Talk:Jefferson Davis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

–

	Kentucky Portal Jefferson Davis is within the scope of WikiProject Kentucky, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Template Usage] [Watch Project Articles] [Project Talk]
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance on the Project's importance scale.
	Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page.

This article is part of WikiProject Mississippi, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Mississippi.

This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. See the 2005 press source article for details. The citation is in: Magen Howard. "Confederate parks vote is today -- Majority needed to send issue to City Council", The Commercial Appeal (Memphis), July 21, 2005.

Contents 1 Need an Explanation 2 Question for Clarification 3 Jefferson Davis factual error 4 "Trivia" & Importance 5 First Marrage location 6 Succession box 7 Intro 8 Headline text 9 Born in the 20th century 10 Possible error 11 On human bondage 12 clarification of election 13 Possible date errors re: imprisonment 14 Jefferson Davis and his 2 wives. 15 Ben Montgomery 16 Jim Limber Inconsistencies 17 Baptism 18 Middle name 19 1st President of the CSA or only? 20 Cleanup Request 21 This needs to be modified 22 Elipses 23 Capture 24 The Prison Life of Jefferson Davis 25 Braxton Bragg 26 a U.S.-ian? 27 The first paragraph needs revision 28 Old vandalism - need thorough proofread 29 Provisional President & President 30 civil war

[edit] Need an Explanation

This line doesn't make any sense to me "Davis was never touched by corruption", mainly because it's entirely out of context, but also because it's in the second line of the summary of the article, and is stuck between his rank as president and his inability to find a plan defeat the Union. Hobo Joe 14:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question for Clarification

I am curious of the origin of this statement, "Though an opponent of secession in practice". I do not agree in my studies of Jefferson Davis. His papers and speeches are littered with comments telling the south to prepare to leave the Union and that if a abolitionist wins the Presidency to pack your bags. I think it may be good to tell that side of Jefferson Davis. - --Tniem 00:11, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

All the material on the /Timeline so far is from a 1923 collection of Jefferson's letters and speeches called Jefferson Davis: Constitutionalist by one Dunbar Rowland . It is in the public domain. I've edited it slightly to conform with "neutral point of view". By slightly I mean where I've said Davis fought in such-and-such a battle Rowland says he 'gallantly' fought at such-and-such a battle. -- Matt Apple

Anybody want to tackle turning this into an article instead of an outline? -- Zoe

How about you? See, I even started it for you. -Smack 04:37 5 Jul 2003 (UTC)

---

Re: 1845: It seems correct according to the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. -- Someone else 08:41 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Jefferson Davis factual error

Moved from Wikipedia:Village pump on Thursday, July 10th, 02003.

I was parlaying the timeline that is Jefferson Davis into something reasonably article-like when I came upon a statement that Davis was elected to the House of Representatives in 1845. From context, I inferred that this was the United States House of Representatives, not a similarly-named legislative body of the state of Mississippi. The problem is, in case you haven't figured it out yet, that 1845 is not an election year. I think I have three options at this point: keep the erroneous date, spend hours finding a free resource where I can find the correct date, or scrap the whole timeline as factually untrustworthy. -Smack 07:24 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water for goodness sake! Just because there is one error do not delete the whole thing. I check each Events entry in the day articles I work on and sometimes delete several entries that I cannot confirm. And there is such a thing as a run-off elections and maybe a minor error where the author wrote "elected" when "took office" should have been inputted instead. --mav 07:31 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

The Funk & Wagnall's encyclopedia that's collecting dust in the other room here says "...He was a planter in Mississippi from 1835 to 1845, when he was elected to the U.S. Congress. In 1846 he resigned his seat..." No details, but it could well be a mid-term election due to the previous guy resigning or dying, or some sort of run-off. Or, of course, it could also be badly worded. --Brion 08:16 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Village Pump is too long for me to edit without truncating, but 1845 seems correct for Jefferson Davis. See [Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]. -- Someone else 08:39 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

That does confirm he started his term in 1845. The article claims he entered office in December 1845, which if true would be consistent with a late election (in 1845). --Brion 08:44 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Very well then. The timeline says that he took office on December 8, 1845. Unless someone here objects, I'll say explicitly that this was a special election. (Which is rather odd, since Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution says that vacancies in the House shall be filled by "writ of election" of the governor of the state affected. I'll just say that he was elected to fill a vacancy.) -Smack 23:51 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

On the other hand, his biography on the Congress website says he served in the House from March 4, 1845 -- right at the start of the 29th Congress -- until his June 1846 resignation. However, I see December or December 8th, 1845, sometimes with a November or November 4, 1845 election date, plastered all over mysterious amateur web sites. Anyone want to look up the Congressional Record and make sure? :P --Brion 00:19 7 Jul 2003 (UTC)

From what I read here, it looks like he won the election in 1844 (inaugurations for regular elections in those days were held in March, not January). - Hephaestos 17:44 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

So you're saying the December 8 thing is erroneous? -Smack 19:01 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I would think that Davis was elected either in Nov or possible Dec of 1844, than took office at the normal time in March of 1845. I may attempt to work on this. I check his cong bio and he took office at the normal time in March 1845, So perhaps just rephrase he was elected to the US H R in 1844 and served from March 45 to whenever Smith03

Removed the parenthetical reference to the December date, as I have yet to see any source claiming that which is more authoritative than the Congressional bio here.

---

[edit] "Trivia" & Importance

Also moved from Wikipedia:Village pump on July 10

This article contains a lot of information about speeches that Davis delivered in Congress. Nobody but a serious researcher would care about that information, but policy is not to delete anything useful. What is to be done? -Smack 21:27 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Is there something wrong about having info for serious research? :-) Evercat 21:30 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Not really, per se, but what I was saying is that the article has lots of information that roundly fails the "5000 people test". -Smack 01:34 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

In particular: 1877, Visits England; 1878, Returns to Beauvoir, Mississippi; 1881, visits Europe; 1882, Visits Alabama and Georgia.

And he isn't particularly well-travelled already, how about those people who do? Do those trips merit mentioning? If so, list his great deeds. If not, that chronology is just a diary that belongs to sourceburg (sourcebourg?) Wikipedia (still under discussion, admittedly). --Menchi 06:44 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I have no doubts about keeping those. I'm looking more at stuff like "February 6. Speaks in the House regarding the ownership of the Oregon territory. March 16. Delivers a strict-constructionist speech on the river and harbor bill. March 27. Speaks on the bill to raise two regiments of riflemen."

It doesn't even say what positions he took. If it did, some insight could be gleaned, but otherwise it's virtually useless. -Smack 21:48 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I'm not going to let this unresolved question hold up the refactoring of this article any longer. I'm moving the trivial the Congressional activity here. We can figure out what to do with it later.

• 1845
  • December 19. Speaks in the House, his first speech in that body, on naturalization laws. Offers resolutions with regard to military schools and a mail route from Mobile, Alabama, to Jackson, Mississippi.
• 1846
  • January 13. Offers a resolution in the House requesting information from the Secretary of the Navy with regard to the Ship Island channel.
  • February 6. Speaks in the House regarding the ownership of the Oregon territory.
  • March 16. Delivers a strict-constructionist speech on the river and harbor bill.
  • March 27. Speaks on the bill to raise two regiments of riflemen.
  • April 8. Speaks on the bill to raise a regiment of mounted riflemen.
  • May 28. Speaks on the House resolution of thanks to General Taylor.
  • May 30. Speaks on the bill to alter the pay department of the Army.
  • June 12. Offers resolutions that medals be awarded in recognition of services rendered by General Taylor and his army at Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma.
• 1848
  • January 3. Speaks on a bill to increase the size of the Army.
  • February 17. Speaks on the resolution of thanks to General Taylor.
  • May 5. Speaks on the bill providing for a temporary occupation of Yucatan by the United States.
  • July 1. Speaks in defense of the reputation of General John A. Quitman.
  • July 12. Speaks on the bill to establish a territorial government for Oregon.
• 1849
  • January 12. Speaks on a petition for the African colonization of free blacks.
  • January 22. Speaks on resolution by the Legislature of New York with regard to the slavery question.
  • January 31. Speaks on the bill to aid the construction of a railroad across the Isthmus of Panama.
  • March 3. Speaks on the bill for the establishment of the Department of the Interior.
  • December 20. Opposes a resolution inviting Father Mathew to a seat in the Senate on the ground of his being an abolitionist.
• 1850
  • January 10. Speaks on the resolutions of the General Assembly of the State of Vermont with regard to slavery.
  • February 8. Speaks on the question of receiving a petition for the dissolution of the Union.
  • February 12. Speaks on the subject of the extension of slavery to the Territories.
  • March 18. Speaks in defense of Buchanan's position on the slavery question.
  • May 1. Delivers a strict constructionist speech on the joint resolution providing aid to search for Sir John Franklin.
  • May 2. Objects, in a speech, to the granting of public lands to corporations.
  • May 8. Presents "the report and resolutions of the Legislature of Mississippi, on the subject which distracts and divides the people of the Union, and which threatens, unless checked in its onward course, to produce consequences fatal to the cause of human liberty, as secured and advanced by the Constitution of the United States."
  • June 13. Speaks on the bill to grant to Arkansas the swamp lands in that State.
  • September 28. Speaks on a proposition to abolish flogging in the Navy.
  • January-September. Speaks many times on Clay's compromise measures with regard to slavery.
• 1851
  • January 22. Speaks on Clay's resolution of inquiry into the expediency of making more effectual provision for the suppression of the African slave trade.
  • February 18. Speaks on Clay's resolution with regard to resistance, in Boston, to the execution of the fugitive slave law.
• 1852
  • July. Speaks in Philadelphia on the Administration's policy with regard to internal improvements, and visits New England.
  • December 1. Transmits to Congress his first report as Secretary of War.
• 1854
  • January 22. Conducts Stephen A. Douglas and some other prominent southerners to the White House for an interview with the President on the Kansas-Nebraska Bill.
• 1858
  • December. Speaks in the Senate on his proposed substitute for the Pacific Railroad Bill.
• 1859
  • January. Speaks several times on the French Spoliation Bill.
  • February 1. Speaks on the agricultural colleges bill.
  • February 28. Speaks on questions connected with slavery in the Territories.
  • December 5. Speaks on a resolution of inquiry into John Brown's raid at Harper's Ferry.
• 1860
  • February 29. Speaks on the bill for the admission of Kansas into the Union.
  • May 8. Speaks on his resolutions with regard to the relations of the States.
• 1865
  • January 12. Appoints commissioners to the conference at Hampton Roads.
• 1884
  • March 10. Delivers his last address to the Mississippi Legislature. I removed this because the timeline never reported his election.

Why not copy the whole timeline and place it at Jefferson Davis timeline? --mav 02:11 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Timeline of Jefferson Davis (redirect) - 17th of January revision. Moved from Jefferson Davis/Timeline (also a redirect). All of the information in the timeline now resides either in this article, or in the copy-and-paste dump above. I don't think it would be a good idea to have two parallel articles on one person. -Smack 07:09, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

No. One would be the article and the other would be an extensive timeline. --mav

[edit] First Marrage location

The 2 sections that talk about his first marrage place it in two different states. (Kentucky and Lousiana, in her aunt's home or in his sister's). Was there 2 weddings? I doubt it, so which is correct?

[edit] Succession box

Preceded by none

President of the Confederate States of America 1861–1865

Succeeded by none

Why have a succession box when there are no successors or predecessors? This seems a bit silly. -Willmcw 02:01, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

True, but succession boxes also give one a quick sense of the positions held over the course of a lifetime. john k 05:59, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well, the intro has all that too, at the top of the page. Maybe there should be a "position" box. Anyway, if other editors think it has merit.... -Willmcw

07:23, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

How about presindents of United States

• I have restored the previous succession box, "Heads of the Confederacy," which has an actual succession. Richard75 15:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Intro

Is it necessary to refer to the American Civil War as "The War Between the States"? As far as I know, the latter is not used here in the United States, except as an alternative way to frame the discussion of the nature of the war. It seems redundant. Perhaps in Canada, England, etc. it is known otherwise, in which case, it would be good to keep it like that.

Follow that link to Naming the American Civil War and you'll see a discussion of the various names used. Hal Jespersen 17:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

The most correct title is from the U.S. Army War Department, which compiled the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion sometime in the early 1900s. "War of the Rebellion" was reached in a consensus of Northerners and Southerners. --Ezratrumpet 05:34, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I stand corrected. Within days of commenting, I saw at the court house in Gainesville, Florida, a memorial war to the town's residents who have died in wars. It included a listing for "The War Between the States." ~takethemud 11/01/05, 845 AM, EST

Doesn't the victorious side always get to write the history? I presume this would include naming rights (not to be confused with States rights) m 23:00 15 Dec 2005) :-)

I removed "famous for serving as the first, only, and last President of the Confederate States" and put "only President". "First, only and last" is a bit pointless. Richard75 19:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Headline text

how do you understand this???

It's not difficult to understand, in my opinion - TopAce 14:28, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Born in the 20th century

Surely Davis could not have been born in 1908, as indicated by the bio box- especially if he died in 1889.

[edit] Possible error

The above error has been corrected, but this sentence is questionable:

These courts were free to choose a variety of punishments including a warning, extra labor, etc., but whippings were not prohibited.

Is the double negative intentional?

Also, this sentence, added as a single edit, seems redundant and probably politcal in nature, since it was already established that Davis was a slaveholder:

Regardless, Davis supported the idea of holding human beings as captive workers against their will.

Runderwo 10:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

"These courts were free to choose a variety of punishments including a warning, extra labor, etc., but whippings were not prohibited."

The double negative may be the problem, as Runderwo suggests, but perhaps "prohibited" was the typo, and what was meant was "not permitted." The tenor of this section seems to be that J.D. was a benevolent slaveowner - either change would appear to make more sense in this context. What was the original source for the "slave court" info? Bog 17:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On human bondage

An editor is removing the phrase "holding human beings as captive workers against their will" and replacing it with, simply, "slavery". The argument is that the former shows bias and "when the sentence was worded in the previous way i assumed the writer of the article was against slavery, as am i, however an encylclopedia should never take sides". I disagree. "holding human beings as captive workers against their will" is a straightforward description of slavery. Is it damning? Only if you are against slavery. This argument strikes me as a bit like arguing that describing the Holocaust biases Adolf Hitler's argument against him. In fact, we simply explain the facts as they happened, and the readers can, I expect, draw their own conclusions of the monstrosity involved. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 20:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] clarification of election

Regarding this passage:

Elected to the U.S. Senate again, he refused the office in 1875, having been barred from federal office by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Is this supposed to say "he was refused"? It sounds like it's saying that he was the one doing the refusing. Also, was this "election" a popular election, or was he elected by the legislature. By picking him, did Virginia give up one seat in the Senate for six years, or did they just pick another person. To me, that's signficant, in terms of how much of a point (through sacrifice) they were willing to make, in choosing somebody they knew wouldn't be allowed to serve. --Rob 00:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Added: I guesse the intent of this was to say, the legislature chose him, but he refused, because he knew he couldn't actually serve. If that's what's meant, it should be clearer, since you can't really refuse an office, until there is a valid offer for the office. You can merely refuse to seek it. --Rob 00:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible date errors re: imprisonment

Not a biggie, but I am in possession of a book published in 1866 and written by Bvt. Lieut.-Col. John J. Craven, M.D. which refutes the dates provided in this section. John Craven was the personal physician mentioned in this section and, according to him, the William P. Clyde, with Jefferson Davis and family on board, dropped anchor in Hampton Roads on May 19th. It was not until the afternoon of May 22nd, when Major-General Miles arrived to take over command of the fort, that Davis was escorted to casement #2.

Also, while he was shackled on the morning of the 23rd, they were not removed until Sunday, May 28th...

"That afternoon (May 25th),at an interview sought with Major-General Miles, my opinion was given that the physical condition of State-prisoner Davis required the removal of his shackles, until such time as his health should be established on some firmer basis."

"Sunday, May 28th. - At 11 A.M. this morning was sitting on the porch in front of my quarters when Captain Frederick Korte, 3rd Pennsylvania Artillery, who was Officer of the Day, passed towards the cell of the prisoner, followed by the blacksmith... I hastily followed the party, but remained in the outer guardroom while the smith removed the shackles."

Also of note, he did not spend the two years of his imprisonment in the casemate. On Oct. 5th Dr. Craven "directed Gen. Miles... to remove Mr. Davis from the casement to his new and more pleasant abode." The new quarters was in Carroll Hall.

• Yankees are sick. Why did they put this guy into prison?! user:deliogul

• • Just speculation, but maybe they thought he was a dangerous rebel leader.

[edit] Jefferson Davis and his 2 wives.

In the information box, I added Sarah Knox Taylor and change the caption from First Lady to spouses. I did this because we need to be accurate. I hope there will be no problems. My apologies for the delay with explanation as to why I did this. Thank you-RFD 18:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Montgomery

In that article, we read that he was Joesph Davis's slave, not Jefferson's. That article looks pretty careful — is a change here in order? Bill 11:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed this as well, not corrected since first reported over 6 months ago. Did Jefferson Davis or Joseph Davis own Montgomery as a slave? MDonfield 06:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Limber Inconsistencies

There are many inconsistent stories about Jim Limber, a boy that was allegedly adopted by Jefferson Davis. Many stories found in amateur websites and southern editorials claim that the boy was black. [1] However this biography I found says Jim Limber was mulatto (half-white-half-black). [2]

Some stories claim that Union soldiers forcibly took the boy away by force while the boy was crying and resisting wildly, however others claim that Varina gave the boy to family friend and Union general Rufus Saxton. [3]

I say there's too many unknowns and inconsistencies for Jim Limber to be included in the article. Dionyseus 06:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Would it be better to say that there are conflicting reports about an adopted child? Omitting all mention of the adoption story inspires those who've heard of it to correct the omission. It may just be an urban/confederate/internet legend. If there's any truth to it there should be some mention in his printed biographies. I agree that until we can find a solid source we should remove it but eventually we should touch on it, if only to debunk it. -Will Beback 07:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

PS: Davis' 7000-word entry (twice as long as ours) in "Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928-1936." doesn't mention Limber at all. It certainly isn't a major factor in his life. -Will Beback 07:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baptism

I removed the following paragraph from the article:

Davis was baptized in St. Paul's Episcopal Church of Richmond, Virginia in 1862. [4]

It was in the middle of the Leadership of the Confederacy section and seemed to interrupt the section. Unless it was a requirement of office to be baptized, the sentence belongs somewhere else (and if it were a requirement, we should say that). However, I didn't see anywhere better to put it. Anyone else see a better place for it? JordeeBec 15:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Middle name

According to Rice University's collection [5], there is no evidence to support "Finis" as his middle name, although it appears in the Hudson Strode biography. No known official documents spell out his middle name. In light of this, I've changed the article to reflect this. JordeeBec 16:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1st President of the CSA or only?

Which would be more accurate in his infobox: to describe him as the 1st PotCS or simply PotCS? Calling him the 1st seems to imply that someone succeeded him. Any other thoughts? JordeeBec 18:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Change him to the only. --195.93.21.1 20:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup Request

The wiki-table of Davis's Cabinet members in this article needs to be cleaned up to match a similar wiki-table in the Confederate States of America article. --TommyBoy 23:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This needs to be modified

The following statement is too P.O.V. for an encyclopedia- I'm not saying it's wrong, it is just too opinionated.

"On May 10, he was captured at Irwinville, Georgia and unrightfully held as a prisoner for many years while the carpet baggers came into his south and took over what he had worked so hard to create."Saxophobia 21:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC

[edit] Elipses

Surely that elipses should be replaced with a a full stop at the end of the first paragraph (I think).

[edit] Capture

His capture by Henry Harnden and the Iron Brigade should be expanded. I don't much about the topic otherwise I would. -- Al™ 00:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Who really cares if he won or if he was agy or the he did!! yea not really meh!! good-bye!!

[edit] The Prison Life of Jefferson Davis

This book seems to have been influential in getting Davis released from prison, although it is not an entirely reliable source. Even Davis found fault with it. I'm not familiar with the subject of this article, so I am putting what I found here. --Jtir 10:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Scanned text of The Prison Life of Jefferson Davis as published in 1866.

Title: The Prison Life of Jefferson Davis
ISBN: 1582185107
Publisher: Digital Scanning Inc
Author(s): John Joseph Craven
Format: Paperback
Publication Date: Jun 1, 2001 [As Published in 1866]
Subject: History / U.S.
Dimensions: 5.56 x 8.48 x 0.97 in
Pages: 384

Review of Davis' annotations.

Review: [Untitled]
Reviewed Work(s):
    * "Fiction Distorting Fact": The Prison Life, Annotated by Jefferson Davis. by Edward K. Eckert
Review author[s]: David S. Heidler
Journal of Southern History, Vol. 54, No. 4 (Nov., 1988), pp. 673-674

Dr. Craven and the Origin of the Free Association Library, 1883-1893.

"In June 1866 The Prison Life of Jefferson Davis appeared, taking the U.S., London, and Paris (as La vie de prison de Jefferson Davis, translated by Wallace Jones) by storm. The book built sympathy for Davis' plight, and called for his release. It served as a catalyst that mobilized a the public and coalition of powerful publishers and politicians, led by Thaddeus Stevens, Horace Greeley, Gerrit Smith and others, who took up the cause and secured Davis' release, on May 13, 1867. Davis, ever combative (even after his release), would heavily annotate his copy, mercilessly criticizing the factual accuracy of most every assertion in Craven's work. (Then again, Davis, over his career, was not generally renowned for unpartisan, charitable positions toward those with whom he might find himself in disagreement.)"

[edit] Braxton Bragg

This and the Braxton Bragg article contradict each other about the relationship between the two men. 41.241.126.242 19:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] a U.S.-ian?

Should the article describe him as [[United States|American]] in the first line? Isn't he most famous for leading the Confederacy against the United States?—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:11, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

He was born and died a citizen of the United States. -Will Beback · † · 20:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

True, but he's famous for leading the Confederacy.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 21:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The first paragraph needs revision

The first paragraph should be brief, to-the-point, and factual. When referring to a person who people feel strongly about, care should be taken to not distort the person's image to one side or the other. I argue that most of the first paragraph is not only unnecessary, but strongly opinionated, and it paints a distorted image of this controversial man. Below is a clip of the first paragraph as I read it:

" leading the rebelling southern slave states (the Confederacy) to defeat because of a lack of soldiers and supplies toward the end of the American Civil War, 1861-65. Davis was never touched by corruption, but he lacked the resources and experience to overcome his counterpart Abraham Lincoln, and was unable to defeat a more industrially developed Union. His insistence on independence even in the face of crushing defeat prolonged the war—Davis was a strong believer in the rights of the people to "alter or abolish governments whenever they become destructive of the ends for which they were established," noting such in his first inaugural address. Sam Houston of Texas uttered perhaps the most succinct, if not the most unbiased, characterization of Davis when he said the Mississippian was "ambitious as Lucifer and cold as a lizard." After Davis was captured in 1865, he was held in a Federal prison for two years, then released with no charges being brought against him."

Words such as, "rebellion," "lack of soldiers," lack of "experience," "crushing" defeat, the insinuation that Davis "prolonged" the war, the out-of-place opinion of Sam Houston which the writer says, "the most succinct"... What kind of picture is this author trying to paint of Jefferson Davis? After reading the first paragraph of this article, who would care to venture forth and learn more about Davis? I was horrified when I saw it.

Somebody please clean up this article.

Jamie@jamiejamie.com 04:01, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old vandalism - need thorough proofread

I've just tried to revert some old vandalism (in these edits). In the process I accidentally restored a false birth date, but fixed that. Might not be a bad idea if some people with more knowledge of Davis than I have could do a thorough proofread to see what other leftover vandalism might be leftover somewher in the article. Fan-1967 21:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Provisional President & President

The Infobox should read Provisional President of the CSA: February 18, 1861-February 22, 1862 & President of the CSA February 22, 1862 to May 10, 1865. GoodDay 21:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] civil war

i think the civil war wasn't that important and i think its dumb because our country was fighting over the dumbest thing ever when they could of just got rid of slavery —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.81.119.5 (talk) 16:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC).