The Missouri in the Civil War Message Board

Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
In Response To: Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed ()

Dave,

Let me work with this for a few days, and I will get back to you.

Before I go, I will tell about the internal problems with the Union units in Lafayette and Saline Counties that the Union District of Central Missouri chief, Brigadier General Egbert B. Brown, was probably alluding to in his district's 10 September 1864 letter to LTC Lazear from "O.R." series 1, vol. 41, page 144.

It was common knowledge throughout Missouri that "General Price and his army are coming back to Missouri to throw off the yoke of the tyrant Union troops," or words to that effect long before 19 September 1864 when Price's army entered southeast Missouri. There were rumors, newspaper articles about the rumors, Union spy reports from Arkansas, and so forth, and I get the impression that General Price may have favored the thought that the rumors vexed the Yankees

Such rumors and worries did trouble Union troops and citizens of northern sympathy in Missouri to the extent, in my understanding, that some were taking "radical" measures to deal with their concerns. Missouri was deeply divided into northern and southern sympathizers, and the southern ones really enjoyed this sort of publicity. Ladies over the fence were quoted as telling the other ladies something to the effect that "Hey, your turn is coming. Missouri's true patriots will soon be coming back to avenge some of us. We will see who laughs last, won't we?" Similar quotes actually made it into newspaper editorials, and, remember, there were no Missouri newspapers by autumn 1864 allowed to print pro-southern views.

The coming national election for November 8 pitting the Democrat "Peace" Party under General "Little Mac" McClellan against the Republican's Abraham Lincoln was already gearing up in the "Show Me State," and that did nothing to calm nerves, either. The Dem's General McClellan clearly expressed the opinion that the war had gone on long enough with the long casualty lists in the newspapers, and maybe America really should separate into two nations, since their differences seemed impossible to settle.

About 90 Union soldiers of two Missouri regiments and a Kansas regiment broke up a Democrat political rally in downtown St. Louis in front of the Lindell Hotel the evening of September 15, and carried off an American flag from the podium as a form of protest. In fact, because of their laying their all on the line for their beliefs typified many Union soldiers as counting among the radicals. What could be more radical than giving your life for what you believed?

Back in west-central Missouri, Union troops and sometimes their leaders seemed to differ from the moderate view that "we need to convince our wayward southern citizens by reason and not force to drop this evil secession and come back into the fold" and the more radical view that "the South refuses to be reasonable, so we need to make meaningful the lives given in battle by so many by seeing this war to the finish of being one country, even by force."

Soldiers of the 1st Cavalry Missouri State Militia on September 10 were serving as the Lexington garrison, and they probably bristled that their regimental commander, Colonel James McFerran, had the reputation of being a moderate. In fact, also on September 10 a large number of Lexington residents signed a petition to the overall Missouri department chief, Major General William S. Rosecrans, pleading for the general to remove Colonel McFerrin as the Lexington garrison commander because they feared his timid views about the military solution of the war may fail to protect their town from southern raiders. The residents expressed similar doubts about the district commander, Brigadier Egbert B. Brown, even though he lost part of one arm battling against Confederate Brigadier General Marmaduke's raid on Springfield in January 1863. The Lexington petitioners expressly asked that LTC Bazel F. Lazear of that same regiment, known locally for his fearless prosecution of the war, be placed as their commander instead. Some soldiers of that regiment had to wonder if their colonel had the same dedication to the Union cause as did they.

As the terrible guerrilla war continued in west-central Missouri with neighbor distrusting neighbor, and soldiers questioning the motivation of their leaders, perhaps some of those troopers of that regiment or perhaps Lafayette County men in the 71st Enrolled Missouri Militia Regiment, in desperation, struck out on their own to attack men known or suspected to harbor southern sympathy in desperation in a misguided attempt to hasten the end of this long war. When these soldiers struck out at southerners, they may have taken valuables out of jealousy that they serve with little pay while known southern men live comfortably at home enjoyed the fruits of their disloyalty, by their thinking.

The September 10 letter was actually from the district commander, BG Egbert B. Brown, to LTC Lazear, accusing Lazear of failing to control men who served under him. The accusing nature of that report attests to strong disagreement between General Brown and LTC Lazear, that the Lexington resident's petition that same day would make worse. This letter is also an indicator that General Brown's personal feelings were affecting his judgment. These indicators a few days later led the Missouri Union commander to replace Brown with another general known for his radical view, more in keeping with those Lexington petitioners.

This discord between Union commanders in west-central Missouri is also an indicator of their frustration that their war against the southern guerrillas was not going well.

Until later, Bruce

Messages In This Thread

Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed
Re: Edward Thomas Smarr Confed