Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Civil War 150th

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Civil War 150th Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/28/2011 8:38:15 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
Somewhere Around 150 Years Ago Today:

The Missouri Convention appointed Hamilton Rowan Gamble the new Governor of Missouri. (I have seen several different dates for this.) Like Virginia, Missouri now had two men claiming to be Governor. The difference was that the pro-Union forces in Missouri controlled the state capital, the biggest city, and most of the land area. Interestingly, both Governors of Missouri would die in office.

The South's cotton harvest began to come in, but little of it would reach the mills. Senator James Hammond had delivered his "Cotton is King" speech on March 4, 1858, where he declared:

"Without firing a gun, without drawing a sword, should they make war on us we could bring the whole world to our feet. The South is perfectly competent to go on, one, two, or three years without planting a seed of cotton. I believe that if she was to plant but half her cotton, for three years to come, it would be an immense advantage to her. I am not so sure but that after three total years' abstinence she would come out stronger than ever she was before, and better prepared to enter afresh upon her great career of enterprise. What would happen if no cotton was furnished for three years? I will not stop to depict what every one can imagine, but this is certain: England would topple headlong and carry the whole civilized world with her, save the South. No, you dare not make war on cotton. No power on earth dares to make war upon it. Cotton is king."

Now it was decided to put it to the test. From what I have been able to find out, Jefferson Davis never formally declared a cotton embargo; it was essentially a popular movement which he did not oppose. But most historians believe it was one of the Confederacy's greatest mistakes. The Union Navy was not yet capable of effectively blockading the thousands of miles of Confederate coast -- but the Southerners were doing the job for it.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 211
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/29/2011 7:02:05 AM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
Capt. Harlock, I just wanted to thank you for all these posts. I've learned a lot, a whole lot. 

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!
Post #: 212
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/29/2011 8:23:10 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

But then again I got my picture of this era from movies like 'Gone with the Wind'.


"Gone With the Wind" is a bit dangerous: for one thing, the portrayal of slavery completely fails to show how much the vast majority of slaves resented being slaves. But it also has some fairly accurate parts, at least for the time dealing with the Civil War. The death of Scarlett's first husband from disease is an entirely realistic development. For all the battlefield slaughters during the war, disease killed twice as many soldiers as did combat. The book and movie also correctly show that it was Southerners who first set a fair amount of Atlanta on fire. (Sherman's troops did a more extensive job later on.)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo
Post #: 213
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/30/2011 5:54:21 AM   
wz0036@hotmail.com

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 7/29/2011
Status: offline
Good stuff, thanks Capt.Harlock. I would love to be in Charleston tomorrow, to celebrate "independence" dayI

< Message edited by wz0036@hotmail.com -- 7/30/2011 5:55:15 AM >


_____________________________

welcome to my website:free games|free online games|y8 games

(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 214
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/30/2011 10:29:17 AM   
nicwb

 

Posts: 519
Joined: 4/26/2010
Status: offline
Well one good thing about "Gone with the Wind" - I got a school excursion to go see it at the movies on the excuse that it was relevant to my Modern History course when we did the US Civil War !

One thing that surprised me though is how few movies there really are about the War -for such an interesting subject it seems very uncovered.

(in reply to wz0036@hotmail.com)
Post #: 215
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/30/2011 3:49:18 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
HEAD-QUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF VIRGINIA FORTRESS MONROE, July 30, 1861.

Hon. Simon Cameron, Secretary of War:

SIR: By an order received on the morning of the 26th of July, from Major-Gen. DIX, by a telegraphic order from Lieut.-Gen. SCOTT, I was commanded to forward, of the troops of this Department, four regiments and a half, including Col. BAKER's California Regiment, to Washington, via Baltimore. . . Up to and at the time of the order I had been preparing for an advance movement, by which I hoped to cripple the resources of the enemy at Yorktown, and especially by seizing a large quantity of negroes, who were being pressed into their service in building the intrenchments there. I had five days previously been enabled to mount, for the first time, the first company of Light Artillery, which I had been empowered to raise, and they had but a single rifled cannon, an iron 6-pounder. Of course, everything must, and did yield to the supposed exigency and the orders. This ordering away the troops from this department, while it weakened the posts at Newport's News, necessitated the withdrawal of the troops from Hampton, where I was then throwing up intrenched works, to enable me to hold the town with a small force, while I advanced up the York or James River. In the village of Hampton there were a large number of negroes, composed, in a great measure, of women and children of the men who had fled thither within my lines for protection, who had escaped from maurauding parties of rebels who had been gathering up able-bodied blacks to aid them in constructing their batteries on the James and York Rivers. I had employed the men in Hampton in tin owing up intrenchments, and they were working zealously and efficiently at that duty, saving our soldiers from that labor, under the gleam of the mid-day sun. The women were earning substantially their own subsistance in washing, marketing, and taking care of the clothes of the soldiers, and rations were being served out to the men who worked for the support of the children. But by the evacuation of Hampton, rendered necessary by the withdrawal of troops, leaving me scarcely 5,000 men outside the Fort, including the force at Newport's News, all these black people were obliged to break up their homes at Hampton, fleeing across the creek within my lines for protection and support. Indeed it was a most distressing sight to see these poor creatures, who had trusted to the protection of the arms of the United States, and who aided the troops of the United States in their enterprise, to be thus obliged to flee from their homes, and the homes of their masters, who had deserted them, and become not fugitives from fear of the return of the rebel soldiery, who had threatened to shoot the men who had wrought for us, and to carry off the women who had served us to a worse than Egyptian bondage. I have therefore now within the Peninsula, this side of Hampton Creek, 900 negroes, 300 of whom are able-bodied men, 30 of whom are men substantially past hard labor, 175 women, 225 children under the age of 10 years, and 170 between 10 and 18 years, and many more coming in. The questions which this state of facts present are very embarrassing.

First -- What shall be done with them? and, Second, What is their state and condition?

Upon these questions I desire the instructions of the Department. . .

. . .I should have no doubt on this question, had I not seen it stated that an order had been issued by Gen. MCDOWELL, in his department, substantially forbidding all fugitive slaves from coming within his lines or being harbored there. Is that order to be enforced in all Military Departments? If so, who are to be considered fugitive slaves? Is a slave to be considered fugitive whose master runs away and leaves him? Is it forbidden to the troops to aid or harbor within their lines the negro children who are found therein, or is the soldier, when his march has destroyed their means of subsistence, to allow them to starve because he has driven off the rebel master? Now, shall the commander of regiment or battalion sit in judgment upon the question, whether any given black man has fled from his master, or his master fled from him? Indeed, how are the free born to be distinguished? Is one any more or less a fugitive slave because he has labored on the rebel intrenchments? If he has so labored, if I understand it, he is to be harbored. . .

I have very decided opinions upon the subject of this order. It does not become me to criticise it, and I write in no spirit of criticism, but simply to explain the full difficulties that surround the enforcing it. If the enforcement of that order becomes the policy of the Government, I, as a soldier, shall be bound to enforce it steadfastly, if not cheerfully. But if left to my own discretion, as you may have gathered from my reasoning, I should take a widely different course from that which it indicates.

In a loyal State I would put down a servile insurrection. In a state of rebellion I would confiscate that which was used to oppose my arms, and take all that property, which constituted the wealth of that State, and furnished the means by which the war is prosecuted, beside being the cause of the war; and if, in so doing, it should be objected that human beings were brought to the free enjoyment of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, such objections might not require much consideration.

Pardon me for addressing the Secretary of War directly upon this question, as it involves some political considerations, as well as propriety of military action. I am Sir, your obedient servant,

BENJ. F. BUTLER.



The full text of Butler's letter is available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/1861/08/06/news/slave-question-letter-major-gen-butler-treatment-fugitive-slaves.html?pagewanted=1




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to nicwb)
Post #: 216
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/30/2011 5:11:47 PM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
That just illustrates how the politics and morality of the Civil War was not clear cut black and white as most people think. A lot of the politics and issues were pretty murky.


_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 217
RE: Civil War 150th - 7/31/2011 9:12:47 PM   
parusski


Posts: 5167
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Jackson Tn
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

That just illustrates how the politics and morality of the Civil War was not clear cut black and white as most people think. A lot of the politics and issues were pretty murky.



So true, so true. Many issues were not much clearer after that horrific war ended. Look how long it took for black Americans to even start getting real "rights". I wonder how different things might have been if Lincoln had not been assassinated and his "let'em up easy" policy had been instituted.

_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 218
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/2/2011 5:26:54 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

In Missouri, Nathaniel Lyon had marched out of the city of Springfield in an attempt to surprise the Southern forces. The armies' vanguards skirmished at a place called Dug Springs -- which was not surprising, since it was a blisteringly hot day and both sides wanted water.

The general rule for the first half of the war in the Eastern states was that the Union cavalry was far outclassed by the Confederates, since the city-dwelling Northerners were less familiar with horses. This was less true in the Western states, where both North and South had depended on horses to cover the long distances between their spread-apart towns. This time, thanks to a determined charge by Union cavalry and poor coordination amongst the Southerners, the Federals won the day.

But that evening, Lyon learned from scouts and local Union sympathizers that the opposing State Guard had been reinforced by units under Confederate Brigadier General Benjamin McCulloch and Arkansas state militia Brigadier General N. Bart Pearce, making the mixed Missouri/Arkansas/Confederate force over twice the size of Lyon's 6,000-man force. A retreat back to Springfield was in order.

In Washington, D.C., an enterprising individual named Thaddeus Lowe received funds and authorization to build a balloon for military observation. Some attempts had already been made using privately owned balloons, but Lowe would pave the way to the establishment of the U. S. Army Balloon Corps, under the authority of the Bureau of Topographical Engineers.

< Message edited by Capt. Harlock -- 8/2/2011 8:48:59 PM >


_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 219
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/2/2011 6:00:01 AM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
I bet a hard charger like Lyon just hated the thought of retreating! 

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 220
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/3/2011 8:07:02 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

A rival balloonist to Lowe named John LaMountain used the deck of the small vessel Fanny to launch an observation balloon 2,000 feet (610 meters) over the James River. (Which is Richmond's waterway to the Atlantic.) It is the first aerial ascent from a ship in history.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 221
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/5/2011 8:37:09 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

The special session of Congress began to bear fruit. (Some of it bitter.) President Lincoln signed into law a variety of bills including the Revenue Act of 1861. Included in this act was the first direct income tax (3% of all incomes over $800).

In Missouri, General McCulloch and the mixed rebel army began to catch up with General Lyon's army as they retreated to Springfield. The Confederate advance forces skirmished with the Union rear-guard, McCulloch himself occasionally riding up to take a pot-shot or two at the Northerners. But it was another searing hot day, and the Confederate supply wagons had not been able to keep up with the rest of McCulloch's forces. By the end of the day McCulloch halted his army for rest and water, and planned a slower pursuit.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 222
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/6/2011 8:09:30 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

Benjamin Butler's argument to treat runaway slaves as "contraband of war" prevailed in Congress, producing the Confiscation Act of 1861:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That if, during the present or any future insurrection against the Government of the United States, after the President of the United States shall have declared, by proclamation, that the laws of the United States are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the power vested in the marshals by law, any person or persons, his, her, or their agent, attorney, or employe, shall purchase or acquire, sell or give, any property of whatsoever kind or description, with intent to use or employ the same, or suffer the same to be used or employed, in aiding, abetting, or promoting such insurrection or resistance to the laws, or any person or persons engaged therein ; or if any person or persons, being the owner or owners of any such property, shall knowingly use or employ, or consent to the use or employment of the same as aforesaid, all such property is hereby declared to be lawful subject of prize and capture wherever found ; and it shall be the duty of the President of the United States to cause the same to be seized, confiscated, and condemned.

(Note that the opening language was a copy of the preamble to Lincoln's call for the militia on April 15. The full text of the Act can be found at: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=557 )
Congress also retroactively approved all of Lincoln's previous proclamations, including suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Chief Justice Taney had declared that only Congress had the right to authorize such a suspension, so (better late than never) it was now legal.

In Missouri, McCulloch's Confederate forces made camp at Wilson's Creek, a short distance from Springfield. He now had a choice of whether to besiege the town and the Union force, or use his advantage in numbers to carry it by direct assault.

In western Virginia, a name to be famous entered the scene. General Robert E. Lee set up a headquarters at Valley Mountain, preparing (he hoped) to drive the Union forces from the Kanawha Valley. Unfortunately, he did not have direct command of the majority of the Confederate troops in the area. While pulling together an army, he sent his son as a messenger to northern General Rosecrans with a proposal:

With a view of alleviating individual distress I have the honor to propose an exchange of prisoners. If you will cause to be forwarded a list of those in your hands including those placed on parole an equal number of U. S. troops, man for man or similar grade, will be sent to the point most convenient to their present abode. An exchange in this manner can be conveniently effected.
Very respectfully,
R. E LEE, General, Commanding.


The prisoner exchange would work quite well for the first half of the war -- but its breakdown would lead to tragedy.

< Message edited by Capt. Harlock -- 8/7/2011 4:30:04 AM >

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 223
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/7/2011 6:51:47 AM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
I like how respectful Lee's letter was. 

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 224
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/7/2011 4:53:49 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:


Wealthy industrialist James B. Eads signed a contract to produce seven armored river boats or "ironclads". These were the design of Samuel Pook, which would draw only six feet and mount 13 guns. In order to carry engines that would drive armor and cannon at eight knots while maintaining the light draft, the boats had to be made with a high beam to length ratio. Pook's design gave the hull three keels, the outboard two longer than the one in the middle. Propulsion was provided by a single paddle wheel at the stern.
The contract specified the cost to be $89,600 per vessel, and the first to be delivered by October 10. In a classic case of government contracting, design changes caused the deliveries to be late, and the cost soared to about $191,000 each. However, the boats would give invaluable service during the Union river campaigns.





Near Fort Monroe, Virginia, General John B. Magruder gave the first southern response to the Confiscation Act. With two companies of Confederate troops, he overran the village of Hampton, where a number of "contrabands" had gathered. Seizing all the blacks, he ordered all the whites in Hampton to evacuate as well, and then had the village burned to the ground.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Capt. Harlock -- 8/7/2011 4:58:49 PM >

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 225
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/7/2011 6:32:43 PM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
I wonder what the wood and sail old time sailors thought when they saw those new fangeled contraptions.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 226
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/9/2011 2:59:34 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

I wonder what the wood and sail old time sailors thought when they saw those new fangeled contraptions.


Surprisingly enough, history records something like an answer. For the first part of the war, the river gunboats were assigned to the Army instead of the Navy, so not many of the "old tars" saw the craft. (Eventually it was realized that fresh water posed essentially the same problems of maintenance as salt water, and the boats went under the wing of the more experienced Navy.) By that time, the locals at the launching sites had dubbed the boats "Pook turtles" after the designer, and the name stuck.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 227
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/9/2011 8:31:52 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

It was becoming clearer and clearer to both sides that Nathaniel Lyon did not have enough troops to hold Springfield, Missouri against the mixed Confederate army camped at Wilson's Creek. Sterling Price waived his supposed seniority (he was a Missouri Major General; Ben McCulloch a Confederate Brigadier) and vested command with the more cautious Texan. But now McCulloch agreed that the time was right to attack.

Coincidentally, Lyon planned to withdraw northeast to Rolla, Missouri to reinforce and resupply, but he also decided on a spoiling attack to delay pursuit.



Union Colonel Franz Sigel developed a very risky plan, with which Lyon concurred, that split the already out-numbered Union force. Sigel proposed striking the Confederates in a pincer movement. He planned to lead 1,200 men, coming in from the south, while the main body under Lyon struck from the north.



The Union army marched out of Springfield into rainy night, leaving about 1,000 men to protect supplies and cover the retreat. The rebel army also began its move, but the rain showers threatened to soak the powder of Price's men. The poorly-equipped State Guard lacked cartridge boxes, so the Confederates returned to camp.

Attachment (2)

< Message edited by Capt. Harlock -- 8/9/2011 8:34:10 PM >

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 228
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/10/2011 5:31:55 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

At about 5:00 a.m. Nathaniel Lyon's army, in two columns commanded by himself and Col. Franz Sigel, attacked the Confederates camped on Wilson's Creek. Because the Southerners had planned to march that day, they had not set out a proper number of pickets during the night. Rebel cavalry received the first blow and fell back, but reinforcements soon rushed up and brought the Union advance to a halt. Soon it became apparent just how badly the Federals were outnumbered.

Meanwhile, the Confederates had routed Sigel's column, south of Skegg's Branch. The Northerners mistook the approaching 3rd Louisiana for the 3rd Iowa Infantry (which also wore gray uniforms), and didn't fire until the Confederates were nearly upon them. Sigel's flank was overrun, and the colonel and his men fled the field, losing four guns.

Trying to advance a little further, Lyon directed two companies of Iowa troops to go forward, himself leading the column, swinging his hat. A murderous fire was opened from the thick brush, and a bullet hit Lyon's chest. He slowly dismounted, and as he fell into the arms of his faithful orderly, Lehmann, he exclaimed, "Lehmann, I am killed," and died a few moments later. He had become the first Union general to be killed in action. Colonel Mitchell was also severely wounded about the same time and removed to the rear.

With all the higher-ranking officers down, Major Samuel D. Sturgis assumed command. Happily for the Northerners, Sturgis proved equal to the crisis. He established a defensive line on what came to be known as "Bloody Hill". The Confederates attacked the Union forces three times over the next few hours but failed to break through the Union line. Finally at 11:00 a.m., the Confederates withdrew. Sturgis realized, however, that his men were exhausted and his ammunition was low, so he ordered a retreat back to Springfield. The Confederates, having supply problems of their own, decided not to pursue.

Given that the troops present were less half of the numbers at Bull Run, losses at Wilson's Creek were heavy. Union casualties were 1,317 (258 killed, 873 wounded, 186 missing), fully a quarter of those engaged. Confederate casualties were at least 1,232 (277 killed, 945 wounded, 10 or more missing).

Sterling Price was delighted with the Union retreat and urged immediate invasion of Missouri by the entire army. Benjamin McCulloch demurred, claiming he had insufficient supplies and no way to support such a move. Price angrily resumed his command of the Missouri State Guard, and moved on with that half of the Confederate force.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 229
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/14/2011 8:01:18 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

The Union force had given up Springfield, Missouri, and was falling back on Rolla, which had a railroad station and so had more supplies. But under Franz Sigel's command, they were marching very slowly, largely due to Sigel's pampering of the troops of German ancestry. The news of the retreat and the death of Nathaniel Lyon traveled considerably faster. In St. Louis, which had been fairly calm since the riots in the spring, there was renewed unrest as the fortunes of the Confederates seemed to be on the rise.

(In Springfield, however, the Southerners were becoming less popular as a number of Benjamin McCulloch's men disobeyed his orders and took what they wanted to alleviate their shortage of supplies.)

St. Louis was now the headquarters of the entire Department of the West, commanded by Major General John Charles Fremont. At this time Fremont was one of the most famous men in America. He had been an explorer (with Kit Carson on one expedition), made a fortune in the California gold rush, and most importantly, been the first Republican candidate for President in 1856. He was also a staunch abolitionist. Fremont now took the step of declaring martial law in St. Louis, and began thinking of further measures.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 230
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/19/2011 8:31:13 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

The problem of the same names for places in different states showed up dramatically, as there was house-to-house fighting in Charleston. But this was the town of Charleston, Missouri, which had been occupied by 500 men of the pro-secessionist Missouri State Guard. A Union force of 300 troops advanced from nearby Bird's Point. The Northern cavalry went the wrong way and were out of the action, but the 250 remaining Federals advanced into the town square after sunset. In a spirited shoot-out in the darkness, the Union troops managed to drive the rebels off, remarkably losing only one man killed and six wounded. There are no official figures of Confederate losses -- General Fremont reported forty dead to Washington, but this is certainly an exaggeration.

As far as your humble correspondent knows, this was the first case of soldier-to-soldier street fighting in the Civil War. (As opposed to the soldier-vs-civilian fighting in the Baltimore and St. Louis riots.)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 231
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/20/2011 5:20:17 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

The Second Wheeling Convention presented an ordinance laying out the means to create the state of "Kanawah". When the convention approved the ordinance that day, its work was done. The convention was adjourned, to be replaced by the State Constitutional Convention that November. (A new state requires a new state constitution.)

The Confederates were not about to take this lying down. But although Robert E. Lee was in the area, the Southerners were giving a classic demonstration of the cost of not having unity of command. Lee had very few men under his direct authority, with most of the troops led by either General John Floyd or General Henry Wise. Floyd and Wise despised each other, and cooperated as little as possible. Nonetheless they began to move slowly forward to expel the Union forces from western Virginia.



_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 232
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/20/2011 6:21:00 AM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
The state of Kanawah? I can't get into that.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 233
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/21/2011 4:08:38 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

A conference of four thousand Cherokees was assembled at Tahlequah, Indian Territory. (Modern-day Oklahoma.) There were two major factions: the neutral-leaning Keetowahs, led by John Ross, and the Knights of the Golden Circle, led by Stand Watie, who wished to side with the South. Ironically, both men were slaveholders, and Ross was only one-eighth Cherokee. Faced with the Confederate victories at Bull Run and Wilson's Creek, Ross reluctantly agreed that it would be best to back the winning side.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 234
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/21/2011 4:43:58 PM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3627
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
I never knew about the Indians.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 235
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/22/2011 1:45:26 AM   
rhondabrwn


Posts: 2582
Joined: 9/29/2004
From: Snowflake, Arizona
Status: offline
Stand Watie and his Indians had a counter in Victory Games "Civil War" as I recall

< Message edited by rhondabrwn -- 8/22/2011 1:46:21 AM >


_____________________________

Love & Peace,

Far Dareis Mai

My old Piczo site seems to be gone, so no more Navajo Nation pics :(

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 236
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/22/2011 5:25:18 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

The town of Harpers Ferry changed hands again when a troop of Confederate cavalry under Captain Turner Ashby rode in. Ashby had been part of the original group that had seized the rifle works when Virginia seceded. His career would be meteoric: he would come to be called "The Black Knight of the Confederacy" for his daring and endurance in combat, and be promoted several times in less than a a year. After achieving the rank of Brigadier General, he would be killed in action in June 1862.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to rhondabrwn)
Post #: 237
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/24/2011 8:40:56 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

Jefferson Davis named James M. Mason as "commissioner" to Great Britain and John Slidell as commissioner to France. (Since the countries had not formally recognized the Confederacy, they couldn't be titled "ambassador".) They would play their part in history even before they crossed the Atlantic.


_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 238
RE: Civil War 150th - 8/26/2011 5:30:25 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5354
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
150 Years Ago Today:

Brigadier John Floyd, commanding Confederate forces in the Kanawha Valley, had crossed the Gauley River. Four days later, Colonel Erastus Tyler had marched 850 soldiers of the 7th Regiment Ohio Volunteer Infantry to Kessler’s Cross Lanes, fewer than three miles from Floyd’s camp. Floyd wasted no time in responding to the Federal threat. Early the next morning, August 26, his 2,000 soldiers launched a surprise attack against Tyler’s encampment. The Rebels routed the Federals in a short battle that last only thirty to forty-five minutes. Estimated Casualties: Union 245; Confederate 40. At last the Confederates had achieved a success in western Virginia. But instead of pursuing, Floyd withdrew back to the river and established a defensive position at Carnifex Ferry.

In one of the least important diplomatic events of the year, King Kamehameha IV proclaimed the neutrality of the Hawaiian Islands during the Civil War. (Hawaii was an independent kingdom at that point.)


_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 239
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Civil War 150th Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.184