RE: [civilwarwest] Big Dogs
- MargaretMay I suggest one book for you to read. It is called, "The South Was Right." I must say though that you go into reading that book with an open mind. It will help quell most of your beliefs.Thank youAndy-----Original Message-----Wayne,
I'd suggest you read "Apostles of Disunion" by Charles Dew about the
secession delegates, the delegates that the states that were already in
rebellion sent to the states that were considering it in order to offer
support and/or persuasion as needed. He uses the letters and speeches
that these gentlemen made and there is very little that is talked about
other than the need to protect the institution of slavery from the
perceived threat to it and the society that had formed around the Peculiar
Institution due to the election of a "Black Republican". There was
no war during the period from December through March, in large part,
because that was the lame duck period of the Buchanan administration
(Presidents were inaugurated on March 4 until the Constitution was amended
in the 1930s to move inauguration day to its current January 20 ). On the
one hand, the Confederates sent several commissioners to DC to try to
negotiate with the Buchanan administration over turning over or accepting
payment for property already seized in rebel states. Although Buchanan
had gone to great lengths to accommodate the South's demands before
secession began, he refused to either formally receive the commissioners
(implying recognition) or to turn over federal property like Ft. Sumter.
While denying the legality of secession, he basically bided his time until
it became Lincoln's problem. During the period between the presidential
election and Lincoln's inauguration, the rebels had created a provisional
government and Constitution, put together an army and called for troops to
be raised, seized federal property including the Federal mint and custom
house in New Orleans, and fired on federal armed forces (including firing
on the relief ship that Buchanan sent in an unsuccessful attempt to provide
relief to the US garrison on Ft. Sumter). The formal hostitilities
started with a deliberate decision on the part of the Confederate cabinet
to prevent a relief expedition with food for the starving Ft. Sumter
garrison of which the Lincoln administration had formally notified the
South Carolina governor and assured him that it no soldiers or weapons,
etc. were involved, only food and other such non-overtlly military items.
It seems clear that the decision was, in part, to force wavering slaves
states into joining the rebellion.
Had there been no secession, there would have been no war, and the
protection of slavery, in the words from that critical period from those
who advocated and made the decision to rebel, was why secession occurred.
- I would second Carl. Grandpa's knee is a wonderful place to learn to
love history but often a terrible place to learn accurate history.
I do not recall any mention of anyone telling Scott how to run a war.
And he was an experienced general -- I doubt that anyone needed to give
him ideas about how to run a war.
There were similar claims for a Marylander named Anna Carroll (? I may
have the name wrong) who claimed that she gave Lincoln the idea for the
But some things are so obvious -- John Sherman recalled going to visit
his brother early in the war and finding Cump and Thomas crawling around
on the floor on a huge map of the United States, "talking shop" about
how *they* would defeat the Rebels. As the senator remembered the story,
his brother and Thomas basically outlined the way the war turned out.
The secret was not in figuring out the strategy, but in finding the man
or men who would be able to carry out the plan. It took a while but
Grant, Sherman, Thomas, Sheridan and a few others, Lincoln finally found
the men who imposed their will on the armies.
Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
Hello addison, please do share that. I'll caution you, tho', that
family traditions are a bit touchy, you know, everyone in the family
cherishes them and all; but sometimes they are a bit hard to confirm.
Carl aka Unre, etc
--- In civilwarwest@y..., jaaah@t... wrote:
> Well, if this isn't too late, I want too add something.
> Family history records that we are related to the Scotts, and that
my Great Great Grandmother was the one to actually give General Scott
the idea for the 'Anaconda Plan'. My Grandfather has the full
details, but from what I remember, she was at a dinner party with
him, and he was telling her about the plans for the war against the
Confederacy. She then asked "well why don't you just cut them off
from everything?" When he asked what she meant, she gave him the
basic idea for what became the 'Anaconda Plan.' If you want the full
details, my Grandfather has them all!
> A. Hart
> > ** Original Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] The Anaconda Myth