- Joined
- Oct 17, 2012
- Location
- Middle Tennessee
Compared to anti-confederate resistance in almost all Southern states it is very mild by comparison. In my thread "Union vs CSA guerrillas I have numerous sourced quotes that their was considerably more violent resistance to the CSA then the Union suffered in Il. Their was significant violent ant-Union resistance in Mo, Ky and Wv.
Compared to anti-confederate resistance in almost all Southern states it is very mild by comparison. In my thread "Union vs CSA guerrillas I have numerous sourced quotes that their was considerably more violent resistance to the CSA then the Union suffered in Il. Their was significant violent ant-Union resistance in Mo, Ky and Wv.
Leftyhunter
No doubt their was plenty of Northern dissatisfaction with the CW. Yes Cooperheads did win some elections and as I noted in my thread "How serious was Union desertion" it very much was a problem for the Union. On the other hand in the 1864 election McCellan did not pledge an immediate cease fire or recognition of the CSA if he won. Il did vote for Lincoln to be reelected. The Union Army was only composed of 6% draftees. The Congress did adequately fund the Union military. Yes their was indeed dissent but nothing on the scale that the CSA went through.You're totally right in that there was no comparison in the levels of anti-government violence. But I don't think this necessarily indicates a greater unity or commitment among the citizenry of the North, but rather is a function of the very different situations "on the ground". In the South, manpower had been stripped, military units were coming and going, and increasingly semblance of civil authority was evaporating as a result. This is an environment ripe for aggression of all sorts, political and criminal. The northern citizenry never did live in this type of environment. There always were military forces available to counter any outbreaks and the local civil systems did not break down. Please understand, I do not say that this also necessarily proves there was a level of dissatisfaction equal to that in those southern regions you mentioned. It only suggests that the dissatisfaction may have been much higher than indicated by violent incidents.
Very true Ole. Due to the Ohio River and the shape of Kentucky, there's a portion of IL and IN that are south of Richmond, VA. There were a number of settlers in southern IL that had come from the South and a fair number of settlers in northern IL that had come from New England, New York and PA. These met in central IL. Probably one of the main reasons for the existence of Cairo, IL as a shipping and ship building terminal during the war, like an arrowhead pointed toward the South.Southern Illinois and Indiana, were quite southern and still are.