Hubbry Logo
Unconditional Union PartyUnconditional Union PartyMain
Open search
Unconditional Union Party
Community hub
Unconditional Union Party
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Unconditional Union Party
Unconditional Union Party
Unconditional Union Party
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The Unconditional Union Party was a unionist political party in the United States during the American Civil War. It was a regional counterpart to the National Union Party that supported the wartime administration of Abraham Lincoln.[1] The party was active in the border states and Union-occupied areas of the Confederacy. After the war, it formed the nucleus of the Republican Party in the Upper South.[2]

Key Information

Following the commencement of hostilities in April 1861, Unionists won critical elections in Kentucky and Maryland ahead of the July 4 emergency session of Congress and established provisional governments in Missouri and the western counties of Virginia.[3] Emancipation and the enlistment of Black soldiers split the Unionist movement, with Radicals embracing calls for the immediate abolition of slavery in response to wartime exigencies. Factional strife culminated in a formal schism between the Conservative Unionists and the Radicals, who called themselves the Unconditional Union Party to signify their uncompromising support for the war effort.[4]

Nationally, Unconditional Unionists aligned themselves with the Radical Republicans in calling for the immediate abolition of slavery in the United States, the enlistment of Black soldiers to fight in the Union Army, and the aggressive prosecution of the war.[5] They frequently clashed with the Lincoln administration and Conservative Unionists in their own states over issues related to emancipation, military appointments and strategy, and the looming issue of Reconstruction. Some Radicals favored running a candidate against Lincoln in the 1864 United States presidential election, but most eventually supported Lincoln's re-election on the National Union ticket.[6] After the war, the party continued to operate as a regional counterpart to the Republican Party. Circumstances emerging from Reconstruction, particularly the introduction of Black suffrage, led state parties to adopt the Republican label in the late 1860s, although in Missouri the Republican organization continued to call itself the Radical Union Party as late as 1870.[7]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Unconditional Union Party

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Unconditional Union Party was a political faction that emerged in several U.S. border states during the American Civil War, committed to the unconditional preservation of the federal Union without compromise toward secessionist demands. Formed in early 1861 in Missouri following southern states' rejection of Abraham Lincoln's presidential election, it drew support from former Whigs, Democrats, and other unionists who prioritized suppressing rebellion over sectional reconciliation. Active primarily in slaveholding border states such as , , , and , the party advocated vigorous federal enforcement of Union authority, including military suppression of Confederate sympathizers and, increasingly, as a wartime necessity to undermine the rebellion's economic base. Its platforms emphasized ending and crushing secessionist forces to restore national integrity, distinguishing it from conditional unionists willing to tolerate limited autonomy for southern loyalists. In , where secessionist sentiment was strong, the party organized rapidly after the Union's early setback at Bull Run, mobilizing against pro-Confederate elements and contributing to the election of unconditional unionist congressmen like Benjamin Franklin Loan. Kentucky's branch similarly bolstered Republican-aligned unionism postwar, forming the core of that state's emerging GOP structure amid internal debates over reconstruction policies. The party's alignment with the National Union Party facilitated Lincoln's 1864 reelection campaign in divided regions, though it faced tensions between conservative elements favoring gradual and radicals pushing immediate abolition and of ex-rebels. These divisions reflected broader wartime fractures in border-state , where unconditional unionism helped secure federal control but eroded traditional party lines, paving the way for Reconstruction-era realignments. By war's end around 1866, the organization dissolved as its goals merged into the Republican Party, leaving a legacy of prioritizing national sovereignty over local slaveholding interests.

Historical Background

Antebellum Unionism in Border States

In the border states—, , , and —antebellum unionism emerged from a emphasizing national cohesion, with the North, and resistance to sectional extremism, particularly within the Whig Party and its successors. Whigs, who dominated much of the region's politics until the mid-1850s, positioned themselves as defenders of the Union against both northern and southern disunionism, advocating compromises like the 1850 measures to preserve federal balance. This sentiment was reinforced by the states' diversified economies, reliant on , , and hemp or production rather than , fostering pragmatic loyalty to the existing constitutional framework over disruptive change. Kentucky exemplified this through its Whig strongholds, where leaders like championed unionism during the debates; a bipartisan festival in Lexington on , 1850, celebrated Clay's role in averting crisis, drawing thousands and underscoring widespread commitment to sectional reconciliation. As the national Whig Party declined post-1852 amid slavery disputes and nativist shifts, many Kentucky Whigs aligned with the (American) Party by 1854-1855, which adopted unionist platforms invoking Daniel Webster's "Liberty and Union, now and forever" motto, opposing agitation on slavery while prioritizing constitutional fidelity. This continuity manifested in the 1860 Constitutional Union Party, formed largely by ex-Whigs, which secured 45% of Kentucky's popular vote (66,058 ballots) for John Bell, outperforming southern Democrat John Breckinridge's 36%, reflecting entrenched pre-war aversion to secession. Missouri's unionism paralleled Kentucky's, with Whigs gaining legislative traction in 1850 (29 assembly seats) and opposing slavery's unchecked expansion alongside anti-southern Democrat Thomas Hart Benton, electing Henry Geyer to the that year. Figures like James Sidney Rollins, Abiel , and Alexander Doniphan embodied this stance, controlling six of seven congressional districts by 1854 despite internal rifts that left a Senate seat vacant until 1857. German immigrants, comprising a significant after 1848 revolutions, bolstered anti-secession views, contributing to the Whigs' collapse by 1856 into fragmented groups that funneled into the 1860 Constitutional Union ticket, which garnered 31.1% of Missouri's vote against Douglas's 35.3% and Breckinridge's 28.1%. In Maryland and Delaware, where slave populations were smaller ( held fewer than 2,000 slaves by 1860), unionism drew from similar Whig legacies and economic ties to the North, yielding near-ties for Bell (41.3% in , 35.3% in Delaware) in 1860, signaling broad rejection of disunion before .

Response to Secession Crisis (1860-1861)

In the wake of Abraham Lincoln's election on November 6, 1860, and South Carolina's ordinance on December 20, 1860, unconditional unionists in border states such as , , and rejected disunion outright, organizing public meetings, petitions, and electoral campaigns to affirm federal authority without concessions to secessionist demands. Unlike conditional unionists, who sought compromises like strengthened slave laws to preserve alongside the Union, unconditional unionists prioritized absolute loyalty to the and opposed any negotiation that implied legitimacy for southern exit from the federal compact. This stance reflected a commitment to national sovereignty over sectional accommodations, drawing support from urban immigrants, former Whigs, and anti-secession Democrats wary of 's expansion as a catalyst for . In , unconditional unionists, including German-American communities in , campaigned vigorously against Governor Claiborne Fox Jackson's pro-southern sympathies, framing as rebellion rather than a state right. The state legislature's January 16, 1861, call for a convention to assess federal relations provided a focal point; unconditional advocates urged voters to select delegates pledged to unconditional adherence to the Union. On February 18, 1861, elections yielded delegates nearly unanimous in unionism, with no avowed secessionists elected, reflecting widespread opposition to immediate disunion amid reports of 110,000 votes cast predominantly for Union preservation. The convention convened on February 28, 1861, and on March 19, 1861, defeated a ordinance by a vote of 89 to 1, affirming no adequate cause existed to dissolve ties with the while deferring further action. Kentucky's response mirrored Missouri's, with unionists leveraging the legislature's refusal to convene a convention despite Governor Beriah Magoffin's advocacy. On January 17, 1861, the assembly instead endorsed a peace conference and border state cooperation, electing unionist delegates who prioritized Crittenden Compromise-style adjustments over separation. By April 1861, a state convention formalized neutrality, rejecting amid strong public sentiment—evidenced by Unionist sweeps in special elections—against joining the Confederacy, though internal divisions persisted between unconditional and pro-slavery unionists. In Maryland, unconditional unionists, bolstered by federal troop deployments after the April 19, 1861, Baltimore riot, thwarted Governor Thomas Holliday Hicks' initial secession leanings and a proposed convention. Local committees suppressed disunionist assemblies, ensuring the state legislature voted against secession on January 5, 1861, and maintained Union control despite geographic proximity to Washington, D.C., and southern sympathies in rural areas. These efforts across border states delayed Confederate expansion, preserving strategic territories through electoral mobilization and rhetorical insistence on the Union's indivisibility, setting the stage for formalized unconditional union organizations.

Formation and Organization

Establishment in Missouri (February 1861)

In response to the secession crisis following Abraham Lincoln's election in November 1860, unconditional unionists in —those committed to preserving the Union without compromise or concessions to secessionist demands—began organizing politically in early 1861. The , on January 16, 1861, authorized an election on February 18 for delegates to a state convention to address the state's relations with the federal government, prompting unionists to mobilize against potential . Unconditional union men, distinguishing themselves from conditional unionists who favored negotiation or non-coercion policies, held preliminary meetings to nominate delegates pledged to unconditional loyalty, such as a gathering reported on January 31 in aimed at selecting anti-secession candidates. The election resulted in no avowed secessionists securing seats, with delegates predominantly unconditional and conditional unionists, reflecting strong statewide opposition to immediate separation. Key organizers included figures like Democrat James Overton Broadhead, who helped form the unconditional union framework earlier in January, and Republicans Francis P. Blair Jr. and , who led efforts to rally support for unwavering Union adherence even if it required federal enforcement against rebellion. This organizational push crystallized the Unconditional Union Party as a distinct faction, emphasizing rejection of any "qualified" unionism that might entertain under certain conditions. On February 28, 1861—the same day the state convention convened in Jefferson City—the party's first formal gathering occurred in , inviting only unconditional and anti- conditional unionists while excluding overt secession sympathizers. This meeting solidified the party's structure, passing resolutions affirming absolute fidelity to the and the Union, without concessions on or that could legitimize disunion. The state convention, influenced by unconditional delegates, soon tabled and rejected it outright on March 21 by a 98-1 vote, underscoring the party's early success in steering away from the Confederacy.

Expansion and Structure in Other States

In , the Unconditional Union Party formed in response to persistent pro-Confederate agitation within the state, particularly after the legislature's early neutrality stance gave way to open divisions; by 1863, it positioned itself as the vanguard of radical Unionism, mobilizing voters against conservative factions that sought compromise with the Confederacy. The party coordinated through local committees and public addresses, emphasizing suppression of rebellion and eventual support for federal emancipation policies, though it initially prioritized Union preservation over immediate abolition to broaden appeal among slaveholders. Its efforts contributed to Unionist dominance in wartime elections, with the party endorsing candidates who backed enlistment drives and federal authority, sidelining those with conditional loyalty. Maryland saw the emergence of an Unconditional Union Party in 1863 as the radical counterpart to Governor Augustus Bradford's conservative Union Party, which favored gradualism on slavery; the unconditional faction, drawing support from urban reformers and former Know-Nothings in Baltimore, advocated uncompensated emancipation, Black military recruitment, and constitutional reforms to entrench Union loyalty. Led by congressmen like Henry Winter Davis, it secured legislative majorities in November 1863 elections by defeating both Democrats and moderates, enacting policies such as slave enlistment quotas that bolstered Union forces. Organizationally, the party operated via a state central committee that issued platforms and nominations, maintaining exclusivity by barring secessionists and focusing on wartime governance rather than permanent infrastructure. In , formed from Virginia's Unionist counties in 1863, Unconditional Unionists—aligned with the party's principles—dominated the new state's politics, with figures like I. Boreman and senators Waitman T. Willey promoting immediate loyalty pledges and to differentiate from conditional Unionism in the parent state. The faction's structure emphasized ad hoc conventions and congressional delegations, as evidenced by Unconditional Unionist representation in the U.S. House during the 39th Congress (1865-1867), prioritizing reconstruction measures over slavery's nuances given the region's limited slave population. Across these states, the party's expansion relied on decentralized, issue-driven networks rather than centralized , adapting Missouri's model of exclusionary conventions to local contexts while avoiding formal national ties until wartime coalitions like the National Union Party absorbed elements post-1864.

Ideology and Principles

Unconditional Loyalty to the Union

The Unconditional Union Party's core ideological commitment was to absolute, unwavering allegiance to the federal Union, rejecting any form of compromise with secessionists or recognition of Confederate . This principle prioritized the preservation of national unity under the over regional or sectional interests, viewing secession as an illegal rebellion that demanded vigorous suppression rather than negotiation. Party members, drawn primarily from former Whigs and pro-Union Democrats in border states, contrasted their stance with that of conditional unionists, who sought to avert conflict through concessions like slavery protections or state guarantees. In , the party's founding convention on February 28, 1861, in explicitly affirmed this by excluding secession sympathizers and passing resolutions opposing any state disunion efforts, thereby pledging full support for federal authority amid the escalating crisis following Abraham Lincoln's . This unconditional approach extended to endorsing military measures to enforce Union supremacy, including the defense of federal arsenals and the mobilization of Home Guards against local rebels. Adherents argued that required not mere passive adherence but active resistance to disloyal elements, as evidenced in party handbills declaring the need to preserve the Union "at any cost" and to "crush the rebels." The emphasized constitutional fidelity without reservations, with party rhetoric framing the Union as indivisible and paramount over individual states' claims. In and , similar declarations tied unconditional loyalty to oaths of allegiance, rejecting armistices or peace terms that would concede rebel legitimacy. This position aligned the party with broader Union war aims, influencing support for policies that subordinated local interests to national restoration, though initial focus remained on rather than immediate .

Positions on Slavery, Emancipation, and Rebellion

The Unconditional Union Party prioritized the preservation of the federal Union above all other considerations, viewing secession as an act of rebellion that demanded unconditional suppression regardless of implications for slavery. Party adherents, particularly in border states like Missouri, initially emphasized maintaining slavery as a means to secure loyalty among slaveholding Unionists and prevent further secession, arguing that immediate abolition would alienate moderates and strengthen the Confederate cause. This stance reflected a causal prioritization of territorial integrity over moral reforms, with leaders like Francis Preston Blair Jr. advocating conservative unionism that tolerated slavery in loyal states to focus resources on quelling the insurgency. However, as military necessities evolved, the party shifted toward conditional acceptance of emancipation as a pragmatic war measure essential for weakening the rebellion's economic base and bolstering Union forces through enlistment of freedmen. By 1862–1863, prominent Unconditional Unionists in and publicly endorsed immediate , framing it not as an ideological crusade but as a strategic imperative to "secure that end most speedily" by undermining Southern resolve and aligning with federal policies like the of January 1, 1863. In , the party's radical faction pushed for state-level abolition via ordinance in January 1865, without compensation, to eliminate as a potential Confederate asset, though this divided conservatives who preferred tied to Union victory. branches urged submission to federal mandates by 1864, recognizing 's role in fueling the rebellion and the futility of resistance against Lincoln's re-election platform, which linked abolition to . Post-war, the party's remnants opposed extending to former slaves, prioritizing punishment of rebels over broader racial reforms to consolidate white Unionist control. Regarding rebellion, the party uniformly condemned secession as treasonous insurrection requiring total military defeat, with 1861 campaign materials calling for crushing rebels through "unconditional surrender" and rejecting any negotiated peace that preserved Confederate autonomy. This absolutist position distinguished Unconditional Unionists from "conditional" variants who entertained compromises, such as recognizing Southern independence if slavery remained intact in the North; instead, the party supported expansive federal powers, including suspension of habeas corpus and conscription, to prosecute the war vigorously. Leaders like Henry Winter Davis, despite personal slaveholding, advocated unrelenting Union offensives, viewing rebellion's persistence as tied to slavery's labor system and justifying emancipation as a tool for its eradication. By war's end, the party's framework had evolved to endorse constitutional amendments abolishing slavery nationwide, seeing it as the rebellion's root cause and a barrier to lasting reconciliation under federal authority.

Leadership and Prominent Figures

Key Organizers and Politicians

Francis P. Blair Jr., a U.S. Congressman from , served as the primary organizer of the Unconditional Union Party in that state, consolidating supporters of , John Bell, and into the new entity in early 1861 to oppose and promote unconditional loyalty to the federal government. Blair, who had previously aligned with conservative Unionists, led efforts to rally diverse factions against pro-Confederate elements, including armed opposition to Missouri's secessionist governor . His military service as a Union general further bolstered the party's pro-war stance, though internal divisions arose over emancipation policies. B. Gratz Brown emerged as a prominent leader in Missouri's branch of the party, advocating for radical measures against rebellion while navigating tensions between unconditional Unionism and 's persistence in border states. Brown, who later ran for governor under the party's banner, represented the faction pushing for stronger federal authority and eventual . In Maryland, , a Congressman and influential orator, led the Unconditional Unionists by organizing anti-secession campaigns and securing the state's loyalty to the Union amid threats of Confederate invasion in 1861. Davis's efforts included pushing for the abolition of in by 1864, though he clashed with Lincoln over reconstruction leniency. In , key politicians included Lovell H. Rousseau, a U.S. Representative and Union general who aligned with the Unconditional Unionists to enforce federal authority and suppress Confederate sympathizers. Lucian Anderson, another Kentucky Congressman, exemplified the party's commitment by voting for the Thirteenth Amendment in , despite personal risks from local pro-slavery backlash. These figures, often former Democrats or Whigs, prioritized preserving the Union over compromise with secessionists, though their ranks included conservatives wary of immediate abolition.

Notable Congressional Representatives

Henry Winter Davis represented Maryland's 3rd congressional district as an Unconditional Unionist in the 38th Congress (1863–1865), emerging as a prominent for unconditional to the federal government and emancipation policies during the Civil War.) A former and Unionist, Davis shifted to the Unconditional Union banner in 1863, co-authoring the Wade-Davis Bill, which proposed stricter Reconstruction terms than President Lincoln's approach, requiring 50% voter oaths for readmission of Confederate states. His tenure highlighted tensions within Union ranks over slavery's abolition, as he pushed for Maryland's constitutional convention to end the institution, though he lost reelection amid conservative backlash. Francis P. Blair Jr. served as an Unconditional Unionist in the 38th (1863–1864), playing a pivotal role in organizing the party's early structure in the state by uniting pro-Lincoln Democrats, former Constitutional Unionists, and anti-secession elements against pro-slavery factions. A in the Union Army, Blair's congressional efforts focused on suppressing rebellion in border regions, supporting as a war measure, and contesting elections tainted by guerrilla violence; his seat was successfully defended against challenger Samuel Knox in 1864 despite irregularities.) Blair's alignment with radical Unionism underscored the party's commitment to total victory over the Confederacy, influencing Missouri's provisional government's policies under military oversight. Benjamin Gratz Brown held Missouri's U.S. seat as an Unconditional Unionist from 1863 to 1867, filling the vacancy from the expulsion of Confederate sympathizers and advocating for immediate to undermine Southern morale. As a key organizer, Brown raised a Union and commanded it before entering the , where he criticized conditional Unionists for compromising on , arguing that half-measures prolonged the ; his reflected the party's dominance in state conventions amid federal intervention against secessionist ordinances. Brown's senatorial record emphasized causal links between 's persistence and , prioritizing empirical suppression of Confederate sympathizers over gradualist reforms. In , Green Clay Smith represented the 6th district as an Unconditional Unionist in the 38th and 39th es (1863–1867), enlisting as a Union general before transitioning to legislative support for Lincoln's administration, including votes for the 13th Amendment abolishing despite Kentucky's slaveholding majority. Similarly, Lovell H. Rousseau served the 6th district in the 39th (1865–1867) after resigning his commission, having commanded troops in key border state campaigns; his election affirmed the party's wartime coalescence of anti-secession Democrats and Republicans. Lucien Anderson, from the 1st district in the 39th , exemplified risks faced by Unconditional Unionists, voting for emancipation amendments amid threats from Peace Democrats and former Confederates, which contributed to his narrow defeat in 1866. These Kentuckians' support for rigorous Union policies helped secure the state's loyalty without , countering secessionist undercurrents through electoral mobilization.

Activities During the Civil War

Support for Union War Policies

The Unconditional Union Party endorsed aggressive federal military measures to suppress the Confederate rebellion and restore national unity, viewing compromise with secessionists as untenable. Party adherents in border states mobilized public support for President Abraham Lincoln's calls for volunteers, emphasizing the imperative to "crush the rebels" through decisive force rather than negotiation. This stance aligned with the party's core commitment to Union preservation at any cost, including the suppression of domestic insurrection via and enforcement of federal authority in contested regions like and . Party members in , particularly from , provided legislative backing for expanded war powers, including appropriations for troop recruitment and campaigns against Confederate forces. For instance, Unconditional Unionist representatives advocated measures to bolster Union armies in the western theater, where border state loyalty proved critical to early victories such as the capture of in February 1862. They rejected conditional peace proposals, insisting on the Confederacy's as the only path to resolution, mirroring Lincoln's evolving strategy that prioritized military dominance over conciliation. On , the party shifted toward support for it as a strategic policy, with leaders arguing that abolishing would undermine the South's labor system and manpower. In , prominent figures like drove state-level efforts without owner compensation, enacted via constitutional convention in 1864, framing it as essential to securing Union control and preventing state defection. Kentucky's Unconditional Unionists in the 38th Congress similarly backed federal initiatives, prioritizing Union integrity over property rights in slaves, even as they navigated local resistance to radical measures. This evolution reflected pragmatic adaptation to wartime exigencies, where served as both a for some and a coercive tool to deprive the rebellion of resources.

Electoral Engagements (1861-1864)

In the wake of the Confederate attack on in April 1861, the Unconditional Union Party mobilized for elections in border states to affirm loyalty to the federal government without compromise. In , party organizers, including figures like Frank P. Blair Jr., rallied unconditional unionists against secessionist sympathizers; in municipal elections that year, Unconditional Union candidates prevailed by margins exceeding 5,000 votes, reflecting strong urban support for suppressing rebellion. Similar dynamics played out in state conventions, where Missouri unionists rejected disunion ordinances in March 1861 by a vote of 98-1, averting formal despite guerrilla unrest. Kentucky's August 5, 1861, legislative elections marked a pivotal Unionist triumph, with candidates opposing recognition of the Confederacy securing majorities in both houses of the General Assembly—76-24 in the and 27-8 in the —thus preserving neutrality initially but tilting toward federal authority. In , the Union Party convention of May 23, 1861, nominated pro-Union slate, leading to victories in the June gubernatorial and legislative contests; Augustus W. Bradford was elected governor, and Unionists captured control of the assembly amid suppressed secessionist activity under federal military oversight. These outcomes, certified by official canvasses, ensured the border states' delegations to in July 1861 aligned with Union preservation, providing critical votes for war funding and enlistment measures. The 1862-63 U.S. House elections saw Unconditional Union candidates contest districts in , , , and nascent , often fusing with Republicans against pro-peace Democrats. In 's seven districts, the party secured at least five seats, including victories for Austin A. King and John B. Clark (replacing secessionist holdovers); 's nine districts yielded eight Unionist wins, with figures like Lovell H. Rousseau advancing unconditional loyalty platforms. 's five districts went overwhelmingly to Unionists (4-1), bolstering emancipation-adjacent policies despite slavery's persistence. Turnout and vote shares varied by wartime disruptions—e.g., 's aggregate Unionist popular vote topped 60% in contested areas—but federal troop presence influenced outcomes, as documented in congressional records. By 1863-64, amid emancipation debates, the party's electoral focus shifted to endorsing the National Union ticket for the presidential race. Maryland's November 1863 state elections reaffirmed Union control, with Thomas Swann elected governor under a pro-Lincoln banner. In the November 8, 1864, presidential contest, Unconditional Unionists in border states campaigned for , though McClellan carried (68,000-52,000) and (72,000-58,000) due to anti- backlash among conditional unionists; , however, delivered Lincoln 37,000 votes to McClellan's 29,000, reflecting entrenched party discipline. These results, tallied by state boards and federal canvassers, underscored the party's role in sustaining Union majorities despite internal fissures over slavery's eradication.

Regional Dimensions

Operations in Missouri

The Unconditional Union Party in coalesced in early 1861 as secessionist sentiments intensified following Abraham Lincoln's election, with party organizers prioritizing unwavering federal allegiance over compromise with Confederate sympathizers. Frank P. Blair Jr., a U.S. congressman, established the Union Safety Committee in to coordinate resistance, reorganizing civilian clubs into armed military units primarily drawn from German immigrants, who provided numerical strength against local secessionist militias. By spring 1861, these efforts raised over $10,000 for weapons, ammunition, horses, and supplies, which were smuggled into the city to equip Union loyalists amid fears of state militia seizures. These preparations culminated in the on May 10, 1861, when U.S. Captain , collaborating with Blair's forces, surrounded and captured approximately 700 secessionist state militia troops encamped near , preventing an armed takeover of the federal arsenal and asserting Union control over the city's key infrastructure. The operation triggered civilian riots that resulted in at least 28 deaths, mostly Union supporters, but solidified as a Union stronghold, enabling subsequent federal reinforcements. Lyon's forces, bolstered by unconditional unionist recruits, then advanced up the in June 1861, capturing the state capital at Jefferson City on June 15 and installing provisional Union authority, which derailed Governor Claiborne Fox Jackson's secessionist maneuvers. Politically, unconditional unionists dominated the February 18, 1861, election for delegates to the state convention called to consider , securing a decisive that convened on and rejected disunion by a vote of 98 to 1 on , marking Missouri as slave state to convene such a body and affirm Union loyalty. This electoral success stemmed from widespread mobilization against conditional unionists—who favored negotiation with the Confederacy—and secessionists, yielding victories in key districts by margins exceeding 5,000 votes statewide in pivotal contests. The convention subsequently organized a on July 31, 1861, installing conservative unconditional unionist Hamilton R. Gamble as provisional governor; he served until March 1864, emphasizing state sovereignty within the Union, militia reorganization for federal defense, and resistance to overreaching Union generals like , whose order Gamble contested to preserve border-state stability. Throughout the war, the party's operations extended to sustaining , with furnishing over 109,000 Union troops by 1865, many enlisted through unconditional unionist networks in urban centers like and rural strongholds. In response to Confederate General Sterling Price's 1864 invasion, party-aligned militias and Home Guards mobilized to repel raids, contributing to Union victories at Westport and Mine Creek on October 23, which expelled Price from the state. Electorally, unconditional unionists maintained dominance in 1862 congressional races and the 1864 presidential contest, where 's nine electoral votes went to Lincoln under the party's banner, reflecting coordinated efforts to suppress rebel sympathizers and enforce loyalty oaths. Internal tensions arose between conservative factions favoring gradual and radicals pushing immediate abolition, but these did not derail the party's core mission of Union preservation until postwar radical ascendancy in 1865.

Role in Kentucky

The Unconditional Union Party in Kentucky formed in 1863 amid intensifying divisions over the Civil War, positioning itself as a staunch advocate for unwavering loyalty to the federal government against secessionist sympathizers and conditional Unionists who prioritized preserving slavery over total war commitment. This development countered strong pro-Southern sentiments in the state, where slavery remained entrenched and many Democrats favored negotiated peace or limited federal authority. The party aligned with national Union efforts, endorsing President Abraham Lincoln's reelection in 1864 and pressing Kentuckians to accept emancipation as a wartime necessity to secure Union victory, as articulated in campaign materials urging submission to inevitable constitutional changes ending chattel slavery. In the 1863 congressional elections, Unconditional Unionists secured key victories, including Lucien Anderson's election to represent Kentucky's 1st district in the 38th Congress (March 4, 1863–March 3, 1865), where he championed aggressive prosecution of the war. The party's candidates emphasized suppressing rebellion without compromise, contributing to a Unionist majority in state politics that bolstered federal recruitment and resource support despite local resistance to conscription and emancipation policies. By the 1864 elections, Unconditional Unionists formed part of the broader National Union coalition, though Lincoln carried only a minority of Kentucky's vote amid widespread Democratic opposition; their platform explicitly tied Union preservation to emancipation support. The party's most consequential influence emerged through its congressional delegation's pivotal votes on the Thirteenth Amendment. On January 31, 1865, four Unconditional Unionist representatives—Lucien Anderson (1st district), William H. Randall (5th district), Green Clay Smith (9th district), and (2nd district)—defied prevailing state opinion and instructions from 's legislature, which opposed abolition, to vote for the amendment abolishing nationwide. This action, risking political backlash in a slaveholding border state, provided critical margin for passage (119–56 in the House), reflecting the party's evolution from initial focus on Union preservation to acceptance of as essential to defeating the Confederacy. These votes laid groundwork for the party's absorption into 's nascent Republican organization post-war, though it faced hostility from conservative Union Democrats and former slaveholders.

Presence in Maryland and Tennessee

In Maryland, the Unconditional Union Party emerged as a dominant force among pro-Union factions following the Civil War's outbreak, prioritizing unwavering loyalty to the federal government and advocacy for over conservative Unionist hesitations on . The party organized state conventions, such as the one held on , 1864, which adopted resolutions endorsing the Union , military enlistment, and opposition to Confederate sympathies. By late 1863, Unconditional Unionists had secured control of the through electoral gains, particularly in western counties where Unionism proved numerically superior in special elections. This dominance facilitated a constitutional convention in April 1864, resulting in a new state constitution that prohibited , which voters ratified on October 12, 1864, by a margin of 29,536 to 27,541. The party's influence extended to federal politics, with Maryland sending Unconditional Unionist delegates to Congress and aligning with national Union platforms, though internal tensions arose between radicals pushing immediate emancipation and moderates favoring gradual measures. Publications and addresses from the Unconditional Union State Central Committee, such as those circulated in 1863, emphasized suppressing rebellion and enlisting freed slaves in Union armies, reflecting the party's commitment to total war against secession. In , the Unconditional Union Party maintained a presence primarily through individual politicians and congressional representation, concentrated in the pro-Union strongholds of , where secession faced significant resistance. Horace Maynard, a longtime Unionist, won a special election to the U.S. in 1863 as an Unconditional Unionist from the 2nd district, advocating preservation of the Union without compromise and later supporting Reconstruction policies. Similarly, Samuel Mayes Arnell represented the 7th district as an Unconditional Unionist from 1867 to 1871, aligning with radical elements in Tennessee's postwar politics while navigating the transition to Republican dominance. John W. Leftwich also served briefly as an Unconditional Unionist representative, underscoring the party's role in funneling Unionist sentiment into federal governance amid Tennessee's divided loyalties and . Tennessee's Unconditional Unionists participated in national Union demonstrations, affirming their integration into the broader party framework by , though their organized activities remained less formalized than in states like due to the region's intense and secessionist control until mid-1862. The party's congressional figures contributed to wartime legislation, including support for and suppression of , helping to legitimize Union control in a state that had voted against secession initially but joined the Confederacy after a second referendum in June 1861.

Post-War Trajectory

Involvement in Reconstruction

Following the Confederate surrender at Appomattox on April 9, 1865, the Unconditional Union Party continued operations in border states such as , , , and , where it had been strongest during the war. Party members prioritized rapid restoration of civil government under President Andrew Johnson's leniency toward former Confederates, provided they took loyalty oaths, while resisting federal mandates for broader electoral reforms. In the 39th (March 4, 1865–March 3, 1867), 13 representatives affiliated with the party held seats, primarily from border districts, advocating positions that aligned with Johnson's policy of excluding high-ranking rebels from initial pardons but avoiding punitive measures like land redistribution or military governance. The party's Reconstruction stance emphasized limiting suffrage to proven loyalists, explicitly opposing enfranchisement for both freed slaves and ex-Confederates to prevent shifts in political power away from wartime Union supporters. This position, articulated in post-war platforms, stemmed from concerns that black voting would inflame racial tensions and that rebel readmission without restrictions would undermine Union victories, effectively preserving white loyalist dominance in Southern and border politics. Figures like Congressman McKee, elected as an Unconditional Unionist in 1865, exemplified this moderation by supporting amnesty for low-level Confederates but voting against radical bills expanding federal oversight. Tensions escalated with ' push for the (April 9, 1866) and Fourteenth Amendment (ratified July 9, 1868), which many Unconditional Unionists viewed as overreach threatening and social order. In response, state branches in and splintered, with some leaders like Benjamin Gratz Brown shifting toward Republican radicalism on emancipation enforcement but retaining skepticism toward universal suffrage. The party's national cohesion eroded amid these debates, culminating in its dissolution by early 1866 as affiliates realigned with emerging Republican factions or conservative Democrats, marking the end of its distinct role in shaping Reconstruction's early contours.

Decline and Absorption into Republican Party (1865-1867)

Following the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia's surrender at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865, the Unconditional Union Party's raison d'être eroded as the Union's preservation without territorial or constitutional concessions was secured. Wartime imperatives that had galvanized the party's formation—unyielding opposition to and support for federal military suppression of —ceased to demand a separate organizational identity. Membership, concentrated in border states such as , , and , fragmented amid shifting priorities toward reintegrating former Confederate states and addressing emancipation's aftermath. Intensifying factionalism accelerated the decline, particularly in , where the party originated in 1861. Radicals, favoring rigorous loyalty tests, disenfranchisement of ex-Confederates, and expanded civil rights for freedmen, clashed with conservatives who prioritized rapid reconciliation and resisted federal overreach into state laws. This rift peaked with Missouri's state constitutional convention, which convened in late 1864 and ratified the Drake Constitution on January 11, 1865; the document imposed stringent "ironclad" oaths disqualifying approximately 15,000 to 20,000 former rebels from voting or office-holding, while mandating public education and prohibiting slavery. Radicals, led by figures like Charles D. Drake and , consolidated control, reorganizing as the Radical Union Party and sidelining conservative elements associated with Frank P. Blair Jr. Similar divisions manifested in , where Unconditional Unionist Davis's death in June 1865 removed a key radical voice, weakening the party's cohesion. Absorption into the Republican Party progressed through 1866–1867 as national Reconstruction debates aligned Unconditional Union remnants with the GOP's platform of federal guarantees for loyalty and civil equality. Congressional elections in 1866 saw Radicals, functioning de facto as Republicans, win all nine U.S. House seats and retain state dominance under Thomas C. Fletcher. The of March 2, 1867, which divided the into military districts and mandated new constitutions with black male , further incentivized border-state Unionists to integrate into the Republican fold, providing organizational continuity for anti-Confederate politics. By mid-1867, the party's independent structure had dissolved, its activists and voters bolstering Republican infrastructure in the Upper and border regions, though conservative Unionists increasingly drifted toward Democrats.

Legacy and Impact

Formation of Southern Republicanism

The Unconditional Union Party's post-war dissolution facilitated the emergence of Republican organizations in Southern states, as its adherents—primarily white Unionists from border regions and the Upper South—provided the core non-freedmen base for the party. These individuals, having rejected and endorsed unconditional preservation of the Union during the Civil War, aligned with Republican emphases on federal authority and , distinguishing them from former Confederates who gravitated toward Democrats. In states like , , and , party remnants reorganized as Republican factions by 1865-1866, with figures such as Tennessee's William G. Brownlow leveraging Unionist networks to secure initial Republican governorships and legislatures supportive of Reconstruction policies. The Reconstruction Acts of March 2, 1867, which divided the South into military districts and mandated new constitutions enfranchising black males, accelerated this coalescence by creating electoral incentives for Unionists to partner with freedmen against ex-Confederate resurgence. White Unionists, often economically marginalized for their wartime loyalty, positioned themselves as natural leaders in these coalitions, as seen in the May 1867 Mount Hermon Church gathering in Louisiana's Washington Parish, where speakers urged freedmen to back Unionist candidates for constitutional conventions based on mutual opposition to the Confederacy. This alliance briefly enabled Republican victories, such as Tennessee's 1867 ratification of black suffrage and control of state offices by Unionist-Republicans. Sustained viability proved elusive, however, due to ingrained racial hierarchies among many Unionists, who viewed black enfranchisement instrumentally rather than equally, coupled with systematic violence and intimidation from Democratic paramilitary groups like the , founded in 1865. By 1868-1870, internal fissures—evident in Unionist reluctance to fully embrace black political agency—eroded coalitions in most states, confining enduring to pockets in the Upper South until federal withdrawal in shifted power dynamics decisively toward Democrats.

Evaluations of Effectiveness and Contributions

The Unconditional Union Party demonstrated effectiveness in mobilizing political opposition to in border states, particularly through victories in key elections that reinforced loyalty to the federal government. In , unconditional unionists secured a in the state convention held on February 28, , rejecting secession ordinances and adopting resolutions affirming unconditional allegiance to the Union, which prevented the state from joining the Confederacy despite strong pro-southern sympathies. Similarly, in , the party's candidates triumphed in the June elections, capturing a significant in the and governorship under pro-Union Democrat Beriah Magoffin, who nonetheless adhered to neutrality until Unionist pressure shifted policy toward federal support. These outcomes stemmed from the party's ability to unite former Whigs, Democrats, and nascent Republicans against both secessionists and conditional unionists willing to negotiate with the , thereby stabilizing Union control in strategically vital regions. The party's contributions to the Union war effort included bolstering enlistment and logistical support in divided states, where it provided a framework for suppressing Confederate sympathizers and facilitating federal military operations. In Missouri, unconditional unionists, often backed by German-American immigrants and figures like Frank Blair, collaborated with Union forces to neutralize secessionist militias, contributing to the retention of the state's resources and railroads for northern supply lines after events like the Camp Jackson Affair on May 10, 1861. In Kentucky, Unconditional Unionist congressmen such as Lucien Anderson and Green Clay Smith advocated for Union policies in Washington, including support for the Confiscation Acts and eventual backing of the Thirteenth Amendment, helping to align the state with emancipation despite initial resistance to abolition. Overall, by maintaining the fidelity of border states—Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri—the party averted a potential Confederate encirclement of Washington, D.C., and preserved approximately 500,000 troops and critical agricultural output for the Union, as Lincoln prioritized these areas to avoid alienating slaveholding allies essential to his gradualist approach on slavery. Evaluations by historians highlight the party's short-term tactical success in wartime cohesion but note limitations from ideological fractures, such as tensions between conservative unionists favoring slavery's preservation and radicals pushing for immediate , which eroded unified action by 1864. While effective in electoral mobilization—evidenced by its role in the National Union Party's 1864 platform endorsing —its post-war absorption into the Republican Party by 1867 reflected a lack of enduring organizational vitality, as border-state unionism fragmented amid Reconstruction debates. Nonetheless, the party's efforts were instrumental in Lincoln's strategy of conditional loyalty, credited with tipping the balance against Confederate expansion and enabling Union military dominance in the West.

Controversies and Criticisms

Internal Divisions Between Radicals and Conservatives

Within the Unconditional Union Party, ideological tensions persisted between radical and conservative factions, centered on the timing and method of , the role of federal military authority, and the treatment of suspected secession sympathizers in states. Radicals prioritized immediate abolition and expansive federal intervention to suppress disloyalty, while conservatives emphasized gradual, to preserve social stability and state sovereignty, often viewing radical demands as inflammatory to white Unionist support. These divisions manifested in fierce intraparty rivalries that hampered coordinated action against Confederate sympathizers. In , conservatives led by Provisional Governor Hamilton Gamble advocated delaying until after the war and favored General John M. Schofield's lenient enrollment policies toward ex-rebels, arguing they prevented unnecessary alienation of border-state loyalists. Radicals, including Senator Benjamin Gratz and D. Drake, countered with calls for uncompensated as early as and the removal of Schofield, whom they accused of protecting "slaveholding traitors"; a radical delegation confronted President Lincoln on September 30, 1863, demanding Schofield's ouster, though Lincoln mediated without fully endorsing either side. This schism intensified after the October 1863 state convention, where radicals narrowly secured control, leading to a 1865 constitution mandating immediate abolition despite conservative resistance. Maryland's Unconditional Unionists, under Congressman , exemplified radical dominance, pushing for black enlistment and a strict that disenfranchised conservatives; they secured 69% of the statewide vote in the November 1863 elections, capturing four of five congressional seats and enacting a new abolishing slavery via soldier ballots (2,633 in favor, 263 against). Conservatives, aligned with figures like , opposed these measures as precipitous, favoring to avert unrest among slaveholders still loyal to the Union. Kentucky's divisions escalated into a formal rupture in May 1864 at the state Democratic convention, where Unconditional Unionists—advocating and Lincoln's reelection—split from Conservative Unionists insisting on restoring "the Union as it was" without altering . Federal impositions, such as General Stephen Burbridge's Order No. 59 authorizing executions of guerrilla families, further polarized radicals but eroded broader support, contributing to Lincoln's 1864 defeat in the state (27,786 votes to McClellan's 64,301). Such factionalism eroded the party's cohesion, as radicals increasingly aligned with national Republican agendas on Reconstruction, while conservatives gravitated toward Democratic leniency, foreshadowing the party's fragmentation by 1867.

Accusations of Suppression and Overreach

The Unconditional Union Party faced criticism from Democrats and conditional Unionists for endorsing policies perceived as suppressing political opposition during the Civil War, particularly through support for loyalty oaths and voter restrictions in border states. In , party leaders played a central role in convening the 1864 constitutional convention, which imposed a stringent test oath on voters during registration for the ratification referendum, requiring affirmation of loyalty to the Union and denial of aid to the rebellion since 1861. This measure, ratified on October 12-13, 1864, by a margin of 29,536 to 27,541, effectively disenfranchised thousands of Confederate sympathizers and former slaveholders, prompting accusations that it rigged the process to abolish slavery and entrench Unionist control. Opponents, including the , argued this constituted overreach by altering the franchise without broad consent, likening it to revolutionary fiat rather than democratic reform, though proponents countered that it neutralized secessionist threats amid documented plots to derail Union efforts. Similar charges arose in Tennessee, where Unconditional Unionists aligned with Governor William G. Brownlow's administration, which enacted loyalty oaths under the 1865 state constitution to bar ex-Confederates from voting or holding office until 1868. Critics, including , condemned these as punitive overreach that suppressed dissent and fostered one-party rule, with reports of enforcement and legislative expulsions of 24 members in 1866 for disloyalty. The party's endorsement of such mechanisms, including federal backing for enforcement, fueled claims of , as Brownlow's regime armed Union Leagues to counter Ku Klux Klan precursors, resulting in documented violence against perceived traitors. While these actions preserved Union loyalty in volatile regions—evidenced by Tennessee's readmission to the Union in 1866—detractors like former Confederate sympathizers viewed them as violations of pre-war liberties, prioritizing wartime security over reconciliation. In , accusations centered less on state-level oaths but on the party's alignment with Abraham Lincoln's suspension of , which enabled over 13,000 arrests nationwide by 1863, including Kentucky peace Democrats labeled Copperheads for anti-war rhetoric. Unconditional Unionists, such as congressmen Lucian Anderson and William Randall, defended these federal interventions as essential against , yet faced rebukes from state Democrats for in silencing opposition newspapers and rallies, as seen in the 1864 military suppression of pro-McClellan gatherings. Such criticisms portrayed the party as radical enablers of executive overreach, though empirical records show arrests targeted active conspiracies, like the 1864 plot to seize Camp Douglas, rather than mere dissent. These claims persisted into Reconstruction, with opponents attributing the party's electoral dominance—securing Kentucky's congressional delegation in 1863—to coerced loyalty rather than genuine support.

References

  1. https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/ket-history-civilwar68/unconditional-union-party-handbill/
  2. https://voteview.com/parties/203
  3. https://kyhistory.pastperfectonline.com/webobject/1D691D06-1197-46AB-A412-371533523245
  4. https://www.raabcollection.com/presidential-autographs/lincoln-als-may-1863
  5. https://civilwar-history.fandom.com/wiki/Unconditional_Union_Party
  6. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23378981
  7. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/1860
  8. https://ir.library.louisville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3542&context=etd
  9. https://missouriencyclopedia.org/groupsorganizations/whig-party
  10. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/secession.html
  11. https://civilwaronthewesternborder.org/blog/missouri-rejects-secession
  12. https://www.nps.gov/articles/the-border-states.htm
  13. http://www.thecivilwarmuse.com/index.php?page=preparing-for-war
  14. https://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/history/timeline/3
  15. https://battleofwestport.org/blog/f/presentation-recap-the-struggle-for-missouri-in-1861
  16. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/kentucky-in-the-civil-war-1861-1862.html
  17. https://www.history.ky.gov/markers/confederate-state-convention
  18. https://umbc.edu/che/tahlessons/pdf/Maryland_During_the_Secession_Crisis%28PrinterFriendly%29.pdf
  19. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0013.104/--abraham-lincoln-and-the-border-states?rgn=main%3Bview=fulltext
  20. https://www.nytimes.com/1861/02/01/archives/the-national-troubles-highly-important-from-the-federal-capital-the.html
  21. https://digital.shsmo.org/digital/api/collection/mhr/id/27847/download
  22. https://community.village.virginia.edu/unionist/node/558
  23. https://sgcld.thelibrary.org/lochist/history/paspres/ch11pt2.html
  24. https://www.historynet.com/missouri-in-the-balance-struggle-for-st-louis-march-98-americas-civil-war-feature/
  25. https://doi.org/10.5149/9780807899366_marshall.6
  26. https://dokumen.pub/the-defeat-of-the-confederacy-a-documentary-survey-4t64gn49r.html
  27. https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc5800/sc5881/000001/000000/000229/pdf/msa_sc_5881_1_229.pdf
  28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2587658
  29. https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc5300/sc5339/000113/024100/024134/20190513e.pdf
  30. https://www.wvencyclopedia.org/articles/414
  31. https://history.house.gov/People/Search?id=33059
  32. https://freepages.rootsweb.com/~mogeneal/genealogy/mowar.htm
  33. https://npshistory.com/publications/civil_war_series/26/sec1.htm
  34. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23371682
  35. https://www.nytimes.com/1863/10/09/archives/the-political-campaign-in-maryland-the-times-the-unionists-of.html
  36. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/henry-winter-davis
  37. https://academic.oup.com/book/3993/chapter/145614879
  38. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/18442/francis_preston-blair
  39. https://emergingcivilwar.com/2025/07/07/unconditional-frank-blairs-fight-for-missouri/
  40. https://history.house.gov/People/Listing/D/DAVIS%2C-Henry-Winter-%28D000104%29
  41. https://history.house.gov/People/Listing/R/ROUSSEAU%2C-Lovell-Harrison-%28R000468%29/
  42. https://www.civilwarmonitor.com/craig-ullrich-unconditional-unionist-2016/
  43. https://history.house.gov/People/Detail/17072
  44. https://bioguide.congress.gov/search/bio/B000905
  45. https://bioguide.congress.gov/search/bio/R000468
  46. https://academic.oup.com/book/2093/chapter/142017962
  47. https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SDU18610827.2.8
  48. https://www.hchsmd.org/2024/12/18/political-sentiment-during-the-early-civil-war/
  49. https://www.nytimes.com/1861/06/23/archives/the-maryland-election-the-majority-of-the-people-for-the-union-a.html
  50. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2669330
  51. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1130&context=ljh
  52. https://ir.library.louisville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1806&context=etd
  53. https://civilwaronthewesternborder.org/encyclopedia/price-sterling
  54. https://civilwaronthewesternborder.org/encyclopedia/gamble-hamilton-r
  55. https://history.house.gov/People/Detail/8535
  56. https://filsonhistorical.org/archive/ovhpdfs/OVH_V4N4_Cole.pdf
  57. https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/01/29/four-kentucky-congressmen-helped-end-slavery/22519043/
  58. https://nkytribune.com/2016/04/old-time-kentucky-kidnapped-congressman-would-emerge-in-time-to-contribute-vote-to-end-slavery/
  59. https://www.crossroadsofwar.org/discover-the-story/reconstructing-the-region
  60. https://www.nytimes.com/1864/02/23/archives/the-maryland-unconditional-union-convention.html
  61. https://mdhistory.msa.maryland.gov/sources_secondary/allegiances001.pdf
  62. https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc5300/sc5339/000125/000000/000001/restricted/radoff.pdf
  63. https://lib.guides.umd.edu/c.php?g=326774&p=2197452
  64. https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SDU18660814.2.7
  65. https://history.house.gov/People/Detail/17674
  66. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42627156
  67. https://americanpolitics.fandom.com/wiki/Unionist_Party
  68. https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/confederates-blocked-from-congress/
  69. https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Samuel_McKee_%281833%29
  70. https://civilwartalk.com/threads/brown-benjamin-gratz-u-s-senator-mo.185221/
  71. https://archive.org/details/missouriunderrad0000parr
  72. https://ozarkscivilwar.org/archives/458
  73. https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/handle/10355/15696
  74. https://naucenter.as.virginia.edu/good-and-faithful-union-men-struggle-forge-republican-coalition-reconstruction-south
  75. https://lsupress.org/9780807176627/true-blue/
  76. https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/news/local/2010/12/26/1861-state-divided-controversial-elections/21466895007/
  77. https://millercenter.org/president/lincoln/domestic-affairs
  78. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0013.104/--abraham-lincoln-and-the-border-states?rgn=main;view=fulltext
  79. https://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-state-by-state/abraham-lincoln-and-missouri/index.html
  80. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/418834/summary
  81. https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/pdf/friedman_article.pdf
  82. https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000001/000667/html/am667--14.html
  83. https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/34064/31151024813812.pdf
  84. https://www.amazon.com/Unconditional-Unionist-Hazardous-Anderson-Congressman/dp/1476663696
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.