Uncivil Podcast: The Story of Silas Chandler

"MCS: I believe it was 2003 the Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of the Confederate Veteran uh, they, they put an Iron Cross on his grave and a Confederate flag."

They did so with the permission of family members.

"JH: These groups… had taken Myra’s ancestor away from her…... They had redefined who Silas was."

I've never seen any writing by Silas or even a quote in a newspaper about his Civil War experience. And I don't think MCS knows any more about his sentiments regarding that conflict than anyone else. It's all speculation. BTW Andrew (the "oppressor") was witness for Silas when he applied for a Confederate pension after the war.

I do think it was removed after a lot of petitioning from his family. But, It was highly inappropriate and out of line.

It was highly insensitive for those organizations to assert themselves -- and basically make the decision to do such a thing. No one would be OK with that if the shoe was on the other foot - unless everyone in the family was OK with it and signed approval. That wasn't done.

I am the Great Granddaughter of Silas Chandler. The lies being told about Silas fighting in the confederate army keep growing. And that is what they are “LIES”. The majority of the descendents of Silas are also disgusted about all of the lies told about our ancestor. Silas was a slave, and did what he had to do in order to survive. I am a Black Chandler who grew up in West Point, Mississippi where it was unheard of to even look at or even speak to a white Chandler. I have a letter signed by the majority of the descendents of Silas demanding the Iron Cross and Confederate flag be removed from Silas’ grave. Signing this letter is the Granddaughter of Silas who is 107 years old and still lives in Long Island, New York. I grew up with my Grandfather, who was the son of Silas. He told us all about Silas and how he saved his money and hid it in the barn and bought his freedom. He also bought the land where he built his house. That record is in the Clay County court house as of this day. Source: http://cwmemory.com/2010/03/10/descendents-of-silas-chandler-respond/

We don't know what Silas felt - but neither did the organizations who chose to make that decision. They took the agency from the deceased and from his relatives who chose his resting place and the marker they chose.

On top of that, it was a Black cemetery - with many Black people who were former slaves or their descendants. They were laid to rest there due to Black people not being able to be buried in the same cemeteries as whites.

To place a symbol that represents to many Black people -- enslavement, separation and negative historical baggage and trauma -- in a sacred place is terrible. It is not the place for such symbols.

Claims can also be found on the Internet that Andrew helped Silas to receive a pension in 1878 for his “service” in the Confederate Army. No evidence corroborates that statement.​

In Silas’ final years, troubled by failing vision, he more than once applied for a pension. It was approved at least twice by 1916, three years before his death at 78. But the pension that he—along with thousands of former servants living in the former Confederate states—received after the war was defined as an “Application of Indigent Servants of Soldiers or Sailors of the Late Confederacy.” The paperwork Silas Chandler submitted clearly indicates that, as a servant, he was not recognized as a Confederate soldier. Source: https://www.academia.edu/5196718/The_Loyalty_of_Silas_Chandler
 
Was there a problem with Insurgent Fighters in the Civil War? If someone who pick up a Gun and fired it against an opposing Force they were some kind of Combatant. Was anyone ever arrested for Attempted Murder during the Civil War? It all comes down to what the definition of a Soldier is.
It seems to be generally agreed in the sources I've seen that a 'soldier' is one who fights as part of a regular army.
John Burns, who took up his musket and joined the fight at Gettysburg on July 1, 1863, is considered a 'combatant', but not a 'soldier'.
 
Well, there is one sun and it sets, this is pretty much a fact based on Physics.

There were a lot of people, slaves, slaveholders, white, black, in-between, Yankees, etc. Saying that all people on a particular arbitrarily ordained category (eg. "slaves") felt in a particular way, or were even informed on the details of what was going on, to have a consensus point of view about a situation as a whole, is a hastily generalized opinion.

Would had been a fact if there were a poll or other data, and again, even in a poll, there would be more than one results.

Thus, the opinion part. Opinion is a hypothesis not supported by data. So saying that no single slave would have a reason to do something or another is an opinion, unless you go and poll every single slave. And this is a fact :smile:


When the sun sets this evening, that will be a fact. Until then, if one wishes to stretch the point, which is exactly what I was doing to make a point, it is still only a theory - an opinion, of sorts. I have been a physicist for a living for the past forty years, so you needn't explain the difference between physical facts and opinions.

As for your claim that I said that all slaves felt a particular way about anything, you are putting words in my mouth that I never said. I said that black slaves had no reason to trust white people's intentions regarding their freedom or welfare. Nothing in the history of slavery or Reconstruction suggests to me that they should have. Even if the intentions of specific white individuals could be trusted, those of the larger group could not be. What decisions individual slaves made and the gambles they decided to make based on their limited information and options was a very personal thing. I never implied that everyone made the same choices. To the contrary, I clearly indicated the opposite.
 
Last edited:
The term is Black Confederates. Don’t see Soldier in that Term.
Thanks for your response.
Nor do I. I was supporting your statement, "It all comes down to what the definition of a Soldier is."
 
Family has a Right to have whatever Inscription on their loved ones Marker they wish. Should Sue for Damages whoever alters their Marker or misuse their Family Members Image.

In this environment they might want to start a GoFund me Page. Probably get enough money to do whatever they wanted. God Bless Em.
 
Chandler earned his pension and was an honorable son of the south. That said confederate heritage groups should respect will of the family and the truth. Chandler was a true and faithful servant.
 
Family has a Right to have whatever Inscription on their loved ones Marker they wish. Should Sue for Damages whoever alters their Marker or misuse their Family Members Image.

In this environment they might want to start a GoFund me Page. Probably get enough money to do whatever they wanted. God Bless Em.

From what I read on CWMemory, they just wanted it all removed and they were successful.
 
the antique roadshow clip says his GGS Bobby Chandler went to the grave side ceremony to accept the southern cross of honor, from what was provided it doesn't appear the whole family wouldn't seem in agreement as to if its false or unwanted............

about 2:35 in roadshow clip
 
Last edited:
Claims can also be found on the Internet that Andrew helped Silas to receive a pension in 1878 [?] for his “service” in the Confederate Army. No evidence corroborates that statement.

1878? Mississippi didn't start awarding pensions until 1889.

Anyhow...

Silas Chandler's pension file (two pages)- http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/pensions/show/458

Here's the part that shows A. M. Chandler, Sr., as witness (@page two)-

SilasC.jpg
 
1878? Mississippi didn't start awarding pensions until 1889.

Anyhow...

Silas Chandler's pension file (two pages)- http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/pensions/show/458

Here's the part that shows A. M. Chandler, Sr., as witness (@page two)-

View attachment 173152

The article I referenced states "Internet claims" -- so I am pretty sure that's why 1878 was mentioned in the article.

The document you provided does indeed state Mr. Chandler did -- but the article stated was refuting claims that it was done in 1878 - therefore he was clearing up the "Internet claims" -- that allege it was done around that time or even in the 1800's.

It was done in 1916 - 51 years after the war. After a later attempt in life due to sickness.

I hope I helped clear that up.
 
Oh my! Thanks for the podcast! I had not listened to Uncivil before.
I'm so sorry that young man on the show had the experiences he did.
I'm not very familiar with Kevin Levin who also participated on the webcast but I know he is mentioned here on this site.
As the discussion began, at first, I wasn't sure what this young man's issues had to do with Silas Chandler but about halfway through it then segmented to the Antique Roadshow episode which I had also not been familiar with. Doing some additional research myself, I am also sorry there have been differences with some of the families involved. I mentioned in another thread, my hope is that some day this issue will not be one of contention but of respect and care as we all seek to share in each others histories.
I am curious about Silas after the war! The buildings he built and the church! Amazing!
 
Then show your resources for the facts if you don't like opinions. So far that is all you have put up.
You're asking me to prove that a slave had little reason to trust slaveholder's' promises of personal benefit if he fought for them? Seriously? What would the slave do if the South, or an individual slaveholder reneged? Sue? My statement was a logical conclusion based on the fact that a slave had no means of holding a slaveholder, or for that matter, any white person, to a promise.

Logic doesn't need a source.
 
Last edited:
Neither were Yankee Free Blacks or Southern Slaves who fought for the North, equal or accepted.

The North Excluded Southern Blacks from going North. First with their Colonization Plan. Next with General Thomas’s Plan of keeping Blacks growing Yankee Cotton, building Military Infrustructure and Arming them to fight their War, all in the South. Freedmans Bureau had the explicit purpose to keep Blacks in the South. And Finally Northerners thought their Cold Climate and admittedly more severe Racial Attitudes would make Northern Emigration not tolerable. And if all that failed, they could just turn the Irish loose on them.
I recognize your evasion of my question.

Kevin Dally
 
Back
Top