Just curious. Is Mr. Kramer stating that enslavement was not practiced by American Indians? Don Knight ----- Original Message ----- From: <PATKRAM@aol.com> To: <MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:31 PM Subject: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 As to it not being a great leap from American Indians serving in the Confederacy to Blacks serving. American Indians were not enslaved. Blacks were. Pretty big difference. > Pat Kramer > Cherokee > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but change > the -L- to a -D- > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >

THAT WAS GREAT!!! > > From: "Bill Morgan" <wmorgan1@kc.rr.com> > Date: 2005/11/02 Wed PM 09:38:12 EST > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > > Bradley, I'm at a loss as to why you would call ME a "revisionist." Are you > playing the devil's advocate here or are you truly confused about how this > country was settled? > > One of my 4th great-grandfathers came to Pennsylvania as an indentured > servant in 1729 and worked for eight years to pay off his passage and > obligation. Because he was literate (hence the name "Scrivner") he probably > worked in a clerical or bookkeeping capacity. He lived in Byberry Township, > which is now part of Philadelphia. At that time even Pennsylvania was mostly > rural farming country and he watched the country grow. > > The population centers then were from Virginia to Massachusetts and North > Carolina was considered "frontier." His 3d son, my 3d great-grandfather, > migrated to Rowan County, North Carolina with his two older brothers, > traveling in Conestoga wagons, and soon thereafter enlisted in the > Continental Army. The large population centers of the country then were > Boston, Philadelphia and New York. > > Though there were growing cities in South Carolina and Florida, the greatest > assemblies of immigrants remained in "the North" and most of Georgia, > Alabama and Mississippi were sparsely settled. The French presence in > Louisiana didn't end immediately with the Louisiana Purchase in April, 1803, > but except for the booming port of New Orleans most of that territory was > wilderness. > > When the first state capitol building was erected in Jefferson City in 1826 > my 2d great-grandfather's was one of only 31 families in permanent residence > there. > > By the time of Mr. Lincoln's aggression against it in 1861 the entire > Confederacy had a population of less than half that of the Union. > > As for your comment about the end of slavery in Texas, it is ludicrous on > its face. You state that slaves in Texas learned of the Emancipation > Proclamation in June (Juneteenth) but slavery did not end in Delaware until > the 13th Amendment was ratified in DECEMBER, some six months later. > Remember, Texas was one of the original eight Confederate states so Mr. > Lincoln's meaningless proclamation (he lacked the authority to "proclaim" a > law effecting sovereign states of another nation) was aimed at Texas. It > simply had no meaning until circumstances forced General Lee to surrender > his forces. > > As for responsibility--and guilt--for the "Bleeding Kansas" years I must > admit that some Missourians retaliated too strongly and harmed some > innocents, but if the Jayhawkers hadn't crossed into Missouri to rape, rob > and pillage there would have been no need for retaliation by Quantrill, > Anderson and others. For example, Colonel Anderson joined Quantrill only > after a Unionist murdered his father and he turned especially vicious after > Union soldiers murdered one of his sisters and maimed another. > > My own great-grandfather joined the "border ruffians" only after marauding > Jayhawkers burned out several of his friends and neighbors under the thin > guise of their "anti-slavery" views. It didn't matter to them that none of > the homesteads they attacked had slaves. They just wanted to steal horses > and cattle, kill men and rape women and any excuse would do. > > As for Southern failure to industrialize, there was a failure to build ships > of their own for trading in Europe. The wealthy New York and New England > businessmen of the time owned or controlled most U.S. flag vessels and did > their best to prevent shipments of machinery to the South. They also > threatened suppliers in Europe and England with curtailment of their own > purchases if machinery was sold to Southern businesses. They used the > despotic federal government to impose exorbitant import duties on any > industrial equipment brought into the South. They wanted the South to remain > predominantly agrarian and to supply them cheap cotton and tobacco. > > As for the retribution you question, have you never heard of > "Reconstruction" or Yankee carpetbaggers? > > And thanks to the failure of the Confederate States to maintain their > freedom and independence, we now have a gluttonous national government that > strives to absorb all our country's wealth and redistribute much of it to > the northeastern states. Slavery today is a bit more subtle. Workers can > have cars and color TV sets but they still have to give about 40% of their > earned wealth to support politicians, their otherwise unemployable relatives > and the slothful constituents who return them to office every election in > return for a few welfare dollars. > > Now let's get back to more specific study of Missouri's participation in the > War of Northern Aggression. > > Bill, in KC > =-=-=-=-= > > > > Subject: RE: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > > > > Hello, > > > > I am well aware of our history and not some the revisionist bunk below-War > > of Northern Aggression surely you jest-the South ran rough shot over the > > north-until immigration began to turn the tide and the numbers tilted to > > the north-once the south knew they could no longer bully the north they > > decided to cut and run. I find it funny that the North kept the South > > down-when in actuality the south up until the time of the Civil War more > > often than not had the White House, The Congress, and more importantly the > > Supreme Court- > > > > Actually, you are welcome to challenge my grasp-but you better come loaded > > for bear-how interesting that you sit in judgment of a wonderful political > > decision by Lincoln to only emancipate certain slaves. > > > > Federal Despotism-I find this to be a hoot-perhaps you should look into > > the despotism of those in the south who not only railroaded many of their > > people on the issue of Secession-then to further spit in the face of the > > rights of the people decided that counties in their states who wanted no > > part of this could not in turn leave the state-ironic. > > > > The last state to end Slavery was Texas-they forgot to tell the slaves > > they were free-the day of freedom in Texas is still celebrated as > > Juneteenth. > > > > By what right I ask you did border ruffians have to enter Kansas vote in a > > bogus election-how do they stand for the rights of the people against > > tyranny? the short answer is they don't. The Ruffians were the instigators > > of the violence-once the Free Staters saw that they were to be governed by > > an illegal government elected by the Ruffians-they indeed began to fight > > back-something the Southern were not familiar with-some would call it > > resistance. > > > > You are correct in that Jayhawkers used many excuses to pillage farms-etc. > > But you are blinded by your revisionism to see that both sides were > > equally guilty. > > > > I disagree with your economic analysis-first, Slavery depresses wages-no > > need to pay white folks a good wage when you can work slaves for free-or > > nearly free-since one does have to feed and cloth them. > > > > Let us keep in mind the planter elite were not interested in progress-they > > wanted to emulate the wealthy land owners of England-you should ask > > yourself why the southerners didn't take it upon themselves to develop > > their industry, railroads, etc.? Oh, mean northerners made life tough on > > the cotton plantation owners-I guess this would excuse them from > > diversifying-investing, etc. > > > > I will agree that there was little interest in many northerners to > > eliminate slavery-however, the Slave Owning elite drove them to this > > position by the attempt of Southerners to not only expand slavery west and > > south but to dictate to northerners the terms by which they would agree to > > stay in the union. > > > > One last note-the rebels got off easy-no mass executions-no mass > > confiscation of rebel property, and no mass expulsion of rebels. Had > > northerners been as the revisionists and the neo-confederates make them > > out to be then were was the retribution? > > > > Face up rebels-you all got hood winked by the wealthy-and paid the > > price-god forbid you all should own up to it. > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but change the -L- to a -D- > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx >

Joanne, I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. Though born and raised in Kansas, I lived for three years in Washington, D.C. and for eleven in South Carolina and Arkansas. Black Americans were treated no better in our national capital than in two of the original Confederate states. Education is the obvious key to economic advancement for anyone born to poverty or limited means. The problem is that public education as constituted in this country is a failed experiment that needs to be euthanized. It is just human nature to place a low value on things perceived to be "free." Many people who should know better look upon public schools as little more than "free" daycare and take no active role in insuring that their children actually get an education. Thanks to general apathy we have allowed our public schools to be completely taken over by liberals who teach "political correctness" and revisionist history rather than focusing on the basics. For decades now our public schools have cranked out generations of graduates who can't read their own diplomas. In Japan and Viet Nam I visited public schools and taught English conversation classes to youngsters who had to pass competitive examinations to advance to subsequent grades. By the second or third year of high school those Asian children had studied algebra, physics, chemistry, biology, calculus, English, French, their own languages and a great deal of world history. They had to show a high level of knowledge of each discipline just to remain in school. Meanwhile, in my local school district teachers are not allowed to assign failing grades to any students who show up for at least half of their classes. The meaningless C is the minimum standard grade even for pupils/students who can't spell Mississippi or balance a checkbook. My youngest daughter and her elementary school classmates in the '70s had a teacher whose spelling they corrected whenever she wrote on the chalkboard. School systems with no performance standards for children can't really be expected to have minimum standards for teachers. I consider education of our young a much too important task to be left to politicians and bureaucrats as we do today. I don't have simple answers but there must be some way to impose tuition fees on parents as a means to encourage them to get involved and strive to get their money's worth. Throughout much of American history schools were cooperative efforts of entire communities and education was greatly prized. Now they are government indoctrination centers and little effort is made to prepare young people to excel in life. Excellence is instead reserved for the wealthy who can afford the private schools to prepare their children for the Ivy League and eventual control of our national government. Since several southern states had laws prohibiting teaching Negroes to read and write, I can hardly argue that the Confederacy would have done a better job with education than the union. I CAN say that slavery and racism were deplorable facts of life throughout the United States before the War of Northern Aggression and were certainly not in the sole province of the South. Bill, in KC =-=-=-=-=-= Subject: Re: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism >I would like to add just one tidbit to this discussion regarding the >african american and the civil war. All of my ancestors fought for the >union, yet I have lived in the south for 30 years, and have a great >affection for this area. > I greatly object to my friends and family who do not live in the south > referring to the racism of the south. I live in a small community where > both races are living near one another, and amiably. My friends and family > do not live near or have occasion to associate with the black community. > > Still contending that economically there has to be a better future for the > black community, and that is through education. My family [white] are > extremely involved in trying to improve the situation with the > impoverished and those blacks who do not have opportunities. > Having said that, in regards to the Civil War, I have long noted that the > photographs of the union army leadership often have a black man or boy > nearby to do their 'errands'...so to laud the north as the beneficent > group regarding the black community 100 years ago, or even today, would > indeed be a false interpretation of reality. > thank you for listening. > joanne

Just an interesting tid-bit. The book coming out by Pelican Publishing written by Donald Gilmore of Belton, Missouri, ""War on the Missouri/Kansas Border"". Don Gilmore was a Technical Director for the Movie you speak of, ""Ride With The Devil"". Donald Gilmore is an accomplished Author and a wealth of information on the subject of Missouri and it's involvement in the war called Civil War. Claiborne Scholl Nappier

----- Original Message ----- From: "Trueman Farris" <jfarris@execpc.com> To: <MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:41 PM Subject: Re: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > Thank you for adding a note of reality to what has been otherwise a waste of > time involving chatter by folks who seem not to know what they are talking > about. In a word, y'all, shut up and listen. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <joannecole@charter.net> > To: <MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 7:05 PM > Subject: Re: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > > > >I would like to add just one tidbit to this discussion regarding the > >african american and the civil war. All of my ancestors fought for the > >union, yet I have lived in the south for 30 years, and have a great > >affection for this area. > > I greatly object to my friends and family who do not live in the south > > referring to the racism of the south. I live in a small community where > > both races are living near one another, and amiably. My friends and family > > do not live near or have occasion to associate with the black community. > > > > Still contending that economically there has to be a better future for the > > black community, and that is through education. My family [white] are > > extremely involved in trying to improve the situation with the > > impoverished and those blacks who do not have opportunities. > > Having said that, in regards to the Civil War, I have long noted that the > > photographs of the union army leadership often have a black man or boy > > nearby to do their 'errands'...so to laud the north as the beneficent > > group regarding the black community 100 years ago, or even today, would > > indeed be a false interpretation of reality. > > thank you for listening. > > joanne > > > > > >> From: "Bill Morgan" <wmorgan1@kc.rr.com> > >> Date: 2005/11/02 Wed PM 01:46:22 EST > >> To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > >> Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > >> > >> With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery > >> existed > >> in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr. > >> Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing > >> of > >> slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the > >> Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely > >> making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for > >> independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right > >> of > >> habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court. > >> > >> His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland, > >> Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky, > >> Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in > >> December, > >> 1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery. > >> > >> Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the > >> North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee > >> brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into > >> northern ports for sale. > >> > >> The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called > >> "civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort > >> Sumter. > >> Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim > >> Montgomery > >> and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in > >> Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border > >> ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted > >> family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were > >> fair > >> game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery. > >> > >> The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was > >> over > >> money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills > >> and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing > >> southern > >> cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the > >> Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington > >> and > >> used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same > >> businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to > >> economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a > >> burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the > >> profits > >> of that "unholy institution." > >> > >> Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of > >> the > >> world. > >> > >> This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants > >> (economic > >> slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from > >> the > >> people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. > >> "Human > >> bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United > >> States > >> just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South. > >> > >> Bill, in KC > >> =-=-=-=-= > >> > >> > If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then > >> > you > >> > are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's > >> > uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South > >> > Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil > >> > war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon > >> > the > >> > racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain > >> > with > >> > slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor > >> > whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy > >> > laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first > >> > draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I > >> > think > >> > this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. > >> > > >> > Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners > >> > who > >> > clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed > >> > widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks > >> > tend > >> > to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent > >> > resistance > >> > to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery > >> > AMERICANS > >> > in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to > >> > trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black > >> > Americans. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM > >> > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > >> > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 > >> > > >> > > >> > Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the > >> > textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South > >> > and it's > >> > resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to > >> > most > >> > the > >> > south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different > >> > issue. > >> > State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears > >> > to > >> > be a > >> > repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please > >> > don't > >> > misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to > >> > introduce > >> > the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's > >> > point > >> > of > >> > view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. > >> > They > >> > were > >> > just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. > >> > Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, > >> > ect...... > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > >> > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > >> > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > >> > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will > >> > be > >> > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > >> > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > >> > > >> > ============================== > >> > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > >> > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > >> > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > >> > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the > >> > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to > >> > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but > >> > change > >> > the -L- to a -D- > >> > > >> > ============================== > >> > Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records. > >> > New content added every business day. Learn more: > >> > http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx > >> > > >> > >> > >> ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > >> NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > >> political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > >> messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > >> grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > >> Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > >> > >> ============================== > >> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > >> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >> > > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > > > ============================== > > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > > > > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > This message scanned for viruses by CoreComm > > > > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx

Thank you for adding a note of reality to what has been otherwise a waste of time involving chatter by folks who seem not to know what they are talking about. In a word, y'all, shut up and listen. ----- Original Message ----- From: <joannecole@charter.net> To: <MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 7:05 PM Subject: Re: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism >I would like to add just one tidbit to this discussion regarding the >african american and the civil war. All of my ancestors fought for the >union, yet I have lived in the south for 30 years, and have a great >affection for this area. > I greatly object to my friends and family who do not live in the south > referring to the racism of the south. I live in a small community where > both races are living near one another, and amiably. My friends and family > do not live near or have occasion to associate with the black community. > > Still contending that economically there has to be a better future for the > black community, and that is through education. My family [white] are > extremely involved in trying to improve the situation with the > impoverished and those blacks who do not have opportunities. > Having said that, in regards to the Civil War, I have long noted that the > photographs of the union army leadership often have a black man or boy > nearby to do their 'errands'...so to laud the north as the beneficent > group regarding the black community 100 years ago, or even today, would > indeed be a false interpretation of reality. > thank you for listening. > joanne > > >> From: "Bill Morgan" <wmorgan1@kc.rr.com> >> Date: 2005/11/02 Wed PM 01:46:22 EST >> To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism >> >> With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery >> existed >> in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr. >> Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing >> of >> slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the >> Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely >> making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for >> independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right >> of >> habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court. >> >> His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland, >> Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky, >> Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in >> December, >> 1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery. >> >> Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the >> North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee >> brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into >> northern ports for sale. >> >> The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called >> "civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort >> Sumter. >> Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim >> Montgomery >> and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in >> Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border >> ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted >> family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were >> fair >> game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery. >> >> The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was >> over >> money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills >> and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing >> southern >> cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the >> Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington >> and >> used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same >> businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to >> economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a >> burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the >> profits >> of that "unholy institution." >> >> Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of >> the >> world. >> >> This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants >> (economic >> slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from >> the >> people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. >> "Human >> bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United >> States >> just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South. >> >> Bill, in KC >> =-=-=-=-= >> >> > If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then >> > you >> > are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's >> > uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South >> > Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil >> > war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon >> > the >> > racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain >> > with >> > slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor >> > whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy >> > laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first >> > draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I >> > think >> > this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. >> > >> > Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners >> > who >> > clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed >> > widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks >> > tend >> > to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent >> > resistance >> > to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery >> > AMERICANS >> > in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to >> > trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black >> > Americans. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM >> > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com >> > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 >> > >> > >> > Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the >> > textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South >> > and it's >> > resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to >> > most >> > the >> > south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different >> > issue. >> > State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears >> > to >> > be a >> > repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please >> > don't >> > misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to >> > introduce >> > the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's >> > point >> > of >> > view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. >> > They >> > were >> > just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. >> > Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, >> > ect...... >> > >> > >> > >> > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== >> > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, >> > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal >> > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will >> > be >> > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen >> > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net >> > >> > ============================== >> > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find >> > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: >> > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx >> > >> > >> > >> > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== >> > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the >> > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to >> > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but >> > change >> > the -L- to a -D- >> > >> > ============================== >> > Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records. >> > New content added every business day. Learn more: >> > http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx >> > >> >> >> ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== >> NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, >> political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal >> messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be >> grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen >> Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net >> >> ============================== >> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the >> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx >> > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > This message scanned for viruses by CoreComm > >

Bradley, I'm at a loss as to why you would call ME a "revisionist." Are you playing the devil's advocate here or are you truly confused about how this country was settled? One of my 4th great-grandfathers came to Pennsylvania as an indentured servant in 1729 and worked for eight years to pay off his passage and obligation. Because he was literate (hence the name "Scrivner") he probably worked in a clerical or bookkeeping capacity. He lived in Byberry Township, which is now part of Philadelphia. At that time even Pennsylvania was mostly rural farming country and he watched the country grow. The population centers then were from Virginia to Massachusetts and North Carolina was considered "frontier." His 3d son, my 3d great-grandfather, migrated to Rowan County, North Carolina with his two older brothers, traveling in Conestoga wagons, and soon thereafter enlisted in the Continental Army. The large population centers of the country then were Boston, Philadelphia and New York. Though there were growing cities in South Carolina and Florida, the greatest assemblies of immigrants remained in "the North" and most of Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi were sparsely settled. The French presence in Louisiana didn't end immediately with the Louisiana Purchase in April, 1803, but except for the booming port of New Orleans most of that territory was wilderness. When the first state capitol building was erected in Jefferson City in 1826 my 2d great-grandfather's was one of only 31 families in permanent residence there. By the time of Mr. Lincoln's aggression against it in 1861 the entire Confederacy had a population of less than half that of the Union. As for your comment about the end of slavery in Texas, it is ludicrous on its face. You state that slaves in Texas learned of the Emancipation Proclamation in June (Juneteenth) but slavery did not end in Delaware until the 13th Amendment was ratified in DECEMBER, some six months later. Remember, Texas was one of the original eight Confederate states so Mr. Lincoln's meaningless proclamation (he lacked the authority to "proclaim" a law effecting sovereign states of another nation) was aimed at Texas. It simply had no meaning until circumstances forced General Lee to surrender his forces. As for responsibility--and guilt--for the "Bleeding Kansas" years I must admit that some Missourians retaliated too strongly and harmed some innocents, but if the Jayhawkers hadn't crossed into Missouri to rape, rob and pillage there would have been no need for retaliation by Quantrill, Anderson and others. For example, Colonel Anderson joined Quantrill only after a Unionist murdered his father and he turned especially vicious after Union soldiers murdered one of his sisters and maimed another. My own great-grandfather joined the "border ruffians" only after marauding Jayhawkers burned out several of his friends and neighbors under the thin guise of their "anti-slavery" views. It didn't matter to them that none of the homesteads they attacked had slaves. They just wanted to steal horses and cattle, kill men and rape women and any excuse would do. As for Southern failure to industrialize, there was a failure to build ships of their own for trading in Europe. The wealthy New York and New England businessmen of the time owned or controlled most U.S. flag vessels and did their best to prevent shipments of machinery to the South. They also threatened suppliers in Europe and England with curtailment of their own purchases if machinery was sold to Southern businesses. They used the despotic federal government to impose exorbitant import duties on any industrial equipment brought into the South. They wanted the South to remain predominantly agrarian and to supply them cheap cotton and tobacco. As for the retribution you question, have you never heard of "Reconstruction" or Yankee carpetbaggers? And thanks to the failure of the Confederate States to maintain their freedom and independence, we now have a gluttonous national government that strives to absorb all our country's wealth and redistribute much of it to the northeastern states. Slavery today is a bit more subtle. Workers can have cars and color TV sets but they still have to give about 40% of their earned wealth to support politicians, their otherwise unemployable relatives and the slothful constituents who return them to office every election in return for a few welfare dollars. Now let's get back to more specific study of Missouri's participation in the War of Northern Aggression. Bill, in KC =-=-=-=-= Subject: RE: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > Hello, > > I am well aware of our history and not some the revisionist bunk below-War > of Northern Aggression surely you jest-the South ran rough shot over the > north-until immigration began to turn the tide and the numbers tilted to > the north-once the south knew they could no longer bully the north they > decided to cut and run. I find it funny that the North kept the South > down-when in actuality the south up until the time of the Civil War more > often than not had the White House, The Congress, and more importantly the > Supreme Court- > > Actually, you are welcome to challenge my grasp-but you better come loaded > for bear-how interesting that you sit in judgment of a wonderful political > decision by Lincoln to only emancipate certain slaves. > > Federal Despotism-I find this to be a hoot-perhaps you should look into > the despotism of those in the south who not only railroaded many of their > people on the issue of Secession-then to further spit in the face of the > rights of the people decided that counties in their states who wanted no > part of this could not in turn leave the state-ironic. > > The last state to end Slavery was Texas-they forgot to tell the slaves > they were free-the day of freedom in Texas is still celebrated as > Juneteenth. > > By what right I ask you did border ruffians have to enter Kansas vote in a > bogus election-how do they stand for the rights of the people against > tyranny? the short answer is they don't. The Ruffians were the instigators > of the violence-once the Free Staters saw that they were to be governed by > an illegal government elected by the Ruffians-they indeed began to fight > back-something the Southern were not familiar with-some would call it > resistance. > > You are correct in that Jayhawkers used many excuses to pillage farms-etc. > But you are blinded by your revisionism to see that both sides were > equally guilty. > > I disagree with your economic analysis-first, Slavery depresses wages-no > need to pay white folks a good wage when you can work slaves for free-or > nearly free-since one does have to feed and cloth them. > > Let us keep in mind the planter elite were not interested in progress-they > wanted to emulate the wealthy land owners of England-you should ask > yourself why the southerners didn't take it upon themselves to develop > their industry, railroads, etc.? Oh, mean northerners made life tough on > the cotton plantation owners-I guess this would excuse them from > diversifying-investing, etc. > > I will agree that there was little interest in many northerners to > eliminate slavery-however, the Slave Owning elite drove them to this > position by the attempt of Southerners to not only expand slavery west and > south but to dictate to northerners the terms by which they would agree to > stay in the union. > > One last note-the rebels got off easy-no mass executions-no mass > confiscation of rebel property, and no mass expulsion of rebels. Had > northerners been as the revisionists and the neo-confederates make them > out to be then were was the retribution? > > Face up rebels-you all got hood winked by the wealthy-and paid the > price-god forbid you all should own up to it.

I would like to add just one tidbit to this discussion regarding the african american and the civil war. All of my ancestors fought for the union, yet I have lived in the south for 30 years, and have a great affection for this area. I greatly object to my friends and family who do not live in the south referring to the racism of the south. I live in a small community where both races are living near one another, and amiably. My friends and family do not live near or have occasion to associate with the black community. Still contending that economically there has to be a better future for the black community, and that is through education. My family [white] are extremely involved in trying to improve the situation with the impoverished and those blacks who do not have opportunities. Having said that, in regards to the Civil War, I have long noted that the photographs of the union army leadership often have a black man or boy nearby to do their 'errands'...so to laud the north as the beneficent group regarding the black community 100 years ago, or even today, would indeed be a false interpretation of reality. thank you for listening. joanne > From: "Bill Morgan" <wmorgan1@kc.rr.com> > Date: 2005/11/02 Wed PM 01:46:22 EST > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism > > With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery existed > in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr. > Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing of > slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the > Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely > making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for > independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right of > habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court. > > His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland, > Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky, > Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in December, > 1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery. > > Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the > North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee > brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into > northern ports for sale. > > The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called > "civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort Sumter. > Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim Montgomery > and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in > Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border > ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted > family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were fair > game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery. > > The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was over > money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills > and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing southern > cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the > Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington and > used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same > businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to > economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a > burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the profits > of that "unholy institution." > > Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of the > world. > > This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants (economic > slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from the > people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. "Human > bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United States > just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South. > > Bill, in KC > =-=-=-=-= > > > If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then you > > are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's > > uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South > > Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil > > war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon the > > racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain with > > slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor > > whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy > > laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first > > draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I think > > this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. > > > > Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners who > > clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed > > widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks tend > > to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent resistance > > to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery AMERICANS > > in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to > > trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black > > Americans. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM > > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 > > > > > > Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the > > textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South > > and it's > > resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to most > > the > > south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different issue. > > State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears to > > be a > > repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please > > don't > > misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to > > introduce > > the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's point > > of > > view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. They > > were > > just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. > > Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, > > ect...... > > > > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > > > ============================== > > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx > > > > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the > > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to > > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but change > > the -L- to a -D- > > > > ============================== > > Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records. > > New content added every business day. Learn more: > > http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx > > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx >

I should have addressed you as Jackie. I am just excited. Thanks Barb

Tanimara, I think you are on the right track and I will take you up on your offer of the Royal census records. I have been searching for them on the wrong side of MO. Very appreciative

Thanks Adruain! How would I get in touch with her? Al in Music City ----- Original Message ----- From: <Cato324@wmconnect.com> To: <MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 3:37 PM Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Burn Order > Al > The name of the researcher is Peggy Reaves > > Adruain > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx >

A lookup please for William A Royal that died Mt Grove Missouri and some family says he was born in NC. I think Mt Grove is in Wright County. I do not know William's age but his third wife was named Martha Horton Royal. William A Royal had at least one child named Joseph G Royal. I wish I could give you better data. Barb

Barb, I show two William Royals in Wright Co on the 1900 census. One is 30 the other 38. Surname Given Name Age Sex Race Birthplace State County Location Year ROYAL WILLIAM 30 M W IN MO WRIGHT GASCONADE TWP 1900 - wife named Flora ROYAL WILLIAM F 38 M W IL MO WRIGHT MTN GROVE TWP 1900 - wife named Hanna These men were still there in 1910. 1920 Census shows the one born IN is not there. Another Will Royal age 35 is shown in Wright Co. on the 1920 census, a grocery store merchant. If you need images, let me know. Jackie mstauf wrote: >A lookup please for William A Royal that died Mt Grove Missouri and some >family says he was born in NC. I think Mt Grove is in Wright County. I do >not know William's age but his third wife was named Martha Horton Royal. >William A Royal had at least one child named Joseph G Royal. > >I wish I could give you better data. >Barb > > >==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== >NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > >============================== >New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 > > > > > > -- "At the birth of the Sun, and his brother the Moon, their Mother died. So the Sun gave to the earth her body from which was to spring all life, And he drew forth from her breast the stars and he threw them into the night sky to remind him of her soul." Owner/Breeder Tanimara Great Pyrenees <http://www.geocities.com/tanimara_2000/> CC: Ripley Co MO GenWeb <http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Emoripley/> CC: Harringtongen <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harringtongen/> - a genealogy site for Harringtons and collateral lines.

Kirby I thought it was 1865 but thought it might be too late in the War. Just got back from Southeast Mo and just had to go to Scatterville, Ar. Have some pictures and will forward them when I get them developed. Adruain

Al The name of the researcher is Peggy Reaves Adruain

Hello, I am well aware of our history and not some the revisionist bunk below-War of Northern Aggression surely you jest-the South ran rough shot over the north-until immigration began to turn the tide and the numbers tilted to the north-once the south knew they could no longer bully the north they decided to cut and run. I find it funny that the North kept the South down-when in actuality the south up until the time of the Civil War more often than not had the White House, The Congress, and more importantly the Supreme Court- Actually, you are welcome to challenge my grasp-but you better come loaded for bear-how interesting that you sit in judgment of a wonderful political decision by Lincoln to only emancipate certain slaves. Federal Despotism-I find this to be a hoot-perhaps you should look into the despotism of those in the south who not only railroaded many of their people on the issue of Secession-then to further spit in the face of the rights of the people decided that counties in their states who wanted no part of this could not in turn leave the state-ironic. The last state to end Slavery was Texas-they forgot to tell the slaves they were free-the day of freedom in Texas is still celebrated as Juneteenth. By what right I ask you did border ruffians have to enter Kansas vote in a bogus election-how do they stand for the rights of the people against tyranny? the short answer is they don't. The Ruffians were the instigators of the violence-once the Free Staters saw that they were to be governed by an illegal government elected by the Ruffians-they indeed began to fight back-something the Southern were not familiar with-some would call it resistance. You are correct in that Jayhawkers used many excuses to pillage farms-etc. But you are blinded by your revisionism to see that both sides were equally guilty. I disagree with your economic analysis-first, Slavery depresses wages-no need to pay white folks a good wage when you can work slaves for free-or nearly free-since one does have to feed and cloth them. Let us keep in mind the planter elite were not interested in progress-they wanted to emulate the wealthy land owners of England-you should ask yourself why the southerners didn't take it upon themselves to develop their industry, railroads, etc.? Oh, mean northerners made life tough on the cotton plantation owners-I guess this would excuse them from diversifying-investing, etc. I will agree that there was little interest in many northerners to eliminate slavery-however, the Slave Owning elite drove them to this position by the attempt of Southerners to not only expand slavery west and south but to dictate to northerners the terms by which they would agree to stay in the union. One last note-the rebels got off easy-no mass executions-no mass confiscation of rebel property, and no mass expulsion of rebels. Had northerners been as the revisionists and the neo-confederates make them out to be then were was the retribution? Face up rebels-you all got hood winked by the wealthy-and paid the price-god forbid you all should own up to it. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Morgan [mailto:wmorgan1@kc.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 10:46 AM To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery existed in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr. Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing of slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right of habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court. His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland, Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky, Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in December, 1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery. Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into northern ports for sale. The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called "civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort Sumter. Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim Montgomery and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were fair game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery. The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was over money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing southern cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington and used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the profits of that "unholy institution." Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of the world. This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants (economic slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from the people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. "Human bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United States just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South. Bill, in KC =-=-=-=-= > If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then you > are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's > uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South > Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil > war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon the > racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain with > slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor > whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy > laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first > draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I think > this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. > > Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners who > clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed > widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks tend > to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent resistance > to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery AMERICANS > in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to > trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black > Americans. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 > > > Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the > textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South > and it's > resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to most > the > south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different issue. > State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears to > be a > repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please > don't > misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to > introduce > the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's point > of > view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. They > were > just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. > Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, > ect...... > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but change > the -L- to a -D- > > ============================== > Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records. > New content added every business day. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx

Most Missourians were of Southern Origin and by a large measure Missourians wore the Blue-something a few folks would like to believe otherwise Brady Umfleet -----Original Message----- From: Crystal [mailto:mywebtree@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 10:39 AM To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [MO-CW] Who are we? --- "Simmons, Donald" <donald.simmons@encorp.com> wrote: > Jeanette Rays folks - hoping for Rebel ancestry!!!! This makes me smile.. I remember talking to someone about my MO ancestor and mentioned he served in the CW .. the guy was SOOOOO disappointed when I said he was apparently Union ..LOL. ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net ============================== New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429

Just an interesting though: " The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was over money and wealth." While this is no doubt true, I believe there was only one cause for the civil war - Lincoln. I get tired of people (mostly yanks) saying how great a man he was for trying to hold the Union together. Here, let me get out my little fiddle and play "My Heart Bleeds for you". The South came out and said that if Lincoln gets elected president we'll secede. Lincoln was elected, the southern states seceded. If Lincoln really wanted to hold the union together as much as he proclaimed, all he had to do was withdraw from the race. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Morgan [mailto:wmorgan1@kc.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 12:46 PM To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery existed in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr. Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing of slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right of habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court. His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland, Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky, Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in December, 1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery. Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into northern ports for sale. The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called "civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort Sumter. Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim Montgomery and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were fair game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery. The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was over money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing southern cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington and used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the profits of that "unholy institution." Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of the world. This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants (economic slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from the people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. "Human bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United States just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South. Bill, in KC =-=-=-=-= > If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then > you are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's > uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South > Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term > civil war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play > upon the racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing > to gain with slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle > and poor whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life > of fancy laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our > first draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or > more (I think this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. > > Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners > who clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed > widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks > tend to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent > resistance to and repression of free speech and free press for > anti-slavery AMERICANS in the south-suffice to say that the Slave > Owning elite were able to trample on the rights of the working class, > the anti-slavery, and Black Americans. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 > > > Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had > the textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the > South and it's resources. I believe much of the history to be correct > in regards to most the south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an > entirely different issue. > State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it > appears to be a repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was > wrong so please don't misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify > slavery. I am trying to introduce the real reasons for the SO CALLED > CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's point of view. My family lost all it > had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. They were just simple God > Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. > Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, > ect...... > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will > be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but > change the -L- to a -D- > > ============================== > Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records. > New content added every business day. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx

With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery existed in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr. Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing of slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right of habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court. His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland, Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky, Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in December, 1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery. Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into northern ports for sale. The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called "civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort Sumter. Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim Montgomery and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were fair game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery. The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was over money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing southern cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington and used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the profits of that "unholy institution." Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of the world. This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants (economic slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from the people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. "Human bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United States just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South. Bill, in KC =-=-=-=-= > If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then you > are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's > uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South > Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil > war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon the > racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain with > slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor > whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy > laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first > draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I think > this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. > > Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners who > clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed > widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks tend > to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent resistance > to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery AMERICANS > in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to > trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black > Americans. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM > To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 > > > Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the > textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South > and it's > resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to most > the > south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different issue. > State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears to > be a > repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please > don't > misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to > introduce > the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's point > of > view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. They > were > just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. > Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, > ect...... > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net > > ============================== > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx > > > > ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the > utility address MO-CW-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM If you are trying to > unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but change > the -L- to a -D- > > ============================== > Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records. > New content added every business day. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx >

If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then you are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon the racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain with slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I think this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight. Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners who clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks tend to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent resistance to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery AMERICANS in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black Americans. -----Original Message----- From: SEASNAPPIER@aol.com [mailto:SEASNAPPIER@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM To: MO-CW-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134 Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South and it's resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to most the south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different issue. State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears to be a repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please don't misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to introduce the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's point of view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. They were just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were. Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger, ect...... ==== MO-CW Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett kathleenburnett@earthlink.net ============================== View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find marriage announcements and more. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx