As an Oxford resident, I’ve met Mr. Callahan and appreciate his sincerity and volunteer work with the Fire Department and other community involvement. Yet I am disappointed but not surprised at his description of the Talbot Boys history. The movement to move the statue and pedestal has to be taken in the context of the racial injustices still extant in the US and in Maryland. The monument was placed in its current position during the midst of the Jim Crow era in defiance of the U.S. Constitution that indicated that all men are created equal and equality for all.
I believe Mr. Callahan’s letter presents classic Lost Cause mythology, that is the post-war confederates’ view of the confederate enterprise and especially confederate Marylanders’ distilled version of events. I take specific issue with Mr. Callahan and base my commentary on several important works of history, namely, Dickson Preston’s “History of Talbot County”, Robert Brugger’s “Maryland, A Middle Temperament 1634-1980” and two books on the Lost Cause Mythology, one by Rollin Osterweis and the other by Edwin Bonekemper. The commentary of James McPherson’s standard “Battle Cry of Freedom” also heavily colors my comments.
One side could claim a moral basis – that it was fighting against the permanence of slavery. One side could claim it supported the Judeo-Christian ethic for the sanctity of marriage, against the arbitrary breaking up of families, the freedom from physical brutality of slavery. Lincoln called for 75,000 volunteers to put down a revolutionary attack at Ft. Sumter, which was perpetrated to coerce the 8 other slave states that refused voluntarily to secede in late 1860/early 1861. The longer Lincoln went without violent reaction to the 7-state secession movement, the more pressure there was on the 7 to give up the movement. Time was on Lincoln’s side. Jeff Davis decided to resort to armed conflict. Lincoln reacted to a military revolt.
Lincoln was against slavery as proven by his statements in the Lincoln-Douglass debates where he pointed out that although he felt whites were superior to blacks, it was immoral and unchristian to keep them in the brutal system of slavery. He was against slavery and that is why the southern states were so frantic about secession. There are mountains of such documentation and the fear campaign to convince poor white southerners to secede and fight. Lincoln would not have “gladly” kept the colored race in perpetual bondage as evidenced by his statements on their future freedom. Lincoln used the Emancipation Proclamation to strategically discourage Europe, which sought to see the destruction of American democracy and he also wanted an excuse to allow blacks to fight in the war for freedom. Yet Jeff Davis started the war to protect and preserve slavery and enlarge the number of confederate states.
Thousands of slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation in large swaths of Tennessee, Mississippi, Virginia and Louisiana, which had already been occupied by Union troops.
Southern leaders fought against secession before it suited enough of them to try it. Southern senators fought eloquently against threats from New England states which brought up the possibility of secession at the Hartford Convention in 1814. In 1830, they agreed that South Carolina had no right to secede and President Jackson (of Tennessee) threatened to jail his VP John C. Calhoun for his intention to lead SC out of the Union in the Nullification Crisis. Thus, the South claimed the right to secede, but the evidence shows they were simply making the claim to power or bluff their way out. They also frowned upon each other’s secession statements when they agreed to the Compromise of 1850. Lincoln acted to suppress the revolt and was met by overwhelming positive response. The firing on Ft Sumter also caused 4 other slave states NOT to secede (MD, KY, MO and DL).
In a deeply divided border state like Maryland, the Maryland press was buzzing about the unconstitutionality of Lincoln’s actions. The press in Maryland was also divided and some supported the US government against the confederate states firing on the US flag at Ft Sumter. That act created an overnight, massive wave of outrage throughout the North against the confederates and created resentment from the border states which largely understood and condemned the resort to violence. They would not be dragged into a war on the side of the confederates and slavery.
Maryland’s Governor Hicks (of a Dorchester County slave owning family) understood that the deep south wanted to use the border slave states as the battleground for the fighting. He and the legislature rejected personal appeals from confederate representatives to secede. US soldiers seeking to peacefully change train lines in Baltimore on April 19th, were confronted by a political mob. It is suspected that the mob was organized by the well-known secessionist City Police Commissioner George Kane and some of his police force, some of whom were members of the secessionist militia. Kane’s son was a leader of that secessionist militia. In fact, Baltimore was known then as “Mobtown” with regular mob violence between white nativists and white immigrants. The riot that followed the 1856 mayoralty election was worse in terms of dead and wounded. Union troops simply acted to protect themselves and each other. In April, 1861, 4 soldiers and 12 Baltimoreans were killed. In 1856, 10 were killed and 150 seriously wounded over a mayoralty election.
Lest we forget, on April 27-28, 1861, the deeply divided Maryland Legislature met in Frederick away from any Union troops and declined to secede citing a lack of authority to do so. Efforts by secessionists to proclaim secession failed. Thus, the Lost Cause narrative that it was only the hard hand of Abraham Lincoln that kept Maryland in the Union is patently false. In fact, on April 27-28, as the Maryland Legislature decided on its own course of loyalty, President Lincoln was huddled in the White House with only one NY regiment in the city to defend the US Capitol from any attack across the Potomac or by the secessionists militia regiments in Maryland. While Maryland truly wanted to simply be left alone, that would not be possible under those circumstances of its geographic location. But mature leaders like John Garrett, Johns Hopkins, Henry Winter Davis and John Pendleton Kennedy, among numerous others. They understood that Baltimore could/would never survive or prosper as a slavery-based city economy.
It is a supreme oversimplification that Lincoln ordered the entire legislature arrested. Why would he arrest Unionists? That is not a sensible claim. Does anyone really think that Lincoln didn’t have the support of Maryland’s Unionists in his dealings with the state? Maryland’s leadership sought to keep traitors and subversives (who didn’t have the courage of their convictions to join the Confederate armed forces) lurking publicly in their midst to bring down the Union as Maryland’s Union troops were being killed and wounded in battle defending the American flag.
Unionist press also wrote unending articles in support of the US government and Maryland’s. The government didn’t arrest “any editor that disagreed”. How, then, could the Easton Star continue to print it’s intensely secessionist (and thus subversive editorials here for 2.5 years) before the editor was finally removed to Confederate lines in Virginia? It’s unclear whether the paper was actually shut down.
I’d like to see your source for “The occupying Federal troops began looking for anyone disloyal to the. administration – coming to their homes in the middle of the night to arrest and whisk away those with opposing political views.”
Judge Carmichael physically resisted soldiers by attacking who sought to escort him out of his chambers. The soldiers likely overreacted, but the judge should not have physically resisted. With a war going on, it was clearly subversive/treasonous activity to undermine the state and federal government authority. Why should this be illegal? Judge Roger Taney was simply acting the role of a secessionist partisan protecting other partisans. Lincoln and state authorities could/would not allow men who acted on behalf of an enemy to freely destroy transportation and otherwise undermine state authority in Maryland once the state chose to remain in the Union. Why do you suppose Governor Hogan removed the statue of Taney from the state capitol grounds? It was because of his Dred Scott decision on slavery and his egregious behavior in the Ex Parte Merryman decision.
Sources, for the claims of “numerous beatings, murders and rapes” are conspicuously absent from Mr. Callahan’s letter. Having lived in Georgia for a decade, there are similar unsubstantiated claims against Sherman – none of which have ever been documented. OTOH, when Lee invaded Maryland (and Pennsylvania) farmers were subjected to theft of crops, thousands of head of cattle and other livestock stolen and property destruction. In fact, the presence of Union troops in Baltimore probably protected the minority of southern sympathizers from murder and mayhem by Unionists who knew them as such and would likely have taken vengeance with Union reversals. Confederate Marylanders like Bradley Johnson and Harry Gilmour threatened the cities of Frederick and Middletown with large ransoms in 1864 Early Raid in this state. I wonder how Eastoners would have reacted to a threat to burn the city if a ransom wasn’t paid to their own dear confederate “neighbors” if they had reached the Eastern Shore.
Mr. Callahan wrote: Union military courts prosecuted over 450 cases of sexual crimes committed by Union soldiers against Maryland women, a number considered grossly under reported given the reluctance of victims to speak about rape”. I doubt anyone can calculate all the rape and physical and mental torture and anguish inflicted for 100 years against black female slaves by these poor unfortunate white southern folk.
I believe it is utterly false that Marylanders had to take an oath of allegiance “to the current administration”. I believe that would have been the pledge of allegiance to the United States of America and not to the Administration as depicted on Page 303 of “Maryland, A Middle Temperament”.
In reality, very soon after the One-day Baltimore Riot was finished, Baltimore went back to work manufacturing B&O RR locomotives, tracks, bridging, rail cars for the Union effort to defeat the confederacy. Baltimoreans also worked with government contracts for clothing, canning food, shipbuilding and repair and all kinds of business and trade enterprises as an integral, irreplaceable cog in the Union effort to defeat the Confederacy. How can anyone believe that all these people were forced by “occupation forces” to work against their own beliefs? How can anyone believe that only 15,000 confederate troops can begin to compare with the 45,000 white Marylanders and nearly 9,000 black Marylanders who fought for the Union, the state of Maryland and to free their people were somehow forced to do so? Many thousands more Marylanders worked arduously to support the Union throughout the war with virtually zero reports of sabotage. That is the reality of Maryland’s efforts to support the Union.
In fact, Talbot County slave owners assisted in the Union effort by raising crops and selling them (as they had been doing prior to the war) to feed Baltimore’s workers. And most of them were paid when they allowed their slaves to be manumitted to join the Union army or navy.
Mr. Callahan asked: How would you “feel” if government forces kicked in your door in the middle of the night to take your guns, your spouse or your parents? This is what Talbot County citizens experienced in the early 1860’s. I’d be more concerned about what Talbot County’s slaves went through for 50 years before the civil war and what all black residents went through for the next century after the civil war and much less concerned about what white folks went through in Talbot County. I’d also suggest its what happened to Breonna Taylor and George Floyd very recently and happens far too often in this country, which Talbot County is part of.
Moving the Talbot Boys statue isn’t an issue of the “emotions of the day”. Its an issue about the recognition of the confederacy’s violent effort to ensure the permanence of the institution of slavery and the Talbot Boys direct participation in that effort. The presence of that monument on the Court House grounds has become more and more an overt insult to all Talbot County citizens – black and white. We must all acknowledge that the presence of that flag, which has become a nationwide symbol of racism and white supremacy, is a shameful reflection of all of us. The issue has been successfully managed by cooler heads in places like Charleston and Columbia, South Carolina and many other cities and town across America. It must also be done in Easton, MD, a place where the confederate never flew during the war and a state in which that flag entered three times to kill Marylanders, destroy property, destroy cities’ infrastructure, destroy RR’s, steal livestock by the thousands, kidnap free blacks into slavery and bring down the US government, which the large majority of Talbot County’s soldiers were fighting to protect.
Talbot County residents who fought against the abuses of government fought for the Union and they did so by a 5-1 margin. Regardless of the Talbot Boys’ individual reasons for joining the confederate army, the confederate army was in the field trying to ensure the permanence of slavery and their violent revolution against the United States of America and the state of Maryland.
I agree that “Our Constitutional rights and liberties are not given to us by our government but are secured by the sacrifices of our citizens and ultimately it falls upon our citizens shoulders to protect those liberties.” This statement would define the actions of those who fought for the Union. 25% of white southerners neither owned land and were desperately poor. This class were terrified of abolition because slavery and racism were the only effective difference between their poverty and blacks surpassing them in society. If you think about it, there are still many poor whites who feel threatened and fearful of being bypassed in society today by educated blacks and immigrants. Sound familiar?
If this issue cannot be decided by the County Council, then we don’t need a county council. We should all vote on everything of importance. The County Council had no trouble voting to leave the statue in place four years ago and shouldn’t start now to weasel out of their responsibilities. In fact, Governor Hogan should step in and use his authority as Governor to remove it as he did the Roger Taney statue on the state capitol grounds in Annapolis.
In raising the name of Frederick Douglass in this letter, I feel safe in believing that his advice would be to take the statue down and move it immediately. As a man of courage and wisdom, I believe he’d also say that the County Council has a moral obligation to do the right thing and handle their responsibility to the public to move the statue. In his wisdom, he’d say that anyone who wanted to see the statue could be free to walk or drive over to its new location in Easton and stare at it all they want.
It should also be known that if the Talbot Boys were like most confederate soldiers, they would have left the ranks long before Appomattox in April, 1865, wholly disenchanted with the confederate government and army. If they could be interviewed, I have little doubt they’d have many choice words for Mr. Davis and his government.
It is the mythology of the Lost Cause that has created a soft spot for confederates in our collective memory of the civil war. The entire issue of “southern honor” is wrapped up in RE Lee’s statement about his honor requiring his support of his state of Virginia. Confederate Marylanders had no such cover for their actions. And thus, the mythological “cover” became Lincoln, who somehow forced Maryland’s leaders to remain in the Union by force. This is a required myth to explain away how Maryland confederates were not traitors to their state. It is a shallow fallacy yet it persists today, just as the myth that the Talbot Boys did not fight for slavery. How the Talbot Boys’ descendants all know their ancestors were not fighting for slavery is remarkable but dubious. Some assume that their poor ancestors did not own slaves and thus, they had no interest in slavery. That is another myth. The poorest whites dreaded abolition and equality with blacks. That is why they supported Jim Crow Laws that precluded blacks from owning land, owning businesses, becoming well educated and prospering in Maryland society for another hundred years after Appomattox.
The confederate enterprise was an abysmal failure for many reasons. There can and be no glorification for the cause or those who supported it. The postwar efforts to glorify the cause has always been abased. With the manner in which the confederate battle flag has come (with good reason) to be the symbol of KKK terrorism and murder, there can be no honored place for any representation of that flag on public property as sacred as the halls of justice in the 21st century. The fact that that statue stands in the immediate vicinity of the former slave auction is a stark reminder of the cruelty and utterly unchristian barbarism ma infested by some of those same people who supported and fought for the confederacy. No more excuses! No more mythological double talk!
Dominic “Mickey” Terrone
Oxford
Paul Callahan says
Mickey, Good to hear from you! Now that you have impressed everyone with your minutia of long winded half truths I must point out to you that you missed a couple very important issues. First, I never put forward the opinion that the statue should remain, in fact I even stated in a reply that I was open to the possibility that it be moved. Second, I never defended the confederacy, outside of stating the intending goals of Lincoln in the conduct of the war, all of the facts I stated was Maryland History from published sources. (You should read more than just Preston). But the main issue you ignored in your long winded dissertation was Lincoln’s order to Winfield Scott authorizing him to bombard our civilians. Why did you leave that out? I know you are a former Army Officer and I just a lowly Marine Corps Officer, but I am sure you were trained on unlawful orders and crimes against humanity. So please we are patiently waiting your defense of an order from the President of the United States to bombard Maryland civilians. Now I will personally challenge you, my army reserve brethren that if you can show all of us where Lincoln had the constitutional authority to issue that order I will forever withdrawal my ascertion that the men of Talbot county had the Constitutional authority to resist such. Oh by the way.. that was my point from the beginning and which history reveals, they rose to protect their homeland. Waiting on you Mickey.
Dominic "Mickey" Terrone says
Hi Paul. If you believe I have offered half-truths, please feel free to indicate some specifics. I pointed out some of the specific Lost Cause myths that you presented as facts, so I ask that you do the same. That’s how we can perhaps resolve differences of opinion calmly, on paper, with facts and using reputable sources. As I noted, I used Preston, Robert Brugger, Osterweis, Bonekemper and McPherson, among many other authoritative civil war authors. Having taught Maryland civil war course at AA Community College (adult ed) for 3 years, I have studied this subject a great deal. I also have about 300+ civil war books at home that I use as references, so I believe I know what I’m writing about. So, Preston’s book is just one of many, and if more life-long locals would read it, local dedication to the confederacy would be reasonably low.
With respect to Lincoln’s order to Winfield Scott, I don’t find specific reference to it. Do you have the order itself? Date? I have to think there were mitigating circumstances like “fire if you are fired upon”. Otherwise, someone didn’t obey the order. Frankly, I think its bogus because there were many thousands of Unionists in Baltimore and the city’s infrastructure was needed by the Union intact. In the very earliest days after Ft Sumter, the Baltimore Riot gave many northerners the impression that the city and state were all for secession but nothing is furfther from the truth. So, since you are familiar with the order, please share it.
Otherwise, I look forward to this discussion because I believe the civil war history of Talbot County has been lafrgelt erased by the presence of the Talbot Boys statue and adherence to the baseless myths of the Lost Cause.
Obviously, I had to write a relatively extensive response because there were so many challenges to be made to your narrative. Plus, I’m also writing to the County Council members who may want to be aware of the context of that monument and why its supporters are so misinformed, accidently or willfully, about the real story.
paul callahan says
Mickey, You taught Civil War History and do not know of Lincoln’s authorization to Scott to bombard Maryland’s cities? One of the single largest abuses against civilians by a US President? Wow! (April 25, 1861 you can download an actual copy in Lincoln’s handwriting). I will admit much of the uglier side of our history has not been kept in the light and has been suppressed, probably for good reason, unfortunately we must “pick at the scab” of this history to discuss the Talbot Boys in the open – but it is there if you look. I do not mean to say this in an offending way but you have an cultural “unconscious bias” on your leanings about this history. Since you are from New York I seriously doubt that you had anyone in your upbringing that cared a hoot about Maryland History or Talbot county’s in particular and I doubt you had any interest before you moved here. You would have been influenced by New Yorkers point of view and the guilt they carried in their brutalization of their countrymen. Its normal for men that return from war to feel quite guilty about what they did and you would have been subjected to the “justifications” – (Its was all ok since Slavery is so evil and so are those Southerners!.) I am sure that when you moved South you thought racism was behind every tree and a white sheet hanging in every closet. Because of this “pre-conditioned bias” you naturally gravitated towards literature that supported your instilled notions. Now, I also would carry a “cultural bias” in that I grew up in Maryland and Talbot County in particular and was influenced by many Talbot Countians that knew much of our history and a grandfather that was raised outside of Baltimore in the early 1900’s and was a devoted Maryland history lover. So I naturally had an interest in this history and gravitated towards such. However I should point out that we are now discussing Maryland and Talbot county history and I understand that you are playing catch up. Again, not meant in a mean way.
Now as for sources, letters to the Editor is not a college term paper and I can assure you every fact I stated had published sources. There are just too many to list but let by put forth just a few: Lincoln to Scott April 25 1861, Major General Tench Tilghman’s order to the 2nd Division of the Maryland Militia April 21, 1861, Frederick Douglas Speech at Freedman’s Monument `14 April 1876. US Supreme Court Decision Ex Parte Merryman, Maryland State Archives “The Maryland General Assembly Moves to Frederick, 1861” Maryland General Assembly Proclamation 13 December 1861, Crystal n. Feimster, “Rape and Justice in the Civil War” documenting the number of Rapes by Union soldiers against Maryland women, Baltimore Sun 4 February 1863 concerning Union Troops beating people of color in Baltimore, Baltimore Sun 7 June 1861, Stephen V. Ash “When the Yankees Came” documenting Union Soldiers bayoneting a black man for scolding children, shooting a boy over the price of Lemonade and Samual Webster of New Hampshire killing Calvin Lamar, Baltimore Sun October 1862, December 27 1862, January 1, 1864 document murders beating and rapes of Union troops against Marylanders. Claudia Floyd – “Union Occupied Maryland”, Charles Mitchell “Maryland Voices of the Civil” War 2007, Daniel Toomey “The Civil War in Maryland. Phillip Shaw Paludan “The presidency of Abraham Lincoln. I can go on a couple more pages if you would like.
My purpose of my two articles to the Spy was to be informative for those (such as you?) that have little understanding of Maryland history. The purpose is so they can make an informed decision.
So get back to us on Lincoln’s Constitutional authority to authorize the bombardment of innocent Men, woman and children.
Thanks
Frank Menditch says
My wife and I were at the Counsel’s public forums five years ago. It is a good concept to include the public for such a emotional issue for some people.
What struck her was the proponents for keeping the statue as is on the court house grounds. Some of the proponents claimed ancestry to these confederate soldiers.
They were very emotional about the connection they felt to their ancestors. I understand the pride they felt. I did not receive the impression that “The Lost Cause” was anywhere on their minds. Some of these people have only this memory to give them self-esteem. We did not find overt racism in the conversation.
Yes, the Confederate Talbot Boys memorial should be removed and placed in a private setting. Not destroyed. The symbolism of racism, terror and treason is the very essence of all Confederate Flags and paraphernalia.
James Fulton says
This is a very interesting and timely discussion. I am in firm agreement with Mr. Terrone that all Confederate statues and other memorials should be removed from public places. In my view, they are only appropriate in graveyards and museums. But I have one more reason beside the ones stated: Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution is quite specific:
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
It doesn’t matter how you you dress it up, everyone who fought for the Confederacy committed treason. I can see no justification for glorifying or memorializing traitorous acts.
That said, there is no reason why the descendants of Confederate soldiers should not continue to venerate their ancestors. We probably all have ancestors who did things that we would not, today, be proud of. But please, keep the memories in the family albums and get the statues off of public lands.
Philip Russell says
Does anyone care to read this term paper? Tired of this back & forth. Just move the damn thing. Move on to more important things. PR
Cornelia Heckenbach says
Well spoken it is so exhausting ….. put up real heroes perhaps John Lewis ?
Willard T Engelskirchen says
A long piece which pretty much says it all.
The Talbot Boys monument was erected in an attempt to put a part of the population in its place. It went up as a White Supremacist thumb in the eye of the Black population. Most of the monuments erected around the country were put up to reinforce Jim Crow or to protest things like Brown vs. Board of Education. They were put up in an effort to argue against the verdict that the South LOST the Civil War…. and make the statement that their cause was so much more just. They are part of the revisionist history promulgated by organizations like the Daughters of the Confederacy. This gave us a nice romantic notion of history which just happens to be wrong.
The important part of this discussion is the simple question: If a mistake was made many years ago, is there any reason not to correct it today?
As far as who has relatives who fought? So, my wife’s great grandfather from Baltimore was in both the Confederate Army and Navy. He was a German immigrant. I think I had relatives who, as very new German immigrants, were in the Union Army. They are all dead. So what? Why honor those who sought to tear our country apart?