Page 371 - American Stories, A History of the United States

In the North, the firing on Sumter evoked
15.1 an outpouring of patriotism and dedication
to the Union. “It seems as if we were never
alive till now; never had a country till now,”
15.2 wrote a New Yorker; and a Bostonian noted,
“I never before knew what a popular excite-
ment can be.” Stephen A. Douglas, Lincoln’s

15.3 former political rival, pledged his full support
for the crusade against secession and literally
worked himself to death rallying midwestern
Democrats behind the government. By fir-
15.4
ing on the flag, the Confederacy united the
North. Everyone assumed the war would be
short and not very bloody. Whether Unionist
fervor could be sustained through a long and
costly struggle remained to be seen.
The Confederacy, which now moved
BoMBardMent this contemporary Currier and Ives lithograph depicts the bombardment of its capital to Richmond, Virginia, con-
Fort Sumter on April 12–13, 1861. the soldiers are firing from Fort Moultrie in Charleston Harbor,
which the Union garrison had evacuated the previous December in order to strengthen Fort tained only 11 of the 15 states in which
Sumter. slavery was lawful. In the border slave
states of Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, and Missouri, local Unionism and federal
intervention thwarted secession. Kentucky, the most crucial of these states, pro-
claimed its neutrality. It eventually sided with the Union, mainly because Lincoln,
who was careful to respect this tenuous neutrality, provoked the South into vio-
lating it first by invading the state. Maryland surrounded the nation’s capital and
provided it with access to the free states. More ruthless methods, which included
martial law to suppress Confederate sympathizers, kept it in the Union. In Missouri,
regular troops, aided by a staunchly pro-Union German immigrant population, sty-
mied the secession movement. But pro-Union forces failed to establish order in this
deeply divided frontier state. Guerrilla fighting made wartime Missouri an unsafe
and bloody place.
Hence the Civil War was not, strictly speaking, a struggle between slave and free
states. Nor did it simply pit states that could not tolerate Lincoln’s election against
those that could. More than anything else, conflicting views on secession determined
the division of states and the choices individuals made in areas where sentiment was
divided. General Robert E. Lee, for example, was neither a defender of slavery nor a
southern nationalist. But he followed Virginia out of the Union because he was the
Quick Check loyal son of a “sovereign state.” General George Thomas, another Virginian, chose the
What was Lincoln’s attitude toward Union because he believed it was indissoluble. Although concern about the future of
the use of force, and why did he want slavery had driven the Deep South to secede in the first place, the actual lineup of states
the south to initiate any hostilities and supporters meant the two sides would initially define the war less as a struggle over
that might occur?
slavery than as a contest to determine whether the Union was indivisible.

Adjusting to total War

15.2 What challenges did “total war” bring for each side?
t he Civil War was a “total war” involving every aspect of society because the

North could restore the Union only by defeating the South so thoroughly
that its separatist government would collapse. It was a long war because
the Confederacy put up “a hell of a fight” before it would agree to be put
to death. Total war is a test of societies, economies, and political systems, as well as
a battle of wits between generals and military strategists—and the Civil War was no
exception.
338