USA > Tennessee > Bradley County > History of the rebellion in Bradley County, East Tennessee > Part 23
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28
In relating this affair in the winter of 1864, the old lady remarked that she felt the loss at the hands of McGriff much more than at the hands of Col. Hunley. When the horse was taken by Hunley the case was fruitful of other troubles, so much greater and so much more calculated to excite her fears, that the idea of property was forgotten, and she was even glad to see the animal go if that would save their lives and rid their premises of such a monster
271
IN BRADLEY COUNTY, EAST TENNESSEE.
as Hunley. But when she saw him taken by one of their own neighbors whom they had never injured, but had always been ready to befriend, it was an injury and a loss that stung her to the heart. She also remarked, that when MeGriff led the animal by the door, he showed himself so high and lofty, was so full of life and looked so grand, that it brought to her mind how long and hard she and her whole family had struggled, and in how many ways they had tried to secrete and save him, and remem- bering in ,connection, at that moment all their other troubles of the rebellion, she went into the house and wept over the loss, feeling almost as though one of the family had been taken away.
After the war Mr. Potts prosecuted McGriff for damages and muleted him in the insignificant sum of three hundred dollars ; when every principle of justice dictated that it should at least have been one thousand.
This, as one instance, will illustrate the justice that is likely to be awarded in cases where the mildness, ameni- ties and advantages of civil law, and the customs of trial by civil law, can be resorted to by criminals whose of- fences were committed, not in defiance of existing civil law, but only after they, as a body of traitors in insurrec- tion and rebellion against their government, have annihi- lated all civil law in the premises. What is government but law ? What are national and municipal governments but systems of civil law, to which all concerned are alike subject ? The man, therefore, or the body of men, who destroys the government destroys the civil law in the most effectual manner possible. He uproots the very source and support of the civil law.
The difference between the private offender in time of peace, and organized and active traitors is, that the first simply offends against existing law. He does not attack the law itself, but commits his crime against it, leaving the law standing and in force to arrest and punish him if he cannot keep out of its way. The traitor, however, in the very first instance of his career, lays violent hands upon the law itself. He attacks and demolishes its very citadel.
272
HISTORY OF THE REBELLION
He does not deign to keep himself out of the way of the law, but he puts the law out of his own way, by putting it out of existence. The government and its time-hon- ored system of laws growing out of it, he sweeps aside as chaff, after which he roams his country an unrestrained freebooter, with no civil power in existence to impede his course.
This was exactly the condition of things, not only in Bradley, but in the whole of East Tennessee, for three years. McGriff's offence, therefore, against Mr. Potts, was not committed against civil law, for no civil law ex- isted in fact or held jurisdiction, or even claimed to hold jurisdiction, in the country at the time.
The principle is, that organized rebellion in a State- rebellion rising to such a magnitude as to compel the State to grant her rebel subjects belligerent rights-anni- hilates civil law, and consequently the jurisdiction of civil law within the territory under military occupation, till a resort to arms settles the dispute.
Government, or civil jurisdiction in the rebel States, was the very thing in dispute while our great contest was going on, and the concession of belligerent rights to the rebels was a mutual agreement between the parties to decide that question by the sword. Government, or civil jurisdiction of the disputed territory, by this mutual agree- ment, was placed in the condition of a stake, a thing pend- ing between the parties, to be won or lost by either party, as the case might be; and while so placed was in fact the property of neither, but as much, by the agreement, the property of one as the other. It finally fell to us, but it might have fallen to the rebels ; and while by mutual agreement it was thus exposed or subject to the chances of their success, as well as to the chances of ours, it was not ours any more than theirs, so far as the agreement was concerned. Indeed, while thus pendent, it was ours no more than theirs in any sense ; for in this agreement we yielded up our right to it on all other grounds, and hoped for it and expected it only on the abstract conditions of the agreement, namely : that we won it by the sword.
273
IN BRADLEY COUNTY, EAST TENNESSEE.
In regard to each party, therefore, ownership, govern- ment, or civil jurisdiction of the disputed territory, under this agreement, was a mere contingency of the future, and while thus a future contingency in regard to both, was practically as well as theoretically out of existence. The civil power on our part was withdrawn, and Govern- ment represented itself there by a more potent element- the military. In other words, its jurisdiction in that ter- ritory passed from its civil to its military branch. The military is a branch of all civil governments, and when from insurrection or rebellion, a State cannot be repre- sented in any of its territory by its civil power, and this consequently is withdrawn, it represents itself there as fast as it can by its military branch ; and in the very na- ture of such changes-in the very nature of such military occupation-the jurisdiction of this branch is complete and unlimited in the premises, as well as final in its action, extending to the conduct of every individual within the rebellious territory as fast as occupation takes place. In the very nature of the case this must be so, or the organization is a myth, and its objects can never be accomplished. Rebel territory, as fast as we could pos- sess it, and the people within it, became subject to military authority, as they were before to that which this had super- seded. McGriff's crime against Mr. Potts, therefore, was not an offense against the civil law, but against the mili- tary law then in force in Tennessee, in place of the civil law, claiming and exercising jurisdiction over him and his conduct, as well as over all others in those parts of the State hat had been redeemed.
Offenses against law or government, are civil or mili- tary according to the power against which they are com- mitted-the power exercising jurisdiction in the premises at the time. The military was the only authority then in Tennessee representing the Government, consequently it eceived and took cognizance of McGriff's offense in that. branch. But this is not all. This offense was not only against and in defiance of the military as the only author- ity then having jurisdiction in Bradley, but it was the act
274
HISTORY OF THE REBELLION
of a military foe against the strength of these authorities -opposing and obstructing their operations. It was committed against Mr. Potts because he was loyal to the Government-a Union man and an enemy to the rebel- lion ; because he was considered as aiding and abetting these authorities in putting the rebellion down. In fact, because he was considered part and parcel of the power then endeavoring to crush the rebellion. The Union peo- ple of Tennessee were a part of the power working to ac- complish this object. Our military authorities looked to and depended on them for aid in various ways. They depended on the Union people for information, for sup- plies, and to act as their guides through the country, and to co-operate with them in every way they could, which they did. When these Union people were damaged, in- jured and weakened, these authorities and their opera- tions suffered by it. Crimes, therefore, like that of McGriff's against Mr. Potts, were offenses against the Union people as a part of the military itself,-offenses, therefore, bearing against these authorities themselves, and against their operations, consequently over which they had unlimited and final jurisdiction.
As a matter of war policy, with a view to defend them- elves, to husband and increase their strength and for- ward their operations, McGriff's case was theirs to dispose of.
These remarks have not been made as indicating, nor are they an attempt to prove, that reorganized civil courts, after the war, can have no jurisdiction over cases of this kind neglected, or that could not be reached by the mili- tary.
For instance, the citizen murderers hung in Murfrees- boro by Gen. Thomas, in the spring of 1862, had they es- caped the military then having jurisdiction over their crimes, would have fallen subject to the authorities suc- ceeding the military ; and, had they ever become known, justly could have been punished by the civil law. Juris- diction of crime in that county changed after the war ; but the guilt of these criminals, had they not been de
275
IN BRADLEY COUNTY, EAST TENNESSEE.
tected then, would have lasted through all such changes. Their crime was committed against natural right-a right which no changes among men can destroy, consequently their guilt could not be annulled by mere changes in the jurisdiction of justice.
Military law should have been applied to all offenses in Tennessee similar to that which we are considering. as soon as possible after our military authorities occupied the country.
The object of these remarks is not merely to establish the fact of military jurisdiction where civil law is with- drawn-a thing generally conceded-but to make it plain that it was the imperious duty of our military authorities, immediately on taking possession of Tennessee, to redress the wrongs inflicted on Union people by their rebel neighbors. This was what the Union people of Tennes- see had a right to expect, and this in fact is what they did expect. Had a military court of perfectly suitable men been appointed in Chattanooga as soon as our forces took the place, within a month after the battle of Mis- sionary Ridge, every Union family in Hamilton, injured by rebels owning real estate or personal property within our lines, might have been redressed, or placed in secur- ity of redress, very many of whom will now never get justice till they get it at the Judgment Seat above.
A military commission of five honest, industrious and positive men appointed in Cleveland, to hold their ses- sions ten hours each day for two months immediately fol- owing our entrance into the county, would have repaired more losses, redressed more wrongs, punished more offend- ers, and administered more justice very important to be administered, than will now be effected there while the rebellion can be remembered.
Who can assign any good reason why all, or all that could have been reached, of the cases in East Tennessee, similar to that of McGriff's offense against Mr. Potts, should not have been called up and disposed of at once by military courts ? Who can assign any good reason why all such cases, or the most of them, should be de -
276
HHISTORY OF THE REBELLION
layed two years, till civil courts could be organized in which to adjudicate them ? No matter whether the per- sons of the offenders could have been immediately reached or not, full restitution at least should have been made by our authorities to all Union parties injured by rebels, where property could be found to confiscate.
SHOOTING OF MR. WM. THOMAS.
Mr. Thomas lived in the eleventh district, Bradley county. He was a poor man, yet not wanting in the poor man's blessing, being surrounded, we believe, with nine children. He resided upon the famous White Oak Ridge, of Union refugee fame, the boundary line between Brad- ley and Hamilton. He operated upon this ridge as a pilot, aiding Union refugees to cross the Tennessee.
In October, 1863, on his way home from Cleveland, Mr. Thomas, after traveling about three miles, passed Larkin Taylor, Jacob Edwards, rebel guerrillas, and Mr. Andrew Carson, a citizen, conversing together by the road. Mr. Thomas saw the three that day, and was seen by them in Cleveland. They were conversing near Mr. Carson's home. Carson was a strong rebel, and had made efforts before that time to have Mr. Thomas arrested. Mr. Thomas knew that Taylor and Edwards pretended to belong to Capt. Snow's gang of cut-throats in Hamilton; and feared from what he saw in Cleveland, and from seeing the three conversing by the road, that they were meditating evil upon himself, and suspected a visit from Taylor and Ed- wards that night, as he presumed that they were then on their way to Hamilton, which would lead them near his house.
Mr. Thomas reached his home, retiring that night with his family as usual, but making preparations for emer- gencies. He was well acquainted with Taylor and Edwards. Two or three hours, perhaps, after he and his family retired, he heard a suppressed call at his gate, which was near the door. He made no reply, waiting for the call to be repeated, the second and perhaps the third time ; hoping if it was from Taylor and Edwards, to recog-
277
IN BRADLEY COUNTY, EAST TENNESSEE.
nize them by the voice. Being foiled in this-they per- haps assuming a ficticious voice-and thinking that it might be Union refugees sent to him for aid, he opened his door, and was in the act of stepping down upon the ground, which brought him into a position to see the vis- itors sitting upon their horses, whom he instantly recog- nized to be Taylor and Edwards. Feeling satisfied that they designed to kill him, he attempted to draw himself back into his house, when one and perhaps both of them fired, and he fell upon his own threshhold. One shot took effect and completely severed his thigh bone. The mur- derers fled, and the next day were tracked into Hamilton, and near to Peter Munger's dwelling, a Union man, whose carding mill and cotton gin-after appropriating to them- selves al. the woolen rolls they could find in the factory- they set on fire. The fire was discovered in time to save the buildings, but much of the property inside of them was destroyed.
Edwards, we believe, left Bradley, and is, doubtless. still at large. Taylor was arrested for this crime after the war, and imprisoned in Cleveland. In 1865 he was dis- charged for want of evidence.
That Taylor and Edwards were the persons who at- tempted to murder Mr. Thomas is beyond peradventure. No honest man, acquainted with the circumstances of the case, can arrive at any other conclusion. Great efforts were made by Taylor's friends and his lawyer, Mr. M. Ed- wards, to impeach the statements of Mr. Thomas in regard to his attempted murder. The positions taken by Tay- lor's friends and his lawyer in regard to these statements, were slanders as foul and unjust as their authors were dishonest and unprincipled.
Taylor, Edwards and Carson, notwithstanding this and all the other crimes they committed during the rebellion, go unwhipped of justice, while Mr. Thomas, through their thirst for Union blood, will spend the rest of his days a ruined and helpless man. His family also, unless Govern- ment shall afford him relief, socially and pecuniarily, will feel the blow, perhaps through life.
278
HISTORY OF THE REBELLION.
UNION METHODIST MINISTERS IN BRADLEY.
Traveling-Wm. C. Daily, J. L. Mann.
Local-Anderson Trim, John Brower, Elijah Still, A. F. Shannon, W. D. Smith, Asa Stamper, Isham Julian, W. W. Hames, P. H. Reed, Peter Swafford, Wm. B. Ballenger, G. Blackman.
All the foregoing ministers suffered their full share of persecution from the rebels. Mr. Daily and Mr. Mann, however, being traveling ministers, were pursued with a proportionately greater virulence than the others ; both being called to an account for their disloyalty to the Con- federacy by the Holston Conference, Mr. Daily at its annual session at Athens, Tennessee, 1862, and Mr. Mann at its annual session at Wytheville, 1863. Mr. Mann was expelled from the Conference. He fled north and was appointed chaplain of the 9th Tennessee cavalry in which he served sixteen months. Mr. Daily and Mr. Mann are now successfully serving under the auspices of the M. E. Church, in their former field of ministerial labor-Brad- ley and its adjoining counties.
The following named ministers were also dealt with for their loyalty to the old Government, by the Conference at Athens.
W. H. Rogers, W. H. Duggan, Jesse A. Hyden, Patrick H. Reed, John Spears, James Cumming, Thomas N. Rus- sel, and Thomas P. Rutherford. Bishop John Early pre- sided at both these Conferences.
REBEL METHODIST MINISTERS IN BRADLEY.
Traveling-A. G. Worley, Presiding Elder. J. W. Belt, G. McDaniel, T. K. Glenn, and H. B. Swisher.
Local-A. L. Brooks.
CUMBERLAND PRESBYTERIAN UNION MINISTERS IN BRADLEY.
Hiram Douglas, Jacob Lawson, Robert Carden, Wash- ington Smith, Richard Parks.
279
IN BRADLEY COUNTY, EAST TENNESSEE.
MURDER OF MR. EARBY COOPER.
Mr. Cooper was murdered on the 15th of December, 1864. About an hour after he and his family retired for the night, five or six men called at his door, assuming to be Federal soldiers, and were admitted into his house. They pretended to be in search of rebels, and told Mr. Cooper that they mistrusted him as secreting rebel sol- diers on his premises. He replied that no rebel soldiers had ever been harbored about his house. Pretending to doubt his statement, they requested the privilege to search for themselves. After searching within, all but one, taking the light, went out doors, ostensibly to search the premises without. Mr. Cooper, his wife and two or three children, and a brother, Dempsey Cooper, who was stop- ping with him him for the night, and the one rebel, re- mained in the house in the dark, with the exception of a faint light that glimmered from the embers on the hearth. By this time Mr. Cooper was convinced of the real char- acter of his visitors, and managed-though the one rebel was present-to express his fears to his brother Dempsey, and both prepared for the worst.
In a few moments the rebels without returned to the door, one with the candle in his hand. The door was opened by Mr. Erby Cooper, when they, standing upon the step, inquired if he was Eraby Cooper. Either delaying to answer, or answering evasively, the whole company commenced to fire upon him, he standing his ground and returning the fire with his revolver.
After firing six or eight shots the rebels yielded the ground and fled. Mr. Cooper pursued them over the yard fence a few steps from his door, where he fell, from which place he was taken up dead a short time afterwards, having been pierced by five or six bullets. A trail of blood was found the next morning along the path taken by the rebels in their flight, but to what extent they were injured by Mr. Cooper, was never, we believe, fully ascertained by his friends.
The moment the struggle commenced at the door
280
HISTORY OF THE REBELLION
between Mr. Eraby Cooper and the four or five rebels, the rebel inside, and Mr. Dempsey Cooper, closed in a hand- to-hand fight with their revolvers, near the bed where Mrs. Eraby Cooper and her children were lying. Mr. Cooper's revolver proving to be out of order, and not discharging regularly, he dropped it, clenched a chair, and felled the rebel to the floor. As the blow was given, however, he received a shot that made it impossible for him to follow up his advantage. The rebel soon recovered, and the door being by this time clear, sprang to his feet and fled. Though severely wounded, Mr. Cooper finally recovered. Whom these rebels were, was, we believe, never ascer- tained. They were unknown to the Mr. Coopers, and as it appears that they did not know which was Mr. Eraby Cooper, the Coopers must have been unknown to them. It was doubtless a similar case to that of the mur- der of Mr. Richmond, the perpetrators being evidently hired and sent to perform the foul deed, by malicious rebel citizens who thirsted for Mr. Cooper's blood on account of his activity as a Union man.
Mrs. Cooper and her children narrowly escaped with their lives. Rebel bullets from the door, some of which possibly passed through the body of her husband, struck near the bed where she and her children were lying. Ax the contest between Mr. Eraby Cooper and the rebels at the door, and that between Mr. Dempsey Cooper, and the single rebel within, commenced and was raging at the same moment, one can easily imagine the frightfulness and horror of the scene through which the family of Mr. Cooper, that night, was compelled to pass. The case also may illustrate the fearful extent to which the Union peo- ple of East Tennessee were made to suffer by the rebel- lion.
APPENDIX.
DEFENSE OF THE UNION PEOPLE OF TENNESSEE.
It is true that our great American rebellion was unlike anything else of the kind in history; and that the Government as well as our commanders in the field, had to proceed in regard to it, almost entirely without precedent to guide them. The policy of the Government, and of the different department commanders also, had to be improvised as the way opened before them, and particularly was this the case in regard to the border states, where rebels and loyalists were so inter- mingled; where the tares and the wheat so persistently sprung up together, that it was difficult to remove the tares without destroying the wheat likewise. Making, however, all due allowance for the unprecedented difficulties of the case, it is questionable whether our military authorities in the border states, particu- larly those in Tennessee, and more particularly still in East Tennessee, acted with that discretion which might have been expected-justly and wisely discriminat- ing between rebels and loyalists, and upon this basis dispensing awards punative and compensative, which the nature of the case not only justified, but the good of the cause positively demanded.
It is donbttul whether any department commander operating in the West, with the exception of Gen. Fremont, and any division commander with the exception of Gen. O. M. Mitchell, and possibly a few others, developed and pursued that line of policy, very perceptibly the most advisable at the time.
Nashville was surrendered to Gen. Buell by R B. Cheatham, its mayor, Feb. 25. 1862. The following is Gen. Buell's proclamation to the people of Nashville and Davidson county on that occasion.
HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE OHIO, [ NASHVILLE, TENN., February 26th, 1862.
The General Commanding congratulates his troops that it has been their privi- lege to restore the national banner to the Capital of Tennessee. He believes that. thousands of hearts in every part of the State will swell with joy to see that honored flag reinstated in a position from which it was removed in the excite- ment and folly of an evil hour; that the voice of her own people will soon pro- claim its welcome, and that their manhood and patriotism will protect and per- petnate it.
The General does not deem it necessary, though the occasion is a fit one, to re- mind his troops of the rule of conduct they have hitherto observed and are still to pursue. We are in arms not for the purpose of invading the rights of our fel- low-countrymen anywhere, but to maintain the integrity of the Union, and pro- tect the Constitution under which its people have been prosperous and happy. We cannot therefore look with indifference on any conduct which is designed to. give aid and comfort to those who are endeavoring to defent these objects ; but the action to be taken in such cases rests with certain authorized persons, and is not to be assumed by individnal officers or soldiers. Peaceable citizens are not to. be molested in their personsor property. Any wrongs to either are to be promptly corrected and the offenders brought to punishment. To this end all persons are desired to make complaint to the immediate commander of officers or soldiers so. offending. and if justice be not done promptly, then to the next commander, and so on until the wrong is redressed. If the necessities of the public service should require the use of private property for public purposes, fair compensation is to. be allowed. No such appropriation of private property is to be made except by the authority of the highest commander present, and any other officer or soldier who shall presume to exercise such privilege shall be brought to trial. Soldiers are forbidden to enter the residence or grounds of citizens on any plea without authority.
No arrests are to be made withont the authority of the Commanding General, except in cases of actual offence against the authority of the Government ; and in all such cases the fact and circumstances will immediately be reported in writing to Headquarters through the intermediate commanders.
The General reminds his officers that the most frequent depredations are those which are committed by worthless characters who straggle from the ranks on the plea of being unable to march; and where the inability really exists, it will be found in most instances that the soldier has overloaded himself with useless and
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.