Book Chat
"The Devil Knows How to Ride:
The True Story of William Clarke Quantrill and His Confederate Raiders"

This chat took place in the Civil War Home Chatroom on 9/19/05 and covered Chapters 7,8,& 9

9/26/2005 9:12 pm (et) ks:

Chapter 7

”Boys, We Had Better Surrender!”: The Raid on Independence Please do tell what you plan to do to Leslie, AHG. ;)

9/26/2005 9:13 pm (et) amhistoryguy: For starters, He is quick to point out that Union troops "Lived off the land, which was a polite way of saying that they had taken food... How did Q supply his group?

9/26/2005 9:14 pm (et) ks: No psychoanalysis (riiiiight), but he explains to us how George Todd's buddies are ambushed and killed and he's sent into a murderous rage from that day forward.

9/26/2005 9:14 pm (et) ks: I suppose he and his men were *given" food and forage. ;)

9/26/2005 9:14 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Leslie goes on to mention that at Shawneetown Q's raid for clothing, stripped some male residents and then killed them

9/26/2005 9:15 pm (et) Basecat: Thing about this chapter, and seems to be a recurring theme in the book, is the stupidity of the Union officers out there. Colonel Buel is a fine example...

9/26/2005 9:15 pm (et) ks: And no doubt they were by some. But they didn't dare refuse a request if they wanted to live and have their homes remain standing. Even giving the requested supplies often resulted in the giver being killed.

9/26/2005 9:15 pm (et) amhistoryguy: My biggest complaint about Leslie thus far, is his description of the Palmyra Massacre - first, what does it have to do with Q?

9/26/2005 9:16 pm (et) amhistoryguy: His description of Palmyra is either a fabrication or the product of some really poor research.

9/26/2005 9:16 pm (et) Basecat: amhg, and my follow up to that is why, after all the killing that had already gone on, did this event cause such a great shock to all in that area?

9/26/2005 9:17 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Leslie "Among their number were an elderly man and a retarded boy. - Just not true

9/26/2005 9:18 pm (et) Basecat: Was it because of the mentally challenged youngster being killed, that they bungled the firing squad?? Just confused me .

9/26/2005 9:18 pm (et) ks: Just not true? You mean you've read elsewhere about these "facts" and found they weren't?

9/26/2005 9:18 pm (et) Basecat: ks..That's another thing I don't get, folks who did what they were told, and yet still were killed...

9/26/2005 9:19 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Confederate Correspondence in the OR Series I Vol 13, Page 909 - indicates members of the 1st Mo Brigade objects to the execution of "Capt Thomas Snider and 9 Privates."

9/26/2005 9:19 pm (et) ks: Well that reinforces the belief that some killed just to be killing, don't you think?

9/26/2005 9:20 pm (et) ks: Oh my. So refuted by the Confed's ORs.

9/26/2005 9:20 pm (et) Basecat: ks..which shows that this was not war, but just blatant murder and pillaging because they could do so.

9/26/2005 9:20 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Yes ks, a bit of research shows that the oldest man executed, Willis Baker, was 60 years old, But, he had been found guilty of the murder of a unionist, Ezekiel Pratt.

9/26/2005 9:22 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The Pro Confederate article in the Palmyra Courier, calling the executions a "Horrible Outrage," makes no mention of a retarded boy or elderly man.

9/26/2005 9:22 pm (et) Basecat: ks...Dumb question here in terms of the raid in Independence, was that in Kansas or Missouri?? Leslie did not say.

9/26/2005 9:23 pm (et) ks: Fascinating. So Leslie's research stinks or is so biased as to present the picture he wants to give, huh?

9/26/2005 9:23 pm (et) ks: Missouri

9/26/2005 9:23 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The Southern Historical Society Papers says that the Confederates chosen for execution were "Ten men of age and responsibility."

9/26/2005 9:24 pm (et) ks: I know he didn't say. But if that had happend in KS I'd surely be working with some tourism people today who were using the raid for advertising. ;)

9/26/2005 9:25 pm (et) Basecat: ks...Plus his notes on the subject indicates he used the same OR citation as amhg just described...How you get a mentally challenged kid out of that makes me scratch my head and say hmm.

9/26/2005 9:25 pm (et) ks: Wow. Even the SHSP say that. And I've thought that some items I've read from their works were the most biased I'd ever read. Thanks for the research you've been doing, AHG.

9/26/2005 9:25 pm (et) Basecat: Independence is near Carthage, Correct?? Just trying to remember from my driving out there.

9/26/2005 9:26 pm (et) ks: I thought something these chapters did well was impart that sense of the ongoing chase and futility of trying to hunt down the guerrillas. That observation from a report to Col Penick that read "We do not believe guerrillas can ever be taken by pursuit; we must take them by strategy." Found that statement to be particularly interesting.

9/26/2005 9:26 pm (et) ks: No. Independence is up North and West of KC...up above Raytown, MO.

9/26/2005 9:27 pm (et) Basecat: As did I, and am wondering when they started to strategize on how to take them. This chapter repeatedly showed that the chase followed every rumor etc,

9/26/2005 9:27 pm (et) Basecat: Thanks ks...Best I break out my map for next weeks reading...:)

9/26/2005 9:28 pm (et) ks: I better back track there. It's more north of KC KS. Independence would be EAST and north of Overland Park. I know you know where THAT is. :)

9/26/2005 9:28 pm (et) ks: I meant EAST earlier. ;)

9/26/2005 9:28 pm (et) Basecat: That I do..:)

9/26/2005 9:29 pm (et) ks: Anything else on this chapter?

9/26/2005 9:29 pm (et) amhistoryguy: One more thing

9/26/2005 9:30 pm (et) ks: Have to say something in order to see if you've said anything AHG. Nature of the room to keep that most recent post out of sight at times. ;)

9/26/2005 9:30 pm (et) amhistoryguy: W H Humphrey was originally selected to be executed, but his family pleaded for him to be spared, he was, Hiram Smith was executed in his place. Thought it interesting that Leslie didn't mention that mercy

9/26/2005 9:31 pm (et) Basecat: Just wish to add again from this chapter, the lack of any concept on how to go after Q and his band, Found the whole thing at Independence to be a travesty by Buel, and chastising that woman out of his office caused me to wonder how he got a command out there.

9/26/2005 9:31 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The entire effort was without direction

9/26/2005 9:32 pm (et) ks: He only mentions when bushwhackers and guerrillas show mercy, AHG. Sadly, that seems to be the case. He loses all credibility with his obvious bias.

9/26/2005 9:32 pm (et) Basecat: amhg...Out of sight and out of mind in the case of the Politico's in DC IMHO.

9/26/2005 9:32 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Bias is one thing the fabrication of Palmyra I see as something completely different

9/26/2005 9:33 pm (et) Basecat: ks...and yet makes sure he tells all how Cole Younger was merciful on more than one occasion.

9/26/2005 9:33 pm (et) ks: Okay, now we can move on...

Chapter 8

”Meet Slaughter with Slaughter”: Prelude to the Lawrence Massacre And we learn what Q and company did during the winter of 1862-63

9/26/2005 9:34 pm (et) ks: I appreciated the information on Cane Hill and Prairie Grove so I could place Quantrill's activities in that time frame.

9/26/2005 9:34 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Todd decides his "discontented with regular army life," so he leaves -- I thought they were soldiers?

9/26/2005 9:34 pm (et) Basecat: Now this chapter showed that they could call themselves soldiers, but they sure did not act like a soldier. Amazes me that some were with Shelby during that winter campaign, and when tired of "serving", they walk up to their buddies and say let's go??

9/26/2005 9:35 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Members of Q's raiders didn't desert, they "continued to defect from Shelby's Brigade and go home."

9/26/2005 9:35 pm (et) ks: And how about Q's meeting with Seddon and the supposed response he gave when asked what HE would do if he had the power and opportunity? Wow...I think that should be typed up. :)

9/26/2005 9:35 pm (et) Basecat: amhg.. Reading that tonight sure puts what they were into a more clearer perspective.

9/26/2005 9:36 pm (et) Basecat: ks..when I read about that meeting..for some reason I thought of Stonewall Jackson, as he most certainly agreed with Quantrill on that aspect of fighting the war.

9/26/2005 9:36 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Basicly Q asked for Confederate approval and support of his murderous rampage.

9/26/2005 9:37 pm (et) ks: "Do, Mr. Secretaty? Why, I would wage such a war and have such a war waged by land and sea as to make surrender forever impossible. I would cover the armies of the Confederacy all over with blood. I would invade. I would reward audacity. I would exterminnate. I would break up foreign enlistments by indiscriminate massacre. I would win the independence of my people or I would find them graves."

9/26/2005 9:37 pm (et) Basecat: and rank of Colonel so he could be saved under the Partisan Act if he got he could be protected.

9/26/2005 9:37 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I would not have been surprised if the Confederacy thought about taking Q down themselves.

9/26/2005 9:38 pm (et) Basecat: amhg...Made me wonder the same thing...

9/26/2005 9:38 pm (et) ks: That next paragraph dealing with what he'd do with prisoners was even more telling. What an "outburst" as Leslie calls it.

9/26/2005 9:39 pm (et) amhistoryguy: No evidence of that of course, but how could anyone not think, "We had better be very careful of our association with this mad man."

9/26/2005 9:39 pm (et) Basecat: More like the ravings of a nut case..:)

9/26/2005 9:40 pm (et) ks: Thoughts on the raid into KS by Dick Yeager's men?

9/26/2005 9:40 pm (et) Basecat: amhg, You would think Seddon told Jeff Davis about that meeting...and warned him of being associated with Q.

9/26/2005 9:41 pm (et) Basecat: Ks..Yep...and pretty much goes along with my take on the Union troops out there, how Yeager and the boys, could make a raid like that, and deep into the territory, on the main road no less, and get away scot free.

9/26/2005 9:41 pm (et) amhistoryguy: "Course Davis was sick so much of the time at that point, he probably didn't bother him.

9/26/2005 9:42 pm (et) Basecat: Even I have heard of the Santa Fe Trail...and could probably find my way along that road..:)

9/26/2005 9:43 pm (et) amhistoryguy: If the Union were to have made a strong enough response to put a halt to the bushwackers, how would that have effected the "real" war?

9/26/2005 9:45 pm (et) Basecat: Good question, and one I was pondering this evening, and reall don't think it would effect the real war. IIRC, mention was made of a US Marshall who chased those boys rather positively, and even warned folks ahead of what was coming.

9/26/2005 9:46 pm (et) ks: They didn't have the man power or the plan. So much in the chapter speaking of how darned near everyone (okay, slight exageration) was out redlegging or bushwhacking or just plain ROBBING and murdering people.

9/26/2005 9:47 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I sure would not have felt safe being for the Union in Mo.

9/26/2005 9:47 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Those folks must have felt a little bit betrayed, abandoned.

9/26/2005 9:47 pm (et) ks: BTW obvious that Cathy's and Dave's research was used in this chapter. :) "Quantrill's Call" and the thought of that being sung in MO parlors and around campfires...very colorful.

9/26/2005 9:48 pm (et) Basecat: ks..which is a good point...Also made me think of what was proposed to Lee before he surrendered, and I tend to think he used what was going on out there as the reason he was against continuing the war on a Guerilla basis.

9/26/2005 9:48 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Very folksy

9/26/2005 9:49 pm (et) Basecat: ks..a what if for you...Bet it would have been interesting if Natty had survived WC, and later in the war was put in charge of trying to track down Q and his band...

9/26/2005 9:49 pm (et) ks: Are you familiar with Barton and Para's music, AHG? If not, I'd certainly suggest you check it out. They've done so much to research the history of the music. And much of what I've read in this book is familiar because of listening to their collections. Really well done.

9/26/2005 9:50 pm (et) Basecat: amhg, One of the best nights we ever had at a muster was when they played for us during our Muster out there...

9/26/2005 9:50 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I agree with you there, ks, very well done.

9/26/2005 9:51 pm (et) ks: OMG...wouldn't it though? Natty driven with his own determination to see HIS flag and HIS country not bow to such "traitors" and going head on with the mindset of a William Clarke Quantrill.

9/26/2005 9:52 pm (et) ks: We'd probably better get on to Order No. 10 and the massacre. :) Other thoughts on this chapter?

9/26/2005 9:52 pm (et) Basecat: ks..:) Thought just crossed my mind while reading tonight, and just from reading about Natty, Highly doubt he would have quit...

9/26/2005 9:53 pm (et) ks: I tend to believe he'd have plotted and pursued the guerrillas with a vengeance. And probably would have gotten himself killed while doing it too.

9/26/2005 9:53 pm (et) Basecat: Same here...but I just don't see him stopping the pursuit, especially if he was close, as was apt to happen, judging by the reading tonight.

9/26/2005 9:54 pm (et) ks: arch mustn't have been thinking clearly. Could he possibly enjoy football more than a chance to elaborate on the Lawrence Massacre from HIS perspective?? ;)

9/26/2005 9:55 pm (et) Basecat: Question?? You think it would be better to save the Massacre at Lawrence for next week??

9/26/2005 9:55 pm (et) ks: I don't. :) I think we could speak of it BOTH weeks. :)

9/26/2005 9:56 pm (et) ks: You know if the others make it in next week they'll want to discuss it. And what we have to say will be long gone by then. ;)

9/26/2005 9:56 pm (et) Basecat: OK, will add to the parts I read about, and will add more next week. :)

9/26/2005 9:57 pm (et) ks: How far did you get, Base? Through the massacre but not to the "rising from the ashes" phase?

9/26/2005 9:57 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I really objected to Leslie's invention of a military objective for the Lawrence raid; "Meant to kill every man and teenage boy capable of bearing arms against the south." The "South" had nothing to do with the Lawrence raid. Then Leslie goes on the describe the murders of several 60 year old men, Otis Longley and Dennis Murphy among them.

9/26/2005 9:58 pm (et) ks:

Chapter 9

”The Most Diabolical Deed of the Whole Civil War”: The Lawrence Massacre

9/26/2005 9:58 pm (et) amhistoryguy: opps, jumped the gun, sorry

9/26/2005 9:59 pm (et) Basecat: ks...Just got to the part why the Massacre was planned, and when they arrived in town...

9/26/2005 9:59 pm (et) ks: No problem. :) So from what you've read elsewhere, how did you think Leslie presented the "facts" of the prison collapse? I *knew* I'd read the theory about the prisoners trying to dig out somewhere.

9/26/2005 10:00 pm (et) Basecat: ks...He used it as an excuse to make the raid...and am with amhg, how Lawrence was a military objective is beyond my way of thinking.

9/26/2005 10:01 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I thought his version was a bit "tainted" - his mention of "women being accused of being wives or Kin of bushwackers " being arrested and taken to KC. They were arrested for buying ammunition and supplies, not for being kin.

9/26/2005 10:02 pm (et) ks: As a matter of fact, the "explanation...that was as natural as a sudden gust of wind." concerning guards cutting holes in the walls in order to gain access to the whores in the lower floors I'd also read elsewhere. Perhaps one of the CW mags had parts of this book in an article?

9/26/2005 10:02 pm (et) amhistoryguy: the vote taken on the Lawrence raid was made 3 days before the Prison collapse. One had nothing to do with the other.

9/26/2005 10:02 pm (et) Basecat: Other thing that I found interesting, Sparing the women, etc. as they were not to be hurt etc. Yeah, I guess killing their husbands and sons probably would not "affect" them at all. The whole thing is sick , and know I have a tough time when I read anyone trying to justify it.

9/26/2005 10:03 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I have heard that as well ks, in any event if they HAD wanted to kill the women, a collapsing building would not be my first clear choice as effective.

9/26/2005 10:04 pm (et) ks: Obviously it didn't, AHG. But that story is sure used to try to explain away the motive for the massacre's inception, isn't it? Get the facts and in the right order and it's a different picture one sees.

9/26/2005 10:05 pm (et) amhistoryguy: yet, the building didn't collapse until three days AFTER the plan to raid Lawrence had been approved.

9/26/2005 10:06 pm (et) ks: Even if there had been a plot to kill the women and make it appear accidental I'm sure there'd have been a way that was less expensive than requiring the collapse of building's sworn to be built of the finest and hardest QUALITY bricks.

9/26/2005 10:07 pm (et) Basecat: amhg..which is another valid point...Tend to believe that even if the Hotel did not collapse, they were going to Lawrence to do what was natural..Rob, kill and plunder...Yeah..that's a military objective.

9/26/2005 10:08 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Quantrill was clear about why he wanted to raid Lawrence.

9/26/2005 10:09 pm (et) mike65: well there raiders there not that in to anyone thing so they do something either bad aor good in this case bad

9/26/2005 10:10 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The Lawrence Convention and Visitors Bureau puts out a wonderful little pamphlet "Self Guided Tour - Quantrill's Raid; The Lawrence Massacre." that is well worth contacting them for, Excellent map and time line.

9/26/2005 10:10 pm (et) Basecat: ks...I agree...Let's kill these women, but do so in a outlandish way so we don't get the heat for doing so...Find the whole thing preposporous...

9/26/2005 10:10 pm (et) ks: Yes, he was. KILL! Kill and you will make no mistrake! Lawrence should be thoroughly cleansed, and the only way to cleanse it is to kill! Kill! Actually sound rather John Brown-ish with the "cleansing", doesn't it?

9/26/2005 10:11 pm (et) mike65: I mean think about the Centrailia massacure they stripped the soldiers down and exacuted them

9/26/2005 10:12 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Don't you think if Quantrill REALLY thought that the women in KC had been murdered, he would have acted in kind in Lawrence ? Remember his reaction to Halleck's order?

9/26/2005 10:12 pm (et) Basecat: ks, which is yet another good point...Brown and Q seemed to read from the same book...and both were wrong.

9/26/2005 10:13 pm (et) Basecat: amhg...Exactly...To me it is hard to justify why it was done.

9/26/2005 10:13 pm (et) ks: And believe it or not, I've never seen that pamphlet, ahg. I did enjoy (strange to use that word "enjoy") the street by street type of descriptions of what took place as I could visualize the action progressing through the streets.

9/26/2005 10:14 pm (et) ks: I do, ahg. Hey, how about Order No. 10? Anything you wish to say about that?

9/26/2005 10:14 pm (et) amhistoryguy: My final slap at Leslie tonight, he claims "the accepted figure for the number slain is 150." Actually it is over 200 - 188 of the dead were identified, the blacks and many of the Germans were not. There were 85 widows, and 250 fatherless children.

9/26/2005 10:15 pm (et) ks: I thought he went on to make the case for it being more like 200, ahg.

9/26/2005 10:15 pm (et) Basecat: Mike...which just goes to show that was not a war out there...Nothing more than plain disregard for human life on both sides..

9/26/2005 10:17 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Order 10 showed, IMO, how misguided and uncontrolled the violence had gotten. It was Ewing's "Hail Mary,."

9/26/2005 10:18 pm (et) mike65: I agree to that but something had to be done to show that the south was something to not be taken lightly. I am not trying to make right out of what they did but the north did alot wors things that lead to the massacure

9/26/2005 10:18 pm (et) Basecat:'s of these said orders really did nothing on their own to be involved in carrying them out.

9/26/2005 10:18 pm (et) ks: Desperate move all right. Clear out that section of the land that offered succor, a place to hide...clear out any form of support for the guerrillas....

9/26/2005 10:19 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Of course not in his text, but in his note on the bottom of the page ks, you are right, he does round up.

9/26/2005 10:19 pm (et) ks: The North did a lot worse things that led to the massacre?? That sounds like more "they deserved it" tit for tat. ?

9/26/2005 10:19 pm (et) Basecat: Mike, again to me, what happened out there had nothing to do with the War, and had everything to do with robbing, and killing. Just my two cents on the matter.

9/26/2005 10:20 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Quantrill and "The South" had nothing to do with one another except in Quantrill's and Leslie's minds.

9/26/2005 10:20 pm (et) ks: I don't buy that kind of justification, mike. I believe there were atrocities on both sides and there's nothing I can be told that "justifies" the Lawrence Massacre.

9/26/2005 10:21 pm (et) mike65: I am not trying to justify the action that took place on that dreadful day

9/26/2005 10:21 pm (et) Basecat: ? from here...In the book, did Leslie say what the reaction was in Richmond after the massacre took place?

9/26/2005 10:22 pm (et) ks: Not that I've read in the book, Basecat.

9/26/2005 10:22 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Not that I saw Basecat, but that is an interesting question, I may have to look into that further.

9/26/2005 10:24 pm (et) Basecat: Can't believe they approved of it, and will do some checking here as well...

9/26/2005 10:24 pm (et) Basecat: Also does not surprise me Leslie did not include it in his book.

9/26/2005 10:24 pm (et) ks: I expect we'll be covering the massacre in more detail. I'd be happy with just 2 chapters as homework. Would also give the opportunity to check into other sources on what kind of response Richmond did have.

9/26/2005 10:25 pm (et) mike65: and I'm not trying to take the side of the south in saying that they deserved it and I'm not trying to sound mean but they brought it on themselves but then again I have to agree with you guys and nothing comes close to justifying that act

9/26/2005 10:25 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Bias is expressed not only by what an author says, but by what he leaves out as well, Basecat

9/26/2005 10:26 pm (et) ks: They brought it on themselves?? I didn't think you were trying to sound mean, mike. Just having trouble understanding what it is you are saying.

9/26/2005 10:26 pm (et) Basecat: ks...Promise to be more prepared next week...Hard thing to read, just bothers me that something like this could happen here.

9/26/2005 10:26 pm (et) mnorton1970: hi everyone

9/26/2005 10:27 pm (et) ks: BTW, in case you've wondered, mike. I'm smiling as I type. Not mad at all. Just (as I said) not understanding what it is you're saying.

9/26/2005 10:28 pm (et) ks: Hello mnorton. Finishing up the Quantrill chat even though we've been very short handed tonight. Thanks ahg and Basecat for hanging in there. NOT trying to shut this down btw. :)

9/26/2005 10:28 pm (et) Basecat: Evening mnorton..Hope all is well.

9/26/2005 10:28 pm (et) Basecat: ks...Homework for next week?

9/26/2005 10:28 pm (et) mnorton1970: evenin'

9/26/2005 10:29 pm (et) mike65: Well the things that lead up to the event is worse than what the southern gurillase did the north scalped them in a previous encounter and then did other thing that I don't want to mention

9/26/2005 10:30 pm (et) ks: I said earlier that I'd be fine with just 2 chapters so people can get caught up and we can cover the massacre in more detail with those who show next week.

9/26/2005 10:30 pm (et) mike65: I'm sorry if I was on the verge off stirring up some stuff I try to stand back and just watch these conversations

9/26/2005 10:30 pm (et) mnorton1970: the Lawrence Kansas raid?

9/26/2005 10:31 pm (et) Basecat: Chapters 9 and 10 then??

9/26/2005 10:31 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Thanks, ks, once again a nice chat, even though we were pretty much in agreement. Brought out some interesting points I had not thought of.

9/26/2005 10:31 pm (et) ks: I don't understand the reasoning in saying "well what the other guys did was worse". That sure seems like trying to justify to me, mike. BTW I'm curious, have you read Leslie's book?

9/26/2005 10:31 pm (et) ks: No, 10 and 11

9/26/2005 10:32 pm (et) mike65: no haven't had the time these days

9/26/2005 10:32 pm (et) ks: Believe that's under 40 pages. Will give the opportunity to do some other research on Richmond reaction or other Southern/Northern reactions.

9/26/2005 10:32 pm (et) Basecat: Ooops...That's what I meant..:) 10, and 11..:)

9/26/2005 10:34 pm (et) ks: Yes, mnorton. The Lawrence Massacre. The reading for tonight was about what led up to it as well as the massacre proper. But we didn't cover much on the massacre and will start with it again NEXT week. Hopefully more of our compatriots for this book chat will be present. :)

9/26/2005 10:34 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Knowing what I do of Leslie, some outside research may be refreshing.

9/26/2005 10:34 pm (et) mnorton1970: sounds interesting, I joined this chat room apparently right in the middle of a good book, I'll have to be sure to jump in the next one.

9/26/2005 10:35 pm (et) amhistoryguy: An interesting book mnorton, not necessarily a "good" book : )

9/26/2005 10:37 pm (et) ks: mnorton, there's a link on the logon page that will take you to the book chat schedule so you can see what we're reading and what's coming up NEXT. No, we aren't just a Lincoln and Gettysburg Book Chat group. The future schedule just kind of looks that way. ;)

9/26/2005 10:38 pm (et) Basecat: More like a frustrating book here ks and amhg...and by that I mean where he gets some of the stuff he writes about, and really have a problem, as his note on Palmyra, includes what amhg posted..same section from the ORs, and yet, we have a mentally retarded child being executed.

9/26/2005 10:38 pm (et) mnorton1970: lol ok, I'll be sure to check that out

9/26/2005 10:39 pm (et) ks: NEXT books are chosen by discussion with current book chat participants and getting an idea for what books they'd like to cover. We try to make sure the book is readily available in our libraries and/or there are CHEAP copies that can be found out there. ;)

9/26/2005 10:39 pm (et) Basecat: just to add...main reason we are focused on Gettysburg the next few months, is that is where out muster in June 2006 will be.

9/26/2005 10:40 pm (et) ks: I forgot another consideration... ;) Sometimes we've chosen a book that many people had on their shelves but had not yet read. Brushed off the dust and jumped in reading it TOGETHER. ;)

9/26/2005 10:40 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Guess that's a better description Basecat - frustrating - The evidence on the Palmyra Massacre is so poor, I didn't get to half the evidence that indicates there was no "retarded boy," and that the "elderly man" at 60, was already convicted of murder.

9/26/2005 10:40 pm (et) Basecat: ks...ala UTC..:)

9/26/2005 10:41 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Leslie provides nothing to support his claim.

9/26/2005 10:41 pm (et) ks: So where did the "retarded boy" story come from, AHG?

9/26/2005 10:42 pm (et) Basecat: and yet, the way the notes are set up, and for those who won't check on the sources, yeah he got hisself covered.

9/26/2005 10:42 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Beats me ks - one pro southern wed site I saw makes a big point out of the fact that two of the men one 19 and one 22, could not read or write, but that does not make them retarded.

9/26/2005 10:44 pm (et) Basecat: Night Mike...Take Care. Do hope you can join us in future book chats.

9/26/2005 10:45 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The local citizens who supported the executions sent a petition to Lincoln in support of the executions, and listed some of the crimes the men had committed. Seems to me if there was a retarded boy - they might have said something about it, or the Palmyra Courier would have cried out about it, or the Southern Historical Society Papers, or the 1st Missouri Brigade who claimed all the men as comrades.

9/26/2005 10:47 pm (et) Basecat: Just a guess...retarted boy comes from the book in the note...surprise...Chapter 13 of the Cole Younger book...He mentions brownlee's book which I do have here, and will check that out as well.

9/26/2005 10:47 pm (et) amhistoryguy: There just seems to by nothing that would indicate that a retarded boy was executed.

9/26/2005 10:48 pm (et) ks: Base too, of course. ;)

9/26/2005 10:49 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Regardless of what Younger wrote. I checked as many of the ages as I could, the youngest I could find was 17. And, as the Southern Historical Society says, the men were "Of age and Respectability. " SHS Papers Vol I, No. 4, page 226 - 243

9/26/2005 10:49 pm (et) Basecat: amhg..Like I have not all that familiar with stuff out that way, but I just find it hard to believe they would execute a boy in that condition...Makes no sense.

9/26/2005 10:50 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Especially after one of the married men was replaced in consideration of his family

9/26/2005 10:51 pm (et) ks: Dobre noc! :)

9/26/2005 10:51 pm (et) ks: logs off.

9/26/2005 10:51 pm (et) Basecat: Night ks...Take Care.

9/26/2005 10:54 pm (et) Basecat: Thanks for the chat amhg

9/26/2005 10:55 pm (et) Basecat: logs off.