Introducing a New Forum on Immigration

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

1950lemans

First Sergeant
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
988
Location
Connecticut
The Louisiana immigrant matrix (I like that term) fascinates me concerning the Battle of New Orleans. From what I've read, the best Louisiana troops were fighting up the Miss. R. in Tenn. and elsewhere. The troops left to guard NO and the forts were supposedly second rate and consisted mostly of immigrants (Scandinavians, Germans, a Russian-trained Polish officer?!?!, etc.) who had no deep loyalty to the Confederacy nor to the military.

Is that statement true? The army consisted of city-dwellers and dock-workers who didn't care who controlled NO. What references are available to investigate this more in depth? Where would one start studying about this?
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,323
Location
Long Island, NY
The Louisiana immigrant matrix (I like that term) fascinates me concerning the Battle of New Orleans. From what I've read, the best Louisiana troops were fighting up the Miss. R. in Tenn. and elsewhere. The troops left to guard NO and the forts were supposedly second rate and consisted mostly of immigrants (Scandinavians, Germans, a Russian-trained Polish officer?!?!, etc.) who had no deep loyalty to the Confederacy nor to the military.

Is that statement true? The army consisted of city-dwellers and dock-workers who didn't care who controlled NO. What references are available to investigate this more in depth? Where would one start studying about this?
Rather than call them "second rate", I would say that many of them remained loyal to the United States.

Here is an article I wrote on the Fort Jackson Mutiny to which you refer.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,323
Location
Long Island, NY
Late saying congrats, please excuse! Had never really thought about Canadians fighting in the war- silly oversight! Looking forward to hearing more- although have a feeling will be looking up information now it's popped into the head.

Not too much longer teachers, swear! Aren't there cruise tickets somewhere with your names on them? And pillows to scream into? And bottles to- ok never mind.
Thanks a lot. I always enjoy seeing you here.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,323
Location
Long Island, NY
The Louisiana immigrant matrix (I like that term) fascinates me concerning the Battle of New Orleans. From what I've read, the best Louisiana troops were fighting up the Miss. R. in Tenn. and elsewhere. The troops left to guard NO and the forts were supposedly second rate and consisted mostly of immigrants (Scandinavians, Germans, a Russian-trained Polish officer?!?!, etc.) who had no deep loyalty to the Confederacy nor to the military.

Is that statement true? The army consisted of city-dwellers and dock-workers who didn't care who controlled NO. What references are available to investigate this more in depth? Where would one start studying about this?
Many of the immigrants who mutinied made decent soldiers for the Union. They were among the first Louisiana soldiers to join the Union army as this article describes.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

diane

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
20,661
Location
State of Jefferson
You are welcome. The whole Jefferson thing is sort of a joke, really, although there are some hard corps types who really believe it's a possibility. Our NPR affiliate calls itself Jefferson Public Radio.
Then there's those bucking for a territory instead of a state. They figure they'll have their cake and eat it, too that way! Either way, the one thing they aren't considering is the war whoops. We've got little federal reserves all over the place. One guy wants to just declare the tribes dissolved, bingo! (Pssst...that's already been tried....) But with the Karuks the second largest employer in Siskiyou County, they probably don't really want to do that.
 

John Winn

Captain
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,715
Location
State of Jefferson
Then there's those bucking for a territory instead of a state. They figure they'll have their cake and eat it, too that way! Either way, the one thing they aren't considering is the war whoops. We've got little federal reserves all over the place. One guy wants to just declare the tribes dissolved, bingo! (Pssst...that's already been tried....) But with the Karuks the second largest employer in Siskiyou County, they probably don't really want to do that.
Well, life do get tedious sometimes.

I hadn't heard about the territory advocates. The logic of declaring tribes dissolved eludes me. Let's see: we want to secede to become a territory (retrocession ?) which would give us control so as to dissolve sovereign nations that have treaties with our governing State.

:confused:
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
19,692
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Yes, kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, on why Butler was SO vilified and remains so- all you get his how he insulted southern females by threatening them into behaving the way they were raised to behave. That isn't in the least a snotty statement- there are 100 snotty ways to make that point- it's a bald statement. ' Beast ' is the nickname he earned by telling the world if females behaved as if they were from a certain class, they would be treated that way. Pouring excrement on folks' heads was just BEYOND the beyond- as was plain, old being barbarically rude in that fashion. Butler was also from one of THOSE families- you couldn't teach him a thing about being high in the instep, he could have been himself. He did know how the females of that supposed class were mandated to behave and that wasn't it.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,323
Location
Long Island, NY
The Louisiana immigrant matrix (I like that term) fascinates me concerning the Battle of New Orleans. From what I've read, the best Louisiana troops were fighting up the Miss. R. in Tenn. and elsewhere. The troops left to guard NO and the forts were supposedly second rate and consisted mostly of immigrants (Scandinavians, Germans, a Russian-trained Polish officer?!?!, etc.) who had no deep loyalty to the Confederacy nor to the military.
BTW, today is the anniversary of the Mutiny at Fort Jackson, so good timing.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

18thVirginia

Major
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
7,757
Yes, kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, on why Butler was SO vilified and remains so- all you get his how he insulted southern females by threatening them into behaving the way they were raised to behave. That isn't in the least a snotty statement- there are 100 snotty ways to make that point- it's a bald statement. ' Beast ' is the nickname he earned by telling the world if females behaved as if they were from a certain class, they would be treated that way. Pouring excrement on folks' heads was just BEYOND the beyond- as was plain, old being barbarically rude in that fashion. Butler was also from one of THOSE families- you couldn't teach him a thing about being high in the instep, he could have been himself. He did know how the females of that supposed class were mandated to behave and that wasn't it.
Butler made a good target who wasn't the President and perhaps if he were vilified enough, the President would remove him. He understood the large sugar plantation owners with whom he was dealing--he'd fought the textile mill owners on behalf of the women who worked in them in court and had dealt with them in trying to get legislation passed to lower the working hours. Which meant that in setting wage, working conditions and contracts for the slaves on the plantations, he was going to be harder for the plantation owners to deal with than someone without his experience.

Someone said that as a military administrator, he always acted as if he were stumping for votes. As Pat points out, he was quite good at politics, but I think in a litigious place like New Orleans, he was dangerous to the existing Confederate aristocracy because he was good as a lawyer at figuring out how legally he could effect whatever policies he wanted.

One interesting note about his time in New Orleans is that he had tickets printed for the food handouts, which were given to the women in the family--unusual for the time. Of course, on the other side there was the confiscation of someone's family silver--which you may to have chosen your silver pattern in high school to understand why Butler was so vilified for that particular offense and why that has still resonated through the years (or read "The Southern Belle Primer: Why Princess Margaret Will Never Be a Kappa Kappa Gamma." http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Ty1MoTdJZYA/TTk9Ae8YjHI/AAAAAAAAASs/_6XuY8wjQus/s1600/Primer001_2.jpg)

Oh, and my silver is "Afterglow." My grandmother, who lived her life out in Nebraska and never baked cornbread because she'd eaten so much of it in her Texas dirt farm childhood, started buying pieces with coupons from the margarine package when I was born.
 

John Winn

Captain
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,715
Location
State of Jefferson
This is very interesting. Up to now, I've really only known of the "beast" and "criminal" legends of Butler. I'd imagined that he, like many, was more complicated than that (e.g. Grant as only the "butcher" or "President of a corrupt administration").
Given that I have to choose my time I've just not read about Butler. So this kind of education is what makes this site such a good resource. I now know three times as much about Butler than I did yesterday.

I'm also forwarding all this stuff to my distant cousin who's husband's family in NO was one of those starving Irish ones. He - not being particularly interested in the CW - has asked me about Butler but I was only able to give him my very limited collection of factoids. Ya'll done started one of them ripple effect things I heard about.

ps - and don't get me started on the family silver !
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,323
Location
Long Island, NY
This is very interesting. Up to now, I've really only known of the "beast" and "criminal" legends of Butler. I'd imagined that he, like many, was more complicated than that (e.g. Grant as only the "butcher" or "President of a corrupt administration").
Given that I have to choose my time I've just not read about Butler. So this kind of education is what makes this site such a good resource. I now know three times as much about Butler than I did yesterday.

I'm also forwarding all this stuff to my distant cousin who's husband's family in NO was one of those starving Irish ones. He - not being particularly interested in the CW - has asked me about Butler but I was only able to give him my very limited collection of factoids. Ya'll done started one of them ripple effect things I heard about.

ps - and don't get me started on the family silver !
One problem with most analysis of "political generals" is the focus on the "general" part of that phrase instead of on the "political".

Butler is an excellent example. How many Union lives were spared because the city of NOLA was secured using many Louisianans' help?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
19,692
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Hee- I didn't know you were allowed to get married if you didn't have yours and how did that work if you did not? True story- took awhile to work it through my head as a young girl, there wasn't some requirement. Mine's ' Clinton', but had an extremely good head start.

Yes, but Butler was rather stuck on the whole taxing the uber wealthy folks, and while he did play somewhat ducks and drakes with funds there were some altruistic reasons for his methods of collections. The extreme poverty he observed first-hand, the abysmal conditions there, the incredibly preventable disease and squalor esp. in contrast to how the wealthy were living got his temper on the broil. No- of course no one loves losing their family silver or lovely treasures- but as opposed to treasures being sacked from the homes by marauding troops and carried of as plunders of war, Butler thought it more a tax element. Of COURSE those who lost everything would not hold the same perspective, would be a little much for anyone to accept that kind of thing happily, Gosh- would drive anyone straight up a wall.

Seems to me there was a lot of plain, old ' revenge' in some of his actions there, no 2 ways about it- a lot of what he saw enraged the man. I can't site it here because it's not in front of me plus the last time I tried to us it as a source I took it in the neck. In Century Magazine's collection exists an essay written by Butler's aid at the time. Very enlightening stuff, the man doesn't seem to have had an agenda from which to invent the events he relates. It's an awfully good read, if anyone's interested. No, it does not make New Orleans sound like a great place sociologically or economically but I'm not recommending it for some agenda-ridden purpose of my own. It's just that with all the agenda out there, being written and spoken of in 2014, it's a good idea to see what really did transpire 150 years ago.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
30,323
Location
Long Island, NY
Yes, but Butler was rather stuck on the whole taxing the uber wealthy folks, and while he did play somewhat ducks and drakes with funds there were some altruistic reasons for his methods of collections. The extreme poverty he observed first-hand, the abysmal conditions there, the incredibly preventable disease and squalor esp. in contrast to how the wealthy were living got his temper on the broil.
As you say, there were two sides to the Butler story. Butler purposefully sided with the city's neglected underclass, the blacks and the immigrants, against the city's elite. While he is remembered for stealing silver, how many descendents of the underclass are alive today because he prevented outbreaks of epidemics in 1862 and 1863?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top