Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yupster

(14,308 posts)
37. It was a very interesting tid-bit of US history
Tue May 16, 2017, 10:03 AM
May 2017

US Grant is the hero of the story.

He and his old friend and best man at his wedding Confederate General James Longstreet kept in contact across the lines trying to organize a meeting that would lead to an end to the war. They kept coming up with reasons for a meeting, like prisoner exchanges. The Union government was adamant against a meeting without an agreement to rejoin the Union. Lincoln kept telling the other side that he would be incredibly generous. Everything was negotiable, but they must agree to rejoin the Union before any meeting could happen.

When the southern delegation of Stephens, the VP of the Confederacy who opposed secession in the first place and an old friend of Lincoln's from his Whig Party days. Confederate Senator Robert Hunter and former US Supreme Court Justice John Campbell arrived at Union lines, they were held and not let through. Lincoln was contacted and asked if they brought authority to end the war, and the answer was no, not at the expense of their country. They were then not let through.

That's when Grant pulled rank and pushed them through the lines and against all orders toward the President. They sat for a few days until Lincoln decided he would meet with them, but not on US soil, but on the steamer, "The River Queen."

In the February 3 conference Lincoln tried to assure the Confederate delegation that he couldn't make promises, but he would be good for his word that he would do everything he could to bring the country together peacefully if the Confederates would lay down their arms by April 1. The conference ended with the Confederates saying they would go back to brief President Davis and they asked if Lincoln could put his promises in writing.

Davis used the terms to rally what was left of southern war spirit noting that Lincoln would not compromise. Lincoln wanted the Confederacy crushed and Davis did not have the Constitutional authority to negotiate his own nation out of existence even if he wanted to. Lincoln was good for his word. He put his plans into writing. He offered amnesty to southern soldiers and leaders. He offered return of all property but slaves. He offered the south $ 200 million to pay for lost slaves if they laid down arms by April 1 and another $ 200 million if they ratified the Thirteenth Amendment by July 1. When Seward complained, Lincoln noted that the north was complicit in the slave trade too. Lincoln's proposal was unpopular in the cabinet and the congress and went no further.

It was a deal the south should have jumped on because as it turns out, Lee abandoned Richmond on April 2 and surrendered about a week later.

Quite the what if of history. A lot of things could have turned out differently in history if leaders were more flexible and wise.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

The protest was not in Richmond, it was in Charlottesville. Yonnie3 May 2017 #1
Jefferson's University of Virginia trof May 2017 #6
Yes and rally leader, white supremacist Richard Spencer, got a BA at UVA in 2001. n/t Yonnie3 May 2017 #7
Yeah, I think I just looked at where it was filed ProudLib72 May 2017 #8
This is local, so it jumped out at me. Yonnie3 May 2017 #10
My point is the absurd rationalization of racism ProudLib72 May 2017 #12
Ha! I was worried someone might think I was condoning them. Yonnie3 May 2017 #15
The south truly was devastated by the war Yupster May 2017 #17
Most of those there are from elsewhere... Demsrule86 May 2017 #22
The city is not redneck but Yonnie3 May 2017 #24
That is true...but Charlottesville area is becoming an extension of Northern Virginia. Demsrule86 May 2017 #26
Yes, but blue mostly near the city. Yonnie3 May 2017 #27
I wonder if he died still rationalizing evil. Boomerproud May 2017 #2
Isn't every age Yupster May 2017 #18
I think he was trying to rationalize something in a different time. kentuck May 2017 #3
By the end of his life Lincoln did. Thaddeus Stevens was always there. DemocratSinceBirth May 2017 #4
We would have been treestar May 2017 #5
Today is not all that different ProudLib72 May 2017 #9
I like your posts, but disagree on this point: raccoon May 2017 #29
I didn't explain that correctly in the previous post ProudLib72 May 2017 #32
Just before the end of the Civil War, Yupster May 2017 #33
Wow. Now that is interesting. nt raccoon May 2017 #35
It was a very interesting tid-bit of US history Yupster May 2017 #37
What did Lincoln (and congress) make of Grant pulling rank? ProudLib72 May 2017 #38
Yes, Grant was pushing Lincoln to do what he thought he wanted to do anyway Yupster May 2017 #39
Historians call it Yupster May 2017 #20
Why were there generals like Grant who truly believed in the cause they were fighting for? DemocratSinceBirth May 2017 #23
Lee was an unreconstructed racist. Buzz cook May 2017 #11
I agree ProudLib72 May 2017 #13
Revisionists keep trotting out the "arm the slaves" letter Buzz cook May 2017 #16
Lee wanted to arm the slaves because Yupster May 2017 #19
He was a traitor, plain and simple, and quite frankly, what we now call white priviledge is... brush May 2017 #28
It was only fitting that his inherited estate became Arlinton Cemetary. Scruffy1 May 2017 #14
Which general do you think would have done significantly better than Lee Yupster May 2017 #21
My Confederate ancestor survived Pickett's charge... VOX May 2017 #25
Interesting post. That's good that you know so much about him. raccoon May 2017 #30
True. He wasn't on the muster sheet until April, 1862... VOX May 2017 #34
Sadly, it wasn't only a Southern ideology. Caliman73 May 2017 #31
Lee was speaking from the ignorance engendered by his privilege. n/t Orsino May 2017 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Analysis of a Robert E Le...»Reply #37