- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anyone Else Purchasing a Robert E. Lee Concrete Statue
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:13 pm to Sayre
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:13 pm to Sayre
quote:
Not true. He owned a small number of them personally during his lifetime.
Link?
quote:
He was also the administrator of his father in law's will.
True. I think I was the first person in the thread to mention this.
quote:
He used a provision in it to retain Parke Custis's slaves in bondage in order to produce income for the estate to retire debt.
In other words, he followed the directions/provisions of the will - the slaves were freed on December 29th, 1862 - notably while there was a shooting war on and his attention was diverted. And this was some months prior to Federal occupation of his wife's property or the Emancipation Proclamation.
This post was edited on 4/23/18 at 9:14 pm
0
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:16 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
How is that stretching the truth?
He held them longer than the will decreed. Years later in some cases.
He owned the plantation/farm where many slaves were...er... employeed.
The Civil War was deciding factor on his slaves being freed, not some moral obligation he had.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:18 pm to Jimmydatiger
quote:
US Grant owned slaves and didn't free them until 1867 - two years after the war ended. Or so I read in the history books
I think the only slave we know he owned personally was William Jones and he freed him in 1859. As far as the Dents' slaves at White Haven, they weren't technically freed by the EP in 1863, but by state constitutional amendment they were legally freed on January 11, 1865. Most (or all) had already walked off the plantation by that point, but legally he couldn't have done anything with their status after January 11, 1865 and, under jurisdiction of the United States by January 31st, 1865, the XIIIth Amendment freed them, legally.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:23 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
He held them longer than the will decreed.
There are no credible allegations he violated the terms of the will. The will said "no later than 5 years" - I'm not defending any of it - slavery for a second is bad, but the man didn't enslave anyone - he freed over 100 slaves.
quote:
e owned the plantation/farm where many slaves were...er... employeed.
That was dower property of his wife, Mary. Lee didn't hold any title to it.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:31 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
It is now in the Museum of the Confederacy.
That place is something, regardless on your views it is a very well done museum, if in Richmond I recomend it.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:31 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
There are no credible allegations he violated the terms of the will. The will said "no later than 5 years" - I'm not defending any of it - slavery for a second is bad, but the man didn't enslave anyone - he freed over 100 slaves.
He didn't enslave them. He just held them....longer than he was obligated to.
quote:
That was dower property of his wife, Mary. Lee didn't hold any title to it.
Seriously. What a fricking defense.
Lee had to be one of the most aloof frickers who ever lived if this is the defense for what he did.
How did he free his wife's slaves if didn't own them?
This post was edited on 4/23/18 at 9:33 pm
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:34 pm to Big_Slim
Melt bitch.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:36 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
He just held them....longer than he was obligated to.
Will said - until debts and obligations are cleared - no later than 5 years.
Lee said, somewhat rhetorically, that he wished he owned 4 million slaves so he could free them to preserve the union and avoid war.
Ironically, he never owned a single one - and freed those for whom he was responsible.
quote:
Lee had to be one of the most aloof frickers who ever lived if this is the defense for what he did.
Inherited property was a big deal back then - Lee's father had basically lost all of theirs - his mother eeked by. He was a soldier - not necessarily the path to riches itself. He married well. I don't know what else to tell you.
Neither he nor his wife were fans of that peculiar institution. It was a very, very complicated issue. It is not as simple as "southern white people = bad, everyone else = good" - though many wish it were so simple.
quote:
How did he free his wife's slaves if didn't own them?
He was named administer/executor of his father-in-law's will.
This post was edited on 4/23/18 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:36 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Yorba Linda, CA and Round Rock, TX? Which one of those places do you have to strap on your sudearm while mowing the lawn?
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:40 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Neither he nor his wife were fans of that peculiar institution. It was a very, very complicated issue. It is not as simple as "southern white people = bad, everyone else = good" - though many wish it were so simple.
The only part of your post that I agree with.
Everything else is trying to excuse behavior that doesn't need an excuse. Why is it so hard to admit that Lee held slaves in bondage for the benefit of his financial gain? It's as if some people feel Lee was some morally absolute individual.
This post was edited on 4/23/18 at 9:41 pm
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:42 pm to Tiger Prawn
quote:
Need to get one and mount it on top of a ladder for Mardi Gras
Yeah! A 3-1/2' tall, 150 lb chunk of concrete on top of a step ladder at a Mardi Gras parade is a GREAT idea! What could possibly go wrong?
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:55 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
Everything else is trying to excuse behavior that doesn't need an excuse.
I'm not excusing anything. Allegations that Robert E. Lee was a slaveowner, as that term is widely used, are factually unsupportable.
quote:
Why is it so hard to admit that Lee held slaves in bondage for the benefit of his financial gain?
Insofar as he oversaw the operation of a fairly large slaveholding, at some point it is a somewhat fine distinction.
quote:
It's as if some people feel Lee was some morally absolute individual.
Like they do with Lincoln? The reality is reality. There is no good reason for Lee to be so polarizing today. He was clearly not a fan of slavery and had no desire to go to war over it. He thought it was silly and reckless. If Virginia had not seceded, there is no question that he would have led the Union forces. He chose his state and his family over the "nation" and that is completely understandable in the context of the times.
On the other hand, the image of him as a kindly grandfather is somewhat disputed by contemporary accounts of his conduct administering the Custis slaves, with some reporting "good" and just actions, while others leveling charges of abuse.
No one is "morally" absolute. The myths surrounding him, particularly the quasi-religious stature he takes in the "Lost Cause" forgets that his costly actions at Gettysburg, despite all his brilliance up to that point, essentially guaranteed Union victory on their terms and ended any chance of a negotiated settlement.
But he didn't legally own slaves or enslave anyone. Period. U.S. Grant, for sure, owned at least 1 more slave than Robert E. Lee did.
Let that sink in and think about all the times someone said the war wasn't really about slavery. Of course it was and it wasn't as the same time, but modern Americans don't have the stomach for nuance, context or any shite like that.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 9:55 pm to White Roach
Come visit the Eastern shore of Va and see the remnants of the original Arlington on Plantation Creek. Very interesting history with Indians, indentured servants and slaves all working the Custis land. The whites sided with England..
Posted on 4/23/18 at 10:00 pm to PhilipMarlowe
quote:
Melt bitch.
Good. Keeping the Aggie stereotype of stupidity alive.
Posted on 4/23/18 at 10:07 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Would make a great bird bath base
Posted on 4/23/18 at 10:27 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Pics of receipts
Posted on 4/23/18 at 10:29 pm to Crawdaddy
"On several occasions before he died, former Confederate General Robert E. Lee expressed opposition to proposals to erect Civil War monuments and memorials, including some devoted specifically to the Confederacy. "As it regards the erection of such a monument, my conviction is that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the south, the attempt in the present condition would have the effect of accelerating the difficulties under which the southern people labour. Moreover, I think it well not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nation's who endeavoured to obliterate the marks of civil strife and to commit to oblivion the feelings it engendered."
Posted on 4/23/18 at 10:34 pm to Big_Slim
quote:
I always find it funny when a bunch of neckbeards talk shite about a guy that has been hailed by multiple presidents as a man of supreme talent and character
I think your confused about the definition of a neckbeard.
Posted on 4/24/18 at 5:55 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Oh god I hate the "Lee was opposed to slavery" crowd. That letter that's used to justify it does not portray Lee in a good light when it comes to slavery. Yeah he says that slavery is an evil, but he goes full on "White Man's Burden" in it, then goes on to basically say that Abolitionists are evil people and are going against God's wishes, because if God had wanted black people to be free then He would have prompted the people to make them free.
Which is itself a rather dis-ingenuous argument since on the one hand he's saying that abolitionists are evil, and yet he's also saying that slavery will end when God moves on everybody to make it that way.
The letter is here for those who want to read it.
Pertinent points:
1.) He rails against those in the North who would "interfere with & change the domestic institutions of the South", then goes on to say that the only way to accomplish those goals (the Abolitionist's goals) is through civil war (because who cares about democratic institutions, right?)
2.) Slavery is a greater evil to the white man than the black.
3.) Blacks are immeasurably better off in America than Africa.
4.) Painful discipline is necessary to improve them as a race. (Hey, it's ok to whip them and then pour salt on the wounds, because it's good for them.)
5.) Emancipation will come through the influence of Christianity. But only the influence of Southern Christians, because we don't want "fiery controversy"
6.) We shouldn't press for emancipation, but pray for it's end and leave it in God's hands. (Clearly men can't do anything about it. God is going to have to come down and do some smiting for it to end.)
7.) It's taken two thousand years for men to be made as Christian as they are and they're still full of errors! Think of how much longer it will take for God's influence to work on slavery.
8.) Oh and the Abolitionist better not create "angry feelings in the Master" because that wouldn't be right. He [the Abolitionist] should just wait for God to make things right (even if it takes 2,000 years)
9.) Abolitionism is an evil course.
10.) Abolitionists are intolerant of the spiritual liberty of others (by which he really means they're intolerant of white Southerns holding slaves).
It doesn't portray Lee in a good light at all, and only by taking the sentence completely out of context can you get to the idea of him being opposed to slavery.
Then of course there's the other things you mentioned in your comment. The continued use of slaves after he should have freed them. The legal suit to keep them as slaves. The harsh treatment he gave those who tried to run away. His fighting for a country that enshrined slavery in it's constitution. Him allowing (not just allowing--it was practically standard operating procedure) his men to take freed blacks on raids and sell them into slavery in the South.
Seems like you have no factual proof Lee didn't actually own slaves when there is quite a bit of evidence showing he not only owned slaves, but he felt blacks were inferior
Posted on 4/24/18 at 5:57 am to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
lets everyone know where you stand.
Sounds like desegragation all over again.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News