The Lawrence Massacre

Booner, I cannot remember who mentioned this before, but I was just thinking about it again: most of the raiding parties were made up of family relations, and many of the victims were family relations. When I was reading about Anderson, Quantrill, John Brown, it seemed like a majority of them had a tipping point -- an event that just pushed them over the edge of insanity, usually the loss of a family member. Unrelated troops fighting in "foreign" territory just don't experience this sort of personal connection to the war.

Bee,
I think your referring to the post I made in the mid February thread of "What made a Civil War guerrilla?" where I referred to the "Fristoe System" where nearly 40% of those guerrilla's who rode with Quantrill were related to each other through the Fristoe family of western Missouri?

I think Anderson was a psychopath and the war gave him the opportunity to unleash his psychosis. The death and maiming of his sisters was the tipping point. He had a little brother, Jim, who followed in his footprint and was nearly as disturbed as Bill was.

J.Brown, as you know, has again been the subject of a recent post, and I think he was a desperately frustrated man (he had failed in every business venture he tried), who used the cause of freeing the slaves as an outlet to free those frustrations. The federal government, the constitution, the supreme court were all against his cause. Maybe it was the fugitive slave act that set him over. He never did have a reason to go to Kansas until his son asked him to come and bring guns. He justified his actions by answering to a higher authority than anything of this earth.

Quantrill on the other hand, is different. He was an educated man, and from his writings to his mother we know that he was initially a mild abolitionist when he first went to Kansas (around 1857). He was an early supporter of Jim Lane, (again from the letters to his mother), but never really took part in "Bleeding Kansas" but sometime around 1858-59 or so his thoughts changed towards being against Lane and the abolitionists. It may have been while he was in Utah where he was in the company of Southerns from Missouri? He came back to Lawrence KS, and was destitute and began to "Jayhawk" slaves from Missouri. He would steal them away but then return them to Missouri for the reward money. I think It was his ego that drove him. The incident at the Walker farm where he plotted to have his Jayhawker companions killed, and the recognition he received from this, (from the very prominent Walked family), gave his ego the boost it needed/craved. But something happened to him after Lawrence and his command fell apart. I think that after the summer of 1863 Quantrill saw that the confereacy had no chance of winning and he wanted to lay low and consider his options. He knew he would never be allowed to surrender or receive a pardon for his actions In Missouri. In 1864 he spent most of his time in central Missouri with his wife/mistress and we don't hear much about him until January of 1865 when he and about 30 others head for Virginia with the hope of surrendering with the confederates there but things didn't turn out as planned in Kentucky.

These are my thoughts/theories so no need to ask for my referrences.

So back to the question of why Larence? According to writer Todd Mildfelt and his study entitled "The Secret Danites, Kansas First Jayhawkers" (not to be confused with the Mormon Danites), the Danites were a radical abolitionist group formed in 1855 in Lawrence by--Jim Lane. The group was dedicated to the eradication of slavery by any means, including war. Other members of the organization Jim Montgomery (the subject of another recent thread), Charles "Doc" Jennison, John Stuart, and Charles Leonhardt. All of these men later became prominent raiders/thieves/murderers as Jayhawkers and Redlegs and hated to the fullest extent by Missourians of both northern and southern perswaition. But if possible, Lane was hated most. And he lived in Lawrence. And Lawrence had always been the capital of the Kansas ablitionists, Jayhawkers and Redlegs.

The Jayhawkers and guerrillas knew who each other were and where they lived. Some of them had been fighting each other since 1855. And they knew who the supporters of each group were too, but in the end that didn't matter much. If you lived on the other side of the border, you were game. This is where someone will say, " did this justify the killing of young boys?" Of course not, but I can find nothing that justified the type of warfare that occured between Missouri and Kansas.

Bee, as always your posts are an example of intelligence and insight.
 
Last edited:
Bee, as always your posts are an example of intelligence and insight.

Thank you kindly for the compliment. You are correct! It was your post that I was referring to. It seems that once again nothing is clear when discussing the border war. It is impossible to generalize about any of the participants, as it appears that they were deeply individual in their motivations. I am hoping that there will be many more discussions on this topic, and if possible, include maps whenever possible.
 
Thanks,Monitor. I don't normaly post a piece this long as most lose interest in it, but I found it to be very interesting and an important insight into the event, so I posted it anyway. I figured if only a few people got something from it, then it was worth it.
That was a fantastic post, I normally read accounts and take them in my stride but for some reason the story of Mr. G. W. Bell the County Clerk really disturbed me, no kidding, what a brave man he was, he was ready to stand and fight for his principles regardless of the outcome, I think that there should be a monument for Mr Bell.
 
You got a couple things right regarding MSM, MEM, HG and the like. They were allowed to stay home and stand guard over a road junction or railroad trestle, instead of being forced to go south and fight against their own people. At least those who weren't Germans.
Actually the MSM has I mentioned in previous posts did cross state lines mostly in Arkansas and one MSM ended up for a time in faraway Alabama. Union Missourians just like other Union soldiers are not fighting their own people they are fighting Confederates. The Confederates are certainly fighting thwm and trying to force them to fight for the Confederacy and taking away their food and belongings. In a COIN conflict neutrality is a rare option choices have to be made and it is survival of the luckiest.
Leftyhunter
 
In what part of my comment (post 34), led you to believe that I thought it was "perfectly justified" that a young boy was killed? Read my post again please as I have no idea where you came up that idea.



It was General Ewing, not Blunt, who issued Gen. Order 11 and and it wasn't "suggested" by Jim Lane, it was demanded. Ewing was Lane's toady. Lane's Brigade had been indiscriminately looting and killing in Western Missouri since 1860. During one raid, a person estimated that their wagon train of Missouri loot was 4-5 miles long. And where did Lane live? Lawrence. All Gen. Order 11 did was complete the destruction of over 2,200 square mile of Western Missouri that had been going on since 1860. Everything in the area was gone, homes, farms, towns, all burned to their foundations. And people, both Union and Southern were removed, the vast majority never to return. There was nothing left to return to.

The Lawrence raid was for revenge. Period. There was never any hope on the guerrilla's part that they could beat the might of the federal forces. It was revenge. In

And the Confederate guerrillas were still very much active after the rest of the fighting in the Civil War was over.

As it has been said over and over and over whenever the guerrilla war threads come up, it was a different type of war. And I just can't get over the thought of how can supposedly civilize people do this to each other? Please, no trite answers add to the discussion.
I cant get to my sources right now but the guerrilla war in Missouri died down well before Appomattox.
Leftyhunter
 
Actually the MSM has I mentioned in previous posts did cross state lines mostly in Arkansas and one MSM ended up for a time in faraway Alabama. Union Missourians just like other Union soldiers are not fighting their own people they are fighting Confederates. The Confederates are certainly fighting thwm and trying to force them to fight for the Confederacy and taking away their food and belongings. In a COIN conflict neutrality is a rare option choices have to be made and it is survival of the luckiest.
Leftyhunter
Lefty, your reply was partially inaccurate. There were some very poorly officered and poorly disciplined Missouri militias, that did, indeed, prey on everyone at times. There were also some exemplary units.
 
Ha! Actually, no. Jim Lane was the hero who took the name plate off his front door frame and then ran into a corn field in his night shirt and hid there. ...But your point is well taken.
I wonder why such an important Union cavalry officer was hanging out at his home in kansas, far from the important battlefields during the summer of 1863. Everything I've read about Lane and the other prominent jayhawker leaders indicates they were in their element when facing off against unarmed and undefended civilians. They didn't fair nearly so well when going up against the Missouri State Guard.
 
I cant get to my sources right now but the guerrilla war in Missouri died down well before Appomattox.
Leftyhunter

No need Lefty, I'll agree that after Price's Raid in the fall of 1864 Guerrilla activity fell off, but it didn't end with the collapse of the confederacy. All you have to do is read the OR's to see that, if anything, the Fed. activity to end the guerrilla raids increased. Some of the guerrill's took advantage of Prices raid and joined his army. And many of the guerrilla leaders who's names we remember were either dead (Anderson) or inactive (Quantrill). I was referring to some of the smaller bands of guerrilla's and their members we haven't mentioned, such as Jim Jackson (here in central MO) who didn't surrender until after the war was over. I have a list of 30 some guerrillas that didn't take the oath until June 15, 1865 ( in Rocheport, MO) and the list of guerrillas who surrendered at Lexington Mo from May 1 - June 7 1865 is over 100 names long. And then there were a few, Such as Jesse James, who tried to surrender but was shot while doing so. He ended up at his mothers place in Rulo NB, to heal up, and had her take him back to die in Missouri. As we know, that didn't happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bee
Did the post Civil War move west by the US army have any effect on Missouri/Kansas?
 
Ha! Actually, no. Jim Lane was the hero who took the name plate off his front door frame and then ran into a corn field in his night shirt and hid there. ...But your point is well taken.

And Jim Lane was the man who, in Nov of 1861 returned to Kansas after leading his 5th KS brigade on a 76 day raid into Missouri, traveled over 400 miles in the state, plundered between 1600 & 2400 Missouri farms and never-never encountered any enemy ( confederates, MSG, or guerrillas). And as soon as he returned to KS, his troops discovered he couldn't pay them, but that didn't happen until he had already left them for his home in Lawrence.
 
Did the post Civil War move west by the US army have any effect on Missouri/Kansas?

Not sure I understand your question. Do you mean, "Did the federal war objectives down the Mississippi River have any effect on the war in MO/KN?
 
@Booner I guess what I was referring to was after the war wound down, much of the US army was sent west to deal with the Indian issue. I was wondering if by that time things were sorted out in MO/KN?
 
Reconstruction coincided with the U.S. Army war against the Plains Indians. At least during the 1870s. I found this interesting presentation by Mark Geiger on You Tube some time ago. It is worth a look. Not sure it answers your questions.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Bee
@Booner I guess what I was referring to was after the war wound down, much of the US army was sent west to deal with the Indian issue. I was wondering if by that time things were sorted out in MO/KN?

I don't think I know enough about your question to give you an educated answer. I do know the 2nd Colorado Cav. was organised in St. Louis in 1863? and was made up of two brigades. One went out west immediately to take care of the Indian problems there (It was the 1st Colo. Cav. that was responsible for the Sand Creek massacre- I think). The other brigade of the 2nd stayed in Mo. for a year or so chasing the guerrilla' and by reports I've read were fairly good at it. Late in the war they were sent West to North-East Colorado to guard the trading roads from the KS border SW into Denver. Sorry, but I can't tell you much more.
 
Sorry, but I can't tell you much more.

I appreciate all information. It does show that there was movement through the border area as the armies moved West.

Yes. Col troops that were responsible for Sand Creek.
 
I don't think I know enough about your question to give you an educated answer. I do know the 2nd Colorado Cav. was organised in St. Louis in 1863? and was made up of two brigades. One went out west immediately to take care of the Indian problems there (It was the 1st Colo. Cav. that was responsible for the Sand Creek massacre- I think). The other brigade of the 2nd stayed in Mo. for a year or so chasing the guerrilla' and by reports I've read were fairly good at it. Late in the war they were sent West to North-East Colorado to guard the trading roads from the KS border SW into Denver. Sorry, but I can't tell you much more.
The 2nd Colo was demoblized in late 1864. There is was a book published about them over a hundred years ago titled something like" 3 1/2 years in the armr ir a history of the Second Colorados. " Dyers Compendium should have basic info on them.
Leftyhunter
 
Last edited:
Lefty, your reply was partially inaccurate. There were some very poorly officered and poorly disciplined Missouri militias, that did, indeed, prey on everyone at times. There were also some exemplary units.
My post was about the Missouri State Militia it had nothing to do with civilian milita units. Has you know the name Missouri State Militia is a misnomer since the men were paid full time soldiers and were elegiable for federal vetern pensions. I have covered civilian milita units on other threads.
Leftyhunter
 
I wonder why such an important Union cavalry officer was hanging out at his home in kansas, far from the important battlefields during the summer of 1863. Everything I've read about Lane and the other prominent jayhawker leaders indicates they were in their element when facing off against unarmed and undefended civilians. They didn't fair nearly so well when going up against the Missouri State Guard.

Lane was not serving in any military capacity in the summer of 1863. His role as "general" with the Kansas Brigade was isolated to the late summer of 1861. During the attack on Lawrence, Lane was a sitting U.S. senator visiting home.

His military exploits in 1861 were only quasi-official. He was a senator and was, technically, not allowed to hold office and a military commission at the same time. He was offered some sort of commission, primarily to raise troops in Kansas. He exaggerated his authority and led them into the field.

His political opponents in Kansas, led by Governor Charles Robinson, sensed an opportunity to take his Senate seat and nominated a new candidate, citing Lane's touted military commission as proof he had resigned. Lane quickly denied that he had vacated his seat and argued that he never officially accepted the commission. He rushed back to DC in late 1861 and saved his place in the Senate. But he knew he could not carry out such overt military field activities again.
 
Back
Top