Brother Against Brother; Or, The War on the Border — John Shaqi
Brother Against Brother; Or, The War on the BorderOptic, Oliver
History
Brother Against Brother; Or, The War on the Border
Optic, Oliver
United States -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865 -- Juvenile fiction
In Kentucky the wealthy planters and slaveholders, with many prominent
exceptions, were inclined to share the lot of the seceding States; but
the majority of the people still clung to the Union. Both sides of the
exciting question were largely represented, and the contest between them
was violent and bitter. For a time the specious compromise of neutrality
was regarded as the panacea for the troubles of the State by the less
violent of the people on both sides. Home Guards were enlisted and
organized to protect the territory from invasion by either the Federal
or the Confederate forces.
The occupation of Columbus and Hickman on the Mississippi River by
Southern troops, immediately followed by the taking of Paducah by
General Grant with two regiments of Union soldiers from Cairo,
practically dissolved the illusion of neutrality. The government at
Washington never recognized this makeshift of those who loved the Union,
but desired to protect slavery. It was honestly and sincerely cherished
by good men of both parties, who desired to preserve the Union and save
the State from the horrors of civil war.
The government did not regard the seceded States as so many independent
sovereignties, as the Secessionists claimed that they were, but as part
and parcel of a union of States forming one consolidated nation, with no
provision in its Constitution for a separation of any kind, or for the
withdrawal of one or more of the individual members of the Union. The
States which had pretended to dissolve their connection with the other
members of the compact were considered as refractory members of the
Union, in a state of insurrection against the sovereign authority of the
nation, who were to be reduced to obedience and subjection by force of
arms; for they had appealed to the logic of bayonets and cannon-balls in
carrying out their disruption.
With the duty of putting down the insurrection and subduing the
refractory elements in the South on its hands, the government could not
respect or even tolerate a neutrality which placed the State of
Kentucky, four hundred miles in extent from east to west, between the
loyal and the disloyal sections of its domain. If for no other purpose,
armies of Federal troops must cross the country south of the Ohio in
order to reach the seat of the Rebellion.
The Home Guards were powerless to prevent the passage of the loyal
armies through the State; and any attempt to do so would have been to
fight the battle of the Confederate armies, and would have at once
robbed neutrality of its transparent mask. A portion of these military
bodies were doubtless honest in their intentions. Those who were not for
the Union in this connection were practically against it. Later in the
course of events, the Home Guards were incorporated in the armies of the
Rebellion; and no doubt these organizations were used to a considerable
extent to recruit the forces of the enemy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account