Talk:History of West Virginia

Page length and History

• Most of the History section in the main West Virginia article is long, long block of text taken mainly from the PD Encyc. Brit. Now that this is the collab of the fortnight, what do we think of blending that section with this separate History of West Virginia, eliminating redundancies and highly detailed specifics that could instead go into separate sections. It just seems that the broad outline of West Virginia history belongs here, and an expanded piece on something like, say, the West Virginia Mine Wars would be a separate article. I'll certainly pitch in. — Tenebrae 15:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Replies are located at Talk:West Virginia#Page length and History section. AndyZ 18:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Berkeley and Jefferson

There are two conflicting accounts of when these counties joined the state, one under the legality heading (which says they were part of WV when it formed, but that was challenged by VA in 1866) and one under the civil war heading (which say they joined WV in 1866). [1] seems to support the first version, but does someone more knowledgable about the area know for sure? Kmusser 13:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

from Virgil Lewis's History and Government of West Virginia (1896): "Berkeley and Jefferson Counties were not included in West Virginia at the time of its admission into the Union. On January 31st, 1863, the Assembly, under the Reorganized Government, passed an act for Berkely and on the ensuing 4th of March for Jefferson, providing that elections be held in each and, if a majority of the votes cast be in favor of becoming a part of West Virginia, then the chief executive of the Reorganized Government should certify the result to the Governor of West Virginia. This was done, and August 5th, 1863, the Legislature of West Virginia passed an act admitting Berkely county, and by a similiar enactment on November 2nd following, Jefferson county mas made part of the new State."

"On December 8th, 1865, the Virginia Assembly, sitting in Richmond, repealed the act of 1863, by which the counties in question were transferred to West Virginia. Then the authorities of the State appealed to the 39th Congress, and March 2nd, 1866, that body passed an act declaring these counties to be subject to the jurisdiction of the new State the same as if they had been a part of it at the time of its formation. Virginia then brought suit against West Virginia in the Supreme Court of the United States for the recovery of these counties. The case was argued at the December term of that tribunal in 1866, but no decision was reached, and it was not again called until December, 1870, when it was heard a second time and a decision rendered in favor of the defendant-West Virginia-three of the judges of the court dissenting."

The following is from the official state Archives and History website:

"Pierpont ordered an election to allow the residents of Jefferson and Berkeley counties to determine whether their counties should be located in West Virginia or Virginia. Union troops were stationed outside polling places to intimidate those who might vote for Virginia. Despite local support for Virginia, residents who actually filled out ballots voted overwhelmingly to place both counties in West Virginia."

The voting results were approximately 10% of the number of eligible voters. But in this case Jefferson and Berkeley counties had an advantage over the rest of the counties of West Virginia, most of whom did not have a vote at all, the boundaries of the new state being determined by Wheeling without regard to the counties involved. Fearing that many counties would independently reject the new state, they made the vote on statehood binding by total vote, rather than county vote.Dubyavee 04:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The line

How was the line between Virginia and West Virginia decided? --NE2 21:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

In an nutshell, the border between the states is just the borders between the counties that joined WV and those that did not. As for most of those borders, they were essentially the ridgetops of a series of mountains that were used for the old county boundaries.

There is also a local tongue-in-cheek joke that the survey crew that was to draw the state line had a pet snake. One night the snake got intot heir moonshine whiskey and then slithered through their surveying paint and the line that the snake drew was used for the border (hence the look that the line was "drawn by a drunken snake." youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 12:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Reason for secessionist feelings

I read the whole page carefully and I still don't understand what the reason was for the secession from Virginia. Lots of info on HOW, and none on WHY.

Why did West Virginians want to secede from Virginia? 198.49.180.254 20:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

• • You are asking for something that is difficult for Wikipedia, which is providing motivation with proof. If you mean 'Why did ordinary West Virginians favor statehood?', the answer is they didn't, there is no verifiable historical evidence that they did. If you mean 'Why did the Wheeling Government favor statehood?", that is hard to say. Many of them didn't, they almost adjourned on August 17, 1861, with a postponement of the issue, which would effectively have killed it. But a last-minute compromise effort by Charles Hooton put it back on the table. They voted 50-28 in favor of a public referendum on the issue. That referendum was mostly boycotted by the voters, and the vote was further compromised by the presence of Ohio soldier votes. John Carlile was the main proponent of statehood, but he changed his mind and became an active opponent. Waitman T. Willey, who opposed statehood at first, soon became its main champion. There was also a Northern element present in Wheeling which had no emotional ties to Virginia. You can see this clearly in their arguments over the name of the new state. [2] This Northern element manifested itself in the new Constitution (which was discarded in 1872) and in the fact that West Virginia's first three governors were originally from Pennsylvania and New York, and they had all participated in the dismemberment of Virginia. An analysis of the members of the Second Wheeling Convention has never been made to my knowledge, but it would be interesting. I suggest you get a copy of Richard Curry's "A House Divided", which is the only book to go into detail on West Virginia statehood.Dubyavee 01:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe that there are NO sources anywhere which say anything about WHY in addition to the obviously rich trove of references on WHO, WHEN and WHERE. Even the book you indicate - if I read it, am I NOT going to find any WHY in it? You obviously read it. You must know what arguments those men made. I also don't agree that "something [...] is difficult for Wikipedia, which is providing motivation with proof" - except in the case where there is no proof, which I already said I don't believe. 198.49.180.254 23:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Literally hundreds of history articles on Wikipedia provide reasons for the events and the motivations of the people involved. You know what? Just because you might not have something that you regard as "proof" enough for a Wikipedia article, a Talk: page is a different matter. You don't owe it to me to "prove" "Why did West Virginians want to secede from Virginia?". Just say so if you have any idea. Don't worry about me undermining your Pulitzer nomination. 198.49.180.254 23:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

SEE: "Wood County, West Virginia, in Civil War times: With an account of the guerrilla warfare in the Little Kanawha Valley" by H. E Matheny

Our people were starving to death in the winter of 1861 due to the Confederacy's commandeering along the lower Kanawha River. They robbed our packets hauling our farm produce and turned many away from forming Virginia policies. Matheny documents these troubled times in the Kanawha Region. His book includes rosters of Union recruits & where they were recruited. The book also contains the Virginia guerrilla and their female spies.

Rather than simply recite pro-Confederate babble that ordinary citizens of WV did not want to leave Virginia. I'd point you to most WV history textbooks which will go somewhat in depth as to the unfair representation given to Piedmont and Tidewater Virginia, based partially on its including slaves in its population count, and partially in property qualifications which favoured the Virginia aristocracy. Otis Rice's "West Virginia" has a good chapter #10 on the conflict with the east. Residents in the west felt they were not getting their share of roads and schools and their taxes were going to support other internal improvements in the east. It should be noted that most of Virginias constitutional conventions were held because of unrest in the west. The document wich came out the Constitutional Convention of 1829/30 every county in Western Virginia voted heavily against ratification. The censuse of 1840 found that 10 senators and 56 delegates represented the 271,000 white persons living west of the blue ridge and that only 19 senators and 78 delegates represented 269,000 people west of the blue ridge was the cause of the next constitutional convention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.182.9.50 (talk) 18:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Help Please

[edit] Waterway considerations of US Congress section

A user requested citations. I provided them. Somehow, they need put into the citation or notes section at the bottom. I don't know how to do this. Can one of you Wiki-experts do this, please?

Or, maybe the examples about steamboat navigation Legislation on West Virginia waters might just need deleted completely. Really though, I'm not so sure that legislations would be within the scope of West Virginia's early River Traffic, anyway. I guess it's a judgement call on the part of several thinking people who are major editors on this article. Please edit and fix my offerings as you better editors see fit, please.

Thanks for your patience, Conaughy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

And, thanks for fixing the buffalo skin canoes section from Salling journal quote. That looks so much better now... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conaughy (talk • contribs) 20:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

hey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.182.210 (talk) 23:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

A copy of the act is a good citation

"1862 an enabling act was approved by President Lincoln admitting West Virginia on the condition that a provision for the gradual abolition of slavery be inserted in the Constitution" The citations provided to support this claim are not satisfactory, I wish that someone would provide an actual copy of the original act. Right now it seems like "common knowledge" that President Lincoln wanted gradual abolition of salvery in WV. It seems like the sources that are being linked to are using it as such as well. There has to be a copy that can be used as a citation. --Yxskaftet (talk) 18:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

For your kind considerations in Citation Request: Primary Source of the Statehood Proclamation can be viewed here: [3] Primary Source of the Resolution of Committee to Seek Compensation for Loyal Slaveholders can be viewed here: [4] Today's School Text Book Source & school reading book from school library in my youth, "West Virginia: a history" By Otis K. Rice, Stephen W. Brown: [5]. "The original act" can also be found in and read as such, "The children of slaves born within the limits of this State after the fourth day of July, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, shall be free; and all slaves within this State who shall, at the time aforesaid, be under the age of ten years, shall be free when they arrive at the age of twenty-one years; and all slaves over ten and under twenty-one years shall be free when they arrive at the age of twenty-five years; and no slave shall be permitted to come into the State for permanent residence therein." Fast, Richard Ellsworth & Hu Maxwell, The History and Government of West Virginia, Morgantown, 1906, pg. 109 "In the fifth paragraph of the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln was careful to use these words in exempting a portion of Virginia from its provisions: "(except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia. . . .)" This exemption was in accord with Lincoln's philosophy of applying the terms of the Emancipation Proclamation only to the areas then in rebellion against the United States. When the proposed constitution of West Virginia had been before Congress, that body, as we have seen, had voted approval of it. But there was a condition exacted for this approval. That was a change of Section Seven of Article Eleven, dealing with the negroes in the new state. Whereas, the first draft had been vague in the matter, the revised article required by Congress and the President insisted on a system of gradual emancipation in West Virginia to begin on July 4, 1863. The phrasing of this revised article had been suggested by Senator Willey, and is known to history by his name." quoting Squires. Continue quoting, "Lincoln's approval of the West Virginia statehood bill on December 31, 1862, was thus conditioned upon the acceptance by the people of that state of the Willey Amendment to their own constitution. This provision, let me repeat, specifically provided for gradual emancipation of the negroes of the state." "Lincoln and West Virginia Statehood"*, By J. Duane Squires, Volume 24, Number 4 (July 1963) (A copyrighted publication of West Virginia Archives and History) [6] The key to our statehood centers around the reasons for the Willey Amendment as requested by the then President & Congress' Committee, Respectfully, Conaughy (talk) 03:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I suspect I see the problem in that perhaps the sentence should read: "1862 an enabling act was approved by President Lincoln admitting West Virginia on the condition that a provision for the gradual abolition of slavery be inserted in the new State's Constitution". A clarification in phraseology, maybe? I didn't write the paragragh and I shall leave the edits to those editor's. However, this native West Virginian did understand without further clarifications of the implication to our State's Constitution... "the original act" was the Willey Amendment , Respectfully, Conaughy (talk) 04:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Map without legend

The image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wvmapagain.png contains a map with no key or legend whatsoever. It is impossible to tell which counties were for or against secession from the map, or otherwise what the colors white and cyan mean. In any case, the map below it shows no votes were returned from a number of southern counties, so it cannot be determined which way they voted in any case. The map needs to be improved, or removed and replaced with a better explanatory one.Avman89 (talk) 16:53, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Constitution Article. IV. Section. 3. Clause 1:

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

Is this mentioned in the article and I just overlooked it? Is there a citation for the Supreme Court's reasoning as to how this applied to the formation of West Virginia that I also overlooked? --Pawyilee (talk) 11:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The US Congress recognized a Unionist government of Virginia (the Pierrpont government) and it approved the splitup, so the Constitution was upheld to the letter. Richmond's rebel government of course did not have a voice. Rjensen (talk) 11:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Timeline of West Virginia

Any interest in creating a Timeline of West Virginia article? A few other U.S. states have timelines (see Category:Timelines of states of the United States). Here are some sources:

• Benson John Lossing, ed. (1905). "United States: West Virginia (chronology)". Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History. Vol. 9. Harper & Bros. – via HathiTrust. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)
• Federal Writers' Project (1941). "Chronology". West Virginia: A Guide to the Mountain State. American Guide Series. New York: Oxford University Press – via Google Books. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)

-- M2545 (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of West Virginia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070307001222/http://www.wvculture.org/history/statehoo.html to http://www.wvculture.org/hiStory/statehoo.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of West Virginia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100707162340/http://www.wvculture.org/history/civwaran.html to http://www.wvculture.org/HiStory/civwaran.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/quarters/5109/Prisoners_1861.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070727012837/http://www.gbl.indiana.edu//archives/menu.html to http://www.gbl.indiana.edu/archives/menu.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Tiny Nitpick in Native History

I believe the origins of the word Kanawha are most likely coming from Kanawakhe, the Iroquois word for the St. Lawrence River, which basically translates out to "Rapids here." You just drop the ke/ geh at the end & get Kanawha. I think some tribes actually adopted this word as their term for the Iroquoian peoples as a race, as the Iroquois have always said that their ancestors were a single nation of people who lived in the St. Lawrence River Valley. The evidence is the "Book of Cheraw," which, although not being the most helpful book on history took a confused statement from a mixture of Saponi & Catawba on their own history & how they got there & part of that statement corroborates & sheds light on the Saponi belief that their ancestors came from Ohio. To paraphrase, 'They said they came from somewhere in the vicinity of Lake Erie several hundred years prior to European contact, but were driven from the region by the Caunawagan.' So, I think that would mean that the Kanawha tribe were the same tribe as the Little Mingo/ Tionontatecaga. Bobbotronica (talk) 20:14, 28 November 2021 (UTC)