Bellefontaine Cemetery and the Civil War in Missouri

I grew up in the St. Louis Missouri area and still have family there. It wasn't until I was an adult that I began getting interested in the Civil War, so I missed out on some great Civil War related sites during my youth. Cemeteries are a wonderful way to connect to the Civil War and Bellefontaine Cemetery in north St. Louis is chock full of history. Calvary Cemetery is just down the road and has the final resting places of William T Sherman and Dred Scott. Bellefontaine is just as exciting as Calvary is.

The Rural Cemetery Association, headed by banker William McPherson and lawyer John Fletcher Darby, organized the cemetery in 1849 on what was then the outskirts of St. Louis as a means to allow city growth and to ease the concerns that the current cemeteries, located within the city limits, were a health hazard.

The cemetery still has over 100 acres of unused land for burials and as of 2012 has over 87,00 people interred there, including many notable pioneers, politicians, and soldiers. It also contains many architecturally important structures and is on the National Register of Historic Places.

When it comes to significant burials there, specifically Civl War burials, Bellefontaine is actually laid out a little better than Calvary, in that the markers reference a map that is specific to Civil War era figures buried there. There are approximately 31 Civil War individuals buried there, some extremely well known, others not so well known.

I’ll just mention the ones that are better known, with a little minor description of each and then list the rest by name.

Major General Francis Preston Blair Jr. Missouri Senator, Union General and Vice President candidate in 1868. He was a key figure in keeping Missouri in the Union.

Major General Sterling Price Former Missouri governor and Confederate General who lead troops at many of the battles within Missouri including Wilson’s Creek, Pilot Knob and Westport.

Major General John Pope Union general who was appointed to lead the Army of the Potomac by President Lincoln and commanded at Second Bull Run.

Major General Don Carlos Buell Union general who commanded the Army of Ohio and came to Ulysses S. Grant’s aid at Shiloh .

Colonel Emmett MacDonald Confederate Colonel who was captured at Camp Jackson but released and wound up fighting at Wilson’s Creek, Carthage, Pea Ridge and Lexington. Mortally wounded in the thigh in Hartville, MO.

Those five, in my opinion are the more noteworthy of the Civil War people buried here. That leaves many who contributed a lot, but honestly are remembered more by historians and Civil War buffs than by the mainstream. They are:

John Richard Anderson (pastor to Harriet Scott)

Edward Bates (Lincolns first attorney general)

Brig. General Benjamin L.E. Bonnville (commanded at Benton Barracks)

1LT Francis E. Brownell (Medal of Honor)

CPT Given Campbell (escort for Jefferson Davis after fall of Richmond)

Col. Meriwether Lewis Clark (son of explorer William Clark)

James Buchanan Eads (built gunboats for Grant)

Roswell Martin Field (Dred Scott attorney)

Brig. General Thomas Clement Fletcher (Missouri governor after the war)

Hamilton Rowan Gamble (Missouri Governor 1861-1863)

Col. Hugh A. Garland (killed in Franklin, TN)

CPT Robert McCullogh (survivor of Pickett’s Charge)

Dr. Joseph Nash McDowell (Southern sympathizing St Louis doctor)

Brig. General John McNeil (shot prisoners at Palmyra Massacre)

MAJ (Dr.) William M. McPheeters (Medical director for Sterling Price)

LT Henry D. O’Brien (Medal of Honor at Gettysburg)

Col. James Peckham (became author)

MAJ Julius Pitzman (Topographical engineer for Halleck and Grant)

Maj General Andrew Jackson Smith (competent division and corps commander)

Col. Thomas Lowndes Snead (aide to Governor Jackson, congressman and author)

Brig. General John Dunlap Stevenson (led brigade at Vicksburg)

Lt General Alexander Peter Stewart (one of only 17 Confederate Lt Generals)

Col. William Wade (artillery at Wilsons Creek, KIA Grand Gulf, MS)

Brig. General William D. Wherry (Medal of Honor as staff officer to Gen Lyons at Wilson’s Creek)

Col. John M. Wimer (Former St Louis mayor, KIA as member of MO Cavalry)

James E. Yeatman (President, Western Sanitary Commission)

The Boxer Rebellion

Historic picture showing foreign armies in
Beijing's forbidden city during boxer rebellion.

The Boxer Rebellion, which lasted from 2 November 1899 until 7 September 1901, significance and lasting impact would be that never before or since would eight major military powers of the world come together and fight against a common enemy. That enemy would be the I Ho Ch'uan, which means Righteous Harmonious Fists, or better known to the world as the Boxers.

The Boxers were one of many "secret societies" in China and had favor in the imperial court of the ruling monarch, the Dowager Empress Tzu Hsi, in the person of Prince Tuan, who although himself not a Boxer, had strong sympathies for the secret society.

The Chinese people had endured crop failure, famine and locust plague along with the flooding of the Yellow River. All of this, on top of being defeated by Japan in 1895, and an influx of foreigners led to the people feeling disillusioned and oppressed. They would turn to the secret societies to control one aspect of their turmoil they felt they had control over - foreigners, and what they felt was a foreign invasion of their country.

The Boxers had been proponents of anti-foreign sentiment for many years, and even classified these "foreign devils" into three groups. The "first-class devils" were all foreigners. The "second-class devils" were Chinese Christians converts, and "third-class devils" were anyone who worked with foreigners. This hatred of foreigners at the turn of the century, when many nations were flexing their imperialistic muscle, would be critical in bringing together an alliance made up of Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States.

Hostilities would boil over and a significantly ill-equipped, poorly led and badly trained Chinese force of Boxers and Imperial Guard would prove no match for the might of the eight combined imperial powers. What the conflict would lead to is treaties and concessions by the Chinese that would further alienate the common citizen and would ultimately lead to the eventual downfall of the Manchu Dynasty. However, with the influx of westerners to China, the country would experience and explosion in industrial grown. This would not only lead to advances in industry, but would lead to better living conditions and would bring the Chinese peasant into a modern twentieth century.

Ultimately, the crisis would become unstoppable due to the climate of the world at the turn of the century. Imperialism was rampant and the quest for land and power was insatiable. China had already suffered defeat at the hands of the Japanese and with the steady influx of western civilizations into China during an age when imperialism reigned supreme; China was propelled into this conflict by trying to maintain her ancient beliefs. The only chance of avoiding conflict would have been for a disassociation with her belief system and to adopt western culture as her own or to achieve victory over the imperial powers. Regardless, the conflict it seems was ultimately unavoidable.

In the end, China would come out to what many consider gain. She would join the rest of the industrialized nations and ultimately see the end of empirical governance. For the Allies however, the results of the Boxer Rebellion were less grandiose. Lives were lost, alliances would lead to dissension and eventually war and access to natural resources through concessions would be hindered.

But for one brief and shining moment in 1900, the world was aligned together by powers that would ultimately fight two world wars and would usher in the deadliest century the world has ever known.

A brief look at Vladimir Ilyitch Lenin

Vladimir Ilyitch Lenin was an extremely intelligent and well-informed man who was searching for an explanation of the human existence. His introduction to Marxism can be traced back to sometime in 1889 as a young man still living in Kazan and for the first time he viewed a copy of Marx’s Capital that would answer many of the questions his very intelligent mind had been searching for. 

Lenin took the ideas of Marx and freed it of its liberal and democratic base. Lenin was able to use anything and everything to achieve his radical and revolutionary goals.

Lenin had many forerunners who would mold his views including the radical nineteenth-century philosopher, and Lenin’s favorite author, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, who was arrested for seditious activity in 1862 and spent twenty years in prison. Lenin even commented that the words of Chernyshevsky “ploughed him over” before he had even read a word from Marx’s pen. However, possibly the most formative of Lenin’s experiences were the death of his brother and the treatment of Lenin and his family by the Russian government. Lenin’s brother, Alexander, was arrested for his part in a conspiracy against the Tsar and was sentenced to death by hanging. 

Ironically, Alexander, clung to his faith and bowed before the cross leaving his mother with the assurance that her son would receive God’s forgiveness. Still shocked by his brother’s death, Lenin learned that his brother’s actions were part of the Narodnaya Volya (Peoples Will) terrorist faction, but he was actually less concerned with his brother’s ideas but with the stoicism and strength the group showed. This would plant the seed that nothing could be achieved on the way to revolution without radicalism. The idea of individual actions would be unimportant; the main thing was to command huge, unwitting masses. To him this was more effective than that of the individual actions, such as the actions of his brother. He would reinforce his views on Marxism with anything that made his teachings uncompromising, harsh and radical. Lenin summed up his stance by stating, 

“Revolution is a tough business. You can’t make it wearing white gloves and with clean hands… The Party is not a ladies’ school.”

Despite the fact that the Leninist system ultimately would be doomed to defeat, his system was extremely viable. It can be explained by the Parties monopoly on power and its social inertia, but many of the most attractive features of Leninist ‘socialism’ were; elementary social security, free education, medicine, holiday pay, full employment, and guaranteed minimum wage. However, all this would be at the expense and the exploitation of the workers and the countries resources. In the end, the system could not survive or maintain itself due to the violence or the threat of violence that it fostered.

The idea that Lenin has gained respect outside of the Soviet Union can certainly be debated. Lenin’s steadfastness and unwavering principles certainly are to be respected, as is his ability to speak with power and conviction. He was a master of intimidation and used it until the end. However, Lenin most certainly was a hard man who was prepared to forego patriotism, national honor and even common humanity to achieve his goals. 

Lenin’s ideas for creating a just and equal Communist society were delusional but in his mind had certain logic. The revolution to him was just the beginning, his goal was to absorb the entire world and create a Communist utopia. Two months after Lenin’s death, correspondent Lev Kamanev declared that the future happiness would be secured “by carrying out Lenin’s revolutionary proletarian commandments precisely and vigorously. Only by taking the path of Leninism will we live until the moment when we can go to Lenin’s Mausoleum on Red Square and take the glad tidings that Leninism, and hence proletarian Communism, has conquered the world.”

The defeat of Leninism was programmed by history. The final death throes of Leninism would be due to a change in the international climate. Leninism could only exist through the crosshairs of a gun and only by achieving military superiority. With foreign policy changing and the slow acceptance of trust with the Soviet Union, Lenin’s culture would quickly erode. In the end, it appears that only Lenin himself could save Leninism from extinction. 

But the story of Lenin, his ideas and principles, lay as a mummy on display in Red Square. Alexander the Great once read an inscription on the grave of a fallen king: “Deny me not the handful of earth that covers my body.” By making Lenin into an earthly god, the Soviets not only denied him his handful of earth but now only pay homage to a mummy and his failed cause.

The American Military: A Look At It's Purpose

The American Military has to be considered an integral part of the entire concept of American society, regardless of whether we are peace or at war. From the beginning the roots of the military began with the citizen soldier, the “volunteer”, who was commanded by a leadership of highly trained and skilled senior officers. The military molded the society which it served and was indeed a reflection of that society. 

As the military evolved so did the society and culture it represented, and vice versa. The American military system has been developed to place a minimum burden on the people and give the nation a reasonable defense without sacrificing its fundamental values.

During the Revolutionary War, General George Washington knew his army had not enough trained officers and NCO’s with tactical proficiency to compete with the British. This left Washington with a conundrum to face – how to aggressively beat and remove the British while being forced to fight a strategically defensive fight. Washington clearly stated this position of the military when he said, “…that on our side the war should be defensive. It has even been called a war of posts. That we should on all occasions avoid a general action, or put anything to the risque, unless compelled by a necessity, into which we ought never to be drawn.” This evolved into the military fighting a war of attrition, a strategy that would test the resolve of the leadership, the military and the colonists.

The conflicts that followed up until the American Civil War saw a mostly defensive struggle to the fledgling nation. Russell Weigley in his book ‘The American Way of War’ stated, 

…the war did lead immediately to a clarification of the national military policy for deterrence of foreign attack and defense in case of attack.

The purpose of the military was clear – protect the nation. That is until the Civil War began.

The Civil War brought unique elements to the military. Defense was now not the sole purpose, but preservation of the new nation was. The enemy was not across the ocean, but right here, sometimes in the same town, sometimes in the same home. It also saw the rapid rise in technology and its use in warfare. The Civil War put Americans on the aggressive for the first time – unfortunately against each other. After the Civil War, America had now withstood the trials of becoming a nation and even though it struggled with reconciliation, the bonds that came after that war have since created a band of brothers that has become the premiere world power.

The nation however plunged itself into isolationism at the beginning of the 20th century. Thanks to Alfred Thayer Mahan, the navy was the sole focus during the time leading up to the Great War and strategy and tactics were greatly neglected. Even General John J. Pershing was of the mindset that national security was paramount. He disbanded the tank corps stating that “tanks had no role to play in continental defense.” By 1933 this led to Douglas MacArthur stating that the few tanks left were “completely useless for employment against any modern unit on the battlefield.” However, with the coming of World War Two and the following Cold War, the focus shifted from, according to Weigley, “the use of combats for the object of wars to the use of military force for the deterrence of war.”

Regardless of its position, the American military must occupy two planes of existence: the present and the future. Regardless of victory or defeat, without an understanding of the past and a proactive stance for the future, the military, of any country, is doomed to failure. According to Richard W. Stewart in ‘American History Vol. 1’, “the citizen and the soldier cannot know what path to follow unless they are aware of the breadth of alternatives that have been accepted or rejected in the past.” It should be noted that while the past represents a laboratory for the military strategist, the past must be interpreted in proper context and depth to prepare for the future. How today’s military fights has to be grounded on lessons learned from the past and awareness of what the future may hold.

The American military continues to this day to serve all the roles and purpose it has fulfilled since its birth during the Revolutionary War. These roles and purposes protect American lives, protect the lives of civilians all over the world, promote and herald freedom, provide leadership and promote international relations. The American military grows, evolves, adapts, leads and secures American culture and the concept of a free society. This purpose will never, and should never, change. The American soldier is the very foundation of the success and prosperity of American culture and society. The soldier is the embodiment of the purpose of the American military. And while he or she changes and adapts to the world around, their purpose remains steadfast and still provides to this day security, defense, leadership and prosperity for the American people and the world.

World War II: The conditions for war in Europe and Asia

The conditions and events that led to war in Europe began at the end of the First World War. With Germany’s defeat and the Treaty of Versailles put in place, Germany, a very nationalistic people, were humiliated. The Treaty of Versailles pointedly and directly shamed the German nation. It forced them to not only pay reparations to the various countries involved as well as make land concessions, but held the country personally accountable for the results of the war.

When Hitler rose to power, he thrived on nationalism, and painted the German people as a master race, who would rule the world. But in order to do this they needed room to grow (Lebensraum) and resources to do it. How to get those resources were tied hand in hand with their outgrowth.

Another factor is Hitler’s masterful manipulation of world leaders and his ability to come across as genuine and well meaning. He fooled Neville Chamberlain into believing that he had secured “peace in our time” after his meeting with Hitler, his initiation of Anschluss in Austria without a fight, his ability to maneuver and secure the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia with the support of other nations, except Czechoslovakia, and in securing the support of Italy and Japan in order to serve the Germans needs, not the Italians or Japanese. Then, with the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact, Hitler was able to prevent Soviet intervention in the guise of providing Stalin what he wanted in having Germany and the West against each other, and setting up Germany for war.

All of this finally culminated in Germany invading Poland in 1939 at which point it was very clear that Germany would continue it’s push for European domination unless someone put a stop to him.

The conditions in the Pacific were ignited by a set of very different circumstances. Japan’s xenophobic nationalism was fueled by Western colonization of Asia. With Western countries not really considering Japan an economic competitor, Japan found independent methods of economics its only recourse. But with Western colonization of Asia preventing them any real economic outlets the Japanese found themselves between a rock and a hard place. When the Japanese economy began to fail, they were sure that the United States would accept their position in China and when they did not this only embittered the Japanese more towards the United States.

The Japanese had little interest in the United States and believed themselves to be superior. Yamamoto Isoroku even commented that Americans were “self-indulgent weaklings.” With the outbreak of war in Europe, the Japanese were still focused on China. In aligning themselves with Germany and Italy, they believed that this would cause Russia and the United States to rethink their positions on China. But when the Japanese occupied French Indochina they were met with U.S. sanctions. Then came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and the American response was not what the Japanese expected.