Ohio History Journal

DENNIS K. BOMAN

Conduct and Revolt in the

Twenty-fifth Ohio Battery:

An Insider's Account

 

 

 

On August 10, 1861, in the town of Canfield, Ohio, twenty-eight year old

Robert T. McMahan enlisted as a private in the Second Ohio Volunteer

Cavalry.¹ On September 3, the date of his muster, he began a journal in

which he noted the experiences and impressions of his service in the United

States military.² McMahan first served as a cavalryman and then as a gunner

for the Twenty-fifth Ohio Light Artillery. During his three-year enlistment,

McMahan served in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma and Arkansas, and was

mustered out of the military at Little Rock, Arkansas, September 8, 1864.³

After obtaining transportation from the Quartermaster Department, he arrived

in Columbus, Ohio, September 23.⁴

 

 

Dennis K. Boman is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

He wishes to especially thank William H. and Kathryn Lee White who provided some impor-

tant source material which now is part of the McMahan Papers, Western Manuscript

Collection, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri. He would also like to thank Dr.

Thomas B. Alexander, Dr. Daniel Hooley, Evelyn Nichols, and Keith Shafer who read his

manuscript and made helpful suggestions.

 

1. McMahan was born on November 8, 1832, in Pennsville, Ohio. Clipping of Robert T.

McMahan's obituary from an unidentified newspaper, Robert T. McMahan Papers, Western

Historical Manuscript Collection, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri. Hereafter re-

ferred to as McMahan Papers.

2. Five unpublished journals of Robert T. McMahan, September 3, 1861, and May 19, 1862,

McMahan Papers. Hereafter cited as McMahan Journals. The journals cover September 3,

1861, to September 18, 1864. From October 21, 1862, to January 13, 1863, two separate ren-

derings of the Journals are extant. These will be referred to as the short and long versions.

The long version commences on October 21, 1862, and the short version's last entry is January

13, 1863. Perhaps there can be no absolute certainty that both the short and long versions were

written contemporaneously, yet the weight of the internal evidence favors this conclusion. First,

the long version continues after the short version is discontinued on January 13, 1862. In the

long version there is an absence of any information that would date it later than its entry dates.

Finally, the short version's entries are more concise after McMahan began his expanded en-

tries in the long version. This indicates that McMahan continued to keep his original diary (the

short version) while writing a fuller account in the long version. Unless otherwise noted, all

words underlined or italicized in the quotations below are found in the original documents.

3. Ohio. Adjutant General. Official Roster of the Soldiers in the State of Ohio in the War of

the Rebellion, 1861-1866 (Ohio Historical Society Microfilm FLM 291), 10:635, 638; 11:51,78.

While awaiting his discharge papers, McMahan was given charge of a detail and did not end

his service until September 18.

4. Order to the Quartermaster's Department of the Department of Arkansas, September 10,

• 1
 

164                                                           OHIO HISTORY

 

Before the war, McMahan had been certified to teach English, arithmetic,

geography and U.S. history in Fulton county, Illinois.⁵ He then attended

Jefferson College in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, where he was a member of

the Delta-Upsilon fraternity, a literary society, and a missionary organiza-

tion.⁶ As part of the graduating class of August 1, 1860, McMahan gave an

address during the commencement exercises entitled, "Italy, Its Religious

Regeneration."⁷ In the fall of 1860, McMahan became a student at the

Western Theological Seminary of the Presbyterian Church in Allegheny City,

Pennsylvania, passing his first year's examination in April 1861.8

At the end of his enlistment in 1864, McMahan resumed his studies at the

Western Theological Seminary and, having completed "the full course of

study," received his diploma on April 18, 1866.⁹ During this time McMahan

married Maria A. Walkinshaw.¹⁰ They had eight children, two of whom died

in infancy.¹¹ McMahan served as a Presbyterian minister in Illinois, Ohio,

and South Dakota. In 1887 he moved to Jasper City, Missouri, where he died

of pneumonia on January 11, 1892, at the age of 59.12

During the first months of the Lincoln Administration, the South's capture

of Fort Sumter outraged and unified the North.¹³ In his journal, McMahan

expressed the patriotism of many young northern men who answered

Lincoln's first call to arms. McMahan, a Democrat who had voted for

Buchanan in 1856 and Douglas in 1860, believed that "Abraham Lincoln was

fairly and constitutionally elected President of these United States, therefore,

every true Democrat should support [Lincoln's] Administration and he who

 

 

1864; discharge papers of Robert T. McMahan, September 8, 1864; and a military pass from

the headquarters of the Provost Marshall of Columbus, Ohio, September 23, 1864. All in

McMahan Papers.

5. Teaching certificates for Fulton county, Illinois, June 21, 1852, and September 23, 1855,

McMahan Papers.

6. Certificates of membership in Brainarda Evangelica Societas (Brainard Evangelical

Society), the Franklinia Societas Literaria (Franklin Literary Society), and letter from John

Sunney to Robert T. McMahan, July 27, 1861, McMahan Papers.

7. Program for the commencement exercises held at Jefferson College in Canonsburg,

Pennsylvania, on August 1, 1860, in McMahan Papers.

8. McMahan to Colonel Cummings, Superintendent of the organization of Colored Troops,

Little Rock, Arkansas, May 9, 1864; and McMahan Journals, May 13, 1864, McMahan Papers.

McMahan was applying for an officer's commission to a "Color'd" regiment. It is unclear

whether he completed the application process.

9. Diploma of the Western Theological Seminary, April 18, 1866, McMahan Papers.

10. Marriage license of Robert T. McMahan and Maria A. Walkinshaw, February 26, 1866,

McMahan Papers.

11. Two undated pages recording the dates of each of the children's births and deaths,

McMahan Papers.

12. Clipping of Robert T. McMahan's obituary from an unidentified newspaper, McMahan

Papers.

13. Johnson, R. U. and C. C. Buel, eds., Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, 4 vols. (New

York, 1884-1887; reprint ed., Secaucus, N.J., 1991), vol. 1: "War Preparations in the North,"

by Jacob D. Cox, 84-98. Hereafter cited as Cox, "War Preparations."

• 2
 

Conduct and Revolt                                         165

does not is not for his country but against it." McMahan declared his will- ingness to sacrifice for the good of the country: "Thousands are suffering pri- vations and giving their lives for the preservation of our country, so must we."14 Despite these convictions, within a year and a half McMahan and many of the young men of his regiment would be in open revolt against their leadership. Why did these seemingly patriotic men revolt? This study will consider the attitudes and circumstances that caused the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery to revolt. McMahan in his journal gives an in- sider's view of regimental conduct and the revolt from its beginning to end, detailing some of the internal dynamics that sustained it. Not surprisingly, the regiment did not use Regular Army practices to maintain discipline, for     14. McMahan Journals, May 20, 1863, and January 14, 1862.

• 3
 

166                                                      OHIO HISTORY

 

its volunteer officers were largely ignorant of these methods. The election of

officers by their troops during the first year of the war presented more prob-

lems. Popularity does not necessarily translate into good military leadership.

Given the democratic way in which regiments were organized, volunteer

troops could hardly be faulted for believing that military duties should be con-

ducted like a town meeting-electing officials, arriving at a consensus, and

then going forward with a plan. This combination of democratic rule and lax

discipline created the circumstances which ultimately led to revolt. The first

part of this study will document the unmilitary attitudes and conduct of the

Second Ohio Cavalry and the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery. The second part

will consider the circumstances of the revolt itself.

Before the Civil War, the United States' Regular Army numbered thirteen

thousand officers and men. This number was increased to twenty-five thou-

sand during the conflict.¹⁵ The remainder of the Union's military machine

was composed of volunteers. In mid-April of 1861, Lincoln called for sev-

enty-five thousand militia to serve for three months. Lincoln recognized the

inadequacy of both the troop numbers and the duration of their term of ser-

vice, yet so long as Congress remained out of session, he thought this his

only legal course of action.¹⁶

Soon afterward, because of the extreme need for additional troops, Lincoln

decided to accept volunteer regiments raised in the North although he lacked

Congressional authority to do so, "citing his constitutional power as com-

mander in chief."¹⁷ Congress on July 22, 1861, authorized the enlistment of

a volunteer army of a million men: "the Governors of the States furnishing

volunteers under this act shall commission the field, staff, and company offi-

cers requisite for the said volunteers." The Federal government assigned each

state a quota of soldiers which the states were to raise and organize them-

selves.¹⁸ By this method, some 700,000 men were raised by the beginning

of 1862.19

Despite the readiness of young men to enlist in the military, great difficul-

ties confronted the Lincoln administration's prosecution of the war. At the

conflict's outset, the most formidable task facing the North was how to create

an effective fighting force from civilians. The officers and men of these new

regiments knew little about soldiering.²⁰ Many of the volunteers (including

 

 

 

15. William Tecumseh Sherman, Memoirs of General W. T. Sherman (New York, reprint

ed., 1990), 874-75.

16. Fred Albert Shannon, The Organization and Administration of the Union Army, 1861-

1865, 2 volumes (Cleveland, 1928), 1:31. Hereafter cited as Shannon, Union Army.

17. James M. McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era (New York, 1988),

322. Hereafter cited as McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom.

18. Shannon, Union Army, 46.

19. McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom, 322.

20. McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom, 329-31.

• 4
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                        167

 

the officers) had no military experience whatsoever. Before the war, some

men had served in the militia units of their state, but these units were want-

ing in numbers, discipline, and equipment.²¹

Volunteers tended to think and act like civilians, debating and coming to a

consensus before they acted. During the Second Ohio's first year, both men

and officers often disregarded orders with which they did not agree.²² Even

experienced officers like Ulysses S. Grant discovered that establishing disci-

pline in a volunteer regiment was no easy task.²³

 

 

The Election of Officers

 

The election of officers by volunteer regiments detrimentally affected unit

discipline. This practice was common among state militias before the Civil

War and was continued during the war's first two years. Three days after

McMahan was mustered into the Second Ohio Cavalry, the men elected their

officers. During the campaign for officership, candidates often made promises

which later undermined their authority. "The officer, when elected, was, be-

cause of his closer contact with his constituency, more bound by his cam-

paign promises than was the case of his brother politician outside the

army."²⁴ As a result, these officers, completely unaccustomed to military

command, often accommodated the wishes of their subordinates.²⁵ For their

 

 

21. Cox, "War Preparations," 89-90. Cox tells of inspecting Ohio's State Arsenal with

George McClellan (afterwards commander of the Army of the Potomac) and finding only a

few rusted muskets and worn-out six-pounder cannons.

22. McMahan Journals, January 27 and December 26, 1862; U.S. War Department, The War

of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies,

70 volumes in 128 parts (Washington, D.C.: 1880-1901), Series 1, Volume 22, pt. 1, 488-90

and 494. Hereafter cited as Official Records. See also McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom,

329.

23. Ulysses S. Grant's command of the Twenty-first Illinois provides an example of the dif-

ficulty involved in establishing military discipline over troops accustomed to independent ac-

tion. The regiment was considered to be a "vigorous and hardy" group who were "unused to

any kind of restraint, every man much inclined to think and act for himself." In the month be-

fore he was appointed as a Brigadier General, Grant strictly restored order, though he made

some concessions to the regiment's unfamiliarity with military life. Bruce Catton, Grant Moves

South (Canada, 1960; reprint ed. by William B. Catton, 1988), 3-22. See also, Ulysses S. Grant,

Memoirs and Selected Letters, Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant, Selected Letters 1839-1865

(New York, reprint ed., 1990), 160-67.

24. Shannon, Union Army, 170. By 1863 officers' commissions were awarded by

"appointment and promotion for merit." McMahan Journals, September 6, 1861.

25. Examples of the lax discipline imposed by officers of the Second Ohio Cavalry and the

Twenty-fifth Ohio Battery were related by J. A. Russell in Historical Collections of the

Mahoning Valley: Containing An Account of the Two Pioneer Reunions: Together with a

Selection of Interesting Facts, Traditions, Biographical Sketches, Anecdotes, Etc., Relating to

the Sale and Settlement of the Lands Belonging to the Connecticut Land Company, and History

and Reminiscences, Both General and Local, Volume 1, "J. A. Russell's Experience in Wade

and Hutchin's Cavalry," (Youngstown, 1876), 439-40. Hereafter cited as Russell, Historical

• 5
 

168                                                       OHIO HISTORY

 

part, enlisted men reserved the right to reject any course of action proposed to

them by their officers, men whom they knew from prewar days.

 

Too often both officers and men came from the same neighborhood, to which they

all intended to return. They had known each other and each other's peculiarities all

their lives. The privates could not bring themselves to call by anything but his

first name, or to salute with decorum, the village lawyer, undertaker, or livery-sta-

ble flunky, even if he were now a captain or a lieutenant.²⁶

 

While serving as an escort to a wagon train traveling from Fort Scott,

Kansas, to Carthage, Missouri, McMahan observed an incident which illus-

trated the relationship between officers and enlisted men in the Second and

Twenty-fifth Ohio.

 

This morning the commander of the escort requested Segt. Knapp to fall in the rear

of the train: but we were all opposed to this, and when ready to pull out concluded

if we could pass the advance guard without resistance we would make our own time

to the command below (at Elk Tavern or Pea Ridge) and run all risk of bushwhack-

ers[.] So on we started, passed through the advance guard, who were grazing their

horses and waiting for the advance to be sounded, and struck out for Carthage

alone.²⁷

 

Although the escort abandoned the wagon train, no one was punished for dis-

obeying the order of a superior officer. In fact, the officer later sent forward

riders to ask McMahan and his companions-they were then far in advance-

to await the wagon train's arrival. McMahan and the rest of the escort agreed

to wait, but soon decided that they would go on to Carthage.²⁸ While the es-

cort's disobedience did not result in disaster, the incident illustrates the en-

listed man's independence of action and the officer's reluctance to punish men

who disobeyed his orders.

The commanding officer of a volunteer regiment was not any more exempt

from challenges to his authority than his junior officers. Colonel Charles

Doubleday of the Second Ohio was to learn this lesson when the regiment

was in Kansas.²⁹ According to McMahan, some of Doubleday's officers op-

posed his leadership because they hoped to replace him, while others opposed

him because he planned to carry out Senator James Lane's plan to campaign

 

Collections. According to Russell, private soldiers exercised a great amount of autonomy, go-

ing unsupervised on long foraging expeditions and deciding whether or not they would wear

their uniforms.

26. Shannon, Union Army, 169.

27. McMahan Journals, October 23, 1862, long version.

28. Ibid.

29. Charles W. Doubleday was appointed colonel of the regiment by Governor William

Dennison of Ohio. Doubleday "had acquired some military experience while serving as a

member of a filibustering expedition against Nicaragua." Luman Harris Tenney, Introductory

Notes to War Diary of Luman Harris Tenney: 1861-1865, by A. B. Nettleton, June 10, 1911

(Cleveland, 1914), IX. Hereafter cited as Tenney, War Diary.

• 6
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                        169

 

in Texas instead of in the East which they preferred. One of the officers was

John Hutchins, first lieutenant of Company C and the son of Ohio

Congressman John Hutchins.³⁰ Congressman Hutchins and Senator

Benjamin F. Wade had organized the regiment in 1861 and were influential

men in Washington. During his dispute with Colonel Doubleday, Lieutenant

Hutchins told him "that there were those who drew more water with the secre-

tary of war than [he]."³¹ Obviously, Hutchins thought that his father would

side with him in the dispute. Despite Lieutenant Hutchins' opposition, how-

ever, the expedition, although it did not go to Texas, went into the Indian

Territory (later Oklahoma).³²

Colonel Doubleday was placed in command of the expedition, but was soon

replaced. On June 4, word came that Colonel William Weer, commander of

the Tenth Kansas Infantry, had been given command. Despite strong solicita-

tion from the officers of the regiment, Colonel Doubleday was "so enraged at

the intrigue and rascality of Kansas officers and politicians in making Wier

[Weer] rank him" that he resigned his commission.³³ Doubleday was reas-

signed to a command out East.³⁴ Later during the expedition, Colonel Weer

was relieved of his command and arrested for drunkenness and incompetence.³⁵

After Doubleday resigned his command, he sent a letter to the Youngstown,

Ohio, Mahoning Sentinel, in which he argued that the North's failure to sub-

due the South was the result of the Union Army's lack of discipline.

 

Properly disciplined and officered, our army would overwhelm that of the South. I

speak from a thorough practical knowledge of the comparative merit of our sol-

diers, when judiciously trained and handled. Discard our inefficient officers, pro-

mote deserving men, enforce rigid military discipline, and I will bring you the in-

dorsement [sic] of every practical military man in our army that our present forces

will whip the, at present, successful army of adventurers opposed to us.³⁶

 

 

30. McMahan Journals, May 21, 1862; Whitelaw Reid, Ohio In the War: Her Statesmen,

Her Generals, and Soldiers, 2 vols. (Cincinnati, 1868), Volume 2: The History of Her

Regiments and Other Military Organizations, 755, 757. Hereafter cited as Reid, Ohio in the

War.

31. McMahan Journals, May 21, 1862.

32. Reid, Ohio in the War, Volume 2: 755, 757. The expedition set out in early June and did

not return until August. It is probable that Lieutenant Hutchins did not go on the expedition, for

his resignation was accepted on July 7, 1862.

33. Tenney, War Diary, June 5th, 1862 entry, 17. See also Introductory Notes by A. B.

Nettleton, X, and Reid, Ohio in the War, Volume 2: 754.

34. Mahoning Sentinel (Youngstown, Ohio), letter of Colonel Charles Doubleday, September

24, 1862.

35. Tenney, War Diary, July 11, 1862, letter and July 19 and 20 entries: 20, 21-22. Tenney

tells of Weer's arrest in this way: "Col. S[alomon], all the officers in his brigade and most of

the other approving, concluded to arrest him; sent the adjutant with a detail of 100 men who or-

dered him under arrest. He refused the order. The detail presented bayonets and took him

prisoner."

36. Mahoning Sentinel, letter of Charles Doubleday, September 24, 1862. The following

week's issue of the same paper, October 1, announced that Colonel Doubleday had been re-

• 7
 

170                                                             OHIO HISTORY

 

After the expedition into the Indian Territory and their return to Kansas, the

Second Ohio's officers turned to the task of electing a new colonel. (At least

one officer had returned from Ohio after having spoken with Governor Tod

about the selection of a new commander.)³⁷ A week before the election, the

enlisted men lent their support to Colonel Doubleday and sent a "petition to

Gov[.] Todd [sic] to restore him."³⁸

Ohio Governor David Tod insisted that the election of a new colonel must

be made unanimously; otherwise, he threatened to appoint a Regular Army

officer to the regiment. This threat was effective, for the officers of the regi-

ment soon unanimously elected Major Henry Burnett as its colonel.³⁹

Nevertheless, the governor, perhaps disappointed with their choice, appointed

Colonel August V. Kautz, formerly commander of the United States Sixth

Cavalry. Kautz was an experienced professional officer, who as a young man

fought in the Mexican War at the battle of Monterey. In 1848 he was ap-

pointed to West Point, then remained in the Regular Army until the outbreak

of the Civil War. An educated guess would have it that Governor Tod recog-

nized that only a professional officer could restore order to the Second Ohio.⁴⁰

 

Inexperience and Misdeeds of the Regiment

 

The inexperience of the regiment's officers worked against the establish-

ment of discipline. Soldiers could hardly be expected to follow without ques-

tion officers whose military expertise barely exceeded their own. For this rea-

 

 

 

lieved from duty for writing his letter, which ironically was itself a breach of the very military

discipline he had argued must be maintained.

37. Tenney, War Diary, 30.

38. McMahan Journals, August 31, 1862.

39. In order to gain a unanimous vote, the candidates with the least number of votes after

each ballot agreed to drop out of the election. In this manner the selection was eventually

made. See Tenney, War Diary, September 10, 1862, entry 31.

40. McMahan Journals, August 28, September 10, 27, and October 13, 1862. Colonel Kautz

was later promoted to the rank of Brevet Major General. Besides commanding the Second

Ohio Cavalry, Kautz commanded a brigade consisting of the Second and Seventh Ohio Cavalry

during the spring of 1863. The brigade under his command pursued John Morgan through

Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio. After this, Kautz was appointed the Twenty-Third Corps' Chief

of Cavalry during Burnside's campaign in East Tennessee. In the spring of 1864, Kautz was

appointed commander of cavalry for the Army of the James, conducting raids in Virginia.

From the summer of 1864 to March of 1865, Kautz served successively with the Army of the

James and the Army of the Potomac. At this time Kautz was appointed commander of the First

Division of the Twenty-Fifth Corps, "composed entirely of colored troops," which marched

into Richmond April 3. In May of the same year, Kautz served on the military commission

which tried those implicated in President Lincoln's assassination. After the war, Kautz served

as Acting Judge Advocate of the Military Division of the Gulf on the staff of General Philip

Sheridan. "General Kautz was married on September 14, 1865, to Miss Charlotte Tod, eldest

daughter" of Governor Tod. See biographical sketch of General Kautz in Reid, Ohio in the

War, Volume I: History of the State During the War, and the Lives of Her Generals, 844-48.

• 8
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                    171

 

son, soldiers challenged the wisdom of an order before obeying it. They acted

this way in civilian life, and they saw no reason to change. When the in-

evitable occurred and inexperienced officers made mistakes, soldiers felt all the

more justified in disobeying what they felt to be ill-advised orders.

During the regiment's first movement from Camp Dennison (near

Cincinnati) to Platte City, Missouri, the officers' military inexperience re-

sulted in the exercise of bad judgment. Having stopped for the night near St.

Charles, Missouri, the officers, in what was a major blunder, failed to make

provision for the shelter and sustenance of their troops, although they had

"plenty of time" to do so. According to McMahan, the officers preferred to

spend time in St. Louis rather than provide their troops with adequate

overnight shelter. As a result, "many were the curses the head officers re-

ceived for not making better preparations for us."⁴¹

Not long afterward, the regiment's officers found it difficult to prevent

some of their men from interfering with slavery. At the time (in early 1862),

Lincoln still insisted that the restoration of the Union was his sole object for

prosecuting the war:

 

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to

save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I

would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I

could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.⁴²

 

Many Northerners, including some of the soldiers of the Second Ohio, did

not agree with Lincoln's view and sought to make the war's object the de-

struction of slavery.⁴³ While in St. Charles, Missouri, the men of Company

E (McMahan's company) helped a slave escape from his master; the slave

claimed that "he left his master because he threatened to kill him." The men

hid the slave on the train on which they were traveling.

Two days later, at St. Joseph, Missouri, some of the regiment's men tried

again to help fugitive slaves escape their master. This attempt was not as

successful as the previous one. At St. Joseph, "a negro lady and her 2 little

girls" hiding on some freight cars were, unfortunately, discovered by their

master, an "Old Gray beard," who was intent on retrieving them. The troops

might not have interfered had not the slaves' owner made the mistake of strik-

ing at one of the "little girls with his cane." This deed set in motion an in-

teresting chain of events.

 

 

41. McMahan Journals, January 19, 1862. McMahan, on February 15, complained that

"Captain Hall thought too much of his dinner to get us quarters until too late."

42. Abraham Lincoln: His Speeches and Writings, edited with critical and analytical notes by

Roy P. Basler with preface by Carl Sandburg (Cleveland, 1946; reprint ed., New York, 1990),

letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862, 652.

43. Frederick J. Blue, "Friends of Freedom: Lincoln, Chase, and Wartime Radical Policy,"

Ohio History, 102 (Summer-Autumn 1993), 85-97.

• 9
 

172                                                         OHIO HISTORY

 

Our boys seeing this were bound now to give the Old Chap some trouble though we

knew they could not go with us-They came out of the freight car onto the plat-

form of our car and J.J[.] and John B[.) placed themselves as guards. Lieu[.] B[.]

Loan sent down word that our train should not leave until the slaves were delivered

up. But the boys wouldn't deliver-We were ordered into the [yard?] and then the

Old Gray beard and his minions took the slaves from the car, not without consider-

able trouble, screaming of Slaves &c&c [sic] Charlie (Captain[']s cook colored)

broke a bottle over the old chap[']s head blood flowed quite freely-The boys had

used him pretty harsh, barked at him, shoved him here and there-insulted &

abused, but he bore it all like a Martyr.

 

Later in Platte City, Missouri, some of the soldiers secretly helped slaves

escape, but Colonel Doubleday returned three of these to their owner. The in-

cident prompted military authorities at Fort Leavenworth to issue an order

that the troops were "to have nothing to do with colored property in any way

whatever." In August of the same year, the regiment heard James Lane, the

Kansas senator, and James G. Blunt, who later became a Major General, de-

liver speeches at Fort Scott, Kansas. Their purpose was to raise three new

regiments "and as many negro & Ind[ian] Reg[iment]s as possible."⁴⁴ Four

days later, Charles R. Jennison, commander of the Seventh Kansas, proposed

"raising [a] negro brigade and 'raising more hell in Mo than all Ks ever

raised."'⁴⁵ What effect these speeches had upon the regiment is unclear, but

McMahan's record of them demonstrates that some of the military leadership

from Kansas was in favor of turning the war into a conflict to destroy slavery

before President Lincoln made it Federal policy when he issued the prelimi-

nary Emancipation Proclamation on September 22, 1862.46

Another example of the Second Ohio's insubordination was demonstrated in

their common practice of plundering or "jayhawking."⁴⁷ While on the march,

the Second and Twenty-fifth Ohio confiscated not only slaves but other prop-

erty as well. Confiscation was legal so long as goods were obtainable in no

other way.⁴⁸ Farmers who took the oath of allegiance to the Federal govern-

ment were given a voucher which entitled them to compensation for the

 

44. McMahan Journals, January 25, 27, and February 15, 1862. In his journal, dated March

22, McMahan stated that two hundred slaves had fled Missouri and that Senator Wade, an

abolitionist, had expressed dissatisfaction with Doubleday's action during a visit with the regi-

ment. Also see McMahan Journals, August 12, 1862, and Tenney, War Diary, August 11,

1862, 25.

45. McMahan Journals, August 18, 1862. See also, Michael Fellman, Inside War: The

Guerrilla Conflict in Missouri During the American Civil War (New York, 1989), 66.

Hereafter cited as Fellman, Inside War.

46. The final proclamation was made on January 1, 1863, See Roy P. Basler, ed., Marion

Dolores Pratt and Lloyd A. Dunlap, assistant eds., The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln:

The Abraham Lincoln Association, Springfield, Illinois, Volume VI (New Brunswick, New

Jersey, 1953) January 1, 1863, Emancipation Proclamation, 28-30.

47. McMahan Journals, January 29; February 22, 26; May 15; June 3 and 6, 1862.

48. An excellent treatment of guerrilla warfare in Missouri is found in Fellman, Inside War,

chapters 3 and 4.

• 10
 

Conduct and Revolt                                        173

goods appropriated by the army.49 At other times, troops took and destroyed property as retaliation against those they considered disloyal. Although such action was officially contrary to the military district's policy, it was often winked at by officers who sympathized with soldiers wishing to punish the rebels as severely as possible. Many Missourians, in opposition, became guerrilla partisans, sometimes assuming the identity of loyal Union men while banding together to ambush Federal soldiers.50 In his journal, McMahan detailed the frustration experienced by most Union soldiers who struggled against this elusive enemy. These Bushwhackers are a species of the genus rebel far more to be detested and abhorred than those who come out boldly and enlist in the Confederate Ranks.... A few days ago when in Rolla I recognized among a lot of prisoners just leaving for St[.] Louis, one who lived near Carrolton and from whom we had obtained sev- eral loads of forage. At that time he professed to be a strong union man, and ac- cording to his own story none in that neighborhood had done more for the Union cause than he. But a few days afterwards he was caught in the brush by a squad of our cavalry, whom he and his friends were attempting to bushwhack.51     49. McMahan Journals, November 14, 1862, short version. 50. Liberty Tribune (Missouri), November 15, 1861; May 2 and 9; June 20 and 27; July 4 and 11; August 1 and 15; September 5, 12, and 26; October 17 and 23; and November 21, all in 1863; Ann Davis Niepman, "General Orders No. 11 and Border Warfare During the Civil War," Missouri Historical Review, 66 (January, 1972): 185-210. 51. McMahan Journals, May 20, 1862.

• 11
 

174                                                    OHIO HISTORY

 

On February 4, 1862, near Platte City, some of the soldiers of Company D

raided the home of a colonel of Price's army "and took possession of quite a

lot of hogs & bacon wheat &c&c [sic] designed for the Southern army." A

few months later, fearing the men would plunder a farm despite orders not to,

men were posted to guard a widow's "chicken room and smokehouse" near

Lone Jack, Missouri.⁵²

In November, just before the Prairie Grove battle, McMahan and the

Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery marched into Arkansas. While skirmishing with

the enemy near Cane Hill, soldiers helped themselves to some of the books in

the library of the college. McMahan recorded the strong measures imple-

mented to stop the unnecessary plundering of property. One measure in-

volved raiding soldiers' camps to find stolen items. Having taken some geol-

ogy books himself, McMahan narrowly escaped being caught with them

when guards searched the Twenty-fifth Ohio's camp. In late December, the

Army of the Frontier marched south and captured Van Buren, Arkansas, where

a great amount of looting occurred in the city.

Men were at work all last night with dark lanterns and candles in shops and stores

all over town. Guards were of but little consequence and the officers seemed to care

not whether jayhawking was going on or the men all quiet in their quarters. No

stop was put to the carrying off [of] property in the big Warehouse until after 9

this forenoon the building was filled with Artillery men Infantry & Cavalrymen

from daylight up to 9 when Blunt made his appearance revolver in hand and drove

us all out!!!! Such dropping of goods and skedaddling!! But he had given time

enough.

 

Before General Blunt's appearance, McMahan tells of soldiers ransacking

other stores and buildings in the city. Blunt's personally driving out the sol-

diers from the buildings demonstrated the degree to which discipline had bro-

ken down.⁵³

 

 

An Unpopular Detachment

 

The first part of this study has chronicled the democratic election of the

Second Ohio's officers and how this undermined their authority. Contrary to

their superior officers' commands, enlisted men emancipated slaves and took

or destroyed civilian property. While popularity was the prerequisite for the

selection of officers, it was hardly the best criterion upon which to choose

them. Popular men can also be inexperienced or incompetent. Officers who

 

 

52. McMahan Journals, February 4, 1862 (McMahan does not give the name of the colonel

mentioned), and August 15, 1862.

53. McMahan Journals, November 28, 30, and December 1, 8, (the battle of Prairie Grove,

fought on the seventh, was a Union victory), and December 29, 1862.

• 12
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                 175

 

neglected or did not know their duties and responsibilities caused unnecessary

suffering among their subordinates. Such difficulties occurred during the

Second Ohio's first movement when some officers did not adequately provide

food and shelter for their men. If McMahan's reaction was representative of

the enlisted man's attitude to this type of maltreatment, one must conclude

that such incidents did much harm to the relationship between officers and en-

listed men.

The second part of this study will turn to the circumstances of the revolt it-

self. Groups of men were selected from each of the companies of the Second

Ohio to man a battery of artillery. McMahan's journal reveals that the sol-

diers for the newly formed unit felt betrayed by their leadership. In their

minds, they had enlisted in the Second Ohio Cavalry, and only the most ex-

treme military necessity could justify their being attached to another unit.

This impression was reinforced by some of the junior officers who encouraged

the men to refuse service, but later backed down themselves.

On August 9, 1862, McMahan stated that "strange rumors" were circulating

in camp about the detachment of some members of the regiment into an in-

fantry or artillery unit. Actually, such a move had been under consideration

since mid-March in preparation for an expedition through Kansas and the

Indian Territory. Major Charles G. Halpine, who was Assistant Adjutant-

General, in a report to General H. W. Halleck, commander of the Department

of the Mississippi, gave the reason for the delay as "owing to the non-arrival

of carriages, caissons, and equipment for the guns." By August 28, with the

arrival of the artillery equipment, men were detached from each company to

form the Twenty-fifth Ohio Light Artillery.⁵⁴

Having returned to Fort Scott, Kansas, from the expedition into the Indian

Territory, one hundred and fifty men were detached into an artillery unit.

These men, determined to remain in the Second Ohio Cavalry, the regiment

they had enlisted in, decided to disobey the order. "It was the understanding

however, not to report as per order, and if placed under arrest, to march en

masse to the guard house."⁵⁵ This course of action was recommended by

some of their officers, and according to McMahan

 

. . . one officer, in particular, addressing the detail from his company said, if they

were still determined on going to the guardhouse instead of reporting to the Col.

he would do all in his power to render their quarters as comfortable as possible. He

was instantly hailed with loud cheering which spread like wildfire throughout the

entire camp. All was now excitement[.] It was 1 o'clock and none were ready to

report[.] Squad after squad having refused, were under arrest and on their way to the

 

54. McMahan Journals, August 9 and 28, 1862; and Official Records, Charles G. Halpine to

Major General H. W. Halleck, March 14, 1862, Series I, Volume 8, 615.

55. McMahan Journals, August 28, 1862; and Tenney, War Diary, September 28, 1862; 29.

See also McMahan's letter to the editor of the Mahoning Sentinel, February 25, 1863. A copy

of this letter is found in the February 14, 1863, entry of the McMahan Journals.

• 13
 

176                                                          OHIO HISTORY

 

guard quarters. But hold! The chief officers becoming alarmed at this bold show of

passive resistance rush to the scene of action, and after remonstrating and

earnestly entreating a return to obedience proceed to read from the 'regulations'

the pains and penalties attached to mutiny and disobedience of orders.⁵⁶

 

The company officers, many of whom had previously encouraged the men's

course of action, now advised them to submit. The officers promised the men

that their transfer into the artillery was only temporary, and that they would

be back in their companies within ninety days. With this assurance the men

submitted to the order, and no further incident occurred until four months

later.⁵⁷

The first duty of those drafted into the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery was to

learn how to operate their artillery pieces, and how to properly deploy during

combat.⁵⁸ McMahan and several others from the Twenty-fifth Ohio left Fort

Scott on October 22 as an escort to a wagon train, and arrived at Carthage,

Missouri, October 23. Near Pea Ridge, Arkansas, McMahan and the escort

rejoined their artillery unit and the rest of the brigade under the command of

General F. Salomon.⁵⁹ A few days later Salomon's brigade arrived at Camp

Bowen which was near Bentonville, Arkansas. After drilling twice on

November 4, McMahan noted in his journal that he liked the artillery service.

By November 28, a large force under the command of General Blunt moved

toward Cane Hill, where it skirmished with the enemy.⁶⁰ On December 7 it

fought the battle of Prairie Grove. The Twenty-fifth witnessed the fighting,

but was not heavily involved itself. Under Blunt's command, the Army of

the Frontier pushed southward and captured Van Buren, Arkansas, on

December 28, 1862.61

During these operations and afterward, some of the officers of the Second

Ohio Cavalry, remembering their promise to their comrades in the Twenty-

fifth Ohio Light Artillery, sought to have the detachment returned. In

September of 1862, the Second Ohio's commander, Colonel Kautz, had re-

 

 

56. McMahan Journals, February 14, 1863.

57. McMahan Journals, October 19, 1862 (short and long versions); and February 14, 1863.

See footnote 2 for explanation of the short and long versions of McMahan's Journals.

58. March 30, [1864?], General Orders No. 2, Artillery Head Quarters Military Division of

the Mississippi, Nashville, Tennessee. This document of almost twenty pages was not part of

McMahan's Journals, though it was included in the McMahan Papers in the Western Historical

Manuscript Collection, Columbia, Missouri.

59. McMahan Journals, October 23 and 28, 1862 (short and long versions); Official Records,

Series 1, vol. 13, pt. 1, General Orders, No. 4, Department of Kansas, August 24, 1862, 595.

This order placed the Twenty-fifth Ohio Light Artillery in the first brigade with the Ninth

Wisconsin Infantry, Second Ohio Cavalry, Ninth Kansas Cavalry, Second Indian Regiment

Home Guards, and the Second Kansas Battery.

60. McMahan Journals, October 28 through November 4, 1862 (short and long versions);

November 28, 1862 (short and long versions). See also Battles and Leaders, Thomas L. Snead,

"The Conquest of Arkansas," 449.

61. McMahan Journals, December 7 and 28, 1862 (short and long versions).

• 14
 

Conduct and Revolt                                               177

 

ceived orders to return to Ohio with that part of his command which had re-

mained at Fort Scott in Kansas, in order to remount and refit at Camp Chase,

Ohio. This was accomplished in preparation for the regiment's transfer to

Kentucky.⁶² In December of the same year, at the conclusion of Blunt's

campaign in Arkansas, McMahan noted that the remainder of the Second Ohio

Cavalry was also ordered to report to Ohio. He hoped that Major Burnett was

on his way back from the East to disband the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery as

well.

As late as December 31, McMahan and the men of the Twenty-fifth Ohio

still expected to return to Ohio with their original regiment.⁶³ On the same

day, the Mahoning Sentinel reported that some of the members of the Second

Ohio Cavalry were then back in Ohio.⁶⁴ Perhaps the leadership of the Second

Ohio still expected to return the battery to the regiment, though they had not

yet received definite orders for the Twenty-fifth's recall.

In January 1863, the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery left Bentonville,

Arkansas, and traveled to a camp on Crane Creek, Missouri, in the south-

western part of the state, arriving there January 29, 1863. The trip was very

difficult, the men encountering muddy roads which were "so cut up by the

train that the cannoniers all have to walk and pick their way through the

brush at the side of the road."⁶⁵ Snow and rain fell alternately during the trip,

causing the swelling of rivers and creeks.⁶⁶ On January 19, the Twenty-fifth

Ohio stopped at the White River in order to ford it. Rafts were constructed by

lashing wagon beds together upon which men and equipment were ferried

across the river. The battery crossed the river and entered Missouri on January

22, then arrived at Cassville on the twenty-fifth. Perhaps the men were too

busy during the arduous movement to address the issue of their recall to the

Second Ohio and return to Ohio. Their situation changed, however, when the

Twenty-fifth Ohio went into camp January 29, where they were to remain un-

til February 20.

Unfortunately for McMahan and the men with him, the needs of a military

district superseded the wishes of 150 men. On January 31, their suspicions

were aroused by a telegram from Ohio's Governor Tod addressed to Lieutenant

Julius Hadley. The telegram informed Hadley that "your case has just been

laid before me by Major Burnett and shall receive my earliest attention."

While McMahan admitted that Hadley might be honoring the men's wishes to

 

 

62. Reid, Ohio in the War, 758.

63. McMahan Journals, December 23, 1862 (short and long versions). McMahan's source

for this information was a newspaper account; and December 31, 1862 (short and long ver-

sions).

64. Mahoning Sentinel, December 31, 1862.

65. McMahan Journals, January 18, 1863.

66. McMahan reports rain in his journal January 2 and 13 (long version), 14 and 16; and

snow on January 14, 15, 16 and 26, 1863.

• 15
 

178                                                       OHIO HISTORY

 

return to the cavalry regiment, he and Lieutenant Hubbard thought it more

likely that Hadley was trying to "get Captain Stockton ousted." McMahan

expressed the feelings of the battery when he wrote in his journal, "We are

anxious to get to Ohio."⁶⁷

On February 6, Hadley was commissioned a first lieutenant. He then out-

ranked Lieutenant Hubbard. The following day, Captain Job Stockton re-

ceived an order from Secretary of War Edwin Stanton to muster in the men of

the Twenty-fifth Ohio as an independent battery. The reaction to this news

was swift: "Boys doing nothing to day but cussing and discussing the propri-

ety & legality of such an order coming to us under the circumstances."

According to McMahan, many of the men also thought that Hadley was re-

sponsible for their permanent detachment. The next day, February 8,

McMahan busied himself by writing out the muster rolls in preparation for

the arrival of the mustering officer. Captain Stockton, the Twenty-fifth's

popular commander, was also busy "squaring up his papers," for he had been

ordered to relinquish command of the battery.⁶⁸

After completing the muster rolls, McMahan wrote a long letter to the

Mahoning Sentinel, in which he "expressed himself rather freely." Protecting

himself, McMahan signed his letter "X." In the letter, which was published,

he gave the particulars of the men's detachment from the Second Ohio

Cavalry, then argued that

 

. . . the Battery has honorably acquitted itself in the battles of Newtonia[,] Cane

Hill[,] Prairie Grove and Van Buren. The "Army of the Frontier" has accomplish'd

its mission and there is no longer a military necessity requiring our service outside

the Regiment in which we enlisted. But we may be mistaken.69

 

After making this argument, McMahan really warmed up to his subject and

stated, with some literary flourish, his feelings about the detachment's cir-

cumstances. McMahan expressed the disappointment which he and others felt

when they learned that they would not be returning to their original regiment.

McMahan resented the War Department's treatment of the battery "as mere

'serfs"' and "brainless tools" of the government. He also suggested that

Lieutenant Hadley, Major Burnett, and Governor Tod had conspired to keep

the troops in the artillery branch of service against their wishes.⁷⁰ McMahan

 

67. McMahan Journals, January 19, 1863; January 29 through February 20, 1863; January

31, 1863; and February 5, 1863.

68. McMahan Journals, February 6, 7, and 8, 1863.

69. McMahan Journals, February 10, and February 14, 1863; Mahoning Sentinel, February

25, 1863.

70. On March 11, 1863, Governor Tod addressed a letter to Hadley expressing his regret

that he could not overturn the decision to return the men of the Twenty-fifth Ohio to their origi-

nal regiment. The letter made it obvious that Hadley had not acted duplicitously. The governor

blamed "influences from officials in Kansas .. . [and] that no one connected with the 2nd Ohio

Cavalry had anything to do with it." See Documents Accompanying the Governor's Message

• 16
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                 179

 

concluded that, as a last resort, he and the others might resist authority, if

they were unable to gain their objective by no other means.

 

May God save us from mutiny and desertion and give strength[, courage and will

to fight till the last armed foe expires and till our Glorious Old Banner shall wave

proudly and triumphantly over every foot of territory in this once happy and pros-

perous Old Union. 71

 

Two days after McMahan wrote his letter, Sergeant Thomas M. Morley and

"several of the boys went to Springfield [, Missouri]." They took with them

a petition that was to be sent to Senator Wade and also spoke to General

Schofield who had replaced General Halleck as commander of the department

of the Mississippi. Schofield told Morley and his delegation "that our trans-

fer to the artillery service is legal and we ought as good loyal soldiers to be

satisfied in whatever position the President sees fit to place us, and especially

as we are to be commanded by Ohio Officers." Overhearing the discussion,

Wiery, the mustering officer, stated that he would soon go to the Crane Creek

camp in order to muster the battery into the service.⁷²

 

 

The Revolt

 

After the return of Morley and the delegation, the men appointed a

"committee of investigation" to consider whether it was legal for the military

to force them to serve in an independent battery, and to determine what course

of action to take when the mustering officer arrived. Should they submit, or

instead "bring the matter before a court martial by refusing to answer to

[their] names when called[?]"⁷³

The mustering officer, Wiery, arrived the evening of February 16, and told

the men that they would be mustered into the independent battery the next

morning at eight. Their reaction demonstrated their displeasure at the

prospect of their muster.

To night boys are almost in a state of mutiny[.] Some of the rascals are throwing

cartridges (for French's revolvers) into the fires and so keep up a continual crack-

ing and snapping[.] Officers out several times to find out who did it but no one

knew. Toward 10 oclock[sic] the firing ceased, and we retired to rest and be ready

for morning service.⁷⁴

 

The next morning many of the men refused to report for assembly despite

 

 

of January, 1864 (Columbus, 1864), 42-43. Hereafter cited as Tod, Documents.

71. McMahan Journals, February 14, 1863.

72. Ibid., February 12, 1863.

73. McMahan Journals, February 13, 1863.

74. McMahan Journals, February 16, 1863.

• 17
 

180                                                    OHIO HISTORY

 

the efforts of Lieutenants Hadley and Hubbard, and gave in only when Captain

Stockton personally asked them to fill the ranks. Then, when Wiery called

roll, some of the men answered, while others did not. "Every one refusing to

answer had an m (for mutiny) placed at the end of his name and probably 1/3

if not more had this honorable mark attached to their name."

Wiery then gave a short speech which McMahan recorded in his journal. In

it, Wiery made four points: the men who refused to answer to their names

were still mustered into the independent battery; many of them had behaved in

a "very ungentlemanly, very unsoldierlike" manner; no one could man the

guns as effectively as they could; and the legality of their detachment into the

artillery branch of service was not in question, because the President had the

authority to arm them with whatever weapons he desired.

After Wiery's speech, Captain Stockton lent his popularity to the muster-

ing officer's efforts by stating that the "President has seen fit to arm you with

these big guns and you will have to use them." In response "the boys" gave

"Capt[.] Stockton three loud, hearty cheers, succeeded by three unearthly

groans for L't Hadley, who received the command of the company as soon as

the Capt[.] retired."⁷⁵

Now only one issue remained to be resolved in order to end the revolt. The

question of the order's legality had been settled to the men's satisfaction, but

the matter of whether Lieutenant Hadley's influence was responsible for their

permanent detachment into the artillery had not. Still believing that Hadley

had worked behind the scenes against Captain Stockton, many of the men re-

fused to serve until Hadley addressed this question.

Hadley clumsily attempted to regain control over his command. Unsettled

by the men's public declaration of their preference for Captain Stockton as

commander, Hadley, instead of immediately addressing the main issue-

whether he was culpable for the men's detachment-resorted to name calling,

a serious error in judgment which explains, in part at least, why he was un-

popular with his command. According to McMahan, Hadley's

. . lips quivered his face alternately paled and flushed and his whole frame trem-

bled like an aspen leaf. At length after moving about and drawing his saber and

performing several semigyrations he found utterance to his feelings and poured out

on our devoted heads his full vial of wrath. He challenged his enemies as

'sneaking cowards' who 'dare not step out boldly and say that he (Hadley) had used

his influence in getting the Battery Independent and keeping it in this depart-

ment[.]' Said he would brand any man as a liar who dared to step out and make the

charge.⁷⁶

 

 

75. McMahan Journals, February 17, 1863. Of course, McMahan's account should not be

considered a verbatim transcript of what Wiery said, but rather an approximation of his

speech, detailing its main points. The men had similarly given three cheers for "Old Abe" and

three groans for Jefferson Davis, the Confederate president. See ibid., January 1, 1862.

76. McMahan Journals, February 17, 1863. See footnote 70. It is evident from a letter writ-

• 18
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                    181

 

Some of the men remained opposed to their muster and were prepared to

face a court martial because they believed that Lieutenant Hadley was respon-

sible for their transfer from the cavalry. Hadley must prove to them that he

was not mixed up in the matter; otherwise the men determined not to serve.

After regaining some control over his temper, Hadley handed out "three copies

of letters sent to Ohio urging Major Burnett to use all his influence in getting

us back [into the Second Ohio]... as soon as possible." In this way, Hadley

finally addressed a major obstacle preventing many from returning to duty.

For their part, the men demonstrated their devotion to duty, unanimously

complying with their muster. Hadley then promised that he would no longer

be "too harsh in his expressions toward them." The revolt was over.⁷⁷

McMahan's diary entries after the revolt indicate that the authorities did not

punish the men for their resistance. For their part, the men of the Twenty-

fifth Ohio turned their attention to such soldierly pursuits as drilling, march-

ing, preparing for reviews and inspections. The men had accepted their new

role in an artillery unit.⁷⁸

 

Some Final Thoughts

 

As is evident in this account, the difficulty of creating an effective army

from civilians was formidable. Training and disciplining troops were the

most important duties of a military unit's officers. Unfortunately, volunteer

officers, many of whom had received no formal training, were expected to per-

form duties that strained the abilities of their West Point counterparts.⁷⁹

Moreover, the resistance of volunteer troops to military tactics and the use

of weaponry extended to things military in general. Their attitudes were de-

cidedly unmilitary. Their strong democratic spirit handicapped officers trying

to fulfill their duties. Unaccustomed to taking orders, private soldiers tended

to consider the appropriateness of an officer's command before deciding

whether or not to obey.⁸⁰ This natural disposition toward independent action

created a multitude of problems. To make matters worse, volunteer officers

tended to fluctuate between accommodating their men and treating them too

 

 

 

ten by the governor that Hadley was not responsible for the permanent detachment of the men.

77. Ibid.

78. McMahan Journals, March 13 and 15, April 12 and 19, May 17, June 20, 21, 23 and 25.

In a letter to Hadley, July 19, 1863, Governor Tod stated that the Twenty-fifth Ohio had been

commended by the Inspector General, Brigadier General James Totten, with "the highest

praise." See Tod, Documents, 53-54.

79. Shannon, Union Army, "The Evolution of Discipline," 151-92. Shannon claims on page

187 that many colonels of volunteer regiments were no more knowledgeable than privates.

80. Russel F. Weigley, History of the United States Army, enlarged edition (Bloomington,

1984), 230-32. Hereafter cited as Weigley, History of the Army.

• 19
 

182                                                          OHIO HISTORY

 

harshly, fostering a strong undercurrent of ill feeling toward themselves.⁸¹

While the action taken by McMahan and the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery was

a serious offense for soldiers to commit during time of war, they thought it

justified by their treatment.⁸²

Other military units throughout the North also refused duty, revealing dis-

satisfaction with their circumstances or leadership. The actions of the

Seventy-ninth New York and the Second Maine help to demonstrate further

the attitudes of soldiers who revolted against military authority during the

Civil War. In the cases of the Seventy-ninth New York and the Second

Maine, both of which were volunteer infantry regiments, problems arose

when troops with shorter enlistment periods began to return home, leaving

behind those who had enlisted for longer terms of service The three years

men, despite the terms of their enlistments, naturally desired to leave the mil-

itary as well. Feeling that they had been deceived, both regiments refused to

serve. The Seventy-ninth New York's revolt did not end until Regular Army

troops were sent with artillery to change their minds.⁸³ The Second Maine

returned to duty not by means of force, but by the persuasive talents of the

colonel of another Maine regiment to which they had been assigned.⁸⁴ After

the war, professional soldiers were so impressed by the difficulties associated

with the training and disciplining of volunteer troops that men like General

Emory Upton, a successful commander of volunteer troops, wished to change

the United States' method of war mobilization in order to make the citizen

soldier "thoroughly subsidiary to the Regular Army."⁸⁵

As noted, the officers' inexperience and failure to establish discipline within

the Second Ohio Cavalry and the Twenty-fifth Ohio Artillery prevented the

development of a smooth-working military machine. That officers were

elected contributed further to the weakening of their authority. As a result,

they tended to request rather than order a thing to be done. In addition, pun-

ishment for the disobedience of orders was minimal.⁸⁶

Without the strict enforcement of proper military discipline, enlisted men

often were free to follow their own preferences; this was their habit in civilian

 

 

81. Less than a month after the Twenty-fifth Ohio was mustered in, McMahan related in his

journal that Hadley had given him a "very rough[,] blunt and urgent[,] unmanly answer as I

was about to ask him a question. Had rather bear struck in the face than answered in his

rough[,] blasphemous[,] ungentlemanly style." McMahan Journals, March 9, 1863.

82. Desertion was another serious problem. A total of 260,339 men deserted from the Union

army during the war. Shannon, Union Army, 178.

83. Shannon, Union Army, 180-81.

84. Alice Rains Trulock, In the Hands of Providence: Joshua L. Chamberlain and the

American Civil War (Chapel Hill, 1992), 114-16.

85. Weigley, History of the Army, 275-81. Upton advocated "an expandable Regular Army"

with a military school modeled on the Prussian system, Ibid., 277.

86. See above for examples of this, such as McMahan's disobedience of a superior officer's

order to escort a wagon train to Carthage, Missouri.

• 20
 

Conduct and Revolt                                                    183

 

life and remained largely so during their military service.⁸⁷ As freedom-lov-

ing patriots who had enlisted to restore the Union, they felt justified in

weighing carefully all that they were ordered to do. As volunteers into the

cavalry, the men of the Twenty-fifth Ohio believed that they had been im-

properly detached to an artillery unit. Their naivete, their belief that military

service might be part of the democratic process, revealed a profound ignorance

of their duties as soldiers. The revolt's failure served the purpose of disabus-

ing the men of this misconception.

Not long after the revolt, McMahan was able to look back upon the bat-

tery's accomplishments with pride. "Since the 17th of Feb[.] last the day we

were mustered as an Independent Battery, we have marched nearly five hundred

miles, over every variety of roads imaginable." He also stated, with renewed

confidence and patriotism, that "the Union must and shall be preserved, and

terrible will be the retribution on those who at the end of this desperate

though successful struggle shall be weighed in the ballance [sic] and found

wanting."⁸⁸ Forty years later, McMahan's comrades-in-arms echoed his sen-

timents when they said with contentment that "we faithfully performed the

tasks that were assigned to us, doing our work well."⁸⁹

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

87. Weigley, History of the Army, 231.

88. McMahan Journals, March 20, 1863.

89. Second Regiment Ohio Cavalry, Twenty-fifth Battery Ohio Artillery, Stenographic Report

of Proceedings of the Thirty-eight Reunion held at Cleveland, Ohio, September 30, 1903

(Cleveland, 1903), report of Captain E. F. Webster, 29.

• 21