GDG- New Museum introduction

[Margaret D. Blough]

Chuck

>>After touring it, I was talking to several people and all said the same thing about the introductory area. In this area the cause of the war was stressed as being about slavery. I think it made a good point, and was well presented. I very much agree with it. However many visitors from the south still hold to the lost cause. The general consensus from the people I  talked to varied from "this will close a lot of minds before they even start to see anything", to "this will start the war all over again". No one thought it was a good idea. <<

For such display to close any minds, the minds would have had to be open to begin with.  

The Civil War was our great national Greek tragedy that ended a futile effort among many white Americans to put the issue of slavery out of sight and out of mind that had been ongoing since the birth of the United States, even though Madison stated during the Constitutional Convention:

 >>It seemed now to be pretty well understood that the real difference of interests lay, not between the large & small but between the N. & Southn States. The institution of slavery & its consequences formed the line of discrimination. There were 5 States on the South, 8 on the Northn. side of this line. Should a proportl. representation take place it was true, the N. side would still outnumber the other; but not in the same degree, at this time; and every day would tend towards an equilibrium.<<

I strongly believe that the suffering and death which the Civil War brought is trivialized if we treat the Civil War in general and Gettysburg in particular like a live action war game with live ammunition without context or explanation as to why two groups of brave, noble men were doing their level best to annihilate each other.  If you read pro-slavery/pro-secession sources from the antebellum period rather than the postwar efforts of the Lost Causers to evade responsibility for the disaster that the Civil War proved to be for white Southerners and displace it to others, there is no room for doubt.  Some secessionists did a laundry list of past grievances but, for the most part, they came back to protecting slavery from the threat that a Republican president was perceived as posing to the Peculiar Institution.  I can think of no stronger statement than that made by Lawrence Keitt during the South Carolina secession convention debates.  Keitt was a leading fire-eater who made the 
ultimate sacrifice to the cause he supported. Keitt joined the Confederate army and was killed in action at Cold Harbor.  At the secession convention, Keitt listened to others recite the laundry list of Southern grievances against the North and responded:


>>Mr. KEITT. I agree with the gentleman from Richland, that the power of taxation is the central power of all governments. Put that power into my hands, and I care very little what the form of government it is; I will control your people through it. That is the question in this address. We have instructed the Committee to present a summary of the reasons which influenced us in the action we have now taken. My friend from Richland said that the violation of the Fugitive Slave Laws are not sufficient, and he calls up the Tariff. Is that one of the causes at this time? What is that cause? Your late Senators, and every one of your members of the House of Representatives, voted for the present tariff. [Mr. Miles. I did not.] Well, those who were there at the time voted for it, and I have no doubt you would, if you were in it. The question of the tariff did agitate us in 1832, and it did array this State against the Federal Government. 

I maintain, and do always maintain, that this State triumphed then. Mr. Clay said, before nullification, that the protective tariff system had been established for all time. After the Nullification Ordinance, Mr. Clay did say that the State had accomplished the destruction of that system, and that the State had triumphed. The history of that time has never been written. It is true, we were cheated in the compromise; and really, sir, in what single compromise have we not been cheated? My opinion is, that the State of South Carolina and every other Southern State have been dealing with faithless confederates. 

But the Tariff is not the question which brought the people up to their present attitude. We are to give a summary of our causes to the world, but mainly to the other Southern States, whose co-action we wish, and we must not make a fight on the Tariff question. 

The Whig party, thoughout all the States, have been protective Tariff men, and they cling to that old issue with all the passion incident to the pride of human opinions. Are we to go off now, when other Southern States are bringing their people up to the true mark? Are we to go off on debateable and doctrinal points? Are we to go back to the consideration of this question, of this great controversy; go back to that party's politics, around which so many passions cluster? Names are much -- associations and passions cluster around names. 

I can give no better illustration than to relate an anecdote given me by a member from Louisiana. He said, after the election of Lincoln, he went to an old Whig party friend and said to him: We have been beaten -- our honor requires a dissolution of the Union. Let us see if we cannot agree together, and offered him a resolution to this effect --Resolved, That the honor of Louisiana requires her to disrupt every tie that binds her to the Federal Government. [Laughter.] 
It is name, and when we come to more practicability we must consult names. Our people have come to this on the question of slavery. I am willing, in that address to rest it upon that question. I think it is the great central point from which we are now proceeding, and I am not willing to divert the public attention from it. I believe the address, in this respect, cannot. The gentlemen from Chesterfield (Mr. Inglis) says that certain constructions of the Act of Pennsylvania are denied. He might have gone further and have said that certain constructions of the Personal Liberty Bills are denied. I have never seen any Abolitionist yet who did not say that these Acts had no reference to fugitive slaves. 

I, myself, have very great doubts about the propriety of the Fugitive Slave Law. The Constitution was, in the first place, a compact between the several States, and in the second, a treaty between sections, and, I believe, the Fugitive Slave Law was a treaty between sections. It was the act of sovereign States as a section; and I believe therefore, and have very great doubts whether it ought not have been left to the execution of the several States, and failing of enforcement , I believe it should have been regarded as a causi belli. 

I go for the address, because, I believe it does present succinctly and conspicuously what are the main primary causes. <<


Regards,

Margaret

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Charles Kann" <ckann at comcast.net> 

> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes: 
> 
> 
> For those of you who have been to the new museum, maybe you can comment. 
> After touring it, I was talking to several people and all said the same 
> thing about the introductory area. In this area the cause of the war was 
> stressed as being about slavery. I think it made a good point, and was well 
> presented. I very much agree with it. However many visitors from the south 
> still hold to the lost cause. The general consensus from the people I 
> talked to varied from "this will close a lot of minds before they even start 
> to see anything", to "this will start the war all over again". No one 
> thought it was a good idea. 
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering what others on this list thought of the introduction and 
> background of the war presented in the museum. I understand where it comes 
> from. My question is whether you think it was a good idea, or is it a bit 
> much? Does anyone else think it could close minds even before some patrons 
> see really anything in the museum? 
> 
> 
> 
> I have also been thinking about a grade for the new museum and visitor 
> center. Perhaps because I was told for so long how monumentally, insanely 
> great it was going to be, I came away disappointed. I was wondering what 
> others thought. 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
> You may unsubscribe by going to 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg 
> 
> You can add yourself to the GDG map at: 
> http://www.frappr.com/gettysburgdiscussiongroup 
> 
> View archived posts from May 2004 - present at 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg/