Review - "John Frémont’s 100 Days: Clashes and Convictions in Civil War Missouri" by Gregory Wolk

[John Frémont’s 100 Days: Clashes and Convictions in Civil War Missouri by Gregory Wolk (Missouri Historical Society Press, 2025). Paperback, 3 maps, photos, illustrations, chapter notes, appendix section, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:190/216. ISBN:979-8-9855716-5-3. $22]

Students of nineteenth-century European history are well versed in the details of Napoleon's famous Hundred Days. It was a wildly tumultuous time that witnessed the former emperor's dramatic escape from exile, his return to power as the leader of France, abject defeat at Waterloo, final abdication, and restoration of the Bourbon monarchy. Less than fifty years later during the American Civil War, William Dorsheimer, a former major on the staff of Major General John C. Fremont, referenced that earlier period when searching for a catchy title for his own history of his chief's brief time at the head of the Union Army's Department of the West. Published in three parts by the Atlantic Monthly in early 1862, Dorsheimer's "Fremont's Hundred Days in Missouri" presented readers with a favorable defense of Fremont's actions between July 25, 1861, when the famed Pathfinder of the West personally assumed departmental command in St. Louis, and his relief from that lofty position on November 2, 1861. Over the many decades that have passed since the wartime publication of Dorsheimer's influential account, important bits and pieces of Fremont's reign in Missouri have been reexamined within the pages of numerous popular and scholarly articles and book chapters. However, no full-length study, least of all an exhaustive treatment, has yet attempted to fully describe and contextualize all of its military, political, and legal aspects inside a single volume. Touching upon all of those topics, yet directing the lion's share of its attention toward military matters, is Gregory Wolk's new book John Frémont’s 100 Days: Clashes and Convictions in Civil War Missouri.

Of course, the most controversial as well as most widely discussed aspect of Fremont's Hundred Days is the emancipation feature of the general's August 30, 1861 martial law proclamation, which ignited a political firestorm pitting radical supporters of the measure against its more moderate and conservative detractors. Recognizing that broad-scale emancipation was politically premature and bound to antagonize a large segment of the pro-Union base in the Border States and elsewhere, Lincoln, who also believed that such expansive executive powers were reserved for him alone, was unable to persuade Fremont to rescind the order. Instead, Fremont's recalcitrance forced the President to publicly do it himself. At that point, Fremont's days in Missouri were numbered. The most recent, and arguably one of the very best, treatments of the political aspects of Fremont's Missouri tenure is John Bicknell's The Pathfinder and the President: John C. Frémont, Abraham Lincoln, and the Battle for Emancipation (2025). Although Wolk dutifully devotes space and attention to this important and far-reaching topic, it is not his study's main point of emphasis.

Every Civil War departmental command was heavily politicized, but the one in 1861 Missouri was clearly among the most highly charged. Wolk's narrative follows many of the personalities involved both at the forefront and behind the scenes, among them members of the powerful Blair family and Fremont's deeply supportive wife, Jessie. Along with other noteworthy figures, some interesting individuals from Fremont's staff, including the aforementioned Dorsheimer, are brought into the discussion. The contentious role of General Justus McKinstry, as both departmental quartermaster and later division commander, is revisited. Judging from what Wolk, Bicknell, and others before them have uncovered, a truly accurate and fair appraisal of the allegations of graft and fraud within Fremont's department, a major part of which centered on McKinstry, seems nearly impossible at this late date given how much political interference was present and how slanted the investigation was conducted at the time.

As mentioned above, the main focal point and strength of Wolk's narrative is its coverage of military affairs. By the time Fremont arrived in St. Louis, hyper-aggressive Brigadier General Nathaniel Lyon had already split enemy resistance in the state along the line of the Missouri River, and his and other forces had hounded the largely pro-Confederate Missouri State Guard into the southwest and southeast corners of the state. Wolk recounts Fremont's oversight from afar of Lyon's continued operation that culminated in his battlefield defeat and death at Wilson's Creek as well as other ensuing action in the western part of the state, namely the failed attempt to effectively thwart Missouri State Guard commander Sterling Price's Lexington campaign. Closer to his St. Louis headquarters, Fremont oversaw operations in the Missouri Bootheel between his own forces (which include those of U.S. Grant) and the Missouri State Guard division of M. Jeff Thompson. Covered events there include the October 21 Battle of Fredericktown and the earlier Blackwell Raid. The largest scale operation (involving a Union army totaling upwards of 38,000 men) was led by Fremont in person and is still largely neglected in the literature. Over the last two weeks of October, Fremont marched at the head of his army, which never managed to fully concentrate, from Tipton to Springfield. Price's withdrawing forces, which rapidly diminished in number after Lexington, were never brought to battle, and Wolk persuasively rates the campaign's culminating moment, the famed "Zagonyi's Charge" at Springfield, as more of a wasteful public relations stunt intended to save Fremont's failing reputation than it was militarily sound action. A week later, Fremont was relieved, and he was formally replaced by General David Hunter on November 4.

Fremont's Civil War career has always sparked strong opinions, mostly negative, and one cannot classify Wolk's treatment of Fremont's performance during the Hundred Days as broadly revisionist. It is sympathetic in places, though, and one wishes Wolk had reserved a section at the end of the book for a summary of Fremont's accomplishments and failures. It would also have been interesting to read about what the author deems to have been Fremont's most prominent strengths (if any) and weaknesses as field and department commander. Like most of the recent literature, this study does not characterize the lead-up to the Battle of Wilson's Creek as Fremont hanging Lyon and his gallant little army out to dry. Wolk also counters criticisms of Fremont's actions during Price's Lexington operation by stating that the general did all he could to help Colonel James Mulligan's besieged defenders, but he doesn't elaborate on what those actions were or why those critics who claim that Fremont could and should have done much more to prevent the surrender are mistaken. Like Bicknell, Wolk does credit Fremont for being the first high-ranking officer to utilize U.S. Grant to effective purposes. While Fremont may not have had any great personal regard for Grant or envisioned any special abilities in the Illinois general that others overlooked at the time, both authors argue that he certainly did play a major part in fostering the launching and early development of Grant's Civil War military career.

While Gregory Wolk's John Frémont’s 100 Days may not be the type of comprehensive, exhaustively detailed account desired by some readers, it is well worthy of recommendation as a solid overview of the period. Until such a day arrives when we do get that definitive-level study, a pairing of Wolk's military coverage with John Bicknell's political discussion can provide readers of all stripes with a suitable background in John C. Fremont's brief but eventful 1861 reign in Missouri.