Members of the Brewer family served on both sides of this bloody conflict. The surviving documents outlining their service are invaluable in genealogical research for this time period. Sometimes they give us insight into injuries inflicted or illnesses they might have had, experiences as prisoners of war, battles they were in, and so forth. Pension applications are likely to mention other family members, residences and a host of helpful information.
Feel free to browse through the records I have gathered of our Brewer Confederate and Union soldiers. Check back often, as this blog is a work in progress and I am regularly adding to it. If you would like to view public domain Civil War photos, visit the National Archives albums ➚ on Flickr.
Feel free to browse through the records I have gathered of our Brewer Confederate and Union soldiers. Check back often, as this blog is a work in progress and I am regularly adding to it. If you would like to view public domain Civil War photos, visit the National Archives albums ➚ on Flickr.
SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT
The Civil War is a complex and deeply controversial part of our nation's past. I often think that, in some ways, time has painted it in a much different light than was seen by those who fought it. Sometimes it is helpful to get information straight from the horse's mouth, as they say, or as close to it as possible. My great, great grandfather from a different family line was a Union soldier. His son recorded a lot of his own memories and thoughts, which were undoubtedly influenced greatly by stories he was told by his father. In one of these memoirs, or spasms, as he called them, he recounted the following:
"This war, in my opinion, was for the sole purpose of holding the states together and thereby enabling the North to dictate the policies and actions of the South, as they are still trying to do. I believe the idea that the main issue was to free the slaves was merely propaganda to work on the feelings of the great majority of the common people and make them willing to support the war. The South had already realized that slavery was wrong, both morally and economically, and many of the planters were already freeing their slaves...
"There was no animosity between the soldiers of the North and South. I have heard my father tell of times when the two armies were camped close enough together, the boys from one side or the other would come over for a visit or to trade coffee for tobacco. The South had tobacco but was always short of coffee, while the North had the coffee but often ran short of tobacco."
Following the war, this man moved to the South and lived among them, getting along quite well. Surely not all were as tolerant of each other as my ancestor suggested, but obviously some were. I can't help but wonder what it would have been like to be trading goods, visiting and forging friendships one day, and then being commanded to shoot at each other the next.
When not fighting against one's friend, brother or neighbor, there was always the worst enemy of all: disease. Roughly two thirds of the Civil War deaths were caused by diseases such as dysentery, typhoid, pneumonia, measles, tuberculosis and malaria, rather than by the perils of the battles themselves. I guess what I'm getting at is that, no matter how hard we try to figure out the ins and outs of this conflict, we will never be able to fully understand what it was like for those affected by it.
I tend to agree with the thought provoking words of my great grandfather - that the Civil War was not about freeing the slaves, but rather about the South not wanting to be dominated by the northern government, and the North wanting to keep the Union together. In fact, even though President Lincoln was rightfully opposed to slavery, the Emancipation Proclamation was not given until over a year after the war began, and freeing the slaves was gradual and problematic.
According to what I have read, those living in Union controlled areas of the Confederacy and the border states were not yet included; only slaves in the Confederate strongholds were affected. Understandably, it would have been utterly impossible, in the midst of a war, to free four million slaves all at once and figure out what to do with them.
Not only was it difficult for the government to deal with the situation, but the escaped and freed slaves also struggled mightily to adjust. Often they were not treated much differently as freedmen than they had been as slaves.
It has also been suggested by some that this was a largely political ploy and that it was done this way, at least partially, in hopes of hitting the South where it would hurt the most. Since there was no way to enforce emancipation in areas that were in a state of "rebellion", some suspect that the intent was to encourage more slaves to rise up and leave the fields of the Confederate strongholds to fight on the Union side, thus disadvantaging the South.
Certainly slavery was of great economic importance in the South, but very few Southerners were slave owners. Most were sturdy, hardworking farmers of small plots of land. The cost of purchasing a slave would have been comparable to the annual earnings of such a family. Whether they agreed with slavery or not did not matter, for they could not afford them, nor did they have any justifiable use for them.
The real issues, to my way of thinking, were economics and states' rights. There had arisen a great demand for the South's raw materials, such as cotton, and the larger plantation owners had increased their operations to fill this demand. However, federal laws were forcing them to sell these raw materials exclusively to northern factories, rather than giving them the freedom to sell to other countries.
They were given deflated prices for their goods. The finished products were then taxed so heavily that the South could not afford them. The southern states broke away from the Union because they wanted to be have sufficient control over their own livelihoods and laws. It was a matter of seceding, or living in poverty indefinitely.
The nation was founded in such a way that individual states had their own governments. The South did not take kindly to what they viewed as the North taking a domineering stance over them and making laws that only benefited themselves. I can't help but think that this situation, whether it was intended that way or not, must have felt similar to what their grandfathers and great grandfathers had fought to rid themselves of during the Revolutionary War.
It was these issues that caused secession, and the federal government to do all they could to ensure that the split was only temporary. Yet, somewhere along the way, we have been led to believe that the Civil War was inspired as a way to end slavery and grant equality to all men.
This leads me to another idea that I suspect has no real merit - that the North was all about Negro rights, and that the South held no love for their slaves. One of my southern families that had slaves is known to have treated them like family. I'm not saying this was the norm, but neither was it unheard of. When this household freed its slaves, they did not wish to leave, but asked if they could remain with this family because they felt well-treated there.
Were the majority of Northerners abolitionists who thought of Negros as equal to Whites? The northern family that I mentioned earlier had drastically different views than one might expect. The wife of the Union soldier recalled an experience she had when, a while after the war, they spent some time on an old plantation in Mississippi. Both of them were from Pennsylvania and had no southern heritage that I am aware of.
She told of an instance in which she was washing her feet. A freed Negro woman saw this and told her it was not right for white women to have to wash their own feet, and so she proceeded to take over the task. This northern ancestor expressed her racist views quite explicitly when she later said that, though she allowed it, she cringed during the process because she "could not stand to have those black hands on her feet".
I tell of these two accounts not to cause offense, but because I think that it is important to remember that nothing in history is cut and dried. To assume that the northerners were all about freeing the slaves and making sure they were treated equally to their Caucasian neighbors would not be accurate. There were still some who did not believe the slaves should be free, and they certainly were not considered equals. Even within the Union army severe prejudice existed.
As far as I understand, many of the people that were opposed to slavery, also doubted that the two races could ever co-exist peacefully, and a great concern was figuring out what to do with the freed slaves. Certainly, some would have held views on equality that far surpassed the norm of this era, but many did not. Likewise, not all of the southerners neglected their slaves or treated them violently, or thought of them as little better than livestock, although, again, some surely did.
Was the average Northerner aware of what their government was doing to the South's economic well being? Probably not. Many of them were humble farmers, as were the majority of their southern neighbors. Were the Confederates traitors? I do not believe so. They were only trying to stand up for states' rights and the individual freedoms of which the constitution afforded them.
I believe that time has unavoidably clouded our view of this historic conflict. It is difficult to get past our modern views and remember that our ancestors' realities and outlook were vastly different in the 1860's than ours are now, which is why I am not inclined to judge either side very harshly. Each believed strongly in its cause, and I admire the courage and patriotism to which the soldiers, their families and the general population adhered in their own ways.
There is no need to sweep history under the rug or white-wash it. It is a well documented fact that both sides committed atrocities during this unfortunate conflict. In fact, this continued long after the war ended, as Jayhawkers and Bushwackers roamed the countryside. Yet both Union and Confederate soldiers also showed valor and honor in standing up for what they considered to be a righteous cause.
May the legacy of all of these brave men and boys and their families live on, as important and fascinating players in our nation's history. May we never forget the heritage passed down to us by those who had the courage to stand up for their cause, both northern and southern!
 |
| Union Infantry - Image Source: National Archives ➚ (Public Domain) |
I tend to agree with the thought provoking words of my great grandfather - that the Civil War was not about freeing the slaves, but rather about the South not wanting to be dominated by the northern government, and the North wanting to keep the Union together. In fact, even though President Lincoln was rightfully opposed to slavery, the Emancipation Proclamation was not given until over a year after the war began, and freeing the slaves was gradual and problematic.
 |
| Escaped slaves that joined the Union army Image Source ➚ (Public Domain) |
Not only was it difficult for the government to deal with the situation, but the escaped and freed slaves also struggled mightily to adjust. Often they were not treated much differently as freedmen than they had been as slaves.
It has also been suggested by some that this was a largely political ploy and that it was done this way, at least partially, in hopes of hitting the South where it would hurt the most. Since there was no way to enforce emancipation in areas that were in a state of "rebellion", some suspect that the intent was to encourage more slaves to rise up and leave the fields of the Confederate strongholds to fight on the Union side, thus disadvantaging the South.
Certainly slavery was of great economic importance in the South, but very few Southerners were slave owners. Most were sturdy, hardworking farmers of small plots of land. The cost of purchasing a slave would have been comparable to the annual earnings of such a family. Whether they agreed with slavery or not did not matter, for they could not afford them, nor did they have any justifiable use for them.
 |
| CSA General "Stonewall" Jackson Image Source: National Archives ➚ (Public Domain) |
They were given deflated prices for their goods. The finished products were then taxed so heavily that the South could not afford them. The southern states broke away from the Union because they wanted to be have sufficient control over their own livelihoods and laws. It was a matter of seceding, or living in poverty indefinitely.
The nation was founded in such a way that individual states had their own governments. The South did not take kindly to what they viewed as the North taking a domineering stance over them and making laws that only benefited themselves. I can't help but think that this situation, whether it was intended that way or not, must have felt similar to what their grandfathers and great grandfathers had fought to rid themselves of during the Revolutionary War.
It was these issues that caused secession, and the federal government to do all they could to ensure that the split was only temporary. Yet, somewhere along the way, we have been led to believe that the Civil War was inspired as a way to end slavery and grant equality to all men.
This leads me to another idea that I suspect has no real merit - that the North was all about Negro rights, and that the South held no love for their slaves. One of my southern families that had slaves is known to have treated them like family. I'm not saying this was the norm, but neither was it unheard of. When this household freed its slaves, they did not wish to leave, but asked if they could remain with this family because they felt well-treated there.
Were the majority of Northerners abolitionists who thought of Negros as equal to Whites? The northern family that I mentioned earlier had drastically different views than one might expect. The wife of the Union soldier recalled an experience she had when, a while after the war, they spent some time on an old plantation in Mississippi. Both of them were from Pennsylvania and had no southern heritage that I am aware of.
She told of an instance in which she was washing her feet. A freed Negro woman saw this and told her it was not right for white women to have to wash their own feet, and so she proceeded to take over the task. This northern ancestor expressed her racist views quite explicitly when she later said that, though she allowed it, she cringed during the process because she "could not stand to have those black hands on her feet".
I tell of these two accounts not to cause offense, but because I think that it is important to remember that nothing in history is cut and dried. To assume that the northerners were all about freeing the slaves and making sure they were treated equally to their Caucasian neighbors would not be accurate. There were still some who did not believe the slaves should be free, and they certainly were not considered equals. Even within the Union army severe prejudice existed.
As far as I understand, many of the people that were opposed to slavery, also doubted that the two races could ever co-exist peacefully, and a great concern was figuring out what to do with the freed slaves. Certainly, some would have held views on equality that far surpassed the norm of this era, but many did not. Likewise, not all of the southerners neglected their slaves or treated them violently, or thought of them as little better than livestock, although, again, some surely did.
Was the average Northerner aware of what their government was doing to the South's economic well being? Probably not. Many of them were humble farmers, as were the majority of their southern neighbors. Were the Confederates traitors? I do not believe so. They were only trying to stand up for states' rights and the individual freedoms of which the constitution afforded them.
 |
| Confederate Soldiers captured at Island No. 10 on the Missouri/Tennessee border (possibly an artillery unit) ~Though not necessarily shown above, we had at least one Brewer captured there~ Image Source ➚ (Public Domain) |
There is no need to sweep history under the rug or white-wash it. It is a well documented fact that both sides committed atrocities during this unfortunate conflict. In fact, this continued long after the war ended, as Jayhawkers and Bushwackers roamed the countryside. Yet both Union and Confederate soldiers also showed valor and honor in standing up for what they considered to be a righteous cause.
May the legacy of all of these brave men and boys and their families live on, as important and fascinating players in our nation's history. May we never forget the heritage passed down to us by those who had the courage to stand up for their cause, both northern and southern!
 |
 |
 |
Thank you so much for sharing your research.
ReplyDeleteI admire the great job you have done on your website. I have a connection with the Brewers through my Pearson ancestors.
ReplyDelete