When do you think the American Revolution began? Was it with the signing of the Declaration of Independence; was it with the opening skirmish at Lexington and Concord? I think it became inevitability the moment the Stamp Act was passed in 1765. This one small tax on printed goods was the first in a long train of events which culminated in the Colonies deciding they didn’t want to be governed by British rule anymore.

Therefore, if the Stamp Act was the opening act of the American Revolution, what would you say was the opening act of the so-called Civil War? I may be alone in thinking this, but I think that the implementation of the plan for a government, as outlined by the Constitution, was the first of many events that eventually led to the South seeking its independence from the system of government they had helped bring to life just 70 some odd years earlier. I’ll get to that in more detail in a moment, but for the time being I’d like to discuss another issue that is of concern to me.

I am constantly hearing all this rubbish from those on the political right about how Barack Obama was America’s worst president ever. Whether it was due to his policies or the divisiveness he brought to this country people tell me Obama will go down in the history books as America’s worst president. When I hear that it is all I can do to not fall on the ground in a fit of laughter. Barack Obama was NOT our worst president, not by a long shot; Abraham Lincoln was. Now I’m not giving Obama a free pass; he was a lousy president; it’s just that he wasn’t the worst we’ve ever had.

Abraham Lincoln brought war and death to American soil on a scale heretofore never seen, and never repeated. Under the leadership of Abraham Lincoln entire tracts of land were left barren due to his total war against the South. Under the leadership of Lincoln the entire Southern economy and infrastructure was left in ruins. Under the leadership of Abraham Lincoln the principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence were torn down and replaced with government without consent. Under the leadership of Abraham Lincoln free speech was lost to all those who opposed his war; with newspapers being shut down and journalists who opposed him imprisoned for speaking their minds. Under Abraham Lincoln Habeas Corpus was suspended, State Legislatures were restricted from convening so that they could vote on the issue of secession, and he even, temporarily, issued an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court because he had ruled against Lincoln.

Then, to add insult to injury, after the war ended, his party, the Republican Party treated the South like conquered territories; dividing them into military districts and setting former Union Generals in positions of authority over them. The Southern States were also forced to accept certain measures that they disagreed with before the ruling Republican Party would allow them to send representatives back to Congress to represent them.

And yet Abraham Lincoln is idolized, with millions visiting his monument every year; all while monuments dedicated to the heroes of the Civil War have their monuments torn to the ground based upon the lies and half truths we have been taught in school about this period of American History which saw the death of more than half a million Americans; more than in any other war America has fought since.

If one would but listen they could hear the crying of truth and justice; saying let the truth about the Civil War be heard, let it have its day in the courtroom of public opinion; and only then, when all the facts have been heard, let the public render a verdict of guilt upon those responsible for this tragic period of American History that saw families torn apart and the entire framework upon which our system of government rested upon rent asunder.

But as I said, I believe the Civil War became inevitable the moment the Constitution was ratified and the government it outlined went into effect. Had the government stuck to the few specific powers given it by the Constitution, and promised it would exercise during the ratification assemblies, the Civil War might have been avoided; or at least postponed. The moment the Washington administration got its feet on the ground Alexander Hamilton began to implement his policy of using government to create a mighty American Empire with a strong government that helped grow American business and industry.

Almost from its inception as a free and independent country, America was divided into two distinct regions; the more industrialized North and the agricultural South. As there was no income tax at the time, the money needed to fund the government came from tariffs and duties imposed upon goods. To help grow Northern industry and businesses the government began to impose tariffs upon manufactured goods imported into the United States; similar to what President Trump is now proposing to give American businesses an advantage over foreign markets.

However, there were no tariffs imposed upon the raw materials used to produce these goods. What this did was limit the ability of the South to buy foreign made goods due to the high cost associated with them due to the tariffs imposed upon all imported goods. But, at the same time, the North, which manufactured goods from raw materials, enjoyed a free market where they were able to choose between buying raw materials from either the South of from foreign markets.

The cost of having goods transported to the South from the North was almost as bad as the cost of buying goods from foreign markets with the tariffs added to them, so the South was hit with a double whammy; they had to pay the high cost of purchasing the goods made from the raw materials they produced, and fight against foreign competition because there were no protective tariffs on the raw materials their economy produced. At times these tariffs were upwards of 45%, so you can see that the South was being exploited; not only were they paying higher prices for goods and facing unbridled competition from foreign markets, the money being collected from these tariffs was flowing Northward to build up the infrastructure of the North; such as railroads and other internal improvements; without nary a penny of it being used to aid the South.

This, by the way, was one of the things Patrick Henry feared about the proposed Constitution, and why he argued so fervently against its ratification. On June 5, 1788 Henry declared, “You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased, nor how you are to become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured; for liberty ought to be the direct end of your Government.” Yet from the moment George Washington was sworn in as our first President, he chose to ignore Thomas Jefferson’s pleadings; instead choosing to implement the policies of Alexander Hamilton which put America squarely on the path which led to the industrial North plundering the wealth of the South.

You may think I am overstating things, but in 1828 Senator Thomas Hart Benton, (D. Missouri) delivered a speech to Congress in which he said, “I feel for the sad changes, which have taken place in the South, during the last fifty years. Before the Revolution, it was the seat of wealth, as well as hospitality. Money, and all it commanded, abounded there. But how is it now? All this is reversed. Wealth has fled from the South, and settled in regions north of the Potomac; and this in the face of the fact, that the South, in four staples alone, has exported produce, since the Revolution, to the value of eight hundred millions, of dollars; and the North has exported comparatively nothing…. Under Federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of the Federal revenue…. Virginia, the two Carolinas, and Georgia, may be said to defray three-fourths, of the annual expense of supporting the Federal Government; and of this great sum, annually furnished by them, nothing, or next to nothing is returned to them, in the shape of government expenditures. That expenditure flows in an opposite direction—it flows northwardly, in one uniform, uninterrupted, and perennial stream. This is the reason why wealth disappears from the South and rises up in the North…taking from the South, and returning nothing to it.”

Bet you weren’t taught that in history class. But I bet you were taught that the Civil War was about saving the Union and ending the reprehensible practice of slavery; which is why the Confederacy is painted in such a bad light these days; because after all, if they were fighting against the Union and its noble cause, they must have been fighting to keep their slaves… right?

WRONG!!!

If slavery was all the South was fighting for, (which it wasn’t), then wouldn’t you think that any peaceful means of keeping their slaves would have been preferable to war? Ever hear of something called the Corwin Amendment? The Corwin Amendment, had it gone into effect, would have been the 13th amendment to the Constitution…and it would have made slavery permanent and irrevocable in America. The Corwin Amendment had already been passed by both Houses of Congress and was on its way to the States for ratification when the war broke out.

The text of the amendment states, “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.” Abraham Lincoln supported ratification of this amendment, stating, “I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution–which amendment, however, I have not seen–has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.” (Lincoln’s Inaugural Address)

Therefore, if slavery was the ONLY issue the South was fighting for, why didn’t they just adopt this Corwin Amendment and stay in the Union? Yes the South utilized slave labor to an extent that was greater than in the North, but slavery was not the reason they seceded, and it certainly wasn’t the cause of the war itself. The war came about when Lincoln refused to let them leave the Union; believing it was his duty to hold the Union together; even if it meant waging war against the South to do so.

You see, Lincoln was not so much concerned with maintaining the Union; there was an ulterior motive. Had the South been impoverished I think he wouldn’t have cared one way or another if they had chosen to secede. But they weren’t impoverished, they were the source of wealth which the government had been plundering; and if he allowed them to secede his government would have crumbled into ruin; so he couldn’t let them go.

A key to this is found in Lincoln’s 1862 letter to Horace Greeley, where he states, “The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be the Union as it was…” meaning business as usual with the continued plunder of Southern wealth to fund his government.

Your history books don’t teach you that some in the North supported the South’s right to secede, while others, associated with business and commerce were in a hissy-fit over the secession of the Southern ‘cotton’ States. Newspapers across the North decried the South’s secession from the Union; and gave their reasons why they opposed letting the South go in peace.

On December 10, 1860 the Chicago Daily Times published the following, “In one single blow our foreign commerce may be reduced to less than one-half what it now is. Our coastwise trade would pass into other hands. One half of our shipping would lie idle at our wharves. We should lose our trade with the South, with all its immense profits. Our manufactories would be in utter ruin. Let the South adopt the free trade system, or that of a tariff for revenue, and these results would likely follow.”

On February 19, 1861 the Union Democrat Manchester, out of New Hampshire, published the following, “The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? Literally nothing… it is very clear that the South gains by this process and we lose. No… we must not let the South go.”

In an 1861 editorial entitled, What Shall Be Done For a Revenue, the Chicago Daily Times wrote, “That either the revenue from duties must be collected in the ports of the rebel states, or the port must be closed to importations from abroad is generally admitted. If neither of these things be done, our revenue laws are substantially repealed; the sources which supply our treasury will be dried up; we shall have no money to carry on the government; the nation will become bankrupt before the next crop of corn is ripe. There will be nothing to furnish means of subsistence to the army; nothing to keep our navy afloat; nothing to pay the salaries of public officers; the present order of things must come to a dead stop.”

None of those articles make mention of slavery; their only concern is the harm allowing the South to peacefully secede would cause to Northern businesses and the revenue stream of the government. Heck, Lincoln himself said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” (Also taken from his Inaugural Address)

Lincoln furthermore stated, “If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.” (Lincoln’s letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862)

There is so much more I could go into, but I fear I might lose many due to my bombarding them with too much information. I hope that what I have said has been enough to cause you to question all that you have been taught about the so-called Civil War, and also cause you to seek out more information regarding this period of American History which saw our government go from being a servant of the people to their master.

One other thought before I close. Have you ever stopped to wonder, that is if you even knew, why no Confederate Generals or leaders ever stood trial for treason against the United States? Could it be that had they gone to trial they would have been vindicated because at the time secession was believed to be a State’s right? Could it be that the cause of the war could not have been shifted from economic plunder to the freeing of the slaves; placing the blame for the war squarely upon the shoulders of one man; Abraham Lincoln?

These are just a few of the reasons I believe Lincoln was our worst president ever, and why I spit on both him and his legacy. If you have any integrity, any virtue, you will seek out the truth regarding this period of American History and revise your opinions on who were the bad guys in this conflict. Maybe then, instead of removing Confederate Monuments we can call for the removal of the monument dedicated to America’s worst president ever; Abraham Lincoln.

September 4, 2018

~ The Author ~
Neal Ross, Student of history, politics, patriot and staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Send all comments to: bonsai@syix.com.

If you liked Neal’s latest column, maybe you’ll like his latest booklet: The Civil War: (The Truth You Have Not Been Told) AND don’t forget to pick up your copy of ROSS: Unmasked – An Angry American Speaks Out – and stay tuned – Neal has a new, greatly expanded book coming soon dealing with the harsh truths about the so-called American Civil War of 1861-1865. Life continues to expand for this prolific writer and guardian of TRUE American history.