Hunting Forum

(The old WBTS thread was bogged down pretty bad and took a long time to load for many systems so I am restarting it in honor of the long-anticipated Sesquicentennial celebration which for all intents and purposes begins tomorrow.  Please jump right in to add or discuss (intelligently with dignity) or feel free to ignore my little quirky pleasure here.)

Election of 1860

 

An outrage!  The election of 1860 was without any doubt the most contentious and confusing election in US history.  For the past two decades, the US had factionalized ever more increasingly election after election.  The northern States, being smaller and closer together were greatly tied to the sea and rivers.  Roads and rails had developed between the large cities and numerous townships connecting the people more closely while in the southern States, being larger, good rails and roads were harder to come by.  While there were cities as large as some northern cities, these were spaced farther apart and not connected well enough to allow rapid transfer between them. 

 

The north had become more urban and had more dealings with the European traders.  The south’s major ports tended to deal more with northerners as well as Europeans than the inner rural areas and thus the ideologies of not only the 2 regions, but their internal regions as well had evolved differently. 

 

The campaign season had evolved into a nasty mud-slinging battle with four vying candidates and their individual parties.  The Whig Party had split largely over the very contentious slavery issue, allowing for newer “3^rd parties” to suddenly leap to the front and split the ballots.  The Democrat Party itself had splintered into a Northern and Southern faction, with Stephen Douglas becoming the candidate for the Northern Democrats and former VP John C. Breckinridge leading the Southern Democrat ticket.  The relatively new 3^rd party, the Republicans got on all the ballots except any of the Southern “Slave States” with Illinois Senator Abraham Lincoln running on an abolitionist themed ticket.  And finally, John Bell of Tennessee headed up the Constitutional Union 3^rd party on a ticket hoping to maintain a union based on the US Constitution which would leave the slavery issue alone.  The Democrats were largely ignoring the slavery issue, although the Southern faction was decidedly pro-slavery.

 

Slavery in the US was the enter-twining issue that permeated virtually all other issues.  It was a socio-economic issue that was affecting the economies of European powers as well as the Americans.  Hardly could anyone, north or south of the slave-state border purchase or sell any item that slavery had not touched.  The southern slave-States were wealthy due to the huge population of essentially free-labor to work the large farms that grew mostly cash-crops such as tobacco and cotton for sale in Europe and northern ports to feed their textile industries.  Meanwhile, competition with the slave-labor drove potential prices down that the producers in the non-slave States could charge.  Added to these economic issues were moral issues that had increasingly grown in the past several years that preached the moral evil of slavery. 

 

The southern States were a largely martial culture.  To maintain order in a slavery society, class was very important and thus martial laws and defined class behaviors were maintained leading many men to attend military schools.  The code of honor was impressed upon the people from birth and was something that they could never back down from.  Meanwhile in the non-slave States’ cultures the martial spirit had not become as important nor a code of honor that dictated all inhabitants’ actions.  Large recent immigrant populations dotted the northern cities which had no attitude whatsoever regarding martial honor or any cares about slavery. 

 

When the November 6^th election of 1860 finally arrived, it had become a battle for who would win either the slave-States or the non-slave States.  In the non-slave States, it was a battle between the Republican’s Lincoln and the Northern Democrats’ Douglas.  Meanwhile in the slave-States, it had devolved into a battle between the Constitutional-Unionists’ Bell and the Southern Democrats’ Breckinridge.

 

Simple mathematics of the electoral college then appointed the next President. The Republicans won a decided majority of electoral votes even though less than 40% of the popular vote went to Lincoln.  The Northern Democrats won the next highest popular vote, but achieved the fewest electoral votes.  Then the Northern Democrats and the Constitutional Unionists each split the rest of the popular and electoral votes almost evenly.  In those days, it took several days for all the election results to be decided as paper ballots were counted and recounted and the results wired or mailed in to central collection points in the States which then sent electors to Washington to cast the official votes.

 

As the days crept by, it became clear in each State who had won in them.  The slave-States were satisfied that either Bell or Breckinridge, probably the Southern Democrats would carry the day.  But, across the non-slave States it became clear more rapidly that the Republican ticket was the winner.  News of this filtered south with travelers and newspapers, electrifying the slave-States because none of them had cast a single vote for the Republican who was not even on their ballots.  They realized that the fear they had been talking about for many years that a decidedly anti-slavery northern political party could win thus threatening their very culture.  Fiery rhetoric erupted in the cities and newspapers across the slave-States warning that the theft of the Presidency by an abolitionist would be seen as a direct affront to the honor of the slave-States.

 

The result of the 1860 election became official and set the stage the many pro-secessionist in the slave-States to rise.  The secessionist talk had been in the slave-States (as well as other sectors) for decades, but these people typically had little power.  The election of Lincoln and the Republicans however suddenly showed that many of the warnings these people had been railing about was a reality or at least made these warnings seem less far-fetched.    

 

The schism that had threatened to tear the Union asunder almost since the foundation of the Union had occurred…

“The Union is Dissolved!”

 

Headlines such as this were splashed across the various States’ newspapers on 21 Dec., 1861 and similar posters appealing to patriotic feelings were plastered all over the public buildings from Maine to Florida and out into Texas.  The Southern States had been bucking and griping about what many of them saw as Federal authority running rough-shod over their States’ sovereignty and personal liberties for several years.  Finally, on 20 Dec., 1860, South Carolina officially acted with a legal declaration;

“AN ORDINANCE to dissolve the union between the State of South Carolina and other States united with her under the compact entitled "The Constitution of the United States of America."
        We, the people of the State of South Carolina, in convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the ordinance adopted by us in convention on the twenty-third day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified, and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying amendments of the said Constitution, are hereby repealed; and that the union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of the "United States of America," is hereby dissolved.
        Done at Charleston the twentieth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty.”

 

In the U.S. Senate, a month earlier, the 2 Senators of SC had resigned, returning home to SC to work on the secession movement.  The final vote at the South Carolina Secession Convention that December day was 169-0 in favor of secession.  Within a few weeks, 6 more Southern States had also held secession votes and elected to break from the Union and be sovereign, confederating with the other seceded States. 

 

For a generation, the people of the time had watched as their United States of America had drifted ever more increasingly away from the idea that States are sovereign unto themselves and only bonded together out of mutual love and respect with a weak Federal government.  Election after election had failed to stem this drift toward a strong over-reaching Federal authority that threatened the sovereignty of the individual States.  And out of disgust and in an act of desperation, the talk of secession grew to a fervor pitch as State after State voted or debated that in its own best interest it should leave the Union.

 

Two days after SC seceded, she sent envoys to Washington, D.C. to begin negotiating the peace between her and the rest of the Union, and to make terms to take possession of all forts, ports, arsenals, etc. within her borders.  The Federal authority however would have no dealings with these envoys and shunned their attempts while the people of the Union decided what next to do.  War was the word of the day in most Union States, determination to force the seceded State to rejoin the Union whether they liked it or not.  In Southern States, the talk of war also loomed large as it appeared that other States and the overreaching Federal government of the U.S. was intending to fight rather than live peacefully with its seceded States neighbors.  This talk of war and forced Union from the Federal authorities was exactly the sort of talk and actions that made the Southern States wary of the overreaching Federals in the first place, thereby fulfilling the feared warnings about the power of the Federal government by those leading the secession movement. 

Yesterday was the anniversary of SC's secession from the Union. There were a lot of historical re-enactments, readings, displays, and commemerative occasions being held all thoughout Charleston. Most born and bred South Carolinians promoted the anniversary, while many of the "transplants" and of course the NAACP protested this particular piece of history, and tried to make a racial thing out of it. Too bad! Fugg 'em, it's part of our historical legacy, and if the transplants and the blacks don't like it, they are free to get the hell out of SC!!!!!

I saw some stuff on the NAA(L)CP's protestations and read that they plan to protest all the coming 150th events.  More power to them.  They will have some tough explaining at the big events showing a fair number of black CONFEDERATES and of course the USCT participating.  Perhaps they will be educated, but I doubt it.  They have an agenda and are blinded to truth.

Iliked the read very insrusting to read . That is not tought in school

Shiloh, did you read about the black re-enactor from Charleston, who has been doing the re-enacting for years? The NAACP has called him a traitor to his race, and the local blacks have harassed and bullied him for doing this. He told a Charleston reporter that he was doing this in memory of (I believe ) his great-great grandfather who was a freed slave, and fought for the Confederacy. He was very quick to point out that there were many blacks who supported the Confederacy, as well as the ones who fought and died for the cause. He stated that he will stand by his beliefs and continue to participate in the re-enactments as long as he is physically able! Boy, what a slap in the face to the NAACP, and the black trouble makers who still want to boycott SC because of our having the Confederate flag flying on the State House Grounds, and the new Confederate Memorial and the Secession Signing Memorial that are planned for Charleston.

I think I know the guy you are talking about, but can't think of his name. There is a black Confederate re-enactor that parades, marches and speaks a lot about that lost bit of CW history. He is actually mostly full of it though, for some reason wanting to glamorize even the life of slaves. I think he likes being an aggitator more than anything else. We need to know that there were many blacks that fought in Southern lines, de-segregated, while the blacks in the North's lines were always strictly segregated. Most blacks did fight in the Union for certain, but we need to honor those that chose to stand in Confederate lines as well. They fought for their beliefs the same as the Northern blacks did.

I pulled this off the old WBTS thread as it pertains to the black-re-enactor topic. 

Originally posted by: Shiloh on 7/8/2005 10:34:33 AM

He has done Confederate soldier re-enacting from what I recall from his TV interview I saw. I see many blacks portraying Confederates at events. It is not at all uncommon and actually I see as many if not more black Confederates at some events than I see black Union troops. This used to amaze me when I began, but now it's just common stuff. What I have found is that many blacks refuse to re-enact as Union troops under white officers. I mean, INDIGNANTLY refuse. The problem here lies in the fact that to be historically accurate, this is the way it has to be since the Federal Armies did utilize colored troops but only under white officers. There weren't any official colored officers on either side, but from First Bull Run colored troops were fighting on the field mixed in the ranks with whites on the Confederate side. This part of history is nearly forgotten as even at the time reports of such incidents were hidden from public view pretty quickly. There ar emany accounts remaining of colored troops being taken captive in Confederate service by Federals. One famous exchange between a captured Confederate colored soldier and his white Federal captor goes like this;
Federal: "Why are you shooting at us!?"
Confederate: "'Cause y'all are down here!"
Blacks in fair numbers attempted to muster into Confederate service right from the start, but were largely turned away or put into teamster tasks or fortification building tasks, etc. by the Confederate States' leadership who didn't quite know what to do with them. Blacks attempting to join the Federal forces were flatly refused by the Federals at the start but soon became Federal Army servants to do the same sorts of tasks. It was not until late '62 that the Congress authorized arming "contrabands" and then the mustering of colored troops. By this time however, untold hundreds of blacks had already been SHOOTING at Federals alongside white Confederates in the field. This is one major reason the idea of allowing colored troops into the Federal Armies was adopted. Reports and calls from the Federal officers about the fighting skills of Southern colored troops were reaching D.C. And these weren't all slaves either. It is doubtful that any slaves were ordered to fight for the South although many were forced into fortification building and other such tasks. Some slaves arrived on battlefields as personal servants of the men only to pick up a musket at some point and join a battle where they soon earned enough respect from the company men to be accepted in the lines. Others became adept in spying, foraging, and teamstering jobs and were accepted that way. But some were free men who came along on their own. This was not a huge percentage of the total Confederate troops by any means, but still these brave honorable people have unjustly been hidden from public history and it needs to stop.

A man I have re-enacted with locally is from Richmond. As a young boy (he's in his 90s now) he says he used to go across the bridge to the "burnt district" (ruins from the Civil War fires) to play. There was an old black man there that would sit and watch the kids play in the ruins. My friend says that the old man claimed to have been a Confederate veteran and loved to tell that "Ah farred a musket!" whenever he told the kids about the War. Now, if true, which there's no reason to doubt it, this old black man was proud to have fought for the Confederacy, yet history and time have completely forgotten his brave honorable service to his Country.

I am pleased to finally be able to announce that after YEARS of trying to add a colored troop (USCT) part to the "Hallowed Ground" cemetery tour at Stones River last week we got one. A seasonal ranger who is a black man has become interested in doing a part so the rangers have written a part and last week he dressed as a USCT and recited his part over the grave of one of the USCT men buried there. It's not a true tale as our other parts are because written accounts from these people are not available, but it hopefully adds a good part to the tour.

Hey Shiloh, do you know anything about the war effort out here in the far west?

A local television reporter here does stories about the history of the area.He did a story about a local unit that formed for the Union army late in the war. They made their own uniforms. Grey shirts and overalls. They did get real uniforms just before the war ended. They trained a total of five days and the only action they saw was a big drunken bash they had for a members wedding. Maybe a birthday, I forget.

That's funny!  I have read of several accounts of wild parties with units like that and often there were serious injuries or even deaths involved.  The far west was seeing indian wars during the CW so most of the militias formed and the US Army involved in the far west were after bandits and indians.  The SW saw some actual CW actions in NM and AZ, and CA had some forts guarding harbors.

Interesting to say the least.

One thing that has decreased after the civil war is states rights. Just about non-existant anymore it seems.
Too Bad, think it kept the federal government more in line then it is now.

need more of that today . Send all politions to a history class before they take office

Maybe, SC will do it all over again! We could win this time, due to the manufacturing, military bases, etc. that weren't in the South the first time around.

Posted By rthomas4 on 24 Dec 2010 02:46 PM
Maybe, SC will do it all over again! We could win this time, due to the manufacturing, military bases, etc. that weren't in the South the first time around.

Wow, if one considered it seriously, the death toll would be extreme, especially considering the attitudes of those currently in office. If there was a secession this year, would not the Feds use EVERY weapon in its arsenal against the states? Think about that. It would mean the military (comprised LARGELY of Southerners) is scattered all over the globe, the chaos would be catastrophic, as I met a lot of folks while serving who STILL denied the war was over.. I would hope that people are wiser than that, but anymore, I wonder if perhaps some of what I had been told about Federal usurpations today are not part of what these folks were talking about. States rights are all but gone, either by decree or by blackmail with road funds, self determination is not something many states have a good chance of right now.

If the Fed govt decided to invade any non-cooperative state today, what would happen? My guess is that given that folks are so sheeped now, the feds would roll through like Hitler's Blitzkrieg through Poland. After the first wave, the real shooting would start, but I am thinking it would be pretty one sided. I would already be dead before they got a long way (they have unlimited air support and armor, not to mention LOTS of firepower), but what really WOULD be the outcome? It would be ghastly, of that I am sure, for both sides.

I doubt there would be anywhere near the war it was then.  The Feds today would not have the balls to invade militarily today, the military would not obey such an order with nearly the attitude they did in 1861, and the people today do not respect the ideals of America enough to work up a sweat, much lesee shed their own or others' blood.  Simply put, "America" was worth killing for, even dying for.  CFKA is hardly worth sweat.

We have access to a lot of air power down here, and with the coming build-up at the Beaufort Marine Air Station, we are going to have a hell of a lot more! Don't forget Kings Bay Nuclear Submarine base is in St. Mary's Georgia. That could put a crimp in the Feds that would surpass anything and everything the South had the first time around!!!!!!

RT, I'm afraid you could not count on those assets, not fur sure, as likely as not the forces required to use them would not have full control. That is what I meant by chaos. It takes a LOT of folks on your side to sail out a submarine and then use it effectively. To speak nothing of effective use of air power. You would need whole groups of folks coming over, not one here another there, from different units. Infantry on the other hand, Ft Bragg, Ft Leonard Wood, Ft Hood, Parris Island, THOSE is where the folks would have to come from.

We got Oak Ridge, too.

Posted By Shiloh on 25 Dec 2010 08:07 PM

We got Oak Ridge, too.

Shiloh, I would be more concerned with the Dakotas and Kansas.. Any of those missiles good for really short range work?