The Confederacy Isn’t Something to Be Proud Of (Representatives, attorneys, cost)

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge

Oh, be sure and let the slaves in New Jersey know that. 1860 census, anyone?

Here is some back-up on that one, DC.

Slavery in New Jersey

Furthermore, New Jersey slaveowners had the option to sell their human property into states that still allowed slaveholding, or into long indentures in Pennsylvania, until an 1818 law that forbid "the exportation of slaves or servants of color."

New Jersey, like other northern states, replaced outright slavery with stricter controls of free blacks. Black voters were disenfranchsed by an 1807 state law that limited the franchise to "free, white male" citizens.

In 1830, of the 3,568 Northern blacks who remained slaves, more than two-thirds were in New Jersey. The institution was rapidly declining in the 1830s, but not until 1846 was slavery permanently abolished. At the start of the Civil War, New Jersey citizens owned 18 "apprentices for life" (the federal census listed them as "slaves") -- legal slaves by any name.

"New Jersey's emancipation law carefully protected existing property rights. No one lost a single slave, and the right to the services of young Negroes was fully protected. Moreover, the courts ruled that the right was a 'species of property,' transferable 'from one citizen to another like other personal property.
Thus "New Jersey retained slaveholding without technically remaining a slave state."

[monkeywrenching]

Originally Posted by workingclasshero

The Confederacy Isn’t Something to Be Proud Of

then the founding fathers arent much to be proud of either....since they kept the british policy of slavery....which means the union isnt much to be proud of

see the irony

the usa is also the only country to nuke someone....not too proud there either

I did not mind the USA nuking japan, save alot americans lives that would have been killed otherwise, some say 1 million+.

[expect]

bunch of hicks

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by expect

bunch of hicks

These "hicks" formed the backbone of the military which won our nation's wars.

One might not care much for Ann Coulter (I happen to admire her, but that is neither here nor there), but here is a great column on the subject:

Ann Coulter

[jackmccullough]

Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge

1. Not Lost Cause.

2. Why didn't they file? Um, because they seceded. It wasn't up to them to file a lawsuit. It was up to the Federal Government to file a lawsuit, a complaint.

3. Unfortunately for you, Lincoln's actions are documented. The Secretary of War wanted to abandon Ft Sumter because it wasn't defensible, it's location made it impossible to re-supply, and it had little strategic value militarily. Lincoln alone saw the value, it's provocative value. And he shared his plan with the Senator Browning, a close friend from Illinois who had helped Lincoln with the funeral arrangements for his son Willy. And Senator Browning recorded Lincoln's plan in his diary.

Fort Sumter was a U.S. military installation on United States territory. There was no more reason to negotiate a surrender of Sumter to the traitors than there would be to negotiate a surrender of the Pentagon to Osama bin Laden. Or maybe surrendering the Federal Building in Oklahoma City to Timothy McVeigh.

[maskedman]

Originally Posted by majoun

You guys seceded and fired on US troops rather than negotiate. We were at war with you guys. You guys lost, we won. End of story. Move on.

You have no understanding of the War of Northern Aggression. Sad.

[TKramar]

Originally Posted by jackmccullough

Fort Sumter was a U.S. military installation on United States territory. There was no more reason to negotiate a surrender of Sumter to the traitors than there would be to negotiate a surrender of the Pentagon to Osama bin Laden.

It was no more on U.S. territory than Guantanamo is. The U.S. should close that base and leave also.

[jackmccullough]

Originally Posted by TKramar

It was no more on U.S. territory than Guantanamo is. The U.S. should close that base and leave also.

You're half right. The difference is that Guantanamo is not in the United States, and South Carolina is, and always has been.

[TKramar]

Even when it was a colony? Even when the fine people of South Carolina decided they wanted no part of the United States? Even when there was no "United States" under a Constitution, but a loose confederation of states?

Have you heard the phrase "consent of the governed"? What happens when the governed withdraw their consent?

[jackmccullough]

Enjoy your little get-together around your town's second-place trophy this weekend.