Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas —A Biographical Dictionary Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas ii Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas —A Biographical Dictionary Frank Wilson Kiel Skyline Ranch Press Comfort, Texas 2013 iii Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas Copyright © 2013 Frank Wilson Kiel All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. First edition Skyline Ranch Press 133 Skyline Drive Comfort, Texas 78013 [email protected] Kiel, Frank Wilson 1930– Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas—A Biographical Dictionary vi 205 pp., including 10 tables. Bibliography, 183 references. 1. Civil War soldiers. 2. Kendall County, Texas. 920 CT93.K54 2013 Library of Congress Control Number 2013918956 ISBN 978–0–9834160–1–2 iv Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas Contents Preface Historiography……………………………………….2 Geography…………………………………………...3 Demography…………………………………………5 The Affair at the Nueces………………………….....6 Joining the Confederate forces………………………8 Letters and Pension Applications…………………..10 Methodology…………………………………….....10 Reconciliation…………………………………….. 17 Soldiers in military units………………………………….21 Tables 1. Sources………………………………………..153 2. Naturalizations………………………………..164 3. Eligible men and their units…………………..167 4. Losses………………………………................170 5. Wounded………………………………...……171 6. Prisoners………………………………...…….173 7. Unit affiliation………………………………...175 8. Death, Obituary, and Cemetery……………… 177 9. Tombstone inscriptions………………………. 192 10. Last soldiers and widows……………………...194 Bibliography………………………………...…………....195 v Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas vi Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas Preface Small towns in the Hill Country of Texas, such as Comfort and Boerne, have a reputation as strongholds of Union support in the Civil War. Comfort’s Treue der Union monument commemorates this heritage. Although this conventional belief reflects the winning side and its ability to characterize history, this may not have been the prevalent attitude of the German-Texans at the time. Loyalty to Texas and adherence to states-rights issues may have influenced some. For others, the dominant motive may have been a youthful urge for adventure and excitement. Or maybe just an opportunity to claim an enlistment bounty. “Rebel propensity” is a term attributable to Captain Charles E. Moore, U.S. Army, Secretary for Civil Affairs, Headquarters, 5th Military District, Austin. He certified and filed the 1867–1869 Texas Voter Registration from 130 then-existent Texas counties, verifying them on various dates in 1870. Most counties used the Remarks section mainly for race—colored or white, or to explain why certain individuals were excluded (“held political office for Confederacy,” “disloyal sentiment,” “less than 12 months in Texas,” “expressed contempt for Board,” “voted for secession.” John W. Evans of Blanco County had his name lined through for “having volunteered his services to shoot prisoners captured at the Nueces August 1862.” If the registered voter had moved out of the county or had died, this was noted under Remarks (Ramsdell 1910, 161–165, 190; Richter 1987, 104–108; Campbell 1997, 13–14). But the three registrars for Kendall County used the registration roster’s Remarks column differently and uniquely for the 234 men on the list. As usual, the Remarks column has the racial breakdown: 205 White and 29 Colored. Reasons for the excluded lined-through names were: 5 transferred to another county, 2 dead, and 1 registered by error; none were excluded because of previous office-holder status. The compilation mentions Confederate or Union military service, including whether Confederate service was “conscripted” (Seewald, Strachbein, Schwarz, Klappenbach, Haufler, Pfeiffer, Wittbold, Bergmann, Labhardt, Bechstadt, Pfeiffer) or “voluntary” (Wolf, Philip, Nowlin, Hodges, Giles, J. White, J. Rose, J. Nichols, Brown, G. Nichols, B. Rose, Wilson, T. Manning, J. Manning, Toler, Crews, Toepperwein, Spencer, S. White, Wilson), or “forced” (Adam, E. Pfeiffer, Spangenberg, Callahan). It further characterizes certain veterans as “Good Union man” (e. g., Ingenhuett, Meckel) or as having “Rebel propensities” (Giles, J. White, J. Manning, T. Manning, J. Nichols, J. H. Rose). [Compare this to the term “Unionist proclivities” quoted by Ramsdell that applied to certain post-war office holders in Palestine.] Why certain Confederate veterans were singled out for this tendency or inclination is now unknown. Of the 51 men who have military service listed, 35 were Confederate (11 conscripted, 20 voluntary, and 4 forced) and 16 Union. 1 Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas Fifteen of the Union men were local, only Atherton having served in an Ohio regiment. Five (Zoeller, Claus, two Beverdorfs, and Nickel) joined before the Battle of Gettysburg and the Battle of Vicksburg in July 1863, the others joining in November 1863 (Sansom) or in early 1864 (Bonnet, Sultenfuss, Beseler, Haufler, Short, Labhardt, Haag, Simon, and Nickel), after the aforementioned losses foretold the loss of the war by the Confederacy. That many men were conscripted does not necessarily connote a bad attitude toward the Confederacy. Certainly a few deserted from Confederate units, as did others from Union units. Most, however, stayed with their unit and performed their duty. Recall that the American victories in World War I and World War II were won by conscript forces, i.e., largely drafted men. Colonel Duff, much reviled in later years for his role in the Battle of the Nueces and his stern enforcement measures against Union sympathizers in the Hill Country, led the Confederate 33rd Cavalry Regiment. Of the various Confederate units which Hill Country men joined, Duff’s regiment was one that attracted many voluntary recruits to it. Historiography Historiography refers to a previous body of literature on a subject. Much is available. For example, in a long-lasting article in the Handbook of Texas Online, Rudolph L. Biesele (1886–1960) wrote, “The prevailing sentiment among the German settlers, however, was for the Confederacy” (Biesele 2012). Walter L. Buenger wrote, “The argument that the Union had decayed, backed up by the specific examples of northern attitudes toward slavery, Republican neglect of the frontier, Republican disregard for the law, and Republican fomenting of social discord, weakened attachments to the nation” (Buenger 1983, 173). T. R. Fehrenbach, after discussing the support of the majority of the Germans for their new state, summarized “The dissent of the foreign- born, out of loyalty to the Union and opposition to slavery, has always been exaggerated” (Fehrenbach 1968, 351). Minetta Altgelt Goyne wrote, “The ‘silent majority’ [of German-Texans] were loyal to Texas, whatever misgivings they may have had about its seceding from the Union” (Goyne 1982, ii). Walter D. Kamphoefner wrote, “In Kerr County, the German community around Comfort (soon to become Kendall County) voted nearly two-thirds against secession, actually a surprisingly small margin considering its subsequent resistance to the Confederate cause” (Kamphoefner 1999, 445). Ella Lonn wrote, “[Germans] had found a friendly reception and felt a moral obligation to rise to the defense of their new home. Business interests held many of them in the Confederacy until they were caught by the conscription net. Their entire material possessions, won by many years of labor, were in jeopardy” (Lonn 1940, 58). Jefferson Morgenthaler wrote, “The community around 2 Civil War Soldiers of Kendall County, Texas Comfort and Cypress Creek has long been considered a haven for freethinking, opposition to slavery and advocacy of Unionism. But in 1860 Kerr County there were 49 slaves owned by 11 people. Forty percent of the voters in Comfort’s precinct voted for secession, and that is probably a reasonable representation of the sentiment in the supposedly adamantly abolitionist community” (Morgenthaler 2007, 141). Guido E. Ransleben wrote, “A number of the early residents were actually in favor of seceding. This, however, was mainly prompted by a desire to adhere to states rights as guaranteed under the Constitution” (Ransleben 1974, 125). August Siemering in 1876 wrote, “One can, without fear of dispute, say that the Germans were Union men throughout all of the war. They remained so, and neither conscription nor persecution not the threat of death could swerve them from their loyalty to the Union.” But his editor Paul Burrier observed, “The view presented by Siemering that the German citizens were all Union men and refused to fight for the Confederacy is one of the myths portrayed by many historians and writers. There is no argument that as a group the Germans would have preferred for the South not to have seceded. However, once that occurred many Germans, just as did many Anglos, threw their support behind the Confederacy” (Siemering 2013, 21, 85). This study overlaps the ongoing project of Col. (Ret.) Paul Burrier, U.S. Army, which concentrates on individuals involved in the Battle of the Nueces and in the Unionist- Confederate unrest in the Texas Hill Country. His work, assembled in six volumes, one set of which is at the Comfort Heritage Foundation, provides greater genealogical information (family details, immigration and origin, censuses, and personal characteristics) and includes notable men who did not have active military service (Burrier 2000). This current study, in contrast, emphasizes original documents that support a man’s