Yankee Myth # 5 - Race Relations In The Old South

[wncchester]

"Now...you boys may want too believe that race relations in the old South and thru the 1950's was OK and they were happy with their lot---That is not the truth."

William, don't think anyone has suggested that to be the "truth."  Fact is, few of us have ever been "happy with (our) lot".  Isn't that why we all struggle to improve for ourselves and our children.  But, there was much less antaganism between the races in those days because few blamed the other for their conditions.  Then, in 53,  came the anti-segregation in schools ruling by the SCOTUS and race relations have gone down hill ever since.

Following WWII, my father was a construction worked who followed new highway construction across much of  Ala, Ga, Fla, and Miss.   We lived mostly in very small towns and moved frequently until 1958.  I attended many poor southern schools, three and four per school year.  White schools were, as a rule, as dilapidated and run down as the black schools, no real differnce I could see. 

The last county I lived in south Ga had a really nice new brick school with new text books, central heating and a nice football field.  It wasn't white.  Our school was a sagging old wood structure, books were dilapidated and the steel framed football field stands were eventually declared unsafe above the third tier.  That was at the time the SCOTUS declared that seperate schools were not equal; they sure got that part right but both groups were actually learning, unlike today.  We would have LOVED to attend their school, especially when it was cold!

As a kid in the late 40s and 50s each Saturday afternoon would have a long string of elementry and jr. high kids walking as much as a couple of miles into town to see the latest double-feature cowboy movies (for $.15).  In some towns white kids walked through black parts of town, in others it was reversed.  In all those years, I NEVER saw, or even heard of, a single insidence of improper behavior between the kids of either group.   And, after some 60 years of liberal social engineering, we dare not let kids of either group go through the black sections.  No, we weren't "friends" then but we all felt perfectly safe walking back home alone after sun down. Today, after 60 years of liberal social enginnering, we still aren't friends!  So, how have starry eyed, forced liberal policies advanced racial relations thus far?

Was life "bad" for blacks in the 50s and before?  Maybe so.  Is it bad today?  For sure!  But I ask, in which period is. or was, our respective races actually happier with our lots in life in spite of difficulties, then or now?  I have never gotten a liberal to admit that his airy dreams and forced "solutions" to make things all better always fail.  Instead, they just want to expand their illusions more, give away more money and apolgize for living, remaining streadfastly unwilling to accept they are wrong in it all, to the core.

I can't say you don't have valid evidence to back up what you write but it sure makes me wonder why things were so different in the areas you seem familar with.  ?? 

(PS, I attemped the first test to see if I qualify for the heart experment last Wed, the mega-bucks machine failed so I will try again Thursday.) 

[ironfoot]

"Also, did not Lee FREE his slaves (all of them) several years BEFORE the war?
I grew up in the 50s and 60s."

This article helps illistrate Lee's pro slavery views. If the south had won, slavery would have expanded and continued into the twentieth century.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070624/2lee.htm

Here is a quote:

"Lee was considered a hard taskmaster. He also started hiring slaves to other families, sending them away, and breaking up families that had been together on the estate for generations. The slaves resented him, were terrified they would never be freed, and they lost all respect for him. There were many runaways, and at one point several slaves jumped him, claiming they were as free as he. Lee ordered these men to be severely whipped."

 

[Ga.windbreak]

ironfoot,

In the book that this information came from is misquoted by U.S.News. Having read the book, thanks to SouthernByGrace, there was only one slave that was whipped, not several. He was whipped, not for saying anything to RE Lee, because he and 3 others ran away and were caught and brought back. Was it harsh, yes, but legal in those days. Was Lee wrong for having it done, yes of course, but every man that has ever used a whip for any purpose is wrong be it on a person or anyother being. My guess is that just maybe 70% of the male and 50% of the female population, of this world, is therefore guilty of cruelty of some sort or another.

[ironfoot]

"Through his correspondence, Lee comes across as a man thoroughly steeped in the racism and egocentrism of his time. He thought blacks inferior and slavery as God’s painful discipline to bring them eventually to the Anglo-Saxon level. Lee came into the ownership of a number of slaves upon the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis in the 1850s. Custis was the stepson of George Washington. Parke Custis had promised his slaves their freedom upon his death. Lee refused to honor this promise; instead, he rented out many of his slaves to other plantations. He broke up slave families. He also had runaways severely whipped. Lee never thought blacks could reach equality. After the war, he opposed the education of freedman. While president of Washington College, he did little to assuage the violence of his students toward freedmen."


http://historicaltextarchive.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=767

[Ga.windbreak]

So you are using Mr Jeffery B. Howell's opinion of the Book to state your case. It really would be better to read it, don't you think, to see if Mr. Howell is worthy of your trust? He somehow forgets the Will as a most important fact.

Well there you go, you see, The Will which is the fact of this matter, states that the slaves must be given their freedom no later than 5 years from the death of Mr. Curtis. RE Lee was Mr. Curtis' Son in Law and he was the executor of the will.

As I said before, of course it seems you don't believe it, in the book the author says that there was no proof that any other beatings took place (and she sure did try and find some) except that one time but that beating did take place. This author, by the way, goes out of her way to paint RE Lee as a unwilling master who dislikes having to deal with the slaves or their problems and that he considers them beneath him. Yet there are at least two occasions in the book during the war and after their freedom that, she reports, Lee comes to their aid because others are mistreating them. Just how do you explain that?

Did Curtis say to the slaves that they would be set free at his death, there is no proof of that, other than the slaves saying so. The will disputes their claim and if Mr. Curtis wanted to free them at his death he surely could have done so in the will, could he not? You may post any source you like but if its not the will then I think you are going on someones opinion and not the truth. Of course you are free to believe whatever you chose to believe. Its a really good book you just might want to read it.

Then, of course, there is this, from RE Lee's personal servant:

http://www.confederatecolonel.com/quotes/quotes.shtml


"I was raised by one of the greatest men in the world. There was never one born of a woman greater than Gen. Robert E. Lee, according to my judgment. All of his servants were set free ten years before the war, but all remained on the plantation until after the surrender."
William Mack Lee (Robert E. Lee's Black servant)

Of course we are some 150 years down the road and each of us will believe what he or she will, I tend to put more stock in the writings of the people who were there rather than some news article which distorts the truth. I'm thinking it would be easy enough to get a copy of the will and see what it says but judges are pretty strict about following the letter of the law, don't you think? Yet you may believe what you will.

[SouthernByGrace]

"Through his correspondence, Lee comes across as a man thoroughly steeped in the racism and egocentrism of his time.

ironfoot, just which correspondence would that be? I have Much of that correspondence in my hand, as does Ga.windbreak, and it in no way suggests Lee was "steeped in the racism and egocentrism of his time."

You are like MOST Northerners, you look at this as if it were happening today. In Lee's time, Almost EVERY white man in America, North AND South,  felt blacks were inferior. You act like Lee was one of a very small minority, thereby making him some kind of evil human being. Far from it, my friend! If you would look at this "correspondence" for yourself, as GW suggests, you might just be surprised at your OWN conclusions, and not rely on a Yankee who is trying to perpetuate the myth that "all Southerners are evil because of slavery." It might behoove you to actually read some of the history for yourself and you will see that our "scholarly" friends from the North might just be trying to blow a smoke screen your way.
What for, you ask? If you haven't figured it out yet, let me lay it out for you...

Yankees have villainized Southerners since the days of the War, portraying us as something less than human, all because of slavery. And they do this, even today, to cover up the FACT that slavery existed in the North DURING the War, and UNTIL the 13th Amendment freed them. If you want somebody to villainize and have a good reason for it, look up Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. READ it for yourself. Don't rely on a school teacher who has never even looked at it, let alone Read it, to teach you about it. Tell me how many slaves it freed, and where!

Question... How many Southern States EVER passed a law preventing Free blacks from living in their jurisdictions?
Answer..... NONE!!!
How many Northern States passed such laws? Counting the west coast states of Washington and Oregon, 18 non-Southern states passed anti free black laws.

You dare to cast aspersions on Robert E. Lee, and most Southerners, without the benefit of READING the "correspondence" for yourself. You have no idea of the circumstances surrounding the beating of the ONLY slave to be so punished while in the care of Lee. I assure you, it was not simply because he ran away, others did too, yet they were not punished. But then you probably think Rodney King should've been treated to tea and crumpets.

Have you ever read Custis' will?   I HAVE ! 
As a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, I had the distict pleasure of being allowed to read a copy of the will at a reenactment a few months ago. Nowhere in the will did it state that Custis' slaves were to be freed upon his death. It actually stated that the slaves were to be freed within five years, not immediately. Robert E. Lee was actually forbidden by the will to ever sell any of the slaves. How could he "break up families" if he couldn't sell them? He leased their services, which he owned, to neighboring farms. They were never there permanently, and were required to return to Arlington regularly. There is no documentation that Lee broke up any slave families.

Why is it that Yankees always have preconceived ideas of Southern life and culture? Oh yeah, they've been tought the Yankee Myth for 150 years. I guess old habits are hard to break.

SBG

DEO VINDICE

[SouthernByGrace]

Part 5

December 9, 1889

 

Newspaper Headlines All Over The South Read:

PRESIDENT DAVIS IS DEAD !!

   On December 8, 1889, in New Orleans, Jefferson Davis died. As the news flashed over the South, telegrams and letters began to pour in offering the sympathies of many people. One such telegram was from the old Davis family plantation signed by 13 people which read, "We, the old servants and tenants of our beloved master, Honorable Jefferson Davis, have cause to mingle our tears over his death, who was always so kind and thoughtful of our peace and happiness. We extend to you our humble sympathy." Thornton Montgomery, a black man whom Jefferson Davis had helped educate, sent the following message from his home in Christine, North Dakota: "I have watched with deep interest and solicitude the illness of Mr. Davis... and I had hoped that with his great will power to sustain him he would recover... I appreciate your great loss, and my heart goes out to you in this hour of your deepest affliction..."
   After Davis' death, on the last trip the body of the beloved President was accompanied by his last body servant, Robert Brown. Brown was seen weeping uncontrollably at the outpouring of love that was displayed for his former master.
   Yes, the life and death of President Jefferson Davis displays to all who are open-minded enough to look at how different the relationship between slave and master actually was, as apposed to the way in which it is far too often depicted. But yet, the Abolitionist cult still refuses to admit they could be wrong about the South, and they continue their vicious attacks against anything Southern. They quickly tell us, to this day, that these blacks, who displayed love for Davis or anything Southern, were only lying about their true feelings in order to get ahead or to keep from being brutalized by the "rednecks." For example, most Northerners will try to tell you that the only reason Robert Brown cried for Jefferson Davis was because, as a black man, he had to do so to keep from being abused by white Southerners!! What they conveniently overlook is the fact that Brown could have just disappeared after Yankee-induced freedom, but he didn't! He did not have to maintain a relationship with the Davis family, but he did! Look at the warm letter of condolence from Thornton Montgomery, a black man living in North Dakota. Does anyone think that a black man living in N.D. would fear white Southerners?!? North Dakota is not exactly a Southern State! If anything, Mr. Montgomery would have incurred the wrath of the white community of that Northern state by saying positive things about Jefferson Davis. Yet, Northerners still tell us that these blacks were not sincere in their display of affection for Jefferson Davis OR the South!

   For those foolish enough to believe such a ridiculously stupid Yankee Myth, we only need to consider the life and actions of two black men who were part of the Reconstruction government of the South...
That will be up next time, in Part 6 of Race Relations In The Old South.
Y'all Come, ya hear?

DEO VINDICE

[SouthernByGrace]

PART 6

Blacks Defend The South

Ex-Slave Protects His White Family

   The following account is taken from the Turnley family history, published by the family of Rick Formby of Alabama in 1976. Sam Turnley was a slave of the Turnley family of Jacksonville, Alabama. As Sherman's army marched toward Atlanta, Georgia, Sam deserted the Turnleys and joined the Yankee army. Here is how the story is reported in the Turnley family history:

A man named Sam was given to Mrs. Turnley by her father, Benjamin Isbell, at the time of her marriage. For a time he worked as a blacksmith in Rome, and when Sherman's army came, Sam joined them and marched with a brigade toward Jacksonville, where he had lived with the Turnleys. He asked to see the General, and insisted, until he was finally permitted to see the General. He told him he had to have a squad of soldiers to protect his mistress. When the General told him he was free and no longer had a mistress, Sam insisted. He had seen what happened when soldiers arrived in new territory. The result was that the Turnley family, the home, livestock, silver, crops, all were protected.
   After the War Sam became a member of the State Legislature. He visited Grandmothers Isbell and Turnley in Chattanooga,... went into the kitchen to eat, thanked his former mistress, and left to make his way to Montgomery to meet with the convening Legislature.

Here we have an account of a slave who ran away to join the Union army, but nevertheless still had a strong desire to protect his "people." Even after the war, as a black member of the Alabama Legislature, he continued to visit his old mistress. Can anybody believe otherwise than this man was acting out of love and respect for his people?


Black Representative Defends Dixie

   The sincere respect that many black people had for their "white folks" was clearly displayed by a black Republican in 1890. Rep. John F. Harris was a legislator from Washington County, Mississippi. According to the 1870 census Harris was from Virginia and could read and write. While a member of the State House of Representatives, he had an opportunity to vote for a resolution to erect a monument to the Confederate soldiers of Mississippi. Now, if he were to be guided by the Abolitionist view of the South, we would have to believe that this elected black official from Mississippi would take this opportunity to vote against such a resolution. Surely a black man from the South, having been a slave before Yankee-induced freedom, would not want to pay homage to Confederate veterans. But according to the "Journal of House of Representatives State of Mississippi," Rep. Harris voted FOR S.B. NO. 25, "An act for the benefit of the Confederate Monument, now in process of erection on the Capital Square, Jackson, Mississippi." This bill was passed by a vote of 57 yeas to 41 nays, with Rep. Harris, a black man, voting with the majority. Not only did Harris vote for the funding of a Confederate Monument, but also spoke eloquently for passage of that bill. His speech was reprinted in the Daily Clarion-Ledger, Jackson, Mississippi, on Feb. 23, 1890, as follows:   

Mr. Speaker! I have arisen here in my place to offer a few words on the bill. I have come from a sick bed... Perhaps it was not prudent for me to come. But, Sir, I could not rest quietly in my room without contributing a few remarks of my own. I was sorry to here the speech of the young gentleman (a white man) from Marshall County. I am sorry that ANY son of a soldier should go on record as apposed to the erection of a monument in honor of the brave dead. And, Sir, I am convinced that had he seen what I saw at Seven Pines and in the Seven Days' fighting around Richmond, the battlefield covered with the mangled forms of those who fought for their country and for their country's honor, he would not have made that speech.
   When the news came that the South had been invaded, those men went forth to fight for what they believed, and they made no requests for monuments... But they died, and their virtues should be remembered. Sir, I went with them. I too, wore the gray, the same color my master wore. We stayed four long years, and if that war had gone on til now I would have been there yet. I want to honor those brave men who died for their convictions. When my mother died I was a boy. Who, Sir, then acted the part of a mother to the orphaned slave boy, but my 'old missus' ? Were she living now or could speak to me from those high realms where are gathered the sainted dead, she would tell me to vote for this bill. And, Sir, I shall vote for it. I want it known to all the world that my vote is given in favor of the bill to erect a monument in honor of the Confederate dead.

  What a scene to have witnessed!!! A former Confederate Soldier and an elected black official of Mississippi lecturing a white representative and the son of a Confederate veteran on the duties one generation has for defending the TRUTH about the gallant deeds of another generation. Not only did Rep. Harris vote FOR funding the Confederate monument, but ALL six black Republicans voted with Harris on this matter!
   On the next day, the House Republicans (six black men) presented the Democratic speaker with a silver set in honor of the warm working relationship they had with the speaker and with other Democrats. In his presentation, Rep. Moore stated;

I was born in Mississippi, but was raised in a Northern State; associations there led me to regard the Southern white men as dire foes to the Negroes, but receiving such cordial and unprejudiced association upon this floor (House of Representatives) by the entire Democratic party here these tibidus suspicions have been eliminated from the bosoms of this feeble six and for them I am authorized to speak. You are our best friends;... This has been termed as the Jeff Davis Legislature possibly because the republicans have voted for your Confederate Monument Bill... In tendering you this, we tender a grateful hand to every Democratic member, for you have shown to be our friends, not our enemies.

   Here we see the spokesman for the six black Republicans of the Mississippi House of Representatives speaking about the warm relationship they enjoyed with the white representatives and about their unanimous vote for the Confederate monument. Indeed, the relationship between the black and white people of the South was much better than many would have us believe. I have called upon first-hand accounts of black people who lived during the war and after the war to give us some insight into the nature of slavery and of life in the Old South. Yet there are accounts that will seem even more shattering to those who still see nothing but bullwhips and lynchings down South.

Join me next time for the final installments, Part 7 of Race Relations in the Old South, and learn of a Georgia slave who defends Slavery, a slave preacher who defends his master, and finally, we'll learn about Bill Yopp, a former slave and Confederate soldier. This one will hit home with all of us Georgia Boys, because it happens so close to home.

[Ga.windbreak]

Great post SBG and I can't wait to see what you write about Bill, hope you post some pictures, also.

[jager]

   
   When I was growing up in Oklahoma in the 40's through the 60's, I thought I was a pretty "non-biased" individual regarding race, but later found I had some attitudes that changed by associations, some good and some bad. My introduction to "integration" was a total of three "black" students put in our junior high class when I was 12. While most of the problems of race were related to parents who did not want them there, for whatever reason, those of us that knew them didn't have a problem with their presence or participation in school activities. They were given no special previleges, while they were expected to perform and adhere to the rules like the rest of us. We heard about a lot of "race problems" via the news than we ever saw in real life and thought those places, like L.A. and N.Y., must be really bad places to live. A few blacks had businesses in an adjoining town, but most that worked in our town were involved in agricultural jobs. Those that hired blacks, involved in farming and ranching, regarded their work ethics as being comparable as whites doing the same job. I probably have a more "western" viewpoint regarding race relations than a "southern" or "northern" person and a completly different point of view regarding the American Indian, of whom I knew many.  I do believe most of our "prejudices" are taught by people with an agenda, otherwise we tend to assimilate a bias about an individual person from interaction and experiences. Slavery did not start with skin color, but was perpetuated by it when it became a predominately "black" skin based market. I cannot find where "Slave Ships" were ever owned by the south, but were certainly found in the "Yankee Clipper" fleet who purchased the cheapest "merchandise" available. 
 
    I had a Grandfather who came from Tennessee as a young man (died 1964), whose father fought for the South in the War between the States, and whose family actually owned a slave before the war broke out. He used to tell us stories about his life on the river and relate stories of his family and the war from his father's perspective. In fact, he related that because of the tough economic times his father had to sell their slave, "Old Jess",  who was like part of their family, but who they were no longer able to afford to feed (family grew too fast). It seems that Jess ran away from his new "master" and came back because he wasn't treated as well by his new "employer". (This fact, my Grandfather seemed to take great pride in with some amusement.)
 
    My Grandfather didn't think too much of the KKK by the 1930's, even though he was asked to join. He remarked once that he thought it rather ridiculous that grown men would put a sheet over their head to hide their identity when everyone in his small town knew who he was, who he was trying to intimidate, and where he met with his "associates". My Grandfather said he wasn't impressed or intimated, but thought the KKK had "outlived" their usefulness as "vigilantes" after the "lawless reconstruction" era and became something other than was intended (Nathan Forrest must have thought the same in his later years).  Missouri had a similar vigilante group called the "Baldknobbers".
   
   While I would no longer try to justify slavery then I would abortion, our history books portray it in such a way that almost every family had a slave or they "aided and abetted" the institution of slavery. This "teaching" or dissemination of misinformation is not based on fact. Most Southern Generals and Confederate leaders were against it and expected it to "wither away" once the South became more industrialized. Most Southern property owners did not own slaves prior to the war, and even less owned more than 1 or 2, while some Northerners owned slaves to include General Grant. Secession was based on far more valid reasons than a book written in 1854 (Uncle Tom's Cabin, 7 years before the war) or the Dred Scott case, which was decided by a Federal court before the war in favor of slave ownership. The "abolitionist" raids certainly tried to make it the main issue, with Northern politicians making John Brown a "martyr" after he was hung.  Even eulogizing Brown, the "cold blooded murderer" that he was, to curry political favor did not inflame a population to war.  Lincoln wanted no part of the abolitionist's rhetoric to add to what was to be a very close election (won by "splitting the vote"). No politician at that time, North or South, thought a war would be fought over slavery; no country ever fought for that reason.  (However, most politicians, on both sides of the issues, knew it might be fought over "tariffs", land apportionment, and unfair taxation!) Slavery was not a "rallying cry" used by Union soldiers to inspire a "charge", instead a "forced draft" by the Union was used to "coerce" soldiers to fight their Southern "brothers"; a "cause" was lacking in the first years of the war.
   
   I once taught NROTC Naval history courses at a major northern university for a number of years and was amazed at the reaction of my students when I would announce that the so called Civil War was not caused by the slavery issue and that Lincoln was vehemently opposed to making it an issue until midway through the conflict. (They had much the same reaction when I described "reconstruction" from a more "southern" view, rather than the "peaceful reconstruction" period they had been previously taught.) Consider, if you will, that most people in public schools are taught for 12 years that the "Civil War" was fought because of this "noble" slavery issue rather than "hard core" economic and political reasons.  Believing the slavery "rhetoric" certainly gives one the "high road", but I wonder if it would really make us go to war with ourselves even today?  While most southerners expected the North to attack, the question for the North was what was going to be the moral reason to attack. Would it be Ft. Sumter (there was only one killed when the canon blew up)? Make the South come back into the Union? Or, because the South might attack them?  (Truth was, the South seceded on constitutional grounds, without malice, to form its own government.)  None of these initial reasons made much sense to "spill blood". However, the South could easily make the case that they must protect their "homeland" from the Northern "aggressors", even if the initial battles did not devastate the civilian population. (Sherman and Sheridan changed that situation with their "scorched earth" policies.)
   
   I found that, while for the most part, people that populated northern states (after a career in the military) were just as charitable and good natured as folks in the south, they were more friendly to their own "kind" with the same "up bringing", heritage, and culture (German, Scandinavian, Norwegian, etc.) as people in the south with theirs. Their attitudes, with regard to someone with a "southern" Alabama accent, was not unlike those in the South who incounter a "Yankee"  with a New York accent. However, blacks were foreign to their society and region, where blacks encompassed less than 2% of the total population in most northern midwestern states. Blacks for the most part, did not comprise the upper and middle upper classes associated with the "movers and shakers" in society at that time. People from the northern university where I worked tended to refer to blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc. as "those people", which I thought rather bigoted in itself. To make the situation worse, they would give special privileges to blacks, over all races, with free "room and board", lower test scores for admittance, special grants (the Navy, to its credit, did not). Many blacks resented being thought of as "stupid", "lazy", and "helpless" by people who had never lived or worked with them.  Whites recruiting blacks usually thought they were really good athletes, but rarely thought of them as future business people, doctors, engineers, or lawyers to remain in their state. This situation has been favorably evolving, no thanks to many black "leaders" who champion "victimization" rather than performance and skills. I think the South (IMO) has promoted this "economic ownership" in better ways than in the North where in places like Atlanta (one example), blacks operate successful businesses that cater to blacks and whites. (They still, however, vote their race rather than issues!)
   
   I went to college with many whites from the "deep south" and served with many more in the service and saw little difference in the socio/economic status of them related to people from the north. You had just as many "blue bloods" with whom could recite their southern linage back to Washington or Lee as the "Yankees" could claim kinship to  the Vanderbilt's or Kennedy's while denigrating any and all of those below their economic status regardless of where they were from. (Even Lee was said to curry more favor with his beloved "Virginians" than with a person from South Carolina like Wad Hampton, and "West Pointers" were valued above the "common" Officer.) I have never found such "smart" people as those who went to an "Ivy League" school who regarded those who did not as "under privileged "red necks" . In other words, the "elite" come in many forms and many accents.
   
   I believe that black relationships in the south were demonized by those who never lived in the south (like Harriet Beecher Stowe).  For those that  needed a "smoking gun" to justify a war that had no justification from the outset of invading the south, slavery was the "unassailable" issue that made the north the "crusader" of a "holy war" to save "mankind", and they found an "ignorant" (however, intelligent) population who accepted any propaganda about a culture they knew little about. If the south could have divested themselves of this "plague" called slavery it would have taken the "sails" out of the north's "indignation".  Slavery would probably have died a quick death if the "cotton gin" (Eli Whitney's invention) hadn't provided higher production of a staple requiring massive amounts of labor to harvest its finished product. The total slavery cost was bankrupting the owners before the war began.  Not only was the owner to provided food, clothing, and shelter for another human being, he had to provide health care for his "investment" or it was worthless in the field or on the market. The "victors" of that war were never able to provide any of these things adequately while providing his freedom.  The northern "victor" ended up relinquishing responsibility for those he claimed to free without providing the tools, skills, or a means of survival with the slave's new found liberties.  Reconstruction made sure slavery or a good economy could not be reestablished for decades, which devalued the freed slave even more in a society who had no room for the uneducated and no tolerance for his poverty.   (LBJ came along 100 years later and resurrected slavery by instituting the "Great Society" and the "Welfare" program that put blacks and "impoverished" whites in an economic "quagmire" of stagnation.)  Politicians will do anything for a vote to remain in power .
 
    While individual cases can be made for the "cruel master", "noble master", or "genius slave", the fact that individual cases do not confirm a culture that belies the idea that slave owners kept their "possession" under "lock and key" and had to "whip" them daily in order motivate them to work.  Mistreating a slave was a sure way of insuring economic failure. While a harmonious working relationship that was very personal may seem "farfetched" to some, most farming communities in the north should identify with the need to treat their "off spring" with kindness in order to "keep them down on the farm". It is no wonder that many slaves identified with the farm or "plantation" rather than the "abolitionist".  The abolitionist wanted to take away their security and put them in a foreign environment to compete with the hoard of "foreigners" seeking work in the north. The Irish, who had finally been allowed economic access, certainly didn't want any part of competition from "freed" slaves (the New York riots during the war put many Irish in an early grave). It could be argued that "northern sweat shops" were far worse than slavery with less "re-numeration" for food, clothing, and shelter than he received by the owner and his family. (Slavery in any form is a "bane" on humanity.)
 
    Another excellent book with an different historical perspective is: "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War" by H. W. Crocker III.
    I hope I have not gotten too far off topic, for I have enjoyed the "read" and discussion of a very interesting topic and perspective by GA, et.al on historical events from the "real" southerner's viewpoint.

[Ga.windbreak]

jager - Very well said and as "on topic" as any post I've seen.

[SouthernByGrace]

PART 7

Depending on the response to this post, this will be the final installment in this Yankee Myth, and perhaps the entire series. This myth has turned out to be the most in-depth of all the ones covered here on GBO. I feel that this is due, in large part, to the sensitivity of the issue, making it necessary to cover it so thoroughly. As I said in the beginning of this thread, no other issue in American History has been abused more than the history of African servitude. I still stand by those words, and I challenge anyone reading this series to refute them, especially given the examples posted here.

Part 7 will cover three separate topics directly relating to Race Relations In The Old South. Each topic, being somewhat short in and of itself, will help to further demonstrate just how wrong the North has been about the South in this subject area. Anyone seeking the reality of the events of 1861 - 1865 and beyond should not overlook this very important part of our history.

GEORGIA SLAVE DEFENDS SLAVERY

   In 1861, a slave named Harrison Berry wrote and published a pamphlet entitled "Slavery and Abolitionism, as Viewed by a Georgia Slave." This statement flies in the face of the currently held opinion about slavery. First, the idea that a slave could read and write in 1861 is something that most abolitionists conveniently overlook. Second, the very idea that a slave, literate or not, would freely defend the system of African servitude strikes at the heart of a very sacred Yankee myth. Yet, here we have, in black and white, the very words of a slave as he attacks "fanatical abolitionists."
   Berry's story is unique and inspirational. Harrison Berry was born a slave in Jones County, Georgia, in November 1816 as the property of David Berry. When his master's daughter married S.W. Price, Harrison Berry was given to her as a wedding gift. At the age of ten, Harrison began working in the law offices of John V. Berry, one of David Berry's sons. "These employments were such as to leave a good deal of time at his own disposal, which he was induced to improve in learning to read and write." As he grew up, he was trained as a shoemaker, and spent much time, with the assistance of the berry family, in improving his reading ability.

   He was induced to write upon the subject of Slavery from a firm conviction that Abolitionist agitators are the worst enemies of the slave, and from the settled opinion that slavery is according to Divine Law. He believes, furthermore, that Southern slaves are in a much better condition than if they had remained in their native land,  and this opinion has been formed after a fair and impartial examination of the subject in the light of history, philosophy, and religion.

Thus wrote H.C. Hornaday in the introduction to Berry's pamphlet on slavery.

   In his own words, Berry tells the world that "... I am a Slave, and have been all my life, and therefore, claim the opportunity, at least, of knowing what Slavery is, and what it is not." Berry goes on to state that he was moved to write upon the subject of the agitation for the abolition of slavery by watching how the "evil dangerous and highly detrimental" attacks by the Abolitionists were hurting the very people they pretended to help. He makes it clear that he is writing his pamphlet for the Northern Abolitionists who did not understand the nature of Southern Slavery. Berry's defense of the South echoed other Southern voices raised during the war. After the war, he became a prominent preacher and continued to write on subjects such as theology.

SLAVE PREACHER DEFENDS HIS MASTER

   From Richmond, Virginia, comes the story of one of the South's greatest preachers. Without the benefit of formal training the Rev. John Jasper made his impression on the world not as a political activist, or a civil rights leader, but as a proven warrior of the Christian Church.
   Jasper was born a slave in Virginia. For many years as a young man he felt the call to be a Christian. His master, Samuel Hargrove, whom he called "Mars Sam," was a good Christian man and did his utmost to encourage his slaves in Christian ways. During his life as a preacher, Rev. Jasper had only kind and gracious comments about his former master. He gave this account of how his master responded to the news of his giving his life to the Lord:

Little aft'r I hear Mars Sam tell de overseer he want to see Jasper. Mars Sam was a good man; he was a Baptis', an' one of de old Fust Church down here, an' I was glad when I hear Mars Sam want to see me. "John, what was de matter out dar jes' now?" ... I sez to him: "Mars Sam, ever since the fourth of July I been cryin' after de Lord, six long weeks, an' jes' now out dar, God tuk my sins away, an' set my feet on a rock... de fires broke out in my soul, an' I jes' let go one shout to de glory of my Saviour."
   "John, I believe dat way myself. I luv de Saviour dat you have jes' foun', an' I want to tell you dat I do'n complain 'cause you made de noise jes' now as you did." He walk over to me an' give me his han', an' he say: "John, I wish you mighty well. Your Saviour is mine an' we are bruthers in de Lord." ...Mars Sam well know de good he dun me.

   During the war, and while John Jasper was still alive, he could often be found at the Confederate hospitals in Richmond, preaching to the sick and wounded Confederate soldiers. Is it any wonder that after the war his church was often filled with both black and white people who came to hear this dynamic preacher?
   The warm and cordial relations between John Jasper and his master lasted until Sam's death. Even after the war, Jasper would often tell the story of his Christian master from the pulpit of his church.
   Jasper often thought of his old master as he preached. His feelings for his former master were well stated when he said:

Oft'n as I preach I feel that I'm doin' what my old marster tol' me to do. If he was here now I think he would lif' up dem kin' black eyes of his, an' say: "Dat's right, John; still tellin' it; fly like de angel, an' wherever yo go carry de Gospel to de people." Farwell, my ol' marster, when I lan' in de heav'nly city, I'll call at your mansion...

   The story of the Reverend John Jasper stands out as a clear indictment of the falsehood told about the South and its system of African servitude. The close relationship between black Christians such as John Jasper, and white Christians such as Samuel Hargrove, was not unusual in the Old South. The warm relations between black and white people are manifested in stories all across the South. The history of the Palestine Baptist Church, Simpson County, Mississippi, relates such a story. The Palestine Baptist Church was organized in 1786 (one year before the United States Constitution was ratified) by twelve men, eleven white and one black. The church has served the community from that date to the present. In 1858 the church had 175 members, 100 white and 75 black. These black members were a vital part of the ongoing evangelical work of the church. The significance of the black members of the church is obvious: the first Baptist church west of the Mississippi River, for example, was established in Louisiana by Joseph Wills, a black preacher. Some historians have taken note of this close relation between the Christians of the two races and the increasing number of black church members in the Old South.

The Baptists did this less by deliberate missionary efforts than by accepting Negro members on a basis of Christian Brotherhood that seems strange to the 20th century South. There were many instances where gifted Negroes were allowed to preach to congregations of both races. 

   These stories of a warm and close relationship between black and white people in the Old South are Not isolated stories. There are Many others.

BILL YOPP, FORMER SLAVE AND CONFEDERATE SOLDIER

   Bill Yopp was born a slave in Laurens County, Georgia, near Dublin. As a young man he and Thomas Yopp played and grew up together. When war broke out, Thomas Yopp volunteered in Company H, Fourteenth Georgia Regiment. Bill asked and received permission to go with his master to the war. Bill served his master as cook and assisted him during sickness and when his master was wounded.
   As the war progressed, Thomas Yopp was promoted to rank of captain of his company. Capt. Yopp and Bill were sent to what is now West Virginia, where Bill was often between the lines of the Confederates and United States Armies. Had bill wanted to run away from Capt. Yopp and the Confederate army he could have done so without any problem, but as Bill said, "I had no inclination to go to the Union side, as I did not know the Union soldiers and I did know the Confederate soldiers, and I believed then as now, tried and true friends are better than friends you do not know." Note how Bill, the slave of a Confederate soldier, describes the Confederate soldiers as "tried and true friends."
   Even after Yankee-induced freedom, Bill and Many other ex-slaves stayed loyal to their former masters. During this time many former masters were worse off than the freed slaves. Many such white people were protected and fed by their former slaves. In the story of Bill Yopp an author relates how Bill and other ex-slaves cared for their former masters:

...During the transition period, many of the ex-slaves, Bill among them, supplied the white families with freewill offerings of such supplies as they had. In some plantations for a year or more this writer knows of instances where negroes brought food each Saturday to the families of their former owners.
Charles W. Hampton, Bill Yopp, Narrative of a Slave (DeKalb Litho and Advertising, Avondale Estates, GA: 1969), p.10

Bill Yopp

   Just before the outbreak of World War I, Capt. Yopp was admitted to the Confederate Soldiers' Home in Atlanta, Georgia. Bill made many visits to Capt. Yopp and all the old soldiers at the home. At Christmas, Bill would visit the home and would bring gifts of food and money to the residents. In fact, Bill would regularly be seen in and around Atlanta shining shoes for ten cents. He soon earned the nickname "Ten Cent Bill." He earned enough money shining shoes that, before long, he had more money than the men whose shoes he was shining. That Christmas, Bill approached the head of the soldiers' home and told him of his offer to give the money to the veterans. The administrator assisted Bill in placing the money into envelopes to be given out to the veterans. When they opened their envelopes, each veteran found inside three crisp $1.00 bills, a hefty sum at that time. Afterword, Bill was taken into the chapel, where he gave a speech to the veterans. The Confederate veterans were so overwhelmed by Bill's generosity that in honor of his affection and gifts to them, the Confederate veterans had a medal struck and presented it to Bill. By a unanimous vote, the board of trustees offered Bill a permanent residence at the Confederate Soldiers' Home.
   

Above: Bill Yopp, former slave and Confederate veteran, visiting his former master and lifelong friend, Captain Thomas Yopp, at the Confederate Veterans Home in Atlanta. Bill brought gifts not only to his former master (as shown here) but also to all the elderly Confederate veterans in residence there.

   Bill Yopp, former slave, Confederate veteran, and friend of the old soldiers of the South, died on June 3, 1936, and was buried in the Confederate Cemetery in Marietta, Georgia. It is this author's humble opinion that a more deserving Southern Gentleman and true Confederate would be hard, if not impossible, to find.

[Ga.windbreak]

A little more on Mr. "Ten Cent" Bill.

http://www.charlesrpittman.com/samples.html

[wncchester]

I sadly observe all the information it the posts above is known by supposed scholarly "historians", or could easily be known if they wanted to find it.  But they choose to allow the distortions of past historians to lie in peace with no intentions of correcting the record. 

I say sadly because I am convienced that IF they did so, they could, almost single handedly heal many of the current racial hurts that rage in the hearts of so many blacks.  Think of how much the distortions of  history have harmed race relations all over this country, not just the South.  Think of the healing potential for an honest correction of the stories that not only the "historians" have done but those who still fan the prevailing fires of hatred for personal agrandizement.  Where would Jessie Jackson, our many scholastic liberals, the demagog polititcians, et al, be without that misguided rage against whites in  general?  And think of how much honest pride many blacks could feel for their forefathers if they knew the truth.  But, truth will not be told.  Nor even permitted to be told if those with a vested interest in keeping the status quo have their way.

[SouthernByGrace]

In Honor of Black History Month...

In GaWindbreak's post above, he provides a link to more information on the story of Bill Yopp. In light of the historical significance and importance of this man, I feel it necessary to include the entire text of that link here, to complete the story. I would have given anything to have witnessed this man's legacy and the tribute given him by those he cared so much for, his fellow Confederate veterans. If you can read this and not be teary-eyed at the end, I would strongly question your humanity.

And now...

Part two of the story of Bill Yopp (Ten Cent Bill)

 

God Was in Their Midst Today

June 7, 1936

Confederate Military Cemetery

Marietta, Georgia

 
   The torrential late night thunderstorm that swept through the city had left the ground soggy and the morning air uncommonly cool for early June. Thick pockets of wispy ground fog still obscured most of the creek bottoms in the sprawling cemetery, but the haze on the gently rolling hills was quickly clearing in the morning sun. Near the front of the graveyard, an unusually large assembly of silent dark-suited people was gathered on a tree-covered hill to offer their last respects to a departed old soldier. As they stood in reverent groups around the open grave, rays of sunlight shot like golden arrows through misty gaps in the oak canopy and made more than one person sense that God was in their midst today. Row upon row of white marble headstones, all the same size and shape, spread out across the hills and produced a feeling of quiet reverence and awe. Even the most talkative of the spectators found themselves whispering in the presence of these fallen brothers as if concerned that they would disturb their peaceful sleep.

   The mourners grew suddenly quiet as the faint, eerie sound of a lone drummer rattling out the ageless beat of a funeral march penetrated the morning silence. Curious heads turned left and right as the group searched for a glimpse of the musician while the sound echoed around the knolls and through the valleys. No one knew quite where it was. Several seconds had passed when a young drummer dressed in a gray Confederate soldier’s uniform materialized, ghostlike, from a wall of fog a hundred yards away. He marched slowly toward the gathering group, his old drum swaying back and forth on its neck strap while he drummed out the monotonous death beat. A few seconds later, the distinctive sounds of horse hooves clopping on the granite-cobbled road were heard, and straight away everyone saw the animals and their gray-suited riders as they too emerged from the mist directly behind the drummer.

   Three pairs of dark brown horses with black bridles pulled a black caisson on which a flag draped coffin rested. The front half of the coffin was covered with an American flag and on the back laid the Confederate flag. Three men, also dressed in gray uniforms, sat atop three of the horses while seven rifle wielding soldiers in Confederate uniforms marched slowly behind the caisson in perfect step to the drum beat.

   No one said a word as the soldiers removed the heavy coffin from the open wagon and carefully carried it the twenty paces to the empty grave where they placed it on a small fabric draped platform. Several large arrangements of red, white, and blue flowers with colorful ribbons made a fitting backdrop for the flag covered casket.

   The drumming stopped.

   The gathering included many of Atlanta’s most powerful politicians, including the Governor of Georgia, the mayor, a handful of senators, and several state representatives. In another group, several publishers and editors from prestigious Georgia newspapers stood together.  Several ribbon encrusted generals from Fort McPherson, an army base just south of Atlanta, stood with their arms crossed in reverence. Also in attendance was Marion Ramsey, the influential Superintendent of the Central of Georgia Railroad. Several dozen ordinary people, both blacks and whites, stood together on the hillside and watched the proceedings. Many people held hands to comfort each other. The sounds of muffled sobs, sniffling, and blowing noses could be heard throughout the group of mourners.

   A dozen elderly men wearing colorful war medals on their chests slowly took their seats on the front row of chairs nearest the coffin. Most of these men wore dark suits and used walking canes while several others were in wheel chairs. A few were missing an arm or leg. They were the last residents of the Georgia Confederate Soldier’s Home and were there to say farewell to one of their own fallen heroes. His name was Bill Yopp, more affectionately known as Ten Cent Bill. Each person in attendance could tell dozens of stories of how Bill Yopp, a former slave, had touched their lives in positive and meaningful ways.

   Several of the frail old warriors stared glassy-eyed at Bill’s coffin and the Confederate flag while others could not take their eyes off the men dressed in the Confederate uniforms who stood behind it. For several of them, this was the first time in over seventy years that they had seen a Confederate soldier except in their dreams or nightmares. Each of these survivors had experienced the horrors of the bloodiest war in American history. Some had attended the funerals of deceased Confederate generals and other high-ranking officers, but no one had witnessed such a large group of mourners or a ceremony with such military pomp as this one. The fact that Bill Yopp had been a lowly Confederate drummer boy and never rose above the rank of private was a testament to the importance this man held in their memories.

   A distinguished robed minister who had known Bill well stepped out of the crowd and stood beside the coffin. He was noticeably emotional and cleared his throat several times before he spoke. After a few words of welcome to everyone, he recited a short and meaningful prayer that wished Private Bill Yopp a safe journey to heaven and thanked the Lord for sharing this man with the world. As the fog lifted that morning, there was little doubt in anyone’s mind that Bill’s spirit rose with it.

   When the minister completed his remarks, the Superintendent of the Confederate Soldier’s Home, Major John McAllister, stepped forward and told special stories about the slave from Georgia who had fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War. He described the life of the small black man who had traveled around the world, rubbed elbows with some of the most powerful people in America, and had become one of the most well respected men in the state. In closing, McAllister described how Bill had accomplished these feats at a time when most black people in America continued to be considered second class citizens by the majority of the white population.

   When the ceremony concluded, most of the attendees walked slowly by Bill’s casket to wish him a fond farewell. A ninety-five year old soldier hobbled up to Bill’s flag draped coffin, stood upright at stiff attention, and gave a crisp salute. “Here’s to you, Bill. You take care of them boys up in heaven like you did us, and we’ll be there soon to see you again. I’ll miss you, my old friend, Ten Cent Bill.”