing and, as my father said--heads snapped into focus and resolve took root.

I do believe that those days of 'really' knowing your neighbors; are disappearing. However, being a old relic of the early 1950's; Johnny next door messed up; within five minutes every mother on the block would know about it; next block in eight; the whole neighborhood would know in 15 minutes. LOL Same thing happened if someone had trouble--example; neighbor's pump gave out; my father and other dads would grab their tool box and set off to that neighbor. The favor would be returned if my father ever needed help. Dad's finger was crushed in a yard accident; it was just minutes before a neighbor and doctor came; saw to it and went on their way. I broke my collar-bone as a tot; the story goes my head got caught in between the bars of the play-pen. I was so determined to escape jail (aka play-pen); I broke my collarbone. The neighborhood doctor made a house call and pinned my jammies into position holding my arm fast and sure; healing my collarbone.

Those days are almost gone. Times have changed but--Americans have always stepped up when needed. However, the premise of thought in those days were; if Neighbor Jones has his ox gored; it well could have been mine; therefore it is not just Neighbor Jones' problem --it is all of our problem.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by trice

The context of the quote:

So what you are looking at is the recollection of his wife close to 30 years after the event. This would be from the short time after he returned home from Washington to Mississippi, and before he was selected as President of the new Confederacy.

Tim

Thanks Tim. So Davis long after the war had ended contended that slavery had little to do with the CW. Yet here, before Davis became President of the Confederate States of America and the CW had began he spoke mainly about slavery's fundamental and important role in the South's grievences, its seccession and in the coming conflict with the North.

[trice]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Thanks Tim. So Davis long after the war had ended contended that slavery had little to do with the CW. Yet here, before Davis became President of the Confederate States of America and the CW had began he spoke mainly about slavery's fundamental and important role in the South's grievences, its seccession and in the coming conflict with the North.

No, not that. In a book published in 1890 his wife, Varina, recollected that he had said it in early 1861 in a private conversation. The conversation took place only between the two of them, and during the short period while he was home in Mississippi after Davis left the Senate in late January 21, 1861 and before he was selected as the new President of the Confederacy on February 9, 1861.

Tim