Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
On this matter, should we start with the abduction and apparent murder of the Unionist, over-60 Mr. Andrew Allsman by members of Porter's Confederates? Or the execution of ten prisoners in retaliation after Porter refused demands to return the man unharmed?
BTW, 1 of the 10 executed had reputedly been the murderer of Ezekiel Pratt, Unionist. The other 9 of the 10 had previously been rounded up as Confederates, had taken the oath of allegiance to the US in order to be released. That oath specified "death would be the penalty for a violation of this their solemn oath and parole of honor." Yet they had been captured in arms against the US a second time, so their lives were forfeit by their oath.
McNeill's adjutant, Major Strachan, was later prosecuted and convicted for his part in this, and then pardoned by Rosecrans on the belief that his trial had been prejudiced and unfair. But does that mean we should overlook the "warcrimes" against Pratt and Allman because they were Unionists?
The war in Missouri in particular was a nasty business, with lots of incidents on both sides that can be criticized. When these events occurred in 1862, there was no international standard code of conduct for such situations, and the "Lieber Code" defining acceptable actions had not yet been written at the direction of Lincoln and Halleck. The Geneva Convention also lay in the future. Reprisal executions for guerilla actions were fairly common in Europe at the time, and both Union and Confederate governments threatened them from time to time.
At just about this time, Union Col. John T. Wilder, captured at Munfordville by Braxton Bragg that September, was selected as one of the Union captives who would be hanged in reprisal for a Union action. Negotiations worked out better in that case, Wilder was exchanged, and went on to arm and form the famous "Lightning Brigade". But such threats were seen in certain incidents during the war, and used by both sides. We might not like them, but we certainly should not be surprised by them, or see them as only on one side.
The war in the middle border region: Tennessee, Missouri, Kansas, was extrordinarily vicious.
I would welcome a discussion about the irregular warfare, guerilla actions, occupation "peacekeeping" forces and their actions. The competing factions of whites, in Tennessee of example, the role of blacks and black troops, Union forces, and Confederate partisans made it brutal and nasty.
This may be legend but I believe the Hatfield and McCoy feud began during the Civil War.
Instead of trotting out duelling atrocities, let's try to understand what led to the violence, who was involved and its results. I don't think we need to refight the battles verbally.
Matthew, you mentioned the Hatfield-McCoy fued. That was more of a family matter that really wasn't particularly related to the war. They were in the Kentucky - West Virginia area.
One of the more interesting stories in Tennessee deals with a renegade named Champ Ferguson who lived in the hills east of Nashville. He reportedly killed close 50 men as revenge against a Kentucky regiment who he believed killed his wife and daughter. Champ was hung in Nashville by the US Army.
__________________
Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
Matthew, you mentioned the Hatfield-McCoy fued. That was more of a family matter that really wasn't particularly related to the war. They were in the Kentucky - West Virginia area.
One of the more interesting stories in Tennessee deals with a renegade named Champ Ferguson who lived in the hills east of Nashville. He reportedly killed close 50 men as revenge against a Kentucky regiment who he believed killed his wife and daughter. Champ was hung in Nashville by the US Army.
Here's another: Tennessee Union Colonel Fielding Hurst, best known for extorting money from Confederate towns, shooting a prisoner who refused to give up his boots, having his men kill and bury some Rebels 1 to a mile along a stretch of road as signposts, and a few other things. He and his family ruled over an area of Tennessee known as "Hurst Nation", and controlled about 60 square miles of land along the Tennessee river before the war.
But before Hurst raised his Union TN Cavalry regiment, he was just a private citizen opposed to secession in a secessionist area. When he went to the vote back in June of 1861, he had the gumption to roar back his defiance at the jeering secessionists. He was arrested by militia at the governor's order then, and spent about a year incarcerated in Nashville before being released.
He then raised his regiment and fought a dirty, nasty war over near Memphis and other parts of West Tennessee. He seems to have taken his treatment personally. He is the one who Forrest is complaining about in letters to the Union commander at Memphis (for the dead and mutilated Rebels in his command as well as the extortion from a town) in the days just before Ft. Pillow.
Sounds like Hurst had his reasons, as had Champ Ferguson. Hurst, however, was wealthy enough to raise regiments.
Didn't Hurst have a couple of brothers helping to run that empire?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
One of the more interesting stories in Tennessee deals with a renegade named Champ Ferguson who lived in the hills east of Nashville. He reportedly killed close 50 men as revenge against a Kentucky regiment who he believed killed his wife and daughter. Champ was hung in Nashville by the US Army.
Sam's family was sorted out by his pro Union sympathizing neighbors because they owned the prime real estate in the area. The newcomers wanted what Sam and his family had and they stopped at nothing to get it.
Histyory has not been kind to him. Yet, his is a fasinating story of revenge and reprisal for wrongs done him by Yankee invaders.
On this matter, should we start with the abduction and apparent murder of the Unionist, over-60 Mr. Andrew Allsman by members of Porter's Confederates? Or the execution of ten prisoners in retaliation after Porter refused demands to return the man unharmed?
Andrew Allsman was a Yankee sychophant. He had informed on his many many family, friends and neighbors for being Democrats, having pro Southern sympathies, and/or expressing Secessionist sentiments. He had many enemies.
Col. Porter was "in the bush". He was not aware of McNeil's proclomation and he couldn't have done anything about it anyway. He did not have Mr. Allsman. He did not order Mr. Allsman held captive nor put to death.
I submit to you that the McNeil had been practicing this form of barbory for many months. Kirksville in August and Macon City in September are major examples of a dozen or more each time, but they had been doing it in ones and twos all over northeast Missouri.
You'll find no sympathy for him here. May the Butcher McNeil rot in Hell.
Andrew Allsman was a Yankee sychophant. He had informed on his many many family, friends and neighbors for being Democrats, having pro Southern sympathies, and/or expressing Secessionist sentiments. He had many enemies.
This is well-known. From the pro-Union Palmyra, Missouri Courier: It will be remembered by our readers that on the occasion of Porter's descent upon Palmyra, he captured, among other persons, an old and highly respected resident of this city, by name Andrew Allsman. This person formerly belonged to the Third Missouri Cavalry, though too old to endure all the hardships of very active duty. He was, therefore, detailed as a kind of special or extra provost-marshal's guard or cicerone, making himself generally useful in a variety of ways to the military of the place. Being an old resident, and widely acquainted with the people of the place and vicinity, he was frequently called upon for information touching the loyalty of men, which he always gave to the extent of his ability, though acting, we believe, in all such cases with great candor, and actuated solely by a conscientious desire to discharge his whole duty to his Government. His knowledge of the surrounding country was the reason of his being frequently called upon to act as a guide to scouting parties sent out to arrest disloyal persons. So efficiently and successfully did he act in these various capacities, that he won the bitter hatred of all the rebels in this city and vicinity, and they only waited the coming of a favorable opportunity to gratify their desire for revenge. The opportunity came at last, when Porter took Palmyra. That the villains, with Porter's assent, satiated their thirst for his blood by the deliberate and predetermined murder of their helpless victim no truly loyal man doubts. When they killed him, or how, or where, are items of the act not yet revealed to the public. Whether he was stabbed at midnight by the dagger of the assassin, or shot at midday by the rifle of the guerrilla; whether he was hung and his body hidden beneath the scanty soil of some oaken thicket, or left as food for hogs to fatten upon, or whether, like the ill-fated Wheat, his throat was severed from ear to ear, and his body sunk beneath the wave, we know not. But that he was foully, carelessly murdered it is useless to attempt to deny.
But what is your point? Porter raided the town. Allsman was abducted from his house by force, taken out into the bush, seen in company with 2 of Porter's men in a spot where a farmer would find a skull a few years later. No one doubts he was murdered, AFAIK.
Are you trying to say it was okay for the secessionists to kill Allsman, but wrong for the Unionists to kill secessionists in reprisal for his death?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
Col. Porter was "in the bush". He was not aware of McNeil's proclomation and he couldn't have done anything about it anyway. He did not have Mr. Allsman. He did not order Mr. Allsman held captive nor put to death.
Mr. Allsman was abducted from his house by Porter's men in a raid Porter led, then carried away and apparently killed by Porter's men. He was not "in the bush" when his men did this.
The raid was in September. When McNeil got back to that town, his Provost Marshal published the notice:
=====
PALMYRA, MO., October 8, 1862.
JOSEPH C. PORTER:
SIR: Andrew Allsman, an aged citizen of Palmyra, and a non-combatant, having been carried from his home by a band of persons unlawfully arrayed against the peace and good order of the State of Missouri, and which band was under your control, this is to notify you that unless said Andrew Allsman is returned, unharmed, to his family within ten days from date, ten men, who have belonged to your band, and unlawfully sworn by you to carry arms against the Government of the United States, and who are now in custody, will be shot as a meet reward for their crimes, among which is the illegal restraining of said Allsman of his liberty, and, if not returned, presumptively aiding in his murder.
Your prompt attention to this will save much suffering.
Yours, &c.,
W. R. STRACHAN,
Provost-Marshal-General, District of Northeastern Missouri.
Per order of brigadier-general commanding McNeil's column.
=====
Again, the Palmyra Courier:
A written duplicate of this notice he caused to be placed in the hands of the wife of Joseph C. Porter, at her residence in Lewis County, who it was well known was in frequent communication with her husband. The notice was published widely, and as Porter was in Northern Missouri during the whole of the ten days subsequent to the date of this notice, it is impossible that, with all his varied channels of information, he remained unapprised of General McNeil's determination in the premises.
Now maybe Porter never heard before the ten days were up. It seems just as likely that he might have heard it.
But so what? If he knew that his men had abducted and killed a man, what did he do about it, and why should he be excused for letting it go unpunished? Unionists believed that Porter encouraged violence by his men and turned a blind eye to it, and these executions are undoubtedly a reply to that as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
I submit to you that the McNeil had been practicing this form of barbory for many months. Kirksville in August and Macon City in September are major examples of a dozen or more each time, but they had been doing it in ones and twos all over northeast Missouri.
So? How about Porter's July 13, 1862 raid on Memphis, MO? Dr. William Aylward was roused from his bed, shot in the neck while resisting the intruders, supposedly "escaped" during the night, and his body was found the next day, apparently hanged or strangled. This was attributed to Tom Stacy, a man even Porter's men regarded as a genuine bushwacker, who led a company they referred to as "the chain gang".
In December, the Provost Marshal, writing to the New York Times about the furor, had this to say, in part:
=====
As a specimen of our situation, let me inform you that an old Baptist preacher, named Wheat, was murdered by a rebel gang within 5 or 6 miles of Palmyra, his body mutilated and his person robbed of some $800; that a farmer named Carter, living in an adjoining county, suspected of having given information which led to the arrest of a notorious bridge-burner and railroad destroyer, was shot in his own dooryard and in the presence of his wife and children; that a Mr. Preston, living but a few miles from the same neighborhood, was taken off by a gang of these men, whom you seem desirous of recognizing as honorable belligerents, and murdered, leaving an amiable wife and four very interesting little children to cry for vengeance upon the assassins of their father. A Mr. Pratt, living a few miles north of Palmyra, a very intelligent farmer, unfortunately an emigrant from Massachusetts, and a man of the very highest moral character, but guilty of being an unswerving Union man, was murdered, leaving a widow and six children to mourn his loss. A Mr. Spires, an aged man, over seventy years, one of the oldest citizens of Shelby County (adjoining the county of which Palmyra is the shiretown), was taken from his house and hung, and his body mutilated. Other citizens of that county, and those of the highest standing, were taken out and hung until life was nearly extinct. A man named Spaight was taken out, stripped, and brutally whipped. A large body of these rebels went into the town of Canton, in Lewis County, a town not garrisoned, and murdered William Carnegy, a leading merchant and universally respected, but tainted to them with the leprosy of loyalty. Porter, at the head of several thousand of these guerrillas, went into Memphis, also not garrisoned, seized a Dr. Ayl-ward, the prominent Union man of that locality, and hung him, with a halter made of hickory bark, until he was dead.
=====
Again, do secessionists get a free pass for their "war crimes" while only Unionists get blamed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
You'll find no sympathy for him here. May the Butcher McNeil rot in Hell.
The war in Missouri was nasty from the beginning, many months before that, starting with the riots in St. Louis and the troops firing into a crowd. What amazes me is how the secessionists seem to feel their acts are lily-white and the Unionists are black as Hell itself. All of this probably just follows from "Bleeding Kansas" -- where, BTW, 2/3rds of the murdered seem to have been "free-soilers", and John Brown's murders were in respose to murders by pro-slavers -- who would probably tell you they were avenging some prior act. Once you get into this kind of blood-letting and it goes on for awhile, no-one can find the start of it, really, and each side always has some bloody rag to wave to incite the crowd to further violence.
This is what the Courier ended with: It seems hard that ten men should die for one. Under ordinary circumstances it would hardly be justified; but severe diseases demand severe remedies. The safety of the people is the supreme law. It overrides all other considerations. The madness of rebellion has become so deep seated that ordinary methods of cure are inadequate. To take life for life would be little intimidation to men seeking the heart's blood of an obnoxious enemy. They could well afford to make even exchanges under many circumstances. It is only by striking the deepest terror in them, causing them to thoroughly respect the lives of loyal men, that they can be taught to observe the obligation of humanity and of law.
I am certain we can find pro-secessionist papers saying much the same to justify violence against Unionists if we look.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
