Glennon,
I turned right to his regiment in "The Annual Report of the Adjutant General of Missouri for the Year Ending December 31, 1863," on page 399, and found his record as Private Andrew F. Whelan in the online Missouri State Archives in the website of the Secretary of State of Missouri, although Andrew's card is very dim and hard to make out all the letters. Private Whelan at age 23 was enrolled into the Enrolled Missouri Militia on 15 September 1862 in St. Louis at the start of the program into Captain John Evell's Company C, 9th EMM, and he was mustered into active service two days later on 17 September 1862 by order of the regimental commander, Colonel J. (John) M. Krum. There are no details recorded on Whelan's card to tell us more about his service, so I turn to the offier's roster in the first source cited above to get the rest of the story.

From studying the officer's roster, it appears that this regiment struggled along from its inception in the fall of 1862 to the fall of 1863, but I would assume it failed to enroll enough men to be accepted as a regiment in the EMM system. From appearances of details given in the officers' roster, it looked like the field grade and company grade officers struggled along, probably attempting to obtain more men or find some recourse. However, lots of the company grade captains and lieutenants resigned in the summer of 1863, which led Colonel Krum to resign on 14 September 1863 and some of his staff gave it up about then as well as a number of the company commanders.

I know of another development which probably disgusted these officers and convinced so many of them to resign. In spring of 1863, the EMM apparatus attempted to pour the more efficient parts of the better EMM regiments into a "super EMM," which was 11 or 12 regiments of "Provisional EMM" or PEMM. This apparatus poured a number of the several St. Louis area EMM regiments into the new 10th and 11th PEMM regiments. Further, in September 1863 the Union authorities attempted to force many of the St. Louis area EMM members into active duty to be boated down to the fortress at New Madrid near the Missouri "Bootheel" and man the garrison there to free more experenced soldiers to be used for active operations. This failed to work because the St. Louis area EMM men forced into the steamboats mutinied at the St. Louis levee and refused to go. Union authorities refused to let these men off the boats, too, and a tense standoff resulted for a day or two.

Finally, the northern leaders had to admit that these very upset men were not going to work out very well at New Madrid and called the whole thing off. The General Assembly was aghast, and terminated most of the PEMM experiment, that has enjoyed success in some parts of the state, but was a failure in others. In effect, the PEMM men reverted to their former EMM assignments, which meant they could return to their civilian jobs until called to local emergencies, which was the setup of the original EMM all along (the PEMM regiments were totally active duty outfits and cost the state a lot of money in wages and other expenses, whereas the EMM were supplied with weapons and ammunition by the Federal gov't and men were only paid and fed if called to active service for local emergencies.)

However, the mutiny and the high-handed way Union authorites tried to ship off hundreds of St. Louis' working men without much notice irked lots of the men in the several EMM regiments of St. Louis, and resulted in lots of officer resignations. There were so many in the struggling 9th EMM, that the State EMM apparatus simply wrote the 9th EMM off and closed the books on it. However, I would imagine that many of the 9th EMM men volunteered in late September 1864, a year later, when Confederate Major General Sterling Price's army of abou 11,000 entered southeast Missouri and appeared to be heading to attack St. Louis. At that time all the remaining EMM units were activated with good results and large number of volunteers came into service to help build fortifications and man the new and already existing emplacements.

Sadly, the card for Private Whelan fails to give us details of his service after he enrolled and was mustered in during September 1862, and gives no clue if he was involved in the mutiny of September 1863 or the heroic effort to prepare St. Louis to repel an assault by the Rebel army in September 1864. Incidentally, General Price decided after a few days in September 1864 not to attempt to attack the city and veered west seeking easier targets.

I can provide references for the mutiny and the other developments, if you need them.

Bruce Nichols