I can’t help but think of that scene in Gods & Generals when it came to the vote for secession in Rockbridge County, Virginia. Some may remember it, where the actor playing William Nelson Pendleton announced the vote and that there had been only one vote against secession in the county (after which, a person in the crowd yelled out that it must have been the “village idiot” who was the only vote against). I haven’t verified the facts on that one, but I do know that there is some very good evidence on how coercion was used in the referendum for secession (it would be great right about now to have that sketch that was made in the early war about the coerced vote in Virginia, but I can’t find it. If anyone has it, please send it to me so that I can include it in this post).
While I can’t speak with confidence just yet on the referendum for secession in Rockbridge, I have spent a considerable amount of time looking at a county in the central Shenandoah Valley.
On the surface, the results of the referendum for secession in Page County, Virginia show that 1,099 were in favor and four opposed; seemingly a reflection of overwhelming support for secession.[1]
A review of the Southern Loyalist Claims (aka, Southern Claims Commission applications) for Page County, however, reveals that several men had been reluctant to vote, mostly out of fear of retaliation.[2] Morgan M. Price and Martin Ellis felt that it was not safe to go to the polls with their sentiments. Ellis elaborated that there was too “much excitement” to side against secession. Price remembered, albeit incorrectly, that only one man voted against secession, and that that man was forced to “leave immediately to save himself from the mob.”[3] William H. Sours remained away from the polls and stated that “My sympathies were with the Union Cause. I did not talk much in favor of the Union. I had to be careful how I expressed my sentiment. I feared that I would be arrested if I spoke much.” Both James C. Robertson and Joseph Painter, Sr. remembered that they were too afraid to go to the polls. Painter was “informed that a party was coming out to hang several of us unless we would come out and vote for secession.”[4]
For those few Page County residents who applied for loyalist claims in years after the war, yet had been on record as having voted for secession, most stated that they had cast their votes either under an “illusion” presented by others or under duress.[5] Samuel Varner claimed that he had voted for secession because he was told if he “wanted peace he must vote for secesh.” Martin Hite noted that he had been “persuaded to vote for the adoption of the ordinance.” Joseph Miller simply noted that he was obliged to vote for secession through “fear.” [6] However, anyone who voted for secession, no matter the circumstances, would not receive approval for their loyalist claim. Nevertheless, understanding that the threat of bodily harm kept some men away from the polls to express their sentiment, it is not difficult to believe that some who had voted in favor of secession may well have done so out of fear for their lives or that of their families. Thus, even after Lincoln’s call for troops and the almost unanimous show of public support through the public referendum vote, Unionists were still very much a presence in Page County.
As historian John Inscoe points out, after the “secession process was completed and the war under way . . . the fluidity of the political debate as it had evolved in different ways in different states over the winter and spring of 1860-61 quickly gave way to the hard-and-fast allegiances demanded by two nations at war.” He further goes on to state that “suddenly to be a Unionist made one part of a self-conscious minority viewed with suspicion and hostility, a minority whose very presence threatened the new regime and its cause . . . Those who clung to what had been merely one side of a vigorous political debate were suddenly perceived as subversive and even traitorous, as ‘enemies to the country.”[7] The example of the experiences of Page County Unionists fits very well into Inscoe’s description, especially considering the reign of fear that followed the public referendum vote.
[1] County Vote on the Secession Ordinance, May 23, 1861. (Richmond: Library of Virginia, unpublished), 3.
[2] One-third (889) of the loyalist claims filed in Virginia were filed from the seven counties of the Shenandoah Valley; a particularly large portion of those being from Rockingham, Shenandoah and Page Counties, all in the central valley.
[3] Price was in error for saying this as there were actually four men who voted against secession in the county.
[4] Southern Loyalist Claims Application Files (Disapproved Claims), National Archives, Washington, D.C.; Southern Loyalist Claims Application Files (Approved Claims), College Park, Md. Southern Loyalist Claim Application Files of Martin Ellis, Joseph Painter, Sr., James C. Robertson, Morgan M. Price and William H. Sours. According to the 1860 Page County census, Ellis was a forty-eight year old farmer with $825 in real estate; Painter was a forty-two year old farmer with $350 in real estate; Robertson was a forty-two year old teacher with $1,200 in real estate; and Price was a thirty-one year old shoemaker with $100 in real estate. Sours cannot be found in the census records. Of the four men identified in the 1860 census, two resided in Luray and the other two in districts to the east.
[5] Incidentally, there is no evidence to show that those who applied for Loyalist claims in years after the war were in any way shunned by their families, neighbors and friends.
[6] Southern Loyalist Claim Application Files of Samuel Varner, Martin Hite, and Joseph Miller. According to the 1860 Page County census, Varner was a forty-six year old farmer with $4,000 in real estate; Hite was a forty-one year old farmer with $270 in real estate, and Miller was a forty year old miller.
[7] Inscoe, Enemies of the Country: New Perspectives on Unionists in the Civil War South, 2; Inscoe borrows the “Enemies of the County” phrase from a letter written from William W. Gordon to his wife, Nelly Kinzie Gordon on 29 July 1862. Carolyn J. Stefanco details the story of the Gordon family as part of Enemies of the County: New Perspectives on Unionists in the Civil War South, 148-171.
caswain01
April 1, 2008
I’d wonder if the demographics of the settlements play into the vote to a degree. I know in Loudoun (outside the valley of course), the sentiment was initially against secession. Later the vote was still not a forgone conclusion. Loudoun and neighboring Clarke County, over the ridge, both had a mix of tidewater influences with German settlement from PA. I’ll have to check with the Clarke Co Historical Society to get more details.
cenantua
April 2, 2008
Though there were certainly those in the Shenandoah Valley who favored secession prior to April 1861, I think Unionism had a greater presence. After April 1861 and Lincoln’s call for troops, this tipped in the other direction. But the difficulty is sorting out the conditional Unionists from the staunch Unionists. There is evidence that a number of people were firm in their Unionist beliefs, but were afraid to express it in any way (even to the point where they went to the polls and voted for secession, and yet did not necessarily favor the idea). Even when the Southern Claims Commission applications were submitted, not everyone came forward. Then too, there were a number who did come forward just looking for government money, and were, in fact, very much “secesh” during the war. It makes for some very “muddy waters” when it comes to understanding the complexities of sentiment leading up to the war.
Bob A.
July 10, 2008
First, I would like to say that the fact that county voting records have not been published long ago is criminal, history-wise. The Library of Virginia is irresponsible in not making these figures accessible to the general public.
However, some dogged historians have gone to the trouble to ferret figures from period newspapers, and here is the link to what was found. http://www.newrivernotes.com/va/vasecesh.htm
It does indeed show only 1 vote against secession in Rockbridge county.
I understand that a certain amount of coercion was apparent in eastern Virginia, so let us go that that vast, enigmatic and misunderstood region, western Virginia. According to the loyalist Lt. Gov. Daniel Polsley in Wheeling “the Northwest at least had a full and free expression…” So look at the map of the number of counties in West Virginia that voted for secession,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Wvmapagain.jpg
Considering the large part of western VA that voted for secession, I do think the loyalist vote in eastern VA would have been larger, but I don’t think it would have altered the outcome.
cenantua
July 10, 2008
Actually, voting records are readily available at the Library of Virginia. The referendum vote is available in the form of a small hardbound booklet.
As for Rockbridge County, yes, on the books, there was only one vote against secession in the referendum. However, the reason that I mentioned this was that though numbers on paper reflect one thing, items found in such records as the Southern Loyalist applications begin to paint another picture. Though one voted against, 1) how many opposed and did not go to the polls because of threats on their lives, 2) how many went to the polls after others told them that the only way to preserve the peace was with a vote for secession, and 3) how many voted for secession under duress? These are all difficult to ascertain, but worth the ferreting work to begin to fully understand the complex picture of things at the opening of the war.
While the loyalist vote in the west (my particular focus being on the Shenandoah Valley) may have been more significant had their not been the many different forms of coercion and influence, I still believe that the secession vote would have been a majority vote. That said however, my reason for bringing out an idea about coercion is to focus on flaws in contemporary beliefs (by some) that there was a “solid South.” That is very much a myth (and seems to become even more so as the war progressed). Likewise, the model of gentlemanly conduct of Southerners that so many want to believe isn’t so gentlemanly when considering not only coercion, but outright fear tactics employed on those known to be Unionists.
Bob A.
July 12, 2008
Thanks for letting me know about the book from the Library of VA. None of my web searches or book database searches have ever turned up a copy. I will try to get one from them.
Oxford U. Press published an “Atlas of the Civil War”, and when I looked at Virginia I was totally confused, and then I realized that they had used the delegate vote from April 17 instead of the popular vote of May 23, and it gave a very false impression. It is interesting also to note that Louisiana votes were nearly split between Secession and anti-Secession delegates to their convention, but the convention itself voted heavily in favor or secession, so that also gives a false impression of what the people wanted. On the other hand, we have had an overstatement of Union sentiment in western Virginia, which has yet to be corrected. Freehling’s book is full of misinformation on WV, as is Lincoln’s Loyalists by Current.
cenantua
July 12, 2008
I’m not totally satisfied with the information that has been put out about West Virginia. I think that the counties that border the Shenandoah Valley in addition to the Kanawha Valley put forth a good number of Confederates (and of course the one company from as far away as Wheeling).
Though dated (1934), I like Henry T. Shanks’ “The Secession Movement in Virginia.” It has some great maps showing the 1) distribution of slaveholders in 1860, 2) gubernatorial election results for 1858, 3)presidential election results for 1860, and 4) the vote (the 4/17/61 vote) on secession. Like I said, it is dated and needs revision, but there is good information therein.
A lot of people praise Current’s book, however, I wasn’t satisfied with his conclusions. I think there isn’t enough concrete data to back-up his theory (though I think he was headed in the right direction). There is a great deal of “digging” to be done in regard to this subject.
Will Keene
November 21, 2008
David Strother’s diary recollections refer to confederate troops intimidating voters in Jefferson County.
cenantua
November 21, 2008
Hello Will, Thanks for commenting. Yes, the diary of D.H. Strother does offer some great material for considering when discussing coercion and Southern Unionists in general; and I think he is probably my favorite Southern Unionist to study. I hope to do a profile on him sometime in the near future on my other blog, Southern Unionists Chronicles. Thanks again!