Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Abraham Lincoln's Crimes

If you have the Grey Ghost book, then you have a very salient argument for Quantrill's commission as a regular Colonel by President Davis or his staff. I could not find the quote in a quick perusal of my own copy, but will continue to look if you need that to believe me. As to his original commission, only Yankee sympathizers and those deluded by the pop histories generated by the same actually think Quantrill was not commissioned under the Partisan Ranger Act. After the routine commission as Captain, he could have promoted himself in accordance with the customs of the times as more men came to be under his command. His was necessarily a fluid command as to numbers but normally the number was about 250 which could well have merited a Colonelcy given the times. Some sources quote the number of men under Quantrill at Lawrence as closer to 1000 than the normally quoted 300-400. Given the totality of the destruction visited upon that ill-gotten town, 1000 may be more believable than the oft-quoted number.

It has been awhile since I delved into the subject but, let me assure you, I've read at least two dozen books on the war in the west including the three major biographies of Quantrill. When I say he was a commissioned and recognized Colonel of the Confederacy, it is not without reason. I haven't the time presently, but will look up some quotes if you need this to believe what I am saying.

You cannot like that character without also liking another, Rooster Cogburn. If you will remember who Rooster served with Steve, and remember that he was ready to fight at the mention of the good Colonel's honor being sullied-especially the assertion that they had harmed innocents. He called it, "a damn lie". He also went as far as to josh a member of Kirby Smith's merry men as to what side he fought on-the assertion being that some of those farther south had seen so much less action than the Missourians that they were hardly in the war. "True Grit" was a great novel on many accounts, one of the most outstanding being its historical accuracy.

Ethan, I believe you believe it, and strongly.

here's a link to a site devoted to Quantrill by his supporters:

http://quantrillsguerrillas.com/xoops/modules/news/

I have no dog in this fight.

To begin, I take back what I said about not giving a rat's ass about what you think.It's not true and I have to admit to some admiration for the strong convictions you hold about the soldier's, pioneers and "Raiders" of that day.

Being a Virginian for 35 of my near 50 years, I can assure you that I have been coerced into studies of the civil war and post Civil War activities, whether I liked it or not.. I spent a considerable anmount of time in HS(32 years ago) and a good portion of college, studying the raid in Lawrence. Much of my judgment and personal beliefs stem from my perceptions of that raid. It would have to be agreed that many lost their homes and lives during that raid that had very little, if any, ties to the Union Cause or, the Civil War for that matter. Quantrill, if my memory serves me well, relied on a 15 year old common law wife and another 13 year old to assist in selecting those that would be killed, spared, whose houses looted,torched etc.

While I respect your desire to romanticise the crusade of Quantrill and his loyal following, the fact remains many innocents were killed at his hands and many due to the statements of 2 female kids.Historians are ambivalent as to whether he was a profiteering, murderous raider or an officer whose legend remains heroic due to the havoc he created on Union troops, supply trains, the mail etc. That ambivalence by hoistorians always leaves one some doubt as to Quantrill's actual legacy, but, for me, what occurred at Lawrence erases that ambivalence in my mind.

Forgive my earlier insult. I should have counted 10 first before replying. You know you're the last of a dying breed, dont you? I sincerely do have to respect that.

With all due respect Issac, and not flaming here at all...I don't remember anything about Kate King (I presume that is who you speak of) being with Quantrill on the Lawrence trip. Admittedly, it has been awhile since I read the biographies of which I speak.

I respect in-kind the fact that you have actually done your research on the raid. Too many have opinions that are set in stone and yet have done no real reading on the subject. I have the latest (I think) two books on it, Bloody Dawn and Dark Friday. I would say the tactical or military aspect of the raid was that it set Kansas on watch and pulled many troops from Missouri. Unfortunately, there were so many Federals already in that state that it didn't matter much that some left because the others then stepped up the damage they were doing (were that even possible). I've lived close to the Border for a good part of my life. In the counties below the Missouri River and hard against Kansas, clear to the Osage River, not a structure stood save for Union bases. This area had formerly been pretty populous. Except for the Missouri river valley counties, this was the strongest Southern area in Missouri. Order Number 11 was used after the Lawrence Raid to depopulate it. It is still remembered here as many Missourians were former Kansans displaced by the Yankees during the Bleeding Kansas era. The great George Caleb Bingham, a Union Major himself, immortalized the razing of west Missouri in his painting. It (a print) hangs in the Girard Grade School's office, well into Kansas. Many of the southerners re-settled in Kansas after the war as the Yankees who'd had no interest in living here other than the political, left.

Kansas City, especially in certain areas, was a hotbed of southern sympathy. I well remember my Uncle from Independence regaling me with tales of the James Boys. This is one of the reasons the state government of Missouri had to murder Jesse-because he had so much support around where he lived.

But I digress. My remembrance of the Lawrence raid was that Colonel Quantrill rode in with his men and set up headquarters in the Eldridge Hotel-a structure that was spared the conflageration. He put under his protection all of those within the Hotel and even saved other residents during the day. This was despite his own order to kill every man old enough to carry a gun. This order, while possibly reprehensible, was not issued in a vacuum. The Missourians had endured their own being killed by the Federals ever since the General Order issued by the Union high command to do so. With this in mind and also the other incidents already mentioned, the Guerrillas (and a large contingent of Regular Confederate Troops) went wild. One thing that is either seldom mentioned or outright lied about however, is the fact that only one woman came to harm during the battle-and that is a woman who got in the way of an execution and accidentally had her arm broken.

There was a death list, prepared in advance for or by Quantrill. I have never heard of Quantrill's wife, Kate King, taking part in the preparation of it though. Kate King was Quantrill's wife, either common-law or by marriage dependent upon whom you believe. Once Quantrill took up with her, he was much less affective in the field. Certainly the Lawrence Raid or Battle, was a genius of cavalry tactics and execution and would rank right up with some of JEB Stuart's feats were it not for the cold-blooded killing of those who wished to surrender.

I am not one who wishes to romanticize Quantrill or the war in any way. Nor am I a revisionist. I like to see the facts come to light in as unbiased a manner as possible. I don't think they have since the Union won. The histories written subsequently were a mishmash of hatred on both sides. You had either pro-Quantrill (Edwards) or anti (Connelly).

That said, I thank you for the kind words and most excellent post Issac.

Thanks for the link. I made a quick study and will peruse it further as time allows.

No doubt there is controversy over whether or not he was commissioned. I think my own opinion is based on the best evidence available. Edwards, who is not generally reliable but upon whom we almost have to rely for the history of the guerrillas early existence and formation, states that Quantrill was commissioned a Captain under the Partisan Ranger Act. I don't think this can be disputed with any validity. There are numerous sources quoting Quantrill's trip to Richmond during the winter of '62-'63 and his audience with high officials, if not Davis himself. I quickly scanned our mutual reference which my own admittedly flawed remembrance of which pointed to his Colonelcy by Davis himself. Alas I couldn't find it. Again, if I have time I will look more.

I guess what I am saying new here is that I concede that I know of no record of Quantrill's officership amongst CSA archives (as you said). I just think that in lieu of this, the best evidence points towards two seperate (perhaps even three) commissions from duly appointed CSA authorities.

Btw, much of #1354451 was written with tongue firmly in cheek.

I can't remember where I actually found the women who may have accompanied Quantrill up to and through the raid Ethan, but I'll research some more so it at least means something to you.

I recall not only his wife being present but also a Sallie Young. There was much historical discussion as to whether Young was a heroine or a traitor IIRC.

But, as I mentioned, that's a flash-back memory and a cursory reoccurrence of old memory. I know it's concrete in your brain for the most part but I will look further and at least try to establish some further credibilty.

Etahan--After you fill your next cup of coffee, check this site out and let me know your opinion as to it's substance. I don't rely on it as authoritative but merely a keeping of my promise to find something somewhat supportive of my earlier post.
=================================================================



http://www.ljworld.com/section/citynews/story/181849

If you really want an analysis...

I think the article was a mixed one. It started out very good and then degenerated when it went from eye witness accounts/speculation-hypothesis to accusations. Calling Todd a murderer may be justified in the face of the killing he perpetuated on the old man which I myself have related and is fairly well documented. I can't recall one instance of Quantrill actually murdering somebody. Take note that in our last correspondence I referenced "cold-blooded KILLINGS" not murders. Whether even those killings at Lawrence are murders or not depends on your perspective. There is no doubt that even a popular and charismatic leader such as Q could exert only so much control over the troops he had. They were fighters but were unruly by any assessment.

Again, not 100% proof-positive, nor by wild baseless assertions, but by the best evidence as my flawed memory recalls it.

There is little doubt that Quantrill and other groups had spies within Lawrence previous to the raid. It was indeed well-thought out and planned and not a spur-of-the-moment thing. The raid had been talked about and dismissed many times. The Zeitgeist was finally in place to motivate the dangerous ride in order to root out the den of theives that had plagued Missouri and Kansas southrons since well before the war proper. The various camps came together like lightening after the collapse of the jail and the "murder" (in the minds of Anderson, Younger and others) of their helpless ones. It is likely that William Gregg was one of the best-known Quantrillites that infiltrated Lawrence prior to the raid. Likely, Quantrill had spies in Kansas at various locations, throughout the war. His was a military organization, regardless of what others have charged. It was very professional in its organization and execution given the circumstances.

I seem to recall the usual number bandied about as being 300-400 men who attacked Lawrence. 448 seems unusual. William Gregg said that there were over a thousand. I would not shy from the large number due to the totality of destruction wrought and the ineffectiveness of the Union troops who attacked the retreating column.

Many of the men were uneasy about such a long ride in enemy territory and were hesitant even at the last minute, to attack. Some witnesses say Quantrill, upon receiving word from his scouts that all was well, said simply, "I don't know about the rest of you, but I am going to Lawrence." Whereupon he drew his Army Colts and charged off down the hill towards town.

Col. Holt's men were correct in their assumption as many of the men attacked were Yankee troops. Some were in uniform and some were not. A whole contingent was camped at the far end of town near the river and were slaughtered.

There was indeed a carefully prepared death-list, which included Sen. James Lane, also nominally a Kansas Militia General and the man responsible for the sack of Osceola, Missouri in 1861. Lane escaped into a cornfield.

I do not recall Kate King being along on the ride. Nor do I recall any stories of Sally Young-but my memory may fail me. Kate King did ride along with Quantrill, sometimes dressed in rough clothes. Her appearance on the scene was generally associated with Q's decline as a commander and leader in Missouri though. If Sally Young was from Lecompton and actually accompanied the raiders, she may indeed have been an accomplice. The towns in pre-war Kansas were divided into pro-slavery and anti-slavery ones. Lecompton was one of the earliest capitols of Kansas and a pro-slavery mecca. Many pro-slavery people bent to the will of their neighbors and stayed in Kansas, keeping a low profile, even after the majority of their fellows were driven out. She could have come from this stock. Plus, it was unlikely the Missourians, driven by notions of chivalry and the sanctity of womanhood, would have pressed her into service as a guide. So if she was present, there would have been conotations to that presence.

It is pretty much undisputed that Jesse James WAS one of Quantrill's men. He very likely joined AFTER the Lawrence action and wasn't present during it. He was definitely one of Bloody Bill Anderson's men and participated in the massacre of the troops in and around Centralia in September of 1864.

Cole Younger was widely credited with saving many Union men during the raid. Supposedly his taste for revenge had diminished and he joined the regular forces afterwards. The term "war hero" has been much-associated with Cole's name.

Larkin Skaggs was the guerrilla whom Quantrill prevented from harming further the woman in question. She received a broken arm in trying to prevent him from killing her father and has the distinction of being the only woman harmed during the raid. Skaggs was the only Confederate casualty of the raid. He lingered too long in Lawrence in a drunken rage. A Delaware Indian finally killed him and cut his head off. It was displayed in the streets of the ruined town.

The part about Quantrill being a "mass murderer" and especially the link to 9/11 is ignorance, IMO. Certainly if you consider the killings in Lawrence and even subsequently, in Baxter Springs, to be murders, then he is. If you do however, you almost have to admit that many of his counterparts on the Union side, who routinely executed prisoners under the guise and cover of orders, are mass murderers as well. In fact, mass murder must be admitted to have been ordered at the highest levels of the Union command.

If you're not for us, you are against us.
An old tradition.

Perhaps not, unless that institution was founded upon enslaving a particular race, which the slavery that Davis built a career on protecting and propagating most certainly was. Your gymnastics of reasoning on this issue being as tortured as those old Southern laws that defined what fraction of bloodline exactly made person "Black" and thence subject to chattel slavery.

While I grow weary of egregious charges of "racism", Leonard Pitts once wrote words to the effect that "racism isn't when someone calls you a name, racism is when you can't get a home mortage because of your race". On THAT yardstick, Davis was as profoundly racist as anyone in his day.

[With respect to the persecution suffered by German pro-Unionists in Texas you wrote]

Which seeks to minimize the salient point that Southerners were as guilty of as many abuses upon those dissenting in their midst as anything committed by the North.

One reason you DON'T hear much about the Texas Germans nowadays (and they were many, about half as many as in Missouri in close to the exact same proportion) is that their descendents themselves don't mention it much, them not being given to the sort of aggrieved fits of historical narcisscism common in the South.

On the topic of Quantrill I know little, and therefore have not commented (some have it that never stopped me before ). I do find the question of whether he had a formal commission or not and from whom to be largely irrelevant.

If he DID have a formal commission, surely that would make him all the more culpable in the murders committed by him and his men in Lawrence (and whether he himself pulled a trigger, he was responsible).

I believe his pre-war career was unremarkable and worse, marred by allegations of theft (granted, that part could have been written by his enemies).

Neither do the allegations he was swayed by his teenage bride nor the one that he spared that hotel in Lawrence because he had been treated decently there once speak of anything close to a deep thinker.

Certainly his raid on Lawrence was ultimately distastrous for his home country, inciting as it did that ruinous Union response.

With regards to his official status in the Confederacy, it is relevant to ask how did the Government in Richmond regard him AFTER Lawrence? One imagines they would seek to put as much distance between himself and themselves as possible.



Give examples please.

Birdwatcher

William Tecumseh Sherman and his march through Georgia, is plenty of example for this.

I would have said so too, but then I came across this...
http://people.cohums.ohio-state.edu/grimsley1/usma/rest2.htm


Worth looking into, that very last point quoted I find worthy. According to the popular portrayal, we are asked to believe that the Union rank and file suddenly became amoral monsters on that final march to the sea.

Surely someone here will jump in with quotes from orders actually issued by Sherman during that campaign. This guy I quoted is a military historian and doubtless has done research to back up his claim.

Birdwatcher

If you're saying they just stole what they could and burned the rest, but failed to murder or rape every white resident of Georgia in the process, I wouldn't disagree. There was a great deal more rape of Negroes by the Union troops than of white women. I'd have to do some searching to find Sherman's orders....his famous Special Order No. 15, purporting to give 40,000 freedmen expropriated plantation land came later. Although abrogated by President Johnson and clearly illegal, it is the basis for Jesse Jackson and Co.'s claim that they are due 40 acres and a mule.

The best evidence I can find quickly, is his famous quip to his pal Grant, wherein he promised to "make Georgia howl", which he surely did. That quote is found in a telegram by W.T. Sherman to Gen. U.S. Grant, Oct. 9, 1864, reproduced in Sherman's Civil War, pp. 731-732

Weak evidence at best. With regards to giving those Freedmen plantation lands one could argue that certainly they had earned lifelong sweat equity, and to do otherwise would be to push them off the lands that had supported them their whole lives. They had to live somewhere.

Sherman's definition of "howl" on that telegraph could mean any number of things.

The suspicion grows that if there WERE such orders, someone would have compiled and published them all long ago such that they would be easily accessible.

Again, are we to believe that the Americans in Sherman's army suddenly turned en masse into monsters, and then all conspired to keep silent on the fact? Doesn't add up.

Birdwatcher

define monsters....all your sources says is they probably weren't murderers and rapists....OK, they were just arsonists and thieves, if that's not a monster then they weren't.

Not uncommon behavior for armies in the enemies' country throughout history, it would be more shocking if they didn't loot and burn, wouldn't it?

Nope, just got one already cited, but it sounds credible.



No, not an army composed of Americans, how did the Army of Northern Virginia act in Pennsylvania?

Stealing chickens and corn? Butchering cattle? Heck, I'd venture to say most armies did that to some extent to their own as well.

Raping women? Even just Black women? Again, doesn't sound credible except by a scummy few, about in the same proportion in the population that we still have today, this especially so given the likely penalties for such at that time.

On the other hand the strong preponderance of a White admixture in the Southern slave population does speak of a systematic practice of what modern courts would consider rape by at least some Southerners, relations between young slave women and the members of their masters' households apparently being not uncommon.

The allegations of brutality on Sherman's march always suggest such was intended from the top down.

Perhaps, as this author states, 1) the brutality was overblown and 2) such would have never been countenanced, even by Sherman.

I'm more than willing to be shot down on this one, heck, I never even questioned popular history on this issue until that article.
But much in it rings true.

Birdwatcher

I think you're fighting a straw man. I've never really heard about Sherman's bummers committing violent crimes....they were labeled as thieves and arsonists. Most whites with the ability to move got up and went, so the victim pool was pretty shallow anyway. So your historian, it seems to me, is sort of arguing against a point nobody really makes. If one really wanted to check, the court martial records of Sherman's army would be the place to look, and if I cared, I'd go searching for the Ph.D. dissertation I'm sure somebody has done on those documents. But its not an issue I've really heard raised, and I've spent a lot of time in SCV gatherings in the company of some serious Sherman-haters .

What?

Do you mean to suggest the unparalleled brutality of Sherman's infamous march to the sea is NOT a staple of popular belief pertaining to that war? Especially in the South?

Heck, it was the first thing VAnimrod suggested, and I expect most here would have immediately said the same thing. Me too, but now I'm wondering.

..but back to the point, I'm assuming your reply is a concession that there were in fact no orders requiring unusual brutality, beyond an obtuse prior suggestion by Sherman that he would "make Georgia howl".

Birdwatcher