Civil War and Reconstruction in AlabamaFleming, Walter L. (Walter Lynwood)
History
Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama
Fleming, Walter L. (Walter Lynwood)
Alabama -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865; Reconstruction (U.S. history, 1865-1877) -- Alabama
On November 30, 1864, the Confederate "Deserter Book" showed that since
April, 1864, 7994 Alabama soldiers had deserted or been absent without
leave from the armies of the West and of Northern Virginia. Of these 4323
were again in the ranks, leaving still to be accounted for 3671 men. There
were many deserters in the hills of Alabama from the commands from other
states. After the fall of Atlanta, the number of stragglers and deserters
greatly increased, and late in 1864 it was estimated that 6000 of them
were in the state, some in every county; there being no longer a force to
drive them back to the army. For a year or more the force for this purpose
had been very weak.[296]
Much of the toryism and of the trouble resulting from it was due to the
weak policy of the Confederate authorities in dealing with discontent and
in protecting the loyal people in exposed districts. Many a man had to
desert in order to protect his family from outlaws, and was then easily
driven into toryism.
There was a mild annoyance of the more peaceable tories by the Confederate
officials in the spasmodic attempts to enforce the conscription laws, but
it amounted to very little. The loyal southern people suffered more from
the depredations of the disaffected "union" people of north and southeast
Alabama than the latter suffered from all causes combined. The state and
Confederate authorities were very lenient--too much so--in their treatment
of these people. There was no great need of a strong Confederate force in
north Alabama, since only raids, not invasions in force, were to be
feared; yet the governments--both state and Confederate--were guilty of
neglect in leaving so many of the people at the mercy of the outlaws when,
as shown in several instances, two or three thousand good soldiers could
march through the country and scatter the bands that infested it. Assuming
that the state had a right to demand obedience and support from its
citizens, it was weak and reprehensible conduct on the part of the
authorities to allow three or four thousand malcontents and outlaws to
demoralize a third of the state. Often the families of tories and
"mossbacks" were supplied from the state and county stores for the
destitute families of soldiers, while the men of such families were in the
Federal service or were hiding in the woods, caves, and ravines, or were
plundering the families of loyal soldiers. Not enough arrests were made,
and too many were released. The majority of the troublesome class was of
the kind who preferred to take no stand that incurred the fulfilment of
obligations. In an emergency they would incline toward the stronger side.
Prompt and rigorous measures, similar to the policy of the United States
in the Middle West, stringently maintained, would have converted this
source of weakness into a source of strength, or at least would have
rendered it harmless. The military resources of that section of the state
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account