Illinois in the Civil War

Illinois in the Civil War

During the Civil War, the State of Illinois ranked 4th (behind New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio) in total soldiers serving in the Union military.

to the 1860 U.S. census, Illinois, a free state, had a population of 1,711,951. During the conflict, 256,297 Illinois men served in the Union army and as a result the state suffered 34,834 killed and several thousands more wounded. According to The Union Army, "the losses among the Illinois troops, the computation being made on the basis of the whole number of men furnished by the state, one in 20 was killed in battle or died of wounds; one in 11.2 died of disease."

During the American Civil War (1861-1865), Illinois was a major source for troops (particularly for those armies serving in the Western Theater of the Civil War), military supplies, food and clothing for the Union Army. Situated near major rivers and railroads, Illinois was a vital region early in the war for Ulysses S. Grant's efforts to seize control of the Mississippi and Tennessee rivers. Illinoisans in various factories and mills, as well as the port and stockyards, helped provide a steady source of materiel, food, and clothing to the Union war effort. Mound City foundry workers converted river steamboats into armored gunboats for Federal service. With traditional Southern markets cut off by the war, the port of Chicago rose in prominence as Illinois expanded trade with the Great Lakes region.

Beginning with Illinois resident President Lincoln's initial call for troops, the state mustered 150 infantry regiments, which were numbered from the 7th Illinois to the 156th Illinois. Seventeen cavalry regiments were also mustered, as well as two light artillery regiments. Although there was a high response to the voluntary calls to arms, the military draft was a factor in supplying manpower to Illinois regiments late in the war. Illinois troops fought predominantly in the Western Theater, although a few regiments played important roles in the East, particularly in the Army of the Potomac. Several thousand Illinoisans were killed or died of their wounds during the war, and a number of national cemeteries were established in Illinois to bury their remains.

There were no Civil War battles fought in Illinois, but Cairo, at the juncture of the Ohio River with the Mississippi River, became an important Union supply base, protected by Camp Defiance. Other major supply depots were located at Mound City and across the Ohio River at Fort Anderson in Paducah, Kentucky, along with sprawling facilities for the United States Navy gunboats and associated river fleets. One of which would take part in the nearby Battle of Lucas Bend.

Leading major generals with Illinois ties included Ulysses S. Grant, John Buford, John Pope, John M. Schofield, John A. Logan, John A. McClernand, Benjamin Prentiss and Stephen Hurlbut. Brigadier General Elon J. Farnsworth, who began his career in the 8th Illinois Cavalry, died at the Battle of Gettysburg. President Lincoln maintained his home in Springfield, Illinois, where he is buried. More than 100 soldiers from Illinois units would be awarded the Medal of Honor during the conflict.

The Union Army states," The splendid record made by the volunteers from Illinois could not have been accomplished, however, but for their gallant and able leadership. The state gave to the nation and the world not only the illustrious Lincoln, but the great commander-in-chief, Gen. Grant, who led her armed hosts to final victory. Eleven other major-generals of volunteers were credited to Illinois, namely: John Pope, John A. McClernand, Stephen A. Hurlbut, Benjamin M. Prentiss, John M. Palmer, Richard J. Oglesby, John A. Logan, John M. Schofield, Napoleon B. Buford, Wesley Merritt, Benjamin H. Grierson and Giles A. Smith. Twenty of those who started out as commanders of regiments were promoted to brevet major-generalship; 53 — excluding those named above — rose to be brigadier-generals, and 120 attained the rank of brevet brigadier-generals. The state was equally well served by the staff officers and aides-de-camp appointed therefrom, headed by the brave and efficient Gen. John A. Rawlins."

Throughout the Civil War the Republicans were in control, under the firm leadership of Governor Richard Yates. The Democrats, however, had a strong Copperhead element that opposed the war and tried in local areas to disrupt the draft. In Chicago, Wilbur F. Storey made his Democratic newspaper the Chicago Times into Lincoln's most vituperative enemy. See also Illinois and the Civil War (1861-1865).

The Free-Soil Party: The Forgotten Free-Soilers

Free-Soilers and the American Civil War

 

Their opponents, called Free Soilers, countered with their own election. They drew up a constitution that outlawed slavery -- though it also barred black settlement -- and then applied for admission to the Union as a free state. Kansas now had two governments -- and its people were about to go to war with one another.

 

The Free Soil Party 

     The Free Soil Party was a short-lived political party in the United States at the end of the Second Party System. It ran presidential candidates in 1848 and 1852, and some state candidates. After the Compromise of 1850 undercut its position some members returned to the Democratic Party, others supported John P. Hale for president in 1852, but he had little impact on the election.

     It was a breakaway faction of the Democratic Party and was largely absorbed by the Republican Party in 1854. Its main purpose was opposing the expansion of slavery into the territories, arguing that free men on free soil comprised a morally and economically superior system to slavery. The ‘free soilers’ were against the expansion of slavery but not the idea of slavery; their goal was to gain the land to the west, and keep the land free of slaves. Slavery was seen as a "social bad because it hurt free men," but, unlike the abolitionists, they did not denounce it as sinful.

     Free Soil candidates ran on the platform that declared: "...we inscribe on our banner, 'Free Soil, Free Speech, Free Labor and Free Man,' and under it we will fight on and fight ever, until a triumphant victory shall reward our exertions."

     The party also called for a homestead act and a tariff for revenue only (as opposed to a protective high tariff). The Free Soil Party attracted mainly Yankees from the Northeast and upper Midwest, especially Yankee areas of upstate New York, western Massachusetts, and northern Ohio.

     In 1848, the first party convention was held in Buffalo, New York, where the party nominated former Democratic President Martin Van Buren of New York, with Charles Francis Adams of Massachusetts as vice president. The main party leaders were senators Salmon P. Chase of Ohio and John P. Hale of New Hampshire. They won no electoral votes.

     The Free Soil Party was a notable third party. More successful than most, it sent two senators and fourteen representatives to the thirty-first Congress, elected in 1848. Its presidential nominee in 1848, Van Buren, received 291,616 votes against Zachary Taylor of the Whigs and Lewis Cass of the Democrats; Van Buren received no electoral votes. The Party's "spoiler" effect in 1848 may have put Taylor into office in a narrowly-contested election. Its long-term impact was to allow antislavery Democrats an easy transition into the Republican Party, which formed in 1854 and incorporated Free Soil principles. Important Republicans included Senator Charles Sumner, architect of Reconstruction, Vice President Henry Wilson and Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase. Continue to: Free-Soilers: A History,  Missouri Civil War History and Kansas Civil War History.

Abraham Lincoln : President Lincoln Homepage

Abraham Lincoln : President Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln has had more biographers than any other American president, and, with practically every single volume idolizing and worshipping Lincoln, it is no doubt the number one reason why he is ranked the greatest (or number one) U.S. president in history.

 

Just days after the nation honored the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, 65 historians ranked Abraham Lincoln as our nation's best president, while George Washington -- yes, one of our Founding Fathers, that great hero of the American Revolution, and our first president -- settled for a distant second. Now how is that, I asked? It led me to many questions. 

 

To most Americans, President Abraham Lincoln is known as Father Abraham, Honest Abe, Lincoln the Great Emancipator, and even Saint Abe. Make no doubt about it, through the ages Abraham Lincoln has been idolized, mythologized and even immortalized. We have been taught in our public school system that Lincoln really was larger than life, that he was a Moses or Jesus figure. Even paintings with angels hovering about the president's head adorn the walls of many Americans. Has anyone ever seen a painting with George Washington surrounded by a multitude of angels?

When I lived in England I was schooled on the English view of the American Revolution, or American Rebellion, and those Colonial rebels, and it was a real eye-opener to say the least. But from America’s perspective, it was a revolution for freedom and a rebellion against tyranny, right? Is it possible that both sides were correct? During the American Civil War, the North also referred to the South as rebels and to the war as the War of the Rebellion, but, on the other hand, the South believed it was a second war for independence, a war against tyranny, a war against the tyrant Abraham Lincoln. Could it also be that both sides were correct?
 

A district attorney can lead a grand jury in any direction and to any conclusion, and that is why there is a subsequent trial with both the prosecution and defense present. In a marriage, just like in any given divorce, there are two parties involved. In debate, we witness both the affirmative and negative positions. And so there are two sides to the President Abraham Lincoln story.

In the 1860 election, without a single Southern electoral vote and with only 39.8% of the popular vote, Abraham Lincoln became the 16th President of the United States.

John Cabell Breckinridge was a U.S. Vice President, the most senior ranking public official to commit treason, cousin to Mary Todd Lincoln, presidential candidate (ran against Abraham Lincoln), and prominent Confederate general. Breckinridge (often misspelled as Breckenridge), furthermore, has witnessed only one full-length biography written about him. On the other hand, President Abraham Lincoln has been honored with more than 14,000 biographies.

The point is -- the victor not only writes and teaches its own version of history, but presents it with outlandish bias and with utter disdain for the vanquished. We must remember that there are two sides to the story, and to obtain fairness, balance and objectivity we should lend an ear to each side, and anything less is not history in context, period. The South, consequently, had staunch views and beliefs about Lincoln, and it is only proper that its viewpoints be studied. With more than 14,000 Lincoln biographies, perhaps somewhere in the midst is the real Lincoln. But, if you could read one Lincoln biography each day -- it would take you more than 38 years to read them all...

Was Lincoln really the Great Emancipator? Did the Emancipation Proclamation free a single slave? Was Lincoln a racist and white supremacist? Did he really have plans to ship African Americans to some colony abroad? Was Lincoln responsible for the Civil War and its outcome? Were the slaves freed in the middle of the conflict only because Lincoln feared losing the war? Was the emancipation a political decision because England and France would not assist a nation that supported slavery? Did Lincoln trample, trump and trash the U.S. Constitution? Of course it wasn't coined until decades later, but we all know that famous quote: “The buck stops here.” The resources on this page will allow the reader to access the good, the bad, and the ugly regarding our so-called greatest president. See also Abraham Lincoln History Homepage.