INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Com pany 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9325494 “War at every man’s door” : The struggle for East Tennessee, 1860—1869. (Volumes I and n) Fisher, Noel Charles, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1993 Copyright ©1993 by Fisher, Noel Charles. All rights reserved. UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 "WAR AT EVERY MAN’S DOOR": THE STRUGGLE FOR EAST TENNESSEE, 1860-1869 VOLUME I DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Noel C. Fisher, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1993 Dissertation Committee Approved by Allan R. Millett Joan E. Cashin Advisor Michael Les Benedict Department of History Copyright by Noel Charles Fisher 1993 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My list of debts to my advisor, Professor Allan Millett, is quite long, but I would particularly like to thank him for originally pointing me to this project, for making numerous suggestions that greatly increased my understanding of the East Teimessee war, and for encouraging me throughout the entire process. I would also like to thank Professor Joan Cashin for her close questioning of my analyses, her criticisms of style, and her valuable suggestions for further research. My thanks also go to Professor M. Les Benedict for his very helpful comments on Chapters II and VII and for his encouraging me to ask broader questions. There were many people who made the research for this project both fruitful and enjoyable. The staffs of the Tennessee State Library and Archives, the University of Tennessee Library, the McClung Collection, the Southern Historical Collection, the Perkins Library at Duke University, the North Carolina State Archives, the Military History Institute, the National Archives, the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, and the Federal Records Center in Atlanta were all knowledgeable, friendly, and remarkably efficient. The Alumni Research Fund of the Graduate School at The Ohio State University provided generous funds for travel and research. And Barb and Jerry Ryan made my stay at Durham, North Carolina unforgettably pleasant. My gratitude also goes to the people who encouraged me throughout this project. The Department of History, Ohio Wesleyan University, provided employment at a critical time, and Dr. Jan Hallenbeck, Dr. William Walker, Dr. Richard Spall, Dr. Deborah Van Broekhoven, and Ms. Carol Doubkin all took an interest in my work. Dr. Carl Beamer and Terry Beamer were the best of friends, and they also provided practical help, including the use of their extensive libraiy and aid with statistics. My deepest thanks are reserved for my wife, Angela, who traveled with me, aided me in my research, supported my work, and lived every day of this project. This dissertation is as much hers as mine. u VITA December 11, 1962 ........................................................Bom - Sidney, Nebraska 1985 ..........................................B.S., University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska 1987 .................. M.A. in History, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1986-1990 .................. Graduate Teaching Assistant, The Ohio State University 1991-1992 Instructor, Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio PUBLICATIONS ’“Prepare Uiem for My Coming’: General William T. Sherman, Total War, and Pacification in West Tennessee." Tennessee Historical Quarterly 51 (1992): 75-86. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: History Studies in American Military History - Dr. Allan Millett Nineteenth Century United States - Dr. Merton Dillon, Dr. Joan Cashin European Military History - Dr. Williamson Murray Nineteenth Century United States Diplomacy - Dr. Marvin Zahniser Sub-Saharan African History - Dr. Robert Baum 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................ii VITA .................................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................ v LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................vi INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1 CHAPTER PAGE I. "THE WHOLE COUNTRY IS NOW IN A STATE OF REBELLION"..................................................................13 II. "HEWERS OF WOOD AND DRAWERS OF WATER"... 69 in. "WAR AT EVERY MAN’S DOOR" ..................................... 129 IV. "THE LENIENCY SHOWN THEM HAS BEEN UNAVAILING"....................................................................196 V. "TO GUARD AGAINST REAL OR EVEN SUPPOSED DANGER".............................................................................259 VI. "I AM HEARTILY SICK OF EAST TENNESSEE"............328 IV LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. SECTIONAL COMPARISONS, TENNESSEE, 1860 ... 102 2. SECTIONAL DISTINCTIONS, TENNESSEE, 1860 ... 103 3. COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION...............................106 4. SINGLE REGRESSIONS, VOTE AGAINST SECESSION...........................................................................107 5. MULTIPLE REGRESSIONS, VOTE AGAINST SECESSION.......................................................................... 108 6. SINGLE REGRESSIONS, REGION AND ECONOMIC FACTORS........................................................................... 109 7. TROOP STRENGTHS, CONFEDERATE AND UNION, 1861-1865 ............................................................. 180 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. EAST TENNESSEE, 1860 .................................................... 16 2. LOCATION OF BRIDGES BURNED, NOVEMBER 8-9, 1860 .................................................................................. 52 3. UNION COUNTER-GUERRILLA OPERATIONS, OCTOBER 1864 .................................................................. 333 4. UNION COUNTER-GUERRILLA OPERATIONS, MAY 1865 ........................................................................... 334 5. UNION SUPPLY LINES, 1863-1865 .................................. 376 VI INTRODUCTION The national pattern of loyalties in the Civil War period presents a more complex picture than the simple divisions of North and South, Union and Confederate, Blue and Gray that are commonly employed. Both before and during the war there existed in the United States a wide belt of territory straddling the Mason-Dixon line in which the sectional alignment was blurred and political loyalties dangerously mixed. This divided region went beyond the border states and such well-known anomalies as West Virginia. Northern unity was threatened by strong Southern sympathies in the lower Midwest, while Confederate authority was challenged by pockets of Unionism in North Carolina, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee. The danger presented by these disaffected areas has sometimes been exaggerated, but disaffection was nonetheless significant on both sides. Under normal conditions even severe internal differences and divisions could be ignored, accommodated, or adjusted through the political system. But in a war that demanded unity and commitment such divisions were very dangerous. They hampered mobilization, obstructed the operations of the government, and sometimes flared up into overt rebellion. At the same time, the stresses of the war itself accentuated these differences and widened these divisions. 2 The most intractable bastions of Southern Unionism developed in the Appalachians, a region that diverged from the dominant Southern economic and social patterns. This area was characterized neither by the staple crop system of the lower South nor by the rich grain and livestock production of the upper South, and it participated only peripherally in the institution of slavery. These regions were by no means antislavery, and culturally they identified with the South. But neither economic ties, nor political arrangements, nor slaveholder hegemony, nor any other mechanism had integrated them into the Southern system. Furthermore, the