Would anyone have information about Cyrus H. Johnson who was in the Company B, 24th Missouri Infantry, Union, Chaplin. His wife's name was Elizabeth. Thanks, Jerre

In a message dated 1/19/2003 3:00:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, [email protected] writes: > And frankly, I don't blame Afro-Americans for being upset to see it > flying. Put yourselves in their shoes. Quite naturally they focus only on > > the slavery issue. > > Truth? I don't see truth involved in defending flying a flag that once > represented something and today represents something else to the > overwhelming > majority of people in this country. Hey Belle, You make some good points, but if everything that offended one group or another was banned we would have very little to display in this country. I don't argue your point about the Klan. They did adopt that flag, not the flag of the Confederacy, but the Battle Flag. But, myself, I don't want to hang this flag over anyone's head, This flag represents a particular part of history and flying it at the Confederate Cemetery is appropriate in my opinion. Also, I have know a great deal of Afro American's in my life and am very fond of many, but none of them I have ever met was offended by that flag. Most hate groups...black, white or what ever need something to rally behind, this flag does not represent their hate...First and foremost it was a battle flag. Now if someone wants to start calling a dime a quarter...it isn't going to make it so. Thanks for your opinion. Claiborne

Here is some good news. At least the President of "Friends of Ft. Davidson" has her heart on our side. Please read: January 17, 2003 An Open Letter to The Public: I am the president of Friends of Fort Davidson and an Civil War reenactor. I do not reenact as a Confederate and have never owned or flown a Confederate flag. My Civil War ancestor was a Lutheran minister who did not believe Lutherans should get involved in the Civil War at all. That being said, the decision to take down a flag over a grave site containing mostly Confederate remains is just wrong. Since this decision was reached, Friends has lost its vice-president, Ron Warren, who interpreted both Union and Confederate soldiers for the fort anytime they had school groups touring. I hope Ron will reconsider, because the decision was based on political correctness. It is truly sad that political officials now provide the norms of society and dictate what is right and proper when in the past we went to our homes and churches for moral guidance. Whether this action was politically correct or not, it is morally wrong. Finally, I would point out that it is the fault of politicians such as of the ilk of Rep. Gephardt, that we have this problem in the first place. Confederates are the only foes the United States has ever vanquished who were not treated with respect. Instead they suffered years of retribution called reconstruction. We built up Japan and Germany after a war which cost the lives of 52 million people and in which slavery and genocide were issues. We have forgiven the foes of every war we have fought but this one. As a nation, we should admonish ourselves for allowing such actions as the removal of a flag from a soldier's grave and for permitting politicians to tell us what is morally right. I would hope that a compromise can be reached, but even if this decision is final, we should not take this out on the staff at Fort Davidson or at Confederate Memorial or by cancelling reenactments and living histories as some have suggested. We need to organize and demand that our government officials honor the dead and interpret history correctly or be replaced by someone who has a higher moral standard. Sincerely, Sandra L. Walther President

How long did the Stars and Stripes fly over the slavery of African-Americans and oppression of Native Americans and why does it not offend the political correct? OHB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nancy Beck" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 4:13 PM Subject: [MO-CW] The Flag > In order to understand the times our ancestors lived > > in, it is vital that we learn about the burning issues of the day in order to place the people in context. To do otherwise is to be a revisionist......placing today's values and tenets on those of yesterday. > > > > Belle > > `````````````````` > > > > Belle, > > > > That is exactly what we have been trying to say all week about removing the revered Confederate Battle flag. > > To quote you: > > "To do so is to be a revisionist (historian)......placing today's values and tenets on those of yesterday." > > > > The reason we say loosing our freedom of speech et al: > > > > The Supreme Court of America of the US has agreed with the liberals who wish to spit, burn, and do other unspeakable things to our US Stars and Stripes "that it is their Freedom of Speech to do so whether it offends others or not." > > > > We believe that it is our Freedom of Speech to be able to fly the Confederate Flag whether it offends anyone or not. > > `````````` > > There is more to Southern Heritage than a mere piece of cloth. The Confederate flag represents the modern day Ku Klux Klan and hate groups. This is fact not opinion. No amount of "education" is going to counter this. > > > > Belle, You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Just because they use it a symbol doesn't mean that "Flag" represents them or their ideals. They soil the true meaning of that flag. > > > > Nancy in Texas > > > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > "We ran like a herd of wild cattle." > William C. Oates > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >

In order to understand the times our ancestors lived in, it is vital that we learn about the burning issues of the day in order to place the people in context. To do otherwise is to be a revisionist......placing today's values and tenets on those of yesterday. Belle `````````````````` Belle, That is exactly what we have been trying to say all week about removing the revered Confederate Battle flag. To quote you: "To do so is to be a revisionist (historian)......placing today's values and tenets on those of yesterday." The reason we say loosing our freedom of speech et al: The Supreme Court of America of the US has agreed with the liberals who wish to spit, burn, and do other unspeakable things to our US Stars and Stripes "that it is their Freedom of Speech to do so whether it offends others or not." We believe that it is our Freedom of Speech to be able to fly the Confederate Flag whether it offends anyone or not. `````````` There is more to Southern Heritage than a mere piece of cloth. The Confederate flag represents the modern day Ku Klux Klan and hate groups. This is fact not opinion. No amount of "education" is going to counter this. Belle, You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Just because they use it a symbol doesn't mean that "Flag" represents them or their ideals. They soil the true meaning of that flag. Nancy in Texas

I> I just wondered about all this talk of slavery and no one mentioned the > Indentured servants in the North. (Maureen) > > Maureen, Off topic but something I found interesting..........Anytime a slaveholder had dangerous work to do around the plantation like digging a well, they hired an Irishman to do it instead of risking their valuable property. I guess the reason indentured servants are not mentioned is because that practice had ended by 1860. Also indentured servants voluntarily signed the papers which literally enslaved them for a certain amount of time. The black slaves were captured by their fellow Africans and sold into slavery against their will and held by force by the white owners on many occasions. There are many misconceptions about what was referred to as the South's "peculiar institution". I think it behooves every person interested in genealogy to read primary sources on this subject to get as accurate a picture as possible. In order to understand the times our ancestors lived in, it is vital that we learn about the burning issues of the day in order to place the people in context. To do otherwise is to be a revisionist......placing today's values and tenets on those of yesterday. Belle

Nana, I did not mention the D.A.R. to which I belong. Why do I say that in the near future it will be unwise to be members of the UDC and SCV.....well, probably a little extreme. But look what happened to Trent Lott. Does anyone in their right mind think that his statements at Strom Thurmond's birthday party were intended to convey the message that a return to segregation would be good? And you didn't hear one national figure defend him. Lott was left "hanging in the wind" on that one. I was flabbergasted. Where has common sense gone? Southerners have been successful painted and tarred with the "racist label" to those outside of the South. The media has done it for years and are still doing it. Frankly, I would think people would get a little bored with the same old theme rehashed in so many venues. Of course the race riots that have occurred in other parts of the country go unnoticed while the focus is always on the South. There's just no point in waving a red flag in front of a bull in my not so humble opinion. Belle

Sandy California

In response to the message you posted and which I have copied below, let me say this. In essence I agree with you. However, at age 58, I'm a little more selective in which battles to fight. Further, as my dear mother taught me, there's more than one way to "skin a cat". There is more to Southern Heritage than a mere piece of cloth. The Confederate flag represents the modern day Ku Klux Klan and hate groups. This is fact not opinion. No amount of "education" is going to counter this. And frankly, I don't blame Afro-Americans for being upset to see it flying. Put yourselves in their shoes. Quite naturally they focus only on the slavery issue. Truth? I don't see truth involved in defending flying a flag that once represented something and today represents something else to the overwhelming majority of people in this country. Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest started the Ku Klux Klan to fill a need in the 1860's.. The Ku Klux Klan has evolved into nothing but a hate group in modern times. Would any self-respecting person defend the Ku Klux Klan or belong to that organization today? Would you? I doubt it. I'm not a supporter of Dick Gephart. I believe he used this issue for his political advantage but I don't see taking down that flag as an erosion of anyone's rights. I see it more as taking it down out of consideration for what it represents to the Afro-American community and to the overwhelming majority of Americans outside of the South and Border States. Belle =========== > But there is another point of view which says that truth, > even when it appears to be losing the battle, is still worth supporting. > This was the philosophy of Nathan Hale, St. Stephen, Socrates, > Jesus, the US Founding Fathers, etc. These people, and others like > them, have taught that letting liars intimidate you into silence > and passivity is the step just before becoming a liar yourself. Victory > is nice, but it is good also to keep one's integrity, even when > victory seems far away. If everyone had taken the attitude you > espouse, there would be no First Amendment rights to lose, because > the First Amendment would never have been written. Or did you think > the Bill of Rights was written at a time when it was "safe" and "wise" > to stand for freedom? > > >

CONFEDERATE FLAG DISPLAY > > Missouri Democrat Dick Gephardt, who after a visit to South Carolina > declared that the Confederate flag shouldn't fly "anytime, anywhere," > has never objected to a publicly funded Confederate memorial > displaying the flag year-round in his home state, officials said. > > Nor should the congressman from St. Louis have any concern, because > the flag over Missouri's largest Confederate cemetery is "presented > in historical context in a respectful way," Doug Eiken, Missouri's > state parks director, said Monday. > > Gephardt, a 2004 presidential hopeful, initially sidestepped > questions about the Confederate flag during a campaign trip last week > to South Carolina, where the flag's display led to a black-supported > economic boycott. > > View this article at > <http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20030113&Categ > ory=APN&ArtNo=301130941&Template=printart> >

OK, I think I must really be stupid today, but what danger is the DAR, SCV, and UDC memberships? And while I'm at it, I still cease to understand what part of loosing our freedoms, not the fight over slavery, do others not understand? Call me confused in OK with MO, AR, TN, VA, NC, and MD ancestors. > [email protected] wrote: > << No number of bumper stickers "History not > Hatred" or beautifully written articles pleading for historical context > will > ever change it. In fact, I sincerely believe that in the not too distant > future, membership in organizations like the United Daughters of the > Confederacy or Sons of Confederate Veterans will be unwise. > > This is just the way things are. Trying to fight it is a losing battle. > > Just my opinion....................... > > KyBelle43, > You write this and it make me wonder why we fought Hitler, Japan, heck, why > don't we just let the N. Koreans have the Nuclear Bomb and hey > Sadam....have > your way too....Why should we fight...it's just a losing battle. > I know it is just your opinion, but gee why just roll over. Things don't > have > to be the way they seem, we can fight for what is right and good. I spent a > couple years in Vietnam and came home and almost felt the way you express, > but hence I have found that giving in means they don't have to fight to > have > their way. I don't think that grand old ORganizations like the DAR and SCV > and the UDC and other's will ever die, as long as we have a voice. > Claiborne Scholl Nappier >

I just wondered about all this talk of slavery and no one mentioned the Indentured servants in the North. Maureen Hey Maureen, I don't think the indentured servants are represented by Gephardt and his boy's....or maybe we would be talking about them. Not to take away the sorrow of any slavery or repression of any human. We are all equal in the eye's of one Man, and he proved it.....

[email protected] wrote: << No number of bumper stickers "History not Hatred" or beautifully written articles pleading for historical context will ever change it. In fact, I sincerely believe that in the not too distant future, membership in organizations like the United Daughters of the Confederacy or Sons of Confederate Veterans will be unwise. This is just the way things are. Trying to fight it is a losing battle. Just my opinion....................... KyBelle43, You write this and it make me wonder why we fought Hitler, Japan, heck, why don't we just let the N. Koreans have the Nuclear Bomb and hey Sadam....have your way too....Why should we fight...it's just a losing battle. I know it is just your opinion, but gee why just roll over. Things don't have to be the way they seem, we can fight for what is right and good. I spent a couple years in Vietnam and came home and almost felt the way you express, but hence I have found that giving in means they don't have to fight to have their way. I don't think that grand old ORganizations like the DAR and SCV and the UDC and other's will ever die, as long as we have a voice. Claiborne Scholl Nappier

Hi members, Just thought I'd send this website to any of you who are interested in a Confederate Medal. <A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/Delta/3843/purple.htm#Get%20Your%20Own">The Virtual WBTS Memorial Website</A> I obtained one for my gg-grandfather who died in the Civil War. The medal and certificate are beautiful and I'm having them framed together. His name was John Brixey and he was in the Eleventh Missouri Infantry CSA. He died at age twenty-seven at Little Rock, Arkansas on February 10, 1863. I just wondered about all this talk of slavery and no one mentioned the Indentured servants in the North. Maureen

Maybe. But there is another point of view which says that truth, even when it appears to be losing the battle, is still worth supporting. This was the philosophy of Nathan Hale, St. Stephen, Socrates, Jesus, the US Founding Fathers, etc. These people, and others like them, have taught that letting liars intimidate you into silence and passivity is the step just before becoming a liar yourself. Victory is nice, but it is good also to keep one's integrity, even when victory seems far away. If everyone had taken the attitude you espouse, there would be no First Amendment rights to lose, because the First Amendment would never have been written. Or did you think the Bill of Rights was written at a time when it was "safe" and "wise" to stand for freedom? [email protected] wrote: << No number of bumper stickers "History not Hatred" or beautifully written articles pleading for historical context will ever change it. In fact, I sincerely believe that in the not too distant future, membership in organizations like the United Daughters of the Confederacy or Sons of Confederate Veterans will be unwise. This is just the way things are. Trying to fight it is a losing battle. Just my opinion....................... >>

Jaccards was an old firm founded in St. Louis about 1824. They had the carriage trade for many years. Later became Mermod, Jaccard and later still, added King. T hey were at one time owned or in partnership with Vandervoorts. the main store was at 9th & Locust A m uch 'stripped down' company was sold to Zales about 20-25 years ago. Mermod, Jaccard & King is s till a well known name to older St. Louisians. They had quality merchantise/ RGB "Robert F. Schnebelen" wrote: > > > > > >Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 09:34:35 -0600 > >Subject: Fwd: Medal > > > >> > >> > >>Just of possible interest, Jaccards Jewlelry Co. was, until several years > >>ago, THE leading jewelry store in Kansas City, Mo. I'd bet they were the > >>ones who struck that medal. Alas, they are no longer in business here. > > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > "We ran like a herd of wild cattle." > William C. Oates > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

[email protected] said: > The people who actually fought the war put it behind them as fast as possible. I think they would >be appalled at some of the bitterness of later generations....We have the right to disagree but >considering we are absolutely free to speak our minds in this country we should show our respect >for that right by doing so in a civil and respectful manner. Welll...yes, I think you are right here. This is what I mean when I say we all need to get over ourselves *not* that the war and it's aftermath isn't still important. It is. And, as in all family fights, there are still unresolved issues. You are correct that those who survived the War, would probably be deeply grieved to see us, *their own* beloved, cherished, and greatly hoped-for (if not personally known) children, *for* whom they sacrificed *so much*, and also *for* whom, they did *exactly* put it all behind them for the sake of a Peaceful future for *us*, - re-fighting the war. It's the unresolved issues of States Rights versus and Imperial Centralised government, the ideal of a Constitutional democratic republic where *individual* men and women had *control* over their own destinies and lives, and a non-mechanised, non-corporation driven way of life for - all of *these* things, were loved so much more than the enslaved black folks were hated, in those cases where they were really truly hated. The issue today is that there are factions who resent the fact that even though the South lost the War, we *won* the *Peace.* For some petty and spiritually miserly reason, that is resented. And that is *their* *personal* problem and *personality disorder*- we ought not to allow them to make it ours. That would be dysfunctional. And I think the most painful thing that we all realise, and our ancestors must surely have also realised is, that they all got used, black and white, as pawns in a much larger game, and all of thier lives were held cheap, by forces far beyond their control. All everybody wanted was to be left alone and to have control over their own lives. And that was all snatched away. For *everybody.* And the truth is that slavery was a dying institution anyway - the only ones who wanted to keep it - really - were the poor white cracker farmers on the very bottom of the totem pole, because they were only a half-step above the slaves in status. The only status they had -really - was that they weren't slaves. America has always been a class-society, ideals notwithstanding. I really think that if the South had been permitted to just hand over all slaves to the North and then to be *left alone* - the war would have ended immediately. Kathleen

[email protected] said: >Get over it..,...the South LOST THE WAR and rightly so. Ooohhhh..such moral judgments coming from whom? Get over it - the South won the Peace, and we aim to keep *it*. Kathleen

Following is a wonderful message sent to me by someone on the list. > Subj:Re: [MO-CW] Pensions (State by State Break Down) > Date:1/19/2003 10:20:54 AM Eastern Standard Time > From:<A HREF="mailto:RobDougC">RobDougC</A> > To:<A HREF="mailto:KyBelle43">KyBelle43</A> > > > > This is the basic break down of the states that did give pensions to their > Confederate Veterans, wives, and children. Every state listed below shows > that it paid these pensions all the way into the 1950's, with several > states paying all the way in the 1960's, some into 1970's and 1980's. A > good tip when ordering pension applications is to use every form of the > Veterans name. For example my grand daddy's service record has him listed > as J.M. Barlow, but for his pension records lists him as not only J.M., but > James, Jim, James M., and James Mathis. > > In 1867 Alabama began granting pensions to Confederate veterans who had > lost arms or legs. In 1886 the State began granting pensions to veterans' > widows. In 1891 the law was amended to grant pensions to indigent veterans > or their widows. > > In 1891 Arkansas began granting pensions to indigent Confederate veterans. > In 1915 the State began granting pensions to their widows and mothers. > > In 1885 Florida began granting pensions to Confederate veterans. In 1889 > the State began granting pensions to their widows > > In 1870 Georgia began granting pensions to soldiers with artificial limbs. > In 1879 the State began granting pensions to other disabled Confederate > veterans or their widows who then resided in Georgia. By 1894 eligible > disabilities had been expanded to include old age and poverty > > In 1912, Kentucky began granting pensions to Confederate veterans or their > widows. > > In 1898 Louisiana began granting pensions to indigent Confederate veterans > or their widows. > > In 1888 Mississippi began granting pensions to indigent Confederate > veterans or their widows > > In 1911 Missouri began granting pensions to indigent Confederate veterans > only; none were granted to widows. Missouri also had a home for disabled > Confederate veterans > > In 1867 North Carolina began granting pensions to Confederate veterans who > were blinded or lost an arm or leg during their service. In 1885 the State > began granting pensions to all other disabled indigent Confederate veterans > or widows > > In 1915 Oklahoma began granting pensions to Confederate veterans or their > widows > > > A state law enacted December 24, 1887, permitted financially needy > Confederate veterans and widows to apply for a pension; however, few > applications survive from the 1888-1918 era. Beginning in 1889, the SC > Comptroller began publishing lists of such veterans receiving pensions in > his Annual Report. To obtain a copy of the pension application from the > 1888-1918 era, the researcher needs to know the exact year in which the > veteran or widow applied for a pension. From 1919 to 1925, South Carolina > granted pensions to Confederate veterans and widows regardless of financial > need > > In 1891 Tennessee began granting pensions to indigent Confederate veterans. > In 1905 the State began granting pensions to their widows > > In 1881 Texas set aside 1,280 acres for disabled Confederate veterans. In > 1889 the State began granting pensions to indigent Confederate veterans and > their widows > > In 1888 Virginia began granting pensions to Confederate veterans or their > widows > >

My gg-grandfather Thomas D. Hybarger was a soldier in the Civil War CSA for the state of Missouri and was a POW during the war and was released during June 1865 (see website company A): http://missouridivision-scv.org/mounits/woodregcav.htm I have a copy of the General Index Card of my gg-grandfather who served in the Civil War and the information included is as follows (also checked the State of Missouri Civil War CSA index and it has the same information): Hybarger, Thomas D. 2nd Lieutenant Co. A, Wood's Reg't, Missouri Cavalry - Confederate. Apparently my gg-grandfather rejoined some Confederate Troops after his release from prison and was killed between June and November 1865 by Union Troops - do not know exactly when and where or where he is buried. He left behind a wife and two very small sons. My gg-grandparents were married after 1860 (census period), approximately 1861, and had two sons between 1861 and 1863 (have not been able to secure birth, marriage, death or cemtery reords from this area). The town they lived in Long Lane, Dallas County Missouri, had town buildings burned several times which housed birth, marriage, death and cemetery records - public documents. Does anyone know how I can obtain my gg-grandfather's Civil War military records and how I can go about getting some information about them in Dallas County Missouri in the early 1860's (which books etc.). Thanks. Fred Bultman Sugar Land, Texas