HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jsanders@phys.ksu.edu (Justin M. Sanders)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Original 13th Amendment
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:12:19 GMT
Organization: Department of Physics, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bose.phys.ksu.edu

In article <1992Sep15.073913.1@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu> 
cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P. L. Cowan) writes:
[my original post describing the proposed amendment to protect
  slavery, deleted]
>
>It seems a bit of an exaggeration to call this amendment (the so
>called "Crittenden Amendment") the "Original 13th Amendment" as you
>did in your subject line.

Two nits to pick:

My motivation in referring to this amendment as the 13th was primarily
the irony of it.  However, the proposed amendment did carry the 
title "Article XIII".  If it had passed, it would have been the 13th 
amendment, by definition.

Second, this particular proposed amendment is due to Rep. Thomas Corwin
of Ohio (Repub.) who was the Chairman of the House Committee of 33.  It
introduced it on 14 Jan (on the Committee's behalf), and it was passed
by the House on 28 Feb, and sent to the Senate where it was approved
on 2 Mar.

Crittenden's Compromise (introduced 18 Dec 1860) did contain a proposal 
for an amendment essentially
identical to this one, but there was much more.  It was a set of 6 amendments:
1. Extend the Missouri Compromise line.
2. Congress could not abolish slavery in places under its exclusive juris-
   diction.
3. Congress could not abolish slavery in D.C. as long as it existed in
   adjacent states, or without the consent and compensation of the inhabitants.
4. Congress could not inhibit interstate commerce in slaves
5. Congress empowered to provide compensation to owners if officers were
   prevented from returning fugitive slaves.
6. No future amendments could change the Const. provisions regarding slavery,
   or the 5 preceeding articles, or give Congress the power to regulate or
   abolish slavery where it existed.
The first provision, the re-instatement of the Mo. Compromise was the main
point for Crittenden and it was objectionable to both Republicans (for allowing
slavery to extend south of the line) and secessionists (for preventing
slavery to extent north of the line).  For this reason, Crittenden's proposals
were shot down in the Senate on 16 Jan 1861.
--
Justin M. Sanders    "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance"
Dept. of Physics        --last words of Gen. John Sedgwick
Kansas State Univ.
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: morphy@cco.caltech.edu (Jones Maxime Murphy)
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jones Maxime Murphy (was Re: What the FAQ?)
Keywords: none
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:45:38 GMT

whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt) writes:

>>somewhat hyperbolic. So go ahead, suspend my poetic license.

>Against my better judgement, I will comment that, like Mr. Cowan, I took
>this insult (and the others that Mr. Murphy has made) at face value and
>did not see anything in any of Mr. Murphy's posts (which I have read) to
>indicate that it was "farcical" or "hyperbolic" or "poetic license". If
>anyone did, I would ask them to please indicate so.
>If no one does this, I would suggest to Mr. Murphy that he consider
>seriously revising his method of indicating use of "poetic license."

Wow. I can only conclude that you are sufficiently convinced of the veracity
of statements that I considered exaggerations when I made them. Oh well, if the
cap fits,....

Your intelligence and sense of humour need more than a little work, if you take
seriously the assertion that I should compensate myself for the sufferings that
my white ancestors inflicted on the black and aboriginal ones.
Jones
-- 
Jones M Murphy Jr                                        (212) 602-4375
NatWest Investment Bancorp, National Westminster Bank PLC
100 Wall Street, New York, NY10005                   FAX (212) 269-0113
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: whijv2@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (WHITAKER JASON)
Subject: Know any good books?
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:10:13 GMT

I was wondering if any novels have been based on the Civil War?

Could anyone mail me or post to this group.


Thanks

The Sneaky One
whijv2@cspyr1.adfa.oz.au
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P. L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Flesh wounds (was Re: smoothbores, foriegn soldiers etc)
Date: 5 Sep 92 01:23:55 GMT
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab

In article <Bu0vzI.4Gy@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas wrentmore barnes) writes:

[most stuff deleted]
>     Also, I have to wonder about my gg grandfather getting shot in the
> "thigh", he appearantly walked with a limp for the rest of his life, but
> he managed to keep the leg. From pictures I have seen of him, he is
> thin, and there wouldn't be a whole lot to hit in the thigh but bone. I
> am amazed that a minie ball, which was notorious for causing huge, bone
> shattering wounds, didn't hit something vital, which would have led to
> a) death by bleeding, or b) amputation of an open fracture (with
> attendant risks). I speculate that either my gg grandfather was hit by a
> spent ball or piece of shrapnel, or he was grazed ("its only a flesh
> wound...;) ), or he got shot in the butt and was too proud to admit it.
> Any forensic pathologists out there who care to enlighten me?
> 
>    Thanks in advance,
>  
>    Tom

I have had similar questions about my great-granddad's wounds. I have his
military records from the National Archives in addition to stories from my 
father (who lived with him as a boy). Grandad Kirker was hit "below the right 
knee by a Minnie ball" at G'burg. I can only assume it also missed the bones
(which is even harder to imagine than a thigh wound). I doubt that Gg-dad Kirker
had any more meat on him than your ggg-father (he was 5'9" 140 lbs.). He spent
the next 8 months in various hospitals, and returned to duty just in time for
Grant's advance on Richmond. Incredibly, Gg-dad was hit in the same leg, also
below the knee, on the first day of the first battle (Wilderness). He served
the remainder of this 3-year term in another hospital. His regiment had served
(with Kearny) through some of the toughest fighting on the Peninsula, They
followed Meade's advance on the wing at Fredericksburg and were in very heavy
fighting at Chancellorsville (his company was taken prisoner just before 2nd
Manassas and exchanged after Antietam). It seems remarkable he served through
all of that, apparently without serious injury, only to be hit in the same
place (approximately) in two successive battles.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan     Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV   (I'm posting from my own account, but not the preferred one)
        "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is a War Room!"
from _Dr. Strangelove: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb_
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Reenactment in Nevada City
Date: 10 Sep 92 22:55:50 GMT
Reply-To: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Organization: SGI TechPubs


I'd like to second the invitation for anyone in the area to come to the 
re-enactment at Nevada City this weekend, as I'll be there with the 
3rd US Artillery.  I should have my spiffy new uniform on, too.

And since I can't reach you by mail, I'd like to extend a personal
invitation to jthoppers to wander by camp this weekend and join me in 
quaffing a few cold ones to beat the heat... 

Should be a grand time. 

JZ

p.s. 
   If you need directions, send mail....

 
 
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa,alt.appalachian
From: tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas wrentmore barnes)
Subject: Re: civil war connections
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 17:52:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.181602.10606@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> gmclucki@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Gemma McLuckie) writes:
>In article <Bu293K.B3x@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (
>thomas wrentmore barnes) writes:
>>I only know of two in my family
>>
>>    Pvt. Gilbert Barnes Co. I 100th Ohio USVI (wounded)
>>    +Pvt. John Barnes Co. I 100th Ohio USVI (died of disease)
>>
>>I have heard of others, most of whom died, but I haven't done any
>>research on them.
>
>Tom, does your family tell stories about these people?
>
My postings over the last week pretty much tell the story about Gilbert
Barnes. He was the son of a farmer and joined up sometime in 1862 with
his brother, John (who died of disease someplace in Ky. or Tn.). After
he was discharged, he moved to Paulding Co. Oh. and started up a lumber
mill. The only other story I have ever heard about him was that once, he
and another man were on a skirmish line, when a CS sharpshooter got the
range on him and his buddy. A minie ball smashed the fence post he was
standing behind and he decided to "bug out", the other man stayed behind
for whatever reason, and was killed. No great heroism or drama there, my
family is not a family of soldiers.

Have fun,

  Tom
>For instance, in addition to the Peyton Burns/woodpile story, my family tells
>of Peyton's wife (her name is never mentioned -- isn't that odd?).  Supposedly,
>she kept hearth and home together when her husband did his disappearing act for
>three or four years.  At least once, Union soldiers came to the farm in search
>of Rebels because they had heard that the Burns were Confederate sympathizers.
>The soldiers' orders were to destroy the farm, but when they saw how hard
>gggsomething grandma had to work to keep her family fed, they changed their
>minds.
>
>Is this a sort of urban legend, do you think? Or did this kind of incident
>actually occur in Kentucky? I mean, U.S. soldiers coming in search of CSA
>sympathizers.
>
>You know that storytelling is an Appalachian trait, and embellishment is an
>honored characteristic! However, the stories feel like they are based in fact,
>even if they didn't actually happen to my family.  And the stories make the
>Civil War era much more vivid to me.  When I read a Catton or Foote, I can just
>imagine Peyton Burns fighting or marching or being sick.
>
>Gemma McLuckie


Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa,alt.appalachian
From: whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt)
Subject: Re: civil war connections
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:49:21 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.195853.12055@odin.corp.sgi.com> zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide) writes:

>In article <goose.716148355@camelot>, Bradley Riley writes:
>>This is very true.  The succsession of the states of the south was not based
>>soley on slavery. At the time, there was still massive fighting( non-physical) about the 
>>power of the government and the power of the states....And with the 
>>possibility of freeing slaves, their economy would have fallen and they thought
>>the government was out to GET THEM!!
>
>But go one level deeper, and you find that the power of the Fed vs. power of the states
>battles were based on slavery. If it were not so, then why were all the compromises
>based on keeping the balance of slave and free states equal in the Senate? 
>
>JZ
>  
That was one issue, but it was not the only issue. Another, equally important
issue between the states was tariff policy. The Northern states economy
was based on manufacturing goods which were also made in Europe, and they
wanted protectionsist tariffs. The South had an economy geared towards
exporting cotton and indigo to Europe, and they feared European retaliation
if the US passed tariffs, so they opposed them. Obviously the fact that
the South had slavery is related to this, but then again, the fact that the
South had slavery is in part caused by the existence of European export
markets. Don't put the cart before the horse here... Adding Northern states
and Southern states in pairs also kept the tariff policy question in
balance.
  Today tariff policy seems like a silly thing to fight over, but when
the high tariffs of 1836 were passed, South Carolina decided on the
doctrine of "nullification" of Federal acts in the state and decided not
to collect the tariff. This objection was only overcome by President
Jackson's (I think it was Jackson's) threat to send troops to enforce the
collection. The Nullification Crises almost touched off the Civil War
24 years early and was an almost equally significant episode in establishing
the supreme power of the Federal government over the states.
-- 
Steve Schmidt			<><		   whale@leland.stanford.edu

"We have met the enemy and he is us" - Walt Kelly
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: don@q-aais.navo.navy.mil (Don Newcomb)
Subject: Re: civil war connections
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-28199]: q-aais.navo.navy.mil
Reply-To: newcomb@navo.navy.mil (Don Newcomb)
Organization: U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 19:14:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.203559.1454@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> gmclucki@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Gemma McLuckie) writes:
>How many of you have direct connections to the Civil War through relatives?

My only direct civil war relation was my g-g-father, John Wilson
Childerston. He enlisted in the 15th Ill. Cav. on 1 Sept. 1861,at
age 27, and was  discharged 22 July  1862 after  being wounded in
the "lower leg" by a rifle ball. He returned to service after his
recuperation. In his second "hitch" he seems to have served mostly
as a teamster for supply-trains in Kentucky and Tennessee.

He seems to have been pretty tight-lipped about his service, so  
no old war stories are told in the family.

*******************************************************************
* Donald R. Newcomb                * Views expressed are strictly *
* Naval Oceanographic Office       * those of the author. Mention *
* Stennis Space Center, MS 39522   * of commercial products or    *
* newcomb@navo.navy.mil            * organizations in no way      *
* Phone (601) 688-5998             * constitutes an endorsement.  *
*******************************************************************
From: v384rv4k@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Lynn Harper)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Good books
Date: 10 Sep 92 18:22:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Stephen Crane's _Red_Badge_of_Courage_, the restored
version.  (Restored from Crane's notes.  He was forced
to delete much of it by the publisher.  Makes a 
completely different story.)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: cjt1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Charles Ten Brink)
Subject: Re: Nathan Bedford Forrest:Any books?
Reply-To: cjt1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 13:35:56 GMT

In article <1LXVqB1w165w@bluemoon.rn.com> haley@bluemoon.rn.com (Michael J. Kirschenba) writes:
>  I was wondering if any one out there knows of any literature regarding
>Nathan Bedford Forrest.

Check out Brian Wills's "Battle from the Start".  It's a fairly good read,
and has a bibliography of writings about Forrest. 
--Chuck



-- 
D'Angelo Law Library         "The dogmas of the quiet past are
cjt1@midway.uchicago.edu      inadequate to the stormy present. . .
uclcjt1@uchimvs1              We must disenthrall ourselves. . ."
From: jeromema@cc.uvcc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jones Maxime Murphy (was Re: What the FAQ?)
Date: 8 Sep 92 21:31:24 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley Community College

In article <1992Sep8.154538.16219@cco.caltech.edu>, morphy@cco.caltech.edu (Jones Maxime Murphy) writes:
> whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt) writes:
> 
>>>somewhat hyperbolic. So go ahead, suspend my poetic license.
> 
>>Against my better judgement, I will comment that, like Mr. Cowan, I took
>>this insult (and the others that Mr. Murphy has made) at face value and
>>did not see anything in any of Mr. Murphy's posts (which I have read) to
>>indicate that it was "farcical" or "hyperbolic" or "poetic license". If
>>anyone did, I would ask them to please indicate so.
>>If no one does this, I would suggest to Mr. Murphy that he consider
>>seriously revising his method of indicating use of "poetic license."
> 
> Wow. I can only conclude that you are sufficiently convinced of the veracity
> of statements that I considered exaggerations when I made them. Oh well, if the
> cap fits,....
> 

To my readings of the postings back and forth I viewed a fair share of the banterings
as a form of "mental racket ball" on an "intellectual playground".

An excellent way to get a point across is to portray it in an opposite stance from the
normal, excepted format.  Black becauses white and white becomes black, in short,
putting the shoe on the other foot as it were.  When your opponent is prepared to meet
you at the front door, then you come through either the back door, or one of the side
windows.  It will always have an unsettling effect on your opponent that won't soon
to be forgotten.

Besides I'm sure Mr. Jones Murphy has resolved many conflicts that usually exist between
the various races as he is one of those unique individuals that have one or more races
embodied in one person.  If not resolved, then he's got a burden to bear that I would
not like to have to endure.  How would one solve the question of compensation?  Does
the left hand pay the right hand or does the right hand pay the left hand?  I'd get
confused in that exercise.  

Nevertheless, though a subject matter is exaggerated to make a point, the fact remains
that a point was felt necessary to be made, because of the importance of the subject
matter.

Hurrah, for the 54th Mass.!

Marc D. Jerome
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas wrentmore barnes)
Subject: Re: civil war connections
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 17:58:15 GMT

In article <188hqrINNgv5@cs.utexas.edu> russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams) writes:
>Yes, Gemma, it's quite plausible that soldiers were sent to burn your
>ancestors' house, or at least hassle them.  The famous example of taking
>the war to the civilians was Sherman's March, but it went on all over
>the place.  E.g., Missouri was apparently a hellacious place to live
>(kind of like Yugoslavia today) with civilians afraid to admit to
>allegiance to either side.
>
>Russ

Ditto for some places in Western (West) Virginia, Tennessee and
Kentucky. The border states were very tough places to live especially in
the pre- and early- war years before the US got enough troops into them
to pacify things. Even this didn't help if your loyalties lay with the
CSA. If war is hell, then civilians are consigned to the lowest circle.

Have fun,
  Tom


Xref: sparky alt.war.civil.usa:1180 alt.appalachian:708
From: goose@camelot.bradley.edu (Bradley Riley)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa,alt.appalachian
Subject: Re: civil war connections
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:18:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bradley University

In <2925476759.5.p00098@mail.psi.net> p00098@mail.psi.net (Jones M Murphy Jr) writes:

>>DATE:   Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:49:21 GMT
>>FROM:   Stephen Schmidt <whale@leland.Stanford.EDU>
>>
>>In article <1992Sep10.195853.12055@odin.corp.sgi.com> zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide) writes:
>>
>>>In article <goose.716148355@camelot>, Bradley Riley writes:
>>>>This is very true.  The succsession of the states of the south was not based
>>>>soley on slavery. At the time, there was still massive fighting( non-physical) about the 
>>>>power of the government and the power of the states....And with the 
>>>>possibility of freeing slaves, their economy would have fallen and they thought
>>>>the government was out to GET THEM!!
>>>
>>>But go one level deeper, and you find that the power of the Fed vs. power of the states
>>>battles were based on slavery. If it were not so, then why were all the compromises
>>>based on keeping the balance of slave and free states equal in the Senate? 
>>>
>>>JZ
>>>  
>>That was one issue, but it was not the only issue. Another, equally important
>>issue between the states was tariff policy. The Northern states economy
>>was based on manufacturing goods which were also made in Europe, and they
>>wanted protectionsist tariffs. The South had an economy geared towards
>>exporting cotton and indigo to Europe, and they feared European retaliation
>>if the US passed tariffs, so they opposed them. Obviously the fact that
>>the South had slavery is related to this, but then again, the fact that the
>>South had slavery is in part caused by the existence of European export
>>markets. Don't put the cart before the horse here... Adding Northern states
>>and Southern states in pairs also kept the tariff policy question in
>>balance.

>And don't claim that the tail is wagging the dog here. The primary 
>reason Africans were held as slaves was that they were held in contempt.
>Otherwise, whites would also have been forced into slavery as well by the
>mere existence of "European markets". Export markets do not in themselves
>create slavery, as a rule!

*Hey, buddy.  For all purposes, the majority of the first settlers were
*owned by companies and it was called servitude.  But as you can agree,
*servitude is only another name for slavery.
*Plus, africans as slaves was not popular until rum making in the caribbean
*because the Native population was to uncontrollable or DEAD

>Accept it, as unpalatable as it may seem. Slavery was *by far and away* 
>the dominant issue here.

Nope, economics

--
and if i should falter
would you open your arms out to me
we can make love not war
and live at peace with our hearts
		A little respect                  Bradley A. Riley
	        Erasure-the innocents	 	  goose@camelot.bradley.edu
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P. L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Know any good books?
Date: 10 Sep 92 03:36:28 GMT
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab

In article <9SEP199216143981@vxcrna.cern.ch>, casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:
> In article <1992Sep8.221013.1205@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au>, whijv2@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (WHITAKER JASON) writes...
>>I was wondering if any novels have been based on the Civil War?
>> 
> By the way, I highly recommend "The Killer Angels".
>
> Dave

_The_Killer_Angels_ was okay, I guess, but I had a hard time imagining that
"Old Pete" Longstreet was so filled with angst and introspection during the
battle. I enjoyed the parts about the 20th Maine better. Just one man's 
opinion.

I read another novelization about the Battle of Gettysburg last month. 
I left it at work, but I think the title was something like _The_Dark_Days_
It was interesting in that it was clearly drawn from a variety of sources that
are not easily accessed otherwise, but it was rather jarring to read passages
taken directly from Sally Broadhead's diary portrayed as dialog with her
husband or neighbor. I like Richard Wheeler's "Eyewitness" books much better
for that sort of thing.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan     Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV  (I'm posting from my own account, but not the preferred one)
        "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is a War Room!"
from _Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb_
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa