The Real Cause of the Civil War: In 1860, Southern Plantation Owners owed $1 billion+ to NY Banks


Sergeant Major
May 22, 2011
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Is this $300million and the $1billion+ two different stories? Or the same story with incorrect dollar amounts? What I understand from both stories is the South seceded to to not pay money owned to North bankers. The vast amount of difference in money notwithstanding.
Hey, convoluted conspiracy theories invented eighty years after the war don't need facts; just faith.
Sep 28, 2013
Southwest Mississippi
Yes, but I AM currently not at home. I'll try to find the 'Civil War Timeline' book published in Britain a few years back tomorrow when I AM at home.
That would be great !

I'm looking forward to your sources.

Once you get back home . . . if it wouldn't be too much to ask . . . could you also provide original sources that document this mass killing at Appomattox from an earlier thread you posted ?

BTW, I disagree with your theory that Abraham Lincoln was Ben Franklin reincarnated.

But that's just me . . . others may agree with you. :smoke:
Last edited:

Mike Serpa

Jan 24, 2013
@7th Mississippi Infantry

The 2010 Appomattox shootings was a mass murder in Appomattox, Virginia that occurred on January 17 and 19, 2010. Christopher Bryan Speight shot his sister, her husband, and her son and daughter at their home, as well as four other people. He then escaped into a forest and shot at a police helicopter searching for him, but eventually surrendered himself to authorities. On February 15, 2013, Speight was sentenced to life imprisonment....
  • Lauralee Sipe, 38, Speight's sister
  • Dwayne S. Sipe, 38, husband of Lauralee Sipe
  • Joshua Sipe, 4, son of Lauralee and Dwayne Sipe
  • Morgan L. Dobyns, 15, daughter of Lauralee Sipe from a previous marriage
  • Emily A. Quarles, 15, friend of Morgan Dobyns
  • Jonathan L. Quarles, 43, father of Emily Quarles
  • Karen Quarles, 43, mother of Emily Quarles
  • Ronald I. Scruggs, 16, boyfriend of Emily Quarles
8 people dead


Dec 17, 2014
Have you got a source for that? I've never heard that. And are you telling me that perhaps one exemption means that I falsely accused the Rebels of being evil towards the black Union troops?
That's not the one exception. There was no such policy as you suggest. The policy was to capture black soldiers and return them to slavery. Fort Pillow was the worst incident of murdering surrendered black troops that took place during the war. (Although there is legitimate controversy about what exactly happened.) And even at Fort Pillow, where survivors reported the commanders shouting "kill them all," there were sixty- two black prisoners captured.

If you're interested in Fort Pillow, you might try reading "River Run Red." Confederate apologists don't like it and call it biased in favor of the Union but I found it was a balanced examination of the evidence with plenty of reference on primary sources. That's where I found the information on the captured prisoners, which in turn was taken from a variety of sources including Chalmers' reports and the Union records of the 43 USCTs who eventually returned to their units.


Brev. Brig. Gen'l
May 27, 2011
los angeles ca
For 150 years, Southerners have clung to 'The Cause' of States Rights for why the Civil War was fought. In an attempt to rewrite history and thus promote their 'righteousness', even some Neo-Confederates on this forum and elsewhere continue their propaganda of "The Civil War wasn't fought over slavery." Not only was the Civil War all about the struggle to free the African-American slaves, Southerners have attempted to mute how the Rebels never took black Union soldiers prisoner - they were always ruthlessly shot! Furthermore, the real reason for the Southern Secession movement has been effectively kept out of the history books. In 1860, Southern plantation owners were greatly in debt to New York City banks to the tune of over $1 billion dollars! That was a HUGE amount of money back then and no matter how much cotton they sold, they could never pay it back. The plantation owners figured if they could get the Southern States leaders to secede, then they wouldn't have to repay their debts. Wow! I was never taught that in school; you won't find that 'little fact' in a college textbook, battlefield park gift shop or History Channel program.

The combined worth of the African slaves in the Southern States was greater than all the other combined wealth in the United States. Yes, money and greed were the real cause of the Civil War but that wouldn't get hundreds of thousands of Southern men to fight and maybe die for that! So the slave owners' propaganda was "States rights and no Northerners coming down here and telling us how to live!"

Have you heard of anything more evil? Of course, the Northern bankers were also at fault. Their lending practices forced the plantation owners to take drastic actions! It's time to write the truth in the history books.
I admire your zeal but your wrong. I have to go to bed to get up early for my slave master I'l get back to you tomorrow.


1st Lieutenant
Aug 12, 2011
Yes; the earliest mention of it was in an Italian-language pamphlet by the poet Ezra Pound... in 1944. Pound - though an American - was still broadcasting for the in exile Roman fascists at the time. Pound was a deranged anti-semite and fascist who was eventually indicted for treason. The conspiracy theory goes that the war was started to protect the banks (run by a big conspiracy of Jews, of course), and that they then had Lincoln killed because they thought he'd be too soft on the debtors.
Ezra Pond was from Hailey, Idaho. And was married to Dorothy Shakspear.

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Feb 14, 2012
Central Pennsylvania
Here is a direct quote from an earlier thread started by Brad Watson. Emphasis not added.

"Like a lot of the enthusists that participate in this forum, I've always had a strong interest in the Civil War and Abraham Lincoln - perhaps, it could even be an obsession. This was always my favorite part of history and I loved studying it in school and as an adult, taking trips to battlefields and other related Civil War era places, etc. I'd like to think of myself as somewhat of a scholar/historian on all things CW & Lincoln, but yet, I just learned something from a $3 bargain book that I never knew and it is blowing my mind! By the end of 1860, "In commercial dealings, the South owed the North some $300 million, which Southerners believed would be forfeited." - American History - Timeline of the Civil War (p. 23) by John D. Wright (Amber Books, 2007) What?! I had never heard this before!! This one simple sentence provides a whole new take on Southern Secession. Could it be that another of the major factors of the war was a veiled attempt by the Southern rich to avoid paying a huge debt?! WOW!!!

- Brad Watson, Miami, FL
author of 7 Score & 4 Years Later'

Is this $300million and the $1billion+ two different stories? Or the same story with incorrect dollar amounts? What I understand from both stories is the South seceded to to not pay money owned to North bankers. The vast amount of difference in money notwithstanding.

Really don't mean to pile on, but the quote Mike Serpa brought from another thread sounds so much like an Infomercial you can't help adding to it in your head, " But WAIT, for the generous amount only another 9.99 you too can learn what only I know of this most secret moment in history but WAIT for another 9.99 you get this Teflon egg separator and dual toe nail sharpener, but WAIT a second set free shipping and handling 400.00 us currency. "