Discussion Frederick Douglass id's he cause of death of Robert E Lee in 1870

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Your belief based on hearsay.

I suppose we could say the secessionist fire eaters had just as much to do with the end of slavery as did Sherman. Neither one wanted to see it end.
I don't know about Sherman wanting to keep slavery especially as he came up with the idea of forty acres and a mule. We have testimony from Lee's slaves that he had them whipped so that's good enough evidence.
Leftyhunter
 

CowCavalry

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Why would the slaves testimony be any less credible than Lee's?
The question is whether or not it is even a slave's testimony but rather that of an abolitionist newspaper, where it appeared. We have been over this ground recently (19th Georgia's comment was bolded by me):

Here is the rest of Norris' statement. Most of what he says can not be checked or verified (it's just his word against Lee) but the item I have highlighted can be checked-

"....After this my cousin and myself were sent to Hanover Court-House jail, my sister being sent to Richmond to an agent to be hired; we remained in jail about a week, when we were sent to Nelson county, where we were hired out by Gen. Lee’s agent to work on the Orange and Alexander railroad; we remained thus employed for about seven months, and were then sent to Alabama, and put to work on what is known as the Northeastern railroad; in January, 1863, we were sent to Richmond, from which place I finally made my escape through the rebel lines to freedom; I have nothing further to say; what I have stated is true in every particular, and I can at any time bring at least a dozen witnesses, both white and black, to substantiate my statements: I am at present employed by the Government; and am at work in the National Cemetery on Arlington Heights, where I can be found by those who desire further particulars; my sister referred to is at present employed by the French Minister at Washington, and will confirm my statement."

That statement is not true. He was given his freedom in December 1862 and instead of escaping "through the rebel lines to freedom" was given a pass to go through the lines by Gen. Custis Lee.

Of course, if you're trying to demonize Lee, the truth- "I was freed by General Lee and his son gave me a pass to go through the lines" -doesn't serve the purpose.

View attachment 381379
View attachment 381380
View attachment 381381

War of the Rebellion: Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series 1, Vol. 29, part 2, pp.158–159.
Thread: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/lee-as-a-slaveholder-reputable-primary-sources.179384/page-6
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DanSBHawk

1st Lieutenant
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
The question is whether or not it is even a slave's testimony but rather that of an abolitionist newspaper, where it appeared. We have been over this ground recently (19th Georgia's comment was bolded in red by me):


Thread: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/lee-as-a-slaveholder-reputable-primary-sources.179384/page-6
The problem with that is that the account about the pass in the OR was written by Meade, not by Norris. The pass he received may have been for the travel back to Richmond from Alabama, and no further.

On the other hand, the newspaper account is allegedly Norris' own words, and his testimony is no less credible than Lee's.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Why would the slaves testimony be any less credible than Lee's?
??? Seems avoiding Lefty's remarks, which would make the issue why would the slaves testimony be any more credible then Lee's?

Lefty is the one asserting something had happened.
 

DanSBHawk

1st Lieutenant
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
??? Seems avoiding Lefty's remarks, which would make sense the issue why would the slaves testimony be any more credible then Lee's?

He's the one making an assertion something happened.......
Nobody suggested the slaves testimony was more credible than Lee's.

It's certainly not less credible either.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Well if one treated them the same, and discredits conflicting and potentially biased testimony...his assertion is baseless evidence wise then.

His entire assertion was based on that conflicting and potentially biased testimony.....if false a slave could be bearing a axe to grind, if true Lee would benifit from denying it.....both had reason to perhaps be false.
 
Last edited:

DanSBHawk

1st Lieutenant
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
Well if one treated them the same, and discredits conflicting and potentially biased testimony...his assertion is baseless evidence wise then.

His entire assertion was based on that testimony.....
Not true. There was additional evidence to suggest that Norris was telling the truth. Elizabeth Brown Pryor covered it in her book. But that is deviating from the thread topic.

And Lee's denial was just as biased.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Not true. There was additional evidence to suggest that Norris was telling the truth. Elizabeth Brown Pryor covered it in her book. But that is deviating from the thread topic.

And Lee's denial is just as biased.
I agree, why I said conflicting and potentially biased testimonies......little to base any sound assertion of certainty on.

If one does, would think they left objective and impartial......to only hearing what they wanted to hear....
 

DanSBHawk

1st Lieutenant
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
I agree, why I said conflicting and potentially biased testimonies......little to base any sound assertion of certainty on.

If one does, would think they left objective and impartial......to only hearing what they wanted to hear....
Which is why I stated that the slaves testimony was just as credible as Lee's testimony.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Which is why I stated that the slaves testimony was just as credible as Lee's testimony.
Which then it remains there's little to assert a degree of credibility to base a historical assumption of fact on....we don't know, in the end remains we don't know.

If one remains impartial and objective....the correct thing to say often, is actually we don't know...or at the very least say there are actually conflicting accounts if giving personal opinion.
 

CowCavalry

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
The problem with that is that the account about the pass in the OR was written by Meade, not by Norris. The pass he received may have been for the travel back to Richmond from Alabama, and no further.
Not understanding what you mean here; Meade states that Norris was given a pass "to go through our lines via Culpepper" by Custis Lee to pass through the the lines to the Union side, where he was led blindfold on horseback to Union pickets.

On the other hand, the newspaper account is alleged Norris' own words, and his testimony is no less credible than Lee's.
Not trying to be condescending but do these sound like the words of a field hand who grew up in slavery?:

""....After this my cousin and myself were sent to Hanover Court-House jail, my sister being sent to Richmond to an agent to be hired; we remained in jail about a week, when we were sent to Nelson county, where we were hired out by Gen. Lee’s agent to work on the Orange and Alexander railroad; we remained thus employed for about seven months, and were then sent to Alabama, and put to work on what is known as the Northeastern railroad; in January, 1863, we were sent to Richmond, from which place I finally made my escape through the rebel lines to freedom; I have nothing further to say; what I have stated is true in every particular, and I can at any time bring at least a dozen witnesses, both white and black, to substantiate my statements: I am at present employed by the Government; and am at work in the National Cemetery on Arlington Heights, where I can be found by those who desire further particulars; my sister referred to is at present employed by the French Minister at Washington, and will confirm my statement."
 
Last edited:

DanSBHawk

1st Lieutenant
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
Not to mention Norris was given his freedom in 1862 and Meade's note is dated Sept 6 1863. In the newspaper account, Norris is credited with "escaping"; from what?
Perhaps you two could resurrect one of the Lee-whipped-slaves threads. As I said, Pryor makes a case that Norris' account rings true and that Lee had his slaves whipped.
 
Top