The Sunken Fact: Lincoln Instigated the War

The answer to this post and the subsequent post: the willingness of the Confederate Commissioners to go to Washington in the first place should have given Lincoln an inkling that negotiation might be worth the time to sit down and talk with them.

But the description of what they were there for was in the letter Davis sent to Lincoln made it clear that there were to be no negotiations. Surrender first. Surrender period. Davis was willing to send his delegation to accept that surrender. Lincoln wasn't interested in surrendering. So what was there for them to talk about?
 
Last edited:
Largely because of posters such as yourself. :rolleyes:

Your logic is difficult to argue with - because it is nonexistent. You said you write about topics that you haven't followed because of the people who posted them. This begs the question: Why should anyone waste their time reading your posts?

First, I was accused of offering only opinions. Then I was challenged to provide sources for the facts I had already cited to support my opinions. When I did so, that was ignored.
 
Last edited:
Simmer down folks. If this arguing whose facts are opinions and whose opinions are facts does not end, we will close the thread for a time out. That way you will have to simmer down.

Posted as Moderator.
 
Which facts are you questioning, the Corwin Amendment (which is not the only such amendment I could have quoted - there were the Crittendon Compromise amendments as well)? Taney's draft opinion that was pre-empted by secession (source, Chandra Manning, in her book, "What this Cruel War was Over," citing Paul Finkelman, in "An Imperfect Union: Slavery, Federalism and Comity," U. NC Press, 1981)? The Dred Scot decision (needs documentation? Seriously???) The fact that the fundamental dispute behind the war was over the expansion of slavery (2 whole threads filled with documentation that I started on this very website)? Do either of us know what you're talking about?
Thank you. Supposing requires resources. Thanks for the references. I am not trying to see all your resources though you do have some good ones.
 
Your logic is difficult to argue with - because it is nonexistent. You said you write about topics that you haven't followed because of the people who posted them. This begs the question: Why should anyone waste their time reading your posts?

First, I was accused of offering only opinions. Then I was challenged to provide sources for the facts I had already cited to support my opinions. When I did so, that was ignored.
That hurts don't it? Happens to me all the time. Keep reading. I don't have time to set here at the computer like some do waiting for a conversation.
 
But the description of what they were there for was in the letter Davis sent to Lincoln made it clear that there were to be no negotiations. Surrender first. Surrender period. Davis was willing to send his delegation to accept that surrender. Lincoln wasn't interested in surrendering. So what was there for them to talk about?


Will you provide a credible link or source verifying a Davis to Lincoln letter making such a demand, I don't recall Lincoln scholar Richard N. Current mentioning that particular proviso in his Lincoln and the First Shot.
 
Will you provide a credible link or source verifying a Davis to Lincoln letter making such a demand, I don't recall Lincoln scholar Richard N. Current mentioning that particular proviso in his Lincoln and the First Shot.

You know the letter in question so why are you acting like you have never read it?

Davis Letter Lincoln

Davis gave the purpose - surrender to rebel demands that Lincoln recognize the legitimacy of the Southern secession. Not negotiate, surrender. Lincoln wasn't interested in surrendering. So again, what was there to discuss?
 
You know the letter in question so why are you acting like you have never read it?

Davis Letter Lincoln

Davis gave the purpose - surrender to rebel demands that Lincoln recognize the legitimacy of the Southern secession. Not negotiate, surrender. Lincoln wasn't interested in surrendering. So again, what was there to discuss?
Taken from your link, listed below, where does Davis demand a surrender?

MONTGOMERY, February 27, 1861.
The President of the United States: Being animated by an earnest desire to unite and bind together our respective countries by friendly ties, I have appointed M. J. Crawford, one of our most settled and trustworthy citizens, as special commissioner of the Confederate States of America to the Government of the United States; and I have now the honor to introduce him to you, and to ask for him a reception and treatment corresponding to his station and to the purpose for which he is sent. Those purposes he will more particularly explain to you. Hoping that through his agency. &c. [sic.]

JEFF'N DAVIS.

For the purpose of establishing friendly relations between the Confederate States and the United States, and reposing special trust, &c., Martin J. Crawford, John Forsyth, and A. B. Roman are appointed special commissioners of the Confederate States to the United States. I have invested them with full and all manner of power and authority for and in the name of the Confederate States to meet and confer with any person or persons duly authorized by the Government of the United States being furnished with like powers and authority, and with them to agree, treat, consult, and negotiate of and concerning all matters and subjects interesting to both nations, and to conclude and sign a treaty or treaties, convention or conventions, touching the premises, transmitting the same to the President of the Confederate States for his final ratification by and with the consent of the Congress of the Confederate States.

Given under my hand at the city of Montgomery this 27th day of February, A.D. 1861, and of the Independence of the Confederate States the eighty-fifth.

JEFF N DAVIS.

ROBERT TOOMBS, Secretary of State.

See Also
 
You know the letter in question so why are you acting like you have never read it?

Davis Letter Lincoln

Davis gave the purpose - surrender to rebel demands that Lincoln recognize the legitimacy of the Southern secession. Not negotiate, surrender. Lincoln wasn't interested in surrendering. So again, what was there to discuss?

Davis had no intentions negotiating away Confederate independence, but I know of no such letter stating what you posted and I don't think you do either. If anyone was demanding surrender it was Lincoln.
 
Davis had no intentions negotiating away Confederate independence, but I know of no such letter stating what you posted and I don't think you do either. If anyone was demanding surrender it was Lincoln.

If Davis had no intention of negotiating away rebel independence and Lincoln had no intent of recognizing the legitimacy of Southern secession then there was nothing to talk about, and your insistence that there was makes zero sense.
 
Taken from your link, listed below, where does Davis demand a surrender?

Here: "For the purpose of establishing friendly relations between the Confederate States and the United States..." Lincoln's position was not open for discussion, only the rebel position. They weren't there to negotiate anything. They were there to get Lincoln's surrender to their demands.
 
If Davis had no intention of negotiating away rebel independence and Lincoln had no intent of recognizing the legitimacy of Southern secession then there was nothing to talk about, and your insistence that there was makes zero sense.

If you read my earlier posts you would have noticed that I implied more than once that in my opinion negotiations were going nowhere since neither side was willing to yield on Confederate independence. The closest thing to insisting anything was to say something to the effect at least the Confederates made the effort.
 
Posters,
Let's drop the "opinion" back and forth, please. I believe this is not the first time this warning has been posted.


Since warnings aren't working it means thread banning or shut downs.
 
If you read my earlier posts you would have noticed that I implied more than once that in my opinion negotiations were going nowhere since neither side was willing to yield on Confederate independence. The closest thing to insisting anything was to say something to the effect at least the Confederates made the effort.

If the Confederates were not willing to negotiate on the legitimacy of their secession then how can you say they made an attempt?
 
Here: "For the purpose of establishing friendly relations between the Confederate States and the United States..." Lincoln's position was not open for discussion, only the rebel position. They weren't there to negotiate anything. They were there to get Lincoln's surrender to their demands.
More of a diplomatic recognition of an independent nation.
 
Back
Top