UNION CAUSE in KENTUCKY Captain Thomas Speed from a Phirtotjraph the UNION CAUSE in KENTUCKY

This page intentionally left blank. UNION CAUSE IN KENTUCKY Captain Thomas Speed From a phirtotjraph THE UNION CAUSE IN KENTUCKY i86o-i86'5 BY CAPTAIN THOMAS SPEED Adjutant'!4th'Kentucky Infantry and Veteran Infantry Vols. 1861-6$ Member of the American Historical Association Author of "The Wilderness Road," etc. G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS NEW YORK AND LONDON XTbe ftntclterbocfter press 1907 COPVIIICHT, 1907 BY 0. P. PUTNAM'S SONS Sbc tmicletbocltt 0ceM lum loct A FOREWORD BY JUSTICE HARLAN Published by permission of the writer WASHINOTOR, D. C, October 37, 1904. DEAR CAPTAIN SPEED: I have just concluded my final examination of the several articles prepared by you under the general title of "The Union Cause In Kentucky." They are to be cbmmerfded'for the fairness and fulness with which the facts are stated, as well as for the genuine patriotic spirit pervading them all. The Survivors of the struggle of 1861 in Kentucky, and equally their descendants, will wish these articles published Iii .book form, and that the book shall go into every library in the country. And they will, I am sure, feel grateful to you for having, after patient Investigation and great labor, brought together the facts connected with the defeat by the Kentucky Unionists of the attempt to ally our old State with the Southern Confederacy. No more valuable services were performed in the struggle to preserve the Union than were performed by the Union men of Kentucky. I make this statement without the slightest doubt of its accuracy. The country at lai|;e never has had an adequate conception of the sacrifices made and the work.done by the Union men of the Border Slave States. It is not too much to say that If the people of those States had been as favorable to secession as were the people of the Cotton States, it would, most probably, have been Impossible to prevent vi A Foreword b;^Ju3tictr Harlan the dissolution of the Union. No one, after reading what you have w.titltrn-'-^ertainiy ro one familiar with the situation as it was at the commencement of the seces sion movement—will fail to recognize the truth of this view. And yet a strenuous effort was made, after the close of the war, to minimize the work of the Unionists of the Border States, and to create the impression that what they did was not worth remembering, nor of any particular value to the country. I confidently assert that, after the flag was fired on at Sumter, a large major ity of the people of Kentucky were at all times for the maintenance of the Union and unalterably opposed to its disruption by secession. Kentucky was the first-born of the Union, and, despite the strong ties of kinship and business between them and the friends of secession, a large majority of its people held steadily to the view that if the Union ship went down, our State must be the last to desert it. That was the spirit In which the Kentucky" Unionists rallied to the standard of the country In 1861. While some did not approve. Indeed openly disapproved, many things done in the course of the war which were supposed injuriously to affect the Institution of slavery, the Kentucky Unionists, all of them, clung unfalteringly to fhe idea that the dissolution of the Union was not a remedy for any evil, and that, cost what it might in men and money, the national authority, as derived from the Constitution, must be reinstated over every foot of American soil. To say nothing of the colored men In Kentucky who were mustered into the service of the United States towards the close of the Civil War, it Is safe to say that the white men in Kentucky who openly and actively sided with the Union cause, and wore the uniform of Union soldiers, outnumbered, at least twice (I think three times), those who openly and actively sided with the Confederate cause. I observe that you call attention to certain statements A Forqword by Justice Harlan vii made after the war In a brief History of Kentucky as one of the American Commonwealths. Those statements were to the following effect: "The Confederacy received the youth and strength from the richest part of the Ken tucky soil. The so-called Blue Grass soil sent the greater, part of its men of the richer famUles Into the Confederate army, while the Union troops, though from all parts of the State, came in greatest abundance from those who dwelt on thinner soils. The Kentucky troops in the Confederate army being fewer In number, and from the richer part of the State, were, as a whole, a finer body of men than the Federal troops from the Commonwealth.'' These statements are akin to those sometimes heard In i{i6i, that the secession movement in Kentucky had the approval of the "gentlemen" and holders of property in that Commonwealth; that. In the main, the Union cause had the support only of those who had no special social standing and were not identified with the State by own ership of property to any great extent. Those who then lived In Kentucky and had a knowledge of its history and people are aware how reckless were and are all such statements. The Union leaders In Kentucky whose names are given In your book, and many others who might be named, constituted a body of men of whom It may justly be stated that, in respect of social standing, family history, character, education, and intellectual power, they could be favorably compared with any like number of men living at any time in any State of the Union. Many of them were born or were reared In counties popularly known as Blue Grass counties, while the others were, as Lincoln was, born or reared on "thinner soils." But, whatever the nature of the soil on which they were born or reared, they were of noble nature, gentlemen in the best sense of that word, and of the highest social position. No Intimation to the viii A Foreword by Justice Harlan contrary will be accepted astrue or just by any one who knew Kentucky and the Kentucky people of 1861. The same observations may be made in respect of the officers and soldiers who went into the Union army from Kentucky. A very large part—I will not say a majority —of the Kentucky Union officers and soldiers came from counties which, by reason of the richness of their soil, might be called Blue Grass counties—such as the counties of Jefferson, Shelby, Mason, Fleming, Fayette, Bourbon, Woodford, Scott, Harrison, Henry, Washington, Nelson, Marion, Jessamine, Mercer, Boyle, Clarke, Madison, Garrard, Warren, Logan, Christian, Barren, Todd, and Daviess. Undoubtedly the Confederate officers who went from Kentucky were men of high character and won distinction as commanders of troops. But they were of no higher character, certainly did not possess more skill, and did not win more renown than those who commanded Kentucky Union troops. The fact is, the Kentucky Union officers and soldiers and the Kentucky Confederate officers and soldiers were, as bodies of men, whether born on Blue Grass soU or on "thinner soils," the peers. In all respects, of the officers or soldiers of any army ever organized. As Kentuckians, we should be proud of the reputation both sides won in the Civil War for courage and fidelity to the cause each espoused. You have attempted to bring out the truth and the whole truth as to the contest of 1861 in Kentucky. And you have succeeded most admirably. By all means, my dear Captain, put what you have said^tn book form. Yours truly, JOHN M. HARLAN. Capt. THOMAS SPEED, LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. PREFACE T is the purpose of the author of this book to give a I narrative of the struggle of the Union men in the State of Kentucky to hold their State in the Union, when other States were seceding and strenupus efforts were made to carry Kentucky into the Southern' Confed eracy ; also to show what services were rendered by the Union soldiers of Kentucky in the Civil War. It is due to the Kentucky Unionists that such a narrative should be prepared and published. They performed a great work in their day for the Salvation and perpetuity of our national Union, which was not fully understood or appre ciated by many even at the time, and no effort has ever been made to create a better understanding. Histories of Kentucky have been written since the war, but in them injustice is done to the Kentucky Unionists both negatively and positively. They not only fail Jo recount matters richly deserving mention, but contain many misrepresentations. It is a remarkable fact that after the Union was restored the Union men of Kentucky refrained from writing about the events of the past. They were satisfied with the result. That was enough. They did not desire to recall and 'dwell upon the experiences through which they had passed. Therefore the story of their services has remained untold except in so far as it is found em bedded in the records of the war and scattered through many volumes, documents, and current publications of all descriptions, practically inaccessible to the general reader. X Preface Upon this point one of the most distinguished citizens of Kentucky has remarked that " the manner in which the Kentucky Unionists relegated the war into the past, immediately upon its close, is nothing less than a phenomenon. Nothing like it can be found in any history; When the great falct that the Union was preserved became a certainty, all tlie Union element in Kentucky, which preponderated during the conflict, controlling the State and serving magnificently on the field, at once ceased to talk or think of the war, and became from that time voiceless.

Load more