1 Influential works that have provided a national or regional understanding of Civil War memory include Blight, David W., Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001)10.4159/9780674022096CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Janney, Caroline E., Remembering the Civil War: Reunion and the Limits of Reconciliation (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2013)Google Scholar; Neff, John R., Honoring the Civil War Dead: Commemoration and the Problem of Reconciliation (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2005)Google Scholar; Blair, William, Cities of the Dead: Contesting the Memory of the Civil War in the South, 1865–1914 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004)10.5149/9780807876237_blairCrossRefGoogle Scholar. More recently, scholars have begun to examine local variations in this story, including in the border states. See for example, Marshall, Anne E., Creating a Confederate Kentucky: The Lost Cause and Civil War Memory in a Border State (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2010)10.5149/9780807899366_marshallCrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Fluker, Amy L., Commonwealth of Compromise: Civil War Commemoration in Missouri (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2020)Google Scholar. Additional local work on Civil War commemoration is needed to further contextualize these national or regional stories in order to better understand the forces driving the process of Civil War commemoration.

2 Blight originally identified three visions of the war in Race and Reunion: reconciliationist, white supremacist, and emancipationist. Historians since have defined these slightly differently and often added a fourth strand—for instance, Caroline Janney identifies Unionist, Emancipationist, Lost Cause, and Reconciliationist strands. Many historians, including Janney and William Blair, note that these strands of memory are not static and were often more fluid and overlapping than the clear-cut names may suggest, and Amy Fluker notes that these national categories could flatten local variations that existed. This article is contributing to the effort of building a more detailed picture of Civil War commemoration and what it meant to local populations. Blight, Race and Reunion, 1–4; Janney, Remembering the Civil War, 10; Blair, Cities of the Dead, 4; Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 6.

3 Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 5–13.

4 The strength of St. Louis’s Unionism can be seen, for instance, in the results of the election of 1860. While Lincoln only received about 10 percent of the vote in Missouri as a whole, he received 40.4 percent in St. Louis. Similarly, the secessionist John C. Breckinridge received 19 percent of the vote statewide but only 3.8 percent in Kristen Anderson, St. Louis., Abolitionizing Missouri: German Immigrants and Racial Ideology in Nineteenth-Century America (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2016), 82 Google Scholar.

5 Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 38–39; Gerteis, Louis S., The Civil War in Missouri: A Military History (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2012)Google Scholar; Fellman, Michael, Inside War: The Guerrilla Conflict in Missouri during the American Civil War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989)Google Scholar; Lause, Mark A., The Collapse of Price’s Raid: The Beginning of the End in Civil War Missouri (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2016)Google Scholar; Astor, Aaron, Rebels on the Border: Civil War, Emancipation, and the Reconstruction of Kentucky and Missouri (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2012), 75–93 Google Scholar. Martial law had a major impact in Missouri, with nearly half of all military commission trials of civilians during the war taking place in that state. Johnson, Walter, The Broken Heart of America: St. Louis and the Violent History of the United States (New York: Basic Books, 2020), 142–143 Google Scholar.

6 Paul Cimbala discusses how the Freedmen’s Bureau was created with a mandate to deal not with freedpeople in former Confederate states, but “from the rebel states, or from any district of country within the territory embraced on the operations of the army,” with the result that the Bureau had a presence in loyal slave states as well, although many resented it. Cimbala, Paul A., The Freedmen’s Bureau: Reconstructing the American South after the Civil War (Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company, 2005), 9Google Scholar.

7 Astor, Rebels on the Border, 176.

8 Missouri’s 1865 constitutional convention did not give the vote to Black men, but it also denied the vote to those who could not swear an oath that they had not aided the Confederacy in any way during the war. Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877 (1988; New York: Perennial Classics, 2002), 42–43; Parrish, William E., Missouri under Radical Rule, 1865–1870 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1965), 14–35 Google Scholar; Gerteis, Louis S., Civil War St. Louis (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2001), 311–313 Google Scholar.

9 For example, see Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), Aug. 9, 1865, May 9, 1866, and May 27, 1868; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 8, 1868.

10 Gerteis, Civil War St. Louis, 100–115; Johnson, Broken Heart of America, 110–115; Primm, James Neal, Lion of the Valley: St. Louis, Missouri, 1764–1980, 3rd ed. (St. Louis: Missouri Historical Society Press, 1998), 234–238 Google Scholar.

11 Johnson, Broken Heart of America, 116–128. Accounts of how many were killed and wounded differ, but the consensus is that somewhere between eighteen and twenty-five were killed. Burton, William L., Melting Pot Soldiers: The Union’s Ethnic Regiments (Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1988), 41 Google Scholar.

12 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 14, 1862; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 13, 1862, and May 9, 1863.

13 Blair, Cities of the Dead, 9.

14 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 8, 1866, and May 9, 1866.

15 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 11, 1866.

16 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 8, 1868 (author’s translation).

17 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 11, 1868; Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 12, 1868.

18 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 12, 1868.

19 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 30, 1868.

20 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1868 (quotation; author’s translation); Moore, Frank, Memorial Ceremonies at the Graves of Our Soldiers. Saturday, May 30, 1868 (Washington, DC: Collected under Authority of Congress, 1869), 648–655 Google Scholar.

21 Faehtz, E. F. M., The National Memorial Day: A Record of Ceremonies over the Graves of the Union Soldiers, May 29 and 30, 1869 (Washington, DC: Headquarters Grand Army of the Republic, 1870), 502 Google Scholar.

22 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 31, 1870.

23 James Neal Primm, “The Grand Army of the Republic in Missouri,” (M.A. thesis: University of Missouri-Columbia, 1949), 28–29.

24 See for example, Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 28, 1868, noting that the Ladies’ Union Aid Society was planning the day, and Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 30, 1868, noting that the Grand Army of the Republic was leading the planning. For other examples of cooperation between the Ladies’ Union Aid Society and the GAR in planning Memorial Day, see Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 26, 1869, and May 27, 1870.

25 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 8, 1868; Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 30, 1868, May 26, 1869, and May 8, 1870.

26 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), June 1, 1868.

27 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 30, 1868 (author’s translation).

28 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 28, 1870.

29 For correspondence between J. W. McClurg and his allies regarding GAR influence at the 1868 Republican convention, see the following letters: C. M. Ward to William K. Patrick, June 14, 1868; Stuart Carkener to Patrick, June 17, 1868; Lewis Brown to Patrick, June 18, 1868; J. F. Asper to Patrick, June 19, 1868; Ward to Patrick, June 21, 1868; J. W. McClurg to Patrick, June 25, 1868; Ward to Patrick, June 29, 1868. All in folder 3: Correspondence, June 1868, William K. Patrick Papers, Missouri History Museum Library and Research Center, St. Louis, Missouri (hereafter cited as MHM).

30 By 1870, the Republican Party in Missouri had split on the issue of re-enfranchising former Confederates, with the Liberal Republicans supporting it and the Regular Republicans opposing it. The Republican Party was divided on the national level as well, with those who wanted the federal government to take a more hands-off approach to Reconstruction and the economy identifying themselves as Liberals. Foner, Reconstruction, 488–511; Parrish, Missouri under Radical Rule, 269–282; Jacqueline Balk and Ari Hoogenboom, “The Origins of Border State Liberal Republicanism,” in Radicalism, Racism, and Party Realignment: The Border States during Reconstruction, ed. Richard, O. Curry (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1969), 220–244 Google Scholar; Garrison, Zachary Stuart, German Americans on the Middle Border: From Antislavery to Reconciliation, 1830–1877 (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2020), 133–139 Google Scholar; Primm, James N., “The G.A.R. in Missouri, 1866–1870,” The Journal of Southern History 20 (Aug. 1954): 356–375 10.2307/2955155CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 In the heavily German first and second wards, for example, Benjamin Gratz Brown received 90.9 percent and 94.5 percent of the vote, respectively, but only 64.5 percent of the vote in the less German eighth ward. Anderson, Abolitionizing Missouri, 192.

32 Parrish, Missouri under Radical Rule, 269–82; Balk and Hoogenboom, “Origins of Border State Liberal Republicanism,” 220–244; Johnson, Broken Heart of America, 151–155.

33 People’s Tribune (Jefferson City, Missouri), May 18, 1870.

34 Primm, “Grand Army of the Republic in Missouri,” 42.

35 “Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the National Encampment, Grand Army of the Republic, Held at Cleveland, Ohio, May 8th and 9th, 1872,” in Proceedings of the First to Tenth Meetings, 1866–1876, (inclusive) of the National Encampment of the Grand Army of the Republic with Digest of Decisions, Rules of Order and Index (Philadelphia: Samuel P. Town, 1877), 149–150.

36 Blair discussed this phenomenon in the South, where former Confederates were sometimes willing to accept some amount of reconciliation as they strove to regain control over regional politics and where northern Republicans were also willing to accept some reconciliation as they sought to build a non-sectional party. Blair, Cities of the Dead, 107–112.

37 They commemorated the tenth anniversary of the day in 1871. Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 11, 1871. There is no evidence in the St. Louis press of the day being publicly celebrated again until 1884.

38 David Blight has discussed the reconciliationist potential of Memorial Day. Blight, Race and Reunion, 84–86. John Neff points out the difficulties of this in Honoring the Civil War Dead, in which he argues that Memorial Day was not actually conducive to reconciliation, given that any discussion of the Civil War dead would inevitably lead to the cause for which they had fallen, particularly given the need to make these deaths not seem to have been in vain. Neff, Honoring the Civil War Dead, 12–13. In the case of St. Louis, the day served as one of reconciliation at least in the short term, during the 1870s, although by the end of the decade it returned to being one devoted to the memory of the Union cause alone, so this was perhaps not sustainable in the long term.

39 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 10, 1871.

40 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 28, 1871. For summaries of the speeches given, see Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 31, 1871.

41 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 30, 1871.

42 Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 31, 1872.

43 John A. Joyce, A Checkered Life (Chicago: S. P. Rounds Jr., 1883), 170.

44 For examples of programs listing speakers who were in the regular military and text of Memorial Day speeches that did not feature discussion of guerilla conflict, see St. Louis Daily Globe, May 25, 1873; Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1873, May 29, 1874, May 31, 1874, May 31, 1875, and May 31, 1876; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1873; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1875; St. Louis Globe Democrat, May 28, 1876, May 27, 1877, and May 31, 1877.

45 Caroline Janney discusses how guerilla conflict complicated the memory of the war in the border states, making it harder to reach a consensus on the meaning of the war both within the region and with those outside of it, and that some on both sides wanted to remember the guerilla conflict while others hoped to forget it. In St. Louis, some of both was present. Radical Republicans wanted to emphasize guerilla conflict, to make the point that further reconstruction was necessary and that re-enfranchising the former Confederates would be dangerous. Moderate and Conservative Unionists, however, along with many former Confederates, preferred to de-emphasize the memory of guerilla conflict in order to make reunion easier and to support full re-enfranchisement. Janney, Remembering the Civil War, 27. Former Confederates in Missouri who had served in the regular army generally tried to distance themselves from guerillas, refusing to allow them to join their associations or invite them to their events. Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 104–111.

46 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1873; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1873.

47 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1873.

48 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 29, 1873.

49 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 30, 1873 (author’s translation).

50 “Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the National Encampment, Grand Army of the Republic, Held at Harrisburg, Penn., May 13, 1874,” in Proceedings of the First to Tenth Meetings, 1866–1876, 296–300.

51 Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the National Encampment, G.A.R., Held at Albany, N.Y., June 17–18, 1879 (New York: Office of the Grand Army Gazette, 1879), 598.

52 St. Louis Daily Globe, May 30, 1874; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1875; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 28, 1876, and May 27, 1877.

53 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 29, 1875, and May 26, 1878; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 27, 1877.

54 St. Louis Daily Globe, May 31, 1873; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1875; Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 29, 1877.

55 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1874.

56 St. Louis Daily Globe, May 31, 1874.

57 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1875 (author’s translation).

58 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1876.

59 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1877.

60 St. Louis Daily Globe, May 26, 1874.

61 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 10, 1877.

62 St. Louis Daily Globe, May 30, 1873, and May 26, 1874.

63 For descriptions of the program at Jefferson Barracks and those participating in it, see Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 31, 1870, May 31, 1871, and May 31, 1872; St. Louis Daily Globe, May 31, 1873, and May 31, 1874; Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1875; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1876, and May 27, 1878; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1877.

64 Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 127–132; Janney, Remembering the Civil War, 232–265.

65 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 28, 1868; Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 26, 1869, and May 28, 1870.

66 For listings of the committee members organizing Memorial Day, see Missouri Democrat (St. Louis), May 7, 1871, and May 29, 1872; St. Louis Daily Globe, May 25, 1873, and May 26, 1874; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 20, 1875, and May 26, 1876; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 10, 1877.

67 McConnell, Stuart Charles, Glorious Contentment: The Grand Army of the Republic, 1865–1900 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1992), xiii–xiv Google Scholar.

68 Primm, “G.A.R. in Missouri, 1866–1870,” 375.

69 Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 57–59.

70 Memorial Day was also celebrated on Sunday, May 26, instead of on May 30. Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 26, 1878, and May 27, 1878.

71 For complaints about inadequate or last-minute preparations, see St. Louis Globe Democrat, May 27, 1878, May 31, 1879, and May 31, 1880; Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 28, 1879, and May 31, 1880; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1879; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1879, and May 31, 1880. For descriptions of the program and speeches given during the 1879 and 1880 Memorial Day celebrations, see Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1879; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1880.

72 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1879.

73 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1879.

74 Due to a scheduling mix-up, the sole speech given in 1880 was in German. Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1880.

75 I have not encountered complaints about the Union-centered tone of the event in either 1879 or 1880. Nor were complaints evident in 1881 and afterward, as the GAR then started using its official ritual to structure the event.

76 Press coverage of the program noted that each portion would be “according to the ritual.” Examples include Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1881; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 26, 1883, May 30, 1884, May 29, 1885, May 31, 1886, May 30, 1887, May 30, 1888, and May 30, 1889. Programs printed for the ceremony noted the same: “Observance of Memorial Day by the Grand Army of the Republic at the National Cemetery, Jefferson Barracks, Mo.,” May 30, 1884; “Programme of the Grand Army of the Republic for the Decoration of the Graves of 14,000 Union Soldiers at the National Cemetery, at Jefferson Barracks, Mo., on Memorial Day,” May 30, 1888; “Programme of the Grand Army of the Republic for Strewing Flowers on the Graves of 16,000 Union Soldiers, in the National Cemetery, at Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, on Memorial Day,” May 30, 1889; “Programme of the Grand Army of the Republic for Strewing Flowers on the Graves of 16,000 Union Soldiers in the National Cemetery, at Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, on Memorial Day,” May 30, 1891; “Programme of the Grand Army of the Republic for Strewing Flowers on the Graves of 16,000 Union Soldiers in the National Cemetery, Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, on Memorial Day,” May 30, 1895. All from George Weber Scrapbook, MHM.

77 Rev. Joseph F. Lovering, Services for the Use of the Grand Army of the Republic (Boston: E. B. Stillings, 1881), 7–9.

78 Lovering, Services for the Use of the Grand Army of the Republic, 11–13.

79 Lovering, Services for the Use of the Grand Army of the Republic, 13–14.

80 For descriptions of Memorial Day processions and ceremonies, including the GAR ritual, see St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 31, 1881, May 30, 1883, May 30, 1884, May 30, 1885, May 31, 1886, and May 30, 1889; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1882, May 31, 1887, May 31, 1888, and May 31, 1890.

81 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 31, 1881.

82 None of the newspaper coverage of Memorial Day from 1881 to 1900 mentioned the participation of a Confederate group or Confederate individuals, nor do the programs for the day.

83 Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 55–57.

84 Parrish, William E., A History of Missouri: Volume III, 1860 to 1875 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1973), 14–18 Google Scholar.

85 For example, in 1890 the event included a re-enactment of the occupation of Fort McAllister, and in 1892 it re-enacted the storming of Fort Donelson. In 1895, it re-enacted the capture of Quantrill’s guerillas and in 1896, the capture of a group of M. Jeff Thompson’s guerillas. Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 11, 1891, May 9, 1892, and May 11, 1896; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 13, 1895.

86 For a discussion of the heavily German nature of Hassendeubel Post, see Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Encampment of the Department of Missouri, Grand Army of the Republic, 95–98. At the encampment, Francis P. Becker of Hassendeubel Post described his post as “700 solid Dutch” (quotation from p. 95).

87 For typical descriptions of Camp Jackson Day ceremonies, including where they were held, their program, and the GAR posts and other organizations participating, see St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 10, 1884, May 7, 1889, and May 12, 1890; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 9, 1885, May 9, 1887, and May 11, 1888; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 9, 1886; ticket to a “Grand Military Fete at Schnaider’s Garden,” May 10, 1884; letter to Dear Sir and Comrade from Geo. Weissenburger, Chairman, Ignatz Hartmann, P. A. Schroth, Nic. Moll, and Wm. Hahn of Hassendeubel Post No. 13, G.A.R., Mar. 25, 1887; “Special Order No. 1 from the Headquarters of Col. Hassendeubel Post, No. 13, Department of Missouri, G.A.R.” Apr. 23, 1888; “Grand Military Festival and G.A.R. Reunion under the Auspices of Col. Hassendeubel Post, No. 13, at Concordia Park,” May 11, 1890; “Special Order No. 1 from the Headquarters of Hassendeubel Post, No. 13, Department of Missouri, G.A.R.,” May 1, 1891; “General Order No. 3 from the Headquarters of Hassendeubel Post, No. 13, Department of Missouri, G.A.R.,” Apr. 28, 1892; “General Orders No. 2 from the Headquarters of Hassendeubel Post No. 13, Department of Missouri, G.A.R.,” May 8, 1899. All from George Weber Scrapbook, MHM.

88 For examples of years featuring two or more celebrations of Camp Jackson, see St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 12, 1890, May 3, 1891, and May 14, 1893; letter from Arthur Dreifus to Emile A. Becker, Apr. 26, 1890, Frank P. Blair Post Letterbook, 1888–1890, Rare Books and Special Collections, St. Louis Public Library, St. Louis, Missouri; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 4, 1891, May 7, 1892, May 15, 1893, May 10, 1894, and May 11, 1895; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 7, 1894, and May 13, 1895; letter from Robert Rombauer to H. Kalman, May 4, 1898, A041—Alphabetical Files—Kallman, Herman F., MHM.

89 The 1880 census reported the city was 93.6 percent white (328,191) and 6.3 percent Black (22,256), and also recorded fifty-six Chinese individuals and fifteen Native Americans. Volume 1, Statistics of the Population of the United States. Population by Race, Sex, and Nativity, Table V: Population by Race and by Counties: 1880, 1870, 1860, 399.

90 Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 72–74.

91 Missouri Republican (St. Louis), May 28, 1880.

92 Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Encampment of the Department of Missouri, Grand Army of the Republic, Held at Trenton, Missouri, March 14 and 15, 1888 (St. Louis: A Whipple, 1888), 95.

93 For lists of Memorial Day Executive Committees indicating that each post is represented, including Shaw, see Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 10, 1889; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30 1890, and May 29, 1891.

94 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 29, 1888; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 30, 1889, May 31, 1890, and May 31, 1891.

95 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1888; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 30, 1889; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1890, and May 29, 1891.

96 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 28, 1894.

97 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 25, 1892, Apr. 26, 1893, and May 26, 1897; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 28, 1893, May 28, 1894, May 28, 1897, May 28, 1899, and May 20, 1900; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 22, 1895; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 27, 1896, and May 15, 1898.

98 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1892.

99 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 22, 1892.

100 Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Session National Encampment, Grand Army of the Republic, Denver, Col., July 25, 1883 (Omaha, NE: Republican Book and Job Printing House, 1883), 229.

101 Janney, Remembering the Civil War, 123–125; Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 59.

102 Proceedings of the First, Second and Third Annual Conventions of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri, Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic (St. Louis: A. Whipple, 1888), 24.

103 In contrast, Kentucky, although its population was similar to Missouri’s, only had 505 members in the WRC at its height. Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 59.

104 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 7, 1888, May 12, 1893, and May 9, 1897; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 7, 1894, May 10, 1896, and May 6, 1900; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 10, 1895 and May 11, 1899; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 7, 1898.

105 Proceedings of the First, Second and Third Annual Conventions of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri, 24; Proceedings of the Fifth and Sixth Annual Conventions of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri (St. Joseph, MO: St. Joseph Steam Printing Company, 1890), 22–25; Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic, Department of Missouri (St. Louis: Owens Printing Company, 1892), 27–31; Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic, Department of Missouri (Neosho, MO: Miner and Mechanic Print, 1893), 25–30; Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic, Department of Missouri (St. Louis: J. T. Smith, 1894), 29–38; Journal of the Eleventh Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic, Department of Missouri (Trenton, MO: Republican Print, 1895), 33–50.

106 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1888.

107 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 29, 1891.

108 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 28, 1890, May 29, 1891, May 30, 1894, May 30, 1898, May 28, 1899, and May 20, 1900; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 25, 1892, Apr. 26, 1893, and May 26, 1897; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 26, 1895 and May 27, 1896; Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri, 25; Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri, 30–32; Journal of the Eleventh Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri, 33–50.

109 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Aug. 11, 1885, and Oct. 21, 1888. The monument was located first by the south entrance of city hall and then, when some complained this was the “back door” of the building, was relocated to Washington Square Park on the other side, where it remains to this day. Art Inventories Catalog, Smithsonian American Art Museum, “General Ulysses Simpson Grant, (sculpture),” artist Robert Porter Bringhurst and the American Bronze Company: https://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=E677M0150154H.405&profile=ariall&uri=full=3100001~!1608~!0&ri=6&menu=search&source=~!siartinventories.

110 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1892.

111 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, Apr. 26, 1893 and May 12, 1894; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 26, 1895, May 27, 1896, and May 15, 1898; Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis, Missouri), May 8, 1897; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 28, 1899, and May 20, 1900.

112 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, Apr. 26, 1893, and May 12, 1893; Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 29, 1898.

113 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 31, 1887, and May 27, 1894; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1898.

114 The only mention of the financing of the monument to the unknown dead is a newspaper article that reprints correspondence between Annie Wittenmyer Tent of the Daughters of Veterans and the Secretary of War, R. A. Alger, regarding permission to construct such a monument on the grounds of Jefferson Barracks, in which Alger stated that the department would have no objection, so long as there was no cost to the United States. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 25, 1898. For examples of fundraising events held by the Woman’s Relief Corps or Daughters of Veterans in St. Louis, see St. Louis Globe-Democrat, Nov. 23, 1890, Nov. 22, 1891, Jan. 19, 1895, Apr. 5, 1896, and Dec. 13, 1896; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Dec. 10, 1893, and May 17, 1895

115 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1895. The WRC also lists a committee for the parade in 1897, so this practice apparently continued. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1897.

116 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 15, 1898.

117 Gannon, Barbara A., The Won Cause: Black and White Comradeship in the Grand Army of the Republic (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011), 47–48 Google Scholar.

118 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 25, 1894.

119 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1897.

120 Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 15, 1898.

121 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1900.

122 Journal of the Eleventh Annual Convention of the Woman’s Relief Corps, Department of Missouri, 39.

123 For discussions of how fighting together against a common enemy contributed to reconciliation, see Blight, Race and Reunion, 338–380; Janney, Remembering the Civil War, 222–228; Gannon, Won Cause, 178–195.

124 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 29, 1898.

125 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1899.

126 For accounts of the GAR planning Memorial Day with other allied Union associations, see Westliche Post (St. Louis, Missouri), May 15, 1898; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 15, 1898; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 28, 1898.

127 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 25, 1899.

128 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 28, 1899.

129 The group disbanded by 1900, after the Spanish-American War, on the grounds that the cooperation brought about by that war had accomplished the reconciliation the group sought to create, making its existence no longer necessary. Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 141–145.

130 The Ex-Confederate Association of Missouri, founded in 1881, was the first statewide Confederate veteran organization in the state. This group did not embrace Missouri’s guerrilla history, however, and limited membership to men who had been enrolled in the regular Confederate Army. In 1895, this group became the Missouri Division of the United Confederate Veterans. Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 104–110.

131 Although they could and likely did hold private meetings that commemorated the Confederate cause, their public activities in St. Louis during the 1890s were generally restricted to charity for impoverished veterans. For examples of newspaper accounts discussing their fundraising activities, see St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 21, 1891, Oct. 18, 1891, May 26, 1895, and Nov. 17, 1895; St. Louis Globe Democrat, Nov. 23, 1894. For a detailed account of the role of the Daughters of the Confederacy in funding the Missouri Confederate Home, see Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 165–167.

132 By 1902 the UDC had 698 members in Missouri. Fluker, Commonwealth of Compromise, 107. The brief co-existence of the two groups can be seen when they both sponsored activities, as in 1898, when both the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Daughters of the Confederacy sponsored an event with the Daughters of the American Revolution to raise money for U.S. soldiers during the Spanish-American War. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, June 5, 1898.

133 No newspaper coverage of Memorial Day in the 1890s mentions them.

134 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1899.

135 St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 28, 1899.

136 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Apr. 29, 1900.

137 For examples inviting them to be present or listing them in the parade, see St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 28, 1899, and May 29, 1900. For later articles that do not list them in the lineup, see St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 31, 1899, and May 31, 1900.

138 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 30, 1900.