|
|
|
|
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/7/2008 9:11:24 PM | Topgear..please tell me what was the straw!!..please before I go to sleep..And I love tombstone when Doc Holiday says Im your huckleberry..just a darn good movie.
You know you have more than just me hanging here ok..your good!..and thank you AGAIN for the answer of Lee & Jacksons last meeting..looking at my picture a little different now..thank you so much for sharing. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/7/2008 9:29:29 PM | I will take civil war for 200 Topgear.
And the answer is
This could have been the cause that brought about a large portion of the country to break it's mutual bonds with one another.
What could be the South's disaproval that any new state is to be a free slave state? | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 1:40:43 PM | topgear
The Constitution?
The South challenged the North to find a trace of authority in the Constitutionfor invading & coercing a soverign state?..the South believed that the Union formed under
the Constitution was a Union of consent..not force..that the original states were not the creatures but the creator of the Union:that these States had gained their independence,their freedom,and their sovereignty from the mother country,and had not surrendered these on entering the Union.
In other words..they wanted to dominate the South?
Also..I did find where it is safe to say 80% of the Southern armies had no slaves & no interest in the Institution.
When the Constitution was adopted & the Union formed,slavery existed in practically all the states:and it is claimed by Southern people that its disapperance from the Northern & development in the Southern States is due to climatic conditons & industry rather than to the existence or absence of great moral ideas. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 4:07:45 PM | | a matter of dominion! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~``dar | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 4:15:38 PM |
The South challenged the North to find a trace of authority in the Constitutionfor invading & coercing a soverign state?..the South believed that the Union formed under
the Constitution was a Union of consent..not force..that the original states were not the creatures but the creator of the Union:that these States had gained their independence,their freedom,and their sovereignty from the mother country,and had not surrendered these on entering the Union
The South was a bunch of poor losers, who when they discovered that they couldn't dominate the economic policy of the North, wanted to take up their ball and go home.
When the Constitution was adopted & the Union formed,slavery existed in practically all the states:and it is claimed by Southern people that its disapperance from the Northern & development in the Southern States is due to climatic conditons & industry rather than to the existence or absence of great moral ideas.
That would explain why it didn't flourish in the north, not so much why abolitionists wanted it gone from the south. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 5:03:38 PM |
The South was a bunch of poor losers,
Hardly!
Why not stick to the facts instead of name calling? I've thought many of your answers up to this point were very well reported. I'd be greatly dissatisfied to discover you're more interested in derogatory remarks than discussing the facts.
who when they discovered that they couldn't dominate the economic policy of the North, wanted to take up their ball and go home.
While the North was the industrial giant in America it lagged much behind on the scale of the world. The economics of the planet was dominated by the Victorian era (British Empire). Everyone desired British manufactured goods not American goods at that time period. The only thing the British, French, and Spanish industries were interested in from America was for it's raw materials. This is why the Southern States was so overly wealthy despite the fact that they payed for the entire funding of the US Government.
When the Constitution was adopted & the Union formed,slavery existed in practically all the states:and it is claimed by Southern people that its disapperance from the Northern & development in the Southern States is due to climatic conditons & industry rather than to the existence or absence of great moral ideas.
charlesedm---- That would explain why it didn't flourish in the north, not so much why abolitionists wanted it gone from the south.
That's the most popular answer given but very wrong. Is it not just as cold in the North as it was then? Does Industry not exsist in the North still today? Yet we see a very large population of African Americans who do quiet well in both the colder climate and it's industry. It was the prevailing racism that dominated the North that drove the larger number of Africian Americans out of the North and into the South. Those Slave owners who had owned slave in the North started selling them off to Southern States instead of losing the money, when Northern States began to inact laws restricting and eventual ending slave ownership in it's borders. However That is only a brief explination and there is much more to the cause of the exodus of African Americans from the North. (Give the Negros of the time some credit those who made it to America had to survive a journey of great peril and becaus of that their children where strong. To think of them as some frail human being who couldn't survive the cold and couldn't work in an industrial enviroment is absurd) | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 6:26:14 PM |
Badger Bill
the South's disaproval that any new state is to be a free slave state?
Sorry, but that was just another part of the issues that lead to the conflict.
Cottonblossom
The Constitution?
Again sorry, just another part of the puzzle but not the trigger
Cottonblossom
The South challenged the North to find a trace of authority in the Constitution for invading & coercing a soverign state?..
No, they could have done that both in Congress and through the courts. One only needs to read about the "Hartford convention" to settle the question about seccession.
(Who ever heard of a marriage you couldn't get a divorce? Why is it that America would support seccession in other countries claiming that the people had ever right to decided for themselves how to best govern themselves, as long as you don't live in Michigian, New York, Mississippi, Colorado, Oregon, etc,...)
the South believed that the Union formed under
the Constitution was a Union of consent..not force..that the original states were not the creatures but the creator of the Union:that these States had gained their independence,their freedom,and their sovereignty from the mother country,and had not surrendered these on entering the Union.
First the marriage of the States had taken place under the Article of Confederation which had been a perpetual union. Yet, some of the States decided to succeed from that pact because the Articles of Confederation hadn't worked very well. So they created the Constitution which was by wording "a more perfect union" not a binding union as had been under the Articles of Confederation which had in effect been a union who couldn't be absolved. So, when the Constitution was adopted it was only accepted by a few States. That of course means some States were still left with the Articles of Confederation. The States were Sovergin as they had always been thought of and those who adopted the Constitution wanted a less dominating authortiy meaning that the States were to be even more Sovergin than had they been under the Articles of Confederation. The most important thing to remeber here is those States that adopted the Constitution didn't see it as their obligated duty to send in a military force into the States who had not adopted it and force this new form of government upon them.... I recommend reading "Rawles view of the Constitution" as taught at West Point in the early part of the 19th Century. It's the book that most of the Officer who would fight in the Civil war/War between the States had been instructed upon regarding the Constitution/US Government/States...
it is claimed by Southern people that its disapperance from the Northern & development in the Southern States is due to climatic conditons & industry rather than to the existence or absence of great moral ideas.
It's not a Southern view but rather a product brought about by carpetbaggers/scalawags. I touched upon this subject in a previous post. Industry found it far better for profit to not have to house, cloth, provide medical, and retirement benifits to Slaves. Furthermore the northern population disliked negros far more than the Southern population.
What could be the South's disaproval that any new state is to be a free slave state?
Sorry to say, that was only part of the issue not the match that ignited the fire.
dancecard
a matter of dominion!
While not the trigger, most certianly part of the finger that would pull the trigger. (Your so very close to the answer but just haven't found it... Don't feel bad about it for your on the right path and asking the same questions I asked myself. It took me years to figure out what was the finial element that would set off such a war. A nation that was built upon compromise what could it be that would cause it to feel that no resolution could be found other than war... Given the structure of the Constitution how could such a war be waged by it without destroying the Constitution itself?)
The answer really settles upon a single book, written by a Southerner. A book most people have never heard of in our time (No, it's not uncle Tom's cabin)... The book that ignited the fire that would become the war, we know as the "Civil War." It was a manifesto advocating the murder of the white southern population both slave owners and non-slave owners. It was printed in great volumes and smuggled into the south, and distrubuted to the negro population. The book itself was threating enough but the open endorsement by many Northern Sentors of an uprising new politiacl party encouaging the murder of a large segment of the American population was the signal that the Constitution and its protections had ended. That is what caused one by one Southern Congressmen to stand up and walk out of Congress and the Southern States to draft documents declaring their cause of seccession... The book was written by Hinton Rowan Helper, titled " The Impending Crisis of the South: How to Meet it" published 1857... If you ever wanted to know why the Civil War came to be that is the trigger that actually started it... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 6:30:33 PM | Sorry Charlie! , nannie nannie popo ~
But really, your right! we are still pretty sore about it around here, ~ But we still hold our head high with pride. We gave them a war to remember. It was as much about slaves as it was gun powder. Most of us excepted the outcome ~ The Nation truly was baptized in our own blood and today we are a stronger Nation for it. Thats why we fight so hard today to perserve and protect, why our fights have so much fire. ~ seems the fight is never over ~ ~~~~~~never over
The South put up one hell of a fight! In the end , we were throwing rocks at them.
We needed to get crops in, ~ had cotton rotting in the rain ~
They sold us the manpower and then had the balls to tell us we
couldn't have them. Now , what kinda deal is that?
Never being in the South ~ It's hard to convey the virtues one might find here.
Most seem to be hung up on "Uncle Tom's Cabin"
MG, you did miss it ~ I hope you come back again ~ now that you are ready. ~ dar
wow! ~ I posted over you~ ~ a book! ~~ lite the fuse to cannon fire on Fort Sumter!
Topgear1 ~ that was truly an amazing story ~ I thank you and your Uncle~dar | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 6:58:15 PM | Topgear.
I learned something about history today. Thank you
May I go back and change my answer?  | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 7:31:20 PM | | That is not what started the problems in America, not at all. What laws are you refering to? The problem began long before the Missouri compromise of 1820...it began in 1791, when a single event changed three countries; the slave revolt of Haiti. France had Haiti under slave rule with sugar cane, much as the south had with cotton. In 1791, the slaves revolted, and by 1803, the French decided to back out of the area. By 1804, Haiti becomes a free, black republic. This scared people, and Britian would turn and abolish slavery, France would get out of the west , and unloaded Louisiana on us, and America said that no more importing of slaves would happen after 1808. Thing is, the south would maintain the practice of importing slaves until 1859, and that never set well with alot of people. What people knew was that the free slaves of Haiti, these French and African speaking people, were coming to American through New Orleans, we know them as the Creoles. Having the south import more slaves against the law, and these Creoles shaping New Orleans, made the start for the friction between the north and the south. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 7:56:27 PM | charles..this is me..not anyone else ok..you seem to have hate for the South..I am sure you have never even been here so you just insulted more than just me & whites okay..
I have defended myself just for being in the Heart of Dixie my entire life it seems & people like you that come out with that kind of crap is what keeps hate going..I came to this thread because I am a True Southerner & ignorant to the FACTS myself..I want to learn..not have my ancestors called "poor losers"..there was no winners after that war imo..so many deaths!..and then you come along and attempt to disrupt my education..please stop so I can learn and not be ignorant okay.
sleekviper-I am totally lost on your post..I admit it..could you break that down for me..where did you get that information? | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 8:13:22 PM | | The North was never suppose to have slaves...it was banned in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. It states..."There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." This was later stretched farther west by the missouri compromise of 1820. The problem between the north and south first centered on possible slave revolts by continued importation of slaves after 1808. They did not want to have to deal with a slave revolt from being out numbered. That was the start of a rift between north and south. Which part of the info? The Haiti slave revolt, and the impact? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 8:18:24 PM |
dancecard
that was truly an amazing story ~ I thank you and your Uncle
Your welcome and I really enjoyed sharing this thread with you.
Badger Bill
I learned something about history today. Thank you
Your welcome and I encourage you to research some of stuff yourself because theres much to be learned from it that effects your life in todays world. The Hartford Convention is interesting reading, "Cracker culture," by Grady McWhiney explains many of the differences between the people of the north and the south. "I'll take my Stand," is a great book that accurately predicts what we see in todays America and it was published in the 1930's. "Rawle's, view of the Constitution" is an excellent source to learn what the Constitution was and should be... As for the causes of the war the single best source I would recommend is a small book written by Captain Samuel A'Court Ashe "A Southern View of History The War for Southern Independence..."
Just wanted to put some of this in persepctive:
It's almost perfectly fitting that we are discussing this at a time when the Nation is having it's primary's. How would any of us feel if we saw a new politcal party that had endorsed a book that recommended for the illegal aliens to come into are homes at night and kill us and our children. How do you think you would react to seeing that a portion of the Country felt it was perfectly acceptable to murder you and your neighbors? And that it was being reported every night on the nightly news that their candidate was wining primary after primary across their particular part of the country...
As for slavery: (Let me first say I don't agree with the institution and some may look upon this analogy in poor taste but if one looks at the way things were it's perfectly acceptable to anyone who has an open mind and willing to see how things were) Slaves as sad as this may be were viewed as property no different that you see your car today. If it breaks you get it it fixed, If someone hurts it you seek recovery for damage, and of course some people take better care of their cars than others. Now just imagine if only a small number of the population could afford to own a car and the rest of us got around on bicycles. That both the North and the South owned cars and one day the Northern people dicided that they wanted to get rid of the gas powered vehicles they have and replace them with mass transit. Now having spent a great deal of money on their cars and seeing the eventual adoption of mass transit they saw an avenue to still recoup some money from their car by selling it in the south were mass transit wasn't about to be adopted. In a short time the north became car free but cars were abunt in the south. Then the same reason for agruement of ridding the north of cars began to be campagined to rid the nation of cars but the south didn't see the cause for get rid of their cars. Then the North statred lobbying the governement to force the south to rid itself of it's cars but provided no way for the southern car owners to recoup their expense but instead expected each southern car owner to just chalk it up as a loss... That's sort of how slavery was seen in the south, the North had built the ships and ran the slavery importation companies that sailed to the ivory coast and picked them up then brought them to America to be soild both North & South. When they begin to dislike having the slaves living in their part of the country they sought ways to sell them south. Eventually demanding the ending of Slavery altogether but providing no applicable sollution on how to subsidize the loss to the owners.
Slavery was ended everywhere else in the world and no civil war ever had to be fought. A pefectly acceptable solution could have been found the only problem is that the war wasn't being fought for slavery or peservation of the union. The war was an easy excuse for the North to justify it's desire to overthrow the government, the Constitution and pilliage the southern States coffers. Mississippi was one of the most wealthy of the States prior to 1860 today it's dead last. That War didn't end when the guns fell silent in 1865. Each state today lives under the treat of the federal/corporate government cutting off funds or sending an occupying force to enforce it's demands. Does that sound like a republic in the practice of democracy? Does that sound like what you've read in the Constitution prior to the 13th Ammendment? Does that sound like the type of Governemnt the frames of the American experiment had in mind... I dare say if George Washington was to rise from the grave today he would inspire a new rebellion against the tranny that America has become... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 8:32:25 PM | Topgear
Thank you for this..we owe you a home cooked Southern meal here.
I have heard more & more people say with the exception of slavery they wish the South had won!.hearing that more & more.
I have token note of the books you ref. & I will do some serious reading in the future & when I get a better understanding on this I hope this thread & you are still here in a way so I can let you know what I have learned.
And when I said we..you don't realize how many people are watching this thread here lol..and it includes but not limited to Latinos,Blacks,Whites,Asians..I mentioned some of this information & now others are steady asking me about your & others post..so I just take my laptop & let them read it..thank you again for your time & effort.
I did say though when I first started posting on this thread..I wanted to know about the things people don't talk about..not what books have written so much..as the facts people such as myself are not aware of & don't know where to find..so this does mean something to me..I will do my part & read some of your Ref. books but thread has taught me much more than books I have read. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 8:52:18 PM |
sleekviper
That is not what started the problems in America, not at all. What laws are you refering to? The problem began long before the Missouri compromise of 1820...it began in 1791, when a single event changed three countries; the slave revolt of Haiti. France had Haiti under slave rule with sugar cane, much as the south had with cotton. In 1791, the slaves revolted, and by 1803, the French decided to back out of the area. By 1804, Haiti becomes a free, black republic. This scared people, and Britian would turn and abolish slavery, France would get out of the west , and unloaded Louisiana on us, and America said that no more importing of slaves would happen after 1808. Thing is, the south would maintain the practice of importing slaves until 1859, and that never set well with alot of people. What people knew was that the free slaves of Haiti, these French and African speaking people, were coming to American through New Orleans, we know them as the Creoles. Having the south import more slaves against the law, and these Creoles shaping New Orleans, made the start for the friction between the north and the south.
O' I agree there is much in depth issues that built up to the war but that isn't really what was being asked here. What was being discussed was the actual spark that ignited the war not all the interwoven tangled issues that all most certianly contribute to the conflict. It takes much studying and years to understand the scale of it all as you evidently know. People are looking for the cliff note answers in such a forum not a formal 4 year education, that would take for ever to dicsuss on a site such as this one.
The revolt in Hati really did scare the Southern people but not so much the Plantation owners. They knew that no such revolt could ever happen here for slavery was conducted very differently in America as opposed to in Hati. I'll give a great example of why this couldn't occur all one needs to look at is history itself. During the height of the war when all the young able bodied men of the south were away at war, leaving only feeble men, women and children at home in the south. Never was their a more ripe time for the slaves to revolt yet hardly is a case reported of any insurection amoung slaves reported, I find that a unique and curious piece of information. Not to mention all the african American that fought on the southern side that I found to be an odd twist to the conflict. They wasn't forced to fight in the war but chose to do so of their own free will. I wondered why anyone would do that and I think both you and I know we wouldn't fight for someone trying to keep us in chains , so to speak? Unless of course we had some close friendship for someone. I'vc went to bat for one of my Afician american friends when a group of whites wanted to slander him and he's stood up for me when a group of blacks wanted to harrass me. I believe there's much more to it than black and white. A feeling of frendship can have stronger bonds than freedom and chains. Maybe the reason why some southern slaves fought for the south can be directly related to the reason why they fought for Americas Independence when the British was offering them their freedom in exchange for taking up arms against their masters?
Why not ask Mr. H.K. Edgerton? I'm sure he can give you a much better answer... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 9:07:11 PM | The relative population of those that fought for the south was small, and those that did fight were promised freedom after the war. Not all blacks during the war for Independence were slaves. Slaves were kept ignorant, and in constant fear, the odds of a revolt were thin.
The situation went drastic for both sides with the Kansas Nebraska act, and the Dred Scott decision. I need no answers..that is what made the final straw, and the start of the war. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 9:39:14 PM |
cottonblossom
Your welcome
I have heard more & more people say with the exception of slavery they wish the South had won!.
Slavery was on its way out due to the industrial revolution coming on and would have cessed had no war been fought. As for the South wining, unfortantly they never really had a chance. Had they abolished slavery at the onset and provided a way to pay the plantation owners for their investment (Like the government does today for people who's homes where built on toxic waste dumps). Then the North would have had no credability to continue the war as most Eurpoen countries were already set to step in on the side of the south with military/navel and econmoc aide. However with the Norths emancipation act that killed all hopes of the South ever being victorious...
have token note of the books you ref. & I will do some serious reading in the future
The very best book I would recommend in your case is "A Southern View of the Invasion of the Southern States and War of 1861-65," writen by Capt. Samuel A'Court Ashe. I believe you will find it most helpful and it's a very short book but highly informative...
And when I said we..you don't realize how many people are watching this thread here lol..and it includes but not limited to Latinos,Blacks,Whites,Asians..I mentioned some of this information & now others are steady asking me about your & others post..so I just take my laptop & let them read it..thank you again for your time & effort.
LOL, I had no idea I had such a cult following? If I could say something to all of them I would say what ever difference we may think we have our commonalities far exceed our petty differences. The unresovled issues left over from that conflict over a century and half ago play a great importance in our lives today and that for all of us whether we are Latinos,Blacks,Whites,or Asians.
Slavery was a disgusting practice but we shouldn't be blinded into thinking the true motives behind that war was slavery. If it had of been then it would have been along more clear lines, it wouldn't take nearly two years of death and destruction for someone to say hey maybe we should free the slaves in states we have no control over... It was really the destruction of the Constitution and coup of the government. We don't think what happened so long ago would impact our daily lives but each time you pay personal income tax just remember there was no personal income tax before 1860. The subjugation we all live under no matter what our ethnicity is a direct result of that war.
I wanted to know about the things people don't talk about.. facts people such as myself are not aware of & don't know where to find..
Such as?
Fact: Did you know that when Robert E. Lee died that he was buried in a coffin made too short for him. It was all they could locate because days prior to his death a great storm had passed through dumping much rain and washing away all the coffins at the local coffin maker
Gen. James Longstreet was despised by most southerners after the war and was one of the few top generals of the confedracy to have his citizenship restored.
The Confederacy once attacked Vermount via Canada... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 9:43:59 PM |
sleekviper
I need no answers..
Hmmmm, why am I not surprised, but thank you... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/8/2008 10:16:55 PM | | I don't know...why are you not surprised? Your welcome | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/9/2008 5:37:05 AM | The souther slaves were not kept ingorant ~ they were kept uneducated as were many whites. Again, it was a place in time ~ were people were doing the best they knew how.
The south was all about Ag. business ~ on a huge scale even by todays standards.
I had heard this story and about this book many years ago ~ and it loomed just outside the reach of my recall. ~ I just remembered, Sentor's , elected officials walking out ~ but couldn't remember why! for the life of me. ~ It truly was a Doc Holiday wink ~ that set the fire. ~ I'll never forget it again.
We still battle this fog of misunderstanding today ~ I've a friend ~a work buddy~ from Alabama, we work together on a ship for months at a time ~ he pulls 12 hours and then I'm up 12 hrs ~ You get close, as the sun comes up and goes down 30 or 40 times ~ to run a big 100 ton vessle with only four men and two being "do little" Captains, its a lot of work ~ He told me one day that the Stars and Bars was a defeated banner and was truly unlawful to display ~ I understand his sentiments ~ but still, I brissle with the notion. He was leaning on his friendship but I can't argue with the notion. ~ and that's just the way it ~"is".
While we are all slaves in one form or another ~ The right to own another " is" ofcoarse wrong and flawed in nature. ~ That was never was the question ~ slaves and slave trade started long before Kuti Kenti went into the forest in search for a drum.
Long before the Arcadian Removal ~ and it still exist today in many different forms ~ and has no preference to color.
Thanks again ~ for bring this forward topgear1 ~ dar
You are right Charles ~ To the South ~ it had reach the point ~ where ~ it was a "No Confidence Vote" ~ the moral zealots doninated the day ~ not unlike what has happened regarding ~ the far extreme right ~ during this present adminstration.
no moderation ~ not permited enough time to correct. ~ the medicine was more deadly them the illness. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/9/2008 5:41:24 AM | charles..this is me..not anyone else ok..you seem to have hate for the South..I am sure you have never even been here so you just insulted more than just me & whites okay..
Seriously, I don't have a hatred for the south. In fact it's the only part of the USA I have traveled too.
What I hate is historical revisionism. This idea that the souths attempt at seperation was some noble purpose. In the southern states declaration of independence, they outright state that slavery is the issue on the table.
As for the union being voluntary, the entire point of government process is to provide a set of rules to abide by, if you're defeated ellectorally, thats the reality. You have no more right to seperate based on the grounds of slavery, than an American individual has the right to seperate his house from the USA in order to avoid paying parking fines.
Just remember who fired the first shot. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/9/2008 7:23:07 AM | | During the war of northern agression[lets call it what it was] there was a Confiderate sniper on a hill in Alabama.He has pinned down a company of yankee soldiers.The leiutenant told the sergeant to take two men and go get the sniper.The seargent and two men went up the hill and never came down.The next day the Captain told the Leiutenant to take a squad and go the the sniper.the Luiutenant saluted smartly and took his squad and charged up the hill.After a few munites all hell broke loose on the hill.After much shooting and yelling the Leiutenant came running down the hill bleeding ,his clothing hanging in rags and yelled Captain it's a trap there are two of them. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/9/2008 8:51:15 AM | ignorant...Pronunciation: \ˈig-n(ə-)rənt\
Function: adjective
Date: 14th century
1 a: destitute of knowledge or education
Louisiana Forbids Slaves to be Taught to Read or Write, 1830
That all persons who shall teach, or permit or cause to be taught, any slave in this State, to read or write, shall, upon conviction thereof, before any court of competent jurisdiction, be imprisoned, not more than one month nor more than twelve months. (Law of March 16, 1830.)
The General Assembly of Virginia Prohibits the Teaching of Slaves,
Free Negroes, or Mulattoes to Read or Write, 1831
North Carolina Forbids Slaves or Free Negroes to Preach, 1831
An act for the better regulation of the conduct of negroes, slaves and free persons of color.
Alabama Forbids the Teaching of Slaves to Read or Write, 1832
Sec. 10. And be it further enacted, That any person or persons who shall endeavor or attempt to teach any free person of color, or slave to spell, read, or write, shall upon Conviction thereof by indictment, be fined in a sum not less than two hundred and fifty dollars nor more than five hundred dollars.
They were kept ignorant..... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/9/2008 9:53:31 AM | sleekviper
Believe me..I know the definition of ignorant,one of my favorite words actually..ignorance can be cured..stupidity not so easy..thats why I use ignorant in my post or when I actually meet a person that is lacking in knowledge..now you understand why I enjoy this thread.
Not sure what your venturing into with that post..especially singling out 3 States..I want to learn UNKOWN facts about the war..not what you are attempting..and I have my suspicions your not here for education..also I could post back and forth with you on the various states and passages they also passed PRIOR to the war but thats not why I am here..where do you get your information again?..Wikipedia?..the things I am after are not easily googled.
Why would you single out 3 States?..and veer of course of my pp asking for information that no one talks about?..how did you become interested in this thread?..just curious.. ..Alabama is the Heart of Dixie is that the reason for hatred toward our State from some?..why we are singled out?..
I am still absorbing information from this thread & have some interesting,fulfilling reading to do so I can stop being ignorant..I am not one ashmaed to ask others that have more knowledge..to learn the truth..look forward to your reply.
| |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/9/2008 10:09:47 AM | Darn Charles..I missed your post!!..Thanks for the respectful reply..I took issue with you calling my ancestors "poor losers"..they were good people okay.
What did you think of the South when you visited?..Did you visit Alabama?..I just have figured out since I got on the internet that many many people are still in the dark on our State..and when I was asked for answers to their questions..I had to accept the fact I was ignorant on some of it..the main reason I started posting here..to learn is all..and pass it on..get past the history of lies & myths..tell it ALL ..the unspoken facts & tidbits..
Did you see any of the destruction in person even after all these years that the Union Army left behind when they came through Alabama?..the furnaces?..the murder of the very people they were supposedly liberating to freedom?..made me just sick reading what they did at Tanne Hill..and other places we have fought to preserve in this State..
I did get tired after decades of hearing pc history being taught..and the hatred toward me and mine coming from those teachings just because we are Southern & live in Alabama..I am sure you don't realize what it is like having to defend the good part of your heritage..Southerners are just now being allowed to discuss this without being labeled racist..well guess we still get our label..
Anyway..Alabama has been mentioned many times..This State is what many call the new South..I am very proud of Alabama..it is amazing being able to work with so many different cultures..I am blessed to have met many that now make Alabama their home..and we work together..play together..have you seen the Industry our state has now?..and to clarify..I am proud to be a Southerner..you know..American by birth..Southern by the Grace of God..yes I am.
Topgear has and others have answered what I asked days ago..that is what I like reading..not wikipedia & other history I learned in HS..nor can I debate on this thread..I don't have the knowledge yet..getting there,thank you again for the respectful response,much appreciated.
| |
|
|
|
Home
login 
