A MOST UNUSUAL G

176 KANSAS HISTORY

A MOSTUNUSUALGATHERING

Survivors of Quantrill’s raid at the semi-centennial memorial reunion, 1913, Lawrence.

A MOST UNUSUAL GATHERING 177

William Clarke Quantrill at the head of some 450 mounted guerrillas enteredLawrence, Kansas, shortly after five o’clock on the morning of August 21, 1863,without the citizens having any prior warning. One eyewitness who was a guestat the Eldridge House called the wild scenes of the ensuing four hours “not a

fight, not a murder, but the most terrible, cold blooded fiendish massacre ever heard of in thiscountry.” Altogether an estimated two hundred men and boys were killed or later died of gun-shot wounds. It required a week’s labor to gather up and bury the dead. It was estimated thatthe married men who were killed left behind eighty widows and 250 fatherless children.1

Reverend Richard Cordley, pastor of Plymouth Congregational Church and an eyewitnessto the tragedy, said the loss of property had been variously estimated, some putting it as low as$750,000, and others as high as $2.5 million. He thought it could not fall below $1.5 million. Ap-proximately two hundred buildings were burned, including some seventy-five business hous-es on the main street. The Eldridge House was burned after the sixty-five guests were removedto another hotel and personally protected by Quantrill. Fifteen African American employees ofthe Eldridge were reported to have escaped the wrath of the bushwhackers by taking flight. Thedwelling and business houses that were not burned were in most cases robbed, and women aswell as men were robbed of their money, watches, and jewelry. Between four hundred and fivehundred horses taken as fresh mounts were packed with valuable goods stolen from stores and

Richard B. Sheridan is professor emeritus in the department of economics at the University of Kansas. He has published several booksand numerous articles on the history of slavery and plantation economies and society in the West Indies and United States. He earned his Ph.D.from the London School of Economics and Political Science.

For helpful comments and assistance in preparing this article the author thanks Pat Michaelis; Ted A. Kennedy; Jean Snedeger;Sheryl K. Williams; Audrey Sheridan; and the staff at the Kansas Collection, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence; WatkinsCommunity Museum of History, Lawrence; and Kansas State Historical Society.

1. Richard Cordley, A History of Lawrence, Kansas (Lawrence, Kans.: Lawrence Journal Press, 1895), 238–54; William Elsey Con-nelley, Quantrill and the Border Wars (Cedar Rapids, Iowa: Torch Press, 1910), 298–421; Albert Castel, William Clarke Quantrill: HisLife and Times (New York: Frederick Fell, 1962), 122–43; William C. Pollard Jr., Dark Friday: The Story of Quantrill’s Lawrence Raid (BigSprings, Kans.: Baranski Publishing Co., 1990), 29–81; Thomas Goodrich, Bloody Dawn: The Story of the Lawrence Massacre (Kent,Ohio: Kent State University Press, 1991), 84–132; Richard B. Sheridan, “William Clarke Quantrill and the Lawrence Massacre: AReader, Part II, Commentary” (manuscript, Library and Archives Division, Kansas State Historical Society).

The 1913 Semi-CentennialMemorial Reunion of theSurvivors of Quantrill’s

Raid on Lawrence

by Richard B. Sheridan

residences. No women are known to have been rapedor killed. Many housewives stood up boldly to theguerrillas and by ingenious means saved their men-folk and extinguished fires in their homes. AlbertCastel, a leading authority on Quantrill and his bush-whackers, claimed that the Lawrence massacre wasthe most atrocious single event in the Civil War, andit gave Quantrill a reputation as “the bloodiest manin American history.”2

In the years following the Civil War the leaders ofLawrence and local war veterans created a fraternalorganization, built a new cemetery, and set aside aday in memory of the Civil War dead and the victimsof Quantrill’s massacre. Survivors of the massacrefirst joined other townspeople on Decoration Day onMay 30 each year to decorate the graves of Union sol-diers and victims of the massacre. Beginning in 1891they organized an association of survivors of themassacre and from time to time held reunions towhich the general public was invited. Furthermore, amonument was erected and dedicated to the memo-ry of the citizens of Lawrence who fell victim to theferocity of the border guerrillas. This article will ex-plore the background to and execution of plans forthe semi-centennial memorial reunion at Lawrence,

Kansas, on August 20–21, 1913. It will show that in1913 the human and material resources of Lawrencewere mobilized and that some two hundred of thesurvivors gathered to celebrate their escape and tohonor the memories of the citizens who fell duringthe raid.

After the Civil War several developments fos-tered the growth of patriotism in Lawrenceand gave rise to major ceremonial occasions.

In 1866 the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR) wasfounded; it was a national society of Civil War veter-ans who served in the Union forces. According toCharles M. Correll, the GAR was

a comradeship to preserve common memories, tocare for the widows and orphans of soldiers and topromote all that could advance the spirit of patri-otism in the community. . . . in the early 1890’s,when the organization was at its peak, there weresomewhat less than 500 posts with a membershipof not much over 20,000, while it was estimatedthat the probable number of Union veterans with-in the borders of the state was some 100,000.3

Local posts of the GAR were urged to establishmemorial halls for reading rooms and historical mu-

178 KANSAS HISTORY

2. Richard Cordley, “The Lawrence Massacre,” Congregational Record5 (September/October 1863): 98–115; Albert Castel, “The Bloodiest Manin American History,” American Heritage 11 (October 1960): 22–24, 97–99.

3. Charles M. Correll, “Some Aspects of the History of the G.A.R. inKansas,” Kansas Historical Quarterly 19 (February 1951): 63–74.

Quantrill’s 1863 raid on Lawrence was described by one eyewitness as “the most terrible, cold blooded fiendish massacreever heard of in this country.” This sketch appeared in Harper’s Weekly, September 5, 1863.


4. Republican Daily Journal (Lawrence), April l6, 1873; B. JeanSnedeger, ed. and comp., Complete Tombstone Census of Douglas County,Kansas, 2 vols. (Lawrence, Kans.: 1987), 1:6a–6d; Cathy Ambler, “Oak HillCemetery and the Rural Cemetery Movement,” (1990), 49–59, 62–75, pri-vate collection of Cathy Ambler, Lawrence, Kans.; Ambler, “A Place NotEntirely of Sadness and Gloom: Oak Hill Cemetery and the Rural Ceme-tery Movement,” Kansas History: A Journal of the Central Plains 15 (Winter1992–1993): 240–53.

5. Republican Daily Journal, May 12, 1870. Note that most sources wellinto the twentieth century spelled the name “Quantrell” rather than“Quantrill.”

6. Ibid., June 1, 1875.7. Ibid., August 21, 1886.

seums, and to ensure that patriotism was taught andthe national flag displayed in public schoolrooms.Decoration Day (later known as Memorial Day) wasfounded in 1868 as an annual national holiday andmajor ceremonial occasion on May 30 for the purposeof decorating the graves of soldiers who had died indefense of their country during the Civil War. Anoth-er development was purchasing and laying out OakHill Cemetery. It was acquired in the form of unim-proved farmland by a committee of the city council in1865 and became the principal burial ground inLawrence. The Lawrence Republican Daily Journal ofApril l6, 1873, noted that “the refinement and cultureof a community” could be judged by “the respectpaid to the resting places of its dead.” Lawrence wassaid to rank high in this respect: “It is seldom that amore naturally attractive spot is selected for a ceme-tery than the inclosure now known as Oak Hill, andwe are glad to see that the gentlemen in charge of thegrounds are adding to this naturally beautiful site theaids of art.”4

On May 11, 1870, a meeting of Lawrence citizenswas held at the council chambers to arrange for thedue observance of Decoration Day, the new nationalfestival. After a report from a previously appointedcommittee, several resolutions were adopted. Thefirst requested the mayor “to invite the citizens ofLawrence to consecrate Monday, May 30th, to thememory of our patriot dead.” It was also resolvedthat a committee be appointed “to arrange for thedecoration on that day of the graves in and nearLawrence of Union soldiers and of our citizens whowere the victims of the Quantrell massacre, and foran appropriate public ceremonial.”5

At the community-wide celebration of Decora-tion Day in 1875, the crowd at Oak Hill Cemeteryproceeded from the graves of Union soldiers to those

of citizens killed in the Quantrill raid. Sidney Clarke,U.S. congressman from Kansas, delivered the ad-dress, in part of which he said:

Nearly all the professions and employments in lifefurnished victims for this common grave. The ed-ucated and uneducated; native and foreign born;the white and the black, will sleep here side byside till the morning of the resurrection shall iden-tify them for the great hereafter. . . .

We must live together in the future as one peo-ple, proud alike of a common heritage, and equal-ly interested in the name and fame of a nationwhich presents the world with the most wonder-ful civilization of modern times.

After the congressman’s lengthy address, young ladieswearing white dresses decorated the graves with floralofferings that were said to be quite beautiful.6

Prior to 1891 the survivors of Quantrill’s raidwere reported to have met informally every August21 to recall the events of that fatal day. A general ob-servance of the raid anniversary probably was notconsidered necessary because formal ceremonies hadbeen held annually on Memorial Day and Indepen-dence Day. Some of the survivors feared that the pro-ceedings of a public reunion would degenerate into aconflict between those who would revive old griev-ances against the Missourians and others who wereinclined toward conciliation. Moreover, to have de-clared a holiday on August 21 would have interferedwith the county’s agricultural and the town’s busi-ness activities. The local newspaper editor suggesteda compromise when he wrote on August 21, 1886,“Business men may well stop a moment to considerthe terrible events of twenty-three years ago.”7

Readers of the Lawrence Daily Journal on August20, 1891, noted in the section headed “City News inBrief” that “The reunion of those who escapedQuantrell’s men will be of interest to the general pub-lic and everyone is invited to come and enjoy goodspeeches, music, plenty of ice water and comfortableseats, at the park tomorrow night.” It was not thepurpose of the reunion to teach vengeance uponthose who were responsible for it, insisted the Daily

180 KANSAS HISTORY

Journal, “but that the young generation should learnof the patriotism that actuated those who savedKansas from the invaders and made it, by their hero-ism, what it is today.” Another purpose was “toarrange for a permanent organization of the sur-vivors. . . . There is much work that should be donethat no one but the survivors can do, and they can doit only through united effort.” Two days later, at ameeting in South Park, it was resolved that the sur-vivors organize the “Association of Survivors ofQuantrell’s Massacre, of the Citizens of Lawrence,Douglas county, Kansas, August 21, 1863, and thatthe officers of the said association shall consist of apresident, three vice-presidents, secretary, corre-sponding secretary, treasurer and an executive com-mittee of five.”8

On Sunday, August 21, 1892, the survivors of theraid held their annual meeting in South Park. A verylarge crowd gathered there to listen to interestingspeeches. An article in a local newspaper noted thatthe survivors were fewer than the previous year andthe ranks were growing thinner. He expressed hopethat until the last survivor was gone the organizationwould be kept alive and that coming generationswould learn from these survivors what it cost tomake Kansas free.9

On May 30, 1894, the survivors and others whowere interested met at the courthouse, organized theLawrence Monument Association, and appointed acommittee to make arrangements for building anderecting a monument. The committee proceeded tosolicit funds, secure the monument, and have it erect-ed and dedicated. On Memorial Day 1895 the peopleof Lawrence and Douglas County turned out in greatnumbers. “In the morning the G.A.R. and its kindredsocieties decorated the graves of the dead in bothcemeteries [Pioneer and Oak Hill].” The afternoonwas devoted to the procession to Oak Hill cemeteryfor the dedication and unveiling of the monumentthat was erected near the graves of numerous victimsof the massacre. The beautiful memorial is made ofVermont granite, eight by four feet at the base andeight feet seven inches high, bearing the inscription:

DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF THEONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY CITIZENSWHO DEFENCELESS FELL VICTIMS TOTHE INHUMAN FEROCITY OF BORDERGUERRILLAS LED BY THE INFAMOUSQUANTRELL IN HIS RAID UPON LAW-RENCE. AUGUST 21ST, 1863. ERECTEDMAY 30TH, 1895.

The Citizens Memorial Monument was erected by thepeople of Lawrence and friends living elsewhere whonumbered about 150 and contributed a total of fifteenhundred dollars, the cost of the monument.10

Although local survivors of the raid and mas-sacre gathered to hold memorial servicesevery August 21, it was not until 1913, the

semi-centennial or fiftieth anniversary of the tragedy,that both a memorial and a reunion were conducted.The first public announcement that leaders of thecommunity were considering such a memorial andreunion appeared in a lead article in the LawrenceDaily Journal-World on May 17, 1913. It told of a sug-gestion that the survivors who lived elsewhere be in-vited to return for a week, during which timeLawrence citizens would act as hosts to the “oldermembers of the family” in an “old home week.” Con-tinuing, the article said:

The twenty-first of August is a date whichLawrence people can never forget. Heretofore theday has been remembered in Lawrence by the oldsettlers who recalled the events of that day, butthere has never been a general observance of theday. Lawrence people never felt that it was a galaoccasion. It was the saddest date in the history ofthe city. But Lawrence has grown into a city nowand the growth began immediately after theQuantrell Raid. It is urged that this is a befittingdate on which to celebrate this growth.

The article closed by informing readers that themovement would soon be taken up in earnest.11

8. Lawrence Daily Journal, August 20, 22, 24, 1891.9. Ibid., August 22, 1892.

10. Ibid., May 29, 30, 1895; Topeka Daily Capital, May 31, 1895.11. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, May 17, 1913; David Dary, Lawrence

Douglas County, Kansas: An Informal History (Lawrence, Kans.: Allen Press,1982), 252–58.


was published in the Journal-World on June 9. The publicwas asked to read the listcarefully and report at oncethe names and addresses ofany other survivors whocould be reached with an in-vitation. At the planningmeeting on July 30 it was an-nounced that more than fivehundred names were on thelist and others were expect-ed to be added before theday of the memorial.14

On the anniversary ofthe massacre, the Journal-World commented on thelarge number of survivors:

Fifty years is a long timeand it is surprising that somany survivors remain.The town had a population

of about 2,500 at the time of the raid and there arefully 500 survivors. It all argues that a race ofbrave men came to Kansas to make it a free state.They were men of courage and good conduct andthey have remained with us long.

A minor reason for the large number of survivors maybe that the group included men who were permanentresidents but who were away on military service andbuying trips for local stores on the day of the raid.15

During the memorial reunion the Journal-Worldpublished a supplement entitled Lawrence: Today andYesterday. Part of this supplement is devoted to thehistory of the massacre and the reunion, of which twopages contain the names and addresses of the 546 sur-vivors of the massacre. This list is headed: “Men andWomen, Boys and Girls [Who] Survived the LawrenceMassacre. This List Shows Those Living on Aug. 21,1913.”16 Table 1 summarizes the geographical residen-

Eleven days after theabove article appeared ameeting of Lawrence citi-zens was convened. Fifteen(later seventeen) town lead-ers were selected to planand head the Quantrill raidvictims semi-centennial me-morial reunion. One-third ofthe members of the commit-tee were to be women whosurvived the massacre. Col-onel John K. Rankin waselected chairman and Clar-ence S. Hall secretary. Thecommittee was instructed toask every organization inthe city to cooperate in fur-thering plans for the memo-rial. A short editorial in theJournal-World said the com-mittee of seventeen hadbeen appointed to arrange a fitting memorial for thevictims of Quantrill’s massacre. A major task was “tofind the names of the survivors no matter where theymay be living and have them here on August 21.”12

At the meeting of the committee of seventeen onJune 6, a subcommittee of five was named to draw upa tentative program for the memorial. Besides the pro-gram subcommittee, other subcommittees were ap-pointed at the meeting of June 13: historical, finance,entertainment, permanent memorial, invitation, andpublicity. Each chairperson was given authority to se-lect other members of his or her subcommittee. Thesemembers were reported at the July 20 meeting, atwhich time the committee of seventeen was said to bedelighted to have the presence of George W. Martin,secretary of the Kansas State Historical Society, whoapproved of the general plan of the memorial.13

Mary Clark was in charge of collecting the namesand addresses of survivors. She was said to have anatural aptitude for this and worked with great careand thoroughness. An incomplete list of survivors

12. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, May 28, June 9, 1913.13. Ibid., June 7, 14, 21, 1913.

14. Ibid., June 9, 14, 21, July 9, 31, 1913.15. Ibid., August 21, 1913.16. Lawrence: Today and Yesterday. Published by the Lawrence Daily Jour-

nal-World as a Magazine and Souvenir Edition, Commemorating the Semi-Cen-tennial Memorial of the Lawrence Massacre (Lawrence, Kans.: December 23,1913), 127–28.

On May 30, 1870, Lawrence citizens observed Decoration Day, anew national holiday, by honoring their Union soldiers who diedduring the Civil War and the victims of Quantrill’s massacre.

182 KANSAS HISTORY

tial pattern of the sur-vivors.

Table 1 shows that alittle more than half ofall survivors lived inLawrence and DouglasCounty in 1913, one-eighth in other parts ofKansas, and two-thirdsin Kansas as a whole.Three states adjacent toKansas—Missouri, Ok-lahoma, and Colorado—in the aggregate ac-counted for nearly 15percent of all survivors,and the three PacificCoast states of California, Oregon, and Washingtonfor 8 percent. Ten survivors each lived in New Mexi-co and Illinois, and seven in New York. Table 1 doesnot show the states and territories of residence ofthirty survivors. These are summarized as follows:three survivors each lived in Iowa, Texas, and Indi-ana; two each in Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Wisconsin,and Washington, D.C.; and one each in Arkansas,Montana, Ohio, New Hampshire, Utah, Nebraska,South Dakota, Idaho, Maine, Florida, New Jersey,Connecticut, and Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands. Of the182 survivors living outside the state of Kansas in1913, 100 were living in the states and territories tothe south and west of Kansas. Kansas City accountedfor the greater part of those living in Missouri. It is in-teresting that of the 140 survivors who were livingoutside of Kansas and Missouri, 102 lived in statesand territories west of Missouri, and the remaining 38lived east of this line. Thus, the residential patternwas one in which westerners predominated.

Other than a partial list, data are lacking for thesurvivors who attended the reunion in 1913. News-paper accounts place the numbers present as rangingfrom four hundred to five hundred, but no exact totalor geographical breakdown of those in attendancehas been discovered.

Besides compiling a list of survivors and mailingthem invitations to the reunion, the committee of sev-

enteen instructed MaryClark to request lettersfrom the survivors “re-counting their experi-ences of that dreadfulday. It is desirable thateach one in this list willat once write to the com-mittee an account of hisexperiences of that day”and send them as soonas possible. Approxi-mately one hundred ofthese letters are pre-served in the KansasState Historical Society.These recollections are

of great value to historians, supplying narratives ofthe survivors’ wide range of experiences.17

Among other problems encountered by the re-union committee, securing a speaker ofprominence to make the principal address

was no easy task. The first to be invited was BishopWilliam Lawrence of the Congregational Church. Hewas the son of Amos Lawrence, treasurer of the NewEngland Emigrant Aid Company and a wealthy in-dustrialist for whom the town of Lawrence wasnamed. Bishop Lawrence, who was thirteen years oldwhen the massacre occurred, retained a distinct rec-ollection of the shock that this terrible tragedy causedin New England. When Bishop Lawrence wrote re-gretting that prior commitments made it impossibleto accept the invitation, the committee invited HomerHoch, former governor of Kansas, who was in greatdemand as an orator. He too declined, and Charles S.Gleed, who had taken a prominent part in Kansas af-fairs for many years, accepted the invitation to deliv-er the memorial address.18

17. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, July 9, 1913. The recollections writ-ten by survivors of the Lawrence massacre at the time of the semi-cen-tennial memorial reunion are in “Recollections of Quantrill Raid,” collec-tion 159, boxes 1 and 2, Library and Archives Division, Kansas StateHistorical Society.

18. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, June 14, 21, July 19, 1913.

In 1895 this monument, dedicated to the memory of the victims of the1863 raid, was unveiled in Oak Hill Cemetery, Lawrence.


At a committee meeting on July 18, instructionswere given the subcommittee chairpersons to com-plete their parts of the program and report to the en-tire committee as soon as possible. Two weeks laterMrs. Paul R. Brooks was appointed chairperson of thesubcommittee to take charge of decorating all gravesof the raid victims. E. Otis Perkins was named chair-person of the subcommittee to provide conveyancesto the Oak Hill Cemetery for the survivors and dis-tinguished visitors on the anniversary day. Accordingto the Journal-World, “The local autoists are expectedto donate their cars for a short time on this morningso that the visitors can be properly taken care of.”19

An article headed “All in Readiness for theMemorial” summarized the committee’s proceedingson the night of August 15 at the city library. It was de-cided to hold all meetings downtown in the Bower-sock Opera House. This included the evening meet-ing on August 20. It was announced that becauseLeavenworth had accepted an invitation to send a

delegation, the mayor of that town should be invitedto make a short speech or provide someone to do it.The scarcity of flowers was not expected to interferewith decorating the monument in the cemetery sincea large wreath would be provided. Badges and pro-grams were being printed and would be ready intime. Headquarters for the survivors were to bemaintained in the opera house lobby, and all visitorswere to be escorted by the entertainment subcommit-tee, of which Mrs. H.B. Asher was chairperson. Mrs.S.D. Alford reported at the same meeting “that shehad obtained a list of about forty buildings inLawrence that are now standing, that escaped theflames that followed the massacre.” She said that thelist had been placed in the hands of Dr. Edward Bum-gardner, a local historian, for revision and to arrangeto mark these buildings.20

The opening meeting of the semi-centennialmemorial reunion was held at the Bowersock OperaHouse on Wednesday evening, August 20, 1913. Morethan 200 of the nearly 550 living survivors of theLawrence massacre were in attendance. Colonel JohnK. Rankin, chairman of the reunion committee, pre-sided. He and his cousin had been in Lawrence at thetime of the massacre and shot at some of the guerril-las. He also led a party of Lawrence men under thecommand of Senator James H. Lane in pursuit of theguerrilla band after they departed the burning town.Rankin opened the meeting with the following words:

Ladies and Gentlemen: I want to pay a particulartribute to those of our citizens who passed away inthe massacre of fifty years ago. Who were they?They were the cream of the immigration whichcame West at that time to make the country a freecountry—young, energetic, capable men andwomen. They were the men and the women whomade this country what it is, who made this townand this state what it is, and to whom we owe adebt of gratitude that can never be repaid.

Following the chairman’s opening remarks cameshort addresses of various incidents of the raid byJudge Samuel A. Riggs, Mrs. S.D. Alford, Mrs. H.B.Asher, Henry Albach, Gurdon Grovenor, and others.

19. Ibid., August 2, 1913. 20. Ibid., August 16, 1913.

Table 1GEOGRAPHICAL RESIDENTIAL PATTERN FOR THE

SURVIVORS OF THE QUANTRILL RAID AT THE TIME OF THEFIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY REUNION,

LAWRENCE, KANSAS, AUGUST 21, 1913

Living in Lawrence and Douglas County 296 (54.2%)Living in Other Parts of Kansas 68 (12.5%)Total Living in Kansas 364 (66.7%)Living in Other States and Territories

Missouri 42California 27Oklahoma 20Colorado 19New Mexico 10Illinois 10Washington 9Oregon 8New York 7Other 30 182 (33.3%)

Total Survivors Living in the 546 (100.0%)United States and Hawaii

Source: Lawrence: Today and Yesterday, Supplement to the Lawrence DailyJournal-World (Lawrence, Kans.: 1913), 127–28.

184 KANSAS HISTORY

ercises of the day. The people of Lawrence felt thatthis sister city should be shown special favor becauseof its aid given Lawrence. A long article in the Leav-enworth Times detailed the aid measures that hadbeen forthcoming. When Mayor Daniel Anthony hadlearned that the drug stores in Lawrence had beendestroyed, he had made arrangements for severaldoctors to start for the stricken town with variousmedicines. On the night of August 21, Mayor Antho-ny had called a public meeting to raise money for therelief of Lawrence. On the following day the Leaven-worth newspaper had published a list of the sub-scribers to the relief fund, which amounted to morethan ten thousand dollars in one day. Continuing, thenewspaper had reported that “Not only did Leaven-worth send money, coffins and resolutions of condo-lence to her sister city but many of her citizens uponfirst word of the massacre mounted horses and hur-ried to the aid of the stricken city.” The 1913 delega-tion consisted of twelve Leavenworth citizens, sever-al of whom had come to the aid of Lawrence on themorning after the massacre.23

The chief event on the morning of August 21 wasthe service in Oak Hill Cemetery honoring the mas-sacre victims. Automobiles loaned by citizens ofLawrence conveyed a hundred or more survivors tothe cemetery east of the city. Reverend O.C. Brown,pastor of the First Baptist Church, delivered a shortaddress appropriate to the occasion. A song also wassung by the audience in the cemetery. “Gatheredabout the big granite monument erected in memoryof those slain on that day, the survivors with dampeyes paid tribute to the dead whose bones reposedbeneath their feet,” wrote the Topeka Daily Capital re-porter. Most of the victims had been buried the dayfollowing the tragedy in what was later called Pio-neer Cemetery and is now part of the west campus ofthe University of Kansas. There a great trench was ex-cavated and the bodies of many unidentified personswere laid side by side, some with and many withoutcoffins. Later, however, all but a few of the bodies ofthe victims were moved to Oak Hill Cemetery forfinal interment. The Journal-World reported that a list

21. Ibid., August 20, 21, 1913; Topeka Daily Capital, August 21, 1913.22. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 20, 21, 22, 1913.

23. Leavenworth Times, August 20, 23, 1913; Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 20, 21, 1913.

The Journal-World reported that many interesting sto-ries were told:

many a story of narrow escape, of terror and mur-der and destruction. These people were here onthat day, they saw the guerrillas sweep the city,they saw it afterward, a heap of cinders and asheswith the bodies of their relatives and friends andneighbors strewn about the streets where they hadbeen shot down. To them the occasion last nightwas long to be remembered, they saw personsthere whom they had not seen for years and itmade their hearts glad and their spirits lighterthan they had been for some time.

That evening the audience was asked to sing “TheStar Spangled Banner” and “Home Sweet Home.”21

On Thursday morning, the anniversary day,groups of Lawrence people who had beenplanning the memorial set out to accomplish

their tasks. One group went early to the cemetery tomark and decorate all the known graves of massacrevictims and the monument in their honor. The recep-tion committee at the opera house supplied badgesand programs to survivors who had arrived late theprevious night or in the morning. Motor cars awaitedthe visitors at the opera house to carry them to OakHill Cemetery. Another group, also in automobiles,covered the city placing placards on all buildings thathad been standing at the time of the raid. The news-paper listed the addresses and owners at the time ofthe raid of ninety-two buildings where placards wereposted. “It was rather a surprise to find so many oldbuildings about the city that withstood the ravages ofthat day and have remained here fifty years longer,”said the Journal-World. A special marker was postedat the home of Edward Bumgardner at 724 VermontStreet. This building, which had been the Methodistchurch, was converted into a temporary hospital andmorgue on the day of the massacre.22

Another group, including Mayor E.U. Bond, wentacross the bridge to the Union Pacific Railway depotto welcome members of a delegation from Leaven-worth who had been invited to participate in the ex-


forgotten the sorrows offifty years earlier.25

Presiding at the after-noon meeting was JudgeSamuel Bishop, formermayor of Lawrence and asurvivor of the massacre.After the audience sang apatriotic song, he intro-duced Charles SumnerGleed, the speaker of theday, whose memorial ad-dress was entitled “TheLawrence Massacre andits Lessons.” Gleed wasborn in Vermont in 1856and came to Kansas afterthe Civil War. He was astudent at the Universityof Kansas from 1876 to1880, was admitted to thebar in 1884, and there-after had a distinguishedcareer as a business exec-utive and trustee of theUniversity of Kansas.26

Gleed traced the history of Lawrence and its earlysettlers. They came not only from New England butalso Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Germany, andother parts of Europe and North America. These peo-ple believed in the dignity of labor, he said; they werehumanitarians who were, almost without exception,hostile to the institution of slavery. He spoke in a con-ciliatory manner regarding the traditional South,pointing out that slavery in the United States was notthe invention of the Southern states. Instead, it wasbrought to the New World by European slave traders.Neither was the peculiar institution upheld by suchgreat statesmen of the South as George Washington,Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, James Madison,Thomas Hart Benton, and hundreds of other nationalleaders. But the truly great men of the South, he de-

of the killed had beencompiled containing thenames of 143 victims, butthat the estimates were ashigh as 185.24

The principal andfinal meeting of thememorial reunion washeld at the BowersockOpera House on the af-ternoon of August 21.According to the TopekaDaily Capital, four hun-dred or five hundred hadbeen present in or nearLawrence at the time ofthe massacre. “The build-ing was filled with citi-zens and with visitorsfrom far away coun-tries,” reported the Jour-nal-World. Furthermore,this local paper noted:

Many a survivor of theraid had come hun-dreds of miles to be in Lawrence once again, to behere and see the town which fifty years ago hewatched burn. Some of them were only childrenthen and but faintly remember the day but otherssaw it all and can never forget that picture of crimeand suffering. But for all it was a memorable occa-sion here today and the Memorial was in everyway a great success.

To the editor of the Lawrence Daily Gazette, the meet-ing at the opera house was one of the most unusualgatherings ever in Lawrence. Men and women cametogether to talk over one of the most painful periodsof their lives, a time of widespread disaster and con-ditions of which the younger generation had no first-hand knowledge. Although friendly greetings andcheerful conversations were abundant, still through-out the whole proceedings a note of sadness showedplainly on the aged men and women who had never

24. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 21, 1913; Topeka Daily Capi-tal, August 21, 22, 1913; Leavenworth Times, August 23, 1913.

25. Topeka Daily Capital, August 22, 1913; Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 21, 22, 1913; Daily Gazette (Lawrence), August 22, 1913.

26. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 21, 1913.

Lawrence: Today and Yesterday devoted this page to the committee oftown leaders who organized the semi-centennial memorial reunion.

186 KANSAS HISTORY

clared, were ultimately ig-nored by the majority whopursued a course of “recklessand unmoral commercialism”that grafted slavery on theSouth and led to the Civil War.

After recounting the trou-bled and violent history of ter-ritorial Kansas, Gleed asked,“Who and what were theraiders who came to Law-rence to murder and destroy?”He answered that Quantrilland his guerrillas “were tech-nically Confederate soldiers,but they received no orders,made no reports, and were in every way as irrespon-sible as when they were stealing horses and cattleand Negroes on their own account.”

Focusing on William Quantrill, Gleed made itclear that he found no redeeming qualities in theguerrilla leader. Quantrill was described as “a thin,cold, bloodless man with great personal vanity, jeal-ous of all who dared to try to divide the spot-lightwith him, cruel and relentless in all his methods.”Having begun his outlaw career as a petty thief, hehad degenerated into “a great dry-land pirate withplunder his object and murder his pastime.”

Although Quantrill had no redeeming qualities inGleed’s opinion, his men were said to have had“many grades of criminality.” Some of these men saidthat because Kansas Jayhawkers and Red Legs hadcommitted atrocities in Missouri, they were justifiedin seeking revenge at Lawrence for personal losses orgrievances. We know today that Gleed was wrong todismiss all the charges by the Missourians, howeverright he was to assert the uniquely destructive and vi-cious nature of the Lawrence massacre. While most ofQuantrill’s gang were described as “thoroughly badmen, criminals by instinct, by training,” a few ofthem “made some efforts on occasion to prevent mur-der and there were others who declined to do anymurdering themselves.” Another group that came toLawrence “were almost innocent followers, who af-terwards became good citizens. All these have always

regretted the Lawrence mur-ders,” according to Gleed.27

Gleed next asked, “Whatwas done that day in Law-rence?” He answered thatonly the historian could tellwith any completeness, butthat nearly two hundred menand boys had been murdered.But he used the word “mur-dered” advisedly, since warhad no sanction for killingnoncombatants.

There was none to resist andpractically nobody resisted. . . .Two hundred men were mur-

dered because they could not resist. They hadnothing with which to resist. Their political lead-ers were all present, but they had no military lead-ers. General Lane was in the Senate, but happenedto be at home. He ran to the country and gathereda small body of farmers with arms returning whenno help could be rendered. Governor Robinsonwas on Mt. Oread where he could see the burningcity, but he was powerless to help. . . . Such utterhelplessness in time of war can scarcely be com-prehended.

Gleed then addressed “the story of that day’swork,” noting that this “must be had of thehistorian,” but he gave his listeners “sugges-

tions of what happened” to a number of victims:

As an opening episode, the Rev. S.S. Snyder ofthe United Brethren Church, at work on hispremises was riddled with bullets.

Seventeen young recruits of the FourteenthKansas [Cavalry], without arms or uniform, wereshot to death.

R.C. Dix and many others at the JohnsonHotel, were promised safety if they would comeout. They came out and were murdered.

George W. Bell, County Clerk, with a friend,took refuge in the rafters of an unfinished house.One of the murderers began shooting at them. Bellrecognized him as a man he had entertained at hishome, and begged for his life, or at least that of his

In his memorial address Charles Sumner Gleed eulogizedthe martyrs of the Lawrence massacre.

27. Ibid.


building. He begged to be moved, but was shot todeath.

Robert Speer [age seventeen and brother ofJohn Speer Jr.] and his companion were sleeping inthe printing office, and were murdered.

Young Collamore, son of the Mayor, was shotand left on the road. [He recovered.]

John Bergen and six other prisoners were shot.All were killed except Bergen, who was left fordead, but recovered.

Robin Martin, twelve years of age, was shot ashe ran from his home.

Two negro preachers, Stonestreet and Old-ham, were murdered, the latter in the presence ofhis daughter.

Judge Louis Carpenter was pursued throughhis house and mortally wounded. His wife andsister [sic—sister-in-law] threw themselves on hisprostrate body, but were thrust aside enough topermit the final shots.

Mr. Young was shot and burned, but lived.The last man killed, like the first, was a

preacher—Mr. Rothrock of the Dunkard denomi-nation [sic—he was wounded and recovered].

Gleed concluded this part of his address by sayingthat the full story of the massacre as written byWilliam Elsey Connelley “fills the reader with horror.I would not if I could recite it all here. Such is not ourobject at this hour.”28

In the closing paragraph of his masterful and elo-quent address, Gleed eulogized the martyrs of themassacre:

We cannot forget those who died and those whosuffered; those who fell in the hour of attack andthose who survived, broken in health or in heart;those whose life’s hopes and plans were cruellyblasted, blasted forever; those who were, in oneway or another, martyrs to the cause of freedomand equality in the founding of our great state. Forevery one of them there must be glorious reward.In God’s great economy there is no loss. Everydrop of blood spilled that day nourished the flow-ers of liberty. Every cry of anguish reached theheart of civilization and brought help against op-pression. Every golden thread of love and friend-ship, that day broken, was not broken, was not

28. Ibid.

friend. They were promised immunity, but wereshot as they came down.

Mayor Collamore and an employee were dri-ven into the well on their premises where theydied. A friend, Captain J.G. Lowe, entered the wellto try to save the life of the mayor, and he died.

Levi Gates was shot and horribly mutilated.Dr. J.F. Griswold, S.M. Thorp, J.C. Trask and

Harlow W. Baker were induced to leave the Dr.Griswold’s home on assurance that they wouldmerely be taken prisoners. They were promptlyshot. Griswold, Thorp and Trask were killed.Baker was shot five times, but pretending to bedead, was left still alive and finally recovered.

Edward P. Fitch was called to his door andshot and burned with his home.

D.W. Palmer was wounded and left in hisstore to burn.

James Perine and James Eldridge were clerks.After they had given the raiders all that was valu-able in the store where they slept, they were shotand burned.

Mr. Burt delivered his pocket book and re-ceived a bullet.

Mr. Murphy handed one raider a drink ofwater and was repaid by instant death.

Mr. Ellis, a blacksmith, ran into a patch of cornwith his child. A raider left him dead with thechild in his arms.

Mr. Albach was ill in bed. He was carried outof his house by his family and was shot by theraiders.

G.H. Sargent and Charles Palmer were shot.Sargent was not instantly killed. His wife fell uponhis prostrate body. A murderer placed his pistolover her shoulder and sent a bullet into her hus-band’s head.

Mr. Thornton was shot five times and thenbeaten over the head, but lived many years in afrightfully crippled condition, never knowingfreedom from pain.

Mr. Langley was pursued about his home andshot a dozen times.

John and William Laurie were murdered eachbegging for the life of the other. William Laurie’swife was present. One murderer said to Mrs. Lau-rie: “We are fiends from Hell. Get into the house orwe will serve you the same way.”

George Holt and J.L. Crane were butchered intheir shoe store.

John Speer, Junior, seventeen [sic—nineteen]years old, was wounded and fell near a burning

188 KANSAS HISTORY

lished, Quantrill would have attained such a place inthe minds of Missourians that it would have been dif-ficult for the truth to prevail. Instead, Connelleyclaimed that his book was “as a flood of light pouredinto an area of darkness.”

From a hero who had been wronged here inLawrence, Quantrell stood forth a marauder and amurderer. Instead of being an injured individual inKansas, the truth made Quantrell, the kidnapperof free negroes, the stealer of cattle, a horsethief, anincendiary fleeing from justice. He left Kansasfearing the heavy hand of the law for manycrimes. And in leaving he plotted to murder, anddid murder in the most treacherous manner, anumber of Kansas Anti-Slavery men whom he in-duced in their zeal to cross the border in search ofpassengers for the Underground Railroad.

The story of Quantrill was then emerging into thetrue light in Missouri, said Connelley. He called at-tention to a report in the Kansas City Star that no morereunions of the survivors of Quantrill’s guerrillaband would be held “to celebrate the sacking ofLawrence.” Instead, the Quantrill organization wasto be merged with that of Upton Hays, who was de-scribed as a less bloody and ferocious guerrilla. “It isnow beginning to be realized in Missouri thatQuantrell brought fire and sword to Jackson County,”Connelley declared.32

As did Charles S. Gleed, Connelley ended his ad-dress by praising Lawrence in its days of adversityand heroism in words both meaningful and eloquent:

Lawrence stood as a rock about which beat forten years the rage of border-Ruffianism—thestronghold of liberty against which rolled thosebarbarous hordes that crossed our borders to forceupon us human slavery. She led in the Kansas con-flict. When Kansas won, the death knell of slaveryin the nation was sounded. When Quantrell andhis murderous guerrillas turned from this devas-tated town the Confederacy was waning and theend of the war could be seen. . . .

Lawrence made a glorious stand in those days.The fame of that conflict will grow as the impor-tance of it is realized.

broken in vain, for God saw. The day of restorationand requital will come, and when that eternal dayhas dawned, joy, God given, unspeakable joy, willhave come with the morning.29

Following Gleed, an address was delivered byWilliam Connelley, a leading historian of Kansas andthe West. Connelley had a varied career as a school-teacher, civil servant, businessman, manuscript andbook collector, and author. In 1912 he was electedpresident of the Kansas State Historical Society andtwo years later secretary and director, serving the So-ciety in the latter capacity until his death in 1930.Among Connelley’s numerous books, his Quantrilland the Border Wars, first published in 1909 and twicereprinted, has been the most influential.30

Connelley was not a modest man when the im-pact of his book about Quantrill was in question. Hesaid he had no doubt that his labors had helped to re-vive public awareness of the tragedy of the peoplethat the memorial reunion was honoring. When Con-nelley began his investigation, he said there was littlereliable information concerning Quantrill’s life andtimes. Although some accounts were based on truth,he contended, they usually were distorted or exag-gerated. “The only event of which there was a fair ac-count was the Lawrence massacre, and of it the pre-liminary movements were little known.” Since manyKansans and Missourians believed the falsehoodsQuantrill told, Connelley contended it was “necessaryto the truth of history that some reliable and accurateaccount of Quantrell be published.” Quantrill “wasrapidly becoming a hero in Missouri where he was re-garded as one who had been driven out of Kansas be-cause he sympathized with the South.” Connelleyfeared that if the truth were not told, Quantrill wouldbe venerated as a martyr by many Missourians.31

Connelley said that Quantrill had spread abroadfalsehoods regarding his treatment by Kansans sothat he might accomplish “his base and cynical pur-poses.” He believed that had his book not been pub-

29. Ibid.30. Ibid., August 22, 1913. For a biographical sketch of William E.

Connelley, see Frank W. Blackmar, ed., Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State Histo-ry, 2 vols. (Chicago: Standard Publishing Co., 1912), 1:404–5.

31. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 22, 1913. 32. Ibid.


Connelley told his audience the spirit that hadmoved them to gather at the memorial reunionshould be preserved, that the organization should bemade perpetual. It should be made the medium oflofty ideals in which the people would teach theirchildren patriotism that would lead them up toLawrence in the future to commemorate not only themassacre but also other struggles of this city for free-dom for America.33

It should not be thought that the memorial re-union was an event without certain inconsistenciesand contradictions. One local newspaper reportedthat a few local citizens had feared the memorialwould reopen old wounds. It was conceded thatgrievances were long-lived and injuries difficult toheal, and it had taken the town a long time to reachthe point where it could have a reunion in the properspirit. Fortunately, it was asserted, the wounds offifty years ago were all healed. “The sorrows of thosedays live with us and the memory of heroism cannotbe allowed to perish. But the bitterness is gone.”34

The Topeka Daily Capital, however, contradictedthis view:

At the mention of Quantrell the blood of these sur-vivors still boils, and some of the speakers indicat-ed that they still would listen to a proposal toswoop down upon the reunion of the survivors ofQuantrell’s band, now in progress in Missouri, and

wreak a belated vengeance for the blood whichwas shed in Lawrence fifty years ago. Rather harshwords also were spoken by some because officersof the United States army did not pursue and fightQuantrell’s gang after the bloody massacre and be-cause some of these same officers prevented theincensed neighbors and home guards, musteredafter the raid, from pursuing Quantrell and wreck-ing vengeance of their own kind.

That the Topeka newspaper’s account was more per-ceptive of survivor attitudes is suggested by the fol-lowing Lawrence Daily Journal-World article of August21, 1909: “The story of the raid never grows cold hereand the blood of the old settlers who survived theblood lusting raiders, still boils when they read eachyear of the celebrations at Independence of the verymen who shot down their friends and neighbors andrelatives and burned their homes and stores.”35

Planners of the reunion, while they concentrat-ed their efforts on memorializing the victims,were not always consistent in their objectives.

This was borne out at the first planning meeting onMay 17, 1913, when it was reported a movement hadbeen started that had a two-fold objective—to honorthe memory of the men and boys who had beenkilled and to celebrate the town’s present greatness.In subsequent weeks short editorials appeared thatcommented favorably on plans for the memorial but

33. Ibid.34. Ibid., August 21, 1913.

35. Topeka Daily Capital, August 22, 1913; Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 21, 1909; August 21, 1913.

To the displeasure of the people of Lawrence, the survivors of Quantrill’s guerrilla band held reunions to celebrate the sacking ofLawrence. This gathering took place in Independence, Missouri, August 21, 1908.

insisted it should have a fo-cused purpose: “The plan isto have the entire city feelthat it has a direct interest inthis memorial. It is a sacredoccasion and will be carriedout in a reverent spirit.” “Thisis in no sense a parade orshow but a solemn memorial.It has been half a centurysince the raid and it is timethat Lawrence as a town didsomething to commemoratethe memory of the martyrs.”“This is not in any sense a cel-ebration; it is a memorial andas such the solemnity of theoccasion will be maintained. It is fitting that after halfa century the people now living should do honor tothose who gave their lives for a good cause. Thememorial is a town affair and the town generally willparticipate.”36

While the planners proceeded with plans for a re-union of the survivors to commemorate the martyrsin a solemn and reverent spirit, other leaders, chieflythose who were influential in the Lawrence businesscommunity, made plans to celebrate the town’sachievements. In his book Main Street on the MiddleBorder Lewis Atherton asserts that everywhere in thecountry towns of nineteenth-century America menwere enamored with the idea of progress, believingthat while the present was superior to the past, thefuture held even greater promise. Writing in the1950s Atherton said:

As yet, most country towns retain their tradi-tional philosophies of “progress.” Town fatherscontinue to think in terms of population growthand rising real-estate prices. They stress thevirtues of industrialization, of exploitation of localmineral resources, of improved transportation,and of trade-at-home, home town loyalty as keysto “progress.” In doing so, they are captives oftheir own past.

Atherton ends his book by as-serting that “The real problemof the country town thus de-mands only an honest answerto the Biblical question, ‘Forwhat is a man profited, if heshall gain the whole world,and lose his own soul.’”37

Beginning on July 24, 1913,the Journal-World announcedthat it would publish a maga-zine supplement to the dailypaper to commemorate thefiftieth anniversary of themassacre. The supplementwould contain about sixty-four pages, profusely illus-

trated, that aimed “to prove that ‘Lawrence Today’ isa leader in the march of progress of live cities and en-ergetic citizens.” In mid-August the headline in thepaper was “Lawrence to be Widely Advertised.” Or-ders for the supplement to be entitled Lawrence: Todayand Yesterday had been received from a score ofKansas towns and nine states. Readers who assumedthat the publication was simply a money-makingscheme for the publishers were said to have too nar-row a vision. The newspaper claimed that “It is apublic spirited enterprise that will give Lawrence, theuniversity and the state of Kansas the most favorableadvertising that they have ever received from a pub-lication of this character.”

On the day following the reunion an article enti-tled “Memorial Was a Splendid Success” was pub-lished in the Journal-World. It said, in part:

Nothing marred the events of yesterday andthe Lawrence Massacre Memorial was conductedjust as planned, just as was hoped and everyonewho attended was immensely pleased. It was notan occasion for mirth and pomp and splendor; thiswas a solemn occasion, an occasion for patriotismand a time for paying tribute to the dead. But therewas a certain happiness and joy in the occasion,joy for the veterans to be reunited again with those

190 KANSAS HISTORY

36. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, May 17, 18, June 9, 1913.37. Lewis Atherton, Main Street on the Middle Border (Bloomington:

Indiana University Press, 1954), 330–32, 353–57.

The full story of the massacre was recounted by leading his-torian William Elsey Connelley in his Quantrill and theBorder Wars, published in 1909.

they had not seen for years and joy for the youngergeneration to observe and to hear them.

The Memorial Committee is immenselypleased with the success of the undertaking andLawrence should feel proud of the results of thegathering. The visitors were all greatly pleased andto them it will be an occasion long to be remem-bered.

The same paper carried a short editorial saying thatalthough the reunion was a great and fitting one andthe people of Lawrence were “rebaptized with patri-otic fervor,” such things should not pass out of thememory of men. “The world needs to be reminded ofwhat suffering there has been, of what price has beenpaid for freedom and personal liberty. It was a fittingmeeting throughout and the best part of it was thesurvivors who got together and talked over theraid.”38

The Lawrence memorial reunion was held at atime of many Civil War battle reunions andGAR encampments throughout the United

States. By far the largest was the three-day semi-cen-tennial reunion of the Battle of Gettysburg in July1913, where upwards of fifty thousand Union andConfederate veterans were encamped on the battle-field and where many old friends and old enemieshad opportunities to talk over old times. On May 26,1914, the Thirty-Third Encampment of the KansasGAR opened at Topeka with approximately five thou-sand Union army veterans in attendance.39

While the reunion at Lawrence was small by com-parison with those held at Gettysburg, Topeka, andelsewhere, it is significant in that it memorialized atragic event of great importance in Civil War Kansasand the United States. It brought from states near andfar the survivors of the Quantrill massacre to meetwith old friends who remained behind. Never beforeor after was such an assemblage of people gatheredwho, having had fifty years to reflect upon their ex-periences, had the opportunity to meet with friendsand talk over old times. Evidence that the reunionwas the town’s most important public event from1865 to 1917 is demonstrated by the newspaper cov-

erage it generated. From mid-May to late August1913 the leading paper supplied the public with fullaccounts of planning sessions that culminated inpage after page devoted to the proceedings of the re-union, including lists of victims and survivors andthe full texts of the addresses of principal speakers.

To appreciate the uniqueness of the gathering in1913, one needs to understand the special features ofthe raid itself. As Reverend Richard Cordley, long thetown’s leading authority on the raid and massacre,pointed out in his memorial sermon on August 21,1892:

The Lawrence Massacre will always stand amongthe marked massacres of the world. In some re-spects it was unique, and had features of its ownthat distinguished it from any other. In the sud-denness with which it fell, the speed with which itwas accomplished, the hatred and vindictivenesswith which it was persecuted, the violence andbrutality by which it was characterized, it standsalone as something unique in history.

To Albert Castel, a modern authority, the Lawrencemassacre was the most atrocious act of the Civil Warand the outstanding event of the Civil War in Kansas.The fact that the massacre took place during a four-hour period on one day in the life of the people ofLawrence, that they were taken by surprise, were vir-tually unarmed and leaderless, and gunned down re-morselessly, meant that, unlike most kinds of re-unions, it was no easy task to have a large-scalereunion until the bitter feelings of the past fifty yearswere largely healed. Probably the most enduring andunderlying meaning of the reunion was that of psy-chic tension and conflict between the Civil War holo-caust and the subsequent material progress of the sur-vivors. This struggle is symbolized by the seal of theCity of Lawrence depicting a phoenix rising from theashes and the seal of the State of Kansas depicting theprogress from pioneer hardships to agrarian prosper-ity with the Latin inscription, “Ad Astra Per Aspera,”translated as “To The Stars Through Difficulty.”40

38. Lawrence Daily Journal-World, August 22, 1913.39. New York Times, July 5, 1913; Topeka Daily Capital, May 2, 1914.

40. Lawrence Daily Journal-Tribune, August 22, 1892; Albert Castel, AFrontier State at War: Kansas 1861–1865 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell UniversityPress, 1958), 136.


A MOST UNUSUAL G

Documents

Transcript of A MOST UNUSUAL G