A Visit to Henry Clay's Ashland

Today a colleague at work who occasionally reads my blog claimed that I was obsessed with John Brown. Of course, he's right. Since my earliest memories I have seemed to get focused on a topic and explore it to death. Back in the day it used to be snakes and dinosaurs, and for the time being its John Brown. But, I thought I take a break from the "bad old man" for a day or so and share a visit that Michele and I made last Friday to Henry Clay's Ashland (pictured above) in Lexington, Kentucky. I had visited Ashland back last August to do a teacher professional development session, but I didn't get the opportunity to go on a tour of the house at that time.

We arrived just before 2:00 pm and paid our admission price (they give a discount with AAA) and waited a few minutes before we were met at the front door by our guide (and site curator Eric Brooks). On the tour Mr. Brooks explained that he doesn't give many tours except for that time slot on Fridays, so we felt particularly honored to have such a virtual fountain of knowledge on all things Henry Clay.

It is difficult not to be impressed with the house's entrance hall. Beautiful woodwork surrounds you. Mr. Brooks quickly explained something of which I was not aware. He said that the original Ashland fell into terrible disrepair after Clay's death and that it was sold to son James Clay. James made the difficult decision to raze the house and then built anew on the old foundation; albeit with a slightly different architectural style. James resided at Ashland until 1862 when he fled the country for his strong Confederate sympathies.

But, wait, I'm getting ahead of the story. Henry Clay was born in Hanover County, Virginia in 1777. He received an excellent education, as one of his teachers was George Wythe; former teacher of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Clay moved to Kentucky in 1797 and married two years later. By 1809 the main structure of Ashland was constructed, and a couple of years later he added symmetrical wings designed by famed architect Benjamin Latrobe (who designed the Capitol building in Washington DC). Clay and his wife Lucretia lived at Ashland until his death in 1852. After the Civil War Ashland was bought by John Bryan Bowman. In 1882 it was bought by one of Clay's granddaughters and her husband. In 1950 Ashland became a historic house museum, as it remains today; a memorial to one of America's premier statesmen, and probably the grandest U.S. Senator in history.

We were afforded a close look at the old house as each room was explained. We saw rare Clay relics including a book that was given to Abraham Lincoln by Clay in the 1840s. Probably what I enjoyed the most were the Clay family stories. Henry Clay Jr. had a difficult time living up to his namesake and it seems he tried to make a name for himself by fighting in the Mexican-American War. The senior Clay as a vehement opponent of the war and Mr. Brooks explained that this was one few issues on which Clay the younger did not follow his father's advice. Clay Jr. met his end by being bayoneted to death at the Battle of Buena Vista. I guess he should have listened to Pops.

I was pleased to find that Ashland doesn't dodge Clay's slave owning. But, really it would be pretty difficult since compromising national slavery-related political issues is what Clay was known for. The "Great Compromiser" didn't get his name by deciding what color of drapes to buy. Mr. Brooks explained that Clay owned a large number of slaves himself. His ownership varied usually between 40-70 slaves, which made him one of the largest owners in Kentucky. Clay granted a small number of his slaves their freedom during his lifetime, and at least one apparently refused freedom when it was offered. Learning more about Clay's stance on slavery was quite interesting. He strongly felt that both slavery and Union could exist in the United States, but he also was a primary founder of the American Colonization Society, which attempted to return African Americans to the land of their ancestors.

Clay died in Washington DC in 1852 and was returned to Kentucky for burial in the Lexington Cemetery. Mr. Brooks explained that Clay's funeral drew what is probably still the largest crowd for a funeral in Kentucky history.

Other than a couple of the other visitor's inconsiderate cell phone ringing, our tour was fantastic. I highly recommend seeing Ashland for yourself. Not only is the house a wonder to see, the grounds are also interesting to explore (the ice houses are cool-no pun intended). I think you will come away with a greater appreciation and understanding of this important Kentuckian and American. I know I did.

Here is a neat video about Ashland I found on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3srvwgXBlc8

Did the Vice President Adivse Clemency for John Brown?

Native Kentuckian John Cabell Breckinridge was the youngest man ever elected vice president when he won the office in 1856 at the age of 35. Breckinridge would run unsuccessfully for president in 1860 on a divided Democratic ticket, but later would become a Confederate general and the Confederate Secretary of War.

In the fall of 1859 a letter appeared in the Frankfort Yeoman newspaper anonymously signed, "Kentucky Gentleman." The article quickly reappeared in several other papers and it was claimed that Breckinridge was the author. Breckinridge later denied the claim in the Lexington Kentucky Statesman.

Whether Breckinridge wrote the article or not is difficult to determine. It was certainly produced by someone of more than average intelligence and access to historical and current information, due to a number of its references.

In the article, the author (whoever it was), compared John Brown's role in Kansas to the Indian attacks on early Kentucky settlers. He wrote, "Charred ruins and the unburied bodies of murdered men indicated his presence as surely as similar remains did that of the remorseless savage to the pioneers of Kentucky." But, he explains that references to Brown's Kansas forays are not meant to encourage his hanging. He writes that Brown certainly deserves to die for his actions at Harpers Ferry, "if ever a traitor; and a murderer and a robber did," but if he was spared, "it would place the South upon a vantage ground in the eyes of the whole world; it would show that the spirit of Legree [slavemaster Simon Legree from Uncle Tom's Cabin] does not pervade our people; that conscious of the rectitude and humanity of our institutions, we can afford to be magnanimous to the very Barabbas of our enemies." The author summarized, "he is the very fittest subject upon which to display the chivalric sentiment of the South."

The writer's main reason for advising clemency is clearly stated in the following paragraph. "If old John Brown is executed there will be thousands to dip their handkerchiefs in his blood; relics of the martyr will be paraded throughout the North; pilgrimages will be made to his grave, and we should not be surprised to hear of miracles wrought there, as at the tomb of Thomas A'Becket [saint and martyr of Catholic and Anglican churches]. The blood of this martyr would be as seed to this fanatical church, as as that of Joe[esph] Smith [Mormon founder] to the Church of Latter-Day Saints. It could be called to attention of the purity of their faith; and Governor Wise would be compared to Julian the Apostate [Roman emperor who rejected Christianity], or Grahame of Claverhouse [persecutor of the Scottish Converters].

The author closes the article by claiming that clemency is in keeping with the "spirit of the times." He says that if European despots can free thousands "with a single dash of the pen," then "think of the shame which must rest upon the Commonwealth of Virginia with a million of freemen, themselves the sovereignty, and a quarter of a million of slaves held under patriarchal rule, whose loyalty under temptation is an astonishment to many who call themselves patriots; we say, think of the shame that must rest upon her, if her security demands and receives the blood of, one old brave bad man."

If Breckinridge did write the article then he was wise to deny it, for claiming its authorship would have certainly undermined his Southern base of support in any future political endeavors. But, regardless of who penned it, it is interesting to see the intelligence, logic, and reasoning that it contains belonged to a Southerner. It shows that not all Southern men during this particular time period were violent and reactionary.

"Louisville" Demanded John Brown's Sentence Commuted

Sorry for the week-long hiatus on blogging, but I have been enjoying a most welcome vacation. During my respite I was fortunate enough to visit a few historical locations that I hope to share in a few future posts. But, for this post, I wanted to share another letter I came across in the Governor Wise papers that was sent to him anonymously and with only the location (Louisville), and the date (November 28, 1859), as indicators of its origin.

I found numbers of letters, especially from Northerners, that threatned the safety and or life of Wise (and even his family) should the Governor go through with the execution of John Brown, but I only found one from a slave state; this one. It seems that some people felt that Brown's actions were wrong and that he should be punished, but that his deed did not warrant a capital punishment.

I found it interesting that this particular letter starts off quite respectful, but quickly turns threatening toward the governor. The writer, apparently a slaveholder, explains that he has slaves, but that he would not demand blood should they be taken from him. More than once he uses Biblical references and curses to remind Wise of the importance of his decision.

Here is the letter, edited for spelling and punctuation:

Louisville, Nov. 28, 1859

Gov. Wise

Dear Sir:

I feel I cannot rest satisfied or die happy should I fail to speak a word in behalf of those unfortunate men held at Charlestown under sentence of death.

I do not in any degree justify that insurrection at Harpers Ferry, but it does not present so sickening a picture to the conation of man as hanging coolly five human beings, and I earnestly entreat you as you regard your future happiness to commute their punishments. If you do not darkness and confusion will come over you and the vengeance of blood will forever be at your heels. I demand their release from the gallows; justice demands it and all that is sacred cries for mercy. You will never see another happy day should you persist in hanging those men. Your bed will henceforth be a bed of thorns and each day will dawn darker and darker upon you until your miserable life will end and you will never hear amidst the torments of the damned. So beware of your [illegible]. I have slaves but should they all be taken from me I should not require the blood of a fellow man. I did think you would commute their punishments, but I see by the papers that you intend on carrying out your hellish purpose; but remember, you will be a vagabond and fugitive on earth and mildew will come over your posterity.

I deeply regret that I have written at so late a day. May God in heaven influence you to act in accordance with the Gospel. He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone.

"A Southern Planter Arming His Slaves to Resist Invasion"

Thanks to Mr. Lou DeCaro for commenting on the last post and identifying the artist of that cartoon as David Hunter Strother. Virginia Unionist Strother was a correspondent for the Harper's magazines (no relation to Harpers Ferry) before the Civil War who went by the pseudonym of Porte Crayon. His travel adventures throughout the South are almost as interesting and entertaining as those of the more well known Northerner Frederick Law Olmsted. Strother went to Charlestown, Virgina to report on the Brown trial and did a number of articles and sketches of Brown while there. Strother was also related to Brown's prosecutor Andrew Hunter and was allowed to be present when Brown was interviewed by Hunter and Virginia governor Henry A. Wise.

I had recently ran across another image that I thought I would share that Strother did in the wake of Harpers Ferry, and was published on November 19, 1859 in Harper's Weekly. In this picture, titled "A Southern Planter Arming His Slaves to Resist Invasion," the white planter, his wife, and young son are surrounded by their "faithful" slaves. This image is much like the previous cartoon in that it attempts to convey the idea that slaves would not support an abolitionist insurrection, but would rather rally to protect their masters.

It is interesting to see that the slaves are all armed with crude farm implement weapons such as hoes, hatchets, pitchforks, and grain knives, while it appears that the youngest slaves shown seem to be bringing the only military-type weapons (sword, gun and powder pouch) to the master. It is purely speculation on my part, but it would have probably gone against Strother's personal beliefs to present an adult slave with a gun. Also of significance are a couple of faithful hunting dogs looking up respectfully toward their owner.

Beyond claiming that it was a terribly oppressive labor system, it is personally difficult for me to generalize on the subject of slavery. There were just so many different dynamics that made individual situations specific. Geographic location, owner and owned personalities, type of labor (agricultural or industrial and domestic or field duties) all made for unique situations. Would slaves have rallied to protect their masters? I have no doubt that some would and did. Would slaves have rallied to kill their masters? Some did or at least tried to (see Gabriel Prosser, Nat Turner, and Denmark Vesey). Did some slaves try to resist or escape the oppression of slavery? Thousands of runaways and runaway advertisements are proof positive that they did. Did some slaves resist emancipation when it was offered? Some few probably did.

Obviously, images are powerful conveyors of information. The thoughts and sentiments that pictures present are sometimes just as, or more effective than text. It was William M. "Boss" Tweed (of the New York City political machine Tammany Hall) that later complained of political cartoons about him, "Stop them damn pictures! I don't care so much what the papers say about me. My constituents don't know how to read, but they can't help seeing them damned pictures."

A John Brown Political Cartoon

Political cartoons can make for some of the best primary sources available to teachers and students. Images such as these are particularly excellent for visual learners. They also tend to stimulate conversation and critical thinking in students. One must keep in mind though that political cartoons are usually produced to present a particular point of view; they aren't usually intended to be "fair and balanced." In fact, they can sometimes be down right propagandist; often to encourage action on the part of the viewer, or to focus attention on an individual or event.

Political cartoonists usually draw images that are exaggerated and incorporate symbols, make use of stereotypes, and have some level of humor, and or irony to deliver their specific point of view. If you understand and look for these artistic concepts then political cartoons can be a very useful medium to learn history.

In this particular cartoon, titled "A Premature Movement," a disheveled and elderly John Brown, with rifle in hand, is encouraging an African American, most likely a slave, to take one of his pikes and follow him. The caption says, "Here! Take this and follow me. My name's Brown." The slave, labeled Cuffee in the caption, responds, "Praise God! Mr. Brown dat is impossible. We ain't done seedin' yit at our house."

By the use of the image, the title of the cartoon, and the caption, this artist clearly shows that he thinks Brown was "premature" in believing that slaves would leave their masters and follow him to freedom. The wording in the slave's caption indicates that the artist believes that slaves have more loyalty to their owners than to a rifle-wielding crazy looking old man. The phrase "We ain't done seedin' yit at our house," makes one think that the slave imagines his master's home and fields are his own; "we," and "our" being the choice words.

Political cartoons have been around for hundreds of years and continue to make people think about current events and issues. Their unique ability to deliver points of view in the past, as well as in the present, make them a popular medium that will likely keep us thinking into the future.

More on the John Brown Hanging Rope

I was delighted to receive the microfilmed version of letters to Virginia governor Wise about Harpers Ferry on interlibrary loan from the Library of Virginia recently, and I was even more pleased to find a number of letters from Kentuckians expressing their opinions on the affair.

A letter that I was especially looking for was fortunately included; it was from Zeb Ward, "late keeper of Kentucky penitentiary." The letter was sent from Ward's home in Versailles, Kentucky on November 23, 1859, and formally addressed Wise as "His Excellency."

Here is the body of the letter:
"I send you by Adams Express [the UPS of this era] this morning a rope made expressly for the use of John Brown & Co. Kentucky will stand pledged for its being an honest rope - I had it made in her behalf and send it to show we are willing and ready to aid our mother State in disposing of those who may attempt to destroy & overthrow her government I hope you will use it.

The hemp of which it is made was grown in Missouri - a state that Brown had troubled much, and made at Frankfort Kentucky I had it made for the express purpose - & I hope you will pass it over to the proper authorities to be used"

A letter such as this is invaluable to the researcher. It clearly states at least this person's feelings on the issue and shows that this individual felt so strongly as to act on those feelings.

I found it interesting that Ward mentioned that the rope was made of Missouri hemp. Kentucky was just as well known, if not more so, for its hemp than Missouri. It would be fascinating to know if he used Missouri hemp solely due to Brown's previous association with that state as he seems to indicate, or if he used it just because that is what he had on hand. Since he mentions that the rope was made in Frankfort, it was most likely made at the state penitentiary. Ward was the former keeper of the facility, and one of their major prisoner manufacturing operations there during the antebellum era was rope making.

I will try to share a few other letters that I found over the next several posts; some of which are proving quite difficult to transcribe due to their author's poor handwriting, the condition of the microfilm, and the fact that copies were made from the microfilm machine. I prefer to transcribe whole manuscripts rather than bits and pieces, simply for the reason of gaining a better understanding the author's context and line of thinking. It is often easy to misinterpret a writer's intention by just picking and choosing passages that are the most legible.

Three Similar Depictions of John Brown on the Way to the Gallows

A moment that never happened appears in three of the most famous images of John Brown on the day of his execution. In all three Brown is shown leaving the jailhouse in Charlestown, Virginia (now West Virginia) on his way to be hanged. Surprisingly, all three were made at different times. The earliest, made in 1863, seems to have inspired the other two. Apparently the artists took Brown's special request three days before his execution to heart. In that request Brown asked that "his religious attendants" be only "poor little, dirty, ragged bare headed and barefooted slave boys and girls; led by some old grey headed slave mother."

The image above, "Last Moments of John Brown," is probably the most recognizable of the three. It was painted by Thomas Hovenden in 1885 and depicts a bound Brown descending the jailhouse steps and stopping briefly to kiss a black child held up by its mother. Soldier guards hold back the crowds below the steps as almost everyone in the image focuses on Brown and the child.

The image above, "John Brown on His Way to the Execution," was first painted by Louis Ransom in 1860, and then printed by Currier and Ives as a lithograph image in 1863. This look also presented Brown on the jailhouse stairs. A frowning soldier waits for Brown as officials point the way. A sarcastic Virginia state flag floats behind Brown's head with its motto "Sic Semper Tyrannis" (thus always to tyrants) clearly visible. On the steps is the African American mother and child, while a statue of a "blind justice" is on the left bottom corner.

This last image, "John Brown's Blessing," was painted by Kentuckian Thomas Satterwhite Noble (see December 26, 2009 post) in 1867. Noble grew up the son of a Kentucky hemp planter and served in the Confederate army during the Civil War. If Noble held prejudices against abolitionists and African Americans they certainly do not come across in his artwork. This image of Brown, like the other two, shows the black mother and child, but this time Brown places his hand on the child's head as a blessing. Soldiers that look like they would be more correct for a Revolutionary War or European painting appear behind Brown. One reference to the image states that the attire of the soldiers is correct for one of the militia units that guarded Brown, while another states that the soldiers are dressed as Continental soldiers to symbolize the disparity between the sentiments of the Declaration of Independence (all men are equal) and the reality of 1859 Virginia.

Another Adelbert Volck Image: "Worship of the North"

A few posts ago I showed an image of a demonically influenced Lincoln working on the Emancipation Proclamation by Adelbert Volck. I wasn't aware that Volck produced so many images during the Civil War, but this is one that caught my eye as well. I am not sure if I would consider this a political cartoon or not. It is certainly a political commentary, but I don't know if it was supposed to be humorous when it was drawn in 1863 or not.

The image is titled Worship of the North, and incorporates many of the Republican and abolitionist personalities of the era. This image shows a host of individuals gathered around the "shire of the Negro," (with a bust of Lincoln on the right corner) labeled the "Chicago Platform," and says "The End Sanctifies the Means." The Chicago Platform refers to the Republican convention in 1860 that ended with Lincoln's nomination for president. An ominous John Brown pike rises from behind the seated black man. In front of the shire is an alter upon which the white man has been sacrificed to the various ills of the day. Those labeled ills included "Negro Worship," "Spirit Rapping," "Free Love," "Socialism," "Atheism," "Rationalism," and "Puritanism."

Henry Ward Beecher serves as the white man's sacrificial agent, holding a raised knife. Massachusetts senator Charles Sumner holds a torch to light up the bloody work. New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley holds a censer that emits a snake, and John Brown (St. Ossawattomie) stands on a pedestal to the right of the "Negro shrine." Other "worshipful" individuals pictured include: Vice President Andrew Johnson, General Winfield Scott, General Henry W. Halleck, General David Hunter, a kneeling and prayerful General Benjamin F. Butler, General John C. Fremont in buckskins, Massachusetts governor John Andrew, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton.


My interpretation of this image is that Volck believes that the Union war effort is largely a war to elevate the black man at the expense of white men. His choice of depicted individuals bears this out. While abolitionists and emanicpationists dominate the image, others personalities are merely supporters of the Union war effort and are implicated by that support.

Pennsylvania Democrats React to Harpers Ferry

I am sorry that my "historical thoughts" have not been so random lately. Much like America in the winter of 1859-60, I have had John Brown on the brain. Part of the reason for that is because I have been doing research on how Kentuckians reacted to the Harpers Ferry raid, and part of it is because I just plain find it an intriguing story.

In doing my research I have found any variety of responses to Harpers Ferry. From outright contempt, to down right praise. Of course, how one reacted to the Harpers Ferry affair often had to do with where one came from....not always...but generally.

The best exception to that rule related to political parties. Northern Democrats sought to label John Brown as a Republican - a Black Republican at that - in effort to make political capital in the upcoming 1860 election. The Republicans had officially stated in their political platform that they were only against the extension of slavery into the territories; that they did not wish to meddle with the institution where it already existed. That fact did not matter to the Democrats; they were more or less for popular sovereignty...to allow the people the opportunity to decide if slavery should exist in a territory or not. To the Democrats, North and South, anything that hinted of anti-slavery or abolition was ties to the Republican party. In addition, John Brown never claimed to be a Republican, he and those of his temperament, such as Frederick Douglass, considered the Republican party in 1859 as to passive on the slavery issue.

The image above was printed in the Pennsylvania Statesman newspaper, a sheet that was supportive of Kentuckian, and then current Vice President John Breckinridge, for the Democratic nomination in 1860. The image is titled "Black Republican Argument," and the outline is the actual-size shape of the blades on the pikes that Brown had made to issue to the slaves he hoped would flock to his cause during the Harpers Ferry raid.

Propaganda pieces were not then, and are still not, new today. You have to admit though, this image effectively conveys the message that the Democrat party wanted to express with very few words; regardless of how incorrect it truly was.

Kentucky Artist Portrayed a Dignified John Brown in 1860

It is amazing what a little looking around will turn up. Recently, while browsing through our museum gallery at the Kentucky Historical Society (KHS), I ran across a thumbnail image and mention of an artist that was born in Kentucky and was featured in a section on native Kentucky talent. What drew my attention was the image to right; John Brown. It piqued my curiosity why a Kentucky artist would paint the abolitionist, and then the next thought that entered my mind was, when was this portrait produced? I wrote down the artist's name and went to searching after work that day. I wasn't able to find much online about this specific piece, so I checked the KHS library catalog and found a small booklet that was produced in the early 1980s for an exhibition at KHS on the artist's (Patrick Henry Davenport) work.

Davenport was born in Danville, Kentucky in 1803 and began his career as a portraitist in the 1820s. He married a "Georgian belle," Eliza Bohannon in 1827 in Vicksburg, Mississippi and the couple returned to Danville to live. Davenport's ability must have been quite well known because one of his earliest subjects was the wife of Kentucky's first governor (Isaac Shelby), Susannah Hart Shelby. Davenport actively advertised his talent in Kentucky newspapers and solicited his services mainly to the upper class. In 1838, he along with his widowed mother, purchased Crab Orchard Springs resort spa in Lincoln County. At this time Davenport was a husband, father to five children, and the owner of three slaves. In 1853 Davenport sold the resort, and after considering a move to Texas, decided to relocate to Illinois, as many other Kentuckians had. In Illinois Davenport continued to paint, often going into Indiana to do portraits as well. He continued to paint after the Civil War and lived to see his eighty-eighth year, dying in 1890.

The painting of John Brown that Davenport produced was made in 1860, apparently from photograph images of Brown. On the back of the painting Davenport wrote, "A Martyr to the Cause of Freedom John Brown, who was hung at Harper's Ferry, Va. December 21 [Dec. 2], 1859 aged 63 [59] years." Davenport family tradition states that the portrait was commissioned by one of Brown's sons and then refused upon completion.

A multitude of questions arise for me. Why would a former Kentucky slave owner paint such a dignified portrait of the most vehement abolitionist of the time? Did his views on slavery change so significantly in the six years since he had left Kentucky? I suppose, if he was commissioned by the Brown family as tradition states, he approached the piece as paid work. But, did he truly subscribe to the words he wrote on the back of the painting? Or were those just written for the patron's sake? Since the painting was completed in 1860, emotions over the Harpers Ferry raid were still quite fresh in America; North and South. It would seem that not enough time would have passed to change the image of Brown in most people's eyes, especially a former Southerner. But then again, possibly Davenport was able to put period prejudices aside. After all, while he still lived in Kentucky, he did paint free man of color Dennis Doram and his wife Diademia (see May 19, 2009 post).

At the time the exhibition booklet was produced (1982) this original work was in a private collection in Washington state. Now it resides in the collection of the Kentucky Historical Society. Today, I was fortunate enough to get to see it in person in our collection storage. Believe me, it is even more impressive than the image presented here.

Opposing Image Perspectives on the Emancipation Proclamation

Examining opposing views in history makes studying the subject more exciting and potentially provides one balance. Of course, different perspectives not only come in words, they also come in images. One of the most controversial measures of Abraham Lincoln's presidency was his decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. First presented preliminarily in September 1862, it was set to go into effect on January 1, 1863. The measure was to free the slaves in those slave states still in rebellion and not under Federal control, and specifically did not free the slaves in the volatile Border States.

Union soldiers as well as civilians viewed the Emancipation Proclamation in diverse ways. Some were for anything that would end the war sooner, while others swore that they would desert before they would fight for anything other than to preserve the Union. Most Southerners were of the opinion that the document was nothing more than a presidential sanction for slave insurrections and wanton destruction.
The image above was drawn by Confederate sympathizer Adelbert J. Volck. Volck was a Prussian political refugee who came to America during the 1848 European revolutions. He was not only an artist, he practiced dentistry as well. Produced in 1864, this pro-Southern image portrays Lincoln as the demonic author of the despised Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln rests his left foot on the Constitution, while a demonic icon hold his glass of water. A statue of Lady Liberty has a hood over head in the corner as bats are seen out the window. A picture of John Brown holding a pike and with a sarcastic halo is on the wall and labeled "St. Ossawattomie," for his role in Bleeding Kansas and his Harpers Ferry raid. The picture to the right of Brown's image is a scene of terror from the Haitian revolution, "Saint Domingue," where a slave rebellion started in 1791 and took power from the French colony. Finally, what appears to be a buzzard's skull holds back the curtains, while another skull image is worked into the president's chair back.

A more favorable view of Lincoln's measure is David Gilmore Blythe's lithograph, President Lincoln, Writing the Proclamation of Freedom. Also produced in 1864, Blythe's Lincoln is much different than that portrayed by Volck. Blythe's Lincoln is shown working hard on the document in his bed clothes and slippers with books and papers surrounding him for inspiration. Instead of standing on the Constitution as Volck portrays it at top, Blythe shows Lincoln with the Bible and Constitution on his lap. A bust of Andrew Jackson, who threatened to put down South Carolina's threats during the Nullification Crisis of the early 1830s, sits on the mantle, while a bust of former president James Buchanan (who proved inactive in South Carolina's December 1860 secession) hangs by a rope from the bookcase. An American flag drapes the window to allow enlightenment enter the room, while a scales of justice hangs on the wall and a rail splitter's maul lays on the floor with one of his bedroom slippers.

It has been said many times that "a picture is worth a thousand words." Art, like history, is open to interpretation and is influenced by the artist's sympathies and biases. An artists' perspective often comes out as clearly in images as an historians' does in written text. Part of the fun of studying history is recognizing those sympathies and biases and weighing them against what you have previously learned.

Lincoln and Davis On John Brown's Raid

In my search for Kentuckians' thoughts on John Brown's raid, I somehow almost overlooked two of the state's most important native personalities of the era; Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis. I suppose that my oversight was largely due to the little time that either man actually lived in Kentucky. Lincoln's family moved Indiana when he was seven years old and the Davis family left for Louisiana (and then Mississippi) when Jefferson was only two or three years old.

Both men would eventually return to the Bluegrass State during their lives for brief times. Lincoln would come back in 1841 to visit his Illinois friend Joshua Speed at his Farmington Plantation outside of Louisville. Davis would return for his education. He first studied at St. Thomas, a Catholic school in Washington County, Kentucky, and then returned again for college at Transylvania University in Lexington before going on to West Point.

Since Lincoln and Davis were in opposing parties at the time of John Brown's raid, it is not surprising that their opinions differ somewhat; although only slightly. Lincoln, the Republican, had proclaimed that he was not against slavery where it already existed, but he was against the extension of slavery into the western territories. Davis, the Democrat, slaveholder, and ideal Southerner believed that the territories were open to settlement and that settlers had the right to bring their slave property with them.

Lincoln commented on Brown several times in the fall and winter of 1859-60. In one speech in Kansas, Lincoln stated that Brown has been wrong in his actions for two reasons. One reason was that Brown's method was against the law. The second reason was that the raid was useless as an attempt to get rid of a "great evil." He called Brown a man of "great courage," and "rare unselfishness," but ultimately concluded that Brown was "insane." Later on during the same Kansas trip, Lincoln said that Brown had been "executed for a crime against a state." He continued that if Kansas chose to go with those that would seek to destroy the Union, then "it would be our [I suppose he means federal government's] duty to deal with Kansas as old John Brown has been dealt with." In his famous address at Cooper Union in New York City on February 27, 1860, Lincoln reiterated the thoughts he has shared in Kansas, but went on the offensive. He claimed that there was not any connection between Brown and the Republican party. Lincoln said that Harpers Ferry was not a slave insurrection, but rather "an attempt by white men to get up a revolt among slaves, in which the slaves refused to participate." He explained that Southerners had attempted time and time again since the event to make political capital out of it. Lincoln claimed it was the perfect example of the South's attempt to "rule or ruin."

At the time of Harpers Ferry, Davis was a Mississippi senator in Washington DC. In speeches Davis called Harpers Ferry "a murderous raid," and "a conspiracy against a portion of the United States, a rebellion against the constitutional government of a State." He called for investigations into the affair and was a committee member who took an active role. In a senate speech on December 6, only four days after Brown was hanged, Davis explained the major reason an investigation was necessary. "The great consideration is the invasion of a State to disturb its domestic peace, the preservation of which is a purpose which stands prominent among the great objects for which our Union was formed."

Lincoln and Davis seem to differ little in opinion on Harpers Ferry, but while Lincoln could consider that Brown had courage and was unselfish, Davis would not have consented to such an idea. Both thought Brown wrong in that he violated the constitutional laws of a State. But, Lincoln saw Harpers Ferry as an isolated event. He thought slave insurrections were no more common after the formation of the Republican party than before. Davis, on the other hand, saw Harpers Ferry as what Southerners could expect from an unsympathetic North.

A Kentucky Free Man of Color That Mentioned John Brown

Every once in a while when researching you stumble across something you didn't intend to find, but makes all the other fruitless searching worth the work. Last evening I intended to do some more searching through nineteenth-century Kentucky newspapers for mentions of John Brown. While looking for the roll I wanted to see I saw the Kentucky governors papers on microfilm. After speaking with the reference librarian who had a broad listing of what those paper contained, I saw one section for Governor Magoffin said "Harper's Ferry Affair." BINGO!

About half way through the roll I found what I had only hoped to find; a Kentucky African American perspective on John Brown.

This letter was was written on January 12, 1860; a time when things in Kentucky were fever-hot over Brown's raid. Brown had been hanged on December 2, 1859, and John Fee and his Berea missionaries had been exiled from the state later in the month. Cassius Clay had addressed a crowd from the Kentucky state capitol steps on January 10, in which he condemned Brown's actions, but supported the right to speak freely in opposition to slavery. The letter was written from Lebanon, Kentucky in Marion County.

The author, Abraham Meaux, was a free man of colour (as he spelled it), and was a barber. He had been given his freedom at the death of his master. Since his emancipation he said that, "I have lived every since from the Sweat of my own brow." He stated that "My forefathers was emegrated from Africa to America against their will," and he obviously thought that he too would be moved against his will, as he explained, "its hard that I will have to be driven from home to some place I know not where." Meaux was referring to the tighter controls that were being put on free blacks in Kentucky in the aftermath of John Brown's raid.

Meaux was not totally correct when he said that, "My unfortunate rase [race] had nothing to do with John Brown And nor Harpers ferry." It was quite well known that four of the five African Americans that participated in the raid were free blacks. Meaux expressed strong feelings against Brown and the trouble that he was currently causing free men of color. "I see the evil that he [Brown] has done us poor coloured people in the state of Kentucky. I wished that they had hung him the first day that they imprisoned him higher than Haman was hung," Meaux wrote. He explained that he well knew that there were some free blacks "that is getting their living out of chicken coops and Smoke houses" [thievery]. "But it will look so hard to drive those who stand up and faces the open day light upon his honesty like a white man."

Meaux said that he had recently heard rumors in his barber shop from legislators heading to Frankfort that the governor intended "to make a law to drive" the "free coloured people out of the State." Throughout the letter Meaux is very deferential as one would expect. To close out the letter he became even more so. "I am in hopes that this letter will not be considered as an insult nor as an offence to you. I am a stranger to you but I presume that you was acquainted with my father Walter Meaux he was a man who lived his days honest." He explained that, "Although I have some reckles relatives I have been accused in one or two instances myself but I can raise my right hand at the hour of death not guilty. Alough [allow] me to say againe as your humble servant do not receive this letter as an insult for it is not intended as such. I know you will not condisend [consider, consent?] to answer this address." He closed, "I remain your Obedient Servant;" a common closing of the era.

A description was written on the outside of the letter in different handwriting that said, "Abraham Meaux-free boy." Meaux had described himself as "Boy" earlier in the letter when he wrote he "was raised in the little county of Boyle can bring a repprobation [approbation] from my county court showing that I have been an obedient Boy and have lived honest. Although it looks like my obedience will do me no good in this case it seems that I will have to suffer with the guilty" [he means Brown].

Meaux's spelling and punctuation left something to be desired, but it was certainly no worse and probably much better than many of the whites whose letters I have read. I am curious to learn more about this "free man of colour." How old was he? Did he, as did many blacks in Kentucky, participate in the Civil War? How did he experience Reconstruction? I will probably never find the answers to those questions, but I now have something I had only hoped to find when I began my research; an African American Kentuckian's perspective on John Brown's raid. I love research!

Kentucky Confederate Provisional Governor Hawes Gives His Take On What the War Was About

Kentucky's role in the Civil War was unique. The state had representatives in the United States congress in Washington, and they had representatives in the Confederate congress in Richmond. They had a star in the United States flag, and they had a star in the Confederate battle flag. And, of course, men from the Bluegrass State fought for both the Union and Confederate armies. Kentucky really did experience a war of brother vs. brother.

Kentucky also had two competing governors. Early in the war Bowling Green was designated as the Confederate capital of Kentucky and George W. Johnson was named governor. Johnson's rule was short lived though as the Confederates were driven out of the state in the spring of 1862. Johnson traveled with the Confederate army on its retreat out of the state and fought as a private in the Battle of Shiloh with fellow Kentuckians where he was killed.

Richard Hawes (pictured above) was selected to replace Johnson, and when Braxton Bragg's Confederate army invaded the commonwealth in the late summer of 1862, the Confederate forces captured the capital at Frankfort and held an inauguration for Hawes. But, Hawes's stay in Frankfort proved very short as the Confederates left the state after the Battle of Perryville.

Recently a colleague at work gave me a copy of Hawes's inauguration speech. I found it extremely interesting. Of particular interest to me was a section of the oration where Hawes described why the war was being fought. He said, "The people were told, the that the Federal Government did not intend to destroy the titles to slave property. It is now a truth and a fact, that the great aims and purposes of this war of subjugation, are the abolition of African slavery."

He continued in this same vein, "Let us then forget if we care, the past minor issues and plant ourselves on the one side or the other of this Abolition war. I have lived in your midst from my boyhood to the age of seventy-five [actually sixty-five] years, and I have utterly misconceived the characters and souls of Kentuckians if they hesitate as to the side they will take in this Abolition war."

Hawes then outlined his feelings on slavery, the destruction that emancipation would bring, and the sacrifices needed to win the war. "You know, fellow citizens, what African slavery is. You know that emancipation would be the most unmitigated curse which could be inflicted upon the slave race. You know that the abolition of slavery would crush and desolate the planting States. You know that a war of subjugation, to be successful, must be ruthlessly borne over the dead bodies of millions of the most chivalrous devotees of liberty, who are the bone of your bone and flesh of your flesh."

The Confederate governor concluded this part of his speech on the subject of slavery by stating, "I assume the duties devolved on me as Provisional Governor, to give you and opportunity to take your stand and make your choice in this Abolition war, and to decide fully and fairly whether you will cast your destiny with the North or the South."

Bragg had entered Kentucky with wagon loads of rifles to give to the flocking Kentuckians that he was told would enlist if he would only make a stand for the state. Kentuckians never come to the Confederate standard as expected and Bragg left the state following the terrible Battle of Perryville on October 8, 1862. Hawes would leave the state with Bragg, but his hopes and efforts for another major Kentucky campaign lasted until the end of the war.

Just finished reading - The Kentucky Tragedy: A Story of Conflict and Change in Antebellum America by Dickson D. Bruce, Jr.

I first heard about the "Kentucky Tragedy" story shortly after moving to the state. The museum theater group were I work (The Kentucky Historical Society) presented a theatrical interpretation of the story at the annual Boone Day celebration this past June in Frankfort. Unfortunately I was not able to see the play, but I remember that my curiosity to learn more about this event was stirred from the play's description.

Author Dickson D. Bruce in The Kentucky Tragedy: A Story of Conflict and Change in Antebellum America not only covers the history of the Tragedy, but also explores the plethora of copy-cat works of fiction and theatre that closely followed this intriguing murder. Well known authors such as Edgar Alan Poe, William Gilmore Simms, and Charlotte Barnes, among a host of lesser known writers all used the story as a base for works largely because of the public interest in the story.

The idea of honor was as pervasive as any in antebellum America; and most historians would agree even more so in the Old South than anywhere else. At that time one's reputation and family name was paramount to any other consideration, especially for those of wealth and political renown. Bruce uses the idea of honor throughout his book to explain not only the story of the Kentucky Tragedy, but also as a framework to explain how the related events were received by Americans that read the story and the related fiction works that followed.

OK, OK, maybe I have whetted your appetite for what went down. Here goes: Around 1819, Solomon P. Sharp, one of the Bluegrass state's leading politicians allegedly seduced Ann Cooke, who later delivered a stillborn child she claimed Sharp fathered. A few years later Cooke married Jereboam Beauchamp (17 years her junior). During the summer of 1825, the scandal of Cooke and Sharp's illicit affair reemerged, most likely for political reasons. The resurfacing of the event obviously sent Mr., and now Mrs., Beauchamp into a fury. The couple agreed that the only honorable course left them, since Sharp had ruined Ann (and by marriage, Beauchamp's) good name, was to kill Solomon Sharpe.

On November 7, 1825, the day before the Kentucky legislature was set to meet, at about 2 a.m., Beauchamp went to Sharp's Frankfort home and knocked on the door. After a very brief conversation Beauchamp stabbed Sharp in the chest and then fled the scene. Beauchamp was caught, tried, and sentenced to hang for the murder. Ann received permission to visit often with her husband in jail while he awaited his execution date. After asking to be left alone sometime before the execution, they both drank laudanum that Ann had smuggled in, with a desire to commit a double suicide. The drug did not have the desired effect though, it only made them sick. The morning of the execution Ann somehow smuggled in a dagger, and as they pledged their love for one another, they apparently stabbed each another. The stab wound she received proved fatal but his wasn't. Beauchamp's hanging went on as scheduled. The two had requested to be placed together in a single grave and their wish was granted. Wouldn't this make for an interesting short movie?

In his conclusion, Bruce explains that although much as changed since the time of the Kentucky Tragedy, much has also remained the same. "We remain, in many ways, part of the Tragedy's world. Our admiration for the antisocial, violent hero remains undiminished. And many of the tendencies and tensions of antebellum life - its competitive individualism, its stress on appearances, even its seemingly archaic approaches to gender - remain with us as well. We continue to define courage, loyalty, and duty in essentially violent terms. Placing law on the side of rules and rules in opposition to heart-felt action, we remain wedded to scenarios in which law and justice, law and virtue, stand in tense relationship that only violence can resolve. We retain that fascination with and fear of the physical self that underlay the Tragedy's appeal in its own time."

It appears that the Kentucky Tragedy is still as popular today as it was in the 1820s and 1830s. Yet another recent scholarly work has appeared on the subject. Murder and Madness: The Myth of the Kentucky Tragedy by Matthew G. Schoenbachler just came out last fall from the University Press of Kentucky. Looks like I'll have to check out this one too.

1860 Kentucky Statute Limited Free Blacks

In an earlier post I discussed Governor Beriah Magoffin's call to reorganize the Kentucky state militia in the wake of John Brown's Harpers Ferry raid. In his message to the Kentucky General Assembly in December 1859, the governor also called for tighter restrictions on African Americans, especially the free people of color in the Commonwealth.

With thoughts of a potential John Brown-like insurrection weighing heavily on his mind, Governor Magoffin said, "Self-preservation and the safety of the republic demand renewed vigilance upon our part, whether agents and emissaries of the Republican party, and the enemies of the union come among us as teachers, as peddlers, or as free negroes from the free states." The governor was all too aware that free black men such as Dangerfield Newby, John Copeland, Lewis Leary, and Osbourne Anderson had been among Brown's most trusted men.

Magoffin made several recommendations he hoped the state legislature would take seriously. He said "I would therefore recommend a heavier taxation upon peddlers, a repeal of laws allowing free negroes to come within our borders from other States, and the enactment of a law imposing a heavy penalty upon them for coming to the State, under any pretense whatever." He continued, "It would be well, too, to offer to each free negro, who wished to leave the State, who had not the means, a sufficient sum of money to bear his expenses to this destination; when once out, he could not return." In effect he was saying, we want you gone, and we'll help you leave, and once you're gone, don't come back.

The governor made clear his thoughts about free blacks. "This population is a great nuisance in our State, and while the good and industrious ought to be protected and respected, I am not sure that it would not have been well to have sold into slavery again those who were guilty of crimes of a certain description, and for misdemeanors, instead of punishment now provided by law - for drunkenness, immorality, laziness, and general misconduct, upon proof and conviction before a proper tribunal, it might have been well to have hired them out for a year, or longer, for the first offense, and for the second to have banished them from the State, or sold them into slavery, the money raised this way to be transferred to the school fund. Better far would it have been, both for the black and the white man, than to permit him, an idler, a thief, a drunkard, and a vicious vagabond, to have the name of a freeman, and to be left uninterrupted to associate with and to corrupt our slave population."

The Kentucky state legislature took the legal ball in a hand-off from the governor and ran it for a touchdown when they put into law in that session many of his recommendations. On March 3, 1860 the lawmakers passed 14 laws titled, "An Act concerning free negroes, mulattoes, and emancipation."

The law said that no slave could be emancipated in Kentucky without a bond being taken out to remove that slave within 90 days after emancipation; any free black or mulatto that came into the state would be guilty of a felony and subject to a sentence of six years in the state penitentiary; any Kentucky free black that leaves the state and enters a free state will forfeit his residence and not be allowed to return; any free black "who shall keep a disorderly house, or be found loitering about, engaged in no honest calling" could be sold into servitude for no less than two and no more than ten years; any free black or mulatto that shall allow others "to assemble at houses occupied by them, or upon premises under their control, for the purpose of gaming, drinking, or dancing," would be punished as detailed in the previous statute.

Interestingly the lawmakers allowed free blacks (men over 21, and women over 18) that wanted to, to choose a master or mistress, "whom he or she will serve during life." They also made it illegal for anyone, white or black, to purchase a slave in order to make them anything other than a slave.

I am not passing judgement or trying to justify the actions of these law makers from 150 years ago; I'm only trying to show what they did and the motivations behind their actions. These laws vividly demonstrate the race basis of slavery in mid-nineteenth century America. Now, can you imagine any body of legislature anywhere at this time making laws such as these that applied to white men? How many white Kentuckians would have filled the state penitentiary if they had been subject to these statutes? Think about it.

Help Save the Franklin Battlefield

CARTER COTTON GIN HOUSE-FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE

From an email sent by the Civil War Preservation Trust:

"Let's Reclaim a Key Section of the Franklin Breakthrough.

'The most desperate fighting imaginable.'

There were many horrifying scenes of carnage throughout the Civil War, but there are few that can compare tot what was witnessed on November 30, 1864 at the Battle of Franklin.

In what became one of the largest and most precipitous charges of the Civil War, Confederates of Frank Cheatham's corps hurled themselves against strong Union entrenchments. Despite facing enormous odds, these battle hardened Confederate forces did manage to break through the Union line at its center.

Facing the sudden prospect of total defeat, Colonel Emerson Opdyke and his brigade of veteran Midwestern soldiers - Opdyke's Tigers - charged forth into the breach and drove back the Confederate attackers. After five hours of frenzied fighting more than 8,500 soldiers would lay dead on the field and John Bell Hood's Army of Tennessee was left in shambles.

CWPT is partnering with Franklin's Charge to preserve forever a 1.07 acre portion of the Franklin battlefield - ground which witnessed the Confederate breakthrough and Union counterattack. Join us in saving this hallowed ground.

Franklin 2010 Preservation Campaign

Acres: 1.07

Total Cost: $950,000

CWPT Fundraising Goal: $150,000

Match: $6.33 to $1

Match Sources: ABPP, Franklin's Charge

For more information - www.civilwar.org/franklin10

It's not everyday that we get the chance to reclaim a battlefield that has been lost. As we did with the former Pizza Hut location, at the Carter House Garden, and on the Eastern Flank, we are slowly taking back what was lost at Franklin. Join us in adding another crucial part of the puzzle at the Franklin battlefield.

Very sincerely yours,

Jim Lighthizer

President, CWPT"

Origins of Underground Railroad Name

While just about everyone has heard of the Underground Railroad, few realize the origins of the name. One story has it that in 1831 a runaway slave from Kentucky, Tice Davids, reached the Ohio River just across from the town of Ripley, Ohio. The fugitive's master was in close pursuit and as Davids slipped in river to swim across, his owner found a boat on the shore and followed. The owner could see Davids's bobbing up and down in the current and saw him emerge on the Ohio bank. When the master finally made his way across the river, he searched high and low in the town in attempt to reclaim his property. But Davids was no where to be found, which led the frustrated owner to exclaim that Davids must have "gone on an underground road."

Although the practice of aiding fugitive slaves predates the term itself, with the rise of the invention of the train, and the rapid expansion of the railroad system in this era, those terms were added to the "underground road" name. In addition, such railroad terms as stations (safe houses), and conductors (friends of fugitives), as well as phrases such as "catching the next train North," were appropriated by those that supported the practice.

Ripley, Ohio was known throughout Kentucky as "the hell hole of abolitionism," due to the fact that many people in the town provided help to fugitives from the Bluegrass state in their effort to make it to Canada. The Rev. John Rankin was the recognized leader in the community. His house sat high atop the town on a ridge (see picture above) and served as a beacon to Kentucky slaves. Rankin was born and raised in Jefferson County in East Tennessee and had later moved to Northern Kentucky to preach, but he finally moved on to Ohio when his antislavery messages were not well received in the Commonwealth. John Parker, a mixed raced freeman born into slavery in Virginia and then sold in a slave coffle to Alabama tried to escape several times before finally purchasing his freedom. He moved to the town in the mid 1840s after a short stay in New Albany, Indiana. Parker eventually established his own iron business and made numerous exciting trips into Kentucky to pilot slaves across the Ohio River and help send them on their way to Canada. His story is vividly brought to life in The Autobiography of John P. Parker, Former Slave and Conductor on the Underground Railroad.

Both the Rankin and Parker houses survive today in Ripley. I hope to soon make a trip across the Ohio myself to see both of these historically significant sites.

John Brown was Hanged with Kentucky Hemp Rope

One of the most rewarding things about doing research is finding that otherwise obscure nugget of information that helps answer the historical question you are asking and that solidifies your hypothesis. On the other hand, one of the most frustrating things about research is finding those nuggets of information and then having to wait to find time to dig deeper to learn even more about a source. I recently ran across a couple of accounts that credited Kentucky with supplying the hemp rope that was used to hang John Brown. Apparently three states (South Carolina, Missouri, and Kentucky) vied for the honor of providing the cordage, but the Bluegrass hemp won out. One account I found explained that the three ropes were examined in a public forum for several days before the execution. The South Carolina rope that was made of cotton was judged too weak for the job, and the Missouri hemp rope was also judged inferior to the Kentucky rope.

So, what happened to this relic after the hanging. It appears there is some disagreement in the historical record. One account said that the wooden gallows was disassembled and mixed with other lumber for use in other construction projects while the rope was burned. Other accounts say that the rope still exists. One possible sample of rope is in the Warren Rifles Confederate Museum in Front Royal, Virginia (pictured above). Apparently this piece of rope was brought back from the hanging by the Warren Rifles militia unit that attended the hanging and later became a company of the 17th Virginia infantry regiment in the Civil War. Another piece is said to be in the West Virginia State Museum. The Massachusetts Historical Society also claims to have some of the rope. A newspaper article from the Charleston (West Virginia) Gazette published in 1929 said that the rope or a piece of it was in the Kentucky archives. I don't think that the Kentucky archives was even existence in its current state in 1929, but possibly they meant the Kentucky Historical Society; anyhow, apparently this piece of the rope no longer exists.

I think that it is a particularly significant gesture for the state of Kentucky to send this token of its hate for abolitionism to Virginia to be used in the execution of Brown. It shows that the state was committed to the institution of slavery and that an attempt such as Brown's to end that practice would not be tolerated. Kentucky was nationally known for its hemp and rope production during the Antebellum years, and by choosing this gifted symbol it solidified its proslavery position in the country's perception.

Which is it, Southern or southern?

Are they any English majors or grammar experts out there that can help me out? I am have been having trouble deciding whether the word Southern or Southerner should be capitalized or not. I was informed by a professor in graduate school that the proper use is, southern, with a small "s". Later, I was corrected by yet another authority that the "s" in Southern or Southerner should be capitalized.

I know that the word South should be capitalized when talking about the region, and should be lower case when speaking about the direction (same goes for North, or course). But when it comes to Southern it seems that anything goes...although there must be a correct and incorrect way to use it. I have often referred to my multitude of books on Southern history for examples, and there too it is used both ways, although, it seems that more recent texts go with lower case "s," while the older books use Southern or Southerner more. It seems that the only rule I can figure is to use one or the other consistently.

If anyone has an opinion or actually knows the rule I would be glad to be properly informed. I have always used Southern, Southerner or Northern and Northerner on the blog here, but I would like to be correct. It will help me sleep better at night.