A Brief Comparative Analysis of Civil War Pensions

Through the course of this study, the historian has focused his efforts in pursuing research that supplement his dissertation topic: Combat Trauma in the Civil War. For the current class, the historian proposed a study of pensions for Civil War veterans, particularly those that presented symptoms of Combat Trauma or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), in order to discover what effects the pensions might have had on a veteran’s recovery. To begin, the historian will examine some differences in pensions as the government issued them in order to do a comparative analysis of the differences along each veteran’s road to recovery and reintegration.

The first notable difference in pensions issued follows the conflict’s divide: the veterans of the states that remained in the Union and of those that left and formed the Confederate States of America (CSA). Soldiers of the Union army received pensions for their service starting in 1862, funded by the United States Government.[1] The Pension Act specifically barred those veterans who joined the CSA from receiving the benefits.[2] This law remained the same after the war, forcing the former CSA states to each separately fund and pay the pensions of their own veterans. For example, Georgia paid for their veterans’ pensions, Virginia theirs, and so on, with each determining when the benefits would start and who could draw the pensions.[3]

Diving for deeper comparison, the Union veterans started receiving a benefit in 1862, and, unlike in previous wars, this included African American soldiers. Veterans alone could draw benefits until 1890 when Congress passed the Dependent Pension Act, which allowed widows and certain other dependents to receive the pensions.[4] This act also finally allowed Union nurses to receive benefits, an odd oversight to be sure.[5]

When compared with the former CSA states, one finds many differences. Owing to the system, a CSA veteran could apply for a pension in the state they were living in rather than the state they enlisted from. Only those veterans declared impoverished or with an actual disability could apply, and not all states offered benefits from the outset. According to the National Archives, these states began offering pensions in the year noted: Alabama and North Carolina in 1867, Georgia in 1870, Texas in 1881, Florida in 1885, South Carolina in 1887, Mississippi and Virginia in 1888, Tennessee in 1891, Louisiana in 1898, Missouri in 1911, Kentucky in 1912, and Oklahoma in 1915.[6]

Several of the states placed limitations on who could receive aid, such as loss of limb, blindness, or some other verifiable disability. Of the states mentioned above, Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia differentiated in types of disabilities and denied indigency or old age as a reason for support, while all the rest offered support for all eligible disabled or impoverished veterans from the outset. However, note the timing: no one offered indigency support prior to 1881, with the first mention of old age qualifying for support coming in 1894 in Georgia. This begs the question of what changed, something to consider for later study.

Another difference came with the addition of widows or dependents to CSA pension benefits. Several CSA states began including these groups before the 1890 Dependent Pension Act offered the same support to dependents of Union veterans. Georgia added support for widows in 1879, North Carolina in 1885, South Carolina in 1887, Virginia in 1888, and Florida, Mississippi and Texas in 1889. Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Virginia included widows from the start of their support to veterans.

Part of the reason the CSA states may have waited so long to offer such support to their veterans could stem from the region’s historically infamous distrust of centralized government, even their own state governments. Indeed, Kathleen Gorman wrote in depth on this topic, discussing the strong distaste in the south for “social welfare” for veterans.[7] Ignored by the Federal government, these veterans faced many difficulties recovering in a region that viewed concepts like honor and duty with such reverence and where religious fervor often compelled those struggling to put on a good face for society.[8]

This just scratches the surface of a comparative analysis of Civil War pensions, with more study needed into what the support amounted to, how it impacted the veterans and dependents, how the support compared to the monthly income of a healthy citizen or veteran doing similar work, and more. For now, it suffices to say that the Civil War pension systems remained as varied as they did controversial, a reflection of the overarching struggle to reconstruct a nation torn asunder from within.

[1] For a more detailed breakdown of the benefits, see “History of the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers (U.S. National Park Service)” (www.nps.gov).

[2] To read the exact law, see U.S. Congress, U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 12 -1861, 36th and 37th Congress. (United States, 1891, 1890).

[3] “Confederate Pension Records.” 2016. National Archives. August 15, 2016. https://www.archives.gov/research/military/civil-war/confederate-pension-records. ‌

[4] To read the exact law, see U.S. Congress, U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 26 -1891, 51st Congress (United States, 1891, 1890).

[5] Gorman, Kathleen. Civil War Pensions. Essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com. 2019. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/civil-war-pensions.html.

[6] Detailed breakdowns can be found at “Confederate Pension Records” (National Archives, 2016).

[7] For more, see Kathleen Gorman, “Confederate Pensions as Southern Social Welfare,” in Elna C. Greene, Before the New Deal: Social Welfare in the South, 1830-1930. (Athens GA: University of Georgia Press, 1999).

[8] For more, see Ashley Michelle Mays, “A Past Still Living: The Grieving Process of Confederate Widows” (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 2014) and Debra J. Sheffer, ““No Sacrifice is Too Great, Save that of Honor”: Honor, Death, and Psychological Combat Trauma in the American Civil War.” (University of Kansas, 2009).

Bibliography

“Civil War-Era Veterans Benefits.” n.d. VA Handbook. Accessed March 23, 2023. https://va-handbook.com/veterans-law-history/civil-war/.

‌“Civil War Widows – Encyclopedia Virginia.” n.d. https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/civil-war-widows/.

“Confederate Pension Records.” 2016. National Archives. August 15, 2016. https://www.archives.gov/research/military/civil-war/confederate-pension-records.

Gorman, Kathleen, “Confederate Pensions as Southern Social Welfare,” in Elna C. Greene, Before the New Deal: Social Welfare in the South, 1830-1930. Athens GA: University of Georgia Press, 1999.

_____. Civil War Pensions. Essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com. 2019. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/civil-war-pensions.html.

“History of the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers (U.S. National Park Service).” n.d. Www.nps.gov. Accessed March 31, 2023. https://www.nps.gov/articles/history-of-disabled-volunteer-soldiers.htm.

Mays, Ashley Michelle. “A Past Still Living: The Grieving Process of Confederate Widows.” Order No. 3622413, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2014. In PROQUESTMS Military Database, https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/past-still-living-grieving-process-confederate/docview/1548715565/se-2.

Sheffer, Debra J. ““No Sacrifice is Too Great, Save that of Honor”: Honor, Death, and Psychological Combat Trauma in the American Civil War.” Order No. 3365880, University of Kansas, 2009. In PROQUESTMS Military Database, https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/no-sacrifice-is-too-great-save-that-honor-death/docview/304910872/se-2.

U.S. Congress. U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 12 -1861, 36th and 37th Congress. United States, - 1861, 1860. Periodical. https://www.loc.gov/item/llsl-v12/.

U.S. Congress. U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 26 -1891, 51st Congress. United States, - 1891, 1890. Periodical. https://www.loc.gov/item/llsl-v26/.