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.
And here we are, after running furiously in a circle, just to get back to where we were.
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Well I see you have made four replies...don't have time to answer all so I'll answer the last one (shortest) first
Trice #4 post
With GUNS it is.
...
Again: With GUNS it was.
...
Actually, it was perfectly legal for groups to organize and arm themselves in Missouri in 1861. Governor Jackson wanted to make it illegal and apply it in a one-sided fashion to favor secession. The state legislature refused to do so in January, February, March and April.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
Difference: What they plan to use them for.
You have not presented any evidence at all about what they planned to use them for. Stop arguing in rhetorical questions. Come out of the bushes and explain what you mean and what evidence you have to support what you say. Or is the problem that you have no evidence for what you want to claim?
...and replying to part of post #1
It's also defined in the Missouri Constitution.
*
Sidenote:
John Brown was hung for treason against the State of Virginia...
...NOT the United States.
From the Missouri Constitution:
==========
Section 30. That treason against the state can consist only in levying war against it, or in adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort; that no person can be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on his confession in open court; that no person can be attainted of treason or felony by the general assembly; that no conviction can work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate; that the estates of such persons as may destroy their own lives shall descend or vest as in cases of natural death; and when any person shall be killed by casualty, there shall be no forfeiture by reason thereof.
===========
Very similar to that in the US Constitution, probably almost a word-for-word copy.
We have positive proof that Governor Jackson was engaged in treason against the US. You have presented none to back up your contention. Where is it?
BTW, while it was true that Brown was convicted on all three counts Virginia brought, including treason against Virginia, it is hard to believe that a non-citizen of Virginia was guilty of treason against Virginia -- just as a British citizen who waged war against France would not be considered guilty of treason against France, for example. The charge is a bit on the absurd side, a legal claim that should never have been brought as a charge and should have been disallowed on appeal, IMHO.
Actually, it was perfectly legal for groups to organize and arm themselves in Missouri in 1861. Governor Jackson wanted to make it illegal and apply it in a one-sided fashion to favor secession. The state legislature refused to do so in January, February, March and April.
You have not presented any evidence at all about what they planned to use them for. Stop arguing in rhetorical questions. Come out of the bushes and explain what you mean and what evidence you have to support what you say. Or is the problem that you have no evidence for what you want to claim?
Tim
Unauthorized military organizations were outlawed as of 13 February 1861 by the State of Missouri.
The Minute Men were mustered into State service.
Blair and his Wide-Awakes (renamed Union Guard) continued their now illegal organization and received their first shipment of arms on 14 February 1861.
The stated purpose by one of its founders (James Peckham)- "It was very evident that, if the Republicans desired to retain a foothold as Union men in Missouri, there must be preparations made to meet force with force." *
Captain Nathaniel Lyon, United States Army, assisted them in training.
Richard Yates, Governor of Illinois, supplied more arms.
Lincoln's political cronies sent in money to buy more arms and equipment.
They were acting on their own and had no authorization from anyone in the Federal government.
They were giving aid to an illegal organization with traitorous designs against the Governor and State of Missouri.
~
*James Peckham, General Nathaniel Lyon and Missouri in 1861
Unauthorized military organizations were outlawed as of 13 February 1861 by the State of Missouri.
I would be interested in seeing an exact source for this claim.
While Governor Jackson had been calling for such measures since he was inaugurated in January, I have never seen that the Militia Bill was passed before May -- and here you are saying it was three months before that.
Confederate Military History, MISSOURI IN THE CIVIL WAR says: ====
... The bill to provide for calling a State convention was passed, and also the bill for curtailing the power of the Republican mayor of St. Louis, but the bill for organizing, arming and equipping the militia--which was by far the most important of the three--met with opposition and was not passed until the State was plunged into war.
... ...The bill for organizing, arming and equipping the militia was under discussion in the house on the day of the election, and its advocates were confident of securing its passage, but the next day a number of members who had been clamorous for arming the State refused to support the bill, claiming that the people had declared they did not want it to pass, and that in obedience to the wishes of their constituents they were constrained to oppose it. ===== That sets it as still not passed after the February 18 election for the secession convention -- yet you say they passed the bill on February 13. It also says that it "was not passed until the State was plunged into war" -- which would appear to mean the bill that was passed in mid-May, after Lyon arrested the militia at Camp Jackson.
Are you perhaps referring to some other bill, and if so, would you please give us some detail on what it is you are referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
The Minute Men were mustered into State service.
Yes, Gov. Jackson accepted his 5 companies of his "Minute Men" secessionists into the State Militia on Feb. 15, IIRR. Very convenient for him and them. He assigned them to Frost, who back in January he had told to seize the St. Louis Arsenal when he had a chance, and they were among the troops Lyon seized in May.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
Blair and his Wide-Awakes (renamed Union Guard) continued their now illegal organization and received their first shipment of arms on 14 February 1861.
Since the secessionist "Minute Men" organized in early January, when did they receive their first arms? And, of course, you still haven't shown this activity was illegal for either of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
The stated purpose by one of its founders (James Peckham)-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
"It was very evident that, if the Republicans desired to retain a foothold as Union men in Missouri, there must be preparations made to meet force with force." *
Yes? Your point is? That the Union men understood the secessionists meant them harm and they wished to be prepared to defend themselves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
Captain Nathaniel Lyon, United States Army, assisted them in training.
Yes, he did; that isn't illegal unless you can show some reason it is. His immediate superior, Major Hagner, conspired with Governor Jackson and state militia General Frost to turn the St. Louis Arsenal to the secessionists, which was certainly a violation of his duty and probably of the law. What is your point here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
Richard Yates, Governor of Illinois, supplied more arms.
Yes, he did, although I have never seen that he gave them Illinois arms or violated the law. If you think he did, please supply some evidence of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
Lincoln's political cronies sent in money to buy more arms and equipment.
Again, what is your point? There was nothing illegal in that at the time. Secessionists were doing the same sort of thing at the same time. Jefferson Davis, however, would soon secretly send artillery and arms stolen from the Baton Rouge Arsenal to Governor Jackson and his secessionists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
They were acting on their own and had no authorization from anyone in the Federal government.
Yes, I am glad you recognize that. They were individual citizens acting in a way regarded as legal. However, what Governor Jackson, General Frost, and their sympathizers were conspiring to do seems to be illegal(treason) under Federal law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
They were giving aid to an illegal organization with traitorous designs against the Governor and State of Missouri.
You haven't shown yet that their organization was illegal. Maybe you are right, but it isn't obvious. Please provide some documentation of what you are referring to.
The stated purpose by one of its founders (James Peckham)- "It was very evident that, if the Republicans desired to retain a foothold as Union men in Missouri, there must be preparations made to meet force with force." *
*James Peckham, General Nathaniel Lyon and Missouri in 1861
If you looked just a few paragraphs down below this line, you'd find this in Peckham's account:
==================
The minute-men under the lead of McLaren, James George, Thornton Grimsley, Wm. Wade, and others, were depending upon Claib Jackson for orders to take the arsenal. Grimsley wrote a letter to Jackson, which was afterward captured among Jackson's papers at Jeffferson City, in which he urged Claib Jackson to allow him (Grimsley) to attempt the capture of the arsenal, which he said he could safely do, as he had over one thousand men, drilled, armed, and ready for any work. Besides, he claimed the co-operation of General D. M. Frost, in command of the State militia, a graduate of West Point, an officer thoroughly in the interest of the rebellion, and reputed a brave and skillful tactician. Frost knew the value of prompt and decisive action, and had Jackson been as bold St. Louis streets would have run with blood as early as January. To obtain possession of St. Louis in advance of any Federal attempts to re-enforce it; to call upon the people of the State to rush to the defense of State rights and of their own elect; to fortify and garrison the prominent points on the river to some place south of Cairo; to seduce Southern Illinois into the scheme of the rebellion; to disarm every doubtful man, and enforce a vigorous conscription--such was the outline of the St. Louis-Jefferson City juntas; but Jackson wanted backbone to take this initiative, and preferred to follow in the wake of the Southern States.
...
This property, in the hands of the national Government, was cause of much grief to the conspirators, and there is no doubt that, had they realized the fact of a probable change in the commandancy of the arsenal, they would have attempted its seizure early in the month of January; but Major Bell, the officer in charge, was in alliance with the conspirators, and the plan was adopted to leave the arsenal in his hands until such time as it was necessary to take it, and then, by means of some excitement studiously to be caused in the city, the Governor, under the plea of "protecting Government property," would march his minute-men to the "assistance of Major Bell." ...
==============
Seems these secessionists were plotting all kinds of illegal things, doesn't it?
I came across the following account in Grant's Memoirs. I thought it interesting that both Grant and Sherman were in St. Louis on the day of that Lyon marched out to capture the militia at Camp Jackson, although apparently neither was in contact with the other. Here is Grant's account:
==============
As I have stated, the legislature authorized the governor to accept the services of ten additional regiments. I had charge of mustering these regiments into the State service. They were assembled at the most convenient railroad centres in their respective congressional districts. I detailed officers to muster in a portion of them, but mustered three in the southern part of the State myself. One of these was to assemble at Belleville, some eighteen miles south-east of St. Louis. When I got there I found that only one or two companies had arrived. There was no probability of the regiment coming together under five days. This gave me a few idle days which I concluded to spend in St. Louis.
There was a considerable force of State militia at Camp Jackson, on the outskirts of St. Louis, at the time. There is but little doubt that it was the design of Governor Claiborn Jackson to have these troops ready to seize the United States arsenal and the city of St. Louis. Why they did not do so I do not know. There was but a small garrison, two companies I think, under Captain N. Lyon at the arsenal, and but for the timely services of the Hon. F. P. Blair, I have little doubt that St. Louis would have gone into rebel hands, and with it the arsenal with all its arms and ammunition. Blair was a leader among the Union men of St. Louis in 1861. There was no State government in Missouri at the time that would sanction the raising of troops or commissioned officers to protect United States property, but Blair had probably procured some form of authority from the President to raise troops in Missouri and to muster them into the service of the United States. At all events, he did raise a regiment and took command himself as Colonel. With this force he reported to Captain Lyon and placed himself and regiment under his orders. It was whispered that Lyon thus reinforced intended to break up Camp Jackson and capture the militia. I went down to the arsenal in the morning to see the troops start out. I had known Lyon for two years at West Point and in the old army afterwards. Blair I knew very well by sight. I had heard him speak in the canvass of 1858, possibly several times, but I had never spoken to him. As the troops marched out of the enclosure around the arsenal, Blair was on his horse outside forming them into line preparatory to their march. I introduced myself to him and had a few moments’ conversation and expressed my sympathy with his purpose. This was my first personal acquaintance with the Honorable—afterwards Major-General F. P. Blair. Camp Jackson surrendered without a fight and the garrison was marched down to the arsenal as prisoners of war.
Up to this time the enemies of the government in St. Louis had been bold and defiant, while Union men were quiet but determined. The enemies had their head-quarters in a central and public position on Pine Street, near Fifth—from which the rebel flag was flaunted boldly. The Union men had a place of meeting somewhere in the city, I did not know where, and I doubt whether they dared to enrage the enemies of the government by placing the national flag outside their head-quarters. As soon as the news of the capture of Camp Jackson reached the city the condition of affairs was changed. Union men became rampant, aggressive, and, if you will, intolerant. They proclaimed their sentiments boldly, and were impatient at anything like disrespect for the Union. The secessionists became quiet but were filled with suppressed rage. They had been playing the bully. The Union men ordered the rebel flag taken down from the building on Pine Street. The command was given in tones of authority and it was taken down, never to be raised again in St. Louis.
I witnessed the scene. I had heard of the surrender of the camp and that the garrison was on its way to the arsenal. I had seen the troops start out in the morning and had wished them success. I now determined to go to the arsenal and await their arrival and congratulate them. I stepped on a car standing at the corner of 4th and Pine streets, and saw a crowd of people standing quietly in front of the head-quarters, who were there for the purpose of hauling down the flag. There were squads of other people at intervals down the street. They too were quiet but filled with suppressed rage, and muttered their resentment at the insult to, what they called, “their” flag. Before the car I was in had started, a dapper little fellow—he would be called a dude at this day—stepped in. He was in a great state of excitement and used adjectives freely to express his contempt for the Union and for those who had just perpetrated such an outrage upon the rights of a free people. There was only one other passenger in the car besides myself when this young man entered. He evidently expected to find nothing but sympathy when he got away from the “mud sills” engaged in compelling a “free people” to pull down a flag they adored. He turned to me saying: “Things have come to a —— pretty pass when a free people can’t choose their own flag. Where I came from if a man dares to say a word in favor of the Union we hang him to a limb of the first tree we come to.” I replied that “after all we were not so intolerant in St. Louis as we might be; I had not seen a single rebel hung yet, nor heard of one; there were plenty of them who ought to be, however.” The young man subsided. He was so crestfallen that I believe if I had ordered him to leave the car he would have gone quietly out, saying to himself: “More Yankee oppression.”
By nightfall the late defenders of Camp Jackson were all within the walls of the St. Louis arsenal, prisoners of war. The next day I left St. Louis for Mattoon, Illinois, where I was to muster in the regiment from that congressional district. This was the 21st Illinois infantry, the regiment of which I subsequently became colonel. I mustered one regiment afterwards, when my services for the State were about closed.
==============
Tim
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
)
Linear Mode
