Friday, November 30, 2018

La Guerre Civile


Still working on the third installment of Sarge's "Off the top of my head" History Lectures*... (Too dang busy answering comments last night!)

I want everyone here to bear in mind that I was born and raised in Vermont, if you go any further north, you're in Canada. So I was born and raised a Yankee. What, you may ask, is a Yankee? Well, this is the definition that I prefer -
  1. To foreigners, a Yankee is an American.
  2. To Americans, a Yankee is a Northerner.
  3. To northerners, a Yankee is an Easterner.
  4. To easterners, a Yankee is an New Englander.
  5. To New Englanders, a Yankee is a Vermonter.
  6. And in Vermont, a Yankee is somebody who eats pie for breakfast.
I heard a variation of that definition a long time ago. The version I heard is that the pie one had for breakfast had to be apple pie. And yes, I've done that but only when The Missus Herself isn't looking.

So I'm about as Yankee as it gets, though my brother, Ye Olde Vermonter, is even more Yankee than I. He still wears flannel shirts, chops his own wood, and talks like a Vermonter. Which is both an accent and an attitude, to wit -

Car pulls over, tourist leans out: "Say old fellow, can you tell me how you get to the local shopping plaza?"

My brother, tipping his flannel hunting hat back on his head: "Well, sometimes I walk, sometimes my sister drives me..."

And yes, that story might be apocryphal. I wasn't there, he claims it's true, though he's been known to stretch the truth from time to time.

Anyhoo.

A few more definitions are in order, for reference purposes of course -

civil- relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters. (Yeah, it can also mean courteous and polite. If you use the term "civil war," then neither courteous nor polite really apply.)

war - a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

civil war - a war between citizens of the same country.

All that being said, it was sort of a "War Between the States," though technically it was a war between two groups of states. So I don't much care for that term. As to the "War of Northern Aggression" - we can probably debate that one from now until Kingdom Come (and yes, that was intentional) and we still wouldn't agree.

I always point to the buggers who fired the first shot when I say, "Well, you started it." The shooting bit anyway. But want to know a secret, it's always the politicians who scream for war. It's seldom politicians who do the bleeding and the dying. Part of the reason I care not for that breed.

(Source)
Not to veer off on a tangent (which I love doing), while looking at Civil War** photos the other day I stumbled upon that fellow above, one Corporal Joseph Pierce, of the 14th Regiment, Connecticut Volunteer Infantry, born in Canton, the one in China, not the one in Ohio. You should chase this link and read more about Corporal Pierce. It's worth your while, chase the link under his photo as well. He wasn't the only man of Chinese descent to fight in the Civil War**. Chase this link to read about Thomas Sylvanus, born in Hong Kong, brought to the U.S. and enslaved in Baltimore. From said place escaping at the start of the Civil War** to join the Union Army. More on him at the link under the photo below.

There's even a blog called The Blue, The Gray and the Chinese! Hasn't been updated in a while, but it's interesting reading.

(Source)
The things you learn from blogging!




* Meaning which, I don't do a lot of research before writing, picture me answering a question about a topic while sitting down, face to face, avec moi, perhaps over an adult-type beverage. Hopefully which the questioner is buying. (Hint.) Reader suggestions for future topics along these lines are welcome. Of course, the post might wind up being. "Hhmm, I know next to nothing about that." Hey, it happens.
** Insert whatever you like to call it in place of "Civil War."

84 comments:

  1. Did the War of Northern Agression take place about the same time as the War of Southern Arrogance, and about the same time as the Late Unpleasantness?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Replies
    1. The Damn Yankees play baseball.

      ;)

      Delete
    2. I was about fourteen when I found out that damn yankee was two words.

      Delete
    3. STxAR, it IS????? I always thought it was a 4 syllable word. Dah-yum-yan-keys!

      Delete
  3. The second best time to eat apple pie is for breakfast, with a slice of chedda, extra sharp please!! The best time to eat apple pie is about an hour after being removed from the oven, so the vanilla ice cream gets kinds melty...ok, now I need to make a pie this weekend cause I am hungry!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. In the 1880s, Congress passed a resolution stating the name of that war is The War Between the States.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I need a reference Chaps, I'm not getting any hits on that. (Perhaps my Google-Fu is weak today.)

      Delete
  5. I heard two days ago that John Marshall, supreme court justice that died in 1835, was worried the country would separate. That was at least 25 years before the war. It wasn't the first shot that caused the war. The US was on the road to that war for decades. During that conversation, I found out that a researcher thinks we under shot the tally of dead by 120,000. He scoured the census records and noted at least that many missing men. That puts the toll near 750,000....

    Found this gentleman yesterday. Listen to an eye witness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL0jeC9K9qA

    I found his lack of animosity refreshing. It seems that the farther we are from the actual conflict the stronger the feelings grow.

    Wow, I almost fell in a trap. Hence the deleted comment.

    It's strange that those who wanted the new states to have the right to organize, as outlined in the constitution, were the bad guys. And the folks that wanted a strong central government were the morally superior. Drives me back to the "consent of the governed".

    Before the war, "The United States are" was common usage. After the war, "The United States is" was ascendant. I submit that was not the founding fathers' intent. But it is our reality now. "As the government gets bigger, the citizen gets smaller."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Much to think on here STxAR. I don't think that we've found the proper balance yet between the powers of the Federal government and the powers of the individual state governments. I personally think the Constitution is clear on who gets to do what and who can't do what as regards the Feds versus the states. I do think that the Feds have stretched their powers well past what the Founders envisioned. The states need to push back more. But greedy politicians of all stripes and at all levels won't do that, after all, many (if not most) politicians want to be in Washington some day, if they limit that power, what's the point? Another reason I am a firm believer in term limits.

      Delete
    2. "I personally think the Constitution is clear on who gets to do what and who can't do what as regards the Feds versus the states. I do think that the Feds have stretched their powers well past what the Founders envisioned."

      Hear, hear! On this point, we are in total agreement.

      Paul

      Delete
  6. I visited Mt Airy, NC and found out that Chang and Eng, the Siamese twins settled there and had sons that fought in the war.
    https://www.ourstate.com/chang-and-eng-bunker/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I read that as well, a fascinating story.

      Not very well known either. Great link, thanks!

      Delete
  7. So far what I'm seeing are a fair number of references to Joint Senate Resolution No. 41, with pointers to the Congressional Record of March 2nd, 1928. What I'm actually finding there is a lengthy discussion of reimbursements to the State of Nevada for their expenditures during the war, not a formal debate and determination of the "official" name for the conflict. What "War Between The States" web sites point to is an amendment to that reimbursement resolution proposes by the Judiciary committee as follows:

    ~~~~~

    Strike out all of that part of the resolution after the resolving clause
    and insert in lieu thereof the following:

    "That the Comptroller General of the United States is authorized
    and directed to reopen, restate, and resettle the account of the State of
    Nevada for moneys advanced and expended in aid of the Government of
    tbe United States during the War between the States, and on such
    restatement and resettlement (1) to assume the balance due the State
    of Nevada on January 1, 1900, as being correctly stated in the account
    set forth in the reports of the Secretary of the Treasury printed in
    House Document No. 322 and Senate Document No. 441, Fifty-sixth Congress
    first session; (2) to add to such balance the interest certified by
    the Governor and the comptroller of the State of Nevada as actually paid
    by said State from January 1, 1900, to the date of the approval of this
    joint resolution, on the principal sums o advanced and expended; and
    (3) after deducting the amounts repaid by the United States to the State
    of Nevada since January 1, 1900, to certify to Congress for an appropriation
    the balance found due the State of Nevada."

    https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1928-pt4-v69/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1928-pt4-v69-6-1.pdf

    ~~~~~

    Unfortunately for those supporting the "War Between The States" definition, all the speakers quoted during the March 2nd debate used the term "civil war"! Finding a full copy of Resolution 41 has been a bit more of a challenge. The March 2nd discussion makes no mention of a date for drafting the resolution, but does state that it had been voted on 5 times previously, making a hand search of the C.R. a bit of a challenge. And similar to Sarge, my Google-foo isn't giving me a copy of the resolution itself.

    /
    L.J.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great data point L.J.! I've seen references from the time which I hope to get to soon. This might turn into a whole bunch of posts on the war.

      Delete
  8. The south fired the first shots but the "war if northern aggression" is a great propaganda term! It was really the 'war over states rights' and the states lost.

    Pie for breakfast really perked me up! I thought you meant cold pizza...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True on the first, on the second I used to have cold pizza for breakfast, but I grew out of it. Odd that.

      But pie, oh yes, first last and always.

      Delete
    2. The south may have fired the first official shots, but...

      The whole pre-actual separation and shooting time is one full of rancor and animosity between the two 'nations' starting somewhere around, oh, 1787. Then there's little 'civil' (meaning non-full military) things like slave raids, John Brown and so forth.

      And, yes, all the states lost the 'War over States' Rights.' Expansion of the Federal Government was just one of the issues behind the war, and the war succeeded in creating the all mighty Fed. Which has been hammering it's citizens over the head ever since. Nobody signed up for Bureaucracy Uber Alles, but that's what we got. (In some no-small way thanks to that rat-bastige Woodrow Wilson and his follow-up FDR and some other arrogant anal circular muscle from Texas that juvat has no use for.)

      Delete
    3. Ah, but you anticipate tomorrow's post!

      (Yes, it's done, FWIW.)

      Delete
    4. As to cold pizza-pie (I remember when it was pizza-pie) for breakfast, well, that requires leftover pizza to be available.

      Delete
    5. I am not going to peek at what I may have anticipated. Either I or you read each other's minds too frequently. Freaky, totally freaky.

      Delete
    6. Ah yes, the joy of a fresh pizza (I do remember it being called a pizza pie) with the sweet anticipation of cold pizza on the morrow.

      Delete
    7. We are freakishly often on the same wave length.

      Delete
    8. One of our local pizza establishments makes apple,cherry, and blueberry pizzas for desserts. In early summer they have raspberry, and strawberry!
      At the resort where I am a Night Audit, we have a quite acceptable pizza place. They close at 2300, and I will sometimes have them send a thin crust all meat pizza, but I can't get to it, until 0300. One of my goals in lifeboat find out barbiturates like warm.

      Delete
    9. I typed in, one of my goals in life, is to find out what it tastes like warm.

      Delete
    10. Scott - You really need to get a different spell checker. That last sentence was epic.

      Delete
    11. As to having a goal to see what it tastes like warm, I hope you get there brother.

      ;)

      Delete
    12. If you don't have pizza left over for breakfast you're not buying (or making) enough. This holds true for meatloaf too, why make it if you won't get sandwiches later?

      Delete
    13. Good point Rob. Ditto on the meatloaf.

      Delete
  9. Pie, pie, me, oh, my...

    Really confuse the issue. Have a nice steak, Cataline or pot pie. Meat and pie crust, and in the case of the Cataline pie, meat, pie crust AND fruit.

    Cataline pie is excellent hot or cold, makes a good lunch.

    If meat pies are good for 'old school' Friar Tuck, then they're good enough for me. Just... not kidney anything, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pie, is pie, is pie. Meat, fruit, meat and fruit, we loves 'em all. Well, except kidney pie.

      Old joke: "How do you cook kidneys?"

      Answer: "Boil the piss out of 'em."

      I wouldn't know. If it ain't ground up in a haggis or stuffed in a sausage, I avoid those bits. And no, I never, ever ask what's in my hot dog.

      Ever.

      Delete
  10. Hey, hey, didja see, didja see the comments count yesterday? Whooohoooo. Over 100! Whoooohoooo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup, 120 at last count. Of course, you, me. and Paul accounted for a lot of those. But dang, that was fun!

      Delete
    2. Yes, the comment counter still shows 120. Puts one in mind of days gone by and another blog, it does.

      Paul

      Delete

    3. Delete












      OldAFSargeNovember 30, 2018 at 2:28 PM

      "Sigh..."

      Roger that. Then there is the dustiness.

      Paul


      Delete
    4. The allergies do act up from time to time.

      Delete
  11. Hmmm, thought of another reason, thanks to this and yesterday's comments, as to why we love to hate the French.

    We can no longer have champagne from the US. We have 'sparkling white wine made with champagne grapes.' Because, thanks to the French and the UN, champagne is only sparkling white wine made with champagne grapes if it comes from the Champagne region of France.

    Why we so far still love the English, kinda. We can have Vermont Cheddar. Heavy, thick, flavorful cheddar cheese, made in Cheddar, England or made in America, or Australia, or maybe one day on Mars, because though the English may be snooty, they aren't complete frog-eating jerk-faces like the French.

    The Germans don't mind us or the Aussies bottling reislings using reisling grapes and all the correct processes just like they do in the Reisling district of Germany and calling our reislings 'Reisling.'

    The Italians don't mind us using Italian origin grapes to make Italian style wines and calling them by their Italian names.

    But the French get all butt-hurt and suddenly no more Champagne. And they tried with Burgundy, too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, come on bro, it's all they've got.

      (Ahem, it's spelled Riesling, Kein Problem, aber dein Deutsch ist schwach.)

      Delete
    2. Dagnabit! No wonder I haven't been able to find the large blue bottles of my favorite wine lately. Oh, well...

      Delete
    3. Look for spätlese or auslese. The first is sweet, the second sweeter still, but not in a cloying way. More like a crisp apple on a brisk fall afternoon.

      Delete
    4. I actually know that, and I actually prefer but can rarely afford Eiswein. Bummer.

      Delete
    5. Eiswein is pretty pricey. But worth it once in a great while.

      Delete
  12. In response to your comments on politicians I must quote and old Marine song I learned long ago:

    Now Congress sent a commission out, they loaded up with Scotch
    While they were throwing parties we had forties up the crotch

    They cried "Let's kill the bastards, Let's drive them to their knees
    But there weren't any Congressmen on the List of Casualties

    Name a war, any war, and the song probably applies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And it probably applies regardless of nationality or form of gummint!

      Delete
    2. "But there weren't any Congressmen on the List of Casualties"

      I'm not positive, but I believe that I have read that during WWII, some Congressmen resigned their seats and joined the armed forces. If so, they weren't Congressmen at the time, but had been when the U. S. officially became at war.

      Paul

      Delete
    3. Both Nixon and Johnson served in WWII, neither saw Combat. LBJ got a Silver Star when he went on a mission as an observer, but the airplane aborted and RTB'd, landing before the other aircraft even reached the target area. MacArthur personally presented him with the Silver Star for Gallantry. The only member of the crew to receive an award.
      Since ya'll already know the high esteem I have for that penile cranium, I'll leave it at that.

      Delete
    4. I have long been aware of RMN's and LBJ's service and what sort of noble warrior he ( LBJ ) was. However, I don't believe that ether of them were in Congress before Dec. 8, 1941.

      Paul

      Delete
    5. Not a big MacArthur fan either. For that, and appointing Ned Freaking Almond to command X Corps in Korea.

      Delete
    6. Johnson was a Congressman from 1937 to 1949. Nixon didn't enter Congress until '47.

      I liked Nixon, the other guy, no, not at all.

      Delete
    7. To my knowledge, the slug from Texas never resigned his seat in the House.

      Delete
  13. "My brother, tipping his flannel hunting hat back on his head: "Well, sometimes I walk, sometimes my sister drives me...""

    That is exactly how I would, and do, answer questions. I answer the question asked, not they one the questioner wanted answered.

    Thanks for the post.
    Paul L. Quandt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, the old Heinlein "Fair Witness" trick.
      Questioner: "What color is that building painted?"

      Fair Witness: "The side I see right now appears to be painted a shade of white, not quite sure of the shade, may be dirt discoloring it, but mostly white."

      In other words, "Just the facts, Ma'am."

      Delete
    2. "Go to the store and get a gallon of milk, if they have eggs, get a dozen."

      An engineer will come home with 12 gallons of milk.

      Delete
    3. I too tend to be overly literal at times.

      Delete
    4. "In other words, "Just the facts, Ma'am.""

      You mean Jack Webb him?

      Paul

      Delete
  14. "...asked, not they one..."

    Proofread, must learn to proofread. Before I hit ' Publish '.

    Paul

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But what did Publish ever do to you that requires you to hit him/her/it?

      Delete
    2. Paul - You're too hard on yourself. That's our job.

      ;)

      Delete
    3. Publish needs to be hit, it begs to be hit.

      Delete
    4. "But what did Publish ever do to you that requires you to hit him/her/it?"

      It allowed me to put this: "...asked, not they one..." bit of stupidity out for public consumption.

      Paul

      Delete
    5. I claim to be an editor, someone who keeps writers on the straight and narrow. If I can't keep myself on the s and n, how can anyone depend on me to help them? Perhaps I just have too much time on my hands.

      Paul

      Delete
    6. "Kill it with fire!"

      Well, I used to call for fire. Fire Direction Control in the 1/143rd FA.

      Paul

      Delete
    7. Perhaps your brain, like mine, flies too fast for your fingers to keep up?

      1/143rd Field Artillery? Didn't know you were also a red leg Paul. Cool.

      "Artillery adds dignity, to what would otherwise be an ugly brawl..." - Friedrich der Große

      Delete
    8. Paul - Editors are allowed to make the occasional mistake.

      And your wife is traveling, therefore, by definition, you are operating without adult supervision.

      ;)

      Delete
  15. I've taken to calling it "The War of 1861."
    As to "who fired first." Seven states left the Union between 1860 and Lincoln's swearing in. Many legal scholars of the time thought it to be one of the powers reserved to the states. After all, New England had threatened to leave the Union three or four times between the time the Constitution was ratified and 1861. No one though it illegal or unconstitutional when northerners wanted to do it. The Articles of Confederation, that permanent, unbreakable document (until it was replaced by the current Constitution) did call it a permanent union. But for some reason the members of the Constitutional Convention managed to leave out that clause.

    Lincoln in his inaugural address pretty much said that he really didn't care if they stayed or left, just so they kept paying the taxes, duties, and tariffs. Kind of like England expecting the US to continue paying taxes to London after we separated from England. Lincoln refused to withdraw federal troops from SC territory, and was sending in reinforcements. Consider if a gang leader is staging people on your front porch in anticipation of a home invasion robbery. He has been told to get his people off your porch, but sends in more. In fact, they have gone so far as to open your front door. Do you let them just walk in?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May be Joe, may be.

      I will go to my grave saying that Lincoln did the right thing.

      Delete
    2. I go back and forth. I think that overall having our republic held together was good for mankind in general (although who knows what history would have been like if the federals had just let the seven deep south states go).

      But the damage he did to the Constitution, and the perception of our republic as a single nation controlled by DC rather than a union of co-equal states with a very weak and limited central government sometimes makes me wonder.

      Delete
    3. There needs to be a balance between Federal and state power. Right now the Feds have too much, but as long as local politicians aspire to be national politicians (where the big money is) it won't happen. I really believe that term limits at the national level might go far to solve that particular problem. Just my two cents.

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)
Can't be nice, go somewhere else...

NOTE: Comments on posts over 5 days old go into moderation, automatically.