What are Confederates proud of?

Lord Palmerston despised Lincoln, and would have liked nothing better than to support the southern confederacy, because he hated the United States, too. But the British public would not have endured it. In fact, Parliament passed legislation to make it illegal to support either of the belligerent, which was, of course, meaningless to the United States, but a deadly wound to southern hopes. Bill once again demonstrates that his knowledge is shallow and narrow.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

.

Quote:

But the British public would not have endured it. In fact, Parliament passed legislation to make it illegal to support either of the belligerent, which was, of course,

LOL British almost declared war over a US warship stopping a Brit mail ship sailing from Cuba and removing two Confederate diplomats/agents. In fact they move somewhere in the neighborhood of 10,000 troops to Canada as a result.

If I also remember correctly the Brits was cheerfully building a number of warships for the Confederate and only when it was late in the war and there was no longer any question who would be the winner did they stop doing so.

Brit public opinion also only change in a big way after Lincoln declare slavery ended in the south.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_American_Civil_War

A long-term issue was the British shipyard (John Laird and Sons) building two warships for the Confederacy, including the CSS Alabama,[1] over vehement protests from the United States. The controversy was resolved after the Civil War in the form of the Alabama Claims, in which the United States finally was given $15.5 million in arbitration by an international tribunal for damages caused by British-built warships. The British built and operated most of the blockade runners, spending hundreds of millions of pounds on them; but that was legal and not the cause of serious tension.

1 Reply

Actually, I'm finding much of this thread a quite fascinating read, and now realise how little I know about your Civil War.

Would anyone care to suggest a book or two for me to read, regarding this subject?

3 Replies

@Lordyaswas,

Lordyaswas wrote:

Actually, I'm finding much of this thread a quite fascinating read, and now realise how little I know about your Civil War.
Would anyone care to suggest a book or two for me to read, regarding this subject?

I don't know of any Civil War books, but the old Ken Burns TV series is pretty good, IMO.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

As i said, you are appallingly ignorant. Admiral Bullock, who represented the Confederate States Navy purchased the ship which had already been constructed and which became CSS Florida. He then ordered a second ship. The fitting out of Florida outraged British opinion, which lead to the act of Parliament. Agents of the British government were on the way to Liverpool to seize the newly constructed ship when she slipped her cables and fitted out in France, becoming CSS Alabama. No more ships were built for the southern confederacy in British shipyards. It's not as though Parliament could have waved a magic want to make it all stop.

Jesus wept, it's as though you have compulsion to show how very little you know about the American civil war.

1 Reply

As an interesting side note, Admiral Bullock's sister had married Theodore Roosevelt, Sr of New York. The admiral was therefore the uncle of Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., who would one day become the President of the United States.

0 Replies

@Lordyaswas,

There is only one brief book that i know of, and that is Bird's Eye View of the Civil War by Theodore Ayrault Dodge (1883). Dodge had lost a leg at Gettysburg, and began his military history writing when the Massachusetts Military Historical Society commissioned a paper on the battle of Chancellorsville. The book is, however, a very brief outline, of course.

Oralloy has mentioned Ken Burns' documentary The Civil War, which he produced for PBS, the Public Broadcasting System. It is a mostly reliable account, and is largely based on the three volume history of the war published by Shelby Foote (who, i believe, appears in the documentary). When i have a minute, i'll see about getting you the titles of the books, which may be in your library system.

Clicking here may (or may not) take you to a page of Youtube vids of the entire series of documentaries.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Oh, and the poor innocent Brits was willing to settle the matter for millions after the war?

Give me a break that the English government was not aware of what was going on in their own ship yards until it was too late or that Confederate agents could buy ships without the English government knowing it well in advance.

1 Reply

@Lordyaswas,

You might find podcasts by a history professor on the US civil war and many other subjects of interest to you.

He have a numbers of CDs for sale that cover that period along with many others periods in History and every week he released short podcasts for free.

http://www.summahistorica.com/ is his main page and http://www.summahistorica.com/order.htm is his page to order Cds take note of the many civil war CDs on the list.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

I didn't say anything about poor innocent Brits, you great braying jackass. Why don't you address what i've written, and not your half-witted, sneering sarcasm. My little dog knows more about history than you do.

1 Reply

Here ya go, Lordy:

Shelby Foote:

The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol 1: Fort Sumter to Perryville
The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol 2: Fredericksburg to Meridian
The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol 3: Red River to Appomattox

The Ken Burns documentary was, as i've said, based on these works. Although better than most of what has been published in the last 150 years, they still suffer somewhat from the tenets of the lost cause myth.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

LOL the Brits did aid the south to the point they needed to reached a settlement of millions of dollars for producing war crafts for the south after the war.

Yes, we have no idea that we have confederate agents running around our island buying ships to turn into warships, is that what you are trying to sell?

To say nothing of the other war materials that ended up in southern hands that was deliver mainly by English build and to a large degree crew blockade runners.

There was, during a large faction of the war, a real chance that English would have intervene on the southern side if the south had done better on the battlefield.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_American_Civil_War#Potentially_recognizing_the_Confederacy

Earl Russell had given Mason no encouragement whatever, but after news of the Second Battle of Bull Run reached London in early September, Palmerston agreed that in late September there could be a cabinet meeting at which Palmerston and Russell would ask approval of the mediation proposal. Then, Russell and Palmerston concluded not to bring the plan before the cabinet until they got further word about Robert E. Lee's invasion of the North. If the Northerners were beaten, then the proposal would go through; if Lee failed, then it might be well to wait a little longer before taking any action.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Your stupidity is incredible. There was no law to prevent Confederate agents from operating in England, and i have said nothing which exculpates Palmerston or anyone else in Britain who attempted to aid the southern confederacy. The reason the ship yard was made to pay more than $15,000,000 in reparations was precisely because they had violated Britain's neutrality, you wooly-pated fool. The same shipyard attempted to build and deliver two iron-clads, which the British government seized. How, precisely, do you propose that the British government was to prevent blockade runners? Hunt down their own nation's ships at sea? I really cannot believe how idiotic you can be.

2 Replies

Shouting doesn't change anything. I've already pointed out Palmerston's antipathy. That still would not have enabled him to override British public opinion. Recognizing the southern confederacy would simply have been political stupidity. Attempting to actively interfere in the conflict would have caused his government to fall.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

British public opinion was far more mixed. It's been characterised as the rich favouring the South and the middle and working classes as favouring the North. Obviously it wasn't quite as simple as that, but there wasn't a strong enough feeling either way to get us involved other than a bit of arms dealing on the side.

And we'd not long fought the Crimean war and dealt with the Indian Revolution, and were too war weary to get involved in a foreign conflict.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

Recognizing the southern confederacy would simply have been political stupidity. Attempting to actively interfere in the conflict would have caused his government to fall.

That your opinion...........

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

How, precisely, do you propose that the British government was to prevent blockade runners?

LOL my my the poor English government seems to have less power then the US government have from the very beginning of our nation to control what it ship yards and it citizens does in relationship to them getting involved in foreign conflicts by your silly statements!!!!!!!

See the The Neutrality Act of 1794 where the US control it citizens and it shipyards in that regard.

Stopping your nation citizens from taking part in building in British shipyards and then manning blockade runners would be well within the power of the English government or any other government for that matter.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

There was no law to prevent Confederate agents from operating in England

So the poor powerless English government could not have stop foreign agents from operating in their nation against the wishes of the government!!!!!!!

Talk about a stupid statement.

1 Reply

What are Confederates proud of?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know