Talk:William Rosecrans

Birthplace
Anyone know what is up with this guy's birthplace? The first page of Google hits gives Delaware City, Kingston, and Little Taylor Run, Ohio. - Hephaestos 02:18, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Well, according to Mapquest, Little Taylor Run isn't a true city (probably a tiny village). However, Delaware City & Kingston are kinda... far away from each other... civilwarhome.com says Delaware City, and that's my most reliable site. However, I don't know... I'll just leave it as it is then. ugen64 01:01, Nov 25, 2003 (UTC)


 * It's possible also that Little Taylor Run isn't a populated area now, but was then. Kind of hard to say at this point, but I'm sure we'll get it exact eventually. - Hephaestos 01:04, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Yeah. That would make sense. ugen64 03:39, Nov 25, 2003 (UTC)


 * General William S. Rosecrans was born in Delaware County, Kingston Township, Ohio. The farm on which he was born is located approximately four miles northwest of Sunbury, Ohio.  There is a very nice stone monument erected on the site which is located on Rosecrans Road, approximately a quarter mile east of the intersection of Rosecrans Road and Carter's Corner Road.  Little Taylor Run is a small stream that crosses the site.

Ancestry
Rosecrans sounds like a German name. Has anybody data about his ancestry?


 * Added info on his parents. Feel free to expand. Hal Jespersen 17:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

William's mother was Jemima, not Jane, and she was _not_ descended from Stephen Hopkins per http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=Search&surname=hopkins&father=hopkins&spouse=crandall+rose* Ron Bauerle [rdbauerle@juno.com] 2-October-2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.69.111.236 (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Thanks for pointing this out. Hal Jespersen (talk) 19:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The location of the monument is correct. The name was Dutch, not German.

As one of his living relatives from Delaware, County, Ohio I have to say that we are very proud of him.

The small rural county sent more than 2500 volunteers to the war. He was the highest ranking.

But we still don't understand the conversion from Methodism to Catholicism and from the Whigs to Democrats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.29.59 (talk) 04:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Rosecrans. 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://archive.is/20120829203141/http://www.dean.usma.edu/history/web03/atlases/american_civil_war/ to http://www.dean.usma.edu/history/web03/atlases/american_civil_war/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion From Article Header
The article's introduction contains this sentence:

'''He was briefly considered as a vice presidential running mate for Abraham Lincoln in 1864 but the telegram correspondence Rosecrans sent back to Washington that stated his interest, was intercepted by Stanton, who buried the message. As a result, Lincoln never received his response and began looking for other candidates.'''

This is contradicted somewhat later:

'''During the 1864 Republican National Convention, his former chief of staff, James Garfield, head of the Ohio delegation, telegraphed Rosecrans to ask if he would consider running to be Abraham Lincoln's vice president. The Republicans that year were seeking a War Democrat to run with Lincoln under the temporary name of "National Union Party." Rosecrans replied in a cryptically positive manner, but Garfield never received the return telegram. Friends of Rosecrans speculated that Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of War, intercepted and suppressed it.'''

Since this is only speculation, not fact, I suggest that the sentence in the introduction that claims this as fact be deleted.TH1980 (talk) 03:38, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Since no objections have been raised, I have deleted the sentence in question.TH1980 (talk) 03:32, 20 December 2020 (UTC)