Disaffection in the Alabama Hill Country, 1861

Hugh C. Bailey is Associate Professor of History at Howard College and is a native Ahbamian . He holds the Ph.D. degree from the University of Alabama and has published in "Agricultural History," "The Journal of Southern History," and elsewhere. Disaffection in the Alabama Hill Country, 1861 HUGH C. BAILEY rr has been recognized that a number of areas of the South were opposed to secession and that disaffection was widespread in die Confederacy from 1862 on.1 Too often, however, historians have not been aware of the fact that more than token disloyalty to the Confederacy had been prevalent in a number of areas from the beginning of the war. This was especially true of the Appalachian highland and adjacent regions. In the mountain counties of Georgia, Union sentiment was not reduced by secession. The old flag continued to be flown by many people, much to the consternation of loyal Confederates, who sought the aid of Governor Joseph E. Brown. By giving the mountain region preference in arms and equipment, the Governor was able to raise at least one military company in each county and postpone major difficulties until 1862.2 "Geographically the 'disloyal country'" of Mississippi included "the greater part of the hilly country stretching from the northeastern Mississippi -Tennessee border down through the central part of the state and 1 Georgia Lee Tatum, Disloyalty in the Confederacy (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1934), pp. 1-23; E. Merton Coulter, The Confederate States of America, 1861-1865 ([Baton Rouge]: Louisiana Stete University Press, 1950), pp. 84-89; Clement Eaton, A History of the Southern Confederacy ( New York: The Macmillan Co., 1954), pp. 31-42; Walter L. Fleming, Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1905), pp. 112-122. 2 Tatum, op. cit., pp. 73-74. 183 184HUGH C. bailey widening as it approached the Gulf Coast." The Unionists of Jones County were bold enough to burn in effigy their delegate to the secession convention, while a Corinth newspaper openly opposed the Confederacy. Only the formation of Confederate vigilance committees forced Unionist activities under cover. With the coming of the Union Army to the northern part of the state and die retreat from Shiloh, the mask was removed.3 Unionist sentiment was so strong in Virginia's western counties that they successfully established and maintained tíieir independence as West Virginia. In the southwestern portion of the reduced Virginia, where "not more than one-fourth of the people had favored secession . . . [were] many strong unionists who never became reconciled to the war."4 By November, 1861, disaffection was so widespread in western North Carolina that Governor H. T. Clark asked Secretary of War Judah P. Benjamin for troops to protect the loyal Confederates in the area. The Governor had received numerous requests for aid, he reported. Since the counties involved had furnished troops to the Southern armies, the loyal Confederates were left defenseless and at the mercy of their "tory" neighbors.5 Aid was especially necessary since the Unionists in western North Carolina were in constant contact with their fellow-partisans in East Tennessee. As early as June, 1861, a number of Union companies had been formed in North Carolina, and an organization of Unionists in the area had been completed. By fall, the Tennessee Unionists, agitated by the means taken to prevent their movements to the east, began to seek revenge on their Confederate neighbors, who in turn appealed to Governor Isham G. Harris for protection. Exemplary justice was meted out to many by Confederate forces. With the collapse of the Confederate government in Tennessee in 1862, however, the Unionists were comparatively free to carry out their own designs.6 For Alabama one of the most complete reports of Southern Unionist activities in the early days of the war is available. In 1861 Alabama's "hill counties," like tíiose of the neighboring highlands, consisted of predominantly poor lands cultivated by small farmers, most of whom owned no slaves. The absence of adequate transportation alone would have precluded the development of a stable economy in the area. Most of its residents received little, if any, formal education, and their cultural lives differed...