Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War Essay Example Essay Example

Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War? Essay Example Paper Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War Essay Introduction The inauspicious commencement of the Civil War signalled that the war would not be a brief affair, even if such briefness had earlier been anticipated. The first battle christened the Bull Run on July 21 1861, pitted federal troops numbering 30,000 under General Irvin McDonell against Confederate troops numbering 22,000 under General P.G.T. Beauregard.1 The defensive superiority of the Confederates rent a major blow to the budding press corps. This was just the beginning. Even though the Union forces desired to increase their manpower concerns in the white American mind rent questions as regards the black man’s degree of intelligence, humanity and common sense. These questions and doubts created a situation in which the Lincoln administration was unsure of which side the African Americans slaves would take in the conflict between the Union and the Confederacy. Most whites believed that blacks could barely comprehend the nature of the war. Moreover, the degree of their loyalty to their slave masters rendered them irrelevant to the overall outcome of the conflict.1 These initial doubts to the recruitment of the black soldier were answered unambiguously just within the initial weeks of the war. As the Union forces advanced and occupied South Carolina Sea Islands, slaves escaped from the plantations and joined the Union army lines. To understand the developments in the Civil War, a concise exposition is worthwhile. The Civil War gave the slave population the opportunity to actively engage in their own emancipation and become free men. Even though major slave uprisings were absent and not more than a quarter of the overall slave population made it in the Union lines, slavery disintegrated as the Union Armies moved with irreversible momentum into the slave territories.2 Through the act of seizing their freedom whenever opportune, African Americans became enshrined into a self-emancipation process. The process was to extend to almost all spheres of their lives leading into the reconstruction. After Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, the black quest for freedom was converted into an official war aim. Even though the proclamation was historically congruent to Lincoln’s constitutional scruples, the ramifications of the proclamation itself was lost on the general public who viewed it as nothing but a general moral anti-slavery crusade. Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War? Essay Body Paragraphs However, blacks began to sense that the war against the Confederacy was a war for their own liberation; the war was caused by their being slaves and that the end result of the war would be their eventual freedom.3 Therefore as federal forces advanced, they acted as a magnet; attracting slaves from the adjacent areas. The first attraction of such kind occurred in Charleston, South Carolina, Savannah and Georgia. Geographically these areas covered rice and sea island plantations. As more and more blacks hurried into the Union enclaves, the surrounding areas which had hitherto been ripe in slavery collapsed. As the Union armies moved into New Orleans, thousands of blacks moved into Union camps resulting in the collapse of slavery in the entire lower Mississippi. This ripple effect was repeated as the Union forces advanced into new areas. In New Orleans the Southern myths that blacks were docile were blown away when the black populations decided to release years of accumulated hostility and anger. The slaves seized the lands for their own use, drove off overseers, stopped working or fled to the Union camps.4 As blacks continued to pour into contraband camps, the mortality rates increased averaging approximately 25%. In line with the Union policy, these refugees received employment in whatever capacity that was deemed useful to the Union war effort. Both the Navy and the Army organized labour battalions of the increasing black population for work as teamsters, construction hands, laundresses, and cooks and so on. In practice, the employment was akin to imposition of forced labour controls by the military. Thus, the refugees received pay but these wages were way below what their white counterparts’ received. A greater number were also leased out, according to the terms of employment drawn by federal commanders and the conferences and local planters or superintendents representing Northern freedmen’s aid societies, to work in plantations that had been se ized by the Union forces. Amid these employment options, the eagerness of blacks to fight for their cause could not be vanquished because since the war began, blacks had tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to register in enlist in the Union Navy and Army.5 On April 23 1861; a black employee of the United States senate: Jacob Dobson drafted a letter to the Secretary of War to express his determination as well as that of other three hundred Black Americans to militarily play a part in defending their capital. In New York, Black men independently organized drilling sessions in preparation for the war. In a rally held in Boston in April 1861, blacks expressed their wish that the statutes prohibition their enlistment in the United States army be abolished. Despite all these, Lincoln still held profound doubts about the character of black males. He feared that if blacks were to be armed, then in a few weeks time the same arms would be in the hands of the rebels.1 On another occasion Lincoln rei terated that should blacks be enlisted in the army then it would be akin to betraying the political realities that existed at that time. He was disturbed that such an enlistment would turn the fifty thousand bayonets originating from the Border States that were loyal against the Union. During the war there existed a popular sentiment that the Civil War was a white mans war. Others feared that enlisting the black man into the army increased their probability of being successful in the battlefield hence making the black man gain additional respect that the white had no intention of extending to their black brethren. Added to these concerns, was the discriminatory attitudes among the white soldiers who believed that it was extremely deteriorating to fight alongside a race they considered too inferior. It is prudent to note that during this period, the white male was viewed as being too cowardly and an unthinking menial. Such an image was extrapolated to imply that they when recruited t hey would be poor soldiers In 1863, Lincoln made a bold step that created the program for the enlistment of black soldiers into the federal forces. At the onset of the program, the insecurities of the Northern white supremacist majority were immediately aroused as they thought that the Union and its gains may be tainted if blacks shed blood in their own defence or in the process of liberating the remaining slaves. This was one of the reasons that Lincoln had delayed the recruitment of blacks in the Union forces. The presence of political risks posed by white backlash as well as the military danger that such a move would lead to a drop in morale other challenges to the recruitment of blacks in the army. However, he overcame these challenges by successful implementing the policy whose main aim was to increase manpower in the Union armies. Eventually, the policy enabled the recruitment of 200,000 Afro-Americans in the Union military.2 The recruitment of blacks into the military did not instantaneously transform the northern racial attitudes; in fact it exacerbated racial tensions and intensified the Democratic opposition to the emancipation. The black soldiers were segregated, given meagre pay, commanded by white officers and deemed fit for the labour battalions and the garrison.6 As blacks transformed the war into a revolution intent on throwing out the old order, Lincoln attitude towards the policy changed from that of reluctance to that of enthusiasm. Blacks soldiers fighting for their own liberation signified the progress in the revolution that Lincoln had started by the Emancipation Proclamation. In the South, the response to black enlistment was ferocious both on paper and practically. Upon hearing of the policy, General Beauregard called for the execution of black Union soldiers. A sober analysis of the Generals policy prevented the enforcement of such an order but there were evidences of the execution of black soldiers in the South either in the battlefie ld or thereafter. Reports and rumours of such massacres caused a vexation among the Union authorities during the entire war period. This was one of the main reasons why Lincoln had initially hesitated to enlist blacks in the Union army as combatants since they had a high risk of capture. Moreover, the Confederate utterly refused to treat black soldiers who were captured as legitimate prisoners of war. This refusal eventually led to the breakdown of prisoner of war exchanges. As the war strode on attitudes that has delayed their recruitment in the Union Army began to change. There are those who believed that recruiting blacks was a sure way of saving whites from dying in the battlefield. Expanding the ranks with black men also served in hastening the war towards its end. Despite the difficulties these black soldiers faced such as discrimination from white soldiers, white men, bad food, cold winter quarters, boredom, loneliness, hard drilling hours, dirt and diseases, they endured the m all. On the other hand, they were earning a reputation for exhibiting courage under fire, winning heroic invasions on Confederate territory.7 Numerous accounts of unflinching courage among colored regiments finally silenced the critics of the emancipation and black enlistment. However, from the first day that the blacks entered into the battlefield they faced greater perils than the white soldiers. As prisoners of war, they were either shot or hanged. In reaction, Lincoln threatened the confederates that for every single soldier shot or hung, the same will be done to rebel prisoners of war. It was this threat that led to the cessation of prisoner exchanges as the South refused to hand over black prisoners of war and so the execution by the South continued, but these actions could not stop blacks from enlisting into the army. As the Civil war ended, between 180,000-200,000 African Americans had adorned the Union uniform; constituting 10% of the Northern Army. We will write a custom essay sample on Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War? Essay Example specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War? Essay Example specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Why did it take Lincoln so long to allow blacks to join the military and fight for the north in the Civil War? Essay Example specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer

Mayhem and Maiming

Mayhem and Maiming Mayhem and Maiming Mayhem and Maiming By Maeve Maddox A series of insurance ads personifies insurable disaster as a man who causes various kinds of property damage. The ads always end with the character saying, â€Å"be protected from mayhem like me,† spreading the idea that mayhem means, â€Å"damage.† Mayhem shares its origin with the verb maim, which originally meant â€Å"to wound or cause bodily hurt or disfigurement.† In current usage, maim means â€Å"to mutilate† or â€Å"to cripple.† Twin Blasts Kill 3 and Leave Scores Maimed, Wounded Children maimed, tortured in Syria, says damning UN report A new generation of maimed veterans is coming home with critical needs that overwhelm existing care facilities and devastate their families. As a term in criminal law, mayhem retains the meaning of inflicting physical injury on a person. Mayhem is a crime in which tremendous violence is done onto the victim.   [] to prove the defendant guilty of mayhem, the prosecution needs to prove that the defendant had malicious intent to maim or disfigure, cuts or maims an ear, nose, lip or cuts off or disable limb of another person. (site of a Boston attorney) In ordinary speech, mayhem is used to refer to any kind of violent behavior or disorder. A surfers’ event in Huntington Beach, Calif., ended in mayhem late Sunday, as riot police were called to the streets to disperse violent crowds and break up numerous fights. Akm Antivirus 2010 Pro is a virus that is causing mass mayhem around the internet by infecting thousands of PCs. Current mayhem in the financial sector opens up an opportunity for Nigeria to rid itself of the political and economic cancer it has endured for decades. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that Yanukovych must decide between protecting the people that he serves all of the people versus violence and mayhem. The word maim always denotes a crippling injury. Apart from legal use, mayhem may refer either to physical injury or to violent behavior that does not necessarily lead to injury. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Vocabulary category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Passed vs Past5 Lessons for Mixing Past and Present TenseCapitalizing Titles of People and Groups

Criminal justice Thesis Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 2

Criminal justice - Thesis Example There have been a number of issues however that have been raised when dealing with medical experimentation especially when the test subjects are human beings. This has to do with medical ethics and the right of going about seeking test subjects as well as the process of the experiments themselves. One of these issues is the matter of using prisoners to conduct medical experiments on various diseases such as AIDS and Hepatitis C when seeking cures. The argument behind the use of prisoners for the conducting of medical experiments in these areas is the fact that there is a higher prevalence of these diseases in the prison populations as compared to other groups and thus it is generally a convenient approach whilst seeking test subjects (Epstein, 2009, pg38). However, it has to be considered whether it is right to use prisoners as guinea pigs for medical experiments, or is it a type of discrimination on the part of the medical researchers (Tauber, 2005, pg18). This subject can be said to have both pros and cons when put into, and the issue is if the pros outweigh the cons considerably enough to win the day. There are a number of advantages to be considered by using prisoners as test subjects for new drugs to combat these diseases. These advantages have to do with the situation at hand and the potential positive outcome should the drugs be successful. They include: Situational advantage – Prisoners are in a position where they reside in a controlled environment and thus this would make it easier for researchers to ensure that the test subjects are placed in a conducive environment for the conduction of the research (Lakhan et al, 2009, pg 12). For example, this is to say if the subject is not supposed to take any alcohol during the test period, this would not be a problem as they have no access to any liquor. Since the test subjects are all located in one area for the entirety of the test period, observation also becomes a simpler process as

Cross-Cultural Enterprise Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4000 words

Cross-Cultural Enterprise Management - Essay Example Focus of the paper will be towards emphasizing the importance of effective cross cultural management in an enterprise and to what extent this affects the survival of the enterprise. Cross-cultural management is particularly important for the operation of an enterprise to gain the requisite advantage in the fiercely competitive world. If the problem of cultural conflict in an enterprise is not handled well, it might influence the entire working environment of the enterprise and make the task of management more complex and the decision-making and implementation of multinational operation more difficult. Such problems might restrict the selection of human resources from native or overseas market, products and services. The impact of cultural conflict on the transnational business happens to be quite comprehensive, systematic affecting the entire process. This study will center on the cross-cultural enterprise management to analyze the problems in enterprise cultural management and prese nt possible solutions which are of a certain guiding significance to some of the UK companies On the basis of successful and unsuccessful case analyses of overseas investments by some of the UK companies or by some MNCs in UK, the study tries to put forward general theories in such a manner that the study proves to be of some help in future research work. Background Cross-cultural management in essence means managing different cultures with effective coordination amongst the cultural groups and management teams of different cultures with its impact on organizational behavior, effective communication with people who come from different countries and cultural backgrounds. (Li,C & Lu,C, 2000) Along with the rapid development in the economic field and globalization and integration of economies, the role of corporate culture is becoming increasingly significant in upgrading enterprise competitiveness. Different culture backgrounds, values, enterprise management modes, politics, beliefs and cultures as well as racism and communication misunderstanding will give rise to corporate cultural conflicts. Cultural conflicts will in turn affect the relationship between multinational management and local employees and may lead to a loss in market opportunity and organizational efficiency, thus hampering the implementation plans of global strategies of multinat ionals. The so called "cultural conflict" refers to the process of confrontation and repulsion between different cultures or cultural elements, which not only includes the conflict arising from cultural difference between multinationals and countries where multinationals operate but also the conflict among internal employees from different cultural

LAND LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

LAND LAW - Essay Example He was not regular in visiting his property since he purchased it in year 1952, when he had asked his seller to plant Christmas trees on the land with the idea of harvesting it in later years. However, he could not tend to his land since he was posted at Bonn between the years 1955 to 1967. Subsequent to his return, between the years 1967-1972, the McFarlane’s could make few visits to the property site, but it was clear that his interest in his property was waning. The McFarlanes did not suspect that their land was under the possession of Powell until, in 1972, they noticed the new fencing on their land, which gave rise to suspicion in their minds that perhaps all was not well regarding their claims to the stated property. Powell brought action stating that he was in adverse possession of the said disputed land since 12 years from the period 1960 to1972.In order to substantiate this statement, he had to prove that he had actual possession and control over the said land for the last 12 years. The facts, as observed by Slade J, were that for a person to be in possession, whether legal or illegal, he should be able to bring action for trespass, against any trespasser or squatter, who comes into the said land, without his permission. This is except in the case of a person who has a better title to the land then what he himself has.. In other words, he had to maintain animus possidendi.This means that, when the law has to attribute possession of a land to person who does not have paper title on the said land, he must be in a position to prove that he has both the factual possession as well as the requisite intention to possess the said land. (Farlane 1977). The main issue in the event of alleged possession is that the squatter is dealing with the land as though it is his own, and in a manner that would be used by the true owner, and nobody else. The essence of animus posited is that the squatter, in his own

John Dalton And Atomic Theory

John Dalton And Atomic Theory John Dalton was the originator of atomic theory, which theory provided scientists with new ways of seeing the physical world. Atomic weights and fixed ratios of atoms inside compounds provided researchers with the knowledge to explore chemical compositions of matter. Daltons new information on atomic weights allowed a Russian chemist, Dmitry Mendeleyev, to create the periodic table of elements. This table provided the means for discovering new elements, and Dalton also proposed symbols for the elements. The symbols would represent the atom combination in compounds, but these were later changed to the abbreviations known today. Daltons theory had been accepted at the time, but it opened new questions about atom interactions. The structure and interaction of atoms refined atomic theory. Until Dalton, the line between physics and chemistry was almost unnoticeable, but his atomic theory distinguished and divided the two disciplines. In physics and chemistry, the atom is a cornerstone providing an understanding of matter and force, especially in quantitative analysis. Quantitative analysis refers to the measurement of how much of a certain substance is within a sample. Daltons theory was the beginning of nuclear energy and fusion research still used today. The theory also provides for the study of the quantitative relationships between substances in chemical reactions, or stoichiometry. It provides for structural theory and arrangements of atoms for influencing properties. Daltons models eventually turned into the understanding of 3-dimensional qualities of molecules and the affect of structure on properties. Daltons theory did have some inaccuracies, but it did provide the foundation for future generations of scientists. Atomic theory is the idea that matter is made u p of little units called atoms. In 1897, the British scientist J.J. Thomson discovered that atoms are in fact made up of smaller particles. Today atomic theory refers to matter being made up of units that are indivisible only some of the time. Dalton concluded that evaporated water exists in air as an independent gas. He wondered how water and air could occupy the same space at the same time, when obviously solid bodies cant. If the water and air were composed of discrete particles, Dalton reasoned, evaporation might be viewed as a mixing of water particles with air particles. He performed a series of experiments on mixtures of gases to determine what effect properties of the individual gases had on the properties of the mixture as a whole. While trying to explain the results of those experiments, Dalton developed the hypothesis that the sizes of the particles making up different gases must be different. John Dalton published the first table on relative atomic weights that included six elements viz. hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous and sulfur. He stated the atomic weight of hydrogen to be 1. It was not confirmed as to how he derived the atomic weights. However, his laboratory notebook indicated that he found out the relative weights from the studies of the compounds water, carbon dioxide and ammonia. In his notebook, the elements were represented by symbols. He was the first person to propose the idea of identifying an element by its symbol. Later on, elements are represented by their abbreviations, for example, H is the abbreviation of the element hydrogen. While the concept of atoms was thus being made indispensable, the ancient belief that they were probably structure less and certainly indestructible came under devastating attack. J.J. Thomsons discovery of the electron in 1897 soon led to the realization that the mass of an atom largely resides in a positively charged part, electrically neutralized by a cloud of much lighter electrons. A f ew years later Ernest Rutherford and Frederick Soddy showed how the emission of alpha and beta particles from radioactive elements causes them to be transformed into elements of different chemical properties. By 1913, with Rutherford as the leading figure, the foundations of the modern theory of atomic structure were laid. It was determined that a small, massive nucleus carries all the positive charge whose magnitude, expressed as a multiple of the fundamental charge of the proton, is the atomic number. An equal number of electrons carrying a negative charge numerically equal to that of the proton form a cloud whose diameter is several thousand times that of the nucleus around which they swarm. The atomic number determines the chemical properties of the atom, and in alpha decay a helium nucleus, whose atomic number is 2, is emitted from the radioactive nucleus, leaving one whose atomic number is reduced by 2. In beta decay the nucleus in effect gains one positive charge by emitting a negative electron and thus has its atomic number increased by unity. Rutherfords gold foil experiment, performed in conjunction with Geiger and Marsden, provided evidence for the nucleus due to the scattering of alpha particles. The protons. Further work by Chadwick revealed the existence of neutrons within the nucleus of the atom. The atomic number describes the number of protons in the nucleus. For a neutral atom this is also the number of electrons outside the nucleus. Subtracting the atomic number from the atomic mass number gives the number of neutrons in the nucleus. Isotopes are atoms of the same element they have the same number of protons, or the same atomic number which have a different number of neutrons in the nucleus. Isotopes of an element have similar chemical properties. Radioactive isotopes are called radioisotopes. Most of the elements in the periodic table have several isotopes, found in varying proportions for any given element. The average atomic mass of an el ement takes into account the relative proportions of its isotopes found in nature. A nuclear binding force holds the nucleus of the atom together. The nuclear mass defect, a slightly lower mass of the nucleus compared to the sum of the masses of its constituent matter, is due to the nuclear binding energy holding the nucleus together. The mass defect can be used to calculate the nuclear binding energy, with E = mc2. The average binding energy per nucleon is a measure of nuclear stability. The higher the average binding energy, the more stable the nucleus. The basic difference between Rutherfords Atomic Theory and the Plum Pudding Model has to do with the fact that the Plum Pudding Model theorized that an atom was made up electrons the plums surrounded by a positively charged mass the pudding. Rutherford later proved that this wasnt the case and theorized that atoms were comprised of a very small nucleus surrounded by electrons. The basic tenets of that statement are still held to be true in the modern era. The chief difference is the fact that Niels Bohr, when theorizing the design of the atom, included a thesis for the forces that help to hold the atomic structure together. The Bohr model is still widely accepted by contemporary scientists. The Bohr model of the atom was established in 1913 as the leading theory of atomic structure. Because of this, it can be truthfully said that Rutherfords Atomic Theory was an extremely short-lived phenomenon. Despite its brief time frame, however, Rutherfords theory was extremely important because Niels Bohr wouldnt have been able to develop his own model without the established background that Rutherfords Atomic Theory laid out for him. www.angelfire.com/sc2/atomtheory/ www.iun.edu/~cpanhd/C101webnotes//dalton.html www.angelfire.com/sc2/atomtheory/ www.chemprofessor.com/atomic.htm www.nobeliefs.com/atom.htm www.chemlin.net/chemistry/atomic_theory.htm

No School Should Usurp the Rights of Any Student Essays -- Teaching Ed

No School Should Usurp the Rights of Any Student   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Children are forced to go to school. This has been the way for a long time. School is a place where students go to learn a curriculum given by government officials. They are not there to get their rights taken away from them. Although teachers have power, they cannot stop students from hearing the issues, speaking without censorship, or knowing their rights.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Students are living, breathing human beings. We go to school to learn about and succeed in the outside world. Government officials are to teach us these things and see how well we learn them. We are curious creatures. We need to know everything or else we will rebel. Teachers should tell us both parts of a certain subject to allow objectivity in our minds. If we hear only one side of a controversial issue we tend to assert ourselves with the only point of view. We may also find out information on our own that is bad and believe what we find out. Teachers are here to guide us to the correct information. If a teacher takes a side he/she may tell us only the negative points to his opposing side. He/she may, also, just tell us good points about his side. Either way, he/she gives us a one sided perception. We need to hear both sides in order to make up our own minds.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Many believe that teachers have more power than students. This is a weak argument because teachers cannot remove rights of students. The Supreme Court stated this: â€Å"It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the school house gate† (Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent School District). Therefore, students are just as powerful as teachers. Teachers want to discipline their students how and when they choose. This is a major dispute among parents, teachers, and students. A teacher may not ever hit a student purposely. A teacher may lower our grade for not doing work or failing class criteria. They may not lower our grade just because they don’t like us or we act slightly out of hand. Many people say that students don’t know what is best for them. This is may be true at lower elementary, but in high school, students can speak for themselves and know what they need. In some court cases or public meetings, teachers or the school bo... ...rookfield: Millbrook,1997. â€Å"Student Government†. World Book: Millennium 2000. 2000ed. â€Å"Student Rights†. Natural Math. 21 Jan. 2002 . â€Å"Students Rights†. Rethinking Schools. Vol. 14, Issue 4 (Summer 2000). 21 Jan. 2002 . â€Å"Students Rights†. Y and M Online. 21 Jan. 2002 . â€Å"Students Rights and Responsibilities†. University of Virginia. 21 Jan. 2002 . â€Å"Students Rights Guide†. American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. 21 Jan. 2002 . â€Å"Students‘ Rights of Free Speech†. The American Center for Law and Justice. 20 Jan. 2002 . â€Å"Students Rights on Public School Campuses†. Liberty Counsel. 20 Jan. 2002 http://www.lc.org/OldResources/Students_rights_0900.html. â€Å"Teachers‘ Rights on Public School Campuses†. Liberty Counsel. 20 Jan. 2002 . Young, David. Survey. Oakridge High School: 30 Jan. 2002.