Did Maryland Ever Consider Remaining Neutral?

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,892
Location
NC
#1
Ask Maryland how their attempt at being neutral worked out. Neutrality was never going to happen. The Union troops were going to march through regardless of what the states wanted.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,892
Location
NC
#2
Thanks for your response.
Maryland enjoyed a special situation, certainly. I don't recall that Maryland ever considered neutrality; can you provide more detail?
If the Union must be dissolved let it be done calmly, deliberately and after full reflection on the part of the united south . . . . After allowing a reasonable time for action on the part of the northern states, if they shall neglect or refuse to observe the plain requirements of the constitution, then, in my judgment, we shall be fully warranted in demanding a division of the country.'

December 8, 1860
- Thomas Holliday Hicks, Governor Maryland

http://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc3500/sc3520/001400/001462/html/1462extbio.html

We have violated no rights of either section. We have been loyal to the Union. The unhappy contest between the two sections has not been tormented or encouraged by us, although we have suffered from it in the past. The impending war has not come by any act or wish of ours. We have done all we could to avert it. We have hoped that Maryland . . . might have acted as mediator between the extremes of both sections and thus have prevented the terrible evils of a prolonged civil war.'

Thomas Holliday Hicks, Governor Maryland

http://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc3500/sc3520/001400/001462/html/1462extbio.html

On May 14th, without orders, Butler had troops occupy Baltimore and control the Federal Hill area by placing camps on high ground to support the artillery at Fort McHenry. Before long, Baltimore was placed under martial law to quell the secessionists.

Maryland in the Civil War
By Mark A. Swank, Dreama J. Swank, p. 14
Edited.
 

O' Be Joyful

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
2,835
Location
Use-ta be: Zinn-zä-nätti o-HI-o The BIG city.
#3

Gov. Hicks maintained a stance of neutrality until he discovered the designs of the secessionists, which he later described as a senator on Feb. 28, 1863. From the Congressional Globe pgs. 1372-1373: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=063/llcg063.db&recNum=461

hicks001.jpg
hicksScreenshot002.jpg


hicks3.jpg
Screenshot001.jpg

The second highlight notes that Maryland was invaded by troops from Virginia.


Here is the third highlighted passage:

"If the president had had forty of those men [secessionist leaders] hung, I would have voted for exonerating him from any responsibility"
-Hicks, speech in U. S. Senate, February 28, 1863

https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/educ/exhibits/hicks/html/case3-1.html
 

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,892
Location
NC
#4
Here is the third highlighted passage:

"If the president had had forty of those men [secessionist leaders] hung, I would have voted for exonerating him from any responsibility"
-Hicks, speech in U. S. Senate, February 28, 1863

https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/educ/exhibits/hicks/html/case3-1.html
But that was 1863, a time well away from any chance of Maryland being neutral.

Notice how my quotes are from the time leading up to the War, not after the War broke out and he feared he would be blown away by Beast Butler's cannons pointed at his Union State. Martial law has a funny way of persuading people and getting them to say what you want.

Are you referring to the invasion well after the War broke out by General Lee? If so, that is a completely different topic altogether.
 
#6
But that was 1863, a time well away from any chance of Maryland being neutral.

Notice how my quotes are from the time leading up to the War, not after the War broke out and he feared he would be blown away by Beast Butler's cannons pointed at his Union State. Martial law has a funny way of persuading people and getting them to say what you want.
Hicks is talking about April 1861 immediately after Lincoln's call for troops and before Martial Law or the suspension of Habeas Corpus had been declared.

Are you referring to the invasion well after the War broke out by General Lee? If so, that is a completely different topic altogether.
Hicks is clearly referring to the invasion of Maryland and the seizure of private property by Virginia State troops during "the latter part of April and the early part of May" 1861.
 
#7
Ask Maryland how their attempt at being neutral worked out. Neutrality was never going to happen. The Union troops were going to march through regardless of what the states wanted.
Let's just say that the peace loving Virginians who only seceded because Lincoln wanted her to provide troops to help quell the rebellion afoot in 7 Southern states, secretly supplied 2000 muskets of a 5000 piece order on April 22, 1861 per the request to Governor Letcher by secessionist Maryland legislator, Thomas Parkin Scott that were picked up and taken to the secessionist Board of Police in Baltimore on April 26, 1861. Scott's two sons, John White Scott and William Parkin Scott joined the Confederate army serving in Virginia regiments. William Parkin was a personal escort of Jefferson Davis when the President fled Richmond in April 1865. Also, according to Maryland's Governor Thomas Hicks, Virginia "armed forces" entered western Maryland during the "latter part of April" 1861 stealing private property before leaving during the "early part of May..."
 

O' Be Joyful

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
2,835
Location
Use-ta be: Zinn-zä-nätti o-HI-o The BIG city.
#8
Hicks is clearly referring to the invasion of Maryland and the seizure of private property by Virginia State troops during "the latter part of April and the early part of May" 1861.
That part really surprised me. I had never heard or read here, of all places, anything about Virginia State troops invading--to borrow a term--western Maryland that early, or your just posted account of 2000 rifles being sent to the innocent freedom loving pug-ugies of Baltimore.

Another thing that took me aback, but really should not have, was the charge by Hicks that secession commissioners were "negotiating" with him to turn Maryland to the confederacy and that by doing so Wash. D.C. would legally revert to Maryland. We always hear about their activities in Va., as if no other place meant anything at all and is merely an afterthought. Of course we all know that it was all about Virginia. :wink:

If anyone has access to more detailed accounts of these secession commissioners "activities" in Maryland I would love to see them as I am sure others will.

It seems the only time we hear about Maryland; its all about Taney, habeas corpus, Evil Lincoln and those innocent traitors that Maryland's governor would not have lost a night's sleep over to see hung. Btw, @Old_Glory thanks for providing the impetus for me to dig further into this untold side of rebel neutrality interference---I'm sure Lincoln "made 'em" do it-- I hope we see more on this.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,627
Location
Denver, CO
#9
Maryland is only a construct of the people living in Maryland. Some people in Maryland probably were in favor of neutrality. I suspect most of the free blacks and the enslaved people in Maryland opposed neutrality. But if what you really want to argue about is the result of the Civil War, this is as a good a place to start as any!
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,627
Location
Denver, CO
#10
So maybe some of those rioters in Baltimore and places like St. Louis that attempted to block the marches of United States regiments were not as native to Maryland and Missouri as might appear at first glance?
 
#12
That part really surprised me. I had never heard or read here, of all places, anything about Virginia State troops invading--to borrow a term--western Maryland that early, or your just posted account of 2000 rifles being sent to the innocent freedom loving pug-ugies of Baltimore.

Another thing that took me aback, but really should not have, was the charge by Hicks that secession commissioners were "negotiating" with him to turn Maryland to the confederacy and that by doing so Wash. D.C. would legally revert to Maryland. We always hear about their activities in Va., as if no other place meant anything at all and is merely an afterthought. Of course we all know that it was all about Virginia. :wink:

If anyone has access to more detailed accounts of these secession commissioners "activities" in Maryland I would love to see them as I am sure others will.

It seems the only time we hear about Maryland; its all about Taney, habeas corpus, Evil Lincoln and those innocent traitors that Maryland's governor would not have lost a night's sleep over to see hung. Btw, @Old_Glory thanks for providing the impetus for me to dig further into this untold side of rebel neutrality interference---I'm sure Lincoln "made 'em" do it-- I hope we see more on this.
Two places in the O.R. that will provide pages and pages of information in regards to the first months of the events in Maryland are:

War of the Rebellion: Serial 114 Page 0623 THE MARYLAND ARRESTS.

War of the Rebellion: Serial 002 Page 0139 Chapter IX. BALTIMORE POLICE COMMISSIONERS.
 
#13
So maybe some of those rioters in Baltimore and places like St. Louis that attempted to block the marches of United States regiments were not as native to Maryland and Missouri as might appear at first glance?
I doubt that it wasn't any different back then than it is today with the anarchists and protesters that show up in different cities around the U.S.
 

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,892
Location
NC
#17
Let's just say that the peace loving Virginians who only seceded because Lincoln wanted her to provide troops to help quell the rebellion afoot in 7 Southern states, secretly supplied 2000 muskets of a 5000 piece order on April 22, 1861 per the request to Governor Letcher by secessionist Maryland legislator, "
I never said any of that, nor did I mention Lincoln. Notice I said Butler, who was awful and did play a tremendous role in Maryland's decision.

Can you cite specific examples of what Virginia did and when? Was it officials acting on behalf of Virginia or was it citizens? Are you making the case that it was these invasions by Virginia that kept Maryland in the Union and not the force of the Union Military?
 

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,892
Location
NC
#18
@Old_Glory thanks for providing the impetus for me to dig further into this untold side of rebel neutrality interference---I'm sure Lincoln "made 'em" do it-- I hope we see more on this.
By all means do, but I haven't seen anything that shows it wasn't through brute force of the Union. I'm not sure what the Confederates did because no one has posted it.
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
15,874
Location
los angeles ca
#20
Ask Maryland how their attempt at being neutral worked out. Neutrality was never going to happen. The Union troops were going to march through regardless of what the states wanted.
You ask a briad question.
Here are some broad answers.
1. Tens of thousands of Marylanders fought on both sides more for the Union especially since we should include black residents of Maryland.
2. Can you cite case or statutory law that in the event of a rebellion the federal government is obligated to respect a state declaration of neutrality?
3. Can you name any civil war in history where the concept of neutrality was honored?
Leftyhunter
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top