Union vs CSA Guerrilla

Borderruffian, as you and I are both residents of central Missouri and, as we know many of those "burnt district" families had to move over here into our home counties, I think we should remind our readers of this: Order Number 11 was closely watched by the sons of many of those families. They saw their boyhood farms going up in flames. They saw their parents dispossessed. It threw fuel on a burning hatred. It strengthened their resolve to fight back. It did nothing worthwhile, but it left resentments which still exist today. Heck....I've never lived in the Burnt District, nor did my family, but I am still outraged about it!

Exactly. Well stated.
 
Well the 64 raid was a last gasp, it didn't take a genius to see the writing on the wall,couple that with the fact that many bands were heading south to winter in Texas. Thrailkil , Anderson , George Todd were dead WCQ was preparing to scurry off to Ky and the bands were fragmenting for different mostly internal reasons. I don't believe the MSM had the leading role in bringing the Partisan bands to ground, nor although it played a bigger role did the dept.of Missouri or out state troops, the Partisans were their own worst enemy in terms of unit cohision especially in the late war.
In COIN war you take your victories when you can. Anyway you look at it counterinsurgency is a tough long slog. The Union counterinsurgency troops on an overall comparison with other historical counterinsurgency campaigns didn't lose and that's as good as it gets in counterinsurgency warfare.
Leftyhunter
 
In COIN war you take your victories when you can. Anyway you look at it counterinsurgency is a tough long slog. The Union counterinsurgency troops on an overall comparison with other historical counterinsurgency campaigns didn't lose and that's as good as it gets in counterinsurgency warfare.
Leftyhunter

No they didn't lose. However giving them credit for winning is another thing entirely, in many respects the partisans beat themselves by their infighting beginning in the winter of 62-63 until it became full blown by the winter of 63-64 causing the large command to fracture into smaller ones. These smaller bands also uped the anty on brutality, however were never brought to ground by the MSM or union forces. Really until Anderson and Todd got careless the Union and MSM very rarely got one over. In fact if not for Dave Poole many of the bushwhackers would have remained at large unsurrendered, although Poole was given good almost unheard of terms for himself and his Company. Poole then played the role of negotiater with other bands. Arch Clements stayed out until 66 till he was killed although he became more an outlaw in truth,and several simply left the State and never surrendered.
So excuse me if I don't heap praise on the MSM for defeating the Partisans , they were only just learning to engage them (Andersons ambush) at wars end and only just being properly armed to fight guerilla's .
 
I can't say from any certain knowledge, but I've never read of it. ...of course, there are MANY things I've never read about, so take that comment for what it's worth.

Here's what I am pretty sure happened:

Lane was a Kansan, an abolitionist, a political megalomaniac and a zealot to the point of being insane. In his warped view, ANY Missourian was scum, because they lived in a slave holding state. Never mind that most Missourians didn't own slaves. Never mind that it was a legal institution (I'm not inferring that it was moral--of course it was not). Lane ordered Ewing to burn out the territory, under the excuse it would deprive the guerrillas of their support infrastructure. Lane didn't care who he burned out. I believe Ewing was, at first, reluctant. I believe he was about to bend to Bingham's persuasion. But Ewing had political ambitions and Lane was already well-fixed in that arena. Lane threatened to destroy Ewing politically. Bingham also threatened to destroy Ewing politically. Ewing couldn't win, no matter what. Bingham got the job done in terms of derailing Ewing.

Meanwhile, I don't believe the guerrillas suffered so much. Livestock had been driven off into the bush. It could not have been all that difficult to shoot a free roaming hog for dinner.

You left out how Lane made his bones as a Pro Slavery Democrat prior to coming to Kansas and taking up the Abolition Banner because it was politically expediant for him to do so, and abetted his desire for higher office. He did become the feted saint of many an abolishionist in Kansas and elsewhere but who really knows what was in the Grim Chieftans heart of hearts.

Ewing was endebted to Lane for his Political and to some extent his Military and legal career's so he owedLane. After Lawrence Lane made it clear what he wanred, eventually he got it after telling Ewing if he didn't issue the GO THEN HE "WAS A DEAD DOG" POLITCALLY.
 
Borderruffian, as you and I are both residents of central Missouri and, as we know many of those "burnt district" families had to move over here into our home counties, I think we should remind our readers of this: Order Number 11 was closely watched by the sons of many of those families. They saw their boyhood farms going up in flames. They saw their parents dispossessed. It threw fuel on a burning hatred. It strengthened their resolve to fight back. It did nothing worthwhile, but it left resentments which still exist today. Heck....I've never lived in the Burnt District, nor did my family, but I am still outraged about it!
Amen to that you said it all.
 
No they didn't lose. However giving them credit for winning is another thing entirely, in many respects the partisans beat themselves by their infighting beginning in the winter of 62-63 until it became full blown by the winter of 63-64 causing the large command to fracture into smaller ones. These smaller bands also uped the anty on brutality, however were never brought to ground by the MSM or union forces. Really until Anderson and Todd got careless the Union and MSM very rarely got one over. In fact if not for Dave Poole many of the bushwhackers would have remained at large unsurrendered, although Poole was given good almost unheard of terms for himself and his Company. Poole then played the role of negotiater with other bands. Arch Clements stayed out until 66 till he was killed although he became more an outlaw in truth,and several simply left the State and never surrendered.
So excuse me if I don't heap praise on the MSM for defeating the Partisans , they were only just learning to engage them (Andersons ambush) at wars end and only just being properly armed to fight guerilla's .
I wasn't referring exclusively to the MSM being the sole contributor to the Union's eventual victory over Confederate guerrillas. I was just saying that despite many setbacks the Union ultimately prevailed over the Bushwackers.My other point is that defeating insurgents out right is a rare victory to be savored be it by hook or crook.Most insurgencies end in a negotiated political settlement with the caveat that fighting can resume at anytime.
Leftyhunter
 
Hope this hasn't been mentioned, if so I apologize. But has anyone read A Savage Conflict: The Decisive Role of Guerrillas in the American Civil War by Daniel Sutherland? I stumbled across it looking for information on Daniel W. Lindsey, Adjutant General for the state of Kentucky.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1469606887/?tag=civilwartalkc-20
I have and have quoted it quite a bit . Sutherland wrote another book on Unionist guerrillas.
Leftyhunter
 
I have and have quoted it quite a bit . Sutherland wrote another book on Unionist guerrillas.
Leftyhunter
Yeah, saw the other book too. Like I said, I was late into this thread and noticed his book had some correspondence from Lindsey and when I read the title I immediately thought of this thread.
 
Yeah, saw the other book too. Like I said, I was late into this thread and noticed his book had some correspondence from Lindsey and when I read the title I immediately thought of this thread.
Hi HB,
If you would like please join us on the moderated thread on comparing and contrasting Vietnam to the CW. You might find it interesting.
Leftyhunter
 
Annie,
I've just been reading through this long-legged thread again late this afternoon, and the irony of your question really caught my attention. "What in blazes happened?", you asked. A simple, smart-mouthed but accurate answer would be: "Blazes happened."

Of course, by that, I refer to all the towns and houses on both sides of the border that were burned. There were many. This is not meant to side track Leftyhunter's thread, but is a direct answer to your question. Osceola and Nevada, Missouri were burned out as thoroughly as was Lawrence, Kansas. I have no idea how many individual farms were destroyed in either state. Three and one-half counties in Missouri will forever be known as "The Burnt District". They were burned out by order of federal Gen. Ewing (acting as Jim Lane's puppet. That crazy order ruined loyal unionist and southern-leaning families alike. These stories are so bizarre and horrible that it's simply a case of the truth being stranger than fiction. You can't make this stuff up! You don't need to make it up because it really happened. My question after reading your very sincere and honest question is: How could anyone here be unaware of the war in Missouri and Kansas? But it's not your fault. There is way too much information out there for anyone to absorb, and most of it focuses east of the Mississippi.

However, returning to Leftyhunter's original intent for this thread: I concede that guerrilla warfare occurred to one degree or another all over the country. I think it left particular marks in Missouri that have not totally healed to this day, because for all but a few months of the war's timeline, guerrilla war was the only war the citizens of Missouri and Kansas experienced.
Hi Patrick H,
My friends on the moderated f\thread which compares and contrasts the Vietnam war to Mo's Civil War era guerrilla war invite you to join us at your earliest convenience.
Leftyhunter
 
“Intolerable Evil”

Brigadier Rufus King, commanding Division, of Major General Irvin McDowell’s First Corps, of McClellan’s Army of the Potomac, on April 7, 1862, at Bristoe, Virginia, thirty miles southeast of Washington , issued General Orders no.36,”numerous complaints have reached division headquarters this morning of depredations upon peaceable and unoffending citizens by some of the troops in this command. The evil has grown to be intolerable. (9)


“Rape and other Crimes”

On May 16, 1862, Colonel Hermann Haupt at Potomac Creek, near Aquia Creek Station, north west Virginia, sent a dispatch to McDowell, “Guerillas are forming in various parts of the country, provoked by rape and other crimes committed by Union men. Cases have occurred in this vicinity recently of an aggravated character. (10

On the same date, McDowell, Department of the Rappahannock, opposite Fredericksburg, Virginia, threatened in General Orders no.12, “Some of the few men among us who are evilly disposed have attempted the commission of a crime which will justly draw upon the troops universal condemnation. The punishment for rape will be death, and any violence offered a female, white or colored, with the intent… to commit rape will be considered as one and punished accordingly. (11)


“Ravages”

Later in a Court of Inquiry into charges against McDowell, in Washington, during testimony of Brigadier general Hermann Haupt about events while he was charge of rebuilding the Aquia and Fredericksburg Railroad from the Potomac to Falmouth. McDowell questioned him, “what acts of violence on the women of the country came to your knowledge near Fredericksburg?” (12)

Haupt answered:

I reported one case, which occurred within three miles of Potomac Bridge. A rape upon the daughter of a farmer who had tended me material assistance in searching for timber…I inquired of the parents in regards to the facts, and found that the act had been perpetrated by one of the numerous stragglers who were continually passing through the country… and from those ravages not a single farm-house in the vicinity of the road was exempt when guarded, and not always even then. (13)

Source: Thomas Bland Keys, The Uncivil War: Union Army and Navy Excesses in the Official Records, pp. 18-19.

(9) OR, vol. XII, pt.III:54.

(10) Ibid., 196.

(11) OR, ser. II, vol. III: 545.

(12) OR, vol. XII, pt. I: 78.

(13) Ibid.
For you my friend upon your request.
Leftyhunter
 
How much is known of individuals acting on their on. It seems I remember seeing a book (on Amazon) about a father, when after his sons were killed, became an excellent and successful assassin. Can someone fill in the blanks? Thanks.
 
There are at least two major differences.
Gen.Kelly developed"ironclads" armored rail cars with small cannon that drove away guerrillas from the B&O RR in Va . These cars where so well made even Mosbey's men avoided it. The second was the use of the block house which worked against guerrilla bands but not against Mosby's men.
Leftyhunter

It's my impression from reading a little about the armored rail cars on the B&O that they were considered a failure, not a success.

Frank_Leslie's_Illustrated_Newspaper_-_18610518_-_p1_-_Railroad_Battery.png


The problem is evident from the illustration. If the wheels or the engine can be disabled, then the gun platform becomes immobilized.
 

Attachments

  • Frank_Leslie's_Illustrated_Newspaper_-_18610518_-_p1_-_Railroad_Battery.png
    Frank_Leslie's_Illustrated_Newspaper_-_18610518_-_p1_-_Railroad_Battery.png
    638.4 KB · Views: 29
Last edited:
How much is known of individuals acting on their on. It seems I remember seeing a book (on Amazon) about a father, when after his sons were killed, became an excellent and successful assassin. Can someone fill in the blanks? Thanks.
I think that man's last name is Hinson and I know we recently had a tbread on him. One of the moderators might be able to pull it up for you.
Leftyhunter
 
It's my impression from reading a little about the armored rail cars on the B&O that they were considered a failure, not a success.

Frank_Leslie's_Illustrated_Newspaper_-_18610518_-_p1_-_Railroad_Battery.png


The problem is evident from the illustration. If the wheels or the engine can be disabled, then the gun platform becomes immobilized.
I can only go by what the source stated. Maybe another author can give evidence how Confederate guerrillas in Virginia dealt with armoured train's. Either way armoured train's are an interesting development.
Leftyhunter
 

Attachments

  • Frank_Leslie's_Illustrated_Newspaper_-_18610518_-_p1_-_Railroad_Battery.png
    Frank_Leslie's_Illustrated_Newspaper_-_18610518_-_p1_-_Railroad_Battery.png
    638.4 KB · Views: 28
Yup. There is a chapter in the link I posted too naming Wade and Simmons as well.

https://archive.org/stream/historyofwataug00arth/historyofwataug00arth_djvu.txt Just ctrl+f and enter Fort Hamby for further info.
Yup. There is a chapter in the link I posted too naming Wade and Simmons as well.

https://archive.org/stream/historyofwataug00arth/historyofwataug00arth_djvu.txt Just ctrl+f and enter Fort Hamby for further info.

Admittedly, I didn't check the muster rolls of all the regiments with Stoneman. If the ringleaders of the gangs were deserters of the 10th Michigan Cavalry, this may be them :

Private Michael Wade Company F, deserted 4/30/11865 at Wilkesboro, NC.

Michael Wade 10th Mich Cavalry.jpg
Private Mitchell Siggins, Company A, as opposed to Simmons. Deserted 8/1/1864 at Strawberry Plains, Tennessee. Three men named Simmons were in the 10th Michigan, but all three mustered out in Knoxville on June 11 , 1865.

Mitchell Siggins.jpg
 
Back
Top