Quantrill's Raid

[Patrick H]

Based on the posts in this thread I have to disagree with what @PatrickH stated that no one on this thread condoned the murderous actions of Quantrill's Lawrence massacre.

I prefer not to be misquoted. This is actually what I stated above in post #34:

"No one here has said it's perfectly okay to kill unarmed men and boys. Two wrongs have never made a 'right'."

 

[Patrick H]

No, the innocent Missouri civilians were not complicit in the war crimes committed by Confederate guerrillas. In contrast, those residing in Lawrence whose names were recorded on the Q-forces hit lists had been identified as personally involved in large numbers of war crimes committed against Missouri civilians. Additionally, many more Lawrence citizens had financially profited from liquidating the stolen goods and livestock carted off by the Union affiliated Kansas militia border raiders. Lawrence was renowned for marketing the booty stolen from Missourians.

Lusty, I agree with this part of your statement completely. Not sure I agree that Lawrence deserved to be burned out in kind, though. But I think it's a sure bet that many, many Missouri victims were glad to learn that it happened.

 

[Patrick H]

On the other hand Quantrill did state something to the effect" to kill all and you won't be wrong"

Yes, you've got the essence of it. He reportedly said: "Kill and you will make no mistake."

 

[Bee]

Thank you for reviving this thread -- it is a good one to clear up many of the misconceptions that keep circulating, regarding Lawrence. My understanding went from "two boys shot -- one large for his age and in what may have appeared to be a partial uniform" to "Shoot all the little boys on site/sight!!" Not being well-read on the topic, it is very easy to get derailed with the hyperbole and histrionics (as opposed to history)

 

[Lusty Murfax]

Lusty, I agree with this part of your statement completely. Not sure I agree that Lawrence deserved to be burned out in kind, though. But I think it's a sure bet that many, many Missouri victims were glad to learn that it happened.

Lawrence held a special status to those on the western side of the State. I am not aware of any other kansas town that generated such animosity. I went there once to attend a Mizzou football game. They didn't make us feel very welcome and even played clips from The Outlaw Josey Wales movie on their mini jumbotron during breaks in the action. Chickenhawk fans called us "slavers" and made many unkind remarks and threw trash at the Mizzou section. It was confusing to some of the black Missouri fans. I was sitting in the friends and family section, so I got a good many questions regarding why they hated us so much.

That's OK that you don't share my thoughts on 1860s Lawrence. Not all Missourians hate Kansas like us rural folks on the west side do. Remember, don't spend any money over there and be sure to shake the dust and sandburs out of your britches before you come back across the River.

 

[Booner]

I think, for most people who have a passing knowledge of Q and our guerrila war out here, they only see the Lawrence raid as happening in a vacume. For a little background leading up to the raid, please read my earlier post #16 on this thread.

I also think that Q's men were expecting a fight that they didn't get. Lawrence was the "capital" of red leg and jayhawking activity, a recruiting center for the union army, and nearly every male citizen of the city was a member of the local miltia. Are they (Q's men), going to ride 50 miles into Kansas and not meet some resistance? But that resistance never materialized. The weapons of the Militia were locked up in the local armory, and the Red legs and Jay hawkers never materialized. Perhaps the citys' distance from the border gave the citizens a false sense of security.

That the raid turned into a slaughter, given the amount of hatred that had built up for years by the Missouri guerrillias, many of whom had had their families and farms killed and ruined by these same people, or their emissaries, should be easily understood-if you understand what brought all of this about.

I will say this; Lawrence received on a small scale, what had been going on in the border of Western Missouri since the beginning of the war. The war on the Western border was that ugly.

 

[mofederal]

One problem with Lawrence was the fact that were many different guerrilla groups that had been brought together to take part in the raid. These groups were led by Anderson, Todd, and others, some were only loosely allied to the main groups. They took part in the raid for their own reasons, and pretty much did what they felt like doing during the raid. They owed their allegiance to themselves and no one else. Who controlled them? No one, so did they take part in the lion share of the atrocities or not. The answers lie in the groups themselves, and their actions or lack there of. The real secrets of the raid is in who controlled whom. What were their motivations and their mindset. I am sure liquor was also a factor in the actions of the guerrillas. I know there was plenty of blame to go around, and that Quantrill was only nominally in command in Lawrence. It is akin to a firestorm, moving where the winds swept it. Once the raid began I think no one was really in charge and the men ran wild with no command structure at all, free to do what they willed.

 

[leftyhunter]

I prefer not to be misquoted. This is actually what I stated above in post #34:

"No one here has said it's perfectly okay to kill unarmed men and boys. Two wrongs have never made a 'right'."

I was referring to other poster's.
Leftyhunter

 

[Booner]

One problem with Lawrence was the fact that were many different guerrilla groups that had been brought together to take part in the raid. These groups were led by Anderson, Todd, and others, some were only loosely allied to the main groups. They took part in the raid for their own reasons, and pretty much did what they felt like doing during the raid. They owed their allegiance to themselves and no one else. Who controlled them? No one, so did they take part in the lion share of the atrocities or not. The answers lie in the groups themselves, and their actions or lack there of. The real secrets of the raid is in who controlled whom. What were their motivations and their mindset. I am sure liquor was also a factor in the actions of the guerrillas. I know there was plenty of blame to go around, and they Quantrill was only nominally in command in Lawrence. Once the raid began I think no one was really in charge and the men ran wild with no command structure at all, free to do what they willed.

I think what you said is spot on.
The raid was the height of Q's control of the guerrillias. 6 months later, his control over all but a small hand full of them was over. Those that took his place, such as Bill Anderson, were a more violent, harder bunch.

 

[Patrick H]

Thank you for reviving this thread -- it is a good one to clear up many of the misconceptions that keep circulating, regarding Lawrence. My understanding went from "two boys shot -- one large for his age and in what may have appeared to be a partial uniform" to "Shoot all the little boys on site/sight!!" Not being well-read on the topic, it is very easy to get derailed with the hyperbole and histrionics (as opposed to history)

Hello, Bee.

Here is Quantrill's exact order, as quoted by his Lieutenant, William H. Gregg:

"Quantrill's order was to kill, kill, and you will make no mistake. Lawrence is the hotbed and should be thoroughly cleansed and the only way to cleanse it is to kill."

That's a pretty grim order for sure, but it says nothing about the age of those to be killed.

With regard to the burning, Gregg had this to say:

"The killing finished, the men were ordered to burn the town. Quantrill said 'Give the Kansas people a taste of what the Missourian has suffered at the hands of the Kansas jayhawker." (Obviously introducing the revenge motive again.)

With regard to the criminal enterprise at Lawrence, Gregg had this to say:

"I repaired to the southern portion of the main town, where I found about forty shanties built, three side boards and the forth a hay stack and covered with hay, all of these shacks were filled with household effects, stolen from Missouri, much we recognized, many of these had feather beds, quilts, blankets, etc. stacked in there higher than I could reach, fine bedsteads, bureaus, sideboards, bookcases and pianos that cost thousands of dollars."

Of the mass killing, Gregg said:

"This wholesale killing was repugnant to many of the men and, also to many of the officers, but, forbearance had ceased to be a virtue. Our own loved ones had been murdered, robbed and insulted, there was a price upon the head of Quantrill and every one of his men. Anderson's sister had been murdered, Crawford's sisters had been murdered, and, any day, any of our sisters were liable to be murdered, and yet Mr. Horton (one of the civilians who Quantrill protected at Lawrence and who survived the raid) said 'if there was a woman or child harmed by Quantrill's men at Lawrence, I never heard of it'."

Gregg described the killing of Larkin Skaggs--the only Q. man killed at Lawrence. He was shot, dragged through the streets until naked and his body mutilated. Then he was hanged and his body further mutilated with knives, clubs and rocks. One can easily imagine the rage of the survivors.

Gregg goes on to quote a question posed to Mr. Horton:

"Did any of Quantrill's men do anything that mean (referring to Skaggs's mutilation) in Lawrence?"

Mr. Horton's answer:

"They did not."

We can see from all of this that everyone has an opinion about Lawrence, that there were multiple motives for the raid, that some myths have sprung up around the raid, beginning almost in the immediate aftermath, and that it'll be a contentious topic for generations to come.

 

[Patrick H]

Not all Missourians hate Kansas like us rural folks on the west side do. Remember, don't spend any money over there and be sure to shake the dust and sandburs out of your britches before you come back across the River.

And don't forget to look for your great grandmother's silver whenever you're out there!

 

[Patrick H]

One problem with Lawrence was the fact that were many different guerrilla groups that had been brought together to take part in the raid. These groups were led by Anderson, Todd, and others, some were only loosely allied to the main groups. They took part in the raid for their own reasons, and pretty much did what they felt like doing during the raid. They owed their allegiance to themselves and no one else. Who controlled them? No one, so did they take part in the lion share of the atrocities or not. The answers lie in the groups themselves, and their actions or lack there of. The real secrets of the raid is in who controlled whom. What were their motivations and their mindset. I am sure liquor was also a factor in the actions of the guerrillas. I know there was plenty of blame to go around, and they Quantrill was only nominally in command in Lawrence. Once the raid began I think no one was really in charge and the men ran wild with no command structure at all, free to do what they willed.

Good insights here!

 

[leftyhunter]

Thank you for reviving this thread -- it is a good one to clear up many of the misconceptions that keep circulating, regarding Lawrence. My understanding went from "two boys shot -- one large for his age and in what may have appeared to be a partial uniform" to "Shoot all the little boys on site/sight!!" Not being well-read on the topic, it is very easy to get derailed with the hyperbole and histrionics (as opposed to history)

It's not histrionics to state that Confederate guerrillas did kill unarmed boys at Lawrence. For all practical purposes killing 150 men and boy's is the same thing as shoot on sight. We even have Quantrill's quote " kill and you make n omistake" is the same as shoot on sight.
If you think Quantrill was justified in killing boys just say so.
Leftyhunter

 

[Booner]

Lawrence held a special status to those on the western side of the State. I am not aware of any other kansas town that generated such animosity. I went there once to attend a Mizzou football game. They didn't make us feel very welcome and even played clips from The Outlaw Josey Wales movie on their mini jumbotron during breaks in the action. Chickenhawk fans called us "slavers" and made many unkind remarks and threw trash at the Mizzou section. It was confusing to some of the black Missouri fans. I was sitting in the friends and family section, so I got a good many questions regarding why they hated us so much.

That's OK that you don't share my thoughts on 1860s Lawrence. Not all Missourians hate Kansas like us rural folks on the west side do. Remember, don't spend any money over there and be sure to shake the dust and sandburs out of your britches before you come back across the River.

I can recall when my first interest in the guerrilla war in Missouri started. It was in the early 80's and I was sitting on the front porch of my grandmothers house talking with my relatives. The Helena Park Opening was taking place across the street. My elderly cousin ( one of the Stucky girls of Helena--did you know the family?), was telling me about my families history and in particular, my GG grandfather-a justice of the peace and a member of the EEM. A union man, who's farm was destroyed by the jayhawkers. "Wait a minute, the jayhawkers were union too! Why would they destroy his farm?"
"Because he was a Missourian." She then said, in her opinion, "Quantrill didn't do a good enough job at Lawrence!"

I was more than a little confused by that statement, and that started my study of what happened out here.

 

[Booner]

It's not histrionics to state that Confederate guerrillas did kill unarmed boys at Lawrence. For all practical purposes killing 150 men and boy's is the same thing as shoot on sight. We even have Quantrill's quote " kill and you make n omistake" is the same as shoot on sight.
If you think Quantrill was justified in killing boys just say so.
Leftyhunter

I think we have discussed the topic about the boy well enough for most of us to have an idea of what happened and why.
Edited.
Morals didn't have a place in the conflict.

 

[Patrick H]

I went there once to attend a Mizzou football game. They didn't make us feel very welcome and even played clips from The Outlaw Josey Wales movie on their mini jumbotron during breaks in the action. Chickenhawk fans called us "slavers" and made many unkind remarks and threw trash at the Mizzou section. It was confusing to some of the black Missouri fans. I was sitting in the friends and family section, so I got a good many questions regarding why they hated us so much.

I know. I have a friend (an absolutely rabid Tiger fan) who refers to Quantrill's raid as "Missouri's most decisive road victory over Kansas." YIKES! That's kind of extreme!

Mizzou basketball coach Norm Stewart used to walk into the Kansas field house wearing a hard hat...just to mess with them.

A lot of our readers probably don't know about the extent of this rivalry. Until Missouri joined the SEC conference, MU / KU was the second oldest rivalry in the history of college football.

 

[Bee]

If you think Quantrill was justified in killing boys just say so

I find it somewhere between disturbing and amazing the leaps and bounds that are taken from others' posts.

However, it helps to explain the alternative interpretations on the sources, too. Thanks for the demonstration!

 

[Lusty Murfax]

I can recall when my first interest in the guerrilla war in Missouri started. It was in the early 80's and I was sitting on the front porch of my grandmothers house talking with my relatives. The Helena Park Opening was taking place across the street. My elderly cousin ( one of the Stucky girls of Helena--did you know the family?), was telling me about my families history and in particular, my GG grandfather-a justice of the peace and a member of the EEM. A union man, who's farm was destroyed by the jayhawkers. "Wait a minute, the jayhawkers were union too! Why would they destroy his farm?"
"Because he was a Missourian." She then said, in her opinion, "Quantrill didn't do a good enough job at Lawrence!"

I was more than a little confused by that statement, and that started my study of what happened out here.

Yes, I've heard of them. You had to be careful at the Park Opening. Many of the pretty girls were our cousins. My Grandma used to pass on stories about the jayhawkers and the bushwackers, stories she'd grown up hearing and how they tormented the rural farm folks in Andrew and surrounding Counties. Just think how the people south of the River suffered.

 

[Waterloo50]

Whether Q's big raid on Lawrence was his worst move is debatable. It certainly brought a lot of retribution down on many people on both sides of the border. It was a well planned and well executed raid--somewhat amazing to me, in fact. But I also think it was a raid that got out of hand. @Booner and I were reading the Stiles book about it yesterday, and we disagree with part of Stiles's assessment. Stiles says the raid was because Lawrence was a center of abolitionism. I conditionally agree that it was one of several motives. I think @Booner leans more toward the revenge motive. I conditionally agree with that, too. I also believe it was targeted against Lane and other jayhawkers. I see it as a "cut the head off the snake" sort of operation in that way. But @Booner had a point when he said to me that John McCorckle didn't go to Lawrence to strike a blow against abolitionism. McCorckle told us himself that he went because his sister had been killed.

McCorckle obviously has a motive for trying to keep Quantrills name out of the mud and that should be taken into account when reading his memoirs but when he was recounting his story to Oswald Barton, he said that there was a direct order from Quantrill that women and children should not be murdered, that makes perfect sense to me and shows some level of clever reasoning and clear planning, it also removes the accusation that Quantrill was of the 'kill everything' mind set.
On the face of it, the raid may look like an out and out and unplanned frenzied massacre but I don't think that was the case at all. Specific targets were chosen for maximum impact, no denying that some of the men went too far but when you examine some of the hardships and terrible experiences of Quantrills men then things start to fall into place.
I also believe that there was not one single motive for attacking Lawrence but a number of motives, Osceola, Lane and his Jayhawkers were clearly motivating factors and let's not forget the longhorn store and tavern. There were plenty of good reasons to target Lawrence.

 

[Patrick H]

McCorckle obviously has a motive for trying to keep Quantrills name out of the mud and that should be taken into account when reading his memoirs but when he was recounting his story to Oswald Barton, he said that there was a direct order from Quantrill that women and children should not be murdered, that makes perfect sense to me and shows some level of clever reasoning and clear planning, it also removes the accusation that Quantrill was of the 'kill everything' mind set.
On the face of it, the raid may look like an out and out and unplanned frenzied massacre but I don't think that was the case at all. Specific targets were chosen for maximum impact, no denying that some of the men went too far but when you examine some of the hardships and terrible experiences of Quantrills men then things start to fall into place.
I also believe that there was not one single motive for attacking Lawrence but a number of motives, Osceola, Lane and his Jayhawkers were clearly motivating factors and let's not forget the longhorn store and tavern. There were plenty of good reasons to target Lawrence.

Thanks for some good insights. I had forgotten all about McCorckle talking about Q's order that women and children should not be harmed. Yes, it's true that any of these guys had an incentive to put things in the best possible light, but I generally don't have any trouble believing them.

I meant to ask earlier: You referred to a map theory. I'm totally unfamiliar with it, but I'd sure like to read about it here. Please fill us in!