DOCSLIB.ORG

TRANSCRIPTION Ordinance of Secession (Enrolled Version)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TRANSCRIPTION Ordinance of Secession (Enrolled Version) UNION or SECESSION Virginians Decide Library of Virginia | Virginia Department of Education UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Table of Contents Introduction . 1 Chapter 1. Virginia Convention at work . 2 Chapter 2. Map of April 4, 1861, Vote on Secession . 8 &KDSWHU´9LUJLQLDQVFDQQHYHUÀJKt our southern breathren”. .10 Chapter 4. “Submission or war” . .16 Chapter 5. Roll Call of Vote on Secession, April 17, 1861 . .19 Chapter 6. Map of April 17, 1861, Vote on Secession . .21 Chapter 7. Ordinance of Secession (Enrolled Version) . .23 Chapter 8. “To Arms!” . .26 Chapter 9. “Hold themselves ready” . .27 Chapter 10. “To do any thing that a woman can do for her country” . .29 Chapter 11. A speedy union with the other slave states. .33 Chapter 12. Ordinance of Secession (First Signed Version) . .36 Chapter 13. Robert E. Lee takes command of Virginia’s forces. .40 Chapter 14. Ordinance of Secession (Calligraphy Version) . .42 Chapter 15. “Pay Roll of Slaves Employed by the Commonwealth”. .47 2 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Introduction Drawn primarily from the collections of the Library of Virginia, Union or Secession: Virginians Decide presents private letters, public debates, and other records that allow Virginians who experienced the crisis between the autumn of 1860 and the summer of 1861 to explain their thoughts, fears, and decisions in their own words. 800 East Broad Street | Richmond, VA 23219-8000 804.692.3592 www.virginiamemory.com/exhibitions ePub produced by Virginia Department of Education 1 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Chapter 1. Virginia Convention at work Peyton Gravely to Benjamin Franklin Gravely, April 1, 1861, Gravely Family Papers, Acc. 34126, Library of Virginia On April 1, 1861, Peyton Gravely, a member of the Virginia Convention from Henry County, reported on the work of the convention. Elected as an opponent of secession, Gravely commented on the “Strong out Side pressure” the delegates faced from Richmond’s newspapers, most of which favored seceding from the Union. Three days after writing his letter, Gravely voted with a two-to-one majority against a motion to secede. Gravely mentioned speeches of Timothy Rives, of Prince Edward County, Thomas S. Flournoy, of Halifax County, James Barbour, of Culpeper County, William Leftwich Goggin, of Bedford County, William Ballard Preston, of Montgomery County, William T. Sutherlin and William M. Tredway, both of Pittsylvania County, and James Cole Bruce, of Halifax County. The great length of many of the speeches eventually led the delegates to place a time limit on each speaker. Jubal A. Early, whom Gravely thought might be a good candidate to oppose Representative Thomas Salem Bocock for Congress, represented Franklin County in the Virginia Convention. For more links click Virginia Convention at work 2 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Peyton Gravely to Benjamin Franklin Gravely, April 1, 1861, Gravely Family Papers, Acc. 34126, Library of Virginia 3 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Peyton Gravely to Benjamin Franklin Gravely, April 1, 1861, Gravely Family Papers, Acc. 34126, Library of Virginia 4 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Peyton Gravely to Benjamin Franklin Gravely, April 1, 1861, Gravely Family Papers, Acc. 34126, Library of Virginia 5 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Peyton Gravely to Benjamin Franklin Gravely, April 1, 1861, Gravely Family Papers, Acc. 34126, Library of Virginia 6 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide TRANSCRIPTION Virginia Convention at work Richmond April 1st 1861 Dear nephew Your much esteemed favour of march the 25 was duly recived which brought to me the gratifying inteligence wh that all was at that time well at home On friday last resolutions were introduced in the convention to terminate debate in the committee of the whol after tuesday nexte which resolutions meet with Strong oposition from the Secssi Secession Side of the house the resolutions was amended by Substituting thursday in the place of tuesday nexte and has Since been adopted in that Shape by a large majority Tim Rives Spoke on friday last Seven hours in favor of the Union and it was a very able Speech Mr. Flournoy to Spoke on Saturday a bout one houer and a half in favor of the union his Speech was a well timed and very Abel and gives general Satisfaction to the party -LP%DUERXUQH[WWRRNWKHÁRRUHDQGPDGHDYHU\6HFHVVLRQGU\DQGXQLQWHUHVWLQJ6HFHVVLRQ6SHHFKRIDERXWKDOI DQRXUHLQOHQWK0U*RJJLQQH[WHLQWXUQWRRNWKHÁRUHDQG6SRNHIRXUHKRXUVDSDUWHRIZKLFKZDVLQIDYRURI Secession and part in favor of union Goggin and Barbour are boath instructed deligates Baldwin Preston and Flornoy have all made very able Speeches on the Side of union I now think the convention will adopt for its ultimatum the reporte of the committee on federal relations at this time if the vote could be taken it would be adoped by a very large majority (There is not much differince) betwen the reporte of the committee on federal relations and the reporte of the peace conference what will be the result when the vote is taken I am at this tim unable to Say We have in Richmond a Strong Strong out Side pressure the [one word cancelled and illegible] publick presses are all against us but the whig and that will go in a few days, if I have not been misinformed upon the Subject You nead have no fears a bout Sutherlin nor Tredway they will be kept Strate by there constituents So will Flornoy Bruce and ohers Wm Martin lefte here on Saturday morning I think he has Som idea of Runig for congress in oposition to Mr Bocock Majr Early would be a sutable candidate if he could compeat with Bocock on the Stump I think the convention will adjourn by the 15 of April if not before that time I am glad to hear that you have Set a resolution to write y me onst a week during the Siting of the convention My Kind regardes to Julia and the Children And accept the Same for for your Self from PEYTON GRAVELY Citation: Peyton Gravely to Benjamin Franklin Gravely, April 1, 1861, Gravely Family Papers, Acc. 34126, Library of Virginia. 7 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Chapter 2. Map of April 4, 1861, Vote on Secession Residences of delegates who voted for and against secession on April 4, 1861, displayed on E. Hergesheimer, Map of Virginia Showing the Distribution of its Slave Population from the Census of 1860, C. B. Graham, Lithographer (Washington, D.C.: Henry S. Graham, 1861), Library of Virginia. On April 4, 1861, the convention rejected a motion to secede by a vote of 90 to 45. The importance of VODYHU\LQWKHGLIIHUHQWUHJLRQVRI9LUJLQLDLQÁXHQFHGWKHSROLWLFDORSLQLRQVRIFRQYHQWLRQGHOHJDWHVZKHQ they voted on the secession resolution that day. Plotting the places of residence of the delegates on an 1861 map showing the distribution of slaves in Virginia illustrates that the strongest support for secession came from areas where slaves were most numerous and that opposition to secession came from regions where slaves were less numerous. No delegate in the Virginia Convention of 1861 favored abolishing slavery, and some opponents of secession feared that secession and civil war would endanger slavery in Virginia. Voters in cities and in counties with large commercial towns elected very few supporters of secession. Some counties contain no marker because 17 delegates were absent on April 4, and some counties were parts of districts that included more than one county and the district’s delegate resided in another county. For more links click Map of April 4, 1861, Vote on Secession 8 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide Residences of delegates who voted for and against secession on April 4, 1861, displayed on E. Hergesheimer, Map of Virginia Showing the Distribution of its Slave Population from the Census of 1860, C. B. Graham, Lithographer (Washington, D.C.: Henry S. Graham, 1861), Library of Virginia. 9 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide +PIX\MZ¹>QZOQVQIV[KIVVM^MZÅOP\ our southern breathren” James C. Taylor to Governor John Letcher, April 15, 1861, Executive Papers of Governor John Letcher, Acc. 36787, State Government Records Collection, Record Group 3, Library of Virginia. Following the surrender of Fort Sumter, in South Carolina, on April 13, 1861, President Abraham Lincoln UHTXHVWHGYROXQWHHUVLQFOXGLQJRIÀFHUVDQGPHQIURP9LUJLQLDWRSXWGRZQWKH6RXWKHUQ rebellion. James C. Taylor, of Christiansburg, in the southwestern county of Montgomery, informed the governor two days later that “Our Community, has been thrown into the most intense excitement” and WKDW´9LUJLQLDQVFDQQHYHUÀJKWRXUVRXWKHUQEUHDWKUHQµ*RYHUQRU-RKQ/HWFKHUUHIXVHGWRFRPSO\ZLWK Lincoln’s request. On April 16, Montgomery County’s delegate, William Ballard Preston, who had been unanimously elected as an opponent of secession, introduced an ordinance of secession in the Virginia Convention. On April 17, 1861, the convention adopted Preston’s ordinance by a vote of 88 to 55. During WKHFOLPDFWLFZHHNVRI$SULODQG0D\PHQLQ9LUJLQLDMRLQHGPLOLWDU\FRPSDQLHVVRPHWRÀJKWIRU WKH8QLWHG6WDWHVDQGRWKHUVWRÀJKWIRU9LUJLQLDRUWKH6RXWK For more links click ´9LUJLQLDQVFDQQHYHUÀJKWRXUVRXWKHUQEUHDWKUHQ” 10 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide James C. Taylor to Gov. John Letcher, April 15, 1861, Executive Papers of Governor John Letcher, Acc. 36787, State Government Records Collection, Record Group 3, Library of Virginia. 11 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide James C. Taylor to Gov. John Letcher, April 15, 1861, Executive Papers of Governor John Letcher, Acc. 36787, State Government Records Collection, Record Group 3, Library of Virginia. 12 UNION or SECESSION: Virginians Decide James
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Smithfield Review, Volume 20, 2016
    In this issue — On 2 January 1869, Olin and Preston Institute officially became Preston and Olin Institute when Judge Robert M. Hudson of the 14th Circuit Court issued a charter Includes Ten Year Index for the school, designating the new name and giving it “collegiate powers.” — page 1 The On June 12, 1919, the VPI Board of Visitors unanimously elected Julian A. Burruss to succeed Joseph D. Eggleston as president of the Blacksburg, Virginia Smithfield Review institution. As Burruss began his tenure, veterans were returning from World War I, and America had begun to move toward a post-war world. Federal programs Studies in the history of the region west of the Blue Ridge for veterans gained wide support. The Nineteenth Amendment, giving women Volume 20, 2016 suffrage, gained ratification. — page 27 A Note from the Editors ........................................................................v According to Virginia Tech historian Duncan Lyle Kinnear, “he [Conrad] seemed Olin and Preston Institute and Preston and Olin Institute: The Early to have entered upon his task with great enthusiasm. Possessed as he was with a flair Years of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University: Part II for writing and a ‘tongue for speaking,’ this ex-confederate secret agent brought Clara B. Cox ..................................................................................1 a new dimension of excitement to the school and to the town of Blacksburg.” — page 47 Change Amidst Tradition: The First Two Years of the Burruss Administration at VPI “The Indian Road as agreed to at Lancaster, June the 30th, 1744. The present Faith Skiles .......................................................................................27 Waggon Road from Cohongoronto above Sherrando River, through the Counties of Frederick and Augusta .
    [Show full text]
  • Popular Sovereignty, Slavery in the Territories, and the South, 1785-1860
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2010 Popular sovereignty, slavery in the territories, and the South, 1785-1860 Robert Christopher Childers Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Childers, Robert Christopher, "Popular sovereignty, slavery in the territories, and the South, 1785-1860" (2010). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 1135. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/1135 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY, SLAVERY IN THE TERRITORIES, AND THE SOUTH, 1785-1860 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of History by Robert Christopher Childers B.S., B.S.E., Emporia State University, 2002 M.A., Emporia State University, 2004 May 2010 For my wife ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Writing history might seem a solitary task, but in truth it is a collaborative effort. Throughout my experience working on this project, I have engaged with fellow scholars whose help has made my work possible. Numerous archivists aided me in the search for sources. Working in the Southern Historical Collection at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill gave me access to the letters and writings of southern leaders and common people alike.
    [Show full text]
  • “What Are Marines For?” the United States Marine Corps
    “WHAT ARE MARINES FOR?” THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS IN THE CIVIL WAR ERA A Dissertation by MICHAEL EDWARD KRIVDO Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2011 Major Subject: History “What Are Marines For?” The United States Marine Corps in the Civil War Era Copyright 2011 Michael Edward Krivdo “WHAT ARE MARINES FOR?” THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS IN THE CIVIL WAR ERA A Dissertation by MICHAEL EDWARD KRIVDO Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, Joseph G. Dawson, III Committee Members, R. J. Q. Adams James C. Bradford Peter J. Hugill David Vaught Head of Department, Walter L. Buenger May 2011 Major Subject: History iii ABSTRACT “What Are Marines For?” The United States Marine Corps in the Civil War Era. (May 2011) Michael E. Krivdo, B.A., Texas A&M University; M.A., Texas A&M University Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Joseph G. Dawson, III This dissertation provides analysis on several areas of study related to the history of the United States Marine Corps in the Civil War Era. One element scrutinizes the efforts of Commandant Archibald Henderson to transform the Corps into a more nimble and professional organization. Henderson's initiatives are placed within the framework of the several fundamental changes that the U.S. Navy was undergoing as it worked to experiment with, acquire, and incorporate new naval technologies into its own operational concept.
    [Show full text]
  • William Preston and the Revolutionary Settlement
    Journal of Backcountry Studies EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the third and last installment of the author’s 1990 University of Maryland dissertation, directed by Professor Emory Evans, to be republished in JBS. Dr. Osborn is President of Pacific Union College. William Preston and the Revolutionary Settlement BY RICHARD OSBORN Patriot (1775-1778) Revolutions ultimately conclude with a large scale resolution in the major political, social, and economic issues raised by the upheaval. During the final two years of the American Revolution, William Preston struggled to anticipate and participate in the emerging American regime. For Preston, the American Revolution involved two challenges--Indians and Loyalists. The outcome of his struggles with both groups would help determine the results of the Revolution in Virginia. If Preston could keep the various Indian tribes subdued with minimal help from the rest of Virginia, then more Virginians would be free to join the American armies fighting the English. But if he was unsuccessful, Virginia would have to divert resources and manpower away from the broader colonial effort to its own protection. The other challenge represented an internal one. A large number of Loyalist neighbors continually tested Preston's abilities to forge a unified government on the frontier which could, in turn, challenge the Indians effectivel y and the British, if they brought the war to Virginia. In these struggles, he even had to prove he was a Patriot. Preston clearly placed his allegiance with the revolutionary movement when he joined with other freeholders from Fincastle County on January 20, 1775 to organize their local county committee in response to requests by the Continental Congress that such committees be established.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia's Attitude Toward Slavery and Secession
    VIRGINIA'S ATTITUDE TOWARD SLAVERY AND SECESSION VIRGINIA'S ATTITUDE TOWARD SLAVERY AND SECESSION BY BEVERLEY B. MUNFORD HUMANITATEM AMOREMQUE PATRIAE COLITK LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO 91 AND 93 FIFTH AVENUE, NEAV YORK LONDON, BOMBAY, AND CALCUTTA 1909 THE" N.tV.' YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY 480191 ASTOR, LENOX AN© TILDEN FOUNO*TlONi, R 1909 L Copyright, 1900 by Beverley B. Munford TO MY WIFE PREFACE This work is designed as a contribution to the volume of information from which the historian of the future will be able to prepare an impartial and comprehensive narra- tive of the American Civil War, or to speak more accurately —The American War of Secession. No attempt has been made to present the causes which precipitated the secession of the Cotton States, nor the states which subsequently adopted the same policy, except Virginia. Even in regard to that commonwealth the effort has been limited to the consideration of two features prominent in the public mind as constituting the most potent factors in determining her action—namely, devo- tion to slavery and hostility to the Union. That the people of Virginia were moved to secession by a selfish desire to extend or maintain the institution of slavery, or from hostility to the Union, are propositions seemingly at variance with their whole history and the interests which might naturally have controlled them in the hour of separation. Yet how widespread the impression and how frequent the suggestion from the pen of historian and publicist that the great and compelling motives which led Virginia to secede were a desire to extend slavery into the territories and to safeguard the institution within her own borders, coupled with a spirit of hostility to the Union and the ideals of liberty proclaimed by its founders.
    [Show full text]
  • Secession and the Senate
    CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER TEACHERTEACHER LESSONLEssON PLAN SecessioN aNd the SeNate Introduction In November 1860 a deeply divided nation teetered on the brink of a civil war. In December 1860 South Carolina became the first southern state to secede from the United States. Eventually ten additional southern states left the Union. What political issues caused these states to leave the Union? Did they have the right to withdraw from the Union? What actions did the Senate take in response to the seceding states? This activity engages students in analyzing primary sources, including a Senate Seating Chart from 1863, to determine what the Senate’s responses and actions were toward the seceding states. While intended for 8th grade students, the lesson can be adapted for other grade levels. 1 TEACHER LESSON PLAN: SECEssION AND THE SENATE CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER TEACHER LESSON PLAN National Standards U.S. History National Standards United States Era 5: Standard 1 – The Causes of the Civil War Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts, grade 8 Reading Informational Text 2, 3, 4 Speaking and Listening 1, 4 Learning Skills Reading, building vocabulary, analyzing documents, group discussions, presenting and internet research Essential Question What is secession? How did the secession of the southern states from the Union affect the Senate and how did members respond? Documents and Materials Needed • Vocabulary Building Worksheet • Background Information: Secession and the Senate • Document Analysis Worksheet • Newspaper Headline: South Carolina
    [Show full text]
  • Reviewing the Civil War and Reconstruction Center for Legislative Archives
    Reviewing the Civil War and Reconstruction Center for Legislative Archives Address of the Boston Female Anti-Slavery Society NAID 306639 From 1830 on, women organized politically to reform American society. The leading moral cause was abolishing slavery. “Sisters and Friends: As immortal souls, created by God to know and love him with all our hearts, and our neighbor as ourselves, we owe immediate obedience to his commands respecting the sinful system of Slavery, beneath which 2,500,000 of our Fellow-Immortals, children of the same country, are crushed, soul and body, in the extremity of degradation and agony.” July 13, 1836 The Boston Female Anti-Slavery Society was founded in 1832 as a female auxiliary to male abolition societies. The society created elaborate networks to print, distribute, and mail petitions against slavery. In conjunction with other female societies in major northern cities, they brought women to the forefront of politics. In 1836, an estimated 33,000 New England women signed petitions against the slave trade in the District of Columbia. The society declared this campaign an enormous success and vowed to leave, “no energy unemployed, no righteous means untried” in their ongoing fight to abolish slavery. www.archives.gov/legislative/resources Reviewing the Civil War and Reconstruction Center for Legislative Archives Judgment in the U.S. Supreme Court Case Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sanford NAID 301674 In 1857 the Supreme Court ruled that Americans of African ancestry had no constitutional rights. “The question is simply this: Can a Negro whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such, become entitled to all the rights and privileges and immunities guaranteed to the citizen?..
    [Show full text]
  • Antislavery Violence and Secession, October 1859
    ANTISLAVERY VIOLENCE AND SECESSION, OCTOBER 1859 – APRIL 1861 by DAVID JONATHAN WHITE GEORGE C. RABLE, COMMITTEE CHAIR LAWRENCE F. KOHL KARI FREDERICKSON HAROLD SELESKY DIANNE BRAGG A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2017 Copyright David Jonathan White 2017 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the collapse of southern Unionism between October 1859 and April 1861. This study argues that a series of events of violent antislavery and southern perceptions of northern support for them caused white southerners to rethink the value of the Union and their place in it. John Brown’s raid at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, and northern expressions of personal support for Brown brought the Union into question in white southern eyes. White southerners were shocked when Republican governors in northern states acted to protect members of John Brown’s organization from prosecution in Virginia. Southern states invested large sums of money in their militia forces, and explored laws to control potentially dangerous populations such as northern travelling salesmen, whites “tampering” with slaves, and free African-Americans. Many Republicans endorsed a book by Hinton Rowan Helper which southerners believed encouraged antislavery violence and a Senate committee investigated whether an antislavery conspiracy had existed before Harpers Ferry. In the summer of 1860, a series of unexplained fires in Texas exacerbated white southern fear. As the presidential election approached in 1860, white southerners hoped for northern voters to repudiate the Republicans. When northern voters did not, white southerners generally rejected the Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Moves Toward Secession and War
    RICE UNIVERSITY WITH HESITANT RESOLVE: ARKANSAS MOVES TOWARD SECESSION AND WAR BY JAMES WOODS A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF ARTS Dr.. Frank E. Vandiver Houston, Texas ABSTRACT This work surveys the history of ante-bellum Arkansas until the passage of the Ordinance of Secession on May 6, 186i. The first three chapters deal with the social, economic, and politicai development of the state prior to 1860. Arkansas experienced difficult, yet substantial .social and economic growth during the ame-belium era; its percentage of population increase outstripped five other frontier states in similar stages of development. Its growth was nevertheless hampered by the unsettling presence of the Indian territory on its western border, which helped to prolong a lawless stage. An unreliable transportation system and a ruinous banking policy also stalled Arkansas's economic progress. On the political scene a family dynasty controlled state politics from 1830 to 186u, a'situation without parallel throughout the ante-bellum South. A major part of this work concentrates upon Arkansas's politics from 1859 to 1861. In a most important siate election in 1860, the dynasty met defeat through an open revolt from within its ranks led by a shrewd and ambitious Congressman, Thomas Hindman. Hindman turned the contest into a class conflict, portraying the dynasty's leadership as "aristocrats" and "Bourbons." Because of Hindman's support, Arkansans chose its first governor not hand¬ picked by the dynasty. By this election the people handed gubernatorial power to an ineffectual political novice during a time oi great sectional crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • To Live and Die in Dixie: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Nationalism Jacob A
    Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Honors College at WKU Projects 2010 To Live and Die in Dixie: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Nationalism Jacob A. Glover Western Kentucky University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Glover, Jacob A., "To Live and Die in Dixie: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Nationalism" (2010). Honors College Capstone Experience/ Thesis Projects. Paper 267. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/267 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College Capstone Experience/ Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Copyright by Jacob A. Glover 2010 ABSTRACT Robert E. Lee is undeniably one of the most revered figures in American history, and yet despite the adoration awarded to the man over the years, surprisingly little scholarly research has dedicated itself to an inquiry into his nationalistic leanings during the four most important years of his life—the Civil War. In fact, Lee was a dedicated Confederate nationalist during his time in service to the Confederacy, and he remained so for the rest of his life, even after his surrender at Appomattox and the taking of an oath to regain his United States citizenship. Lee identified strongly with a Southern view of antebellum events, and his time in the Confederate army hardened him to the notion that the only practical reason for waging the Civil War was the establishment of an independent Southern nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Studies 06/03: Southern Secession ______Part One: Southern Secession A
    Social Studies 06/03: Southern Secession ___________________________________________________________________ Part One: Southern Secession A. Read the following two documents and highlight as many passages as you think are important Document One As early as 1858, the ongoing conflict between the North and the South over the issue of slavery led Southern leadership to discuss a unified separation from the United States. By 1860, the majority of the slave states were publicly threatening secession if the Republicans, the anti-slavery party, won the presidency. Following Republican Abraham Lincoln's victory over the divided Democratic Party in November 1860, South Carolina immediately initiated secession proceedings. On December 20, its legislature passed the "Ordinance of Secession," which declared that "the Union now subsisting between South Carolina and other states, under the name of the United States of America, is hereby dissolved." After the declaration, South Carolina set about seizing forts, arsenals, and other strategic locations within the state. Within six weeks, five more Southern states had followed South Carolina's lead. In February 1861, representatives from the six seceded states met in Montgomery, Alabama, to formally establish a unified government, which they named the Confederate States of America. On February 9, Jefferson Davis of Mississippi was elected the Confederacy's first president. By the time Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated in March 1861, Texas had joined the Confederacy, and federal troops held only Fort Sumter in South Carolina, Fort Pickens off the Florida coast, and a handful of minor outposts in the South. On April 12, 1861, the American Civil War began when Confederate shore batteries under General P.G.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Select List of Collection Processed by Craig Moore
    Select List of Collection Processed by Craig Moore Record Group 1, Colonial Government A Guide to the Colonial Papers, 1630-1778 Record Group 3, Office of the Governor A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Patrick Henry, 1776-1779 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Thomas Jefferson, 1779-1781 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Benjamin Harrison, 1781-1784 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Acting Governor William Fleming, 1781 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Thomas Nelson, Jr., 1781 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Patrick Henry, 1784-1786 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Edmund Randolph, 1786-1788 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Beverley Randolph, 1788-1791 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Henry Lee, 1791-1794 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Robert Brooke, 1794-1796 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor James Wood, 1796-1799 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor James Monroe, 1799-1802 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor John Page, 1802-1805 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor William H. Cabell, 1805-1808 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor John Tyler, 1808-1811 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor James Monroe, 1811 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor George William Smith, 1811-1812 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor James Barbour, 1812-1814 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Wilson Cary Nicholas, 1814-1816 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor James Patton Preston, 1816-1819 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor Thomas Mann Randolph, 1819-1822 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor James Pleasants, 1822-1825 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor John Tyler, 1825-1827 A Guide to the Executive Papers of Governor William B.
    [Show full text]