Union vs CSA Guerrilla

Knight was a U.S. Marshall during Reconstruction. Knight was such a Billy Bad A#@ that no one not even the Klan messed with him after the war. Knight never left Jones County.
Leftyhunter

Knight was a U.S. Marshall during Reconstruction. Knight was such a Billy Bad A#@ that no one not even the Klan messed with him after the war. Knight never left Jones County.

and Uncle Sam said 3 times : "just a rebel deserter" What a man !

"the evidence fails to support the allegation of the petition that the Jones County Scouts were organized for military service in behalf of United States or that they were in sentiment and feeling throughout the war loyal to the Government of the United States."

United States Congressional Serial Set, Issue 5156 (Washington, 1907), pp. 111-112
 
Last edited:
and Uncle Sam said 3 times : "just a rebel deserter" What a man !

"the evidence fails to support the allegation of the petition that the Jones County Scouts were organized for military service in behalf of United States or that they were in sentiment and feeling throughout the war loyal to the Government of the United States."

United States Congressional Serial Set, Issue 5156 (Washington, 1907), pp. 111-112
Congress did Knight an injustice. Any white man openly shacked up with a black woman and his white wife plus Knight was well known to have offed local Confederates and still lived in Jones County has big big cajhones.
Leftyhunter
 
Last edited:
Lefty, the Snake Hunters, which was partly recruited in Ohio and led by an Ohioan, acted as scouts for McClellan in 1861, and in early 1862 were formally part of the 11th WV, Co. A. I don't think they can be considered "guerrillas".
True but Sutherland did state there were Unionist guerrillas in what became West Virginia until the arrival of Union forces led by McCellan and Rosecrans.
Leftyhunter
 
There was no organized insurgency in the CSA. If the tales about the "Republic of Jones" had been true then that would have been the closest thing to it, but they were not true. Newt Knight didn't set up a government and never had more than 125 in his band of deserters.
Define the term " organized insurgency"?
Leftyhunter
 
"the evidence fails to support the allegation of the petition that the Jones County Scouts were organized for military service in behalf of United States or that they were in sentiment and feeling throughout the war loyal to the Government of the United States.

This is a court of claims ruling with strict rules. link to case
reference
The main stipulations for qualifying to receive a reimbursement were that: the claimant had to prove loss of property, that he had supported the Union during the war and that he not provided any assistance to the Confederates. Nearly 22,300 cases were filed by individuals and families, as well as businesses, institutions, churches, and other organizations. Not only do the names and locations of the claimants provide background information about the Civil War, but each claimant was required to provide witnesses. The witnesses had to answer the same 80+ questions that the claimant had to answer. Many of these witnesses were former slaves whose names rarely appear on any other legal document from the Civil War era. They also provided names and dates for family members who often lived on other plantations​

A very standard to overcome and in line with the quote. The legal ruling has what exactly to do with the issue at hand?
 
Congress did Knight an injustice. Any white man openly shacked up with a black woman and his white wife plus Knight was well known to have offed local Confederates and still lived in Jones County has big big cajhones.
Leftyhunter

It was not a finding of Congress, but a report of a Claims Court case read into the record. link to case
 
It was not a finding of Congress, but a report of a Claims Court case read into the record. link to case

NVM little things like actual findings, if they don't support his position they are just "injustices" and shouldn't count apparently.............

Obviously the United States differs with Lefty in that enlisting twice into the CSA is and was at direct odds with "that he had supported the Union during the war and that he not provided any assistance to the Confederates"

Apparently fighting for the CSA at Corinth was assistance
 
NVM little things like actual findings, if they don't support his position they are just "injustices" and shouldn't count apparently.............

Obviously the United States differs with Lefty in that enlisting twice into the CSA is at direct odds with "that he had supported the Union during the war and that he not provided any assistance to the Confederates"

Apparently fighting for the CSA at Corinth was assistance

This issue at court was "not provided any assistance to the Confederates. " One can support both the US and CSA, just not at the same time and the last support or longest support is significant.
 
This issue at court was "not provided any assistance to the Confederates. " One can support both the US and CSA, just not at the same time and the last support or longest support is significant.
the standard you listed "The main stipulations for qualifying to receive a reimbursement were that: the claimant had to prove loss of property, that he had supported the Union during the war and that he not provided any assistance to the Confederates"

Not aware of anyone disputing he in fact lost property.....so that would seem to make the latter requirement very relevant. After he deserted his homestead was burned........
 
the standard you listed "The main stipulations for qualifying to receive a reimbursement were that: the claimant had to prove loss of property, that he had supported the Union during the war and that he not provided any assistance to the Confederates"

Not aware of anyone disputing he in fact lost property.....so that would seem to make the latter requirement very relevant
I am missing your point. "not provided any assistance to the Confederates" is one of the quoted issues and as he was on the CSA payroll for a bit seems to justify the not provided any assistance part of the judgement.
 
I am missing your point. "not provided any assistance to the Confederates" is one of the quoted issues and as he was on the CSA payroll for a bit seems to justify the not provided any assistance part of the judgement.
I agree with that, obviously he had provided assistance to the enemy, and simply deserting and becoming an outlaw in no way proved any devotion to the Union cause, just disillusionment with the CSA one

As you say "One can support both the US and CSA" One could be against both too
 
I agree with that, obviously he had provided assistance to the enemy, and simply deserting and becoming an outlaw in no way proved any devotion to the Union cause, just disillusionment with the CSA one

As you say "One can support both the US and CSA" One could be against both too
I suppose.
 
The US ruled basicly the same in at least 2 cases, a war dept ruling in 1897, and then the civil claim in 1907
 
Last edited:
Actually has I have shown and will provide more examples their was Unionist guerrilla activity in all 11 CSA states and Ky as well. I don't know if it just resembled Scottish clan fighting since many young men from Tn risked their lives to cross over into Ky to join Unionist regiments from Tn and out of state regiments. I am not aware of Unionist guerrilla massacring children has did CSA guerrillas in Lawrence,Kn and Shelton Laurel. If one shoots and unarmed boy under 18 I would think that is not a so called massacre. Did Unionist guerrillas torture women? CSA guerrillas most definitely did.
Leftyhunter
Lefty,
I read on another thread where you have William Trotter's Bushwhackers: The Civil War in North Carolina. I suggest you reread pages 135-136 where 15-year-old Josiah Franklin had his brains bashed out in front of his mother by one of Col. Kirk's thugs.
 
Lefty,
I read on another thread where you have William Trotter's Bushwhackers: The Civil War in North Carolina. I suggest you reread pages 135-136 where 15-year-old Josiah Franklin had his brains bashed out in front of his mother by one of Col. Kirk's thugs.
I will re-read that book. On the other hand the Confederacy killed more civilians in the Lawrence Massacre, the Shelton Laurel Massacre plus General Whellers men killed escaped slaves following Sherman. So itself like the Confederates are the good guys when it comes to being kind and gentle to civilluans.The above incidents only scratch the surface.
Leftyhunter
 
Last edited:
I will re-read that book. On the other hand the Confederacy killed more civilians in the Lawrence Massacre, the Shelton Laurel Massacre plus General Whellers men killed escaped slaves following Sherman. So itself like the Confederates are the god guys when it comes to being kind and gentle to civilluans.The above incidents only scratch the surface.
Leftyhunter

Lefty,

While the fighting qualities, sacrifices, and devotion to duty of Confederate soldiers are remembered and honoured by many I know of no one who has carried that high esteem to the extreme of crowning them “the god guys.” :nah disagree:
 
I forgot to add an "o" in the word good.. You also forgot to add the part about massive desertion and defections to the Union. You also forgot to add the part about Confederate deserters becoming Unionist guerrillas and freelance bandits. Quite a few Unionist guerrillas were ex Confederate soldiers.
Leftyhunter
 
I will re-read that book. On the other hand the Confederacy killed more civilians in the Lawrence Massacre, the Shelton Laurel Massacre plus General Whellers men killed escaped slaves following Sherman. So itself like the Confederates are the good guys when it comes to being kind and gentle to civilluans.The above incidents only scratch the surface.
Leftyhunter

You should read the account of the Sand Creek Massacre.When hundreds of blue-clad cavalrymen suddenly appeared at dawn on November 29, a Cheyenne chief raised the Stars and Stripes above his lodge. Others in the village waved white flags. The troops replied by opening fire with carbines and cannon, killing at least 150 Indians, most of them women, children and the elderly. Before departing, the troops burned the village and mutilated the dead, carrying off body parts as trophies.

Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/hist...gotten-no-more-180953403/#zqZ7Zh9a87WToxEv.99
 
Back
Top