By Eilene Lyon August 30, 2022

On this date in 1861, Major General John C. Frémont, commander of the Department of the West, issued a proclamation declaring martial law in the State of Missouri, and that those in open rebellion against the Union would forfeit their personal property, including enslaved persons, who would be emancipated.
Frémont’s Emancipation Proclamation angered President Lincoln, who first took the step of modifying the order to comply with Congressional law, and then found a reason (incompetency) to remove the general from his post by October that same year. It was another devastating blow to the reputation of an already-controversial figure and former presidential candidate (the first of the modern Republican party in 1856).

So-called Black Republicans hailed his bold move. They favored the immediate abolition of slavery. More moderate members of the party, including Lincoln, did not wish to aggravate Union supporters in the border states of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri. Kentuckians were particularly incensed at the proclamation. In addition to the freeing of slaves, the measure stated that any armed rebels found in the area held by Union forces would be court-martialed and shot if found guilty.

The Republican-leaning papers in St. Louis favored Frémont’s edict. Unfortunately, no Democrat Missouri newspapers covering September 1861 have been digitized and put online. I had hoped to get a feel for how my slave-owning ancestors in western Missouri reacted to the news.
Missouri remained in the Union, but it was a slave state and a large contingent of the residents favored the Confederacy. The battles within the state were nearly continuous throughout the entire term of the war.
Lincoln later had reason to turn in favor of emancipation, and Frémont provided a model for how to go about it. There are many reasons to find fault with John C. Frémont, but in this singular event, he simply did the right thing, but perhaps at the wrong time and wrong place.
Feature image: John C. Frémont in uniform in 1861. (Wikimedia Commons)
Wow!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the history lesson. Very interesting!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re welcome. I learn through this process, too!
LikeLiked by 1 person
How funny, I was literally just reading about this in one of my old Civil War books the other day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That IS a coincidence. It was a new thing to me, as I am not a scholar of wars. But I felt it relevant to my family history, for sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This sounds like a very interesting historical thread to follow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s well known that Lincoln took time to come around to seeing the need to free the slaves. I just saw a book at the library, The House That Slaves Built, about the Blacks he received at the White House …starting in 1862.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I vaguely remember hearing that before.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, at least he was the kind of man who kept an open mind and learned.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point. Today’s politicians could learn a lot from him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
More than a lot!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very true!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I so admire people who stand by their convictions. These are the stories that are woefully needed in our history textbooks. Thank you for the lesson!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is a good point. He was adamantly anti-slavery. Unlike some in California, he did not use Indian slaves to work his gold mines.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is impressive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is fascinating. Despite being an America history major with a special interest in the Civil War, I never learned about Fremont or any of this. I knew about the Missouri Compromise, but not about the internal political struggles it caused. Thank you for sharing this!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It was news to me, too. It apparently is not considered a noteworthy event in some circles. I have a recently published book about John and Jesse Fremont and the Civil War, and it barely mentions it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for this. I vaguely remember this story from history class, but in a hazy way. Fremont was on the right side of history.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, he certainly was!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well done, Eilene. Yes, it would be interesting to hear from them, but also upsetting. With all the genealogy I’ve worked on over the years, the closest I came to finding slave-holders was my grandma’s brother-in-law’s family.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m currently reading “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” and finding it quite enlightening about people in 1851. Kind of wish I had read it before writing my gold rush book.
LikeLike
Timing really is everything I guess.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If he’d been a more competent leader, maybe he could have made it stick. Oh well!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I lived ‘next door’ to Missouri for almost half my adult life. Interesting history lesson here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a state with a pretty fraught history altogether.
LikeLike
Very interesting! In California, there was Freemont’s Pass (now named Newhall Pass) that was named for this man, who was thought to have passed through it in 1847 on his way to sign the Treaty of Cahuenga. This pass links the San Fernando Valley to the Santa Clarita Valley and is a main entry to the Greater Los Angeles area.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There are many things named for him, and he is also credited with naming the strait “Golden Gate” a couple years before the gold rush began.
LikeLiked by 1 person