Monday, December 29, 2014

Eric Jacobson Has a Nervous Breakdown

Over at XRoads, Jacobson posts:
I have tried to stay out of this, but I can’t help myself any longer. What I find particularly galling is Chastain’s absolute ineptitude when it comes to the Confederate military and its history. She blathers on about the flag, but I highly doubt that she can carry on any substantive conversation that doesn’t involve some long post-war application of it. In that sense, it is all about heritage (her skewed version of it). Note her bloviating about how the South was screwed by intestinal bugs, railroad scams, price manipulations, and the like until well into the 20th century as prime examples. Funny how that sounds like the very kind of victimhood she usually rails against.
Now she also likes to talk about rape and fire (especially as it relates to Sherman and his troops), but that is also mostly post-war poppycock nonsense that was the ultimate creation of the Lost Cause movement. Chastain would throw her walker into the street if she knew how former Confederate AND Southern civilians who had lived through the oft-repeated barbarity of Sherman’s movements actually lauded and celebrated his return to Atlanta in the early 1880s. But, of course, its all about her view of heritage – facts be damned.
Also, most people like Chastain conveniently forget that schools and highways were named for Forrest, Lee, et al, almost 100 years AFTER the war, and as a show of defiance against the winds of change that were blowing in the mid-20th century. Same with the battle flag and battle flag displays that went up and then inevitably came down. They can scream “heritage” violations all they want, but that is false. It’s called time moves on and things change. And sometimes, things just change.

Some folks in Brooklyn and Baltimore have never gotten over their teams leaving them. Same with marriages, and Presidents, and friends, and on and on. Yes, it seems Chastain has a hard time with the ol’ life sometimes sucks mantra.


I can provide endless quotes about how Confederate soldiers viewed the battle flag, and how in the post-war years they were very particular about how it should be displayed and by whom. I doubt they would agree with this bantering, and bickering, and fussing about the flag going up and the flag going down and the lack of the flag being flagged because they didn’t see it as a necessary public display. I’m sure Chastain and others will claim to speak for the veterans, but they have about as much right to that as I do, or anyone else.

I say let her flag away. It won’t accomplish a thing, except to make her feel good, and if that works for her then so be it. I’ll send her new tennis balls if she needs them in 2015.

P. S. – In closing, no sensible person repeatedly quotes the meaning of words from the dictionary. It such a sign of someone who really doesn’t understand the meaning of droll, even if its meaning was quoted from said online dictionary (or an old fashioned printed one).
Goodness gracious sakes alive. One hardly knows where to begin....

Well, that's a joke. I know exactly where to begin....

First, to clarify, when I discuss what Southerners endured after the war (and during it), it's not to showcase victimhood. It's to show (1) what they stoically bore largely without resorting victimhood and (2) who perpetrated it against them.

In typical yankee fashion, Jacobson minimizes the horrors Southerners lived with after the war (as he has in the past minimized what they endured during it). He calls pellagra and hookwork an "intestinal bug"-- and he rails against MY ignorance? Pellagra is a horrific disease with devastating mental and physical manifestations caused by a nutritional deficiency -- said nutritional deficiency caused by poverty-stricken diets. Hookworm was caused by a parasite (hardly a bug)  that plagued people who went barefoot -- BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO POOR TO BUY SHOES. Both were very widespread in the South in the generations following the war.

Apparently, Jacobson doesn't like acknowledging what the greedy union and its diabolical military did to the South and the aftermath of their devastation and ruin...bless his heart...

He sez, "Chastain would throw her walker into the street if she knew how former Confederate AND Southern civilians who had lived through the oft-repeated barbarity of Sherman’s movements actually lauded and celebrated his return to Atlanta in the early 1880s."

Yup, I don't know that they did that, and Jacobson didn't offer any substantiation. I do know that when I was growing up in Georgia I never heard anyone say a nice thing about Sherman. I'd have to see proof that people who lived through Sherman's barbarity lauded and celebrated the thieving, murdering arsonist's return to Atlanta. Interesting that the folks who criticize me for not offering PROOF (when I'm simply expressing an opinion or making a suggestion) let their own off the hook when it comes to substantiating their claims about history.

"Chastain conveniently forget that schools and highways were named for Forrest, Lee, et al, almost 100 years AFTER the war, and as a show of defiance against the winds of change that were blowing in the mid-20th century." It's not forgetting, conveniently or otherwise. It is knowledge that there was not much opportunity to name schools, roads, etc., after ANYBODY in the South until the mid-20th century because the region was still mired in poverty (much of it externally imposed) before then.

I also note that the flippin' CENTENNIAL of the war occurred 100 years after the war (amazing, huh) and that likely accounts for some naming streets, schools, parks, even private businesses, after Confederate heroes.

He can provide endless quotes?  Somehow, I doubt that. And I don't care what HE doubts. I am convinced, though, that Confederate soldiers would know who loves and reveres their memory and honors their sacrifices, and who hates their memory and slanders them as traitors, backward hicks, barbaric racists and slavers.... Moreover, I think if they knew what was going on in our culture and nation today, they'd not only agree with our side of the bantering, bickering and fussing, they'd join in (and they might even take up arms again to defend what's left of the republic).

Jacobson, my appeals to the dictionary for objective word meanings is to showcase the leftists' deliberate, muddle-headed crusade  -- aka, political correctness --  to make words subjective (at best) or meaningless (the extreme) to weaken our communication and thus our cultural cohesiveness and, on a personal level, so they won't have to be held accountable for things they say.


  1. Wow now the crazy is out there for everyone to see.

  2. "Chastain would throw her walker into the street if she knew how former Confederate AND Southern civilians who had lived through the oft-repeated barbarity of Sherman’s movements actually lauded and celebrated his return to Atlanta in the early 1880s [it was 1879]."

    This is a new revision those people have come up with in recent years. I checked some newspaper archives a while back. Does this sound like lauded and celebrated?-

    When Gen. Sherman alighted from the cars at Atlanta, says the Constitution of that city, "there was no perceptible indignation or feeling of prejudice. In most of the clumps of talkers there were jokes flying to and fro. One man proposed to Mayor Calhoun to go and offer the freedom of the city to Gen. Sherman. 'He made too d---d free with it,' said an objector, 'when he was here before.' Another gentleman good-humoredly proposed that a procession of widows in mourning, with bunches of pine kindling in their hands, be appointed to wait on the General and offer to facilitate his work. As the train rolled in a gentleman called, 'Ring the fire bells! the town will be gone in forty minutes!'"
    Times-Picayune (New Orleans, LA), February 13, 1879

    1. Thanks, BR. There's been an effort for over 10 years -- at least, that I'm aware of, and it may go back longer than that -- to cram a sanitized Sherman down Southern throats. It certainly doesn't sound like his return to Atlanta was lauded and celebrated, judging by that account. I also wonder what his reception would have been like if he'd visited places outside the city, where his men, ah, "foraged."

      One thing's for sure. Anybody who celebrates the blood-thirsty union army's depredations in the South have proven themselves morally unfit to bellyache about Pat Hines mouthing off or other imaginary, nonexistent "violence" in Southern heritage.

  3. Ha!! No breakdown here, but you do take liberties with words, which is the same thing you accuse others of regularly. See if I were you I'd be lecturing about what nervous breakdown actually means. :)

    Anyway, ol' BR is wrong about the 1879 date. It was November 1881 that I was referring to, which was when Sherman attended the International Cotton Exposition. If you (or BR) wants to do some real research dig into the Atlanta Constitution and read the coverage of Sherman's speech and his attendance. You'll see he even shared the stage with (gasp) a former Confederate general. You might even find words like "loudly called for" and "immense applause," which you might find interesting. Or not.

    Now I shall let you return to whatever you might be doing.

    1. Yep there was a Foggy mental Breakdown for sure. I notice you post a lot of comments but fail to back one comment up with a source. Wanna try me??? Are you that smart???? Let's see shall we???

      BTW one doesn't have to know a lot about Confederate military history to know about the flag and the issues that caused the war. In my opinion you know very little about either.

      Here is something that might interest you----

      The skill and success of the men in collecting forage was one of the features of this march. Each brigade commander had authority to detail a company of foragers, usually about fifty men, with one or two commissioned officers selected for their boldness and enterprise. This party would be dispatched before daylight with a knowledge of the intended day's march and camp; would proceed on foot five or six miles from the route traveled by their brigade, and then visit every plantation and farm within range. They would usually procure a wagon or family carriage, load it with bacon, corn-meal, turkeys, chickens, ducks, and every thing that could be used as food or forage, and would then regain the main road, usually in advance of their train. When this came up, they would deliver to the brigade commissary the supplies thus gathered by the way. Often would I pass these foraging-parties at the roadside, waiting for their wagons to come up, and was amused at their strange collections--mules, horses, even cattle, packed with old saddles and loaded with hams, bacon, bags of cornmeal, and poultry of every character and description. Although this foraging was attended with great danger and hard work, there seemed to be a charm about it that attracted the soldiers, and it was a privilege to be detailed on such a party. Daily they returned mounted on all sorts of beasts, which were at once taken from them and appropriated to the general use; but the next day they would start out again on foot, only to repeat the experience of the day before. No doubt, many acts of pillage, robbery, and violence, were committed by these parties of foragers, usually called "bummers;" for I have since heard of jewelry taken from women, and the plunder of articles that never reached the commissary; but these acts were exceptional and incidental. I never heard of any cases of murder or rape; and no army could have carried along sufficient food and forage for a march of three hundred miles; so that foraging in some shape was necessary.

      You can find the source of this passage at ---

      You also may want to check out this website ---

      Have you ever heard of the Roswell women???? Was that 1000 years after the war?

      George Purvis

    2. "Sherman Day"

      Augusta News.

      About the worst false step the managers of the Exposition have made is to get up a "Sherman Day" in Atlanta. The people of Georgia have no objection if the management see fit to invite Gen. Sherman and staff to visit the show, or any other national character; but when this management ask the people of the State and the South to help them get up an enthusiastic boom and to receive and welcome with open arms the despoiler of Atlanta, the incendiary who applied the torch to Columbia, and the man who wantonly insulted our mothers, wives and sisters, to say nothing of the countless thousands of dollars he permitted his army to destroy in his devastating march to the sea, is rather overstepping the mark, and a display of "cheek" on the part of the management which is truly wonderful to the Southern mind.

      Glad to Hear It.

      Atlanta Post Appeal.

      Oue exchanges come to us filled with all sorts of flings at Atlanta for having a "Sherman Day" at the Exposition. Atlanta is not responsible for this piece of blundering toadyism. The sole credit belongs to a set of men who do not represent Atlanta any more than a black cat represents midnight. While our people are perfectly willing to allow General Sherman the privilege of visiting the exposition, they are not prepared to unite in an ovation to the most barbarous soldier of the nineteenth century--the man who drew a streak of charcoal through the map of Georgia 400 miles long and forty miles wide.

      Macon Weekly Telegraph, November 18, 1881


      "loudly called for" and "immense applause"

      Here's another version of how Sherman was received-

      The Exposition.

      A Macon Man Sees It.

      ...General Sherman was here this week, but I heard of no gushing demonstrations being made. No hand-shaking and feting, and nothing to distinguish him from the commonest visitor. He spoke of Southern resources in the highest terms, and thought the cotton exposition would do more to restore the fraternal relations of the people than anything that had ever been done or said by our leading politicians...&c

      Macon Weekly Telegraph, November 25, 1881

    3. Well, well, WELL... I do believe Mr. Jacobson was trying to pull one over on us. He shoulda picked somebody besides Kerosene Billy....

      What y'all want to be we won't see hide nor hair of him coming back to address these subsequent posts...

    4. I have plenty of sourced stories about Sherman, his men and the whole Union Army as a matter of fact. If Jacobson wants to play I can play. If he really knew much about the Union army and it' military history he would change sides, but like all good yankee "historians" he only sees what fits his agenda.


    5. Thanks, George. I think Jacobson is hopeless, though. He thinks the burning of Chambersburg is the equivalent of this:

      He thinks the rebel army's few, brief excursions into yankee territory are the equivalent of the yankee army's four year, town burning, thieving, killing invasion of the south.

    6. Well it is easy to see Jacobson is nothing more than a "drive by poster." It is my belief that you have not banned him in any sort of way, and gave him the chance to present any facts he has to support his statements. The fact that he chooses not to present a civil argument does not say much about his credibility.


      PS after Grant left Jackson Mississippi, it was known as "Chimmeyville"

      War of the Rebellion: Serial 037 Page 0529 Chapter XXXVI. THE Jackson CAMPAIGN.

      HEADQUARTERS, Jackson, July 18, 1863.

      We have made fine progress to-day in the work of destruction. Jackson will no longer be a point of danger. We destroy much cotton used in breastworks. Some heavy artillery and a large pile of shot and shell will be thrown into the river. Steele will be at Brandon in the morning, and I have reason to believe all is working well north and south. I hope it will rain to-night, in which case I will order Parke's two DIVISIONS to march for Milldale, via Brownsville. I will hold the balance till I accomplish all your design. The enemy's cavalry has retreated from Canton across Pearl River, so that I think there is no body of the enemy WEST of Pearl River. We have 500 prisoners, and more are being brought in every hour. The inhabitants are subjugated. They cry aloud for mercy. The land is devastated for 30 miles around.

      W. T. SHERMAN,


      Hey Jacobson what say ye about this????

      George Purvis
      Southern heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

  4. Apparently all was not peaches and cream during Sherman's 1881 visit. His apologist, Henry Grady, owner/editor of the Atlanta Constitution trying to smooth things over --

    1. Eddie
      Thanks for the link I don't think Mr. Jacobson thinks we Southerns can read or do research. He like a lot of his colleagues who are not from the South thinks, that because we understand history different than them we are a bunch of yokels who are beneath them. Oh well our people have been dealing with this for the last 150 years.

    2. Our critics are arrogant, sure enough, but a lot of our foibles that they like to ridicule exist primarily in their imaginations, or in their ability to spin, twist and distort (Simpson's a virtuoso distortionist). I suspect some of it -- maybe a lot of it -- is tinged with envy. Our history and culture are unique, and we love them. They make fun of us for honoring "losers" but don't seem to care enough to honor their union winners. They're an odd bunch who gets their enjoyment of life from ridiculing and picking on. Must suck to be them....

  5. Mr. Jacobson
    You might want to view this web site on naming highways you will notice it started considerably early than 1965.

    This is your history lesson for today from someone who is not a historian.

    You’re welcome.

  6. Well well. There's so much to respond to. First of all, Happy New Year!!!

    Mr. Purvis, you are employing your typical technique - and you're already soooo fired up, aren't you?? I say Sherman and his troops did a fine job in Mississippi, and as usual they employed tactics to destroy military objectives and objects. Same as in Georgia. For all of the hollering about rape and fire as I noted in my post which Connie posted, I have yet to see substantive evidence to support the wild claims I hear regularly. In fact, just yesterday I heard someone claim Sherman burned everything in a path 60 miles wide all the way to the Atlantic. That is hysterical - and 100% untrue.

    Btw, have you ever driven the route of his columns across Georgia? How many antebellum homes do you see? How many are still standing?

    You see, what folks like you don't understand (and never will) is that Sherman did not rape and pillage and burn his way across Georgia. That is your version/vision. Prove the allegations of rape. I dare you. As for pillaging, it was a military maneuver and the troops were taking what crops and livestock they needed and destroyed much of the rest. It's a war - sucks doesn't it? As for fire, yep, it was quite convenient when excess stock, gins, barns, etc needed to be destroyed. But let's see if you show me more than the isolated incident where Sherman's troops actually destroyed a house or displaced its inhabitants during the March to the Sea.

    Mr. Sanford, in closing, as to the Roswell women, well, you should be ashamed. The Confederate government had employed women to work in a factory under the flag of a foreign nation. In a time of war, if you pull that kind of crap, you're not going to get a good response. I have no sympathy whatsoever.

    1. ><

      An example of pillage as "military maneuver" --

      Rice Creek Springs, S. C., February 20, 1865.
      Major General F. P. BLAIR, Jr.,
      Commanding Seventeenth Army Corps, Army of the Tennessee:
      GENERAL: I desire to call your attention to the fact that some of our soldiers have been committing the most outrageous robberies of watches, jewelry, &c. A case has come to my notice where a watch and several articles of jewelry were stolen by a foraging party under the eye of the commissioned officer in charge. Another, where a brute had violently assaulted a lady by striking her, and had then robbed her of a valuable gold watch. In one instance money was stolen to the amount of $150, and another, where an officer with a foraging party had allowed his men to take rings off the fingers of ladies in his presence. To-day a soldier was found plundering, arrested, placed under the guard of one of General Corse's orderlies, and was liberated by some of his comrades who had arms in their hands, and who threatened the life of the guard. These outrages must be stopped at all hazards, and the thieves and robbers who commit them be dealt with severely and summarily. I am inclined to think that there is a regularly organized banditti who commit these outrages and who share the spoils. I call upon you upon all the officers and soldiers under you, who have one spark of honor or respect for the profession which they follow, to help me put down these informs proceedings and to arrest the perpetrators. Please furnish to every inspector, provost-marshal, and officer in charge of a foraging party a copy of this letter, and enjoin them to be on the watch to stop these infamous proceedings, and to bring to justice the individuals who commit them.
      Very respectfully,
      O. O. HOWARD,
      (Same to General Logan, commanding Fifteenth Army Corps.)

    2. ><

      Those women were in the employ of the Confederate government? Really, Mr. Jacobson? And you claim to be a historian?

    3. Yankee Capt David Conyngham --

      To draw a line between stealing and taking or appropriating
      everything for the subsistence of an army would puzzle the nicest
      casuist. Such little freaks as taking the last chicken, the last pound
      of meal, the last bit of bacon, and the only remaining scraggy cow,
      from a poor woman and her flock of children, black or white not
      considered, came under the order of legitimate business. Even
      crockery; bed-covering, or cloths, were fair spoils. As for plate, or
      jewelry, or watches, these were things rebels had no use for. They
      might possibly convert them into gold, and thus enrich the
      Confederate treasury.
      Men with pockets plethoric with silver and gold coin; soldiers
      sinking under the weight of plate and free bedding materials; lean
      mules and horses, with the richest trappings of Brussels carpets, and
      hangings of fine chenille; negro wenches, particularly good-look-
      ing ones, decked in satin and silks, and sporting diamond ornaments; officers with sparkling rings, that would set Tiffany in raptures,—gave color to the stories of hanging up or fleshing an “old cuss,” to make him shell out.
      A planter’s house was overrun in a jiffy; boxes, drawers, and escritoirs were ransacked with a laudable zeal, and emptied of
      their contents. If the spoils were ample, the depredators were satisfied, and went off in peace; if not, everything was torn and
      destroyed, and most likely the owner was tickled with sharp bay-
      onets into a confession where he had his treasures hid. If he
      escaped, and was hiding in a thicket, this was prima facie evidence that he was a skulking rebel; and most likely some ruffian, in his
      zeal to get rid of such vipers, gave him a dose of lead, which cured
      him of his Secesh tendencies. Sorghum barrels were knocked
      open, beehives rifled, while their angry swarms rushed frantically
      about. Indeed, I have seen a soldier knock a planter down because
      a bee stung him. Hogs are bayonetted, and then hung in quarters
      on the bayonets to bleed; chickens, geese, and turkeys are knocked
      over and hung in garlands from the saddles and around the necks
      of swarthy negroes; mules and horses are fished out of the
      swamps; cows and calves, so wretchedly thin that they drop down
      and perish on the first day’s march, are driven along, or, if too
      weak to travel, are shot, lest they should give aid to the enemy.
      Should the house be deserted, the furniture is smashed in pieces, music is pounded out of four hundred dollar pianos with the ends of muskets. Mirrors were wonderfully multiplied, and rich cushions and carpets carried off to adorn teams and war-steeds. After all was cleared out, most likely some set of stragglers wanted to enjoy a good fire, and set the house, debris of furniture, and all the surroundings, in a blaze. This is the way Sherman’s army lived on the country. They were not ordered to do so, but I am afraid they were not brought to task for it much either.

    4. more from Conyngham --

      " The army will forage liberally on the country during the march. To this end each brigade commander will organize a good and efficient foraging party, under command of one or more discreet officers. To regular foraging parties must be intrusted the gathering of provisions and forage at any distance from the roads travelled.
      "As for horses, mules, wagons, &c., the cavalry and artillery may appropriate freely and without limit. Foraging parties may also take mules or horses to replace the jaded animals of their trains, or to serve as pack-mules for the regiments or brigades."

      These orders were all right, if literally carried out ; but they were soon converted into licenses for indiscriminate plunder. The followers of an army, in the shape of servants, hangers-on, and bummers, are generally as numerous as the effective force. Every brigade and regiment had its organized, foraging party, which were joined by every officer's servant and idler about the camps.

      These, scattered over the country, without any order or discipline, pounced like harpies on the unfortunate inhabitants, stripping them of all provisions, jewelry, and valuables they could discover. In most instances they burned down houses to cover their depredations, and in some cases took the lives of their victims, as they would not reveal concealed treasures. These gangs spread like locusts over the country. In all cases where the foraging parties were under the command of a respectable officer, they acted with propriety, simply taking what provisions and necessaries they needed. They might as well have stripped the place, though, for soon came the bummers, and commenced a scene of ruin and pillage. Boxes were burst
      open ; clothes dragged about ; the finest silks, belonging to the
      planters' ladies, carried off to adorn some negro wenches around
      camp ; pictures, books, furniture, all tossed about and torn in
      pieces. Though these wretches were acting against military orders, there was no one to complain. The planter and his. family were thankful if they escaped with their lives ; and as to their comrades, they were too deep in the pie themselves to complain of a system which was enriching them.

    5. more yankee account --

      General Sherman had issued an order that the army, as far as practicable, should live on the country.

      The soldiers took this as a license for each man to rob and pillage as much as he could ; and in truth too many of them seemed well inclined to obey this special order.

      For several days a most disgraceful scene of rifling houses, breaking up furniture, ripping up bedticks, and, after making a general mess of things, then firing the houses, ensued.

      This was somewhat modified by regular parties being detailed, under command of officers, to forage. Even these often committed the most wanton excesse's. I was one evening riding out towards our picket lines, and passing near a house, sheltered in the trees, I heard cries and screams, as if from women in distress. I drew my revolver, and rode into the yard ; and what a sight met my view ! The yard was covered with the debris of furniture, beds, and bedding ; dead poultry and pigs lay around, while soldiers were making desperate charges on others that had not yet fallen. All the beehives were rifled, and
      the infuriated bees were flying about like so many little demons.
      I even saw a man wearing the shoulder-straps of a captain, with his hands full of things, rush through a back door at my approach. To add to the savage scene children were rushing about, screaming for their lives ; and on going into the house I found four miserable women huddled together in trembling fear. It took some time before I could convince them that they were safe. They were in such a frenzied state, that I remained some time, and put a guard on the house. ,

      Such scenes were of too frequent occurrence ; and it often happened that the rebel cavalry came upon these pilfering stragglers while they were rifling some houses, and of course they had no mercy to expect.

    6. Eddie, I am quite familiar with Gen. Howard's Feb. 1865 letter. I might note he was referencing what was unfolding in South Carolina, which was undoubtedly more serious than anything which went on in Georgia. Actually, it is a fabulous reference to how the "March" has been skewed. So many insist these types of things occurred during the movement across Georgia, when in actuality the cases were much more prevalent in South Carolina. That being said, you have yet to provide any proof of this being widespread. Did some soldiers loot? Sure they did. But did the army as a whole act in this manner? Of course not. Did they wantonly rape? You still have not proved that. Did they burn everything in sight? No, and I await your proof. If you think moving an army of that size across a wide expanse is not going to lead some to operate outside orders, well, then you and I have a different understanding of what soldiers do in times of war.

      As for Capt. Conyngham, I'm glad you brought him up. He also wrote:

      "Cobb's plantation was well stocked with decrepit negroes, and his granaries well filled with corn. The gallant owner had removed all the able-bodied men, women, and animals from the place, leaving a miserable-looking set of negroes to receive us, whom he had soothingly informed that the Yanks would cut their throats for them...The poor of the South, black and white, were kept in this state of terrorism by the planters."

      Sounds like a great system doesn't it?

    7. Yes Eddie, they were employed by the Confederate government, and they were making cloth for Confederate uniforms. The French flag flying outside didn't fool the Federal troops for long, and the discovery of CS material soon led them in the right direction. The whole thing was a ruse, and what happened to the women falls squarely on the Confederate authorities who allowed it to happen.

    8. Mr. Jacobson, any degree of honesty would admit the difference between being employed by a private concerns manufacturing some goods for the Confederacy, among others, and being employed by the Confederate government. Perhaps you have none. I can assure you that when I worked for manufacturers who contracted some goods for the US government, that the US government did not consider ma and my co-workers as employees, nor did we consider ourselves as being employed by the government.

    9. ><

      What is a great system is the one you are attempting to use to deflect the topic from the wholesale pillage and arson of the yankees. Typical of when you are confronted with facts not to your liking.

    10. Yep we see how smart you are. My posts are in Sherman's own words. Sure I am up to my same MO, posting historically accurate info from period documents. You are up to your same tactics denying everything without posting any sources. Typical of someone with a biased agenda.

      You can say what you want about Sherman's job in Mississippi and Georgia, but facts are facts as posted. If you have sources to prove otherwise, it is as simple as posting them here. You just proved you cannot acknowledge the truth or beat me with facts.

      Now let's see your proof the Roswell women and children were employed by the CSA government. I think perhaps they were employed by someone who had contracts with the CSA government. Wasn't the owners French??? Isn't that the actual facts? I can pull the ORs if I need to.

      And what was the need to send them North??? Destroy the factory and be done.

      Shame on YOU for supporting a WAR ON WOMEN and CHILDREN

      George Purvis

    11. War of the Rebellion: Serial 076 Page 0073 Chapter L. CORRESPONDENCE, ETC.-UNION.

      NEAR CHATTAHOOCHEE, GA., July 7, 1864-11 a.m.

      (Received 5 p.m.)

      Major General H. W. HALLECK,

      Chief of Staff:

      General Garrard reports to me that he is in possession of Roswell, where were several valuable cotton and woolen factories in full operation, also paper-mills, all of which, by my order, he destroyed by fire. They had been for years engaged exclusively at work for the Confederate Government, and the owner of the woolen factory displayed the French flag; but as he failed also to show the United States flag, General Garrard burned it also. The main cotton factory was valued at a million of United States dollars. The cloth on hand is reserved for use of United States hospitals, and I have ordered General Garrard to arrest for treason all owners and employed, foreign and native, and send them under guard to Marietta, whence I will send them North. Being exempt from conscription, they are as much governed by the rules of war as if in the ranks. The women can find employment in Indiana. This whole region was devoted to manufactories, but I will destroy every one of them. Johnston is maneuvering against my right, and I will try and pass the Chattahoochee by my left. Ask Mr. Stanton not to publish the substance of my dispatches, for they reach Richmond in a day, and are telegraphed at once to Atlanta. The Atlanta papers contain later news from Washington than I get from Nashville. Absolute silence in military matters is the only safe rule. Let our public learn patience and common sense.

      W. T. SHERMAN,


      Not much left to be said about who owns the factory!!!!!!!!!!

    12. "They had been for years engaged exclusively at work for the Confederate Government..."

      The French flag was a ruse, and obviously it wasn't owned by the U. S. govt since Confederate war material was being produced. So that leaves but one option.....

    13. ><

      Mr. Jacobson, it does appear that you have no factual honesty at all. A cursory examination of records reveals that of a monthly capacity of 30,000 yards of material, only 15,000 yards were devoted to the CSA. Where might the rest be going? Also, Garrard's report indicates that the woolen mill over which the French flag flew was worked by men, and that the cotton mill was which had no French flag was worked by women. A pity that you are so dishonest concerning facts --

      Near Roswell, July 6, 1864-7 p.m.

      Major-General SHERMAN,
      Commanding Army:
      There were some fine factories here, one woolen factory, capacity 30,000 yards a month, and has furnished up to within a few weeks 15,000 yards per month to the rebel Government, the Government furnishing men and material. Capacity of cotton factory 216 looms, 191,086 yards per month, and 51,666 pounds of thread, and 4,299 pounds of cotton rope. This was worked exclusively for the rebel Government. The other cotton factory, one mile and a half from town, I have no data concerning. There was six months' supply of cotton on hand. Over the woolen factory the French flag was flying, but seeing no Federal flag above it I had the building burnt. All are burnt. The cotton factory was worked up to the time of its destruction, some 400 women, being employed. There was some cloth which had been made since yesterday morning, which I will save for our hospitals (several thousand yards of cotton cloth), also some rope and thread. I have just learned that McCook is near the paper-mills, on Soap Creek, and I may not take up the position first proposed in this letter. I will try to disguise the strength of my command.

      Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
      K. GARRARD,
      Brigadier-General, Commanding.

    14. It doesn't matter that they made cloths for the CSA. They were not employed by the CSA government it is right there in the report.

      prove the French flag was a ruse.

      Here is the reason the factory was burned "but as he failed also to show the United States flag, General Garrard burned it also."

      Now you are just using the same tactics all neo-yankkes use, denying the sources cherry picking parts of sentences, spinning history and just being argumentative. You have been shown documents the day proving these stories were not made up 100 years after the war, proving you were not truthful in your statement. When are you gonna produce a source that supports your point? Can you ? Can you produce any source proving these reports are not factual?

      If this was Cold Southern Steel you would have already been warned, I don't play these childish games.

      George Purvis

    15. Dishonest you say?? What nonsense. Your posts simply confirm my original point - which was that the situation at Roswell was a Confederate run operation. Of course, Kenner Garrard did not have data about the cotton factory, and he said as much. But we know full well the remaining 15,000 yards wasn't benefiting the U. S. forces, or are you actually making that ridiculous claim??

    16. "At the same time General Garrard moved rapidly on Roswell, and destroyed the rebel factories which had supplied the rebel armies with cloth for years. Over one of these, the woolen factory, the nominal owner displayed the French flag, which was not respected, of course. A neutral surely is no better than one of our own citizens, and we do not permit our own citizens to fabricate cloth for hostile uses."

      OR Vol. 38, pt. 1, p. 70

    17. So you have what were once private factories taken into possession by Confederate forces and subsequently trying to hide their true purpose:

      "General Garrard reports to me that he is in possession of Roswell, where were several valuable cotton and woolen factories in full operation, also paper-mills, all of which, by my order, he destroyed by fire. They had been for years engaged exclusively at work for the Confederate Government, and the owner of the woolen factory displayed the French flag; but as he failed also to show the United States flag, General Garrard burned it also. The main cotton factory was valued at a million of United States dollars. The cloth on hand is reserved for use of United States hospitals, and I have ordered General Garrard to arrest for treason all owners and employee, foreign and native, and send them under guard to Marietta, whence I will send them North. Being exempt from conscription, they are as much governed by the rules of war as if in the ranks. The women can find employment in Indiana. This whole region was devoted to manufactories, but I will destroy every one of them."

      OR Vol. 38, pt. 5, p. 73.

    18. Eddie, argue against the facts all you want. Sherman nailed this one, and dealt with it militarily. War is indeed hell.

      "I call your attention to the inclosed paper in reference to the Roswell factories. They were very valuable, and were burned by my orders. They have been engaged almost exclusively in manufacturing cloth for the Confederate Army, and you will observe they were transferred to the English and French flags for safety, but such nonsense cannot deceive me. They were tainted with treason, aiid such fictitious transfer was an aggravation. I will send all the owners, agents, and employees up to Indiana to get rid of them here. I take it a neutral is no better than one of our own citizens, and we would not respect the property of one of our own citizens engaged in supplying a hostile army."

      OR Vol. 38, pt. 5, p. 92.

    19. Confederate run? Run by Confederates, or run by the Confederage government? Factories can by run by US Americans without being run by the U.S. government. Voila, factories could be run by Confederates without being run by the Confederate government.

      Quote, " But we know full well the remaining 15,000 yards wasn't benefiting the U. S. forces..." So? So the Confederate forces and the U.S. forces were the only possible entities the cloth could be made for? It couldn't possibly have been made for civilians or some other market?

    20. r.Apparently your dishonesty knows no ends, Mr. Jacobson. I would suggest to you that you reread, or is it read, Garrard's message and identify which mill had the French flag, and then identify the gender of the workers at each specific mill as reported by Garrard.


      Ultimately, the Roswell incident is a human tragedy, one set in motion by Confederate government officials and then completed by Sherman. But to play it off as one-sided, and act like Roswell was all the fault of Sherman, is disingenuous. It is like talking about Fort Pillow and blaming Forrest exclusively for what happened there.

    22. "If this was Cold Southern Steel you would have already been warned, I don't play these childish games."

      Please stop George, you're scaring me. :)

    23. Connie, I'll post it again:

      "They had been for years engaged exclusively at work for the Confederate Government..."

      But that being said, I'll concede for the sake of argument that the Davis administration didn't "run" the outfit, and may not have even known about it, but there is no doubt that it was a Confederate run operation. Barrington King (who owned the Roswell Manufacturing Company) was a bigshot in Roswell before and after the war, and his own son commanded the CS cavalry that occupied the town until just before Garrard got there. Plus the operator Olney Eldredge had ties to the State of Georgia and was producing what was known as Roswell gray fabric for Confederate uniforms. They were not producing anything for civilians in 1864. A simple review of multiple sources discounts that idea.

      The sad thing is that they (especially Eldredge) knew exactly what they were doing, who they were producing material for, they put women to work, and then when the enemy showed up they tried to put up a sham to cover it up. I think what infuriated Sherman was actually the cover up, not the operation itself. Theophile Roche is fully to blame for the French flag.

      All this being said, Roswell has been twisted and warped into something it never was. Could Sherman have simply destroyed the manufacturing capacity and not shipped the women away? Yes. Could those who were running the operation have simply stood up and admitted what they were doing? Yes. But neither happened.

    24. "prove the French flag was a ruse."

      Ok, it wasn't owned by the French.

    25. From a study of the site:

      As Union troops advanced upon Roswell, Georgia in July of 1864, Confederate Adjutant A. W. Harris wrote on behalf of Colonel M. H. Wright in Atlanta to the Captain of the Roswell Battalion, stationed in Roswell, to retreat across the Chattahoochee River toward Atlanta to avoid allowing their arms and ammunition to fall into the hands of the enemy. James Roswell King, Captain of the Roswell
      Battalion and son of one of the founders of the Roswell Manufacturing Company, gave final instructions to his “head man” to keep the mills running “until driven out” by the soldiers. Then,
      with his seventy- five men, he withdrew across the river and burned the bridge behind him. To keep the munitions from falling into the hands of the Union soldiers, he left Roswell and its collection of cotton, wool, and flour mills unprotected against
      the advancing army. All that remained to defend them were the elderly, the women and children who worked in the mills, two mill superintendents, and a few foreign workers. The Reverend Nathaniel Pratt, Presbyterian minister, also stayed behind to tend his flock and defend the homes of the wealthy owners of the mills, who earlier fled to Atlanta, Macon, Augusta, or Savannah. The men entrusted with the task of keeping the woolen mill running in the face of an advancing enemy, executed a desperate plan. They hoisted a French flag belonging to an employee and citizen of
      France, weaver Theophile Rochè, above the mill and continued operations. When General Kenner Garrard of the Union Army marched into Roswell on July 6, 1864, Rochè claimed that he, a French national, was an owner of the mills and that the
      soldiers should not harm the mills since they operated under a neutral flag. This gambit worked until the next day when Garrard, inspecting the mills, observed the letters CSA woven into the cloth.
      He immediately closed the mills, removed large amounts of cloth, thread, and rope for the use of the Union Army, and ordered the mills burned. At the direction of General William Tecumseh Sherman, Garrard arrested the mill workers on charges of treason and marched them under guard to Marietta as prisoners of war, where Union soldiers put them on trains heading north.

    26. War is hell is a convenient excuse for the abuses of non-combatants. As morally depraved as Sherman proved to be I would be embarrassed to have to resort to the baseness of quoting him for any justification.

    27. -- and still you have proved nothing except you support a war on women and children.

      We all can read and we all see your tactic of denying sources.

      Yep on Cold Southernn Steel you and your childish ways would have been long gone. You Yankees are easily scared. In fact so scared you big brave Union generals were scared of a bunch of women LOL LOL LOL

  7. First, my apologies to Mr. Sanford. The last part of my post was for Mr. Purvis, and I meant to include my response to Mr. Sanford's post. So here goes...

    Yes, the JD Highway was initiated about 50 years after the war. That is one. My point is the majority of highways and schools whose names are under the greatest scrutiny today are ones who had an initial name and were changed to something Confederate related in the 1950s and 1960s. The recent school (in Florida I think) named after Forrest which was changed is a classic case. It wasn't named for Forrest initially. It was changed in the 1950s and now is changed again. If something, like the JD Highway, was the original name, I'm all for NOT changing the name, no matter what the political pressure.

    Now I must say this. I have lived in the South for over a decade and have raised my children here. So you're stuck with me. :)

    1. A whole decade, huh? I guess you think that makes you a Southerner now?

      Why did you come South?

    2. Mr. Jacobson, the recently renamed school in Jacksonville, Florida didn't exist until 1959, and it had no name before being named for Forrest. It was simply "New School 207." There were several groups advocating for different names for the new school (Valhalla HS, Wesconnett HS after the neighborhood where it was located. The UDC pushed Forrest's name.) Wikipedia says "After multiple votes failed to find agreement, the Duval County School Board voted to name the school Nathan B. Forrest High School on September 17, 1959." The sources for this info is listed as various Florida news outlets, two print, one television.

    3. Robert E. Lee High School in Montgomery, Alabama didn't have another name that got changed in the 1950s. The school didn't exist until 1955. Another case in point. Escambia High School here in Pensacola. The school didn't exist before 1958. The school mascot was a Confederate soldier, the team nickname was the Rebels, and the band played Dixie. ( At Lee HS. the mascot is the Generals.)

      Lee and Escambia and Forrest-turned-Westside have a look of mid-century modernism to their architecture, testifying to the period of their origins.

      In the 1950s, people were anticipating the approaching centennial of the civil war -- some official commissions were created as early as 1957.

      I know there are people who want to see white Southerners (with a few exceptions) as a bunch of scum-sucking racist hick supremacists; they want to think that in the past, said Southerners did everything from a motive of resisting civil rights and integration, and the do everything now from a motive of antagonizing or alienating blacks. But that's an untrue and arrogant view. It reflects the leftist-inspired methodology of taking the small, worst element and projecting it upon the whole.

      Our regional pride (which is certainly reflected in the names we give things) has less to do with distinctions between white and black Southerners, and more to do with distinctions between the South and other regions -- i.e., between white Southerners and white everybody else in the United States. That's my opinion, a conclusion drawn from a lifetime of first hand observation and experience.

      A common claim of the civil rights movement and desegregation was that blacks had been excluded from the mainstream of the US and they just wanted to take their rightful place in country and its culture. Despite the resistance of many, other people thought the claim was reasonable and understandable, and thought bringing blacks into mainstream culture was the right thing to do to correct old wrongs.

      Thing is, in many instances, blacks didn't just want to become a part of what they'd been excluded from. Escambia High School is an example. They wanted to CHANGE what already was. They wanted some unnecessary change to be FORCED onto white people by the power and authority of government, the courts, etc. Wasn't that what had forced segregation for so long? And do people realize that using it to get your way legitimizes the other guy using it to get his way?

      It would be interesting to know just how many of those schools, roads, parks, etc., named for Confederate heroes or battles, etc., in the 1950s really were, as you say, named something else before. It would be interesting, indeed, to read the minutes of boards, commissions. councils, legislatures, that gave the reason(s) for the namings and re-namings.

      Escambia riots:,735363

    4. Connie, I don't think it matters why I came south, other than I happen to like it here, and it is a great place to raise my daughters. :)

    5. Nice try Connie, but the Florida school was originally a white only school. Obviously that is no longer the case. If you cannot see the problem with keeping the Forrest name, then not much I can say will ever matter.

    6. Eric Jacobson, do you consider yourself to be a Southerner?

    7. I'm an American who happens to live in the South.

  8. One more....the situation in Memphis is one I do not support. The name Forrest Park should remain, and in fact I am meeting with someone next week about what steps might be taken to have the name returned. I am not hopeful, but we shall see.

  9. Why are you reluctant to answer the question of why you came South?

    1. Not reluctant at all. I actually answered you. I came here simply because I love the South, and it is a great place to raise my daughters.

  10. yankee account --

    The word " bummer " has so often occurred in this work, that I think it well to give an account of the signification of the name. Any man who has seen the object that it applies to will acknowledge that it was admirably selected. Fancy a ragged man, blackened by the smoke of many a pine-knot fire, mounted on a scraggy mule, without a saddle, with a gun, a knapsack, a
    butcher knife, and a plug hat, stealing his way through the pine forests far out on the flanks of a column, keen on the scent of rebels, or bacon, or silver spoons, or corn, or anything valuable, and you have him in your mind. Think how you would admire him if you were a lone woman, with a family of small
    children, far from help, when he blandly inquired where you kept your valuables. Think how you would smile when he pried open your chests with his bayonet, or knocked to pieces your tables, pianos, and chairs, tore your bed clothing in three-inch strips, and scattered them about the yard. The bummers say it takes too much time to use keys. Color is no protection from these roughriders. They go through a negro cabin, in search of diamonds and gold watches, with just as much freedom and vivacity as they "loot" the dwelling of a wealthy planter. They appear to be possessed of a spirit of
    "pure cussedness." One incident of many will illustrate : A bummer stepped into a house and inquired for sorghum. The lady of the house presented a jug, which he said was too heavy ; so he merely filled his canteen. Then taking a huge wad of tobacco from his mouth, he thrust it into the jug. The lady inquired, in wonder, why he spoiled that which he did not want. " O, some feller will come along and taste that sorghum, and think you've poisoned him ; then he'll burn your d — d old house." There are hundreds of these mounted men with the column, and they go everywhere. Some of them are loaded
    down with silver ware, gold coin, and other valuables. I hazard nothing in saying that three fifths (in value) of the personal property of the counties we have passed through were taken by Sherman's army.


Comments are welcome, but monitored.