meet at Greeneville, June 17th, after the adoption of resolutions protesting against the military league and the recent acts of the General Assembly, favoring the policy of neutrality which had been recently adopted by Kentucky, and appealing to the people of the State, at the approaching election, to vote down the proposed Ordinance of Secession "while it is yet in their power to come up in the majesty of their strength, and restore Tennessee to her true position." At the election, held about a week later, as we have seen, the State gave a majority of fifty-seven thousand six hundred and seventy-five in favor of secession, but East Tennessee recorded a majority of about twenty thousand against it.

The delegates to the Union convention of East Tennessee reassembled at Greeneville at the appointed time, June 17th. Their ardor for maintaining the Union was not daunted by the overwhelming vote of the State in favor of secession. They adopted a "Declaration of Grievances," and appointed a committee consisting of Oliver P. Temple, John Netherland, and James P. McDowell to petition the General Assembly for the formation of a new State, to be composed of East Tennessee and such adjoining counties of Middle Tennessee as might vote to be included. If this petition should be granted, it was proposed to establish an independent State and to raise an army, with John Baxter as general. The new State was never formed, but many of the East Tennessee Unionists at once joined the Federal army. Others followed later.

With the way open through Kentucky, it can readily be seen that East Tennessee offered the opportunity to break the Confederate line of defence, and its people were ready and anxious to aid in a movement to have East Tennessee occupied by Federal forces. If western Virginia should be similarly occupied and with it the short intervening space through Virginia, a strong Union wedge would be thus inserted through the barrier of the Border States, and a way opened for invasions to reach the heart of the Confederacy. This plan was urged by East Tennesseeans, but the Federal

generals commanding in the West preferred to operate along Mississippi River. While engaged in his western Virginia campaign, General George B. McClellan proposed to General Winfield Scott to move into East Tennessee by way of Wytheville, Virginia. He writes, June 7, 1861: "If the Government will give me ten thousand arms for distribution in East Tennessee, I think I can break the backbone of secession." General Scott at that time had other plans in view, and East Tennessee was left to the possession of the Confederates.

President Lincoln's first call was for seventy-five thousand men for three months. Either he did not comprehend the magnitude of the war in which he was about to engage, or else he intended this call to be but a preliminary step. General Scott informed the political authorities that seventyfive thousand three months' men would be totally insufficient for the invasion of the Confederate States. He therefore advised that the present forces be employed for the purposes of guarding Washington, securing Fortress Monroe and other Federal forts in the South, and in subjugating the Border States Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri, and in erecting western Virginia into a separate State friendly to the Union. This policy was pursued.

Although the idea was early entertained of surrounding the entire Confederacy like a besieged town, yet neither the army nor the navy was as yet adequate to the purpose. Naval operations were begun along the coast, and as early as April 19th President Lincoln announced by proclamation the blockade of the ports of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and in a proclamation of April 27th extended the blockade to the ports of Virginia and North Carolina. It was not until a later period, however, that it was effectually maintained upon the immense scale which it finally attained. Although the battle of Bull Run was fought July 21, 1861, yet it was not so much a part of the subsequent great plan of invasion as of the first preliminary campaigns planned and limited

to the purposes mentioned above. The whole matter can, therefore, be more clearly presented by treating these preliminary detached campaigns separately, following in order the operations in the defence of Washington, the repression or subjugation of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri, and the invasion of Virginia for the purpose of securing western Virginia to the Union, and, finally, the suddenly formed expedition to capture by a dash the Confederate capital, which the Confederate authorities, by defiantly locating their seat of government at Richmond, had brought supposedly within reach of the Union army.

CHAPTER III

SUBJUGATION OF THE BORDER STATES

THE term "Border States" was condemned by President Lincoln, but has been popularly used. Its application, however, is ambiguous. Early in the conflict it was generally applied to the eight most northern slave States, viz: Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and Kentucky, which, stretching from Delaware Bay to the Mississippi, formed the northern frontier, North Carolina and Tennessee, further south, extending in a parallel line from east to west, and together formed a double row covering the northern slave border, with Missouri and Arkansas as a similar double barrier west of the Mississippi. It was perhaps originally given to these States on account of their geographical position as intervening between the two hostile sections. The Confederacy ardently desired to maintain this line of defence, but when it was broken the term "Border States" was restricted to the four States that seceded, or more strictly to Virginia and Tennessee, which became the Southern Border States. The term "Northern Border States" was sometimes applied to Missouri, West Virginia, and Kentucky.

After the secession of Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee, the political efforts of both governments were directed to the States of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri, which still remained in the Union. Delaware was not expected to secede. Each of these States had a large element of foreign population, and of immigrants from the

free States, amounting in Delaware to fifty-four per cent of the white population, in Maryland to fifty-six, in Kentucky to twenty-eight, and in Missouri to eighty-three per cent. The peace movements gave these two classes time to unite their strength. Hence, to the surprise of political leaders, the Union sentiment in these States grew stronger as the time for decision arrived, and these classes coalesced to form a strong Union force. Though a minority in Kentucky, this element was strong, and active aid from the United States government and adroit management stimulated its development. The United States was thus enabled to throttle the contemplated movement in Maryland and Missouri and to take advantage of the conditions in Kentucky, and finally to invade and subjugate these States.

The following tables are compiled from the census of 1870 because that of 1860 does not give all the information needed; for instance, separate statistics for Virginia and West Virginia. For our purposes the ratios given below differ but little from those of 1860. The reader may pursue the narrative of events in each of the States above named with the lesson from the census to suggest that one cause of the apparent hesitation in these States was that their populations were not homogeneous. The especial condition of each State, however, will be considered in its order.

The large percentage of foreign population in Louisiana and Texas as shown in Table III is easily explained. The great body of the foreign element in Louisiana is of French descent, and in Texas of Mexican and Spanish descent, and almost wholly favored slavery and had become thoroughly assimilated in thought and sympathy with the Southern people. It may further be noted, that in all the States which seceded the number of persons therein who were born in the free States, and of their descendants, is small; and the foreign element except in Louisiana and Texas is comparatively insignificant and certainly not large enough to exert any appreciable influence.