RE: War and Genealogy - Carolyn M. Getting
Subject: RE: War and Genealogy
From: Carolyn M. Getting
Date: October 14, 1999

What the South did does qualify for treason in our current thinking, but to
them the treason had already been committed by the Federal Government as
they were dealing with States rights as they saw were guaranteed.  So,
you've got a little more here that Slavery.  The Slavery issue of course was
the big deal, but you've got a whole lot of other issues here.  Why do you
think those Southerners opposed to Slavery fought?? They believed in States
rights.  Things weren't quite a simple as people want to make them.  You
have to get back into the thinking at the time, which for us, can be quite a
problem.  We just don't think the way they did.

What was, was, and is over.  We are one nation....UNDER GOD.  That is the
important part to remember.  God bless.

just an old Texas Gal.
/Gambel/Sinz & Gross

 -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 10:41 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: War and Genealogy
> In a message dated 10/13/99 4:52:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [email protected] writes:
> << Subj:     War and Genealogy
>  Date:  10/13/99 4:52:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>  From:  [email protected] (Greg Simmons)
>  To:    [email protected]
>  I am sorry to see the Civil war discussion going on. What are
>  ancestors did cannot be changed. What we can do now that we are here is.
>  No one wants to cast blame on who or what happen during that time.
>                One note what the Confederate States of America did was
>  treason. They elected their own President and Vice President as well as
>  come up with their own Constitution as well as not allow any one else
>  who was not a member of their Confederate states to run for political
>  office in the states that belonged to the confederates.
>            They also with drew from the Federal Government almost all
>  representatives as well as take over federal property in the southern
>  states and call the property their own because it was in their state.
>  They established their own tax system and would not allow the Union to
>  tax them. They also sought finical help from other countries to supply
>  their Confederates states of America.
>           When the war was over zealous leaders of the Union wanted to
>  try the leaders of the South for treason. To heal the country though the
>  president knew he would have to pardon the leaders and accept them with
>  open arms back into the union with no punishment for them. Although the
>  soldiers of the Confederates were looked down on by Union soliders and
>  leaders after the war, they should have been given the open arms of
>  welcome. It is not wrong to disagree on points of view on items.
>               It is wrong how ever to go to war and fight on these points
>  of war as was done in the Civil war. It was Civil and not just a state
>  issue. When the federal government is effected it becomes federal. I am
>  not casting blame here just stating the facts that are recorded by
>  documents from the south and North. We can disagree on issues but to
>  kill over those issue's is not a very good ideal.
>             I hope we can put this issue to rest and go back to what this
>  list is about Genealogy. I am from Illinois and am tracing my ancestors
>  who came from SC in 1778 to 1799. In the Laurens Co. Area. They are:
>  1)William Harvey
>  2)Littleberry Harvey
>  3)Thomas Harvey
>  4)James harvey
>  5)Philemon or Philip Harvey
>  6)John Holcombe Harvey
>  7) Charles Harvey
>        All were brothers and lived in the Little River area of what was
>  Laurens Co. SC..
>                  Greg Simmons
>  _________________________________ >>
> Greg,
> You are a piece of work. You are declaring the Civil War
> discussion over and
> before actually adjourning the discussion, you produce a summary
> of the usual
> Yankee version of Lincoln's War, which you state as fact. (ho ho ho).
> A book review printed in last Sunday's Washington Post had an interesting
> summary of the statistics. It made reference to Lincoln and pretty well
> credited Lincoln with going to war and seeing 620,000 Americans
> die and the
> Southland devastated just so that the Union would not split on his watch.
> The Southern version would state that the Constitution of the
> United States
> grants powers to the Federal Government only as specified in the
> Constitution
> and all other powers go to the States. This principle is known as "States
> Rights" and has been a cornerstone of Your and my Constitution since the
> beginning.  There is no Federal power to prevent secession, and
> being silent
> on this issue, the States are given the right to decide.
> Possibly Lincoln thought he was putting down an insurrection?
> But the states
> formally acted to secede and, as you so eloquently stated, formed
> their own
> government, printed money, initiated a system of taxation (with
> representation), raised an Army, and proceeded to build a nation.
> Lincoln, I suspect, could not deal with the blow to his ego and
> see the 80
> year old USA divided on his watch. Constitutional Lawyers (strict
> constructionists) would likely side with the South in accepting
> its peaceful
> approach to declaring its freedom.  Liberals interpretations can't be
> predicted. The South acted constitutionally.  Lincoln did not.
> Lee and other Army personnel acted quite honorably by resigning
> from the Army
> of the USA, and signing up with the Army of the new nation being formed.
> There was no treason here, Sir. Only playing fast and loose with the
> Constitution by Lincoln.
> Now comes the crunch. A good hostage negotiator today would
> probably advise
> much more tolerance at Ft Sumpter before firing to drive the
> occupying forces
> out. By a review of the outcome, it might have been a better decision to
> delay firing that first shot, though the Union Army was
> unconstitutionally
> occupying southern property. All of this could have been settled
> peacefully
> and should have been. Unfortunately it was not.  But please put the
> responsibility for those 620,000 death squarely on Mr Lincoln's
> head where it
> belongs.  He foiled a peaceful and legal action to build a new
> nation and he
> is responsible for the outcome.
> Frankly, I love to study these events to understand why my great
> grandfather
> (Francis Marion Kerbow) enlisted in the Army of the Confederacy
> along with
> two of his brothers and his eldest son, and fought to defend his
> family farm
> in the Atlanta area and saw his youngest brother killed at
> Gettysburg.  What
> motivated him to do that other than to defend his nation against
> an invading
> Army.  This IS genealogy in my book. BTW, the Kerbows came to
> Georgia from
> Edgefield, SC after the Revolutionary War... another war where
> the people of
> a geographical area declared their freedom from an oppressing government.
> As a school boy in Dallas, I learned to recite the Gettysburg
> Address and I
> learned to say, "Lincoln was the Greatest president because he freed the
> slaves"...  Maybe he freed the slaves, maybe not, but that was
> not the main
> issue in the Civil War, though certainly by today's standards, slavery is
> unconcionable.  But GREATEST President? Yankee brainwashing!!! I was
> brainwashed back in school, but today I see these facts through different
> glasses and I am satisfied that I am sorting out truth, even though it is
> contrary to the history written by the victors.
> George B. Williams
> Manassas, Virginia
> >

==== SCROOTS Mailing List ====

Go To:  #,  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  G,  H,  I,  J,  K,  L,  M,  N,  O,  P,  Q,  R,  S,  T,  U,  V,  W,  X,  Y,  Z,  Main