This edition is published by PICKLE PARTNERS PUBLISHINGwww.pp-publishing.com
To join our mailing list for new titles or for issues with our books picklepublishing@gmail.com
Or on Facebook
Text originally published in 1934 under the same title.
Pickle Partners Publishing 2016, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted by any means, electrical, mechanical or otherwise without the written permission of the copyright holder.
Publishers Note
Although in most cases we have retained the Authors original spelling and grammar to authentically reproduce the work of the Author and the original intent of such material, some additional notes and clarifications have been added for the modern readers benefit.
We have also made every effort to include all maps and illustrations of the original edition the limitations of formatting do not allow of including larger maps, we will upload as many of these maps as possible.
DISLOYALTY IN THE CONFEDERACY
BY
GEORGIA LEE TATUM, PH.D.
PREFACE
THIS STUDY, prepared as a doctoral dissertation at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, is an attempt to portray the widespread disaffection in the Confederate States and the attempts, during the War between the States, to bring about peace. Until recently, many historians, as well as people in general, have commonly accepted the idea that every man, woman, and child in the South stood loyally behind Jefferson Davis and the Stars and Bars in support of the Confederacy. Despite the fact that out of a population of about eight million whites, six hundred thousand offered their services to the Confederacy in 1861, and also the fact that the staunch, unswerving loyalty of Southerners during the war will continue to rouse admiration, there was, in 1861, a small number, which by 1865 had increased to a potent minority, that did nothing to aid the Confederacy and much to injure it. While many showed their disaffection only by refusing to fight, many others organized not only for self-protection but also for the destruction of the Confederacy. Before the end of the war, there was much disaffection in every state, and many of the disloyal had formed into bandsin some states into well organized, active societies, with signs, oaths, grips, and passwords. In the present study, an attempt has been made to discover the causes for this movement, the classes that participated in it, and the purpose and work of the organizations.
The writer realizes the difficulties involved in the use of the words disloyal and disloyalty. She is fully aware of the fact that what one section of the country execrated as disloyalty, another section of the country praised as loyalty. She found in her sources, both primary and secondary, innumerable instances of warring points of view; of diametrically opposite terms applied to the same phenomenon; of violently contrasting motives imputed to the same act. In the interests of directness and clarity, the following usage was decided upon: the term disloyal is applied to persons living in the Confederacy, who not only refused to support the Confederate government but who also appeared to be actively working against it. The term disaffection is used more broadly to characterize those who, though opposed to the Confederacy, were, on the whole, passive. The term unionist is applied, as it was in certain sources, to those who, like many of the East Tennesseans, were from the first strong advocates of the Union. If at times such unionists have been characterized as disloyal, it has been done because they were overwhelmingly regarded as disloyal by the members of their community, and were so unequivocally characterized as disloyal in the sources consulted that any attempt to determine allegiance seemed likely to cause further confusion.
No reflection is meant to be cast upon anyone who either passively or actively supported the Union; but it is hoped that the study will help to dispel the false idea that the inhabitants of the seceded states were a unit in supporting the Lost Cause.
Louisiana has not been included in this study because it fell into the hands of the Federals in the second year of the war and was practically lost to the Confederacy. It is a question whether Tennessee, especially East Tennessee, should have been included. But despite the facts that a majority of East Tennesseans never favored secession, that many of their leaders openly declared for the Union and consistently supported it throughout the war, and that the Confederate government in the state collapsed in 1862, it has been included, because the state did secede and because the strategic location of so large a group of Union sympathizers certainly weakened the Confederacy. Furthermore, some of the unionists in that section professed loyalty to the Confederacy but worked secretly for its downfallan example of the difficulties involved in characterizing such people accurately.
In view of the almost insoluble complexities of the subject, and its powerful emotional connotations, the author has been content to present the facts as she found them and to leave conclusions to the reader.
The principal materials used in the study were the official records of the Union and Confederate armies; diaries, memoirs, and reminiscences of participants in the War between the States; biographies and general and special accounts of the period. An examination of Mississippi newspaper files disclosed the fact that the type of material sought could not be found in newspapers.
I desire to express my appreciation to the following libraries for the use of their various collections: Library of the State of Tennessee, The Tennessee Historical Society Library, The George Peabody College Library, and the Carnegie Library, Nashville, Tennessee; The Mississippi State Library and the Department of Archives and History, Jackson, Mississippi; the D. A. R. Library, Cleveland, Mississippi; and especially to Vanderbilt University Library and its staff for much help and many courtesies extended to me during my work there.
I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness and to express my deep sense of gratitude to Professor Frank L. Owsley, of Vanderbilt University, who first interested me in this subject and who has given generously of his time in directing, criticizing, and encouraging me in research and writing; to the late Professor Walter L. Fleming, of Vanderbilt University, who, in the absence of Professor Owsley, directed this study for one year and was always ready to offer criticism and encouragement; to Professor W. C. Binkley, of Vanderbilt University, who read the manuscript and proposed valuable suggestions as to organization and arrangement of material; to Professor E. M. Violette, of Louisiana State University; to Professor Evelyn Hammett, of Mississippi Delta State Teachers College, and to other friends who read the manuscript and offered helpful criticisms.
GEORGIA LEE TATUM
Mississippi Delta State Teachers College
Cleveland , Mississippi
March , 1934
