Q & A: PRICE'S LOST CAMPAIGN by Mark A. Lause

By Sara L. Deters

As a history major at the University of Missouri, I've always hoped that Missouri's history would deservedly receive more attention. Mark A. Lause, author of Price's Lost Campaign: The 1864 Invasion of Missouri does just that by exploring the largely ignored events that took place in Missouri during the Civil War. Focused around one military general, Sterling Price, Price's Lost Campaign describes the unsuccessful military raid in Missouri of 1864. Emphasizing guerrilla warfare and how that brutality shaped the political elections in Missouri during 1864 provides cultural as well as political history for the readers out there interested in more than just warfare history. 

What prompted you to write about the military campaign in Missouri?

Most of what’s written on the Civil War in Missouri has focused on the early days - before the Federal authorities secured their hold on the state - or on the colorful and violent events of the guerilla war in the state. 

Although I’ve always had an interest in the 1864 Missouri campaign, I didn’t pursue it seriously until after writing the book Race and Radicalism in the Union Army, which focused on the efforts of John Brown’s surviving followers to build a tri-racial Federal army in the Indian Territory--present Oklahoma.  It isn’t surprising that such a prospect did not please the Confederates at all, but I was surprised at the extent to which the Federal authorities did everything they could to divert it, drain it of resources, and even to line their pockets from the artificial misfortune imposed upon the project.  By the conclusion of that book, I had a very different and much dimmer view of the prospects for a real Reconstruction after the war.

Missouri troops and events in Missouri generally figured heavily in those operations.  At one point, for example, the Indian brigade essentially took over Neosho as a base--the place had been essentially abandoned.  And the fact that the Confederate army ended the 1864 campaign by retreating south right past a Union Indian brigade rendered helpless by Federal policies seemed to require another look at the movements of Price’s Army and his pursuers.

You say that your grandmother passed down stories of her grandfathers witnessing and participating in the 1864 campaign. Any stories you wish to share?

Both of her grandfathers and several great uncles were in the Enrolled Missouri Militia.  However, their wives and children may have seen more of this campaign than they did.  Riders went along those country roads warning that Confederate columns were on the way and everybody grabbed what they could and headed out across the fields into the woods.  They stayed there for several days.  Most of their houses were robbed of anything not nailed down and vandalized. 

The Federal Department of Missouri later made a great issue about the cold-blooded murder of Major James Wilson and his men outside of Union, Missouri.  This was a truly horrific act, but there was no mention of the murder of captured members of the militia the same day only a few miles away, or the previous day in Union, or in the other days before and after Wilson’s murder. The killing of Union soldiers, militia or civilians that fell into Confederate hands was a daily occurrence. 

And, yes, it went the other way, too, though never to the same extent.  

Why did the Federals call Price’s army a “raid” instead of a “campaign?”

The book argues that the Confederates planned the operation as an invasion to reoccupy as much of Missouri as they could on the eve of the 1864 presidential elections.  This included taking St. Louis and/or Jefferson City.  Union Generals William S. Rosecrans and Alfred Pleasanton, though, did not think that the Confederacy had that much life left in it, and originally thought that reports of Price’s presence with a large army represented a panicked response to a mere raid with no more than a few thousand men or less.  They staked everything on this mistaken assessment. 

Notwithstanding the stories later told that Pilot Knob alerted St. Louis to the danger and inspired Rosecrans to mobilize the population in the city’s defense. In fact, Rosecrans and his staff did not really mobilize city’s militia and continued to discuss this is a “raid,” almost until the Confederate advance probed the borders of St. Louis county on September 30.  Among other things, Price’s decision not to attack St. Louis permitted the Federals to continue to speak disparagingly of the operation as “a raid.”

A few days later, after Price again decided not to attack a strategic objective at Jefferson City.  Thereafter, Confederate goals centered on the idea of supporting themselves as long as possible in Missouri.  Indeed, the campaign proved to be such a dismal failure that Price and his staff increasingly preferred to have their achievements viewed in terms of a “raid.”    By the original standards, there was no seizure and occupation of St. Louis or Jefferson City, but nabbing dozens of farm wagons as you pass through Saline County might make a raid successful. 

What can we learn about Missouri’s role in the Civil War from Price’s Lost Campaign?

I hope that readers of the book will realize that historians have been making choices about what priorities to place on aspects of the Civil War.  The sectional tensions between the east and west, perhaps, were secondary only to those between the North and the South.  And sectional tensions represent a gross oversimplification.  The Civil War pit two different ways of seeing America’s future against each other, but there were also many variations in those aspirations, especially on the most complex side of the war. 

What was the most fascinating part for you during your research?

What always amazes me in doing historical research is the extent to which we can actually probe the experience of the rank and file--the soldiers, militia, and civilians touched by the war.   Part of this is has to do with new technologies, such as the digitalization of newspapers, military records, and even some manuscript collections. 

When they digitized the Official Records some years ago, I remember saying that this would probably enable critical researchers to start putting some holes into the often conflicting information contained in them.  That process has started.  I hope that, in a way, Price’s Lost Campaign and the forthcoming Collapse of Price’s Raid will be able to contribute to this.

Any other projects currently in the works?

I have several books already on the way to press, including The Collapse of Price’s Raid: The Beginning of the End in Civil War Missouri (University of Missouri Press), Free Labor: the Civil War and the Making of the American Working Class and a book on the politics of spiritualism in the Civil War years.  I am also finishing a book that grew out of what I learned in the Trans-Mississippi Civil War and applies it to the Franco-Prussian War, tentatively entitled The Last Republicans.  I have started another on political violence in the Wild West, aimed at the role of violence in reconstructing and imposing the two-party system.

Author Spotlight, Robert C. Plumb

Your Brother in Arms by Robert C. Plumb

George P. McClelland, a member of the 155^th Pennsylvania Infantry, witnessed some of the Civil War's most pivotal battles. Never before published, McClelland's letters to his family offer fresh insights into camp life, battlefield conditions, perceptions of key leaders, and the mindset of a young man who faced the prospect of death nearly every day of his service. Plumb expounds on McClelland's words by placing the events in context and illuminating the collective forces at play in each account, adding a historical outlook to the raw voice of a young soldier.

Q: How did you obtain the letters that are in the book?  Are they family letters?

The McClelland letters came to me from a relative of my wife.  Her uncle purchased the 42 letters and photographs of McClelland from a Civil War ephemera dealer during the Civil War Centennial in the late 1960’s.  When the uncle passed away in the early 1990’s, his widow gave the letters and photos to me. So the letters are, in a sense, “family letters,” but McClelland is not a relative.  Nothing had been done with the letters until I began transcribing them in 2005.  And that’s when this soldier’s fascinating story began to unfold.

Q: A lot has been written about the Civil War, including compilations of letters.  What new information does your book offer to readers?

It’s certainly true that more books have been written about the Civil War than any other subject in the American experience, including some excellent books based on diaries and letters.  Your Brother in Arms, however, is a singular contribution to the body of non-fiction work covering the Civil War.  First, the letters cover a broad timeframe – the Army of the Potomac from summer 1862 to spring 1865, a critical period in the war.  And McClelland’s letters are exquisitely written and hold up well for the 21^st century reader.  Finally, I have written contextual narrative to accompany the letters so that the general reader has some historical guideposts to better understand the environment in which McClelland was operating as he was writing his letters.  The eminent Civil War historian Drew Gilpin Faust has said: “War cannot be understood or communicated as a grand panorama.  It is real only in the context of individual lives and deaths.”  The new information for readers is the fresh perspective that the individual life of George McClelland brings to our understanding of a war that was fought 150 years ago.

Q: What went into your work in writing the narrative that surrounds McClelland’s letters?

Military records from the Civil War are very well preserved and relatively easy to access.  I spent a lot of time pouring over McClelland’s service, medical and pension records at the National Archives in Washington, DC.  And I was able to pull a tremendous amount of information from these very complete records.  I spent time in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Davenport, Iowa exploring McClelland’s pre- and post-war life.  During the course of my research, I walked the battlefields where McClelland and his unit fought.  All of these battlefields have been saved from development so that I was able to walk in McClelland’s footsteps without having to detour around a big box store or a housing development. I was also fortunate to spend time with some of our country’s most knowledgeable Civil War historians and battlefield guides to get information first-hand.

Q: Did your own military experience inform your writing about McClelland?

From a macro sense, I think there are shared experiences for anyone who has served in a theatre of combat regardless of whether it’s 1863 at Gettysburg, 1968 in the Mekong Delta, or 2011 in Kandahar, Afghanistan.  The appreciation of correspondence from loved ones at home; a deep sense of responsibility for one’s comrades in arms; and an acute awareness of one’s own mortality -- all these transcend time and place.  Today soldiers write home using e-mail, enjoy vastly better diets and have the benefit of some very sophisticated medical treatment – but the fundamental experiences of a military person in a combat zone are universal and timeless. These overarching aspects of combat did help my understanding of what McClelland was going through as I researched and wrote the narrative material in the book. 

Q: What would you like readers to take away from this book?

I think my answer – or rather answers – depend on the reader.  I hope the general adult reader better understands what the men who fought at well-known battles, such as Gettysburg and Chancellorsville, were facing and thinking.  Short of being there or watching a film of battle -- both of which are impossible when we study the Civil War today – the articulate and descriptive letters from soldiers are the next best thing.  I hope the young reader comes away with an understanding and appreciation of a teenager who went off to serve in one of America’s bloodiest wars and conducted himself with honor and bravery under the most difficult of circumstances.  For Civil War buffs I hope that they get a fresh perspective on the conduct of the war that either confirms their thinking or challenges what they have learned to date and gives them an opportunity to reflect again on this event in American history that is so important to them.

Author Spotlight: Richard A. Sauers

The Fishing Creek Confederacy by Robert A. Sauers and Peter Tomasak

One hundred fifty years after the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln is thought of as one of the best presidents of the United States. However, most Americans forget that he was elected with only 40 percent of the popular vote. Many Democratic newspapers across the North mistrusted Lincoln's claim that he would not abolish slavery, and the lukewarm support evidenced by them collapsed after Lincoln announced his preliminary Emancipation Proclamation in the fall of 1862. The advent of a national draft in the spring of 1863 only added fuel to the fire with anti-Lincoln Democrats arguing that it was illegal to draft civilians. Many newspaper editors advocated active resistance against the draft. In The Fishing Creek Confederacy, Richard A. Sauers and Peter Tomasak address the serious opposition to the draft in Columbia County, Pennsylvania, in 1864. 

 

Q: What inspired you to write this book?
Primarily the story itself, which has never been analyzed and described as we have in this book. There are too many books on battles such as Gettysburg and not enough on the homefront, and even Civil War buffs seem to forget that not all the history of this war was on the battlefields.

 Q: The focus of this book is in Columbia County, Pennsylvania in 1864. Are there any plans to create a larger work encompassing a national Civil War draft sentiment?
No. The research on such a topic would take years to do a thorough job, which would include a close reading of local newspapers all over the North, as well as a deep mining of largely unused record groups in the National Archives, including NA branches across the North.

Q: Was the trial and jail-time you observed in Columbia County similar to what was going on in other parts of the country at that time?
In some places yes. Because Lincoln had suspended the writ of habeas corpus, a lot of anti-war, anti-administration people had been arrested and locked up. Military trials were eventually judged illegal, but not until after a number of them had taken place.

Q: How difficult was it to resist the draft back then or were there other extenuating circumstances that led to draft dodging charges?
Because of the lack of a modern transportation system, and the rural landscapes that predominated, it was easy to evade the draft if one was so disposed, especially in an area like northern Columbia County, where the bulk of the population were anti-Republican, coupled with the two Democratic newspaper editors who fed into this political stance.

Q: There are large communities of people in the United States that are really passionate about Civil War history. What makes the Civil War so appealing to so many of us?
It appeals to many people because their ancestors were involved in some way during the conflict. The war was the single most important event in our history after our independence, primarily because that war in some ways unified the country and started the United States on the path to be a much greater world power than would have been possible before 1861. As a long time reenactor, I've seen the passion that the Civil War brings out in people. The war feeds into the economy in so many ways—books and magazines, historical tours, reenacting events and the supply industry catering to reenactors, educational programs and lectures, etc.--especially now during the 150th anniversary events.

Q: What are your thoughts on the Emancipation Proclamation turning 150 this year?
The EP and the Thirteenth Amendment combined to destroy slavery in the United States, which put an official end to the conundrum caused by the Constitution's guarantee of equal rights and the inequality that actually existed in daily life. However, the Republican Party abandoned blacks after the war and a de facto form of slavery continued to exist and in some form continues today. The Civil Rights movement of the 1950s-60s helped destroy much of this, but latent racism continues to plague the United States. A lot of the criticism leveled at President Obama is outright racism.

Q: What will the next book be about and when can we expect to read it?
My next book is a long way from publication. I am working on a history of my hometown, Lewisburg, PA, and will not finish this for many years since I am reading all available newspapers on microfilm and taking copious notes. I have another idea for a book that will also take some time. I collect high school American History books, and have a large collection dating from the 1820s to the present. I'm planning to write a book on how history has changed in the textbooks, using a topical approach—Revolution, Civil War, women, the West, etc. to show how changing times lead to changing visions and interpretations of the past.

Shades of Blue and Gray, Part IV

by Pamela Chase Hain and Robert C. Plumb

This is the fourth installment in a series of posts about the Civil War experience from the perspective of two soldiers, George McClelland from the Union and Thomas Wragg from the Confederacy. Click here to read Part I and Part II and Part III.

What role did letter writing and other forms of communications play during the war to keep families and friends informed?

Blue - George McClelland

Certainly the central method of communicating for George McClelland during his service in the Army of the Potomac was letter writing – letters to and from his family.  Based on his letters, it seems that George was never satisfied with the volume of mail that he received.  “I now write again to you hoping and praying that this will provoke a reply.  It is almost three weeks since I left home and nothing from my friends – everybody else is getting letters and papers and I get – nothing.  It is discouraging, very.”  Battlefield near Sharpsburg, September 20, 1862.

George was not alone in his hunger for communications from home. “We are aroused from our lethargy by the cry: ‘The mail has come.’ We crowd around expectant, waiting for the names to be called.  Some got half a dozen, others more.” Camp near Sharpsburg, September 30, 1862.

Letters weren’t the only form of communications that George relied on for information.  Newspapers – sent by his sisters – were another important medium for him.  “About papers – I have never got any from you [Lizzie].  I think a good many papers are ‘cabbaged’ on their way at the different headquarters from Corps to Regimental.” Falmouth, Virginia, March 19, 1863.

He may have been the exception among his fellow enlisted ranks, but George was a voracious reader of books and magazines in addition to newspapers.  In an April 12, 1864 letter he mentions reading the Atlantic Monthly magazine as well as books. (e.g. The Bible, Hawthorne’s Marble Fawn, and Soundings from the Atlantic by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Senior.)

In addition to inbound communications, McClelland’s regiment had an “embedded journalist” in George P. Fulton.  Fulton, a quartermaster clerk, sent periodic field reports on the 155^th Regiment to the Pittsburgh Chronicle.

Gray - Thomas Wragg

Prior to the Battle of Bull Run in June and July 1861, Thomas Wragg was regularly exchanging letters with his family and expected them to answer promptly. He wrote to his father, his brother, Mac, his sisters, Jesse and Caro, and his brother-in-law.. By July, however, he told his father to send him money in silver to pay for postage, and to send the money to H. M. Brant President Bank of the Valley, Winchester, Virginia or to Col. Bartow since "Johnson Younger and Otey" kept the letters addressed to him for weeks before sending them on, and had lost mail containing money. [July, 1861] In addition to the difficulty of getting stamps, was the scarcity of materials--paper and pens.

Wragg obtained news from home mainly from his father. Concerning the war effort, much of what he heard was rumor, spread by the troops and rarely newspapers. During his Civil War Military service, Wragg never spoke of reading for pleasure or for news of the war.

After Wragg joined the Confederate Navy with the Savannah Squadron and was captured by the Union Weehawken in Savannah Harbor and sent to Fort Warren Prison in Boston Harbor, his letters to and from home became even more a necessity. He wrote his father that it was his only pleasure to receive letters from home [November 17, 1863]. On another occasion he wrote his father that he had not received any letters from anyone in two months [January 21, 1864]. This was the beginning of a slow decline in letters from home. It appears that the family was tiring of writing to him when they could not see him and his incarceration went on and on. He also apologized to his father that there was nothing to write about, and that his letters must be boring.  His girl friend from prior to the war ceased to write although he prodded his sister to persuade her to write him. He told his father he had written to her three times and she had not answered [February 5, 1864] He then complained that his sister Jesse had not written to him in a long time [March 4, 1864]. One person he regularly wrote to, was Capt. A. F. Butler, imprisoned at Fort Johnson. Both men had plenty of time on their hands to do so, and the authorities had no objections to it.

What changes in morale did the Union and Confederate soldiers/sailors experience during the war?

Blue - George McClelland

In commenting about those who served in the Civil War, historian James McPherson has written:  “Victory in battle pumped up their internal morale and gave them a more positive attitude toward the next battle; defeat lowered morale and caused many soldiers to wonder whether it was worthwhile to continue risking their lives.”

For the Army of the Potomac, victories and defeats were a roller coaster ride from 1862 to the close of 1864.  George McClelland would not have used the word “morale” in describing his state of mind, but his reflections following the Battle of Fredericksburg convey a low point in his spirits: “The tide of war rolls from east to west, and the minds of the people are no sooner allayed, when they are again startled by another scene of blood.  When will the carnage cease?” Falmouth, Virginia, January 10, 1863.

Following the Union victory at Gettysburg, the pendulum had swung in the opposite direction for McClelland. “Our successes in every other part of Rebeldom give us heart, nerves us to finish this intestine strife.”  Near Warrenton, Virginia, July 31, 1863.

By spring 1864, the prospect of victory was once again in question for McClelland and this dampened his spirit. “The campaign has opened inauspiciously for us. The news of Bank’s defeat comes like lightning on the fiendish massacre at Fort Pillow.  And I am not very sanguine of the victory here in Virginia.” Warrenton Junction, Virginia, April 23, 1864.

By late summer 1864, McClelland spirit was buoyed by the addition of more men and Grant’s determined, focused assault against the Confederates. “In a very short time you may expect to hear stirring news from this Region.  The reinforcements are only now beginning to come … [T]he men are arriving 1,000 per day and before a month, we assume again the offensive; 100,000 men now would terminate the war in 60 days – Grant has said it.  I am full of confidence that my prophecy will prove correct.”  Near Weldon Rail Road, Virginia, September 4, 1864.

Through the close of 1864 and into the spring of 1865, McClelland maintained a high level of optimism that the Union cause would prevail and victory won. This perception positively affected his spirit.  The underpinning of this attitude was his first-hand observation of Confederate soldiers. “Four deserters came in on my line and they confirmed the status told by others that Lee’s army is in a desperate condition, almost open mutiny, mutterings – not loud, but deep and wide spread – of a hopeless cause … The final crush of the reeling Confederacy is at hand.” Hatcher’s Run, Virginia, March 15, 1865.

Clearly, morale was a dynamic quality that tracked closely with the successes experienced on the battlefield, as James McPherson has stated.  Further influencing George McClelland’s morale was his confidence – or lack thereof – in his commanding general.

Gray - Thomas Wragg

Thomas Wragg began the war in high spirits. His mood slowly declined when the Confederate Army failed to feed or clothe him on a regular basis. Early in the War the Confederate leadership were not prepared to handle the logistics of the War. Yet, after the first battle of Bull Run and the rout of the Federal Forces, spirits were extremely high, both among the troops and with the populous at home, as evidenced by Thomas Wragg's uncle in his letter on July 22 to Wragg's father. In spite of the grief over casualties, the exultant swagger of Dr. William Wragg over their victory in battle, demonstrates their determination to continue the fight. When Wragg was in the hospital in Richmond with dysentery in the spring of 1862, he was eager to re-join his unit [March 4, 1862]. However, he expressed pleasure that his father was going to try to get him a commission. Presumably he had come to the conclusion, that if he remained in the infantry, it would be better as an officer. Yet, when he eventually returned home to Savannah in the Fall of 1862, he visited Laurel Grove Cemetery and revealed a profound grief over the loss of his fellow soldiers who were killed at the first Battle of Bull Run, and an almost death wish. When he saw the grave of a little child he wrote: "Fare the well, little sleeper. I only envy your place."

If Wragg's morale was low when he left the infantry, it would sink even lower as a POW in Fort Warren, Boston Harbor. Although Fort Warren was a prison for officers, it was still austere and stressful. When the officers of the CSS Atlanta first arrived, they were treated kindly and had more freedom. Then in December 1863 a new commandant arrived and tightened the rules: no newspapers, alcohol, roaming the island were allowed. Their rations were strictly measured. In the day, "the prisoners were allowed to take exercise on the pavements in front of their quarters, but after dark they were locked in the casemates and guards were placed in front of their doors." They were given only one blanket for warmth at night, and this was in a fort with stone walls located in the middle of Boston Harbor. This, coupled with the sense that all his friends and family were deserting him and that he might never receive an exchange--resulted in a steep drop in his morale. 

Shades of Blue and Gray, Part III

by Pamela Chase Hain and Robert C. Plumb

This is the third installment in a series of posts about the Civil War experience from the perspective of two soldiers, George McClelland from the Union and Thomas Wragg from the Confederacy. Click here to read Part I and Part II.

What were their living conditions?

Blue - George McClelland

Much of George McClelland’s time while serving with the 155th Pennsylvania was spent on the march. Consequently, living conditions during those times of being mobile were difficult and, at times, unhealthy. Tents provided the shelter when available and sleep was taken on the bare ground with a blanket for cover. “[A]ll we want are tents of some kind to protect us from the weather.” (September 30, 1862)

“It commenced raining and has rained ever since. No shelter and it is enough to kill every man in the Regiment … Friday night it rained all night and I lay in it ‘til morning, soaking wet and a cold wind blowing.” (October 14, 1862)

The situation changed significantly when the Army of the Potomac went into winter encampment. “My present residence is composed of logs built up about four feet from the ground, two shelter tents on top. It is 11 feet long in the inside and six feet wide. Then in one end there is a three-cornered fireplace, while a bunk in the other end …. The winter is upon us. It is cold, bitter cold (that is outside.) It’s pretty comfortable where I’m sitting now.” (December 19, 1863)

When Grant took command as general in chief, snug, permanent winter encampments became a thing of the past. The Army of the Potomac was kept on the move and George McClelland was feeling the effects of temporary shelter as the weather turned cold. “We are now turned out of house and home in the dead of winter (and real winter it is), compelled to build huts again in our new position near Hatcher’s Run. My fingers are stiff with cold – I sigh in vain for my cozy little hut with the alcove that I shall see no more forever.” (February 15, 1865)

Gray - Thomas Wragg

During Thomas Wragg 's first summer in the Confederate Infantry, sleeping outside would not have been too unbearable. The northern Virginia climate in June through August would have been warm enough for a single blanket at night. As the weather turned colder, Wragg began to ask his family for an extra blanket, as the Confederate Army did not provide one. By 26 December 1861, however, he complained that the weather was turning cold and their thin tents left them very uncomfortable "although most of us have fireplaces built out of sod." At the time, it had snowed only a little, but he was expecting more. He told his father that the regiment had spent a little more than a week preparing to go into winter quarters by cutting down trees to build six "houses," or as he added, "in other words stables" as they only had a slant roof and no flooring. Each company would have six houses for 12 men each. Wragg feared that with so many men crowded together there would be a great deal of sickness. As it turned out, he was right, and he himself was a victim--not of upper respiratory infection but of dysentery. It landed Wragg in a hospital in Richmond in March, 1862. He had already been sick since December and would be granted a leave of absence until May. Again in November and December 1862 he was reported to be "absent, sick".

Instead of returning to the 8th Georgia Regiment in December, he joined the Confederate Navy--the Savannah Squadron. Since his home was Savannah, it is possible he lived at home during his training in ordnance and gunnery on the ironclad ship, the CSS Georgia. It was common practice for the men and officers assigned to ironclads to sleep outside the ship. An ironclad in the summer in the South would have been like an oven, and extremely unbearable at night.