Hi, that's what they told me in Tarleton State Univ (then a junior college in Texas A&M Univ.) Abilene Christian University summer American Heritage scholarship, and the University of North Texas. The Emancipation Proclamation only coverred the territory under rebellion- others not under rebelion kept household servants by fancier names. It was finally siezed on by Lincoln at a low point in the war for the Union. Nothing was ever done about the Indians captureing slaves like Cynthia Ann Parker and Hermann Lehmann of Texas, or about the hundreds of Indians carried to the Caribean Islands to replace African slaves lost to huricanes and disease. Some of these Great Lakes Indians escaped to Florida and joined the Seminoles. My Double First cousin in Florida is working on her P.Hd. in history and has found records and interviews on these Indian slaves which dumbfounded her teacher. Take care, Charles Wyly

In a message dated 09/20/1999 12:25:31 PM Central Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > The avrage Southerner owned 1000 arces of land he farmed himself. One has to begin the study of American history with early Colonial times to understand the many and varied reasons for the tragedy that was the War of Rebellion/Civil War/Late Unpleasantness/Whatever, but I do hope the statement that the average Southerner owned 1000 acres was a typographical error and not presented as a statement of fact. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Joyce

In a message dated 9/20/99 7:18:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: << >(nappies) for years. Their life was hard. They also learned to handle a gun >as well as many men in case of gangs coming around to rob, steal, and rape >while the men of the house were in the fields or off to war. All their chores >where done without running water, unless you want to consider grabbing a >bucket and running to the spring and back, no indoor facilities other than >the chamber pot, no electricity, and no telephones. Our children and >grand-children haven't a clue as to what these women did to run a household. >Betty. >> How ruue. And then of course when their husband died or became incapicitated they had the fields and crops for which they had to also care.

Hi, Grandad Henry Augustine Wyly bought 400 acres of land in Erath County in two blocks- . It had been in & out of various Hatchett and Wyly family members. When I went to work at Convair Fort Worth he asked me why I didn't just farm, it would be mine someday. He said he bought this black land which made as much as a bale of cotton an acre and 60 bushels of oats for 50 cents an acre and worked for other farmers to pay for some of it for fifty cents a day, daylight to dark, or, from can to can't. Anyone know where I can find an acre of land for a day's wages now? Happy hunting, Charles Wyly

Volume II Of A Series of Early Tennessee land Records by Irene M. Griffey "John Armstrong's Entry Book" October 21, 1783 - May 25 1784 If you had relatives on the Holston River ca 1774-1783, or in the Watauga group. Lost State of Franklin.....you will want to get your hands on this one...... Thanks Mary....(and many, many others.....) THIS is why I subscribe to this list........ the sharing of resources. The 'liberal' attitude that presumes I can think for myself - Thank you! lol...... I admit to being a mostly confused middle aged woman..... born in Tennesee and raised in Michigan. I was called a 'hillbilly' most of my life and received blank stares from people when I used euphemisms in conversations... (ex: pitcher's having a bad day on the mound = 'that boy couldn't hit a mule in the butt with a bale of hay'....... but, many people didn't get it! lol) But I was keenly aware of people making fun of my Mother's pronounciation of 'weird' as a 2 syllable word.... she of course 'worshed' her hair and then, 'wrenched' it. Hers was not a strong 'voweled' southern accent..... but, noticably - NOT northern! During my childhood, we regularly 'went home' at a whim...... Daddy would come in after work on a Friday and tell Mamma..... "I'll flip ya for it - heads we go and tails we don't?" The coin would land heads and we would be headed south on I-75, from Detroit --- JUST for the weekend!!! (( I would 'lose my cookies' regularly between Jellico and Lafollette - TN\KY - going around and around those mountains --- THANK GOD FOR I-75!)) Oh yes.... Daddy's coin was "HEADS" on both sides........ and Mamma knew it <grin> Many years later, with two children of my own.... we found ourselves in Memphis after 9 yrs. of marriage........... and nearly EVERY cashier would ask "Are y'all from up north?".......... I would try to explain - but, calling Coca-cola "POP"........ seemed to contradict anything I offered ....... (( so then ---- I'm was a 'northerner'.............?)) hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm NOW....... I sit in Florida....... surrounded by more pine trees than Michigan's upper peninsula........ viewing some people with lifestyle's that rival anything I ever heard attributed to the miner's of W.Virginia or the 'frogger's' of Louisiana's Bayou.........!!!! Michigan was full of what I loved to call 'misplaced hillbillies'..... us included --- who just went north for some of that 'car money' and 'went home' on the weekends! I always thought Florida was old wealthy retirees from New York or New Jersey..... and boy, was I wrong! ANYTIME, we presume to stereotype....... we will find ourselves WRONG! I love my southern heritage...... I admire the nobility of any people, who many times are just folks of good character, doing the best they can - with what they have. And like Mary - I have had to accept that some my people were not-so-good people..... not always doing the best they should or could. However, I have learned one lesson above all the rest............ a CLOSED mind can belong to anyone - anywhere and geography hasn't a damn thing to do with it. "Stupid is as stupid does!"... - courtesy of Forrest Gump's Mamma.......... we can anyone of us, succumb. I love that I have gotten to see even just a little of the diversity this nation's people offer..... military bases certainly house a vast cross section of cultures, languages and lifestyles. The most respectful treatment I have ever received..... was when a person who had a totally diverse opinion - either one, allowed me to voice my opinion and agreed to simply disagree; or two, sited references that they felt helped to express their point of view....... and then presumed that I was intelligent enough to read it for myself! I for one would like to get back to information regarding "Southern Trails"...... of geographic migration and leave the inexhaustable conversation of 'politics', to the chat rooms. AGAIN, my Thanks to Mary and many others....... for their RESPECT in sharing their sources and references --- Connie (the following is a great little anecdote about those 'homeward' migrating hillbillies --- of which I am proud to be one! Someday I too, will get 'back home', for good! ) from Tennessee - A History by Wilma Dykeman...... speaking to their sense of 'home'................( I have a notion that this same 'sense' might well be attributed to anyone of us - who has a sense of pride or love for where ever the ground is..... we each call home.) "Tennesseans, even at their most rebellious, have tended to bear a strong allegiance to their place. Perhaps this sense was embedded early...... Their place became real, became their own. "There have been many jokes about this sense of place and Tennesseans: black and white, from mountains or lowlands, male or female, transplanted to other parts of the United States. One story familiar in Cleveland and Detroit and other northern cities, where the money-tree is reputed to grow, involves a man who died and went to heaven. All was beautiful and as he'd expected --- except for one large group of people who were chained to trees. The newcomer asked who these people were, and St. Peter replied, "Those are Tennesseans. It's Friday and we have to chain them to keep them from going back home for the weekend." I LOVE THAT STORY.........lol - Simplistic maybe....... but, to the point and probably the truth......lol!!! I know my parents 'went home' as a final resting place........ I just hope that as members of the Southern Trail group...... we can continue to share and respect one another -------- AND MAYBE get back on topic.. {one last thought...... I am always suspect whenever a discussion includes making the point that what one is doing is not 'as wrong' as someone else..... I was raised to think of that as an excuse - not an explanation!}

It would be so helpful if you could cite some sources for your information. As examples of what we would like to examine ourselves: "the moneys .....brought on the industrial revolution....profits going out to multilayer industry in such a way that the north east controlled the country." "The central government.....had no source of income except the tariff and other small taxes except in time of war. So bring on the war of 1812.....from this the central goverment got the right to tax the people. The south got low tariffs and no interference in the slave issue...." etc., etc., etc. For one, I thought the War of 1812 was brought on because England insisted they had to right to board our ships and impress any Englishman found there, the rationale being that once an Englishman, always an Englishman. It is obvious that you have done a lot of reading, and I hope you will give us the names of books so that we can also do some reading. Sara >Toly Wrote >Sandy I think you hit the crux of the problem. From the very first of the >countries existence two factions emerged. The Hamaltonians and the Jeffersonians >(republicans of that time). The Hamiltonians prevailed in much of early >politics. They were for strong central government and high tariffs. They and >their supporters many from the Mass. area made great fortunes by buying soldiers >pay bonds. Discounted as much as 75% and redeemed by the government at face >value (After Washington became president). Some of this money served the country >well but it created such power that it is still a factor today. The moneys >started the industrial revolution in this country with the profits going out to >multilayer industry in such a way that the north east controlled the country. >The railroads were built in this manner with right always almost as large as >states along their routs as grants from government. > >The central government was always broke and had no source of income except the >tariff and other small taxes except in time of war. So bring on the war of 1812 >(second revolution) from this the central government got the right to tax the >people. The south got low tariffs and no interference in the slave issue. The >central government still did not have all of the power it wanted. So the scene >was set for the CW. The north industrialists did not like the low tariff that >allowed the south to buy from Europe cheaper and sell their cotton direct. There >was little kneed for the ships even stopping in Mass. anymore as they had full >cargos in cotton from the south. The slavery issue inflamed the do-gooders. So >we got the CW. States rights were pretty much lost and the south was brought >into line. > >The constitution could not be passed , only the 9 small states signed. NC, VA, >NY, and MS, where most of the people lived, would not sign until we got the bill >of rights ( the first 10 amendments). These were signed or promised to allow the >constitution to exist. So the constitution and the bill of rights are one and >the same. We now have continual attacks on the ten amendments. Should any of >these fall we have lost our constitution and it is on to anarchy and socialism, >communism or fascism. The two fascists of governments (Hamiltonians and >Jefersonians) are as strong a force as they were during the CW. Will we be led >astray and loose the rest of our freedoms? The republicans of late have not >demonstrated the tenacity to fight the democrats. The democrats are quite >willing to take the power. Is the docile republicans capable of dealing with the >rapidly moving events of the modern world? I do not know but ,protect the >constitution and the ten amendments we must ,do as the politicians have sworn to >do before they got the job. Will we go for strike three, swinging, foul ball, or >hit a home run? >Please excuse brevity, I hope this makes sense. You can only condense so much. >Toly

Dear Mr. Harrison: Thank you so much for your thoughts. Marian Douglas Mr. Harrison's reply to earlier post: > > In your book you are wrong. Your attitude reeks of bleeding heart >liberalism. If you have a problem with slavery first you need to take it >up with the black African tribes who captured other black African tribes >and enslaved them. They were then sold to the Arabs. Then sold to the >Portugese. Then sold to the Spanish. Then sold to the Dutch. Then sold >to the English. Then sold to a few people in the South. Then you whin >and blame the South on your woes. The vast majority of Southerners did >not own slaves. They went to war because they were invaded. Just because >some elected officials argued about slavery does not make slavery the >issue. The constitution was the only issue. The same thing just happen a >few monts ago in the congress and the senate. clinton was impeached for >lying and subverting the Constitution. To many congressman and senators >said it was about sex. It had nothing to do with sex but everything to >do with subverting the Constitution just as in lincolns day it had >nothing to do with slavery but everything to do with subverting the >Constitution. The people in the South did not violate the constitution. >They did not violate God's law either. The people of the South have been >violated by the north since the first troops invaded the South. The >north and the federal government has not stop violating the South and it >continues to this very day. > Go compare the treatment of slaves in Africa and in Asia to the US. >The treatment of slaves in this country was far more "humane" than what >was done in Africa and Asia. Then go take it up with you brothers in >Africa. > There are human rights violations going on today in the South. They >are being commited against white Southerners whose ancestors never owned >slaves. >Long live a restored US Constitution or long live a restored Dixie, one >without slaves. >Harold > > >==== Southern-Trails Mailing List ==== >Rootsweb is Free! But Rootsweb is supported by volunteers and >contributions. Show your support and become a member. Click here >for more information: >http://www.rootsweb.com > >

In a message dated 9/20/99 11:14:48 PM !!!First Boot!!!, [email protected] writes: << it sounds like your Southern woman was a lot like mine. >> There is one, my g g grandmother, who was quite a gal. In 1842 a family member received a letter from a nephew in Mount Pleasant, TN. His wife had just died and left him with a bunch of children the youngest not yet 3 weeks. He asked that his aunt come and bring one of Cousin Betsy's daughters. The aunt and one of Cousin's Betsy's daughters, Caroline, went from Center Star, AL to Mount Pleasant, TN either by horse or stage. That's a long ride. Any way a year later Caroline and Carlisle were married. And moved to Center Star. Betty.

I received this from another list and I'm forwarding for any who might be looking for this data. Linda > > > > - Rare Slave Records Found in Natchez > > > > The Sun Herald newspaper recently ran a story describing a book > > containing rare slavery records recently found in the basement of > > the Adams County Courthouse in Natchez. The book contains > > invaluable information concerning the transportation of slaves > > from Kentucky to Mississippi before the Civil War. > > > > Written in precise script on yellowing pages, the book contains > > the vital statistics of slaves brought from Kentucky to > > Mississippi just before the Civil War. For instance, here are a > > few typical entries: > > > > Lewis Figg, of black coller, age about 27 years, weighs 160 > > lbs. > > > > William Ball, of black coller, age about 11 years, weighs 90 > > lbs. > > > > July Buckner and 3 children, of brown coller, age about 27 > > years, weighs 160 lbs. > > > > The simply-named "Record Book" was found in the basement of the > > Adams County Courthouse by Mississippi Department of Archives and > > History researchers and Chancery Clerk Tommy O'Beirne. The records > > cover the period 1858-1861. > > > > The complete story is available at: > > http://www.sunherald.com/region/docs/slave083099.htm >

In a message dated 9/20/99 11:44:13 AM, [email protected] writes: << Another contributing factor to the the War Between the States was States Rights. The federal government was trying to dictate to the southern states on matters that should have been state issues and not federal issues. I am not real well versed on all of the factors leading up to the War but I do know that it was not just exclusively about slavery. >> So true !!! that is still going on with BIG BROTHER still trying to govern. I have been a New Yorker all my life but I am sympathetic to the "states rights" issue. I guess it's because I come from a Missouri background.:-) Eileen

The railroad story is very interesting; I know a small footnote that you might find interesting. Before the war Grenville Dodge was an important part of the movement of the railways across country. During the Civil War he was General Grenville Dodge (Union) I read that he was also involved in spying on the south. After the war he was pivotal in building the railroad from the east to Promontory Point and helped drive the golden stake. All this information came with a Victorian Parlor Suite bought by my mother-in-law that had previously belonged to the Dodge family. I'm not sure about this but I think the Grenville signatory on the Declaration of Independence was his mother's family. If anyone knows whether the Grenville story is true please post. Joy ----- Original Message ----- From: Harold Miller <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 5:48 PM Subject: message from Charles - slaves to Africa > Charles....whew.....you always give me so much to think about. > > I know that Thomas Jefferson suggested that the slaves should be sent back > to Africa as he did not think just making them free and leaving them living > near their former masters would work. Even back then, it was difficult for > the founding fathers to reconcile beginning a nation of free men - who owned > slaves. > > Of course the result of allowing our new nation to form with slavery being a > part of it, was the war in 1860-1865. It is terrible that so much blood had > to spill before we could finally resolve the issue. But when you are > talking about people's pocketbooks....and a great deal of wealth in parts of > the south was based on cotton which meant slavery.....people are not going > to do what is morally right but what will help them to keep their way of life. > > It was not that people in the north were so much better than people in the > south, the north did not depend on slavery for their money. Just look at > what happened after the war, while Blacks were given their freedom, they > were not given much else. I do think there was something about 20 acres and > a mule being given to former slaves, but most of them were out of a job with > no education. That is why you will find so much movement of Black families > in 1860s-1880s as they tried to find work. Many moved west, I read > somewhere that there developed a very prosperous settlement of former slaves > in Denver. Black cowboys, Buffalo soldiers, etc. I sure never read about > any of them in my history books. > > Your mention of an Irish ancestor....many do not realize that 1850s > railroads were being built thru the south - like Tennessee. Many new men to > America got jobs building those railroads. So that is why when war broke > out, you find Irish units on both sides, CSA and USA. Someplace there is a > listing of railroad works. I know in trying to find one, I finally realized > that to find him in census of 1860, he would be living in some type of > boarding house. Which meant reading all the census records, not just ones > for his name. Duh....sometimes it takes me a while. > then someone told me of a listing apparently done by the railroad of > boarding houses where these men lived. > > Railroads did not come to NW Arkansas till much later, think the devastation > of the war slowed things down. But when it did, I guess a new immigrant > group from Europe built it. > > Mary > > > ==== Southern-Trails Mailing List ==== > Please remember that real people read the messages you post. > Got a problem? Got a gripe? Don't take it to the list! > Send me a message, and I'll try to take care of it: > mailto:[email protected] > >

> ><< It was > such a dangerous time for the women and children in that area during the > last part of the war. >> >Many seem to remanticize about the Old South. many picture the Southern Bells >sitting on the veranda in her silks and lace, sipping a Mint Julip while a >slave fans her to keep her cool. Many, probably most, of the southern women >had large families and no slaves. They washed, cooked, cleaned, kept a >kitchen garden, milked the cows, churned the butter. Has anyone ever thought >about wash day? Water brought from the spring or drawn from the well. Fire up >the wash pot. Carry the hot water to the wash tub and scrub the clothes. Then >more water brought to rinse. Then hang them out to dry. Many washed diapers >(nappies) for years. Their life was hard. They also learned to handle a gun >as well as many men in case of gangs coming around to rob, steal, and rape >while the men of the house were in the fields or off to war. All their chores >where done without running water, unless you want to consider grabbing a >bucket and running to the spring and back, no indoor facilities other than >the chamber pot, no electricity, and no telephones. Our children and >grand-children haven't a clue as to what these women did to run a household. >Betty. > right you are Betty. And I have found so often that how the next generation prospered depending so much on if the mother was able to read and write. If so, then I guess she taught her children. If she could not read and write, or if she died while the children were still very young, seems the family did not progress as much. I read where the families going west to Oregon, etc. often carried an math book and a reader - so the parents could teach the children. So add that to the list of jobs for those poor women....teaching the children. Also, often the religious training came from the parents if it was a frontier family, or one in a remote area. I know I could not have none what those women did. And then with all the work and all the kids, the husband comes home and wants to pack up and move.....time and time again in those early years. yeh, it sounds like your Southern woman was a lot like mine. Mary

In a message dated 9/20/99 9:37:16 PM !!!First Boot!!!, [email protected] writes: << It was such a dangerous time for the women and children in that area during the last part of the war. >> Many seem to remanticize about the Old South. many picture the Southern Bells sitting on the veranda in her silks and lace, sipping a Mint Julip while a slave fans her to keep her cool. Many, probably most, of the southern women had large families and no slaves. They washed, cooked, cleaned, kept a kitchen garden, milked the cows, churned the butter. Has anyone ever thought about wash day? Water brought from the spring or drawn from the well. Fire up the wash pot. Carry the hot water to the wash tub and scrub the clothes. Then more water brought to rinse. Then hang them out to dry. Many washed diapers (nappies) for years. Their life was hard. They also learned to handle a gun as well as many men in case of gangs coming around to rob, steal, and rape while the men of the house were in the fields or off to war. All their chores where done without running water, unless you want to consider grabbing a bucket and running to the spring and back, no indoor facilities other than the chamber pot, no electricity, and no telephones. Our children and grand-children haven't a clue as to what these women did to run a household. Betty.

Harold H, **************** I would like, also, some substantiation / resources cited regarding the recent posting concerning Abraham Lincoln. ********************* Thank you. [email protected] ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Douglas/Ungaro wrote: > > Someone contributed: > I am not real well versed on all of the factors leading up to the [Civil] > War [between the States] but I > do know that it was not just exclusively about slavery. > >> > > This may be true, that there were issues - money, division of power, > commerce, and politics between the wealthy of the North and the wealthy of > the South (frankly) - other than the chattel enslavement of American-born > persons, but in my book enslavement stands as the single most important one. > > Someone should dig out the Congressional Record (the official record of > the proceedings of Congress, published every day) of the period and just > review the angry debates over African Americans and their status as chattel, > to remember this. Those congressional proceedings - the shouting matches, > etc. - would be the basis for an excellent television documentary today, > because we -- have -- forgotten. We're always talking about, reminiscing > about the Civil War and the Old South, and re-enacting Civil War battles > (when we're not watching "Gone With the Wind" on the late show or on video), > but we tend to forget the underlying moral, spiritual, and human rights (as > we call it these days) issue - Black slavery - that fueled the political > split. > > I would also recommend the excellent autobiography, "Incidents in the > Life of A Slave Girl - Written By Herself", by Linda Brent (I think she also > had another name). > > And (North Carolinian) Dr. Melton McLaurin's "Celia, A Slave", well > written, short, in plain English, and not boring. He researched the court > records of the arrest and trial of Celia (bought at age 14 or 15, executed > at age 18 or 19), for the murder of her "owner" in Missouri, circa 1855-56. > > This and other cold facts of the "lives" of American-born persons > existing under CHATTEL slavery (as opposed to other historical practices of > human slavery) - that is what that war was about. Buying and selling > people and everything else imaginable and unimaginable associated with this. > > In Linda Brent's book, I will never forget her description of the dread > that Black mothers had on New Year's Eve, instead of celebration, because > New Year's Day was "selling day" in the South. And people lost their > families, their children, their babies, their parents, their life partners. > Brent writes about a woman who had, I believe, six children. The woman > sadly expected that some of her children would be taken from her and sold. > All of them were sold, in different, untraceable, directions. Brent > describes seeing that woman on the street later -- out of her mind and > mumbling to herself about how her children were "gone, all gone". > > Thanks, Marian > > ==== Southern-Trails Mailing List ==== > Rootsweb is Free! But Rootsweb is supported by volunteers and > contributions. Show your support and become a member. Click here > for more information: > http://www.rootsweb.com In your book you are wrong. Your attitude reeks of bleeding heart liberalism. If you have a problem with slavery first you need to take it up with the black African tribes who captured other black African tribes and enslaved them. They were then sold to the Arabs. Then sold to the Portugese. Then sold to the Spanish. Then sold to the Dutch. Then sold to the English. Then sold to a few people in the South. Then you whin and blame the South on your woes. The vast majority of Southerners did not own slaves. They went to war because they were invaded. Just because some elected officials argued about slavery does not make slavery the issue. The constitution was the only issue. The same thing just happen a few monts ago in the congress and the senate. clinton was impeached for lying and subverting the Constitution. To many congressman and senators said it was about sex. It had nothing to do with sex but everything to do with subverting the Constitution just as in lincolns day it had nothing to do with slavery but everything to do with subverting the Constitution. The people in the South did not violate the constitution. They did not violate God's law either. The people of the South have been violated by the north since the first troops invaded the South. The north and the federal government has not stop violating the South and it continues to this very day. Go compare the treatment of slaves in Africa and in Asia to the US. The treatment of slaves in this country was far more "humane" than what was done in Africa and Asia. Then go take it up with you brothers in Africa. There are human rights violations going on today in the South. They are being commited against white Southerners whose ancestors never owned slaves. Long live a restored US Constitution or long live a restored Dixie, one without slaves. Harold

At 05:04 PM 9/20/99 EDT, you wrote: >Mary, > >I LOVE your writing. Every time I sit down at the computer I hope you'll be >there. Your Turney's sure did get around and no matter what the situation, >you made them sound like the most interesting people. > > Also love your explanations of the different trails. My gr gr grandfather >was born in NY state in 1796 and we haven't been able to find him again until >1821 when he married in Tn. Any ideas on which trails they might have >followed? > >Keep up the good work. > >Sybil Oveerbey You know, I have just found out something on my Potter/Carpenter line, the Carpenters were from Mass. and moved to TN in early times - he was an early minister on the frontier. And.....the Carpenter wife was a Brown, which connects to John Howland who came over on the Mayflower. Now my husband and kids are calling me their own little Mayflower Madam. So I am beginning to work on those coming into the TN area from the Northeast. Will keep you advised on what I find. I figure, there were good road all the way from Boston, thru New York, to Philadelphia. Then they went thru Harper's Ferry, good road thru Shenandoah Valley. They would then travel thru Montgomery Co VA, into area of Abingdon VA/Bristol TN. do you have the book MAP GUIDE TO AMERICAN MIGRATION ROUTES by William Dollarhide It would help you a lot in understanding the routes out of New York to TN. I have had my copy for a while, but it cost me $9.95 plus $3.50 S&H address to order: AGLL Genealogical Services P.O. Box 329 593 West 100 North Bountiful, Utah 84011-0329 their order number when I ordered mine was 553727 Hope that helps, and will keep you in mind as I work on this Carpenter - who was a Yankee for sure. Mary [email protected]

Joy and I were discussing how interesting Andrew Jackson is to try to figure out what he was thinking. Someone sent me a couple of pages of a book, and it is really good. Volume II Of A Series of Early Tennessee land Records by Irene M. Griffey "John Armstrong's Entry Book" October 21, 1783 - May 25 1784 If you had relatives on the Holston River ca 1774-1783, or in the Watauga group. Lost State of Franklin.....you will want to get your hands on this. I plan on getting my own copy, it explains so much what those guys were up to. Seems they were the first in the area and scrambling to get their names on as much land as they could. Regardless if it still belonged to Indians or not. Some of them had to wait several years to get a good claim, until the land was open for white settlement. But of course my ancestor was in there, staking his claim to land. Some of the men lost everything when the land they claimed was not availble for so long, others made a mint. Some were killed by Indians, it was a real gamble all the way around. And when other people arrived later and claimed some of the land already claimed by these first men, of course it meant they fought it out in court. Explains why I find my ancestor in so many court cases. Just thought I would recommend it if your family was an early one to what became Tennessee. Mary

This sure is fun, seems we can still fight a war that was fought 1860-1865. That is what has always made that time so interesting to me. I have always wondered why each one of my ancestors chose the side he did, what his thoughts and feelings might have been. Why would a small farmer born in North Carolina, living in Carroll/Benton County Tennessee, chose to wear blue. About all I know about him is his height, hair color, where he is buried, who he married. And I think he was a Methodist. That is all, how I wish I had a letter or journal written by him telling me what his thoughts were. He was not a young, single man at the beginning of the war; but a mature, married man. He had a newborn son in early 1864 when captured, and died on march to prison. Who told his widow about his death? In the 1900 Arkansas census she is living with a daughter from a second marriage, and listed as a nurse. Did she work as a nurse during the war? Most southern women did, no matter which side their husbands were on. So many questions. And the ancestor who was a simple farmer in Arkansas with a wife and three children, how can I call him a coward because he spent the last months of the war hiding out in a cave on his property? He had joined the CSA army and been badly wounded. While he was gone, bushwackers had come by his house, taken everything including the cow. His wife could not feed her children, no food. So after he recovered from his wounds, he never went back to the army. Maybe he was a coward. Maybe he felt his obligation to his wife and children was more important. What was he thinking? It was such a dangerous time for the women and children in that area during the last part of the war. I guess I am most proud of the fact that they were all southerners, regardless of which side they were on. The ones who survived, they rebuilt and went on. And their children married the children of their enemy. That I guess is the thing I am most proud of, that they could put their guns down and end the war. That they did not leave me a legacy of hate but one of love and understanding. Mary

Someone contributed: I am not real well versed on all of the factors leading up to the [Civil] War [between the States] but I do know that it was not just exclusively about slavery. >> This may be true, that there were issues - money, division of power, commerce, and politics between the wealthy of the North and the wealthy of the South (frankly) - other than the chattel enslavement of American-born persons, but in my book enslavement stands as the single most important one. Someone should dig out the Congressional Record (the official record of the proceedings of Congress, published every day) of the period and just review the angry debates over African Americans and their status as chattel, to remember this. Those congressional proceedings - the shouting matches, etc. - would be the basis for an excellent television documentary today, because we -- have -- forgotten. We're always talking about, reminiscing about the Civil War and the Old South, and re-enacting Civil War battles (when we're not watching "Gone With the Wind" on the late show or on video), but we tend to forget the underlying moral, spiritual, and human rights (as we call it these days) issue - Black slavery - that fueled the political split. I would also recommend the excellent autobiography, "Incidents in the Life of A Slave Girl - Written By Herself", by Linda Brent (I think she also had another name). And (North Carolinian) Dr. Melton McLaurin's "Celia, A Slave", well written, short, in plain English, and not boring. He researched the court records of the arrest and trial of Celia (bought at age 14 or 15, executed at age 18 or 19), for the murder of her "owner" in Missouri, circa 1855-56. This and other cold facts of the "lives" of American-born persons existing under CHATTEL slavery (as opposed to other historical practices of human slavery) - that is what that war was about. Buying and selling people and everything else imaginable and unimaginable associated with this. In Linda Brent's book, I will never forget her description of the dread that Black mothers had on New Year's Eve, instead of celebration, because New Year's Day was "selling day" in the South. And people lost their families, their children, their babies, their parents, their life partners. Brent writes about a woman who had, I believe, six children. The woman sadly expected that some of her children would be taken from her and sold. All of them were sold, in different, untraceable, directions. Brent describes seeing that woman on the street later -- out of her mind and mumbling to herself about how her children were "gone, all gone". Thanks, Marian

Toly Wrote Sandy I think you hit the crux of the problem. From the very first of the countries existence two factions emerged. The Hamaltonians and the Jeffersonians (republicans of that time). The Hamiltonians prevailed in much of early politics. They were for strong central government and high tariffs. They and their supporters many from the Mass. area made great fortunes by buying soldiers pay bonds. Discounted as much as 75% and redeemed by the government at face value (After Washington became president). Some of this money served the country well but it created such power that it is still a factor today. The moneys started the industrial revolution in this country with the profits going out to multilayer industry in such a way that the north east controlled the country. The railroads were built in this manner with right always almost as large as states along their routs as grants from government. The central government was always broke and had no source of income except the tariff and other small taxes except in time of war. So bring on the war of 1812 (second revolution) from this the central government got the right to tax the people. The south got low tariffs and no interference in the slave issue. The central government still did not have all of the power it wanted. So the scene was set for the CW. The north industrialists did not like the low tariff that allowed the south to buy from Europe cheaper and sell their cotton direct. There was little kneed for the ships even stopping in Mass. anymore as they had full cargos in cotton from the south. The slavery issue inflamed the do-gooders. So we got the CW. States rights were pretty much lost and the south was brought into line. The constitution could not be passed , only the 9 small states signed. NC, VA, NY, and MS, where most of the people lived, would not sign until we got the bill of rights ( the first 10 amendments). These were signed or promised to allow the constitution to exist. So the constitution and the bill of rights are one and the same. We now have continual attacks on the ten amendments. Should any of these fall we have lost our constitution and it is on to anarchy and socialism, communism or fascism. The two fascists of governments (Hamiltonians and Jefersonians) are as strong a force as they were during the CW. Will we be led astray and loose the rest of our freedoms? The republicans of late have not demonstrated the tenacity to fight the democrats. The democrats are quite willing to take the power. Is the docile republicans capable of dealing with the rapidly moving events of the modern world? I do not know but ,protect the constitution and the ten amendments we must ,do as the politicians have sworn to do before they got the job. Will we go for strike three, swinging, foul ball, or hit a home run? Please excuse brevity, I hope this makes sense. You can only condense so much. Toly [email protected] wrote: > Another contributing factor to the the War Between the States was States > Rights. The federal government was trying to dictate to the southern states > on matters that should have been state issues and not federal issues. > I am not real well versed on all of the factors leading up to the War but I > do know that it was not just exclusively about slavery. > Sandy >