Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
As Gen. Lee prepared for his 1862 invasion of Maryland he kept a keen eye on the political situation in the North. Democrats and Republicans were arguing bitterly over the infringement upon civil liberties, the conduct of the war and the emancipation of slaves. Lee knew that a Confederate victory on Northern soil would seriously hurt Lincoln and the Republicans making it easier for the Democrats to press for a negotiated peace settlement. Lee urged President Davis to write a letter to Lincoln proposing such a peace settlement with the aim of the Confederacy being recognized as an independent nation. Lee knew that if Lincoln refused such a request voters would place the blame for the continuing war on the Republicans and not upon the Confederacy. Voters would then go to the polls in November with a choice to prolong the war or to bring about its termination on honorable terms.
Lee also held high hopes for Maryland to break from the Union and join the Confederacy. Lee believed that it was Federal bayonets alone which kept Maryland in the Union. Citizens of Baltiimore had rioted in April 1861. Marylanders had been arrested and detained without benefit of habeas corpus. This included 31 members of the Maryland state legislature together with the mayor of Baltimore. Thousands of Marylanders discussed amongst themselves how long would the Lincoln Administration supress their civil liberties. Lee believed that the influence of his victorious army might embolden Maryland's military age men to step forward and actively support the Confederacy.
__________________ A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal ~ Oscar Wilde, 19th Century writer & poet
I hope you meant that a victory in the north would cause people to elect peace democrats to congress and the senate.
I find it hard to believe that Lee figured to free Maryland from under the bayonets of oppressors. That is so high school. If he had invaded Baltimore instead of farm country, maybe he would have gotten recruits. He must have known, given tallies of votes for and against secession, that the small, yoeman farmer was heavily tilted toward union.
I'll buy the first argument -- swaying northern voters to opt for early and peaceful end. That was a distinct possibility in September '62. I refuse to accept that Lee was dumb enough to launch a costly invasion based on a presumed southern loyalty in Maryland. Sounds a bit like Bragg's '62 invasion of Kentucky.
I prefer to believe that the invasion sounded particularly good in that it would allow Virginia time to harvest and hide their crops. Affecting elections is a reasonable goal. Or it might simply been another demonstration of Lee's vaunted audacity.
Do you think that keeping the momentum going after 2nd Bull Run/Manassas and the possibility of European recognition in the event of a victory north of the Potomac River were in Lee's thinking.
The story comes from an article appearing in the CWPT magazine 'Hallowed Ground'. I probably should have referenced it. It was written by reknown CW author Gary Gallagher.
Yes, I meant in my post that Lee hoped that a victory in the North would aid the Democrats in the November election.
Mr. Gallagher states that Lee was hoping for the men of Maryland to flock to his army during the campaign (there was the famous 2nd Maryland) as much of Maryland's population had Confederate sympathies.
Gaining time and relief for the farmers of Northern VA and the Valley was also a concern of Lee's.
I hope I cleared up any misconceptions.
Mike
__________________ A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal ~ Oscar Wilde, 19th Century writer & poet
Any victory North of the Mason/Dixon line would have been of great benefit to the southern"cause". To Bobby Lee, and to an extent Gen. Bragg, Davis`s defensive plan was not working,and wouldn`t. Both K.Y. & Maryland failed, for different reasons, but would the gambits payed off? A resounding maybe.
I was not attacking your statement -- I assumed you had good authority and, from your response, obviously did. I just personally prefer to believe that Lee did not count on recruits from an invasion of Maryland. Lee was smarter than that. A successful invasion of the North could have been more than good. In retrospect, it had a slim chance of success. But Lee was nothing if not audacious, was he? In for a penny, in for a dollar.
It was bold and, in retrospect, not a good idea. The possibility of success, however, held enough promise to take a shot at it. His only advantage was McClellan.
I all but worship Professor Gallagher, but I believe his statement was one of popular opinion. So, however much I honor his interpretations, I don't want to believe that Lee was that stupid. It's emotional. not logical.
In re-reading this thread, I was appalled by a statement I read and then discovered it was mine.
Let me try to clarify. Accepted history has it that one of the reasons Lee invaded Maryland was to recruit loyal Marylanders to the Confederate Cause. It's one of those "facts" that doesn't ring quite true, given Lee's rational mind. Like that nagging thought or melody that haunts you while waiting for sleep, or the bus.
Can't pin it down, but can't get rid of it either. Lee was audacious and given to taking calculated risks, but I don't see him waltzing into "foreign" territory with any hope of bringing back an army of fresh recruits. It doesn't fit with my concept of Lee. Perhaps my concept is faulty?
"Lee believed that the influence of his victorious army might embolden Maryland's military age men to step forward and actively support the Confederacy."
This small paragraph came out of Mr. Gallagher's article in the spring issue of "Hallowed Ground" printed by the CWPT.
'embolden' is way to big a word for me to use personally; the remark is Mr. Gallagher's. I had to look the darn word up myself to find out what it meant.
I too believe that Lee was audacious. If he had more men, supplies and ammunition I believe that there was no limit to what Lee could have accomplished. I doubt that he invaded Maryland primarily just to recruit troops. It may have been a secondary goal but I don't believe it was a primary one either.
Perhaps because I've only posted part of the article it may be taken out of context? (The article itself was 3 pages long. That's a little wordy for me to type.)
Mike Kotyk
Virginia
Mike
__________________ A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal ~ Oscar Wilde, 19th Century writer & poet
Don't take the time, I have the article or its equivalent in one form or another. I had so wanted to believe that it was Davis' idea, or Jackson's -- not Lee's.
Ole
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Lee's High Hopes for Maryland 
I had to look the darn word up myself to find out what it meant.
Linear Mode
