A Snapshot of Virginia on the Brink: The "Alexandria Gazette," January 19, 1861

The other day while researching for a future post on contraband camps in Northern Virginia, I came across a copy of the January 19, 1861 edition of the Alexandria Gazette. I soon realized the historic value of this particular paper. The articles and classifieds on page three paint a fascinating picture of Virginia on the precipice of the Civil War. The Commonwealth had not yet left the Union, but events were unfolding that would set Virginia on the tragic road to secession. Meanwhile, an innkeeper from Fairfax had just opened a business in Alexandria that would soon become a scene of wartime violence and martyrdom.

In mid-January 1861, the General Assembly of Virginia called for a state convention to consider the question of secession. By the time the Gazette was published on January 19, the campaign to elect delegates was in full swing. The paper published several items related to candidates in Northern Virginia:

The election for delegates was held on February 4, 1861. (See my previous post here.) Moss, a supporter of secession, lost to moderate Unionist William Dulany. George W. Brent, a strong pro-Union candidate from Alexandria County, won his election to the Convention. Janney and Carter, both Unionist candidates, took Loudoun's two seats. Janney would go on to become the President of the Convention. On April 17 the Convention voted to leave the Union, although Brent, Carter, Dulany, and Janney joined the minority against the Ordinance of Secession. Both Dulany and Brent, who placed loyalty to Virginia first and foremost despite their votes in the Convention, served as Confederate officers.

The January 19 edition of the Gazette also reported on a new innkeeper in town:

James Jackson, apparently eager to spread the word about his business, also placed a glowing advertisement in the same paper:

Only a few short months later, the Marshall House would make headlines across the county. On May 23, Virginia voters ratified the Ordinance of Secession by overwhelming numbers. In a public display of his allegiance to the secessionist cause, Jackson hoisted the stars and bars above the Marshall House. As Federal troops moved to occupy Alexandria on May 24, Col. Elmer Ellsworth of the 11th New York Fire Zouaves rushed to the roof of the Marshall House and ripped down the Confederate flag flying there. Jackson confronted Ellsworth in the stairwell and shot him dead. Cpl. Francis Brownell of the Fire Zouaves then killed Jackson with a musket blast. In the aftermath of Ellsworth's death, the young colonel and friend of Lincoln became a martyr for the Union cause. Confederates in Virginia and elsewhere exalted Jackson as a hero who made the ultimate sacrifice in the name of Southern independence. Almost immediately, souvenir hunters began to carry away pieces of the Marshall House. Jackson's new business venture, announced with great fanfare in the Gazette, had become just another casualty of war. 

Engraving of the Marshall House from Harper's Weekly, June 8, 1861 (courtesy of House Divided). The site is today occupied by the Hotel Monaco.

This one page in the Gazette speaks volumes about the interconnectedness of history. The fate of Jackson and the Marshall House were related to the Virginia Convention in ways that no one could have imagined on January 19, 1861. The Unionist candidates from Northern Virginia still hoped that secession could be averted. Jackson supported a break with the Union, but he also had a business to run and money to make. The Convention unleashed forces beyond the Unionist delegates' control. Secession and war soon followed. Jackson, a local innkeeper only months before, met his demise confronting Union troops and came to symbolize the Confederate cause in the early days of the conflict. On January 19, no one knew what the future would hold. Yet the story was all right there, on page three, waiting to happen.

Sources

Martha M. Boltz, "Jackson and Ellsworth: Death on both sides in the Civil War," Washington Times, May 18, 2011; Library of Virginia, Virginia Memory: Union or Secession (on-line resource); University of Richmond, Virginia Secession Convention (on-line resource).

The 17th Virginia at Blackburn's Ford

As many of you, I am looking forward to this week's commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the Battle of First Manassas.  I plan to attend several events later in the week, including the commemoration ceremony at Manassas National Battlefield Park on Thursday and the large-scale reenactment on Saturday.  I also hope to visit many of the Manassas-related sites around Prince William County.  I will be taking plenty of pictures and will be sure to report back when the dust settles. 

In the meantime, I would like to take a look at an action that preceded the big show by a few days.  The Battle of Blackburn's Ford occurred 150 years ago today, when Union troops under Col. Israel Richardson clashed along Bull Run with Confederate forces under Brig. Gen. James Longstreet and Col. Jubal Early.  Many authors, including Ethan Rafuse and William Davis, have covered this action in detail as part of their larger studies on the First Manassas Campaign, and I don't plan to discuss the intricacies of the battle here.  However, I'd like to examine a few connections that Blackburn's Ford has to other aspects of Northern Virginia's Civil War history that should be familiar to many readers.

The 17th Virginia Infantry, comprised of volunteers from Alexandria, Fairfax, Fauquier, Loudoun, Prince William and Warren Counties, was one of the Confederate regiments engaged at Blackburn's Ford.  The 17th Virginia was officially created on June 10, 1861 out of volunteer militia companies from Northern Virginia belonging to what was then called the "Alexandria Battalion."  In April and May 1861, most of these men were stationed at Alexandria and were forced to evacuate the city during the Federal invasion at the end of May.  The Fairfax Rifles became Company D under the command of Captain William Dulany, who had served as Fairfax's delegate to the Virginia Secession Convention.  The Warrenton Rifles were assigned to the regiment as Company K.  This unit was originally under Captain John Q. Marr, the Fauquier delegate to the Virginia Convention, who was killed during a skirmish at Fairfax Court House on June 1.  Montgomery Corse, who once led the Alexandria Battalion, became colonel of the regiment, and George William Brent, who represented Alexandria at the Virginia Convention, served as major.

The 17th Virginia was assigned in mid-June to Col. George Terrett's brigade of the Confederate Army of the Potomac.  Longstreet replaced Terrett at the start of July.  Within a few weeks, the 17th Virginia would face its first test in battle.

General James Longstreet, brigade commander of the 17th Virginia (courtesy of Wikipedia)

On July 18, 1861, a Union division under Brig. Gen. Daniel Tyler entered Centreville and discovered that the Confederates had abandoned their defensive position there.  Tyler pushed Col. Richardson's brigade forward to reconnoiter along Bull Run.  Around midday, Federal artillery shells began to fall on Longstreet's men at Blackburn's Ford.  After thirty minutes of artillery fire, Tyler ordered Richardson's infantry to engage the Confederates at the ford, and companies of the 17th Virginia, along with other units, were rapidly thrown into the fray to counter the Federal attack.

Wartime drawing of Blackburn's Ford (courtesy of Library of Virginia)

After beating back soldiers from Massachusetts and New York, Longstreet directed some of his men in the front line to advance across the stream.  According to Corse,  "Company A, Captain [Morton] Marye, was . . . ordered to cross the run and deploy as skirmishers on the opposite bank.  Company C, Captain [George] Head, and Company F, Captain [George] Hamilton, were subsequently ordered to cross also and sustain this movement." (OR, Series 1, Vol. 51, Part 1, pp. 33-34.)  As Longstreet wrote in his official report, "[a] few small parties, under command of Captain Marye, Seventeenth Regiment Virginia Volunteers, who behaved with great gallantry, met parties of the enemy on the other side of the stream with the bayonet, and drove them back."  (OR, Series 1, Vol. 2, Part 1, p. 462.)  Longstreet, however, believed that his men were likely shaken after taking accidental fire in the rear from Jubal Early's troops, who had been brought up in support of his brigade.  Unsure of whether his advanced elements could press the attack, Longstreet finally recalled the 1st and 17th Virginia from the opposite bank.  The 17th Virginia brought back seven prisoners along with their wounded.  Tyler, meanwhile, ordered a withdrawal of his forces from the field.  As Richardson's men retired, artillery dueling between the two sides ensued until about 4 p.m.

Overall, losses were rather modest compared to later battles in the Civil War.  Longstreet reported 63 killed or wounded, while Richardson recorded 83 killed, wounded, or missing.  Corse described the 17th Virginia's casualties in his report on the battle:

I regret to add that Captains Dulany and [Stephen] Presstman were severely wounded whilst at the head of their companies. Captain [Benjamin] Shackelford, commanding Company K, and Lieutenant [Charles] Javins, of Company E, were slightly wounded. Private Thomas R. Sangster, Company A, was killed, and four privates severely and six slightly wounded. (OR, Series 1, Vol. 51, Part 1, p. 34.)

Due to the serious nature of his injuries, Dulany never returned to active service with the 17th Virginia following the battle.  He left the regiment in March 1862, and served as a Judge Advocate for the Marines and Navy.  Dulany tried unsuccessfully to obtain quartermaster or commissary positions in the Confederate Army.  Apparently recovered from his wounds by April 1863, he asked to receive a commission to raise a cavalry company and ride "with Capt. Mosby on our lines in Fauquier, Prince Wm., Fairfax & Loudoun."  (Letter to Sec. of War James Seddon, April 16, 1863.)  Instead of returning to military service, however, Dulany ended up serving the remainder of the war as a member of the Virginia State Senate.

Officers of the 17th Virginia won the praises of their superiors for their performance at Blackburn's Ford.  Longstreet noted that several officers in his brigade, including Corse, Lt. Col. William Munford, and Brent from the 17th Virginia, "displayed more coolness and energy than is usual amongst veterans of the old service."  (OR, Series 1, Vol. 2, Part 1, p. 463.)  He was "particularly indebted to Lieutenant-Colonel Munford and Major Brent, who having a spare moment and seeing my great need of staff officers at a particular juncture, offered their assistance." (OR, Series 1, Vol. 2, Part 1, p. 463.)  Corse also singled out Munford and Brent, among other officers, for their "gallant conduct" where "the fire was hottest." (OR, Series 1, Vol. 51, Part 1, p. 34.)

Soldiers of the 17th Virginia had finally experienced combat, but the remainder of the Manassas Campaign was a bit anticlimactic for the regiment.  The 17th remained around Blackburn's Ford, and engaged only in light skirmishing on July 21, the day of the Battle of First Manassas.  Longstreets's brigade joined in the pursuit of the retreating Federals, but much to Longstreet's consternation, his men were ordered to stop, and then return to their position along Bull Run.  The 17th Virginia may have largely missed First Manassas, but would see much more action over the next four years.

Note on Sources

The following books contain thorough accounts of the Battle of Blackburn's Ford:

William C. Davis, Battle at Bull Run: A History of the First Major Campaign of the Civil War (1977.) and Ethan S. Rafuse, A Single Grand Victory: The First Campaign and Battle of Manassas (2002).

For more information about the 17th Virginia, see Lee A. Wallace, Jr., 17th Virginia Infantry, Virginia Regimental History Series (1990).

The service record of William Dulany can be found in the Civil War Soldier Service Records collection on footnote.com.

150 Years Ago: The Voters of Fairfax Approve the Ordinance of Secession

As I wrote a few months ago, in February 1861 Virginians elected delegates to a state convention called to consider the issue of secession. They also approved a voter reference clause under which any decision in favor of secession would be submitted to a popular referendum. In Fairfax County, the reference clause passed by a margin of 62 percent to 38 percent.  Following two months of debate, the Convention finally adopted an Ordinance of Secession on April 17 and voted to send the Ordinance to a statewide referendum.   

Pending the Ordinance, David Hunter Strother (courtesy of Library of Virginia)

On May 23, 1861, Virginians across the state headed to the polls to vote on secession.  (Of course, it goes without saying that in 1860s America, blacks and women were disenfranchised, so the vote was really in the hands of white males.)  In many ways, the outcome was a foregone conclusion, or at least the state government treated it that way.  Virginia began to mobilize immediately after the Convention's decision.  Within a few days, state troops had seized key federal installations at Harpers Ferry and the Gosport Navy Yard. Virginia also offered to join the Confederate States of America, and invited the new government to move its capital to Richmond.  By the time of the May 23 referendum, Rebel forces were amassing in northeastern Virginia, not far from Washington. 

The Results of the Vote in Fairfax County
State-wide, the referendum passed by a vote of 125,950  to 20,373.  (Governor John Letcher estimated that an additional 2,934 voted for secession and 11,761 against.)  In Fairfax County, as in other counties across Northern Virginia,* the vote went overwhelmingly in favor of secession.  According to official returns, out of a total of 1,231 votes, 942, or 77 percent, voted to ratify the Ordinance, and 289, or 23 percent, voted against it.**  Four precincts (Bailiss', Centreville, Ross', and West End) voted unanimously for secession.  Only three of fourteen precincts -- Lewinsville, Lydecker's, and Accotink -- went against the tide and rejected the Ordinance.  All but 49 of the county's "no" votes came from these three precincts.  (The actual voting records can be found here.)

Wartime view of Vienna, Virginia, by A.R. Waud.  Lydecker's Store, where voting took place, is  to the right of the tree in the center of the sketch.  The vote at Lydecker's was 44 to 78 against secession  (courtesy of Library of Congress).

Lydecker's Store today.  This photo was taken on Saturday, May 21, 2011, almost 150 years to the day that the vote was held in Vienna.

On May 21, 2011, Historic Vienna, Inc. sponsored a 150th anniversary reenactment of the secession vote at the Freeman Store (Lydecker's) in Vienna.  Here, a tobacco farmer casts his vote for the Ordinance.  I will feature some thoughts about the reenactment in a future post.

Possible Explanations for the Outcome in Fairfax
The vote, both state-wide and in Fairfax, represented a significant change of heart.  After all, Virginia had elected a moderate Unionist majority to the Convention.  In Fairfax County, pro-Union candidate William Dulany defeated the secessionist Alfred Moss by a vote of 57 percent to 43 percent.  But April had been a turbulent month, and the political landscape looked considerably different than a few months before. 

Voters may have changed their views on secession for a number of reasons.  All hope for compromise disappeared after the attack on Ft. Sumter, and many saw President Lincoln's call for 75,000 volunteers as a coercive use of federal power against fellow slave states.  Pro-secession voters also sought to demonstrate loyalty by rallying behind their native state, which for all intents and purposes, had already left the Union.  Even Dulany, who voted against the Ordinance on April 17, decided that his allegiance to Virginia was paramount.   He became the first person to vote for secession in Sangster's precinct on May 23. 

A few factors may explain the "no" votes in Fairfax. The county had seen an influx of Northern migrants prior to the war.  These transplants may have remained loyal to the Union and opposed the Ordinance. One notable migrant, Abram Lydecker from New Jersey, voted against secession at the polling place located in his Vienna store.  Some Fairfax residents, who depended on trade with nearby Washington, may have considered secession as against their economic interest.  Perhaps other voters feared that secession would bring war to their very doorstep.  Dulany himself had given this concern as a reason for his initial vote against secession.  Fairfax, particularly around Accotink, was also home to Quakers, whose pacifism may have led them to vote against secession out of a desire to avoid civil war.

Intimidation and Irregularities
Intimidation and voting irregularities also played an unfortunate role in the referendum's outcome.  Because voice voting was the practice in Virginia at the time, everyone in a precinct would know how their neighbors voted on the referendum.  Such an atmosphere at the polls was conducive to peer pressure and intimidation.  The Southern Claims Commission (SCC) files of approved claims for Fairfax County contain numerous references to threats and harassment used to intimidate voters.  John Lynch of Falls Church, for instance, headed to the polls on May 23, but he and several others left without voting when one of the election officials told Lynch that if he voted against the Ordinance he "would be regarded as a traitor."  John Hart of Centreville did not even go to the polls "because of threats."  Josiah Bowman of Vienna also recalled that he did not vote on the Ordinance "because we were threatened."

"How Virginia Was Voted Out of the Union," Harper's Weekly, June 15, 1861 (courtesy of sonofthesouth.net)

Others refused to be intimidated.  John W. Devers went to vote at Accotink, where "the Rebels had thrown old Mr. Plaskett out of the door."  A man by the name of Willis Henderson told Devers that "if I did not vote for secession I would be taken in the woods and hung."  Devers replied that "I would die in a good cause," and then voted against the Ordinance.  Of course, some voters may not have been as brave in the face of intimidation.  And in such small communities, news about threats must surely have traveled quickly and could have dampened pro-Union turnout.  We may never know how many voters stayed away that day due to intimidation.

There is also at least one episode of possible intimidation by pro-secession military units.  According to a contemporary account in the New York Semi-Weekly Tribune, the vote against secession in Accotink would have been even larger "'if there had not been a Company of Virginia Cavalry marched into the village the night preceding the election.'"  The cavalrymen "'hung out a secession flag on one side of the street, and the Union men immediately flung the Stars and Stripes to the breeze from a window immediately opposite.'"  The Tribune implies that at least 40 voters may have stayed away from the polls in Accotink on May 23 due to the presence of secessionist forces. William Smith, a witness in the SCC case of John Devers, also mentions the "rebel cavalry" at Accotink.  When he went to vote, Smith was told "by a rebel that if I voted against the Ordinance, I would lose my property and perhaps get greased before I got home."  The results for Accotink reveal that Smith never cast his vote.

Other records raise questions about possible voting irregularities. The results for Bailiss' precinct show four names crossed out (one of which is crossed out twice) in the "for rejection" column and moved to the "for ratification" column. The voting returns indicate that "[b]y desire of the voters. . . their votes have been changed." Nothing explains what motivated these men to switch their votes, but such a change after the fact calls into question the legitimacy of the four votes. Incidentally, Bailiss' precinct went unanimously for the Ordinance. A separate document among the Fairfax voting returns shows the Fairfax Cavalry as casting 27 votes for, and 1 against, the referendum. The election officials noted that they received these votes "under protest" given that the Fairfax Cavalryhad allegedly voted on the Ordinance in Alexandria on May 21.

We may never know the full impact of intimdation and voting irregularities. As the SCC files show us, at least some voters in Fairfax stayed away from the polls due to threats. However, without more evidence, we cannot conclude that ratification of the Ordinance was mostly attributable to improper means. In any event, intimidation and threats cast a pall on the voting that day. And the fact that Virginia was already in rebellion against the United States made the referendum seem like a rubber stamp exercise in popular sovereignty. Interesting to ponder what would have happened if the vote had gone the other way 150 years ago.

Footnotes
* Other counties in Northern Virginia voted as follows:
Alexandria 958 for, 106 against (some accounts say 48 against)
Fauquier 1809 for, 4 against
Loudoun 1621 for, 726 against
Prince William 841 for, 38 against

**The total number of "yes" votes listed on the official returns appears not to be accurate.  Each precinct numbered the votes for and against the referendum sequentially next to each voter's name, so that the total "yes" and "no" vote for each precinct was dervived by looking at the number written next to the individuals who cast the last "yes" and "no" vote.  When reviewing the original returns online, I noticed that due to numbering errors, 4 votes were not counted, and 1 vote was added accidentially, meaning that there were 945 in favor (gain of +3).  Regardless, such errors do not alter the overall ratio of "yes" to "no" votes in the county in any meaningful way.

Note on Sources

The following sources were useful in compiling this post:

Thomas P. Chapman, Jr., "The Secession Election in Fairfax County--May 23, 1861," Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County, Vol. 5 (1955); Brian A. Conley, Fractured Land: Fairfax County's Role in the Vote for Secession, May 23, 1861 (2001) (contains many primary source documents on the vote); Library of Virginia, Virginia Memory, Union or Secession: Virginians Decide (2011) (online resource); Charles V. Mauro, The Civil War in Fairfax County: Civilians and Soldiers (2006); Southern Claims Commission, Approved Claims for Fairfax County, Virginia, available on footnote.com;  James Neale Stirewalt, "Secessionist Sentiment in Northern Virginia: December 1860 to May, 1861," Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County. Vol. 10 (1969); "The Vote for Secession in Virginia," New York Semi-Weekly Tribune, May 31, 1861.

The Fairfax Rifles Head to Alexandria

Before the Civil War, volunteer militias were common throughout both the North and South. William Dulany, who later served as a delegate to the Virginia Secession Convention, organized the Fairfax Rifle Rangers in Fairfax Court House on December 1, 1859.  Many such companies of Virginia Militia were formed in the aftermath of John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry in October of that year.  Dulany became captain of the Fairfax Rifles, which was assigned to the 60th Regiment (Fairfax County) of the Virginia Militia.  One of the earlier members of the Fairfax Rifles was James Jackson, who would achieve infamy across the North for gunning down Col. Elmer Ellsworth of the 11th New York Fire Zouaves in May 1861.

Mobilization of military forces in Virginia gained momentum in the days following the adoption of the Ordinance of Secession. Towards the end of April 1861, the Fairfax Rifles headed to Alexandria, an important port city not far down the Potomac River from Washington. Led by Lieutenant William A. Barnes, the Fairfax Rifles arrived on April 25.  They took up quarters on Prince Street, not far from the intersection with Fairfax Street.

Alexandria buzzed with martial activity. Soldiers from various local units, as well as militia companies from other parts of Northern Virginia, were stationed around town.  The Fairfax Rifles joined Major Montgomery Corse's command, which by the end of April consisted of several state militia companies, including the Mount Vernon Guard, the Alexandria Riflemen, the Old Dominion Rifles, the Alexandria Artillery, the Emmett Guards, the Loudoun Guard, and the Warren Rifles.  On April 27, Corse's units officially became the 6th Battalion of Virginia Volunteers.  The battalion was assigned to the overall command of  Lt. Col. Algernon S. Taylor, who led the state troops in Alexandria.  Taylor was the nephew of President and Mexican War hero Zachary Taylor.

General Montgomery Corse, who in the spring of 1861 was a major leading the 6th Battalion of Virginia Volunteers at Alexandria (courtesy of Wikipedia)

The Virginia militia leaders in Alexandria feared a possible Union invasion after adoption of the Ordinance of Secession.  They watched anxiously as the Union military presence in Washington grew.  The Fairfax Rifles, like other units, was assigned to guard the city streets and to keep an eye out for potential movements by Federal troops.  Life was not completely mundane.  The militia soldiers attracted the attention and admiration of the young women of Alexandria.  And at least one picket station was located in close proximity to a local brewery that kept beer on hand for the thirsty militiamen.

Later, in June 1861, Corse's battalion was organized into the 17th Regiment of Virginia Infantry. The Fairfax Rifles were designated as Company D, under Captain Dulany.  It is ironic that Dulany, who feared that secession would bring war to Fairfax's doorstep, was now actively playing a role in events that would ensure the very outcome he most feared.

Note on Sources

The following sources were useful in compiling this post:

Alexandria in the Civil War by James G. Barber (1988).

American Civil War Armies (5): Volunteer Militia by Philip Katcher & Ronald Volstad (1989).

"History of the Seventeenth Virginia Regiment, C.S.A," from the website of the Fairfax Rifles reenactment unit.

17th Virginia Infantry, from the Virginia Regimental History Series, by Lee A. Wallace, Jr. (1990).

The Fairfax Delegate Explains His Vote Against Secession

On April 17, 1861, the same day that the Virginia Convention passed the Ordinance of Secession, William Dulany, the delegate from Fairfax County, rose to explain his vote to fellow delegates.  Readers may remember that although Dulany was elected as a moderate Unionist, the local paper in Fairfax had surmised that he would not oppose secession as a last resort.  However, even in the face of Lincoln's call for volunteers, and the defection of many Union men to the cause of secession, Dulany held firm that day.

Dulany reminded the delegates that he was representing the will of his constituents on the issue:

In voting against the ordinance of secession, I voted in, what I believed to be, strict accordance with the sentiments of the people whom I have the honor to represent here. I voted in strict accordance with my own judgment also upon that subject; because if I had believed that the people of my county were unanimous in favor of such an ordinance, and my judgment did not approve it, I could never have consented to give my vote for it, and would feel bound to resign my seat here and allow my constituents to substitute another who would carry out their will.

Even though Dulany expressed loyalty to his native state, his concern over the impact of war on Fairfax County and his family took precedence:

I thought, sir, according to my poor judgment, that by the passage of this ordinance we were transferring the war, as already commenced, from its present seat to our own State, and especially to the borders of my own native county; and although. . . .  I would willingly offer up the little I have as a sacrifice to preserve the honor of my native State, yet there were ties that bound me to her and to the Union more holy than the mere rights of property, than mere dollars and cents. I do not wish to see an aged mother and sisters, who are dependent upon me, who will be-I say it without egotism-in the first of this conflict-I say I do not wish to see them flying from the county, as I apprehend they will have to do, inasmuch as it is likely to become the seat of the first conflict, being in fact in sight of the emissaries of the Federal Government, and likely to be before long in their exclusive possession.

Dulany concluded that his fears represented the fears of his constituents in the county:

I voted against this ordinance of secession to avoid transferring the seat of war to that section; and I did so, moreover, because, as I have said, I believed that in so doing, I reflected the will and sentiments of the people I represent.

Dulany understood well what war would mean for Fairfax. Before long, Union and Confederate armies would be marching across the county.  And even when the fighting moved elsewhere, citizens experienced the daily hardships of living in occupied territory. 

"Debating the Ordinance of Secession," David Hunter Strother, The Village Magnates, 1861, Pierre Morand Memorial, Special Collections, Library of Virginia (c0urtesy of Library of Virginia).

In the end, Dulany signed the Ordinance of Secession, spoke publicly for ratification, and voted for secession at the polls in May.  A May 22, 1861 article in the Alexandria Gazette on a public meeting in Fairfax provides insight into Dulany's apparent change of heart.  Addressing the crowd, Dulany explained "he had voted against the ordinance of secession, but that he thought now there should be no division.  The course of the administration made it the imperative duty of every loyal son of Virginia to strike for her independence."

Northern Virginia Delegates Divided on Secession

Today marks the 150th anniversary of the Virginia Convention's adoption of the Ordinance of Secession.  As recently as the start of April, the Convention had rejected a similar motion.  Now, after the opening of hostilities and Lincoln's call for 75,000 volunteers, Unionists delegates began to defect to the secessionist camp.  On April 16, Robert Scott of Fauquier County offered a resolution in a last ditch effort to prevent immediate secession.  He proposed to put the question of secession directly to the voters, before the Convention voted on the issue.  The resolution asked voters to choose between secession or holding consultations with the slave states that still remained in the Union.  The Convention, largely whipped into a frenzy over recent events, rejected this resolution by a vote of 77 to 64.

The question of secession was finally put to the delegates on April 17, and the Ordinance of Secession passed by a vote of 88 to 55.  The Northern Virginia camp was markedly divided, compared to the vote just a couple weeks before.  The breakdown was as follows:

Yeas
Robert Scott, Fauquier
Eppa Hunton, Prince William
*John Quincy Marr, Fauquier--Marr was absent for the vote, but announced to the Convention on April 30 that he was in favor of the Ordinance.  The Convention granted him the privilege of recording his vote.

Nays
George Brent, Alexandria
William Dulany of Fairfax
John Carter, Loudoun
John Janney, Loudoun

First signed version of the Ordinance of Secession, April-May 1861 (courtesy of the Library of Virginia)

The Convention prepared a parchment copy of the Ordinance for signature.  All Northern Virginia delegates, with the exception of John Carter, signed the document.  In all, 92 delegates put their signatures on the Ordinance between April 24 and May 1.  The Ordinance was next referred to the voters for ratification on May 23.  However, even before the final verdict was in, Virginia began to mobilize its resources for war. And among those delegates who joined the ranks of Virginia forces were Brent and Dulany, two who had voted against the ordinance on April 17, but whose loyalty to Virginia remained paramount.

The April 4, 1861 Vote on Secession: Prince William County Stands Alone

Today marks the 150th anniversary of the Virginia Convention's first vote on secession.  During the proceedings on April 4, 1861, Lewis Harvie, the delegate from Amelia County, proposed the adoption of an ordinance of secession.  The Convention was not yet ready to pull the trigger on leaving the Union and defeated the motion by a vote of 90 to 45.  The Northern Virginia delegates voted as follows:

Yeas
Eppa Hunton, Prince William

Nays
George Brent, Alexandria
John Quincy Marr, Fauquier
Robert Scott, Fauquier
John Carter, Loudoun
John Janney, Loudoun
*William Dulany of Fairfax was absent, but Brent indicated that Dulany would have noted "no."

The Virginia State Capitol (courtesy of Civil War Daily Gazette).  The Virginia Convention reconvened here on April 8, 1861 once the legislative session concluded.

Prince William County's delegate was alone among delegates from Northern Virginia in supporting secession.  This result should not be entirely surprising, since Eppa Hunton favored secession from the outset.  The moderate Unionists from other counties were still not convinced that preserving Virginia's honor demanded secession. 

The Library of Virginia has posted this great map superimposing the April 4 vote on top of an 1860 census map of Virginia indicating the state's slave population by county.  The Library points out that in general, delegates in favor of secession lived in those areas where slaves comprised a larger proportion of the general population.  Of course, as I indicated in a previous post on Brent, defending slavery did not necessarily equate with supporting secession.

A Black Confederate Soldier from Fairfax? Not Quite

The Civil War blogsphere contains many posts and websites devoted to the topic of black Confederates.  For some time now, I've steered clear of this subject.  Although I understand and support efforts to prevent the distortion of history by those who are pushing certain agendas, the issue has taken on a life of its own, generated excessive controversy, and perhaps distracted us a bit from other issues.  All of that being said, I'd like to take a look at the story of George Lamb, an African-American body servant from Fairfax.

An 1855 entry from the Fairfax County Register of Free Blacks indicates that George Lamb was a free mulatto born to a free mother in Fairfax County sometime around 1834. According to an obituary from the Fairfax Herald, Lamb, who was widely known as "Uncle George," worked on various farms throughout the county. When the Civil War broke out, Captain William Dulany of the Co. D, 17th Virginia Infantry (the "Fairfax Rifles") brought Lamb with him as a body servant. (Readers may recall that Dulany was the Unionist Fairfax delegate to the Virginia Convention.) It is not certain whether Lamb worked for Dulany prior to the war, or whether he was hired specifcially to come with Dulany. 

Lamb remained with the 17th Virginia throughout the war, even after Dulany was severely wounded at Blackburn's Ford in 1861.  Presumably Lamb continued to serve with the regiment as a servant of some sort.  I have not located any evidence that he shouldered a rifle and fought alongside white soldiers.  The website for the "Fairfax Rifles" Living History Society also notes that there were five other blacks "who served with the Confederacy from Fairfax County."  After the Civil War, Lamb worked as a blacksmith for Joseph Cooper, who ran a wagon shop in Fairfax.  Lamb never married and died in 1926.  He is buried at Jermantown Cemetery.

Lamb's obituary notes that he "was on the Confederate soldier pension role, and is believed to have been the only colored man drawing a pension on his record as a soldier in the Southern army."  The paper likely got its terminology confused and its facts wrong.  According to an 1936 letter from the Commonwealth of Virginia in the case of another servant, Virginia paid Confederate servant's pensions in addition to enlisted Confederate soldier's pensions.  The letter notes that nearly all of the servant's pensions were awarded to "colored people, who rendered service to the Confederate Government or Confederate officers" as "body servants while such officers were in service," as "cooks, teamsters, hostlers" or "in Confederate hospitals."  The Library of Virginia's Confederate Pension Rolls, Veterans and Widows Database "includes claims submitted by more than five hundred African Americans who had worked as cooks, herdsmen, laborers, servants, or teamsters in the Confederate army."  Interestingly, the only George Lamb in the database that I located was a man from Greene County, Virginia who enlisted in 1864.  If Lamb in fact received a pension, it was more than likely a servant's pension.  And he certainly was not the only black to be paid such a servant's pension in Virginia.

Andrew Chandler, and his slave, Silas Chandler (courtesy of Civil War Memory)

Lamb's story appears on the website Reconstructed Yankee, which was designed to promote the production and filming of Caleb's Triumph, a fictional story about a black Confederate soldier.  As far as I can tell, the movie has not yet been released.  The site provides background information on several black Confederates, including Lamb and the usual suspects like Silas Chandler.  The website presents most of the facts on Lamb noted above, and concludes:

Given recent research on Black Confederate pensioners in Virginia, the obituaries [sic] erroneous assumption that he was the only such African-American on the Virginia pension roles in 1926 is interesting and indicative of white sentiments at that time. 

The website extrapolates from pension records and reaches the impossible conclusion that "3,700 to 3,900 Black Confederates serving in combat roles from Virginia alone is plausible and feasible." (emphasis in original)  By grouping Lamb together with such claims, it is clear that the author would like to use Lamb's story to support his overall view that blacks willingly and loyally fought for the Confederacy, and in large numbers.

Returning to the facts, we know that Lamb was a free black body servant with the 17th Virginia during the Civil War.  What we don't know, at least from the sources I reviewed, was what motivated Lamb to accompany the Fairfax Rifles.  Was his service merely out of loyalty to Dulany?  Was he trying to avoid losing his freedom through some mischance in civilian life?  Did he welcome this service as an opportunity for steady employment during a time of war?  In any event, we must be careful not to take what we do know about one African-American's story and jump to conclusions about the role of so-called black Confederates in Virginia or elsewhere.

Letter to the Editor: In Defense of Northerners and the Pro-Union Vote

Following the election of moderate, pro-Union candidate William Dulany to the Virginia Convention in February 1861, Fairfax farmer W.W. Ball wrote a letter to the editor of the Alexandria Gazette, published on February 19, 1861.  Although the collection of primary sources that I own does not replicate the article that Ball was responding to, it is clear from the content of his letter that the Gazette was chalking up Dulany's victory in Fairfax to the Northern vote.  (As readers may remember, I posted an entry about Northern migration to Fairfax and the newcomers' influence on local politics a few months ago.  Last week, I looked at the results of the February 4, 1861 vote.)

Ball first rushed to the defense of his Northern neighbors.  He had "great pleasure in testifying, that a more intelligent, orderly, law-abiding, and inoffensive set of men . . . never lived in any community."  He "truly   regret[ted] the publication of the article . . . because it is calculated to prejudice at least some of our citizens against their Northern brethren, and to place them in a false position before the public."  His impassioned defense continued:

Can any man of reflection suppose for a moment that our Northern fellow-citizens would desert us in the hour of peril and danger, and prove traitors to the land of their adoption? I should think not.  Have not a large majority of them invested their last dollar in our lands? Their entire earthly possessions are in the State of Virginia.  Have not many of them married the fair daughters of Fairfax, and buried their parents, wives, and children in our Southern soil?  Is it reasonable to suppose that with all these ties to bind them here, should  the bugle of war ever be sounded in our midst, that they would take up arms against us? No it is not.

Ball refuted the assertion that Dulany was elected by the Northern vote alone.  He first noted that in his Lewinsville Cross Roads precinct, "Dulany received about two-and-a-half of the native votes to [Alfred] Moss's one."  He continued by looking at the results in other counties:

Was it the Northern vote of Fairfax that gave Brent, the Union candidate, 669 majority in Alexandria? Was it the Northern vote of Fairfax that elected the Union candidates in Loudoun by a 1690 majority, and in Fauquier by 788 majority? Was it the Northern vote of Fairfax that swept over the State like a tornado, bearing down all opposition, electing Union men in almost every county, city, town, and borough by the most unprecedented majorities ever given in the State? Why, if all these mighty results have been brought about by three hundred Northern voters in old Fairfax, what an immense influence they must wield in the future destiny of our good old mother.

Map Showing the Comparative Area of the Northern and Southern States, East of the Rocky Mountains, Harper's Weekly, February 23, 1861 (courtesy of Library of Congress).  To the editors of Harper's Weekly, Virginia already belonged to the Southern block of slave states that had seceded, months before the Virginia Convention voted on the issue of secession.  Mr. Ball may have been a bit more optimistic at the time!

Ball believed that in the recent elections, "the masses North and South, East and West . . . resolved to tear off the shackles that have so long bound them to party, and wrought their ruin; and in the future to think for themselves and vote for themselves."  Ball forcefully concluded:

Hence the mighty revolution now going on, throughout the length and breadth of our land, in the minds of the people.  Mark it the Union, the Union will be the watch word in [the] future.  The people are speaking through the ballot box, and will be heard.

Ball's letter demonstrates the Unionist sentiment in Fairfax at the time of the February 1861 vote.  Ball also understood that it could not have been Northerners alone who made the difference in the election of delegates.  In February, Virginians in the northeast of the state, and in other places, were largely moderate, and as Ball said,  hoped to remain in the Union "as long as there is a hope left of an honorable and satisfactory adjustment of the unfortunate difficulties which now exist between the slave and free States."   In the end, Ball, like many Virginians, voted for ratification of the Ordinance of Secession on May 23, 1861.  One wonders whether Ball felt any differently towards his Northern neighbors who remained loyal to the Union as Virginia entered the war on the side of the Confederacy.

Note on sources:
Brian A. Conley, Fractured Land: Fairfax County's Role in the Vote for Secession, May 23, 1861, published by the Fairfax County Public Library in 2001, contains an excellent collection of primary source documents.  Ball's letter in its entirety is reproduced in this book.

February 4, 1861: Northern Virginians Head to the Polls

As South Carolina and states of the Deep South left the Union in the winter of 1860-61, the Virginia General Assembly called a Convention to consider the question of secession.  This Friday marks the 150th anniversary of Virginia's state-wide election of delegates to the Convention.  (I blogged briefly about the election in Fairfax a few months ago.)  Voters were also asked to decide whether the Convention's ultimate decision on secession should be submitted to them for ratification. 

Map of Virginia Showing the Distribution of its Slave Population from the Census of 1860 (courtesy of Richmond Times-Dispatch).  Despite the prevalence of slaveholding in Virginia, the majority of delegates elected to the state Convention were initially opposed to joining the slave states of the Deep South in leaving the Union.

On February 4, 1861, Virginians (or at least, white male Virginians) headed to the polls and elected all 152 delegates to the Convention.  Unionists candidates dominated by a margin of around two-to-one. Virginians also approved the ratification measure.  Results in Northern Virginia reflected the state-wide outcome.  Alexandria, Fairfax, Fauquier, and Loudoun Counties all elected delegates who were generally opposed to secession.*  Prince William County was alone in choosing a secessionist candidate.  Northern Virginians also voted two-to-one in favor of the voter reference clause.  Prince William County again stood alone.

A closer examination of the candidates' positions in the run-up to the election indicates that some pro-Union winners hedged their bets, like all good politicians.  Loudoun candidate John Janney, a Leesburg lawyer, was opposed to secession, but did not rule it out in the event that all other options were exhausted.  Robert Scott, a Fauquier planter and lawyer who was elected delegate, wrote to a friend that:

I am strongly attached to the Union. . . . But I think the slaveholding states ought not, cannot, and will not submit to any party, policy or power that denies to the interests that spring from slave labor the same consideration and respect that is extended by the government to the interests that spring from free labor.  In this there must be strict equity.

John Quincy Marr, a militia officer elected from Fauquier, favored the Union, but informed voters in a letter published January 26, 1861 that he would vote for secession if Virginia's honor and safety demanded as much.  (Marr later became the first Confederate officer killed in battle.)  The Fairfax News even considered that William Dulany, the pro-Union Commonwealth's Attorney elected from Fairfax, would not purchase peace and unity "at the price of the honor and interests of Virginia."  The paper concluded, "hence we infer that Mr. D. is not opposed to secession as a dernier resort."

John Quincy Marr, delegate from Fauquier County and later captain of the Warrenton Rifles, which officially became Co. K, 17th Virginia after Marr's death (courtesy of the Fairfax Rifles)

Some winning candidates were unquestionable in their stance for or against secession.  John A. Carter of Loudoun and George William Brent of Alexandria were strong Unionists who viewed secession as an abomination.  Carter considered the act to be unconstitutional.  Brent, at a public meeting on February 2, 1861, exclaimed that "while he was a submissionist to the constitution of his country, he was no submissionist to the precipitators of revolution" (as quoted in Feb. 4, 1861 edition of the Alexandria Gazette).  Delegate Eppa Hunton, a Commonwealth's Attorney from Prince William, was an unabashed secessionist who thought that the United States should allow the Southern states to leave the Union in peace.

The Convention convened in Richmond on February 13.  A vote on secession was still a few months away, and the delegates would have plenty of time to refine their positions further as events unfolded.

Footnote

*In 1861, the City of Alexandria was part of Alexandria County.  In 1870, the city became independent of the county, and it was not until 1920 that Alexandria County became Arlington County.

Note on sources:
"Secessionist Sentiment in Northern Virginia: December 1860 to May, 1861" by James Neale Stirewalt, published in Vol. 10 (1969) of the Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County, contains a thorough account on the February 1861 elections and includes quotations from many primary sources.  For a more recent overall account, see Brent Tarter, "Virginians Initially Opposed Secession from Union," Richmond Times-Dispatch, Nov. 28, 2010.

Yankees in Fairfax

Residents of the District sometimes view the Commonwealth of Virginia as though still belonging to the Confederacy.  A few of my DC-based friends have even joked that they need a passport to cross the Potomac and enter the Old Dominion state.  Governor McDonnell's original Confederate History Month proclamation did not do much to help matters.  However, as even McDonnell was finally forced to recognize, the wartime reality of Virginia is much more complex and nuanced.  Nowhere is this more evident than in Fairfax County.

Prior to the start of the Civil War, Fairfax and other parts of Virginia had seen an influx of Northerners, who were attracted by the milder climes south of the Mason-Dixon line.  According to the1860 Census, the Northern states with the largest presence in Virginia were Pennsylvania (18,673), Ohio (7,735), New York (4,617), New Jersey (1,611), and Massaschusetts (1,431).

A November 1, 1861 New York Times article on Northerners in Fairfax County observed:

[When] the war broke out. . . they constituted a large and influential class of the population. They settled generally in the eastern part of the county, and are to be found most numerous between Drainsville [sic] and Alexandria. Groups of four or five families are to be found in other parts of the county, and between Centreville and Manassas Northern families are not unfrequently met.

The newcomers helped to improve farming methods and increase agricultural production in an area that had seen its fair share of economic hardship.  As the Times reported, "[w]herever a Northern farmer bought a worn out farm two or three years sufficed to bring it up to an excellent condition."  Moreover, "[t]he Northern settlers rarely buy slaves, but cultivate their farms with free labor. In some instances, where their sons have married into Southern families, they have become possessed of a negro or two; but in these instances, the relation has generally been one of a voluntary character."  (I am not sure what is meant by "voluntary character;" perhaps the Times was trying to rationalize the contiunace of slaveholding by these Northern families.)  The Times speculated that Northern industriousness had improved land values in the county. For example, an "estate of one hundred and forty acres, north of Falls Church, was purchased by a Northern man at $8; a year ago it would have readily sold for $75."

American Farm Scenes, No. 2, Currier & Ives, 1853 (courtesy of The Old Print Shop)

The influx of Northerners also played a role in the politics of Fairfax leading up to the Civil War.  In the 1860 election, the combined "Unionist" vote in Fairfax totaled 807, compared to 685 for the Southern Democrat candidate, John C. Breckinridge.  The Unionists went most heavily for John Bell of the Constitutional Union Party (692 votes), followed by Stephen A. Douglas of the Northern Democrats (91 votes) and Abraham Lincoln of the Republican Party (24 votes).  Although Virginia natives also voted for Unionist candidates -- after all, Bell took Virginia in the election-- it is possible that Northern-born residents in Fairfax and elsewhere helped to contribute to the margin over Breckinridge.

1860 campaign poster for the Constitutional Union Party.  Presidential candidate John Bell is on the left; Vice Presidential Candidate Edward Everett is on the right (courtesy of Wikipedia Commons)

As the country headed towards disunion, residents of Fairfax County initially hesitated to embrace secession.  At least some of this sentiment is attributable to the presence of Northern transplants, as well as economic dependence on close-by Northern markets.  During the election for delegates to the Secession Convention in February 1861, Fairfax's Unionist candidate, William Dulaney, received 57 percent of the vote, compared to the pro-secession candidate, Alfred Moss, with 43 percent.  Dulaney was in the minoirty on April 17, when the Convention voted in favor of secession and sent an Ordinace to the voters for ratification.  On May 23, 1861, Fairfax voters approved the Ordinance by 76 percent.  Only three of fourteen districts (Accotink, Lewinsville, and Lydecker's, in and around Vienna) voted against secession.  (See the original voting records here.)   The start of hostilities at Fort Sumter and Lincoln's call for 75, 000 volunteers may have generated some of this support, which had grown considerably since the February vote.  However, secessionists also intimidated voters at the polls, sometimes by openly threatening violence against pro-Union men.  The voting was not by secret ballot, so everyone at a polling station would have known how a neighbor came out on the question of secession.  Some voters likely switched allegiances or stayed home rather than risk physical harm to cast a vote against the Ordinance. 

"How Virginia Was Voted Out of the Union," Harper's Weekly, June 15, 1861 (courtesy of sonofthesouth.net)

Freeman Store in Vienna, Virginia.  The store was built in 1859 by a recent migrant from New Jersey, Abram Lydecker.  Both Lydecker and his son-in-law, Anderson Freeman, ran the store.  In May 1861, residents of the area in and around Vienna cast their votes on the question of secession here.

As the Union Army occupied Northern Virginia in the fall of 1861, the Times reported:

The Northern settlers are almost unanimous for the Union, and though they have suffered great losses by reason of the war, most of them having been compelled to desert their homes after Bull Run, they have aided the Union cause in every way they could. Some are acting as guides, others in various capacities under the Government.

The paper also called out Northern transplants who supported the Confederacy, including the postmaster of Falls Church, who was arrested and forced to take an oath of allegiance.  The postmaster fled to Richmond, "probably fearing to come back."

Fairfax entered the war divided like the nation itself. That truth is a far cry from the myth that Virginians, including those just across the Potomac from Washington, were solidly in the Confederate camp.  The divisions within the Commonwealth demonstrate why we must be careful not to jump to conclusions about the inhabitants of Virginia and other Confederate States during the war.

Note on Sources:
For a good account of Unionist sentiment in Fairfax County, see Charles V. Mauro, The Civil War in Fairfax County: Civilians and Soldiers.