James Franklin McLure
May 7, 2008 | Items of Interest
I will interrupt my hot pursuit of information about my kindred dead via the NEWFAMILY program, which is becoming more of a puzzle to me each day. However, as I dig through my stacks of notes and disorganized “stuff” I run across items of interest. Here is one. It simply says, “James Franklin died fighting for the Confederate States of America.” He was my GG Grandfather, and that, of course, would make him your (meaning my children) GGG Grandfather, and my grandchildren (Lanie Beth, Jordan, etc>) He would be their GGGG Grandfather. He fought for a lost cause, but evidently it was a cause that he believed in. I don’t know if he was wealthy, and owned many slaves, thus….wanting to keep them in bondage, or if he thought that the southern states had a right to secede from the northern states, and form a union of their own. However, he fought and died. He was born in 1828, and died in 1862, making him thirty-four years old, and leaving his wife, Delia (29) with at least four children. I’m not too sure about that. I know we are descendants of James Alec Mclure.
4 Responses to “James Franklin McLure”
This has been a bone of contention with me for some years now. I was taught, even in school, that the American Civil War was fought for “states’ rights.”
However, as I got older I began to wonder “what rights?” It turns out that, ironically, the Federal government of the United States in the years before the Civil War were, if anything, playing favorites FOR the southern, slaveholding states at the expense of the free states. If anyone had a reason to complain about “states’ rights,” it was the free states, in fact.
EXAMPLE: The Fugitive Slave laws, which were put forward by southern congressmen, and supported by Northern democrats such as Stephen Douglas. What those said was “no matter what your states’ laws might be regarding slavery, if a fugitive slave finds his way to your state, you are REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW to arrest him and help return him to his owner. Illinois passed a law that said, in essence, “Illinois will not comply.” But that law was set aside by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Taney.
EXAMPLE: The “Dred Scott” decision by the Supreme Court, which stated that the Constitution required a slave remain a slave even when he is legally transported to a free state (In this case it was the slave Dred Scott, whose owner took him with him on a business trip from Missouri, a slave state, into Illinios. Dred Scott maintained that he was now no longer a slave because Illinois outlawed slavery, but the U.S. Supreme Court said “no, Scott, you’re STILL a slave no matter what.”
The southern states seceded because of the election of Abraham Lincoln, the Republican party candidate, which of course was the part of emancipation of slaves and the abolition of slavery. That’s it.
The thing that most convinced me was reading the declarations of secession published by several of the states such as South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, etc. They all say “we are seceding from the union because of the election of Lincoln, who will free the slaves.” They mention nothing else.
It is hard for us to understand what the slave question was like in those long-ago days, because none of us can imagine WANTING to enslave another person. But it was considered THE foundation for “southern culture,” it WAS the foundation of Southern economy, no matter if you personally owned slaves or not. In the same way that illegal immigrants can come here and “enjoy” the fruits of the robust economy we have in the U.S., through no effort of theirs, all levels of whites in the antebellum South benefited by the economy that was built largely on slave labor.
Now, that’s not to condemn our ancestor, or anyone else from that era. It was what it was. Slavery was just a fact of life, and those who fought for the Confederacy fancied that they were fighting to preserve their culture and way of life, etc. Slavery was just one of the things that they considered in that equation, but it WAS part of it.
There were many Germans who fought for the Third Reich in World War II, including Latter-Day Saints (CLICK HERE FOR A GREAT STORY). They did so because they considered they were fighting for their country, not necessarily for Hitler. Also, as in Nazi Germany, there was conscription in the Confederate states. Those who were drafted, went away to fight as was their duty.
In the end, I find the history to be fascinating. The past can come alive through genealogical research, and we have great blessings in store when we do work for our kindred dead.
By bill on May 8, 2008
Yes, and many of our kindred dead of that era paid with their lives in that terrible war, and left their wives with the awful burden of raising many children in a south that had all but been burned to the ground. I consider my great-great grandmother, Elizabeth White Parkerson Grimmer who lost her husband and two sons to by a very gallant lady.
I believe she is the one that lost her sight toward the end of her life.
John Henry survived, and came home to help. But he married, and raised a family of eleven children in that little house that stood as a monument for over a hundred years, until it was blown away by a tornado about fifteen years ago.
The history of that time is very fascinating. If you can have a favorite war, however, mine is World War II.
By mother on May 8, 2008
We “like” World War II because of the nobility of it. But the historical revisionists, don’t forget, have been trying for YEARS to deconstruct America’s involvement in that war, to make it seem that we were wrong on so many counts, such as the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I do not think you can judge history by the standards of today’s social mores. Unless you’re prepared to immerse yourself in all the complex issues of the day, you will invariably oversimplify things. Which is exactly what historical deconstruction is about.
By bill on May 8, 2008