\n<\/p>\n
DISCLAIMER (0:00)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 The following program contains descriptions of violence and suggestive topics that may not be appropriate for younger audiences. Listener discretion is advised.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (0:09)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 You\u2019re listening to the American Narrative: Histories of a Nation, a podcast series by Discover America. I\u2019m your host, Tim Murphy, along with my good friend and fellow history enthusiast, Grant Shea. Welcome to the inaugural episode!<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (0:20)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Excited to be here, man! Excited for the journey and excited to explore all these interesting moments in history.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (0:27)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 This project has been a work-in-progress for several years, so it\u2019s just an absolutely amazing feeling that it\u2019s finally ready to launch.\u00a0For all those familiar with the Discover America Blog or have read my articles in the past, thank you. None of this would have been possible without your encouragement and support. And if you\u2019re just tuning in for the first time, welcome! Hope you\u2019re ready to learn some American history. Ready to dive in?\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (0:48)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Yeah, let\u2019s get to it!<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (0:50)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 All right, here we go!\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Today, we\u2019ll be discussing the Fishing Creek Confederacy\u2014the biggest wild goose chase of the American Civil War.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n We typically think of the Civil War as a battle between North and South. However, from a political party standpoint, that division isn\u2019t quite as clear-cut.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Did you know there were four major candidates in the Presidential Election of 1860?\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (1:14)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 I did not. I did not. I know Lincoln and\u2026what\u2019s his name? The main guy. The guy who lost to Lincoln. I\u2019m gonna need your help here, Tim.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (1:26)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Well, we\u2019ll jump into it. So, going into the Democratic National Convention, Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas\u2026<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (1:34)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Stephen Douglas.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (1:35)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 That\u2019s the guy! So, he was projected to secure the party\u2019s presidential nomination, and he was a proponent of popular sovereignty\u2014which was the political doctrine that allowed residents of western territories to decide, democratically, whether to allow or prohibit slavery. He authored the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act, which effectively repealed the legal precedent set by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. And that Missouri Compromise established the 36-30 parallel as the dividing line between slave states and free states.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n But popular sovereignty was not a full-fledged endorsement for slavery\u2019s unhindered expansion into the West. And Douglas\u2019 relatively soft stance drew the ire of radical Deep South Democrats\u2014and they were called fire-eaters\u2014who threatened secession in the absence of more stringent slave codes.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n The DNC assembled in Charleston, South Carolina, between April 23 and May 3, 1860. Throughout the convention, staunch secessionists fearmongered their colleagues, decrying \u201cnorthern violence\u201d and the Republicans\u2019 intention to forcibly emancipate African Americans. Douglas refused to entertain such rhetoric, thinking it would alienate moderate Democrats in the North and Midwest. As a result, fifty fire-eaters walked out, protesting Douglas\u2019 platform. The Democrats issued 57 ballots during the convention; each time, Douglas failed to achieve the two-thirds majority necessary for the party\u2019s official endorsement.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (3:07)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 So, they left and there was no candidate. They reconvened in Baltimore, Maryland, in June 1860. This time, 110 delegates walked out of the convention, and the remaining members elected Douglas as their nominee. Those dissenting Democrats formed their own faction\u2014called the Seceders\u2019 Convention\u2014and appointed then-Vice President and Kentucky native John Breckinridge. So all this contentious infighting and sectionalism had fractured the Democratic Party.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n And then there was John Bell. Do you know who John Bell is?<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (3:39)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 The name rings a bell, but no, just kidding. Yeah, I don\u2019t\u2026<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (3:43)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 John Bell\u2014he was the candidate for the Constitutional Union Party. So, allow me to bring Mr. Bell out of historical obscurity here for a second. He was a career politician from Tennessee who, to put it lightly, had commitment issues. He was originally a Jacksonian Democrat, first elected to the House of Representatives in 1827. He won seven consecutive terms, and even served as Speaker of the House from 1833 \u2013 1835, beating out future president James Knox Polk for the position. So he was pretty popular.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n However, after the Election of 1836, Bell switched his affiliation to the Whig Party. When fellow Whig William Henry Harrison ascended to the presidency in 1840, Bell was appointed Secretary of War. Unfortunately, Harrison died one month into his term, and Bell resigned from his position shortly after John Tyler took office.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n In 1847, Bell was elected to the Senate, where his allegiances varied between the Whigs, Opposition, and Know-Nothing parties.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Although a slaveholder himself, Bell refuted slavey\u2019s expansion into the West. He was the only senator from a southern state who opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and he later voted against Kansas\u2019s admission to the Union as a slave state.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n In 1860, Bell became the presidential nominee for the newly-formed Constitutional Union Party. Edward Everett\u2014the President of Harvard and former Whig governor of Massachusetts\u2014served as his vice presidential running mate.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Constitutional Unionists endorsed \u201cno political principle other than the Constitution\u201d and maintained a rather ambiguous view on the hot-button issue of slavery. Their slogan was “No North, no South, no East, no West. Nothing but the Union.\u201d It was an attempt to counter the partisan, sectional politics of the day, which fell flat across the board.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Bell ended up receiving 12.5% of the popular vote, and carried the states of Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee, which equated to about 13% of the electorate.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (5:41)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 The border states, though, which is kind of interesting.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (5:44)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Yeah, and for a third-party, that\u2019s a pretty substantial chunk.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (5:47)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Yeah, that\u2019s not bad, not at all. No, no. Very interesting.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (5:51)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 And finally, we have your winner of the 1860 Presidential Election: Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (5:55)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Good ole Abe Lincoln.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Tim (5:57)<\/span><\/span><\/strong> \u2013 So Lincoln received 180 electoral votes, which was about 59.5%, but he only garnered 39.8% of the popular vote. The Republican Party\u2019s platform denounced the expansion of slavery as a \u201cdangerous political heresy\u201d that directly contradicted the vision of the Founding Fathers. Lincoln himself supported free soil and containment policies, but did not initially endorse immediate emancipation like many \u201cradical\u201d Republicans. Nevertheless, many Democrats viewed Lincoln\u2019s election as a segue for abolitionist policies and racial equality.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Although the state of Pennsylvania voted Republican in 1860, it had voted Democrat during three of the last four election cycles, and many counties in central and western Pennsylvania, like Columbia County, remained strong supporters of the Democratic Party. The majority of eligible voters in these counties were working-class white males, who labored as miners, mechanics, and lumbermen. From their perspective, the existence of slavery was inconsequential to their livelihoods, and it was not the place for the federal government to interfere in what was considered a states\u2019 rights issue.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n During the Secession Crisis, political discord became increasingly partisan and hyperbolic. While many northern democrats viewed southern secession as unconstitutional and reluctantly supported military intervention, a faction of anti-administration, antiwar advocates wanted to mitigate conflict at any cost. That included codifying slavery\u2019s expansion or allowing peaceful separation. Republicans labeled these so-called Peace Democrats \u201cCopperheads\u201d\u2014poisonous snakes of American democracy.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n After the firing on Fort Sumter, President Lincoln called for 75,000 volunteers to enlist in the Union Army, hoping to quash the insurrection in ninety days. Despite the ongoing political rancor, most Northerners united against the rebellion, riding an upswell of patriotism. Levi Tate, a staunch Democrat and longtime newspaper editor for the <\/span><\/span>Columbia Democrat<\/span><\/span><\/em>, reported: \u201cNow that war has commenced\u2014no matter who is at fault\u2014it is the duty of all our citizens, irrespective of party, to stand by the old flag, with its glorious stars and stripes, and support the Government in all proper and legitimate efforts to bring the contest to a successful issue\u2026it becomes the duty of every patriot to lend his aid in sustaining the honor and glory of our common country.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n However, the Confederate States proved to be formidable adversaries. As months of conflict turned into years, the patriotic fervor and romanticism of war began to dwindle. Federal authorities found recruitment efforts increasingly difficult to satisfy.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n On July 17, 1862, President Lincoln signed the Militia Act into law. This legislation required all able-bodied male citizens, ages 18-45, to enlist in state militias and permitted African Americans to serve in the U.S. armed forces.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Each state was given a volunteer quota proportional to its population, as prescribed by Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. If a state failed to satisfy their quota, governors were authorized to institute a special draft from the militia rolls to make up the difference.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Grant (9:15)<\/span><\/span><\/strong>