Mickey, Good to hear from you! Now that you have impressed everyone with your minutia of long winded half-truths I must point out to you that you missed a couple very important issues.
First, I never put forward the opinion that the statue should remain, in fact I even stated in a reply that I remained open to the possibility that it be moved. Funny how folks just “assume” certain things.
Second, I never defended the confederacy, outside of stating the intending goals of Lincoln in the conduct of the war, all of the facts I stated was Maryland History from published sources. (You should read more than just Preston, I have some books I can lend to you). It is important that our citizens understand that abolition wasn’t in contention for the first couple of years, that’s about as far as I went, and Frederick Douglass was my source.
But the main issue that you ignored in your long winded dissertation was Lincoln’s order to Winfield Scott authorizing him to bombard our civilians. Why did you leave that out? I know you are a former Army Officer and I just a lowly Marine Corps Officer, but I am sure you were trained on unlawful orders and crimes against humanity. So please we are patiently waiting your defense of an order from the President of the United States to bombard Maryland civilians.
Now I will personally challenge you, my army reserve brethren that if you can show all of us where Lincoln had the Constitutional authority to issue that order I will forever withdrawal my assertion that the men of Talbot county had the Constitutional authority to resist such. Now in return I just ask one thing…. If you fail to show where Lincoln had this authority I ask that you withdraw any opposition and provide your support that the names of these men (not confederate symbols – that is seperate) can remain in honor on our Court house grounds.
Good Luck…
Paul Callahan
Oxford
Karen Hayes says
Oh, for heaven’s sake, End this dialogue and REMOVE the darned statues. Give them to the local ancestors to put in their grand yards! IF the ancestors refuse to accept the statues, that just means they want bragging rights to what is visible in front of the courthouse. End this crazy dialogue. I’m tired of reading old men’s grand tales of their importance in days gone by, and who knows more about Confederate history than the other. The current dialogues are no longer about the Talbot Boys……
Cornelia heckenbach says
I love it thank you Karen Hayes I am so over it too.
Are we going backwards in this country ? It is unstoppable , the glorifying had to stop we live in 2020 and have to look forward and solve other problems .
This times are gone bye bye .
Jahnae Wallace says
Thank you, Mrs. Hayes. This is no longer about the Talbot boys, rather an exhausting, unproductive and desperate display of revisionism by negatists who are steering the conversation away from the real issue which is that the statue is racist and exclusionary and has no place in front of a court house.
Carol Voyles says
Lincoln’s order gives the definite impression that Lincoln would have preferred Winfield Scott not attack Eastern Shore citizens, but he would do so if they armed themselves against the Union. And while ideally our militia would not be used against citizens, that seemed a very thin line in our Civil War.
There seems to be agreement on the matter of moving our Talbot Boys statue to a more suitable location, though. Good.
Eugene Lopez says
It has been fascinating to see the discussions about the Talbot Boys statue. From my perspective, it is hard to defend a flag or a statue glorifying the Confederacy. I am glad that Mr. Callahan states that he does not oppose the removal of a Confederate-glorifying statue. I am also glad that he does not purport to support the Confederacy, which illegally rebelled against the US government because the Confederate States, and their sympathizers in Maryland, sought to continue to enslave human beings. Support for rebels who sought to enslave fellow humans is hard to defend In the first place, let alone to glorify with statues on the Courthouse lawn in 2020. So, I think we should all agree that statues, erected at a time of lynchings and Jim Crow laws that sought to deter Black citizens from enjoying their rights under the US Constitution, as amended after the Civil War, should no longer occupy any space at the Courthouse door.
I think I’ll leave it to Mr. Terrone and Mr. Callahan and their respective branches of the Armed Services to duke out the debating points they have engaged in, regarding whether harsh measures were brought to bear against traitors to the Constitution. Civil wars are terrible and messy things, when brothers and sisters fight each other in any context. But that terrible war is long over; the Confederate secessionists lost. The Union prevailed and that is where we live today. No where else in the world do the losers in civil wars get to glorify their mistaken cause for centuries after their defeat, especially when their cause for rebellion was so unjust and inhumane. It’s time to recognize that the losers, their cause, and their admirers should not be glorified anymore with a place of honor in our society. Remove the statue from the Courthouse lawn.
Dominic "Mickey" Terrone says
Paul, if you can show that there was such an order by quoting it and noting to whom it was addressed, then I will recognize that you even have a point. But regardless of the alleged order, the purported context of which I am dubious, the Confederate Talbot Boys statue is a reflection of the Talbot County Commissioners white supremacist attitude. If you read Preston’s history, he wrote (on Page 280) “By this time, it was widely believed in the county that Talbot had been solidly Confederate in its sympathies during the so-called “War Between the States”, and was held in check only by the “despot’s heel” imposed by federal troops. This myth was fostered by the former slave holding families who were still Talbot’s social leaders in the early 1900’s.” Do you understand this? It was a myth that Talbot was a confederate stronghold. It was BS then, and it still is.
I was only an enlisted man in the Army, but I know the artillery at Federal Hill in Baltimore that you claim could kill thousands and destroy the whole city simply could not reach large parts of the city. You weren’t in the artillery in the Marine Corps, were you?
I hope you will agree with me that the current county council has an historic responsibility to differentiate our current society from that of a century ago. At that time, Jim Crow Law ruled over a white supremacist society, the symbol of which remains the confederate battle flag. Without making any personal judgments about the 85 men, the clear choice is to move the statue and pedestal off of the county courthouse grounds. We are now well into the 21st Century but that statue drags the county back into a dark age that America, Maryland and hopefully, the Eastern Shore have progressed beyond.
Oh, and what sources were you using? I’d suggest that Lincoln’s intentions were to put down the revolution against the Unites States. There is no question he believed he needed Maryland but I can assure you it would have done little or no good to destroy the city or the people in it.
paul callahan says
Mickey, Lincoln to Scott April 20 1861, that if Marylanders take arms “he is to adopt the most prompt, and efficient means to counteract, even if necessary, to the bombardment of their cities….” There are other references where Scott and Lincoln agreed that Baltimore could be bombarded into submission to allow the free travel of Union forces through her. Many cite that this threat of civilian slaughter underscores Lincoln’s heavy hand against Maryland. That it was a motivating force in having Gov Hicks change from defiance (burning bridges to prevent Union transit) to coerced cooperation. It is whey the militia was stood down. This threat was done first prior to Lincoln ordering the arrest of 30 members of the Maryland Legislators, US Congressman Henry May, Baltimore’s Mayor, city council and police chief and before declaring marshal law. You can not claim that after these actions were taken Maryland acted as a free State. Nor can it be claimed that these actions against Maryland were Constitutional which create a huge dilemma and makes Maryland unique from all other States – Union or confederate. The Constitutional abuses against Maryland is the motivating force to rise against the Federal Government. By percentage men Maryland’s Eastern Shore were 10-11 times more likely to take arms against the Union then their neighbors just across the line in Delaware. The difference was the abuses against Maryland which Delaware was spared. For an overview of those abuses please refer to the following: https://lincolncivilliberties.weebly.com/document-1—lincoln-to-gen-scott-1861.html
A main objection to the Talbot boys relies on a national talking point concerning the timing of its placement. That due to the racism of that time it was meant to intimidate people of color. It must be noted that this statue was paid for by Talbot citizens and that is is extremely obvious that they chose the least intimidating statue as possible. A young unarmed boy holding an inconspicuous flag in the ceremonial position of surrender. Great expense was taken into carving those 84 names into stone which has no intimidation factor. If the intent was to intimidate why not a charging confederate on horse back with sabre drawn? It is clear that the main intent of those who commissioned this monument was to recognize these men.
You will get no argument from me that the confederate flag and symbols of the confederacy have become offensive, not just to people of color but to many Americans, and that they should be removed from public property. You will however get an argument when you assert the men from Talbot county fought to preserve slavery in some other State to protect their social status in Talbot county. It is overwhelmingly obvious they were motivated by the Constitutional abuses against their homeland – which is an honorable motivation.
So please review the link about the abuses committed against Maryland. That is the true history of why Marylanders took arms against the Federal Government and which needs to be told. The way forward is to remove the confederacy from this monument, both in symbols and in meaning while recognizing these men and telling the true reason they saddled up. It needs to be about Maryland history not the confederacy’s. I hope you can find a way to join me on this endeavor – this history is too important to ignore.
Dominic "Mickey" Terrone says
Paul, Lincoln’s order was to retaliate if attacked by secessionist forces in Baltimore. What is so unusual about that? Lincoln was in a defensive posture in late April, 1861. He didn’t order firing without provocation into the city. That was a standard practice.
But regardless of the order, the purported context of which I am dubious, the Confederate Talbot Boys statue is a reflection of the 1915 Talbot County Commissioners’ white supremacist attitudes. If you read Preston’s history, he wrote (on Page 280) “By this time, it was widely believed in the county that Talbot had been solidly Confederate in its sympathies during the so-called “War Between the States”, and was held in check only by the “despot’s heel” imposed by federal troops. This myth was fostered by the former slave holding families who were still Talbot’s social leaders in the early 1900’s.” Do you understand this? It was a myth that Talbot was a confederate stronghold. It was BS then, and it still is.
I hope you will agree with me that the current county council has an historic responsibility to differentiate our current society from that of a century ago. At that time, Jim Crow Law ruled over a rabid, white supremacist society, the symbol of which remains the confederate battle flag. Without making any personal judgments about the 85 men, the clear choice is to move the statue and pedestal away from the county courthouse grounds. We are now well into the 21st Century but that statue drags the county back into a dark age that America, Maryland and hopefully, the Eastern Shore have progressed beyond.
Regardless of any order issued by Lincoln, today, the Confederate flag is a symbol of racist hatred and white supremacy that has been recognized as such throughout the country. Statues of individual Confederate generals are coming down in former Confederate states. Maryland, which was never a Confederate state, still has a bronze representation of the Confederate battle flag standing on the Talbot County Courthouse grounds glorifying the Confederate cause.
Talbot County was Unionist-dominated but for the wealthy minority trying to control society through the local militia. The wealthy minority wasn’t trying to protect the community from the federal government. They were trying to promote slavery and the Confederacy. The wealthy minority were not loyal Marylanders or loyal Americans.
Paul, maybe its you that have the blind bias. Maybe your defensiveness about Lincoln to obfuscates your ability to acknowledge the essence of the Confederacy’s very establishment – slavery. You merely need to read those states’ articles of secession. Its virtually all about slavery. The reason why Maryland, Missouri and Kentucky remained in the Union was because they believed slavery was safer within the US Constitution and because political leaders knew that the borders slave states would be come the battleground of a civil war. Give Maryland’s leadership credit for grasping that. The noisy minority that would neither abide by Maryland’s decision to remain in the Union nor join the Confederate army sought to undermine this state’s determination to support the Union. Call it disloyalty or call it treason but it is disingenuous to suggest overt dissent that endangers the lives of loyal soldiers and citizens can be tolerated in society as local men are killed and wounded. In fact, the presence of Union troops in Baltimore likely saved the lives of many secessionists who may well have been mobbed or murdered. Most locals knew who were the Unionists and the secessionists. In a city that had a well-earned reputation for mob violence, Baltimore could easily have turned into a civilian blood bath. It was certainly an imperfect process, but it was successful overall.