The 1845-1861 Sectional Fight for the First Footprint for a Transcontinental Railroad: The PRIMARY Cause of the Civil War for Independence

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's getting a little heated gentlemen. Let's exercise a little restraint.

Dear Moderator,

I was not in the least bit offended by Mr. Green's characterization of my writing as tripe. He has complimented me enough by reading so much of it, after having said several times he was never going to read another word of it. I understand well the power of this particular topic.

On the other hand, if I have offended anyone on this thread, please advise. I like to apologize publicly for my public offenses.

Sincerely,

James
 
Last edited:
Dear Posters in General,

Momentarily I have the gift of a good citation for you in re: the title (and I might add, for the benefit of a self-confessed curmudgeon poster, the "clear" and "concise" title) of this thread. But first let me say a thank you again for all of the posts that assert confidently that slavery was easily the primary cause of Secession and War, etc., and not the TRR. I have benefitted from this almost universal drumbeat that I had nevertheless considered at least 20 years ago as nothing more than a non sequitur in just so many pretextual posterity papers. Note, too, that I refer strictly to South Carolina's declarations, as my thesis addresses the question, "Why did Secession and War break out where it did [Charleston] and when it did [1860-1861], instead of in Norfolk, Wilmington, Savannah, Jacksonville, Mobile, New Orleans --or even Nashville in 1850?" By that continued drumbeat I have come to appreciate how hypnotizing and mesmerizing those Carolinians were, as they unquestionably snookered not only the South and naive southern soldiers all over with it but generations of Civil War historians ever since. The spell they have cast over thinkers with 158 years to ponder those papers is truly staggering.

Many on this thread have objected that I have failed to produce any evidence for my thesis. This, of course, is patently untrue, as I have not only offered 400+ free pages of it but many additional posts besides. Following is another one for those still in denial to consider. I refer to the following quotation on p. 362 of the biography of Robert Hayne that I have referenced earlier on this thread (a post after which one of my critics owned up to the confession that he had no idea who Hayne was). While the quotation speaks for itself, I will comment on it after producing it. Here it is:

The Washington Globe for June 19, 1833 asserted that "the construction of the Charleston Railroad was a part of the disunion plan of nullification to make Charleston a free port, connect with the contemplated roads in Tennessee, rob the Mississippi of half the rich freight carried to market, blotting out the river, while the Old Dominion was to be thrown like a stranded whale upon the frontier."

Note that as early as 1833 some people actually saw what was going on, while some critics on this thread cannot even see it in retrospect. All I claim in my book is that this recognition of the railroad's capabilities was a constant from at least 1833 right through 1860-61 and beyond. Short and simple. I think William Freehling should have named his otherwise wonderful volumes THE RAILROAD TO DISUNION instead of just THE ROAD TO DISUNION.

Speaking of William Freehling, I urge upon posters a re-read of his narrative about the days leading up to Secession in South Carolina in December 1860, a non sequitur (i.e., Secession) that I think occurred under the influence of alcohol --an early case of SWI! These Seceshers, banqueting on booze, were riding back and forth between Savannah, Charleston, and Columbia on nothing other than the Memphis and Charleston Railroad that had reached the Mississippi River on March 27, 1857, and later connected to the then envisioned Memphis, El Paso, and Pacific Railroad that became the first truly Southern transcontinental railroad over the footprint envisioned by Jefferson Davis in the Pacific Railroad Surveys. Are we to think that we, re-reading Freehling's wonderful description of those December days, are the only ones to make this connection --or is it possible that the Seceshers riding on that eventual connection to the Pacific never gave it a thought?

If you also read the quote above in context in the Hayne bio, you will see that his biographer quotes a Yankee observer of the Nullification Ball held in The Citadel how the booze was flowing and just might have affected their thinking in re: Nullification.

Just a couple thoughts. I welcome any additional attacks upon my thesis. I do not take them personally. I am simply inviting the best anyone can throw at it.

Sincerely,

James
 
Last edited:
Just a couple thoughts. I welcome any additional attacks upon my thesis. I do not take them personally. I am simply inviting the best anyone can throw at it.

Sincerely,

James

If you want to develop a thesis and invite "attacks" with the purpose of defending it, the best forum is during an official Academic Degree acquisition process.

In this forum,it is flamebait.

Thus this thread is locked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top