Oops, big lump of your posts....


Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Status
Not open for further replies.

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,458
I have asked on many threads on this board, What, exactly, would have identified a town in Ky, as 'Southern' and a similar sized town just across the border in Ohio, as Northern' , other than Slavery?

Would their system and style of gov't, or its laws have been significantly different? Would their religions or their practice have been any different?
What was the only thing that actually(and precisely)identified one section as being North or South, other than Slavery and its effect?
 

E_just_E

Captain
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
6,182
Location
Center Valley, PA
I have asked on many threads on this board, What, exactly, would have identified a town in Ky, as 'Southern' and a similar sized town just across the border in Ohio, as Northern' , other than Slavery?

Would their system and style of gov't, or its laws have been significantly different? Would their religions or their practice have been any different?
What was the only thing that actually(and precisely)identified one section as being North or South, other than Slavery and its effect?
Not sure that Ohio was regarded as a Northern State. When it was part of Virginia it was regarded as a Southern State and after it became an autonomous State in 1803, it was regarded as a Western State, just like Kentucky, Missouri, and Kansas. From the later quarter of the 19th Century on they were all regarded as Mid-Western States
 

CWH1234

Private
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
69
Location
Wilkesboro, NC
Both Sides Treated Each other with Respect and Kindness (General's) when they surrendered.

As well of Uniforms (just different Colors)
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,458
Not sure that Ohio was regarded as a Northern State. When it was part of Virginia it was regarded as a Southern State and after it became an autonomous State in 1803, it was regarded as a Western State, just like Kentucky, Missouri, and Kansas. From the later quarter of the 19th Century on they were all regarded as Mid-Western States


I believe your premise is wrong, But, even if it was correct, it would be irrelevant to my point.

The question remains, What was it that identified Ky. as South and Ohio North, of an artificial political line drawn on a Map, and, how could anyone easily identify a town or its population in one state from the other just a short distance across their state lines from each other, except for slavery and its effects?
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,458
Lincoln himself, seemed mystified by Va.'s secession. He noted that there seemed a solid majority against secession on one day and almost a day later voted overwhelmingly voted for it.

It would seem from their words, that Va. would not defend their right to own slaves, but would send their sons out to defend the right of other states to do so?
 

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
4,462
University of Nebraska - Lincoln
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln
2011

American Indian Civil War treaties: The instruments formed by the Confederate States of America in Indian Territory
Charles D. Bernholz
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, cbernholz2@unl.edu
Laura Weakly
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, lweakly2@unl.edu
Brian Pytlik Zillig
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, bzillig1@unl.edu
Karin Dalziel
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, kdalziel2@unl.edu

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln.

Abstract
The creation of nine treaties between the Confederate States of America (CSA) and the tribes residing in Indian Territory in 1861 formed a significant historical perspective to the understanding of the relationships between governments and indigenous peoples of the United States. This research note describes a Web page – “So Long as Grass Shall Grow and Water Run: The Treaties Formed By the Confederate States of America and the Tribes in Indian Territory, 1861” – that provides access to paired CSA Statutes at Large page images and their text for each of these instruments.

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1245&context=libraryscience
1026

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Lost Cause

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 19, 2014
Messages
3,052
And please no more "invasion" Edited. One person's "invasion army" has always been another person's "liberation army;" that's the entire history of the Western world. So after all it's just as "obvious" that an army would be sent South to take back (liberate) what had been taken (forts, armories, ports and unionist votes) as it would be that an army would be sent South to subjugate the white population and its assets.
Invasionary Army is appropriate. Virginia was going to be occupied by the northern army regardless of Virginia’s allegiance. Would Virginians permit the use of its state as a staging point for an invasion of the Deep South or would it repel the Union army as a part of the Confederacy? Who was the Union army going to liberate in 1861?
 

Potomac Pride

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Messages
1,689
Location
Georgia
I think Virginia's decision to secede had something to do with Lincoln's Proclamation Calling for Troops on April 15, 1861. Earlier that month, they had voted by a clear majority not to secede. However, Virginia had previously stated that it was opposed to any type of federal coercion against the other southern states. After Lincoln's call for troops, the Secession Convention reconvened and voted the next day to secede overwhelmingly. They considered federal coercion to be an abuse of power that violated the Constitution.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,784
Location
Laurinburg NC
I think Virginia's decision to secede had something to do with Lincoln's Proclamation Calling for Troops on April 15, 1861. Earlier that month, they had voted by a clear majority not to secede. However, Virginia had previously stated that it was opposed to any type of federal coercion against the other southern states. After Lincoln's call for troops, the Secession Convention reconvened and voted the next day to secede overwhelmingly. They considered federal coercion to be an abuse of power that violated the Constitution.
In April 1861 it had everything to do with it.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,529
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
After Lincoln's call for troops, the Secession Convention reconvened and voted the next day to secede overwhelmingly. They considered federal coercion to be an abuse of power that violated the Constitution.
2 days later and after ex-governor Wise ordered attacks by VA militia on United States facilities. In Jan VA said if it was unhappy it would join the Slaveholding States. In April it did exactly that.
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
10,109
Respectfully disagree. If we are to move forward we must assign blame for past misdeeds. There's nothing even remotely inappropriate in doing so. History isn't recorded for robots.

There's a pitfall in "political correctness," that artifact from the "I'm OK, You're OK" generation we were born into.

There were those who were to blame for U.S. chattel slavery, some of them Virginians. To excuse them (via lost cause or this softer way) is equivalent to granting permission for bad behavior going forward.
I have not seen an apology from anyone about killing out all the Indians.
 

Viper21

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,467
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
Lincoln himself, seemed mystified by Va.'s secession. He noted that there seemed a solid majority against secession on one day and almost a day later voted overwhelmingly voted for it.

It would seem from their words, that Va. would not defend their right to own slaves, but would send their sons out to defend the right of other states to do so?
No. Virginia would send their sons out to defend other states from coercion ie: Federal invasion/subjugation. Once declaring such, they were then forced to defend themselves from the same.
 

Potomac Pride

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Messages
1,689
Location
Georgia
2 days later and after ex-governor Wise ordered attacks by VA militia on United States facilities. In Jan VA said if it was unhappy it would join the Slaveholding States. In April it did exactly that.
I was referring to the Secession Convention vote on the day after it reconvened on April 16th and went into special session. The next day on April 17th, they voted overwhelmingly to secede from the Union in direct response to Lincoln's call for troops. The Secession Convention vote echoed the sentiments of Virginia Gov. Letcher who in response to the call for troops replied on April 16th: "In reply to this communication, I have only to say, that the Militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers at Washington, for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate our Southern States, and a requisition made upon me for such object---an object, in my judgment, not within the purview of the Constitution, or the act of 1795---- will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war, and having done so, we will meet it, in a spirit as determined as the Administration has exhibited towards the South."

Even before Virginia had aligned itself with the other states, they had passed a resolution which vehemently opposed any type of federal coercion. In this resolution, they stated that the federal government did not have the power to make war against any of the states and any attempt at coercion would be resisted any means necessary.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,529
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
I was referring to the Secession Convention vote on the day after it reconvened on April 16th and went into special session. The next day on April 17th, they voted overwhelmingly to secede from the Union in direct response to Lincoln's call for troops. The Secession Convention vote echoed the sentiments of Virginia Gov. Letcher who in response to the call for troops replied on April 16th: "In reply to this communication, I have only to say, that the Militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers at Washington, for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate our Southern States, and a requisition made upon me for such object---an object, in my judgment, not within the purview of the Constitution, or the act of 1795---- will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war, and having done so, we will meet it, in a spirit as determined as the Administration has exhibited towards the South."

Even before Virginia had aligned itself with the other states, they had passed a resolution which vehemently opposed any type of federal coercion. In this resolution, they stated that the federal government did not have the power to make war against any of the states and any attempt at coercion would be resisted any means necessary.
And they joined with the Free States to oppose such 'coercion'. Oh wait.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Top