The Union Occupation of Coastal North Carolina

2021 ◽  
pp. 123-136
Author(s):  
David Silkenat

In 1861 and 1862, Union forces invaded and occupied eastern North Carolina. This chapter explores the origins, execution, and consequences of this invasion, looking at its military, social, and political significance. It highlights the weakness of Confederate fortifications along the North Carolina coast and the Union military leadership of Cmdr. Silas Stringham, Maj. Gen. Benjamin Butler, Brig. Gen. Ambrose Burnside, and Capt. Louis Goldsborough. As one of the first sites in the South occupied by the Union Army, coastal North Carolina created an early venue for wartime Reconstruction. The chapter emphasizes how African Americans responded to the Union invasion, escaping from slavery, forming refugee camps in Union enclaves, and working for the Union war effort. In 1862, Military Governor Edward Stanly tried to reinstitute slavery.

2019 ◽  
pp. 130-134
Author(s):  
James G. Mendez

As 1865 began, the Union saw victory in sight. Major Union victories in the later months of 1864 led to the sense of optimism in the North. Union armies on all fronts throughout the South continued to put pressure on the Confederates. Still, the Confederates were not willing to end the war just yet. They scrambled to keep their morale up and their armies together and supplied with men and resources. And even with victory in site, African Americans continued to volunteer to join the Union army in 1865. In spite of the hardships black troops and their families experienced in 1863 and 1864 and would endure in 1865, Northern blacks continued to support the Union war effort. And similar to their white counterparts, the more battles they participated in, the more committed black troops became to finish the job and to ensure their fallen comrades had not died in vain.


Author(s):  
Berry Craig

The secessionists and their allies in the press chafed under neutrality. They charged that the unionists were using neutrality as a cover to build support for entering the war on the Union side. The secessionists suffered another hard blow at the polls on June 20, when unionist candidates won nine of Kentucky’s ten seats in the congressional elections. The Southern sympathizers and their newspaper friends pinned their last hopes on the August elections for the state legislature, in which all 100 house seats and half of the 38 senate seats were on the line. Meanwhile, as chances for a Confederate Kentucky melted in the summer heat, some Confederate papers cooled their secessionist ardor and seemed to acquiesce in neutrality, at least for the time being. Neutrality, they reasoned, was better than fighting for the North. But the secessionists stuck to their argument that the “Black Republicans” would destroy slavery and make African Americans and whites equal in Kentucky. The Union Party won its biggest victory yet in the state elections. Thus emboldened, the unionists supported Camp Dick Robinson, a recruiting station for Union army volunteers in central Kentucky. The state was on the verge of abandoning neutrality and fully embracing the Union war effort.


Author(s):  
Leah Platt Boustan

This chapter explains that the mobility of black southerners began increasing in the birth cohorts born immediately after the Civil War. Many of these moves took place within the South. Despite plentiful industrial jobs in the “thousand furnaces” of northern cities at the turn of the twentieth century, the potential wage benefits of settling in the North was dampened by the absence of a migrant network that southern blacks could use to secure employment upon arrival. Large flows of northward migration awaited a period of abnormally high economic returns, which arose during World War I. Circa 1915, northern factories supplying the war effort experienced a surge in labor demand, coupled with a temporary freeze in European immigration, which encouraged northern employers to turn to other sources of labor.


2009 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessie A. Satia ◽  
Marilyn Tseng ◽  
Joseph A. Galanko ◽  
Christopher Martin ◽  
Robert S. Sandler

Mycologia ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 662-667
Author(s):  
William Louis Culberson ◽  
Chicita F. Culberson ◽  
Anita Johnson

Author(s):  
Sönke Johnsen ◽  
William M. Kier

Many morphological, chemical, and behavioural characteristics of echinoderms have been implicated as defences against ultraviolet light, though no studies have investigated whether adult echinoderms are damaged by this form of radiation. This study tests whether the brittlestar Ophioderma brevispinum (Ophiuroidea: Echinodermata) is damaged by solar ultraviolet radiation. Specimens of O. brevispinum were exposed to sunlight at a field station on the North Carolina coast. After 4 d of exposure, 12 out of 13 animals were dead and the remaining animal was moderately damaged. The animals in the control treatment, protected by a UV-opaque filter, suffered almost no damage.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document