The "Rebellion" which fell upon the country as a full scale Civil War... How extensive was it???

Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Regardless of how you personally define the American Civil War as being; be it rebellion, revolt, revolution, invasion or the act of preserving the union, it became a full scale Civil War which fell upon our country, that resulted in 620,000 "American" lives being taken, over the course of 4 years, as a direct consequence of that war. Which is an astounding number taking into consideration that 644,000 Americans were killed in all other conflicts in which our Nation has fought wars. Roughly 1,264,000 American soldiers have died in the nation's wars since we have become a nation, with the American Civil War alone representing nearly half of that number regarding Americans killed in war, and on our own soil no less.

Few who research the American Civil War really profoundly understand the depth of the opposition which turned a rebellion into full scale Civil War and from whence that opposition came. The ACW truly divided us as a nation, in more ways than most understand. After committing myself to hundred`s of hours of research regarding this topic of conversation, I was surprised at my findings. Allow me to share some of those with you.

When I state that the American Civil War divided us as a nation, to bear this out you need only look at the plethora of current and former U.S. government officials, spanning several administrations, as well as Officers in the U.S. Army, who resigned their positions in our government at the time of the war and joined the Confederate States of America or those who had long been out of their positions of power with-in our government who went on to either join the Confederate States Army, became Confederate Senators and Representatives or gave their allegiance and support to the Confederate States of America. This to include numerous U.S. Army and Cavalry Officers, a former U.S. President and Vice-President, several former U.S. Secretaries of War, Secretaries of State, Secretaries of the Treasury, Secretaries of the Interior, Secretaries of the Navy, numerous U.S. Senators and Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, to include former Speakers of the House.

The 1860 Presidential Campaign was a highly contested quadrennial election held between 4 principal candidates: Abraham Lincoln, John C. Breckinridge (sitting vice-president at the time), John Bell & Stephen A. Douglas. On November 6, 1860, Abraham Lincoln won and was elected as the 16th President of the United States of America with Hannibal Hamlin elected as his Vice-President. Half of the 4 candidates who lost in this General election to Lincoln, joined the Confederate States of America, those being Breckinridge and Bell.

Right after the Inauguration of President Abraham Lincoln, Vice-President John C. Breckinridge won a seat in the Senate and served in that capacity for about 6 mos. at which time he joined the Confederate cause and entered service in the Confederate States Army as a Brigadier General, his first action was leading his men into Battle at Shiloh, Tennessee. By April 1862 he was promoted to the rank of Maj. General as he was fighting in Baton Rouge and New Orleans and by January 1865 he was appointed the fifth and last Confederate Secretary of War and was Captured with Confedrate President Jefferson Davis just four months later, on May 10, 1865 at Irwinville, Georgia which brought the Civil War to an end.

John Bell, threw his support behind the Confederacy after the fall of Fort Sumpter. He was formerly the Speaker of the House for the 23rd Congress (1834–1835), and briefly served as Secretary of War during the administration of William Henry Harrison (1841). Although a slaveowner, Bell was one of the few southern politicians to oppose the expansion of slavery in the 1850s, and campaigned vigorously against secession in the years leading up to the American Civil War. During his 1860 presidential campaign, he argued that secession was unnecessary since the Constitution protected slavery, an argument which resonated with voters in border states, helping him capture the electoral votes of Tennessee, Kentucky, and Virginia. After the Battle of Fort Sumter in April 1861, Bell abandoned the Union cause and supported the Confederacy. On April 23, 1861 he called for the state of Tennessee to align itself with the Confederacy and prepare a defense against a federal invasion. Bell's defection to the Confederate cause stunned Unionist leaders. Louisville Journal editor George D. Prentice wrote that Bell's decision brought "unspeakable mortification, and disgust, and indignation" to his long-time supporters. Horace Greeley lamented such an "ignominious close" to Bell's public career. Knoxville Whig editor (and future Tennessee governor) William Brownlow derided Bell as the "officiating Priest" at the altar of the "false god of Disunion."

The 10th President of the United States of America, John Tyler, joined the Confederacy and was elected to the Confederate Congress when the war first broke upon the country. What was really surprising to me was that half of President James Buchanan`s Administration resigned and joined the Confederate States of America, who were in charge of the governmet up until 4 Mar 1861 when Abraham Lincoln was sworn in as the 16th President of the United States of America.

In every presidential administration you had the President, Vice-President, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of War, Attorney General, Postmaster General, Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Interior. Half of Buchanan`s Administration (4 of 8), to include 3 of his 7 Cabinet Members (Howell, Floyd and Thompson), resigned and joined the Confederate Cause.

The 22nd U. S. Secretary of Treasury, Howell Cobb, under President Buchanan, also former Speaker of the U. S. House of Representatives (1849 - 1851), later served in the Confederacy as a General and lead troops into battle to fight for the Confederate cause. Cobb is, however, probably best known as one of the founders of the Confederacy, having served as the President of the Provisional Congress of the Confederate States. Cobb served as the Confederate Provisional Head of State for two weeks between the foundation of the Confederacy and the election of Jefferson Davis as its first President (4 Feb 1861 - 18 Feb 1861). As the Speaker of the Congress, he was provisional Head of State at this time.

The 24th Secretary of War under Buchanan, John Floyd became a Brig. General in the Confederate Army and fought under Robert E. Lee in Virginia.

Buchanan`s Secretary of the Interior, Jacob Thompson became the Inspector General of the Confederate States Army and was the leader of the Confederate Secret Service. Making a total of 4 of his administration, to include Breckinridge, to join and fight for the southern cause. These Gentlemen were the U. S. Government up until the day that Lincoln was sworn in. As a matter of fact nearly all of Buchanan`s Cabinet resigned after South Carolina seceded, save for Breckinridge who remained with him until the end of his term a few months later when Lincoln was sworn in.

Regarding other previous Presidential Administrations; Charles Magill Conrad served in the Confederate Congress. He was acting U.S. Secretary of State in 1852 and the 22nd Secretary of War under President Millard Fillmore and, briefly, Franklin Pierce, from 1850 until 1853. It was he that Jefferson Davis succeeded as the 23rd U.S. Secretary of War in President Franklin Pierces Administration.

In 1861, the 21st Secretary of War under President`s Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore (1849 - 1850), George Walker Crawford, was elected a delegate from Richmond County to the state's Secession Convention which brought him out of retirement to answer the call of his constituents. By the convention's first order of business, Crawford was elected Permanent President of the Convention by which he presided over Georgia's decision to secede from the Union. Crawford was to be tried for inciting a rebellion due to his role in presiding over the state's secession and was excluded from eligibility for both Lincoln's and Johnson's amnesty proclamations because of his leadership status.

President`s Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore`s 19th U.S. Secretary of the Navy (1849 - 1850), William Ballard Preston was an American politician who served as a Confederate States Senator from Virginia from February 18, 1862, until his death in November 1862.

President Millard Fillmore`s 20th U.S. Secretary of the Navy (1850 - 1852), William Alexander Graham, a former U. S. Senator (1840 - 1843) who later became a Senator in the Confederate States Senate (North Carolina) from 1864 to 1865 threw his full allegiance and support behind the Confederate States of America.

Regarding U.S. Army and Cavalry Officers who resigned their commissions and joined the Confederate Army were: Albert Sidney Johnston, Robert E. Lee, William J. Hardee, Earl Van Dorn, Edmund Kirby Smith, P.G.T. Beauregard, Fitzhugh Lee, Joseph E. Johnston, J.E.B. Stuart, John Bell Hood, Joseph Wheeler, Samuel Wragg Ferguson, William Hicks Jackson, Charles Field and others scarcely less famous. 29 officers alone from the 1st and 2nd U.S. Cavalry (Formed by the 23rd U.S. Secretary of War Jefferson Davis in 1855) would become Confederate Generals in the Civil War. So many Officers resigned and joined the Confederate cause that they had to be replaced with very green unexperienced officers to take their place. Which regarding the Cavalry this gave the Confederate States Army a sound advantage up until around 1863.

The reason that I post this is to illuminate the conversation, as many think that the Civil War was just an "uprising" or simply a "rebellion" when in fact it was so much more, it was by all accounts a full scale Civil War. And when you see the likes of the very prominent men who joined the Confederate Cause as former leaders who served in our U.S. Government and Military spanning numerous administrations that becomes evident. Passions were heated and men were willing on both sides to fight, and die if necessary, for a cause that they believed in, to defend their narrative regarding the war. It was a dark time in our history, one which I truly hope that we will never have to repeat again, at least in my lifetime.

Again this post is not intended to digress into the topic of slavery or secession but rather to shed light on just how divided we were as a nation at the time of the ACW and how "some" of the men who governed our nation saw that very confusing time of our history as a nation..
 
Last edited:
Right lefty, you have asked that question before. :D I dont think I have ever attempted to answer your question, but since @Cavalry Charger asked about Howell Cobb's motivations I'll give it a shot.

I think, at least in Cobb's case, advocating for secession was more about the rights that Southern states would potentially lose under the Lincoln administration and a majority Republican congress. Up to that time, the south had enjoyed a majority voice in Congress. In 1860 during the 36th US Congress, the the tides shifted and, the Republican party outnumbered the Democratic party.

@alan polk 's thread Pre-War Newspaper Comparison https://civilwartalk.com/threads/ju...war-newspaper-comparison.154355/#post-1980355 has provided me with a better understanding of southern perceptions at the lead-up to the war. As I interpret it, for most southern politicians at the time, "states rights" was their way to describe decentralized government. (IDK, maybe they didnt even have the term decentralized government back then?) Anyway, to use slavery as a substitute or synonym of "states rights," or to imply that they are the same, oversimplifies the antebellum period, leaves out perceived partiality, and gives the impression of a narrow understanding of the politics of the time, at least as far as Southern perceptions go. If you read some of the articles in Alan's thread perhaps you'll gain a better understanding of some of the perceived fears of southern politicians.

For Cobb and many other Southern politicians, I think it was more about the threat of lost representation in Congress; the threat of a more centralized government; the fear of losing decentralized government; the perceived partiality of government spending; and perceived favoritism in investment and infrastructure. Basically, the southern politicians didn't want to be the minority in Congress. And that was happening - regardless of whether slavery was protected in the areas where it already existed.

So when the question is asked: "What state right was lost" it is implied that there is only one answer -slavery. I would suggest that a better answer is "all of them." You can insert anything you like. Something that might have been predictable at the time or not - including slavery. Anything you put there would no longer be a decision to be solely delegated to the state. Without delving too much into modern issues, look at the challenges Colorado has in trying to exercise its own "states right." :smoke:
Thanks for responding to my question @lelliott19 . I think you've done a great job and certainly added to my understanding :smile:
 
Vote Here:
First, I'd like to say that I think Mr. 2nd Al. Cav. post' was just excellent.

When I read it, my first thought was "what was left of the federal government with all the southeners leaving?" We had a fairly new political party taking power for the first time, but half the government was gone! Truly revolutionary times.
 
Vote Here:
First, I'd like to say that I think Mr. 2nd Al. Cav. post' was just excellent.

When I read it, my first thought was "what was left of the federal government with all the southeners leaving?" We had a fairly new political party taking power for the first time, but half the government was gone! Truly revolutionary times.

Lincoln and Hamlin had no problem filling their Cabinet... But I can not imagine what it must have been like in the Senate and the House of Representatives when one southern Democrat after the other resigned their positions and joined the Confederate Cause. I am sure that this caused quite a bit of confusion, uncertainty, angst and stirred up a lot of deep seated emotions regarding our great nation and its prospects for a bright future. Then when numerous experienced and well respected officers began to resign their commissions in the U.S. Army and Cavalry, only to join the Confederate States Army, it could have only raised more serious concerns. It was so bad that the whole U.S. Army and Cavalry had to be reorganized with numerous young and inexperienced officers being promoted to fill the vacancies of those who had just recently left. Many of the seasoned officers remained in their positions, but I am sure that they lamented heavily at their friends leaving to join an Army against them. Again resulting in more and more confusion and uncertainty. Remember that these men had gone to West Point together and most had served together during the Blackhawk Wars, the 2nd Seminole War, the Mexican-American War, the Utah War (Mormons) and then during the defense of the newly expanding western Frontier. This in addition to quite a few former members and high ranking officials of previous administrations doing the same in joining with the southern cause. I can not begin to fathom the emotions, concern and uncertainty that our fellow countrymen were feeling at that point in time.
 
Last edited:
Vote Here:
Right lefty, you have asked that question before. :D I dont think I have ever attempted to answer your question, but since @Cavalry Charger asked about Howell Cobb's motivations I'll give it a shot.

I think, at least in Cobb's case, advocating for secession was more about the rights that Southern states would potentially lose under the Lincoln administration and a majority Republican congress. Up to that time, the south had enjoyed a majority voice in Congress. In 1860 during the 36th US Congress, the the tides shifted and, the Republican party outnumbered the Democratic party.

@alan polk 's thread Pre-War Newspaper Comparison https://civilwartalk.com/threads/ju...war-newspaper-comparison.154355/#post-1980355 has provided me with a better understanding of southern perceptions at the lead-up to the war. As I interpret it, for most southern politicians at the time, "states rights" was their way to describe decentralized government. (IDK, maybe they didnt even have the term decentralized government back then?) Anyway, to use slavery as a substitute or synonym of "states rights," or to imply that they are the same, oversimplifies the antebellum period, leaves out perceived partiality, and gives the impression of a narrow understanding of the politics of the time, at least as far as Southern perceptions go. If you read some of the articles in Alan's thread perhaps you'll gain a better understanding of some of the perceived fears of southern politicians.

For Cobb and many other Southern politicians, I think it was more about the threat of lost representation in Congress; the threat of a more centralized government; the fear of losing decentralized government; the perceived partiality of government spending; and perceived favoritism in investment and infrastructure. Basically, the southern politicians didn't want to be the minority in Congress. And that was happening - regardless of whether slavery was protected in the areas where it already existed.

So when the question is asked: "What state right was lost" it is implied that there is only one answer -slavery. I would suggest that a better answer is "all of them." You can insert anything you like. Something that might have been predictable at the time or not - including slavery. Anything you put there would no longer be a decision to be solely delegated to the state. Without delving too much into modern issues, look at the challenges Colorado has in trying to exercise its own "states right." :smoke:
The problem is that there was no " centralised government" in the mid 19 th Century. There was no income tax, there was no EPA no Dept of Labor or Education. There were no farm subsidies etc. The modern federal government really didn't begin until the 1930s. The Federal government only had two small federal law enforcement agencies the United States Marshall's Service, US Customs and what is now known as the Coast Guard. The US Army in 2861 had less then 16 k men and was spread out over a wide area in the West. The only foreign military presence was a few gun boats in China.
If the South needed more federal money for internal improvements how would a war help them? Why not just utilize their votes and form political coalition's in the house or Senate?
Leftyhunter
 
Vote Here:
@2nd Alabama Cavalry stated at the end off his last post, "I cannot begin to fathom the emotions, concern and uncertainty that our fellow countrymen were feeling at that time." General Sherman was very expressive before the war while in Louisiana, and later when he visited the President. General Grant too, expressed the intimacies shared among fellow soldiers that served through the Mexican War. These two examples can reveal a mental anguish, or a determination for remaining behind the Union.
On the other hand, I tend to see politicians through a more jaded lens. I believe their devotions were for protecting money interests, chances for prominent placement in world history, remaining true to their own followers as shepherds, and the number one idea I perceive is to begin anew with a fresh chance of building a nation as their forefathers did, sort of like the 'Woodstock II' syndrome, prevalent some decades ago. The States' Rights and slavery et.al. were mere tactics of law and enforcement giving them a claim to build a foundation on a wishful desire within the heart. Thanks,
Lubliner.
 
Vote Here:
Back
Top