Posted on 01/19/2022 11:05:26 AM PST by re_tail20
Regular folks and history buffs who believe Maryland leaned strongly toward the Confederacy during the Civil War era have never lacked evidence for the claim.
It was a Marylander, after all, on the U.S. Supreme Court who wrote the opinion in the infamous 1857 Dred Scott case, which found that Black people were not citizens — a ruling that helped spark the fighting. And Marylanders voted for a Southern sympathizer, not Abraham Lincoln, for president in the election of 1860. Then, some 20,000 Marylanders took up arms for the Confederacy.
But such facts can be deceiving if looked at in a vacuum — or so say the scholars behind a critically acclaimed new book that aims to explode long-standing myths about the period.
In “The Civil War in Maryland Reconsidered,” a collection of 13 essays assembled and edited by Baltimore historians Charles W. Mitchell and Jean H. Baker, are independent thinkers from as far away as California and England and as close as Johns Hopkins University. They point out, among other things, that contrary to popular belief, Maryland judges refused to put the Dred Scott decision into effect; that more Marylanders voted, in total, for the three presidential candidates who backed the Union than they did for John C. Breckinridge, the Southern Democrat who carried the state in 1860, and that four times as many Old Line State men fought for the Union than for the South.
Maryland, in short, was less sympathetic to the Confederate cause, and more behind the Union, than generations of historians have implied, says Mitchell, a self-taught Civil War expert, author and editor who got the sprawling essay project rolling four years ago.
History, he says, is framed by the values of those who pass it along. In the case of Maryland’s antebellum and Civil...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
So why did Lincoln imprison the Maryland legislators without trial? A great puzzle the hindsight probably can’t solve.
A mob had gathered outside the state house in Baltimore demanding secession.
When Lincoln was appraised of the situation he sent troops to guard the statehouse.
Apprised.
He who wins the war, writes the history. Look who’s won today’s war.
Writing skills of this author are really substandard.
The elected members of the Maryland legislature supported the Confederacy. On the other hand, the people did not want to break the Union. In the election of 1860, the Democratic Party split three ways on the Presidency (Bell, Breckenridge, and Douglas). If they had not, Lincoln might not have won and the Southern states would not have seceded.
A few years ago we vacationed on the eastern shore of Maryland. All of the Civil War monuments at the courthouses were Confederate.
One of my GG Grandfathers fought with the G.A.R. in a Frederick County, MD regiment.
My wife had G Grandfather who fought with the G.A.R. in a Baltimore County MD regiment and survived Andersonville.
Did that mob represent a majority of the citizens of Maryland or just some angry southern sympathizers?
Not sure. I’d have to really look into it. Most folks in Maryland were much in favor of secession. I believe Delaware wanted to secede as well.
Besides to offer support for the insurrection 160 years later, how is this relevant? Only 30 legislators were imprisoned, so they hardly represented the majority. However, while its unclear whether Lincoln’s actions were legitimate use of war powers, it’s plain that Maryland was in a state of war. Its own Governor destroyed the bridges and railways around Baltimore to prevent their use by union troops heading South.
It was a Marylander that assassinated President Lincoln.
IBDD
Below the Mason-Dixon line
During the war Maryland raised 19 infantry regts, 4 cavalry regts, 1 heavy artillery regt, and 5 artillery batteries for the Union Army.
Maryland raised 2 infantry regts, 2 cavalry regts, and 4 artillery batteries for the Confederate Army.
Looks like most folks in Maryland were much in favor of remaining in the Union.
I grew up in rural Maryland in the sixties and seventies, and at that time, the matter was far from settled.
Is it still the case that it is illegal to run a train through Baltimore without stopping?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.