SHNV's Supporters for Apr. 2012:
Brock Townsend
Faithful Southron, THANK YOU!!

Southern Heritage <br>News and Views: March 2013

Sunday, March 24, 2013


Dear Confederates,

I’m so excited to inform you that we are weeks away from the groundbreaking for the newest WBTS monument in Tampa Bay will be held next month (in April)!

I would personally like to invite you to get in on the ground floor, so to speak, on the kick-off of this project, by purchasing an inscription brick (or repose bench).

Though not an SCV or UDC monument, this represents an extremely rare opportunity to ensure that our Southern history and ALL our Southern Veterans are remembered, in a Municipal Park…..recognized side by side with American Veterans of Other Wars!

***The commemorative program for the April 20th groundbreaking ceremony will include a “Roll of Honor” listing all sponsored Confederate Veterans, and contributors whose reply has been received by APRIL 10th.***

Would you or your chapter like to participate? The cost is $50 for a 4x8 brick with inscription or $100 for an 8X8 brick. A variety of logos are available including the SCV logo the Southern Cross of Honor or even the letters “SCV”. (This is a great idea for your UDC friends, as well).

Imagine these inscribed bricks being incorporated as in the “Cross of Honor” motif of the Monument as shown below:

Both the printable order form and the approved monument design can be viewed here: and are also attached.

The visual focal point of the monument will be a blockade runner, a central part of Florida’s coastal history during the WBTS.

Over the past few years plans have been under development for a world- class veterans park to honor the service of residents of Hillsborough County, Florida who made extreme sacrifices during each war in the County’s history (KIA, POW, etc.). But integral in the design is an opportunity to honor all Confederate Veterans from any State or locality (as described above). Hillsborough County has contributed significant resources in converting the existing park and museum into a Veterans shrine...honoring all Veterans from all Wars, beginning with the Seminole War up to and including the Global War on Terror.

The new park will attract thousands of residents and visitors each year to pay tribute to fallen heroes from our area into perpetuity. Upon its completion, the War Between the States (“WBTS”) theatre will receive appropriate and proper recognition in the mainstream of the civic landscape—forever.

The Vietnam War Monument was dedicated in 2012, and in January of this year, the design plan for the WBTS Monument was approved.

And of course, you are invited to attend the ceremony on Saturday, April 20th. The Event will include traditional observance of Confederate Memorial Day in a ceremony on the ‘theatre’ site. The program will begin promptly at 2 p.m. and last about an hour. Refreshments will be served.

We have about 2 weeks to make sure that you and/or your camp are included in the PROGRAM, so please act now.

Please email me at or call me at 813-727-3920 if you would like more information on how to participate.

Looking forward to your participation…..

PS…please pass this along to others that you may feel might want to participate as well.

There are opportunities for uniformed Confederate Soldier re-enactors to participate in honor guard and color guard.

….Lest we forget…….

Lunelle M. Siegel

Thursday, March 21, 2013



This report pertains to the criminal court last Thursday - 14 March 2013 - Rose Sanders had filed harassment charges against Todd Kiscaden, our project engineer, & had him arrested within four days. I have been trying to have Rose arrested on theft charges since last Sept and still NOTHING!!! But I am still working on it...will probably have to seek the aid of the Ala Chief Dan George said in Josey Wales, "I will persevere"!!! By the way, Rose brought one of my wreaths into the courtroom ...would ya believe that!!! STOLEN PROPERTY in the courtroom where the owner of the property is sitting!!! I said out loud, "that's my wreath" right in front of the magistrate that sat on my case when I have been trying to get Rose arrested! She passed it on to the prosecuting attorney, Ed Green, who sat on it for months as well! I have retrieved all my evidence and will continue to pursue having Rose arrested! She even read the epitaph th at I had attached to the wreaths while they were at the NBF monument in Confederate Circle! Imagine that!

The federal trial where Todd has filed a $300,000 against the City of Selma and $75,000 against the Chief of Police, William Riley is slated about Nov 2013. We need your support! Any & all donations will be greatly appreciated! Please continue to pray for us! We have the high ground and we will WIN!

Thank you all for your continued and faithful support of our efforts here in Selma to honor General Forrest and preserve our precious Confederate /Southern Heritage!

If you would like to contribute to our cause, please send contributions made payable to: NBF Monument Fund/ Confederate Memorial Circle and mark the check "For Security & Beautification Enhance Project or NBF Defense Fund & mail to: Patricia S. Godwin, FORT DIXIE, 10800 Co. Rd. 30, Selma, Alabama 36701

Confederately yours,

Pat Godwin
Zimbabwe on de Alabamy

P.S. This report was reported on the website:
If any of you would like to continue reading the REAL news from Zimbabwe on de Alabamy (Selma) just click on!

VICTORY… 3-19-13

On Friday, March 15, Virginia contractor Todd Kiscaden was found NOT GUILTY of the phony and frivolous assault charge filed against him by Selma’s premier hate filled racist, ROSE SANDERS. Last August, Kiscaden, who had a legitimate contract with the United Daughters of the Confederacy to make enhancements to Confederate Circle, and his employees from Virginia were going about their work in Live Oak Cemetery when a screaming and ranting ROSE came on the construction site and stood under a boom. At this point, Kiscaden and his men did not know and had never heard of Rose Sanders and were completely shocked that any sane person would enter a construction site, without a hard hat, stand under a boom, and begin yelling insults at people she had never met. Only later did they find out that this strange person was Selma’s own racial agitator, Rosie Sanders.

Even before she entered the construction area and before anyone ever touch her, Rose was yelling that she was going to get warrants against Kiscaden and his men. Not knowing who she was, but knowing that she was in imminent danger on the site and under the boom, Kiscaden gentile took Rose by the arm and walked her out of the danger zone. She subsequently signed a warrant against Kiscaden and had him arrested on the trumped up charge of assault.

AS AN ASIDE BUT FOR THE PUBLIC’S INFORMATION, although the Selma Police Department has TEN THOUSAND OUTSTANDING WARRANTS (YES, 10,000) dating back ten years WHICH HAVE NEVER BEEN SERVED, THE SPD was able to serve Rosie’s warrant IN ONLY 4 DAYS and arrest Kiscaden.

AS A FURTHER ASIDE, ROSE SANDERS HAS STOLEN 5 WREATHS off of Confederate Circle. These thefts have been witnessed by a po lice officer and videotaped. Rose even carried one of the wreaths into the office of Mayor George Evans and had one of them in City Court last Thursday, BUT THE CITY PROSECUTORS AND CITY MAGISTRATES HAVE STEADFASTLY REFUSED TO ISSUE A WARRANT FOR ROSE’S ARREST ON THEFT CHARGES, despite the repeated efforts of the owner of the wreaths to sign warrants!

After numerous delays and untold expense to Kiscaden, who had to come from Virginia with his employees only to be told the trail had been delayed again and again, the case went to trial last Thursday. City Prosecutor Ed Greene, who was supposed to prosecute the case against Kiscaden, was not present when the trial began. WE WANT TO KNOW IF MAYOR EVANS APPOINTED HANK AND ROSE SANDERS TO BE PROSECUTORS because they took over the prosecution. Due to Rose’s hysterics and rants, the trial lasted some 6 hours before acting City Judge Vaughan Russell.

On Friday morning, Judge Russell issued his NOT GUILTY VERDICT. The most ironic fact about the trial and verdict was that it was largely the result of a video made by Rose herself and presented at trial. In his order, Judge Russell wrote:

“When the video was viewed once more by me and by the issuing magistrate, we could clearly hear the substantial noise from the site and could track Ms. Toure’s walking into the heart of the zone of danger and under the overhead boom that was in operation. She had on no “hardhat” and except for grace and good fortune could have been seriously hurt or killed. We could also and for the first time clearly hear Ms. Toure say that she would be getting a warrant against the defendants before any touching (offensive or otherwise) occurred. Though this verdict of “not guilty” could have been my judgment in any event, it was clear after my review of this exhibit using a system with better sound quality than the laptop used at trial that the defendant was in fact “not guilty”.

I have ordered the cash bond returned to the defendant and have entered a mutual trespass order against Ms. Toure and Mr. Kiscaden that will govern their contract in regard to each other for the next year”

We are delighted that this first trial is over and that the Court has justly ruled against Selma’s worst example of unity, ROSE SANDERS!


How much longer are the good people of Selma, black and white, going to tolerate the hate filled antics of Rose and Hank Sanders and their hateful cohorts at HATE RADIO? In addition to her baseless charge against Kiscaden, her actions have caused Kiscaden to file a federal suit against the City of Selma for violation of his civil rights as well as for others reasons, which can be summarized as lost wages, time, reputation.

Due to the rabble rousing protests at Confederate Circle by the racist mob, 4 members of the Selma City Council (Crenshaw, Benjamin, Bowie and Atchison) on September 25, 2012, with only 6 council members present, voted to suspend the work at Confederate Circle without giving Kiscaden a hearing. Although we are not lawyers, this looks to us like a clear violation of his due process rights.

FURTHER THIS ACTION, we believe, VIOLATES THE CITY’S OWN LAW. Kiscaden was doing work which had been approved by the Selma Historic Commission and under a building permit based on the decision of the Historic Commission. BY LAW, TO BE CHALLENEGED, ANY ACTION OF THE SELMA HISTORIC COMMISSION MUST BE CHALLENEGED IN CIRCUIT COURT, NOT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. However, this is not the first time that Rosie has been able to intimidate the members of the Council into taking illegal or ill advised action SUCH AS THE FIVE MEMBERS (Bowie, Benjamin, Crenshaw, Randolph and Johnson) who would not let the Soldier’s Monument (not the Forrest monument) be made handicap accessible. What do these 5 council members have against handicap people?

We understand that Kiscaden’s suit against the City-caused by Rose and the cowards on the City Council-may be heard in federal court in Mobile in September. This has the possibility of costing the taxpayers of Selma mega bucks. We urge city officials to take steps to settle this before it goes to trial.

MEANWHILE…Rose decided to harass and try to intimidate Dr. Cecil Williamson by filing a suit against him for having her removed from the council meeting after she disrupted the meeting (she accuses the police of assaulting her), of slandering her through the Angel fire Site, and other baseless charges. For good measure, she sued Pat Godwin for defaming her by calling ROSE A DOMESTIC TERRORIST.

We do not know how this suit will turn out, but we know that at least one of these charges is baseless-the charge that Dr. Williamson defames her on Angelfire. We have repeatedly said that he does NOT own or control this site and does NOT post articles on this site.

IN ONE OF THE MOST WICKED, EVIL, HATEFUL ACTS OF ROSE’S ENTIRE LIFE (AND THAT IS SAYING A LOT BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY), Rose amended her original suit to add Dr. Williamson’s wife, Peggy, as a defendant. The travesty of this is that in the suit, Rosie lists Peggy Williamson as President/Officer of the UDC and President/Officer of Friends of Forrest. We know Peggy real well and know that not only is she NOT the President or Officer of either of these organizations, but that she does not even be long to either of them and has never attended any of their meetings. We very much understand that Dr. Williamson is a public official and has chosen to be, so that he is open to all kinds of personal attacks, suits, vendettas, and other hateful actions by the Sanders, Fortiers, and Hate Radio, but to attack his wife and falsely accuse her is despicable and beyond the pale.

For good measure, Rose also added Kiscaden and Councilman Greg Bjelke to her frivolous suit. There really should be some legal and economic recourse against people like Rose Sanders who use the law and lawsuits to harass, intimidate and vilify her political enemies.

Fortunately, there is recourse against elected officials-at the ballot box--against people who are so afraid of Rosie and her fear tactics that they won’t even let a 135 year old monument be made accessible to the handicap!


We went to the Chili Cook Off last Thursday. It was a wonderful event with a good cross section of the community present and enjoying themselves. THAT IS WHAT SELMA COULD BE if the SANDERS, FORTIERS, AND HATE RADIO WERE NOT IN THIS TOWN…Selma has so much potential and could be a most wonderful place, but it will never be as long as these people are still here.

While poverty, illegitimacy, unemployment, and crime continue to plague us, the SANDERS continue to stir up trouble in the community. WHY? Our opinion is that the motive is money, greed and power! THEY HAVE BOUGHT UP A MULITITUDE OF PROPERTIES-MOST OF WHICH THEY LET RUN DOWN. Good people continue to move out of town because they do not have to content with the HATE they see in Selma.

THINK ON THIS: At reduced prices and no expenditures to keep up property, the SANDERS ARE ACCUMULATING a multitude of houses, lots, and buildings in the City. All it will take will be some major industrial announcement which will cause Selma to boom and the Sanders’ vast holdings will sky rocket in value. We believe that is why Rose causes so much controversy and trouble so she and her family can accumulate vast holdings of properties to enrich themselves when Selma booms…meanwhile, the rest of the community suffers from her hate filled rage AND THE MAJORITY OF THE SELMA CITY COUNCIL IS TOO COWARDLY TO STAND UP TO HER AND DO THE RIGHT THING.

We Defend Because We Must

By Bob Hurst

As I begin to write this article, I have only recently returned from a wonderful event in Biloxi, Mississippi, that was held at Beauvoir , the retirement home of Jefferson Davis. The beautiful complex at Beauvoir, which is owned and maintained splendidly by the Mississippi Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, was damaged severely by the storm surge created by Hurricane Katrina. Restoration of the mansion was completed several years ago and was celebrated by a huge gathering of people from all over the South who were in attendance that day.

The mansion, which was built very sturdily in 1852, received some damage from the storm but the remaining structures of the complex were completely destroyed. This included the museum/library building. The dedication ceremony for the new Jefferson Davis Presidential Library was the highlight of the event in Biloxi on March 16th.

The Sons of Confederate Veterans had designated this Confederate Heritage Rally as the Sesquicentennial Event of 2013 and the magnificent museum/library building was a worthy recipient of the designation. The structure is absolutely beautiful from every angle. The attendees I spoke with seemed to be as impressed as I with this grand shrine to our president. The restored mansion and the rebuilt library/museum truly complement each other and make for a beautiful vista on the gulf.

I had plenty of time on the drive back to Tallahassee that evening (and into the morning) to think about the importance of this event and the many other events that are held each year to honor our Confederate heroes. These events are especially crucial in this time of political correctness and great division in this country. As I continued the drive toward home and a warm bed I thought of the events I had already participated in this year or I know of that are coming up in the near future.

I thought of a presentation I had given in mid-January to the United Daughters of the Confederacy chapter in Monticello, Florida, and found pleasure in the fact that meetings of this type are held all over the South every month. I also was informed at this meeting by the commander of the SCV camp in this fine old Southern town (who was in attendance) that his camp had begun fundraising for a planned site on Interstate 10 just south of town where a large flagpole will be erected from which will be flown a huge Confederate flag. This will be the fourth such flag site in Florida sponsored by the Florida Division, SCV, or an affiliate camp. I truly love these sites which are a very visible way to honor our Confederate ancestors.

This event was followed a couple weeks later by the 2013 Stephen Dill Lee Institute which was held this year in St. Augustine, Florida. The SDLI is a wonderful event where a number of noted scholars and authors make presentations on a topic of interest to Southerners. These are always factual presentations that are not tainted with the stain of political correctness so prevalent in much of academia. Attendees of this gathering came from as far away as Virginia. The location of the SDLI changes from state to state each year and we were very happy to have it in Florida for the first time.

Later in February I had the privilege of speaking at the Lee-Jackson Banquet sponsored by the SCV camp in Albany, Georgia. I always enjoy these banquets where good Southerners get together and celebrate their personal heritage while honoring two great heroes - Robert E. Lee and Thomas Jonathan Jackson, immortalized as "Stonewall". This event had about a hundred people in attendance and, as I recall, there were about a dozen SCV camps represented by the attendees. It pleases me so much that hundreds of these banquets are held all over the South each year during January and February.

The first weekend in March brought the re-enactment of the Battle of Natural Bridge which is located just a few miles south of Tallahassee. Natural Bridge is especially important to true Southerners in this area since the Confederate victory there allowed Tallahassee the distinction of being the only Southern capital east of the Mississippi River not taken by the yankee horde during the War.

The second weekend in March brought the Camp Gordon Johnston Reunion Weekend Parade in the small coastal town of Carrabelle, Florida. I especially like this event since my father was one of the more than 200,000 World War II American soldiers who received amphibious training at Camp Gordon Johnston before shipping out for either Europe or the Pacific. In my dad's case it was Normandy and an eventual Silver Star. I also enjoy this parade because the crowd there always loves our SCV float big time. Good stuff, that!

The third weekend in March, of course, brought Biloxi and the Presidential Library/Museum dedication ceremony.

April is shaping up to be a busy month. I am scheduled to speak twice - once early in the month and once late. The first presentation is in Talladega, Alabama. I usually don't travel that far from Tallahassee to speak but Talladega happens to be my hometown and when momma calls...well, I think you understand. The later presentation is in Moultrie, Georgia, as a part of the Confederate Memorial Day celebration in that fine town. There are two events in Tampa during April that I hope to be able to fit into my schedule. The first is on April 20th and involves the dedication of a new monument honoring Tampa area veterans, including Confederates. The second is on April 27th and is a Confederate Memorial Day celebration to be held at Confederate Park at the junction of I-75 and I-4. This will feature the raising of a huge (30' X 50') Confederate 3rd National Flag. This will likely be the largest 3rd National flying anywhere.

I would think that it would appear to many readers, at this point, that with all these events occurring in close proximity to just one location (Tallahassee) that the assumption can be made that there are legions of events occurring all around the Southland so the defense of our Confederate heritage must be well in hand and easily under control.

If so, you would be mistaken.

It seems that the attacks on Southern heritage continue to increase and occur in some very unlikely places. I will not attempt an entire litany of these attacks since that would be voluminous. I will mention several of the most egregious, at least in my opinion.

The most current attack occurred in Memphis and is still continuing. At a meeting in early February, the Memphis City Council voted to change the names of three Memphis parks. These three parks - Forrest Park, Jefferson Davis Park and Confederate Park - have been Memphis landmarks for decades. All seven black members of the council voted for the name change plan which assured approval of the plan even though no permanent name changes had been suggested.

This rushed vote was taken because a bill had been filed (but not yet voted upon) in the Tennessee legislature that would prevent cities from altering any "statue, monument, memorial, nameplate or plaque" erected for a number of military events including the War Between the States. The Memphis council wanted to take action before this bill could be voted on in the legislature.

Memphis is rapidly becoming (if it has not already reached that point) the "Detroit of the South". Yet the council, which obviously can't deal with such issues as rampant crime and business leaving the city, can rush a vote on changing the names of historic parks because they are Confederate-related. Hey, let's just do away with all American history prior to 1965. I guess it just comes down to priorities.

This changing of the names of historic parks because they are somehow deemed offensive reminds me of the Taliban blowing up those two statues of Buddha that were carved into the side of a mountain a thousand years ago. They, too, were considered offensive. Perhaps more fitting would be a comparison with the communist practice of changing names to make some people "non-persons". How "Stalinesque" of the Memphis city council. I'm proud to say that the SCV in Memphis and surrounding areas is planning to challenge this atrocity in court.

Another inflammatory action occurred in Charlottesville, Virginia, where a city council member (later the Vice-Mayor) proposed removing statues of Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and a representative Confederate soldier from their locations in that college town. Ironically, the Lee statue is located in "Lee Park", the Jackson statue in "Jackson Park" and the Confederate soldier statue in the cemetery at the University of Virginia where more than a thousand Confederate soldiers sleep eternally.

Wouldn't you just know it, the council member who proposed this ridiculousness is not a native Virginian nor did she attend college there (she attended Grinnell College in Iowa and Northwestern University in Chicago) but she is a board member of the local NAACP in Charlottesville.

Another anti-Confederate attack occurred in Lexington, Virginia, which happens to be the final resting place for both General Lee and General Jackson, when the city council there voted to disallow the flying of any Confederate flag from a public structure anywhere in the town. Interestingly, when I was there last year for Lee-Jackson Day there were large banners hung across several streets proclaiming the upcoming "Martin Luther King Day". Hmmm... large banners for a proven plagiarizer, womanizer and Communist sympathizer but no flags to honor two native sons who were great generals and great gentlemen.

The list of attacks on Confederate figures also includes an attempt at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesboro to have the name of the ROTC building changed since it had long borne the name of the magnificent Nathan Bedford Forrest. This was a student-inspired action by a few dissidents that was not successful but a frieze of General Forrest on horseback that had adorned the building was removed as a result of the complaint.

All attacks on Southern heritage are not relegated to the South. This past December, Dixie State University in St. George, Utah, removed a beautiful statue titled "The Rebels" from the campus location where it had stood for years. School trustees also voted (by a slim 5-4 margin) to retire the school's "Rebel" nickname and mascot. I have also read where the trustees are considring changing the name of the school itself. The supposed reason for these changes was that the Confederate references might be "offensive" to minority students. What if the changes are "offensive" to white students on campus? Would the same concern be shown? It's not even necessary to ask.

These are just a few of the attacks on Southern history and heritage that have taken place in recent years. I did not discuss other actions such as the considered removal of four statues of Confederate figures from the South Mall of the University of Texas campus nor the continuing effort by some minority members of the Georgia legislature to get legislation passed that would require the removal of the iconic carving of Confederate leaders from the face of Stone Mountain.

These attempts and many more have been unsuccessful but who knows what the future may hold. With changing demographics the situation is likely not going to get any better. It seems that many minorities have adopted a battle cry that goes something like this: "I am OFFENDED and I DEMAND that you REMOVE your history to APPEASE my delicate sensibilities." This attitude seems to be most prevalent in more militant individuals and what Rush Limbaugh calls "low information voters". These individuals, though, with assistance and financial support from their liberal, progressive, radical supporters can cause much mayhem.

I don't know when, or if, this "being offended" nonsense will end. Who knows, the "always complaining people" may soon call for the pyramids to be torn down because they were built with slave labor, or for the Roman Coliseum to be destroyed because slaves were forced to fight there. I do know that the "feelings" of these "offended" people do not trump mine or those of others like me. I am proud of my Confederate Southern ancestry and heritage and will fight until there is no fight left in me to defend and preserve it. Why? Because I must!

In closing, let me leave you with the words of a wondrous person, Joan of Arc: "One life is all we have and we live it as we believe in living it. But to sacrifice what you are and to live without belief, that is a fate more terrible than dying."

God Bless the South.


Note: Previous articles of CONFEDERATE JOURNAL are available in book form. Articles from 2005-2007 are in Volume 1 and can be ordered at http://createspace.com3540609/. Articles from 2008-2009 are in Volume 2 which can be ordered at http://createspace.com3543269/.

Bob Hurst is a Son of the South who has special interest in the Confederacy and the antebellum architecture of the South. He is commander of Col. David Lang Camp, Sons of Confederate Veterans, in Tallahassee and is also 2nd Lt. Commander of the Florida Division, SCV. He can be contacted at or 850-878-7010 after 9PM Eastern Time.

Wednesday, March 20, 2013


By John C. Whatley

The American Civil War introduced three major warfare innovations: ironclad ships (the Monitor and the Virginia); the submarine (the Hunley); and rifled cannon destruction of coastal fortresses. This last usually gets no more than a footnote, if that, yet it foreshadowed today’s improved artillery and naval guns.

The first rifled cannon reduction was launched against Fort Pulaski, guarding the Savannah River and the port of Savannah, Georgia. Named for Revolutionary hero Count Casimir Pulaski, it still sits on Cockspur Island, a low marsh island splitting the Savannah into two channels. Two prior forts had been constructed there: a palisaded log blockhouse named Fort George (after King George II) built as defense against the Spanish in Florida, and a timber-reinforced earthen fort mounting a guardhouse and artillery pieces named Fort Greene (after Revolutionary hero Nathaniel Greene). The first was torn down; the second was destroyed by a hurricane.

Because the English fleet had landed troops at will during the War of 1812, the United States decided to build 200 fortresses from Maine to Florida to protect major ports. In 1816 the Board of Engineers designed a series of coastal fortresses called the “Third System”. Cockspur was selected as site of the last Third System fort built.

Recent West Point graduate Lt. Robert E. Lee was the engineer assigned in 1829 to raise Pulaski. Lee spent 17 months determining the fort’s location, building the dikes and drainage system, and planning the support structure. He was succeeded in 1831 by Lt. Joseph Mansfield, who finished the fort in 1846. By then the United States was at war against Mexico, England had become an ally, and the Third System had low priority.


Pulaski was to be a twin to Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor: pentagonal, two-storied with three tiers of guns. But Cockspur could not support such weight and Pulaski was modified into a single-story two-tiered fort. Two layers of subflooring were built atop 70-foot-long pilings driven into the mud. On this the 7½ -foot-thick walls were built, using 25 million bricks. Behind Pulaski’s 48-foot-wide moat, two sides (faces) guarded the north channel, two the south. The top tier of guns was en barbette (on the parapet) and the second tier below fired through the casemate openings (embrasures). Heavy casemate piers and arches backed the fort’s walls. Originally built for 150 guns, Pulaski had only 20 casemate 32-pounders in 1861.

When South Carolina seceded in December 1860, Union Maj. Robert Anderson consolidated his troops at Fort Sumter. Georgia Governor Joseph E. Brown, fearing a takeover of Pulaski by Federal troops, ordered Col. Alexander R. Lawton, commander of the 1st Volunteer Regiment of Georgia at Savannah, to seize Pulaski. The two-person garrison – an ordinance sergeant and the fort’s caretaker – immediately surrendered.

Confederates found the fort neglected: the 32-pounders, mounted on rusted iron carriages, could not be fired; magazines held little powder and few shells; living quarters were uninhabitable; the parade ground was overgrown; silt and marsh grass filled the moat. But by hiring 125 slaves from local rice plantations to repair the fort and to clean the moat, 17 officers and 210 men garrisoned a refurbished Pulaski with 36 guns by October 1861. A telegraph line ran to Savannah, and supply ships regularly docked.

Pulaski as a fortress was considered impregnable. Union Brig. Gen. Joseph Totten, a member of the Board of Engineers who designed the Third System, said Fort Pulaski “could not be reduced in a month’s firing with any number of guns of manageable calibers.” Even Lee told Col. Charles Olmstead, commanding the fort, “They will make it very warm for you with shells from [Tybee Island] but they cannot breach at that distance [1,700 yards].” A contemporary military work noted: “An exposed wall may be breached with certainty at distances from 500 to 700 yards. . . [but at a] distance not exceeding 1,000 yards . . . the quantity of artillery must be considerable, and it will require from four to seven days’ firing.”

But the experts were wrong. New technology had recently arrived in the form of rifled cannon. The stable flight produced by the spin from rifled bores, coupled with the increased range of rifled cannon and the impact effect of conical shot on a target, would render coastal fortresses obsolete.


Englishman Sir Joseph Whitworth manufactured a breech-loading gun with a distinctive hexagonal twisting bore in the 1850s. The hexagonal ammunition followed the tube when fired, producing spin. Whitworth discovered, though, that length and weight of the shot did not affect the gun. Larger projectiles could be made “by simply increasing the length of the projectile without increasing the diameter of the bore.”

Englishman William G. Armstrong tested his breech-loading rifled gun against a Martello tower at Eastbourne, Sussex, England, in August 1860. Martello towers were shorter lighthouse-style towers mounting guns for coast defense instead of lights for navigation. This tower had 7½-foot-thick brick walls. At 1,032 yards a 4¾-inch 40-pounder, a 6-inch 82-pounder, and a 7-inch 100-pounder opened a breach 24 feet wide. The 40-pounder shot penetrated 4 to 5½ feet. A similar breaching test using 68- and 32-pounder smoothbores at the same range was deemed a failure.

The Prussians tested rifled breechloaders against some obsolete fortifications in September 1860. Lt. Col. A. Ross of the Royal Engineers observed that at 640 yards 27-pound rounds fired by two 12-pounder guns produced a breach 32 feet wide in a 3-foot-thick brick wall and penetrated 15 inches.

In America independent inventors experimented with rifled cannon. West Point graduate Robert P. Parrott, supervisor of the West Point Foundry, patented his cast iron rifled cannon design in 1861. Its thick reinforcing band around the breech guarded against the higher internal pressures when firing rifled ammunition. Parrott’s reinforcing band adhered uniformly because he mounted the barrel horizontally on rollers while spraying water inside to cool it. A soft metal band on the shell forced into the rifling imparted spin at firing.

Rhode Island militia general Charles T. James, a self-educated mechanic, invented a round with a conical top of cast iron. Iron ribs connected the top to an open circular base. A lead sabot and a lubricating greased canvas wrapped the ribs. Gases expanded through the ribs when fired, forcing the lead sabot into the rifling grooves, imparting spin.

Capt. Quincy A. Gillmore, the engineer officer of the Union force sent to close Confederate ports along the South Atlantic coast, was familiar with these rifled weapons. He became convinced that rifled artillery could reduce even fortresses such as Pulaski. When Union troops captured Tybee Island, across the South Channel of the Savannah from Pulaski, Gillmore was put in charge of troops there to set up breaching batteries.

Tybee, another Georgia marsh island, has little solid ground. When the cannon arrived, they were hauled by hand from the beach across the flat marshland to their emplacements. All work was done by night and camouflaged before morning. The Confederates heard noise by night, but saw nothing by day.


On the morning of April 10, 1862, the bushes on Tybee had been cut down and a camouflaging sand ridge leveled. The Confederates saw black objects which they suspected were cannon. When a boat under a flag of truce rowed from Tybee to Pulaski carrying the formal demand for surrender, Olmstead politely replied that he was there “to defend the fort, not to surrender it.” A mortar arched the first shot, the Union cannon joined in, and the Confederates replied.

“Very early in the day however,” Olmstead wrote, “it was seen that the effect upon the fortification was becoming disastrous. . . . [The] rifled guns and Columbiads at the Point inflicted more damage to the Fort than all the others combined.” Firing from the Point were three 10-inch and one 8-inch smoothbore Columbiads in one battery, five 30-pounder Parrotts and one 48-pounder James in the second, and two 84-pounder and two 64-pounder James at the third.

The James shells penetrated the bricks, splitting them from the wall and causing whose sections to collapse. Clouds of reddish dust billowed from the walls at each impact. A shot from one of the Columbiads “struck the wall beneath an embrasure while it was still intact and bulged the bricks on the inside,” wrote Olmstead. “[Our guns] upon the faces fronting the fire that was breaching our walls nearly all were dismounted before the close of the day.”

Olmstead inspected the damage from outside the fort that night. “It was worse than disheartening, the pan-coupe [a short wall between faces] at the south-east angle was entirely breached while above, on the rampart, the parapet had been shot away. . . . The two adjoining casemates were rapidly approaching the same ruined condition; the moat was nearly filled with masses of broken masonry, as was the interior of the three casemates where the dismounted guns lay like logs among the bricks.”

The next morning “the breach rapidly became wider and the enemy’s shot and shell played freely through it across the parade upon the opposite interior angle where the principal service magazine [containing 44,000 pounds of powder] was located. The entrance to this was protected by a large traverse sufficiently heavy, it was thought, for the purpose designed. Between one and two o’clock in the afternoon, however, a shell passed through the top of this and exploded in the passage way, filling the magazine with smoke and lighting it up with flame.”

It was evident that a second similar shot would blow up the fort. The white flag was run up. “There are times when a soldier must hold his position ‘to the last extremity,’ which means extermination, but this was not one of them,” wrote Olmstead. After the surrender another round was discovered stuck in the middle of new brickwork closing the ventilation hole to the southwest magazine.

A corporal of the Phoenix Riflemen and a signalman, escaping the fort before surrender, reported to Savannah: “At the close of the fight . . . the casemate walls [were] breached in almost every instance to the top of the arch, say between five and six feet in width. The moat outside was so filled with brick and mortar that one could have passed over dry shod. The officers’ quarters were torn to pieces, the bomb-proof timbers scattered in every direction over the yard, and the gates to the entrance knocked off. The parapet walls on the Tybee side were all gone, in many places down to the level of the earth on the casemates. The protection to the magazine in the northwest angle of the fort had all been shot away; the entire corner of the magazine next to the passageway was shot off, and the powder exposed, while three shots had actually penetrated the chamber.”


After the surrender Gillmore rushed over, eager to see the effects on the fort, and Olmstead escorted him around. He found the James 84-pounders had penetrated 26 inches into the walls, and most James shells penetrated at least 18 inches before exploding, causing enormous lateral damage to the brick. One 42-pounder penetrated 12 feet into the traverses between the barbette guns! Olmstead said the fort’s masonry yielded like wood to the James projectiles. “Brick and mortar cannot stand before them.”

But Union commander Maj. Gen. David Hunter realized Pulaski’s true significance: “The result of this bombardment must cause, I am convinced, a change in the construction of fortifications as radical as that foreshadowed in naval architecture by the conflict between the Monitor and Merrimac [Virginia].

“No work of stone or brick can resist the impact of rifled artillery of heavy caliber.”

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

A minor debate about historians

By Valerie Protopapas

I have been engaged in a small debate arising from a question on a "list" which chooses not to print whatever response I may post. I sent the information to individuals who asked the question about what source the United States military used for the "Rules of Warfare" in 1861. I also sent copies to the list, but neither my original nor my second post were acknowledged. I did, however, receive a response from a gentleman and he and I have been rather going back and forth on this. The book I quoted with regard to the above was Joseph Fallon's "Lincoln Uncensored," a book with which the gentleman took some issue.


My original response to the question:

For your information:

Acknowledged Rules of War Prior to 1861:
From an e-book by Joseph Fallon based upon the words (print and spoken) of Abraham Lincoln entitled Lincoln Uncensored. Endnote xxi, addresses the subject of what sources for such rules was/were used by the United States military prior to the creation of General Order 100 [the Lieber Code]:

xxi Historically, the government of the United States had adhered to the international law code of the Swiss jurist, Emmerich de Vattel (1714-67), author of The Law of Nations, on the proper conduct of war. As late as 1862, the U.S. Supreme Court in rendering its opinion in the "Prize Cases" cited Vattel. Because of the emphasis it placed on the protection of non-combatants, the Vattel code was repudiated by Lincoln who issued a new law governing warfare that lacked international standing – GENERAL ORDERS No. 100, known as the "Lieber Code" of 1863.

From the outbreak of the Civil War, Lincoln's strategy was to defeat the Confederacy by targeting Southern civilians. One of his first acts was to order a blockade of Southern ports on April 19, 1861 to deny food and medicine, among other items, to civilians. Because such acts violated traditional U.S. military rules of conduct, Lincoln needed a new code to "legalize" his actions. He requested Francis Lieber, a prominent Northern attorney and scholar, and former advisor to Otto von Bismarck, to write it.

Lieber was the prefect choice for this task. The Prussian immigrant was contemptuous of the Constitution. He dismissed the federal system it had established as a "confederacies of petty sovereigns" based on the "obsolete ideas" of Thomas Jefferson. He shared Lincoln's drive to centralize political power in the executive branch of the federal government. They alleged implied powers in the Constitution grant the president in wartime authority to enact legislation as well as to interpret the Constitution -- to deny or suspend constitutional rights as the chief executive sees fit.

The new military code Lieber produced was entitled "Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field," but is more commonly referred to as the Lieber Code. A catalogue of 157 rules, it was promulgated by Lincoln on April 24, 1863 as "General Orders No. 100."

It read: "The following 'Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field,' prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., and revised by a board of officers, of which Maj. Gen. E. A. Hitchcock is president, having been approved by the President of the United States, he commands that they be published for the information of all concerned. By order of the Secretary of War: E. D. TOWNSEND, Assistant Adjutant-General, Washington, April 24, 1863.” The War of the Rebellion: a Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, also known as Official records of the Union and Confederate armies or OR, Series III, Volume III, p. 148.

[Biographical Information**: Joseph E. Fallon is a freelance writer/researcher who resides in Rye, New York. He lived in Egypt where he pursued his advanced degree in Middle East studies and has traveled to Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. He received his Masters Degree in International Affairs from Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs and is a member of the Association for the Study of Nationalities, Harriman Institute, Columbia University. (

[** I believe that this is the same James E. Fallon who has written this book, but I am having problems locating the author’s credentials directly tied into this particular work. If I am incorrect, I will do a follow-up on the credentials of the actual author. However, I have heard Mr. Fallon speak on the subject. The interview can be found at]]

Also for consideration, in an article published in 1895, former Confederate partisan commander and lawyer Col. John Mosby wrote:

“In his Memoirs General Sheridan repudiates the humane maxims of Grotius (Hugo de Groot on Natural Law) and Vattel (see above), and lays down an ethical code for the government of armies in war that abolishes all distinctions heretofore recognized between combatant and noncombatant enemies. If the United States should adopt it***, then Napoleon’s saying, “Scratch a Russian (and) you will find a Tarter,” will not apply alone to the subjects of the Czar. In contrast with these pitiless doctrines that suggest the picture of the Infernal Court and “The iron tears that rain down Pluto’s cheek,” are the humane rules of international law as expounded by Professor [Sir Travers] Twiss, of Oxford, in his work on Rights and Duties in Time of War.

[***For some inexplicable reason, John Mosby apparently did not quite understand that the United States had already adopted the “rules of war” produced by Lincoln and his military and that these had been used extensively during the “Civil” War.]

1st response:

This last two communication appears to be sent to me off the board, so I will not post my reply.

But, fyi, Fallon is not a reliable source on Lieber. The passage pasted below is filled with false statements and extremist bias.

For examples: Lieber, far from hating the US Constitution, venerated it and deplored those secessionists who would destroy the nation on which it was built. His pre-war lectures argued the US Constitution was the basis for a permanent nation, not a voluntary compact or league.

Lieber was not an advisor to Otto von Bismarck, who came to power decades after Lieber left for the US. Nor did Lieber advise President Obama to my knowledge.

Lieber did not address the blockade.

Lieber’s Code did not supplant Vattel, nor the other more recent texts in use by Halleck and Wheaton on international law. It provided a pocket manual that partly summarized existing international law and partly adapted it to the special circumstances of a civil war and one involving slaves. For the most part, Lieber extended the protection of international law to rebel combatants and civilians. Otherwise, soldiers fighting for the South, including Lieber’s son, would be treated as criminals.

Most important Lieber provided a legal principle by which slaves could be liberated during the war:

“Article 42: Slavery, complicating and confounding the ideas of property, (that is of a thing,) and of personality, (that is of humanity,) exists according to municipal or local law only. The law of nature and nations has never acknowledged it. The digest of the Roman law enacts the early dictum of the pagan jurist, that "so far as the law of nature is concerned, all men are equal." Fugitives escaping from a country in which they were slaves, villains, or serfs, into another country, have, for centuries past, been held free and acknowledged free by judicial decisions of European countries, even though the municipal law of the country in which the slave had taken refuge acknowledged slavery within its own dominions.”

This and other portions of the Lieber Code aim at affirming humanitarian principles that were supposed to govern nations at war. Many legal scholars regard it as the taproot to the conventions of war established at the Hague and Geneva.

The full text of the Liber Code is available at the Avalon Project:

My response:


I, too, have read GO 100 and have found that whatever Lieber said "should not be done" he also provided with the caveat "unless the military authorities determined....etc." Rules that are only good so long as the authorities agree to follow them are not rules at all but attempts to cover abuses and atrocities, ALL of which were committed by the United States in the War.

I have heard so many people disavow factual presentations with the statement that whoever made them was "not a reliable source" whether it be on Lincoln or Lieber or Sherman or anyone else. That is nonsense, especially when the "unreliable source" proves to be the words of the individual him or herself such as happened in Fallon's work Lincoln Uncensored from which the footnote comes.

I don't mind if people disagree with a point, but to denigrate it because the source isn't one of the "orthodox - i.e. politically correct revisionist - historians" - simply reveals that the desire to present a "correct" view of "history" - that is, the winner's version rather than what actually happened - is in play. Lincoln and the rest of his regime believed in the Hobbesian understanding of government, to wit: might makes right and the ends justify the means. Those particular sentiments are being played out today to the detriment of ALL Americans.

2nd response

The passage you copied from Fallon includes several statements that are flat out incorrect, at odds with historical fact.
I named only a few. I’m sure he has many factually accurate statements in his book as well. But errors and biases such as he displays make him unreliable.

My final response:

You say he (Fallon) has made "several statements that are flat out incorrect (and) at odds with historical fact." What are the statements - and what are the "historical facts" with which he is "at odds?" I've seen a lot of "historical facts" presented by establishment "historians" that were woefully short on both "history" and "facts." Did he misquote Lieber when he stated that the man believed Jefferson's vision of government was obsolete? I doubt it. Lieber seems to be one more German socialist who either came over after the failed revolutions in 1848 or sympathized with those revolutions. Lincoln's government and military was filled with Communists (Richard Dana being one) and socialist German military men. Also, as an advisor to Bismarck* (I take his word that Lieber was not, but I cannot testify to same personally), would not Lieber believe (as did Marx, Engels AND Lincoln) in centralized power and the use of government coercion?

You also state that you "are sure he had many factual statements..." Since everything in the book other than the endnotes were direct quotes from Lincoln, no other conclusion can rationally be reached albeit I have been accused of "taking (Lincoln) out of context" (!) and advised that Lincoln had "grown" since the quote that I provided had been made. Of course, Lincoln changed not one little bit as can be seen from Mr. Fallon's book which includes all ten volumes of Lincoln's papers, speeches and letters.

Furthermore, you marginalize Fallon but fail to mention the "orthodox" historians who write things such as Lincoln never violated the Constitution(!) and fly in the face of irrefutable facts in their "interpretation" of the causes and conduct of the war, failing to mention little things like the ante-bellum theft of Southern resources and the atrocities committed against Southerners (and the Indians) during (and after!) the war. If we're going to dismiss every author who intentionally changed the narrative to suit his own ends, you are going to lose far more Northern defenders than I will Southern ones.

In any event, you cannot deny that Lieber's "code" is filled with well-sounding maxims but appended with caveats that renders it useless as a moral guide to warfare! Why get rid of time-tested Vattel unless you wish to wage total war against civilians and destroy not just enemy armies but enemy civilians and their culture? That's what Lincoln wanted to - and did - do! There is no other reason why courthouses, churches and cemeteries were destroyed when they were not in the path of battle! This was a deliberate effort to destroy the record of the culture of the Southern people in order to consign them and their history to oblivion, a "war" that continues to this day. Such cultural genocide is war crime enough! Even the Germans in WWII limited their efforts in that respect to the Jews.

I have found in the last ten years of my efforts in this field, that people who staunchly defend Lincoln and the Union and resist any effort to broaden the debate to include actual history are of three types. The first are simply ignorant. They believe what they've been told. I was one such until I decided to learn the facts and the truth for myself.

The second discounts and disregards anything and everything including the official records of the Union, photographs of the time and words from the mouths and pens of the people who were there (again, on the Union side), that contradicts in any way, the acceptable hagiography of the wicked, brutal, violent South and the noble, egalitarian, patriotic North. Such people are deliberately delusional and therefore cannot be engaged in serious debate. My mother's response to any argument not going her way is a good example of such thinking when she used to say, "Don't confuse me with facts!"

The third group is far more numerous - and far more troubling. This group accepts accepts and even acknowledges what was done—the atrocities, the crimes, the revocation of the Constitution, the end of the Founding Principle of a nation under a limited (federal not national) government ruling with the consent of the governed and all the rest. But they excuse what was done because it was "necessary!” It was “necessary” to save the Union (did it?) and end slavery (did it not rather enslave everybody?) and as a means of preventing political, social and economic chaos (is that not what we now have?) and all the rest. Such people have a spokesman in well known and respected “conservative” John Bolton who when the matter of today's civil liberties was raised in a recent lecture stated unequivocally, “We killed tens of thousands of American citizens – maybe hundreds of thousands – with no due process whatever in the Civil War. And it was the right thing to do.…”

This is the attitude of many today—both liberal and conservative. Indeed, Lincoln is beloved among many strongly conservative spokesmen! But there is a price for holding the belief that the ends justify the means. Those who do so may not condemn Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot or Mao or bin Laden, all of whom acted out of a belief that what they were doing was right and that therefore whatever they did to obtain their ends was justified. So those—especially scholars and historians—who justify what was done in the War of Secession with the plea that “it was necessary” are morally equivalent to the apologists for every tyrant who has murdered, raped, pillaged and enslaved throughout history as well as every tyrant who will come forth in the future. Changing the venue of tyranny does not change its moral dynamics.

Thursday, March 07, 2013

Saint Patrick’s Day Tribute to General Cleburne

By Calvin E. Johnson, Jr.

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day from Dixie!

The 150th Anniversary--War Between the States Sesquicentennial continues with events including the soon to reopen Jefferson Davis Presidential Library at Beauvoir on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.

Jefferson Davis President of the Confederacy was of Welsh and his Mother Jane Cook of Scotch-Irish descent.

A lot has been written about the 150,000 Irishmen who fought for the Union during the War Between the States but do you know about the 30,000 equally brave Irishmen who fought for the Confederacy? It is written that by population a comparable number of Irishmen fought for the Confederacy as did those who supported the Union.

The 8th Alabama Irish Brigade made their mark in history fighting for the Confederacy and is remembered for their Erin Go Braugh! flag with a field of green with Faugh A Ballagh on bottom that is Irish for “clear the way.”

Sunday, March 17, 2013 is Saint Patrick’s Day and it’s also the 185th birthday of Patrick Ronayne Cleburne.

Among the Union Armies fighting Irish was the 69th New York but….

Did you know the Confederacy’s units included the 10th Louisiana and the 10th Tennessee Infantry which was formed at Fort Henry in 1861 and defended Fort Donelson before becoming part of the Army of Tennessee?

Who was Patrick R. Cleburne?

Patrick Ronayne Cleburne was born on March 17, 1828, in Ovens, County Cork, Ireland. He was an Anglo-Irish soldier who served in the 41st Regiment of Foot of the British Army. He is however best known for his service to the Confederates States of America.

He was only eighteen months old when his Mother died and a young fifteen when his Father passed away. He tried to follow in his Father’s footsteps, Dr. Joseph Cleburne, in the field of medicine but failed his entrance exam to Trinity College of Medicine in 1848. He immigrated to America three years later with two brothers and a sister and made his home in Helena, Arkansas.

In 1860 Cleburne became a naturalized citizen, lawyer and was popular with the residents.

He sided with the Confederacy at the outbreak of the War Between the States and progressed from the rank of private of the local militia to major general.

Cleburne, like many Southerners, did not support the institution of slavery but chose to serve his adopted country out of love for the Southern people and their quest for independence and freedom. In 1864, he advocated the emancipation of Black men to serve in the Confederate Armed Forces.

Cleburne participated in the Battles of Shiloh, Richmond, Perryville, Stones River, Chickamauga, Missionary Ridge, Ringgold Gap and Franklin. He was killed at the Battle of Franklin, Tennessee on November 30, 1864.

General Patrick R. Cleburne said before his death:

"If this cause, that is dear to my heart, is doomed to fail, I pray heaven may let me fall with it, while my face is toward the enemy and my arm battling for that which I know is right."

Cleburne was engaged to Susan Tarleton of Mobile, Alabama.

On March 17, 1979, Cleburne’s birthday, I proudly organized the Gen. Patrick R. Cleburne Camp 1361 of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Jonesboro, Georgia which is still active.

Gen. Cleburne is buried in Maple Hill Cemetery in Helena, Arkansas.

A good book “A Meteor Shining Brightly” Essays on Maj. Gen. Patrick R. Cleburne” --edited by Mauriel Phillips Joslyn, is a good source of information about Cleburne.

April is Confederate History and Heritage Month.
Read more on facebook

Calvin E. Johnson, Jr., Speaker, Writer of short stories, Author of book “When America stood for God, Family and Country” and Chairman of the National and Georgia Division Sons of Confederate Veterans Confederate History and Heritage Month committee.
Please LIKE my
Freedom Watch
Facebook page
share it with friends

Please LIKE my
Southern Heritage News
& Views Facebook page
share it with friends.