Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Civil War buffs...a question...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Fountain79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:20 PM
Original message
Civil War buffs...a question...
I got in a discussion with one of many republican family members concerning the civil war. My cousin made the argument that Missouri had succeeded from the Union. I am aware that it was a slave state but I was under the impression that Missouri was never part of the Confedracy. Anyone have an answer to this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. I seem to recall the Missouri Compromise...
which I believe allowed them to keep slaves, in a compromise with the union.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fountain79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yeah...but they didn't have anything to do with
the Civil war. That determined how states would be admitted into the United States as Free/Slave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. and that had nothing to do with the Civil War?
??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fountain79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. In the sense of...
it happening during the Civil War or determing whether Missouri was part of the confederacy. It determined whether Missouri was going to be admitted as a slave state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Wrong Compromise
That was the Compromise of 1820 also known as the Missouri Compromise that set the line for which there will be no slavery north of it and allowed Missouri to be a slave state to keep the balance in the Senate. Missouri's governor TRIED to make Missouri secede, but his attempts at rallying native Missourians into a fighting force failed spectacularly and the Union army kicked the snot out of the homegrown rebels and kept Missouri in the Union.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. Not sure myself, but my wife is a civil war buff, will ask her when she gets home
AutumnMist has a thing for them civil war guys in Uniform. Maybe if I dress up like Grant and get drunk we could recreate some battles.... :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. You best be happy I was not drinking something
Or you would owe me a new keyboard
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. actually a very interesting question. "border state" is the best description
but basically they had representatives in both the union and confederate governments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_secession
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bookman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. Missouri was a Union State...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
10. I believe that Missouri did leave the Union
and shortly thereafter, with some smoke & mirrors (and probably some illegal or at least unconstitutional) activity it was yanked back into the Union by the good General Fremont (if memory serves), There were several battles and other actions in the State. I visited the Lexington, MO battlefield this past Spring and there is a nice museum run by the State Parks System. Pilot Knob was another battlefield I have yet to get to and there were some actions in St. Louis as the Union Forces captured a Confederate Militia Camp in what is Mid Town St. Louis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Wasn't The Battle of the Hemp Bales fought in Lexington?
I recall hubby and I making our way back from NYC to Colorado on one of our trips - maybe 15 years ago. We stopped in Lexington and visited the battlefield. It was almost smack in the middle of an old residential area.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Yes, Lexington was the battle of the hemp bales
which was rather ingenious on the part of the folks the came up with the idea. Sure beats standing in line and swapping volleys. It was a Confederate Victory, but the pulled out a few weeks later and the Union forces took control of the town again shortly thereafter, so not much of a victory in the long run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Monkeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
11. I think it stayed in the Union But it did have Raiders
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Bushwhackers and Bald Knobbers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. The Missouri Government Then In Place, Sir, Did Attempt Secession
It did not join the Confederacy, however, the stated intention of the Governor at the time being independence entire. Federal forces mustered to the task, many of them German immigrants at St. Louis, quashed this quickly, and under martial law declared by Gen. Freemont the state remained in the Union. Gen. Freemont's declaration included an emancipation and other measures President Lincoln felt unwise at the time and place, and he was removed from command. A civil authority loyal to the Federal Union was established afterwards, though exactly when escapes my immediate recollection. The state remained a cockpit of guerrilla war throughout the conflict, distinguished by both the multiplicity of hostile factions, and the vicious conduct of participants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theophilus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
14. Missouri stayed in the union but a lot of men from Missouri joined
the Confederate cause. There was a ton of guerrilla action in Missouri. They had gotten a lot of experience in the "bleeding Kansas" debacle brought about by the concept of popular sovereignty.

Also, it has been strongly argued that guerrilla war was actually THE civil war in Arkansas. There were only a handful of set battles with many folks being killed by insurgents and guerrillas on both sides. Yes, Southerners were insurgents.

The Simpsons had a great quote about "respecting the flag"........one old dude said "that's the flag my great grandpappy rebelled against!" Time changes everything, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
15. The situation was rather complex
At the start of the war, Federal troops did ensure that the state remain in the Union, but a portion of the state government was pro-secession and organized its own militia, the Missouri State Guard, which was later taken into Confederate service. By 1862 Federal control of the state was pretty much assured; however it remained a scene of raids, guerrilla warfare, and banditry and murder carried out under the banner of war.

The regular representatives and senators of Missouri sat in the US Congress, while the Confederate Congress also recognized secessionist Missouri lawmakers, and Missouri troops fought on both sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Good answer
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the governor also support sucession, and supported the South during the Civil War.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Right, Gov. Claiborne Jackson was pro-seccession
The CSA Missouri government-in-exile ended up in Marshall, Texas by the end of the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Muchas gracias, señor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
18. Missouri was a border state
A slave state that did not secede. Also applied to Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware - and sort of West Virginia, which seceded from Virginia so as not to secede.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC