Confederates after the Confederacy


(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#22
NVM I searched the forums and the only person who has refered to slaves as deliriously happy is some guy who goes by leftyhunter.......he has said it 5 different times now .....and absolutely no one else has.........but thanks for tipping us off your "pro-confederate" apparently as your the only previous poster you can quote...…...
 
Last edited:

16thVA

First Sergeant
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,325
Location
Philadelphia
#23
Back again with another question to aide me in my writing... So, what was the mindset of the Confederate families, soldiers and the like after their defeat and the Confederacy was dissolved. More particularly the Confederates of the Western Virginia territory. Did they remain sour toward the Federal Government? Where they just relieved that the war was over? Are there any links out there I can find info on this?
When the Wheeling Unionists were trying to write the constitution for the new state, Mr. Brown of Kanawha told the convention on Dec. 4, 1861-

"Treason against the United States we are told is to be a prohibition to the exercise of the right of suffrage in the State of West Virginia under this Constitution; and now, sir, let us see. When this goes
into operation in the coming years, the whole courts of the State are crowded - or the Federal Courts that may be within the State are crowded - with the five hundred indictments at every single
court for the next five or six years to come, of these very deluded peoples, and upon which conviction in every instance must take place, because the proof is so very clear and simple that those who
run may read; and by that very provision while you are convicting not with a view of punishing, yet you are excluding them from the right of suffrage. When this Constitution will be in operation and a man is convicted of treason, then he is within the prohibition and must be excluded from the right of suffrage. But we will find the number to exclude will be almost legion."

West Virginia was not really a state during the war. You cannot create a state of 24,000 square miles and a population of 368,689 with the approval of only 19,000 of its citizens and expect it to function as a state. It only became a state with the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia in 1865. The Union control of western Virginia is a little overstated. In 1864 Gov. Boreman wrote to Gen. David Hunter-

"The counties between the Great Kanawha and Big Sandy Rivers, in the southern part of the State, have been infested with large bodies of guerrillas from the beginning of the rebellion, but the loyal people have had some little protection from U. S. soldiers stationed in those counties by order of the several commanders of the department. With what protection there has been it has been difficult to keep up county organization for the execution of civil law, even in counties immediately on the Ohio River, yet in these counties the courts have been held (irregularly) and some taxes collected. In the back counties (toward the mountains) there has been no civil organization for three years."

The Gallipolis, Ohio, newspaper said in 1864 "...it might seem to an unpracticed eye, that the State of West Virginia were not so intensely loyal as some persons wish it to be considered. The fact is that region of country is just as well stocked with rebels both armed and unarmed as any other portion of the south."

You can find a lot of information on post-war West Virginia's ex-rebels in Why the Solid South.

Why the Solid South?
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#25
IIRC, you will find it here:

https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000528187

In The Confederate Veteran and...THEN a simple search of threads should...suffice.
So you dont have a direct quote either......noted. I've neither the time or inclination to read a entire catalog of confederate veteran, perhaps it is your favorite reading material, but I seldom read it, If you have the quote would be much simpler.

Also Lefty refered to " pro Confederate posters " saying it, which would imply someone here...…..again search the forums for "deliriously happy" and the only poster who has used it is leftyhunter...........repeatedly...…. leaving him the mysterious "pro confederate posters" he refers to.......It is a little strange he quotes himself in the third person as pro confederate, but it is what it is looking at the records.............

Because surely this isn't more exaggerated disingenuous misquotes of others from him........I'm trying to give him the benifit of the doubt that its an actual quote, but its not looking good as usual with most his "quotes"
 
Last edited:

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#27
Can we all agree that "deliriously happy" was simply hyperbole intended for humor and move on?
Misquoting others with exaggerated false statements is humorous? Personally I dont see why we shouldn't stay within the realm of reality and if your going to quote or imply your quoting others or someone least do so accurately.....because otherwise it isn't actually a quote...…or lends anything at all to a honest discussion

Seriously hope we aren't going down some rabbit hole where one can purposely misrepresent others to just claim some attempt of humor, rather then discuss actual history and statements with honesty
 
Last edited:

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,143
Location
Laurinburg NC
#28
Misquoting others with exaggerated false statements is humorous? Personally I dont see why we shouldn't stay within the realm of reality and if your going to quote or imply your quoting others or someone least do so accurately.....because otherwise it isn't actually a quote...…or lends anything at all to a honest discussion

Seriously hope we aren't going down some rabbit hole where one can purposely misrepresent others to just claim some attempt of humor, rather then discuss actual history and statements with honesty
Let someone expressing the wrong point of view try to get away with it.
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#30
Perhaps they should create a comedy forum, for those who come here to attempt comedy rather then discuss history

At least a roleplaying forum for those constantly referring to pro confederates, etc. where they could pretend play their imaginary war that they think is still going on...…
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,345
Location
los angeles ca
#31
Who has said slaves were deliriously happy to be slaves?

I must have missed that thread, can you refer to me it or quote the deliriously happy remark? Your constantly referring to things that aren't in the thread at all is rather confusing
You need to read what Pro Confederate posters actually write.
Leftyhunter
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#32
You need to read what Pro Confederate posters actually write.
Leftyhunter
Again search the forums here for "deliriously happy" and your the only poster who has used it before...… If you insist your pro-confederate as your the only one who has used the term, your entitled to call yourself that if you wish, though not sure what calling yourself pro-something that doesn't exist does for you....but if it floats your boat go for it I reckon
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#34
Back again with another question to aide me in my writing... So, what was the mindset of the Confederate families, soldiers and the like after their defeat and the Confederacy was dissolved. More particularly the Confederates of the Western Virginia territory. Did they remain sour toward the Federal Government? Where they just relieved that the war was over? Are there any links out there I can find info on this?
Its also telling in 1871 WV elected its first of 6 consecutive democrat governors and he had ran on supporting the elimination of all remaining legislation that discriminated against former confederates. This at the same time as about all southern and border states were doing the same thing. They also rewrote the 1863 constitution which voters had become to view as too pro union or yankee.

They like a large part of the country had its fill of republicanism and reconstruction politics of continued division.
 
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,304
Location
Midwest
#35
Here in Alabama we did and still do.:D
Whoa there pard ...you don't get "we." You don't even get Alabama. The heritage "we" of Alabama must include both the many white Unionists in that state and the roughly forty percent of black Alabamans at the time. And the "we" of Alabama today comprises a mere minority of white Confederate apologists anymore. Take a walk around town sometime.

Our advice: Don't be claiming "Alabama" or "Southerners" as "we" if you care to retain a modicum of trust or a speck of gravitas on this forum.
 

MattL

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,062
Location
SF Bay Area
#36
Its also telling in 1871 WV elected its first of 6 consecutive democrat governors and he had ran on supporting the elimination of all remaining legislation that discriminated against former confederates. This at the same time as about all southern and border states were doing the same thing. They also rewrote the 1863 constitution which voters had become to view as too pro union or yankee.

They like a large part of the country had its fill of republicanism and reconstruction politics of continued division.
Also like a large part of the country they had their fill of Black rights gains.

With that said it seems the 1872 WV Constitution was a narrow decision even then

https://www.wvpublic.org/post/augus...rrowly-ratify-new-state-constitution#stream/0

----
On August 22, 1872, West Virginians narrowly ratified a new state constitution by less than 5,000 votes, while rejecting a separate proposal that would have restricted office-holding to whites only.
----

Apparently it didn't change all that much but didn't revert all the gains for Blacks (considering it's narrow margins it seems likely "Black Republican" influence couldn't be completely countered enough)

----
There was much radical debate at the convention—even as to whether a U.S. flag should be placed in the hall. In the end, though, the new constitution wasn’t very revolutionary. Most significantly, it upheld the right of blacks to vote and seek public office and maintained a free, but segregated, public school system.
----

It is interesting that there was a debate over whether a US flag should be placed in the hall.
 
Last edited:



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top