VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paul Finkelman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paul Finkelman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:37:34 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
well you might start by looking at the events in Alton, Illinois and the murder, by a mob of MISSOURIANS, who crossed overt there river to attack and killed Elijah P. Lovejoy, who was chased out of St. Louis (where is had lived) and forced to move to Illinois.

There were abolitionists prosecuted and sent to jail for allegedly trying to "steal slaves."  What the US Army did after the war began is very different that the climate in much of Missouri before the  War, when Dred Scott was decided.  During there war, as you probably know, there were atrocities committed by pro-Confederate gangs -- Jesse James, the Youngers, etc -- including stopping hospital trains of wounded US Army soldiers and killed them in cold blood.  There were native Missourians in action.

Do you really think an abolitionist in 1857 had free speech or free press in Missouri?

The last one to try was Lovejoy and he was chased out of the state and murdered by Missourians following him to Illinois.


 
----
Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY  12208


518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)


[log in to unmask]


www.paulfinkelman.com


________________________________
 From: Craig Kilby <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Dred Scott decision
 
Paul,

You have somewhat clarified the Dred Scott decision, yet muddied it up at the same time. I will leave it to others to dissect your take on it. I wish only to address this statement:

On Dec 15, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Finkelman, Paul <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> First Missouri was a slave state. Period. Its Senators and Congressmen voted with the deep south on most issues; it laws persecuted free blacks (like other slave states) and abolitionists risked mobs or prosecution for opposing slavery.  In 1860 there were 115,000 slaves in Missouri.  Why Mr. Adams would think (in a previous post) Missouri was not a slave state is beyond my comprehension. 

Indeed, Missouri was slave state, and had been since it admittance the Union, as was of course one half of the "Missouri Compromise" in 1820. It did indeed vote to secede from the Union, though its convention voted pro-Union and the legislature and Governor soon fled the capital under General Lyon's union troops. That perhaps is another story. But like it or not, the 13th star in the Confederate flag was for Missouri. But only in a symbolic way. And I digress, except to say Missouri had its own civil war, and had more battles than the entire South combined. It was a very ugly affair.

That aside, I wish to address this part of your statement:

"it laws persecuted free blacks (like other slave states) and abolitionists risked mobs or prosecution for opposing slavery."

Where on earth do you come up with that? "Risked mobs?" What are you smoking?

Mob scenes maybe. But it was the Union army shooting down the pro-Southern "mobs" at the outbreak of the Civil War. Not the other way around.

Please, if you may,  enlighten me on my Missouri history.

Yours,
Craig Kilby
Native Missourian


______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US