THE GREAT CONSPIRACY
Its Origin and History
BY
JOHN LOGAN
PREFACE.
In the preparation of this work it has been the writer’s aim to present
in it, with historical accuracy, authentic facts; to be fair and
impartial in grouping them; and to be true and just in the conclusions
necessarily drawn from them. While thus striving to be accurate, fair,
and just, he has not thought it his duty to mince words, nor to refrain
from “calling things by their right names;” neither has he sought to
curry favor, in any quarter, by fulsome adulation on the one side, nor
undue denunciation on the other, either of the living, or of the dead.
But, while tracing the history of the Great Conspiracy, from its obscure
birth in the brooding brains of a few ambitious men of the earliest days
of our Republic, through the subsequent years of its devolution, down to
the evil days of Nullification, and to the bitter and bloody period of
armed Rebellion, or contemplating it in its still more recent and,
perhaps, more sinister development, of to-day, he has conscientiously
dealt with it, throughout, in the clear and penetrating light of the
voluminous records so readily accessible at the seat of our National
Government. So far as was practicable, he has endeavored to allow the
chief characters in that Conspiracy-as well as the Union leaders, who,
whether in Executive, Legislative, or Military service, devoted their
best abilities and energies to its suppression–to speak for themselves,
and thus while securing their own proper places in history, by a process
of self-adjustment as it were, themselves to write down that history in
their own language. If then there be found within these covers aught
which may seem harsh to those directly or indirectly, nearly or
remotely, connected with that Conspiracy, he may not unfairly exclaim:
“Thou canst not say I did it.” If he knows his own heart, the writer
can truly declare, with his hand upon it, that it bears neither hatred,
malice, nor uncharitableness, to those who, misled by the cunning
secrecy of the Conspirators, and without an inkling or even a suspicion
of their fell purposes, went manfully into the field, with a courage
worthy of a better cause, and for four years of bloody conflict,
believing that their cause was just, fought the armies of the Union, in
a mad effort to destroy the best government yet devised by man upon this
planet. And, perhaps, none can better understand than he, how hard, how
very hard, it must be for men of strong nature and intense feeling,
after taking a mistaken stand, and especially after carrying their
conviction to the cannon’s mouth, to acknowledge their error before the
world. Hence, while he has endeavored truly to depict–or to let those
who made history at the time help him to depict–the enormity of the
offence of the armed Rebellion and of the heresies and plottings of
certain Southern leaders precipitating it, yet not one word will be
found, herein, condemnatory of those who, with manly candor, soldierly
courage, and true patriotism, acknowledged that error when the ultimate
arbitrament of the sword had decided against them. On the contrary, to
all such as accept, in good faith, the results of the war of the
Rebellion, the writer heartily holds out the hand of forgiveness for the
past, and good fellowship for the future.
WASHINGTON, D. C.
April 15, 1886.
CONTENTS.
[For detailed Table of Contents see below]CHAPTER.
I. A Preliminary Retrospect,
II. Protection, and Free Trade,
III. Growth of the Slavery Question,
IV. Popular Sovereignty,
V. Presidential Contest of 1860,
VI. The Great Conspiracy Maturing,
VII. “Secession” Arming,
VIII. The Rejected Olive Branch,
IX. Slavery’s Setting Sun,
X. The War Drum–“On to Washington,”
XI. Causes of Secession
XII. Copperheadism vs. Union-Democracy,
XIII. The Storm of Battle,
XIV. The Colored Contraband,
XV. Freedom’s Early Dawn,
XVI. Compensated, Gradual, Emancipation,
XVII. Border-State Opposition,
XVIII. Freedom Proclaimed to All,
XIX. Historical Review,
XX. Lincoln’s Troubles and Temptations,
XXI. The Armed Negro
XXII. Freedom’s Sun still Rising,
XXIII. Thirteenth Amendment Passes the Senate
XXIV. Treason in the Northern Camp,
XXV. The “Fire in the Rear,”
XXVI. Thirteenth Amendment Defeated in House,
XXVII. Slavery Doomed at the Polls,
XXVIII. Freedom at last Assured,
XXIX. Lincoln’s Second Inauguration,
XXX. Collapse of Armed Conspiracy,
XXXI. Assassination!
XXXII. Turning Back the Hands,
XXXIII. What Next?
CHAPTER I.
A PRELIMINARY RETROSPECT.
AFRICAN SLAVERY IN AMERICA IN 1620–CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE COLONIES AND
ENGLAND IN 1699–GEORGIAN ABHORRENCE OF SLAVERY IN 1775–JEFFERSON AND
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE–SLAVERY A SOURCE OF WEAKNESS IN THE
REVOLUTIONARY WAR–THE SESSION BY VIRGINIA OF THE GREAT NORTH-WEST–THE
ORDINANCE OF 1784 AND ITS FAILURE–THE ORDINANCE OF 1787 AND ITS
ADOPTION–THE GERM OF SLAVERY AGITATION PLANTED–THE QUESTION IN THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION–SUBTERFUGES OF THE OLD CONSTITUTION–THE
BULLDOZING OF THE FATHERS–THE FIRST FEDERAL CONGRESS, 1789–CONDITIONS
OF TERRITORIAL CESSIONS FROM NORTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA, 1789-1802–THE
“COLONY OF LOUISIANA” (MISSISSIPPI VALLEY) PURCHASE OF 1803–THE TREATY
–CONDITIONS TOUCHING SLAVERY–THE COTTON INDUSTRY REVOLUTIONIZED–RAPID
POPULATING OF THE GREAT VALLEY, BY SLAVEHOLDERS AND SLAVES–JEFFERSON’S
APPARENT INCONSISTENCY EXPLAINED–THE AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE–
MULTIPLICATION OF SLAVES–LOUISIANA ADMITTED, 1812, AS A STATE–THE
TERRITORY OF MISSOURI–THE MISSOURI STRUGGLE (1818-1820) IN A NUTSHELL–
THE “MISSOURI COMPROMISE”
CHAPTER II.
PROTECTION AND FREE TRADE.
CHIEF CAUSE OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION–OUR INDEPENDENCE, INDUSTRIAL AS
WELL AS POLITICAL–FAILURE OF THE CONFEDERATION DUE TO LACK OF
INDUSTRIAL PROTECTION–MADISON’S TARIFF ACT OF 1789–HAMILTON’S TARIFF
OF 1790–SOUTHERN STATESMEN AND SOUTHERN VOTES FOR EARLY TARIFFS–
WASHINGTON AND JEFFERSON ON “PROTECTION “–EMBARGO OF 1807-8–WAR OF
1812-15–CONSEQUENT INCREASE OF AMERICAN MANUFACTURES–BROUGHAM’S PLAN–
RUIN THREATENED BY GLUT OF BRITISH GOODS–TARIFF ACT OF 1816–CALHOUN’S
DEFENSE OF “PROTECTION”–NEW ENGLAND AGAINST THAT ACT–THE SOUTH SECURES
ITS PASSAGE–THE PROTECTIVE TARIFF ACTS OF 1824 AND 1828–SUBSEQUENT
PROSPERITY IN FREE STATES–THE BLIGHT OF SLAVERY–BIRTH OF THE FREE
TRADE HERESY IN THE UNITED STATES IN 1797–SIMULTANEOUS BIRTH OF THE
HERESY OF STATE RIGHTS–KENTUCKY RESOLUTIONS OF 1798–VIRGINIA
RESOLUTIONS OF 1799–JEFFERSON’S REAL PURPOSE IN FORMULATING THEM–
ACTIVITY OF THE FEW SOUTHERN FREE TRADERS–PLAUSIBLE ARGUMENTS AGAINST
“PROTECTION”–INGENIOUS METHODS OF “FIRING THE SOUTHERN HEART”–SOUTHERN
DISCONTENT WITH TARIFF OF 1824–INFLAMMATORY UTTERANCES–ARMED
RESISTANCE URGED TO TARIFF OF 1828–WALTERBOROUGH ANTI-PROTECTIVE TARIFF
ADDRESS–FREE TRADE AND NULLIFICATION ADVOCACY APPEARS IN CONGRESS–THE
HAYNE-WEBSTER DEBATE–MODIFIED PROTECTIVE TARIFF OF 1832–SOUTH
CAROLINA’S NULLIFICATION ORDINANCE–HAYNE ELECTED GOVERNOR OF SOUTH
CAROLINA–HERESY OF “PARAMOUNT ALLEGIANCE TO THE STATE”–SOUTH CAROLINA
ARMS HERSELF–PRESIDENT JACKSON STAMPS OUT SOUTHERN TREASON–CLAY’S
COMPROMISE TARIFF OF 1833–CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL’S SOLEMN WARNING–
JACKSON’S FORECAST
CHAPTER III.
GROWTH OF THE SLAVERY QUESTION.
“EMANCIPATION” IN NORTHERN AND MIDDLE STATES–VIRGINIA’S UNSUCCESSFUL
EFFORT–CESSION OF THE FLORIDAS, 1819–BALANCE OF POWER–ADMISSION OF
ARKANSAS,1836–SOUTHERN SLAVE HOLDERS’ COLONIZATION OF TEXAS–TEXAN
INDEPENDENCE, 1837–CALHOUN’S SECOND AND GREAT CONSPIRACY–DETERMINATION
BEFORE 1839 TO SECEDE–PROTECTIVE TARIFF FEATURES AGAIN THE PRETEXT–
CALHOUN, IN 1841, ASKING THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT FOR AID–NORTHERN
OPPOSITION TO ACQUISITION OF TEXAS–RATIONALE OF THE LOUISIANA AND
FLORIDA ACQUISITIONS–PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SLAVERY LIMITS–WEBSTER
WARNS THE SOUTH–DISASTERS FOLLOWING COMPROMISE TARIFF OF 1833–
INDUSTRIAL RUIN OF 1840–ELECTION AND DEATH OF HARRISON–PROTECTIVE
TARIFF OF 1842–POLK’S CAMPAIGN OF 1844–CLAY’S BLUNDER AND POLK’S
CRIME–SOUTHERN TREACHERY–THE NORTH HOODWINKED–POLK ELECTED BY
ABOLITION VOTE–SLAVE-HOLDING TEXAS UNDER A SHAM “COMPROMISE”–WAR WITH
MEXICO–FREE-TRADE TARIFF OF 1846–WILMOT PROVISO–TREATY OF GUADALUPE–
HIDALGO–SLAVERY CONTEST IN CONGRESS STILL GROWING –COMPROMISE OF 1850
–A LULL–FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW–NEBRASKA BILL OF 1852-3–KANSAS-NEBRASKA
BILL, 1853-4, REPORTED–PARLIAMENTARY “JUGGLERY”–THE TRIUMPH OF
SLAVERY, IN CONGRESS–BLEEDING KANSAS–TOPEKA CONSTITUTION, 1855–KANSAS
LEGISLATURE DISPERSED, 1856, BY UNITED STATES TROOPS–LECOMPTON
CONSTITUTION OF 1857–FRAUDULENT TRIUMPH OF SLAVERY CONSTITUTION–ITS
SUBSEQUENT DEFEAT–ELECTION OF BUCHANAN, 1856–KANSAS ADMITTED–MISERY
AND RUIN CAUSED BY FREE-TRADE TARIFF OF 1846–FILLMORE AND BUCHANAN
TESTIFY
CHAPTER IV.
“POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY.”
DOUGLAS’S THEORY OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY–ILLINOIS LEGISLATIVE
ENDORSEMENT OF IT, 1851–DOUGLAS’S POSITION ON KANSAS–NEBRASKA BILL,
1854–DRED SCOTT DECISION–SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, REPUBLICAN CONVENTION
OF 1858–LINCOLN’S REMARKABLE SPEECH TO THE CONVENTION–PIERCE AND
BUCHANAN, TANEY AND DOUGLAS, CHARGED WITH PRO-SLAVERY CONSPIRACY–
DOUGLAS’S GREAT SPEECH (JULY 9TH, 1858) AT CHICAGO, IN REPLY–LINCOLN’S
POWERFUL REJOINDER, AT CHICAGO, (JULY 10TH)–THE ADMIXTURE OF RACES–THE
VOTING “UP OR DOWN” OF SLAVERY–THE “ARGUMENTS OF KINGS”–TRUTHS OF THE
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE–DOUGLAS’S BLOOMINGTON SPEECH (JULY 16TH),
OF VINDICATION AND ATTACK–HISTORY OF THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA STRUGGLE–THE
UNHOLY ALLIANCE–THE TWO POINTS AT ISSUE–THE “WHITE MAN’S” COUNTRY–
DOUGLAS’S PLEDGES TO WEBSTER AND CLAY–DOUGLAS’S SPRINGFIELD SPEECH,
JULY 17TH–THE IRRECONCILABLE PRINCIPLES AT ISSUE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND
HIMSELF–LINCOLN’S GREAT SPEECH, AT SPRINGFIELD, THE SAME EVENING–
DOUGLAS’S TRIUMPHANT MARCHES AND ENTRIES–THE “OFFICES SEEN IN HIS
ROUND, JOLLY, FRUITFUL FACE”–LINCOLN’S LEAN-FACED FIGHT, FOR PRINCIPLE
ALONE–DOUGLAS’S VARIOUS SPEECHES REVIEWED–THE REAL QUESTION BETWEEN
REPUBLICANS AND DOUGLAS MEN AND THE BUCHANAN MEN–JACKSON’S VETO OF THE
NATIONAL BANK CHARTER–DEMOCRATIC REVOLT AGAINST THE SUPREME COURT
DECISION–VINDICATION OF CLAY–“NEGRO EQUALITY”–MR. LINCOLN’S CHARGE,
OF “CONSPIRACY AND DECEPTION” TO “NATIONALIZE SLAVERY,” RENEWED–GREAT
JOINT DEBATE OF 1858, BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS, ARRANGED
CHAPTER V.
THE PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST OF 1860–
THE CRISIS APPROACHING.
HOW THE GREAT JOINT DEBATE OF 1858 RESULTED–THE “LITTLE GIANT” CAPTURES
THE SENATORSHIP–THE “BIG GIANT” CAPTURES THE PEOPLE–THE RISING
DEMOCRATIC STAR OF 1860–DOUGLAS’S GRAND TRIUMPHAL “PROGRESS” THROUGH
THE LAND–A POPULAR DEMOCRATIC IDOL–FRESH AGGRESSIONS OF THE SLAVE
POWER–NEW MEXICO’S SLAVE CODE OF 1859–HELPER’S “IMPENDING CRISIS”–
JOHN BROWN AND HARPER’S FERRY–THE MEETING OF CONGRESS, DECEMBER, 1859–
FORTY-FOUR BALLOTS FOR SPEAKER–DANGEROUSLY HEATED CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES
ON SLAVERY–THE DEMOCRATIC SPLIT–JEFFERSON DAVIS’S ARROGANT DOUBLE-
EDGED PRO-SLAVERY’ RESOLUTIONS–DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION,
CHARLESTON, S. C., 1860–DECLARATIONS OF THE MAJORITY AND MINORITY
REPORTS AND BUTLER’S RECOMMENDATION, WITH VOTES THEREON–ADOPTION OF THE
MINORITY (DOUGLAS) PLATFORM–SOUTHERN DELEGATES PROTEST AND “BOLT “–THE
BOLTING CONVENTION ADJOURNS TILL JUNE AT RICHMOND–THE REGULAR
CONVENTION BALLOTS AND ADJOURNS TO BALTIMORE–THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION–
“THE AFRICAN SLAVE-TRADER A TRUE MISSIONARY”–MORE BOLTING–DOUGLAS’S
NOMINATION FOR THE PRESIDENCY–THE BOLTING CONVENTION NOMINATES
BRECKINRIDGE–THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION AND PLATFORM–NOMINATIONS OF
LINCOLN, AND BELL–COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE FOUR RIVAL PARTY
PLATFORMS–THE OCTOBER ELECTIONS–THE SOUTH PREPARING GLEEFULLY FOR
SECESSION–GOVERNOR GIST’S TREASONABLE MESSAGE TO S. C. LEGISLATURE,
NOV. 5–OTHER SIMILAR UTTERANCES
CHAPTER VI.
THE GREAT CONSPIRACY MATURING.
LINCOLN’S ELECTION ASSURED–SOUTHERN EXULTATION–NORTHERN GLOOM–“FIRING
THE SOUTHERN HEART”–RESIGNATIONS OF FEDERAL OFFICERS AND SENATORS OF
SOUTH CAROLINA–GOVERNOR BROWN, OF GEORGIA, DEFIES “FEDERAL COERCION”–
ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS’S ARGUMENT AGAINST SECESSION–SOUTH CAROLINA
CALLS AN “UNCONDITIONAL SECESSION CONVENTION”–THE CALL SETS THE SOUTH
ABLAZE–PROCLAMATIONS OF THE GOVERNORS OF THE SOUTHERN STATES, FAVORING
REVOLT–LOYAL ADDRESS OF GOVERNOR MAGOFFIN OF KENTUCKY–THE CLAMOR OF
REVOLT SILENCES APPEALS FOR UNION–PRESIDENT BUCHANAN’S PITIFUL
WEAKNESS–CONSPIRATORS IN HIS CABINET–IMBECILITY OF HIS LAST ANNUAL
MESSAGE TO CONGRESS, DEC., 1860–ATTORNEY-GENERAL JEREMIAH BLACK’S
OPINION AGAINST COERCION–CONTRAST AFFORDED BY GENERAL JACKSON’S LOYAL
LOGIC–ENSUING DEBATES IN CONGRESS–SETTLED PURPOSE OF THE CONSPIRATORS
TO RESIST PLACATION–FUTILE LABORS OF UNION MEN IN CONGRESS FOR A
PEACEFUL SOLUTION–ABSURD DEMANDS OF THE IMPLACABLES–THE COMMERCIAL
NORTH ON ITS KNEES TO THE SOUTH–CONCILIATION ABJECTLY BEGGED FOR–
BRUTAL SNEERS AT THE NORTH, AND THREATS OF CLINGMAN, IVERSON, AND OTHER
SOUTHERN FIREEATERS, IN THE U. S. SENATE–THEIR BLUSTER MET BY STURDY
REPUBLICANS–BEN WADE GALLANTLY STANDS BY THE “VERDICT OF THE PEOPLE”–
PEACEFUL-SETTLEMENT PROPOSITIONS IN THE HOUSE–ADRIAN’S RESOLUTION, AND
VOTE–LOVEJOY’S COUNTER-RESOLUTION, AND VOTE–ADOPTION OF MORRIS’S UNION
RESOLUTION IN HOUSE
CHAPTER VII.
SECESSION ARMING.
THE SOUTH CAROLINA SECESSION CONVENTION MEETS–SPEECHES AT “SECESSION
HALL” OF PARKER, KEITT, INGLIS, BARNWELL, RHETT, AND GREGG, THE FIRST
ORDINANCE OF SECESSION–ITS JUBILANT ADOPTION AND RATIFICATION–
SECESSION STAMPEDE–A SOUTHERN CONGRESS PROPOSED–PICKENS’S PROCLAMATION
OF SOVEREIGN INDEPENDENCE–SOUTH CAROLINA CONGRESSMEN WITHDRAW–
DISSENSIONS IN BUCHANAN’S CABINET–COBB FLOYD, AND THOMPSON,
DEMAND WITHDRAWAL OF FEDERAL TROOPS–BUCHANAN’S REPLY–
SEIZURE OF FORTS, ETC.–THE “STAR OF THE WEST” FIRED ON–THE MAD
RUSH OF REBELLIOUS EVENTS–SOUTH CAROLINA DEMANDS THE SURRENDER OF FORT
SUMTER AND THE DEMAND REFUSED–SECRETARY HOLT’S LETTER TO CONSPIRING
SENATORS AND REBEL AGENT–TROOP’S AT THE NATIONAL CAPITAL–HOLT’S
REASONS THEREFOR–THE REVOLUTIONARY PROGRAMME–“ARMED OCCUPATION OF
WASHINGTON CITY”–LINCOLN’S INAUGURATION TO BE PREVENTED–THE CRUMBLING
AND DISSOLVING UNION–THE NORTH STANDS AGHAST–GREAT DEBATE IN CONGRESS,
1860-1861–CLINGMAN ON THE SOUTHERN TARIFF-GRIEVANCE–DEFIANCE OF BROWN
OF MISSISSIPPI–IVERSON’S BLOODY THREAT–WIGFALL’S UNSCRUPULOUS ADVICE–
HIS INSULTING DEMANDS–BAKER’S GLORIOUSLY ELOQUENT RESPONSE–ANDY JOHNSON
THREATENED WITH BULLETS–THE NORTH BULLIED–INSOLENT, IMPOSSIBLE TERMS OF
PEACE–LINCOLN’S SPEECHES EN ROUTE FOR WASHINGTON–SAVE ARRIVAL–“I’LL
TRY TO STEER HER THROUGH!”–THE SOUTH TAUNTS HIM–WIGFALL’S CHALLENGE
TO THE BLOODY ISSUE OF ARMS!
CHAPTER VIII.
THE REJECTED OLIVE BRANCH.
THE VARIOUS COMPROMISES OFFERED BY THE NORTH–“THE CRITTENDEN
COMPROMISE”–THE PEACE CONFERENCE–COMPROMISE PROPOSITIONS OF THE
SOUTHERN CONSPIRATORS–IRRECONCILABLE ATTITUDE OF THE PLOTTERS–HISTORY
OF THE COMPROMISE MEASURES IN CONGRESS–CLARK’S SUBSTITUTE TO CRITTENDEN
RESOLUTIONS IN THE SENATE–ANTHONY’S MORE THAN EQUITABLE PROPOSITIONS–
HIS AFFECTING APPEAL TO STONY HEARTS–THE CONSPIRACY DEVELOPING–SIX
SOUTHERN SENATORS REFUSE TO VOTE AGAINST THE CLARK SUBSTITUTE–ITS
CONSEQUENT ADOPTION, AND DEFEAT OF THE CRITTENDEN RESOLUTIONS–LYING
TELEGRAMS FROM CONSPIRING SENATORS TO FURTHER INFLAME REBELLION–
SAULSBURY’S AFTERSTATEMENT (1862) AS TO CAUSES OF FAILURE OF
CRITTENDEN’S COMPROMISE–LATHAM’S GRAPHIC PROOF OF THE CONSPIRATORS’
“DELIBERATE, WILFUL DESIGN” TO KILL COMPROMISE–ANDREW JOHNSON’S
EVIDENCE AS TO THEIR ULTIMATE OBJECT “PLACE AND EMOLUMENT FOR
THEMSELVES”–“THE POWERS OF GOVERNMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE FEW”–THE
CORWIN COMPROMISE RESOLUTION IN THE HOUSE–THE BURCH AMENDMENT–
KELLOGG’S PROPOSITION–THE CLEMENS SUBSTITUTE–PASSAGE BY THE HOUSE OF
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROHIBITING CONGRESSIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH
SLAVERY WHERE IT EXISTS–ITS ADOPTION BY THE SENATE–THE CLARK
SUBSTITUTE RECONSIDERED AND DEFEATED–PROPOSITIONS OF THE PEACE CONGRESS
LOST–REJECTION OF THE CRITTENDEN COMPROMISE
CHAPTER IX.
SLAVERY’S SETTING AND FREEDOM’S DAWN.
THE LAST NIGHT OF THE 36TH CONGRESS–MR. CRITTENDEN’S PATRIOTIC APPEAL–
“THE SADDEST SPECTACLE EVER SEEN”–IMPOTENCY OF THE BETRAYED AND FALLING
STATE–DOUGLAS’S POWERFUL PLEA–PATRIOTISM OF HIMSELF AND SUPPORTERS–
LOGAN SUMMARIZES THE COMPROMISES, AND APPEALS TO PATRIOTISM ABOVE PARTY
–STATESMANLIKE BREADTH OF DOUGLAS, BAKER AND SEWARD–HENRY WINTER DAVIS
ELOQUENTLY CONDENSES “THE SITUATION” IN A NUTSHELL–“THE FIRST FRUITS OF
RECONCILIATION” OFFERED BY THE NORTH, SCORNED BY THE CONSPIRATORS–
WIGFALL AGAIN SPEAKS AS THE MOUTHPIECE OF THE SOUTH–HE RAVES VIOLENTLY
AT THE NORTH–THE SOUTH REJECTS PEACE “EITHER IN THE UNION, OR OUT OF
IT”–THE DAWN OF FREEDOM APPEARS (MARCH 4TH, 1861)–INAUGURATION OF
PRESIDENT LINCOLN–LINCOLN’S FIRST INAUGURAL–GRANDEUR AND PATHOS OF HIS
PATRIOTIC UTTERANCES–HIS FIRST SLEEPLESS AND PRAYERFUL NIGHT AT THE
WHITE HOUSE–THE MORROW, AND ITS BITTER DISAPPOINTMENT–THE MESSAGE OF
“PEACE AND GOOD WILL” REGARDED AS A “CHALLENGE TO WAR”–PRESIDENT
LINCOLN’S CABINET
CHAPTER X.
THE WAR-DRUM–“ON TO WASHINGTON!”
REBEL COMMISSIONERS AT WASHINGTON ON A “MISSION”–SEWARD “SITS DOWN” ON
THEM–HE REFUSES TO RECOGNIZE “CONFEDERATE STATES”–THE REBEL
COMMISSIONERS “ACCEPT THE GAGE OF BATTLE THUS THROWN DOWN TO THEM”–
ATTEMPT TO PROVISION FORT SUMTER–THE REBELS NOTIFIED–THE FORT AND ITS
SURROUNDINGS–THE FIRST GUN OF SLAVERY FIRED–TERRIFIC BOMBARDMENT OF
THE FORT–THE GARRISON, STARVED AND BURNED OUT, EVACUATES, WITH ALL THE
HONORS OF WAR–THE SOUTH CRAZY WITH EXULTATION–TE DEUMS SUNG, SALUTES
FIRED, AND THE REBEL GOVERNMENT SERENADED–“ON TO WASHINGTON!” THE
REBEL CRY–“GRAY JACKETS OVER THE BORDER”–PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S FIRST
PROCLAMATION AND CALL FOR TROOPS–INSULTING RESPONSES OF GOVERNORS
BURTON, HICKS, LETCHER, ELLIS, MAGOFFIN, HARRIS, JACKSON AND RECTOR–
LOYAL RESPONSES FROM GOVERNORS OF THE FREE STATES–MAGICAL EFFECT OF THE
CALL UPON THE LOYAL NORTH–FEELING IN THE BORDER-STATES–PRESIDENT
LINCOLN’S CLEAR SUMMARY OF THE SITUATION AND ITS PHILOSOPHY–HIS PLAIN
DUTY–THE WAR POWER–THE NATIONAL CAPITAL CUT OFF–EVACUATION OF
HARPER’S FERRY–LOYAL TROOPS TO THE RESCUE–FIGHTING THEIR WAY THROUGH
BALTIMORE–REBEL THREATS–“SCOTT THE ARCH–TRAITOR, AND LINCOLN THE
BEAST”–BUTLER RELIEVES WASHINGTON–THE SECESSION OF VIRGINIA AND NORTH
CAROLINA–SHAMEFUL EVACUATION OF NORFOLK NAVY YARD–SEIZURE OF MINTS AND
ARSENALS–UNION AND REBEL FORCES CONCENTRATING–THE NATIONAL CAPITAL
FORTIFIED–BLOCKADE OF SOUTHERN PORTS–DEATH OF ELLSWORTH–BUTLER
CONFISCATES NEGRO PROPERTY AS “CONTRABAND OF WAR”–A REBEL YARN
CHAPTER XI.
THE CAUSES OF SECESSION.
ABOUNDING EVIDENCES OF CONSPIRACY–MACLAY’S UNPUBLI1SHED DIARY 1787-
1791–PIERCE BUTLER’S FIERCE DENUNCIATION OF THE TARIFF–SOUTH CAROLINA
WILL “LIVE FREE OR DIE GLORIOUS”–JACKSON’S LETTER TO CRAWFORD, ON
TARIFF AND SLAVERY–BENTON’S TESTIMONY–HENRY CLAY’S EVIDENCE–NATHAN
APPLETON’S–A TREASONABLE CAUCUS OF SOUTHERN CONGRESSMEN–ALEXANDER H.
STEPHEN’S EVIDENCE ON THE CAUSES OF SECESSION–WIGFALL’S ADMISSIONS–THE
ONE “REGRETTED” CLAUSE IN THE CONSTITUTION PRECLUDING MONARCHIAL STATES
–ADMISSIONS OF REBEL COMMISSIONERS TO WASHINGTON–ADMISSIONS IN ADDRESS
OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO THE SLAVE-HOLDERS–JEFFERSON DAVIS’S STATEMENT IN
SPECIAL MESSAGE OF APRIL 29, 1861–DECLARATIONS OF REBEL COMMISSIONERS,
TO LORD JOHN RUSSELL–HIGH TARIFF AND “NOT SLAVERY” THE PRINCIPAL CAUSE
–PERSONAL LIBERTY BILLS–PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S DECLARATION OF THE
UNDERLYING CAUSE OF REBELLION–A WAR UPON LABOR AND THE RIGHTS OF THE
PEOPLE–ANDREW JOHNSON ON THE “DELIBERATE DESIGN” FOR A “CHANGE OF
GOVERNMENT”–“TIRED OF FREE GOVERNMENT”–DOUGLAS ON THE “ENORMOUS
CONSPIRACY”–THE REBEL PLOT TO SEIZE THE CAPITOL, AND HOLD IT–
MCDOUGALL’S GRAPHIC EXPOSURE OF THE TREASONABLE CONSPIRACY–YANCEY’S
FAMOUS “SLAUGHTER” LETTER–JEFFERSON DAVIS’S STANDARD OF REVOLT, RAISED
IN 1858–LAMAR’S LETTER TO JEFF. DAVIS (186O)–CAUCUS OF TREASON, AT
WASHINGTON–EVANS’S DISCLOSURES OF THE CAUCUS PROGRAMME OF SECESSION–
CORROBORATING TESTIMONY–YULEE’S CAPTURED LETTER–CAUCUS RESOLUTIONS IN
FULL
CHAPTER XII.
COPPERHEADISM VS. UNION DEMOCRACY.
NORTHERN COMPLICITY WITH TREASON–MAYOR FERNANDO WOOD RECOMMENDS
SECESSION OF NEW YORK CITY–THE REBEL JUNTA AT WASHINGTON INSPIRES HIM–
HE OBEYS ORDERS, BUT SHAKES AT THE KNEES–KEITT BRAGS OF THE “MILLIONS
OF DEMOCRATS IN THE NORTH,” FURNISHING A “WALL OF FIRE” AGAINST
COERCION–ATTEMPTED REBEL–SEDUCTION OF NEW JERSEY–THE PRICE-BURNETT
CORRESPONDENCE–SECESSION RESOLUTIONS OF THE PHILADELPHIA DEMOCRACY AT
NATIONAL HALL–LANE OF OREGON “SERVES NOTICE” OF “WAR ENOUGH AT HOME”
FOR REPUBLICANS–“NORTHERN DEMOCRATS NEED NOT CROSS THE BORDER TO FIND
AN ENEMY”–EX-PRESIDENT PIERCE’S CAPTURED TREASONABLE LETTER TO JEFF.
DAVIS–THE “FIGHTING” TO BE “WITHIN OUR OWN BORDERS, IN OUR OWN
STREETS”–ATTITUDE OF DOUGLAS, AND THE DOUGLAS DEMOCRACY, AFTER SUMTER–
DOUGLAS CALLS ON MR. LINCOLN AT THE WHITE HOUSE–HE PATRIOTICALLY
SUSTAINS THE UNION–HE RALLIES THE WHOLE NORTH TO STAND BY THE FLAG–
THERE CAN BE “NO NEUTRALS IN THIS WAR; ONLY PATRIOTS AND TRAITORS”–
LAMENTED DEATH OF “THE LITTLE GIANT”–TRIBUTES OF TRUMBULL AND MCDOUGALL
TO HIS MEMORY–LOGAN’S ATTITUDE AT THIS TIME, AND HIS RELATIONS TO
DOUGLAS–THEIR LAST PRIVATE INTERVIEW–DOUGLAS’S INTENTION TO “JOIN THE
ARMY AND FIGHT”–HIS LAST EFFORTS IN CONGRESS–“CONCILIATION,” BEFORE
SUMTER–“NO HALF-WAY GROUND” AFTER IT
CHAPTER XIII.
THE STORM OF BATTLE.
THE MILITARY SITUATION–THE GREAT UPRISING–POSITIONS AND NUMBERS OF THE
UNION AND REBEL ARMIES–JOHNSTON EVACUATES HARPER’S FERRY, AND RETREATS
UPON WINCHESTER–PATTERSON’S EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT–HE DISOBEYS GENERAL
SCOTT’S ORDERS TO “ATTACK AND WHIP THE ENEMY”–JOHNSTON CONSEQUENTLY
FREE TO REINFORCE BEAUREGARD AT MANASSAS–FITZ JOHN PORTER’S
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES–MCDOWELL’S ADVANCE UPON
BEAUREGARD–PRELIMINARY BATTLE AT BLACKBURN’S FORD–JUNCTION OF JOHNSTON
WITH BEAUREGARD–REBEL PLANS OF ADVANCE AND ATTACK–CHANGE IN MCDOWELL’S
PLANS–GREAT PITCHED-BATTLE OF BULL RUN, OR MANASSAS, INCLUDING THE
SECOND BATTLE AT BLACKBURN’S FORD–VICTORY, AT FIRST, WITH MCDOWELL–
THE CHECK–THE LEISURELY RETREAT–THE PANIC AT, AND NEAR, THE NATIONAL
CAPITAL–THE WAR FULLY INAUGURATED
CHAPTER XIV.
THE COLORED CONTRABAND.
THE KNELL OF SLAVERY–THE “IMPLIED POWERS” OF CONGRESS IN THE
CONSTITUTION–PATRICK HENRY’S PREDICTION–JOHN QUINCY ADAMS’S PROPHECY–
JOHN SHERMAN’S NON-INTERFERENCE–WITH-SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS–JOHN Q. ADAMS
ON EMANCIPATION–POWERS OF CONGRESS AND MILITARY COMMANDERS–GENERAL
MCCLELLAN’S WEST VIRGINIA PROCLAMATION OF NONINTERFERENCE WITH SLAVES–
GENERAL BUTLER’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH GENERAL SCOTT AND SECRETARY
CAMERON–CAMERON’S REPLY–MILITARY TENDERNESS FOR THE DOOMED
INSTITUTION–CONGRESS, AFTER BULL RUN–CONFISCATION, AND EMANCIPATION,
OF SLAVES USED TO AID REBELLION–RINGING WORDS OF TRUMBULL, WILSON,
MCDOUGALL, AND TEN EYCK, IN THE SENATE–ROMAN COURAGE OF THE HOUSE–
CRITTENDEN’S STATEMENTS–WAR RESOLUTIONS–BRECKINRIDGE’S TREASONABLE
SPEECH UPON “THE SANCTITY” OF THE CONSTITUTION–BAKER’S GLORIOUS REPLY–
HIS MATCHLESS APOSTROPHE TO FREEDOM–HIS SELF-SACRIFICING DEVOTION AND
HEROIC DEATH AT BALL’S BLUFF
CHAPTER XV.
FREEDOM’S EARLY DAWN.
THADDEUS STEVENS’S STARTLING UTTERANCES–CAPTURED SLAVES MUST BE FREE
FOREVER–“NO TRUCES WITH THE REBELS”–HIS PROPHECY AS TO ARMING SLAVES
TO FIGHT REBELLION–SECRETARY CAMERON’S LETTER TOUCHING FUGITIVES FROM
SERVICE–GENERAL FREMONT’S PROCLAMATION OF CONFISCATION AND
EMANCIPATION–ITS EFFECT NORTH AND SOUTH–JEFF. THOMPSON’S SAVAGE
PROCLAMATION OF RETALIATION–PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S EMBARRASSMENT–HE
PRIVATELY SUGGESTS TO FREMONT CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS–FREMONT DEFENDS HIS
COURSE–“STRONG AND VIGOROUS MEASURES NECESSARY TO SUCCESS”–THE
PRESIDENT PUBLICLY ORDERS THE MODIFICATION OF FREMONT’S PROCLAMATION–
THE MILITARY MIND GREATLY CONFUSED–GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE
WAR DEPARTMENT–GENERAL T. W. SHERMAN’S PORT ROYAL PROCLAMATION–GENERAL
WOOL’S SPECIAL AND GENERAL ORDERS AS TO EMPLOYMENT OF “CONTRABANDS”–
GENERAL DIX’S PROCLAMATION FOR REPULSION OF FUGITIVE SLAVES FROM HIS
LINES–HALLECK ORDERS EXPULSION AS WELL AS REPULSION–HIS LETTER OF
EXPLANATION TO FRANK P. BLAIR–SEWARD’S LETTER TO MCCLELLAN ON
“CONTRABANDS” IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA
CHAPTER XVI.
“COMPENSATED GRADUAL EMANCIPATION.”
PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S ATTITUDE–SACRIFICES OF PATRIOTISM–ASSERTION BY
CONGRESS OF ITS EMANCIPATING WAR-POWERS–THE CAUSE OF FREEDOM SLOWLY
“MARCHING ON”–ABANDONED SLAVES OF BEAUFORT, S. C.–SECRETARY CAMERON
FAVORS ARMING THEM–THE PRESIDENT’S CAUTIOUS ADVANCES–HE MODIFIES
CAMERON’S REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE SUBJECT–THE MILITARY MIND, ALL “AT
SEA”–COMMANDERS GUIDED BY POLITICAL BIAS–HALLECK’S ST. LOUIS
PROCLAMATION, 1862–BUELL’S LETTER–CONTRARY ACTION OF DIX AND HALLECK,
BUELL AND HOOKER, FREMONT AND DOUBLEDAY–LINCOLN’S MIDDLE COURSE–HE
PROPOSES TO CONGRESS, COMPENSATED GRADUAL EMANCIPATION–INTERVIEW
BETWEEN MR. LINCOLN AND THE BORDER-STATE REPRESENTATIVES–INTERESTING
REMARKS OF THE PRESIDENT–MR. LINCOLN BETWEEN TWO FIRES–VIEWS, ON
COMPENSATED EMANCIPATION, OF MESSRS. NOELL, CRISFIELD, MENZIES,
WICKLIFFE, AND HALL–ROSCOE CONKLING’S JOINT RESOLUTION, ADOPTED BY BOTH
HOUSES–HOOKER’S “CAMP BAKER” ORDER–MARYLAND FUGITIVE–SLAVE HUNTERS
PERMITTED TO SEARCH THE CAMP–UNION SOLDIERS ENRAGED–SICKLES ORDERS THE
SLAVE HUNTERS OFF–DOUBLEDAY’S DISPATCH AS TO “ALL NEGROES” ENTERING HIS
LINES–TO BE “TREATED AS PERSONS, NOT AS CHATTELS”
CHAPTER XVII.
BORDER–STATE OPPOSITION.
APPOINTMENT OF A SELECT COMMITTEE, IN HOUSE, ON GRADUAL EMANCIPATION–
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA EMANCIPATION ACT–THE PRESIDENT’S SPECIAL MESSAGE
OF APPROVAL–GEN. HUNTER’S EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION–PRESIDENT LINCOLN
PROMPTLY RESCINDS IT BY PROCLAMATION–HIS SOLEMN AND IMPASSIONED APPEAL
TO PEOPLE OF THE BORDER-STATES–HE BEGS THEIR CONSIDERATION OF GRADUAL
COMPENSATED EMANCIPATION–GEN. WILLIAMS’S ORDER EXPELLING RUNAWAY
NEGROES FROM CAMP, AT BATON ROUGE–LIEUT.-COL. ANTHONY’S ORDER EXCLUDING
FUGITIVE-SLAVE HUNTERS FROM “CAMP ETHERIDGE”–GEN. MCCLELLAN’S FAMOUS
“HARRISON’S LANDING LETTER” TO THE PRESIDENT–“FORCIBLE ABOLITION OF
SLAVERY” AND “A CIVIL AND MILITARY POLICY”–SLAVEHOLDING BORDER-STATE
SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES AT THE WHITE HOUSE–PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S
ADDRESS TO THEM, JULY, 1862–GRADUAL EMANCIPATION THE THEME–
COMPENSATION AND COLONIZATION TO ACCOMPANY IT–THE ABOLITION PRESSURE
UPON THE PRESIDENT INCREASING–HE BEGS THE BORDER STATESMEN TO RELIEVE
HIM AND THE COUNTRY IN ITS PERIL–THEIR VARIOUS RESPONSES
CHAPTER XVIII.
FREEDOM PROCLAIMED TO ALL.
PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S PERSONAL APPEAL TO COLORED FREEMEN–HE BEGS THEM TO
HELP IN THE COLONIZATION OF THEIR RACE–PROPOSED AFRICAN COLONY IN
CENTRAL AMERICA–EXECUTIVE ORDER OF JULY 2, 1862–EMPLOYMENT OF NEGROES
FOR MILITARY PURPOSES OF THE UNION–JEFF. DAVIS RETALIATES–MCCLELLAN
PROMULGATES THE EXECUTIVE ORDER WITH ADDENDA OF HIS OWN–HORACE
GREELEY’S LETTER TO PRESIDENT LINCOLN–THE LATTER ACCUSED OF
“SUBSERVIENCY” TO THE SLAVE HOLDERS–AN “UNGRUDGING EXECUTION OF THE
CONFISCATION ACT” DEMANDED–MR. LINCOLN’S FAMOUS REPLY–HIS “PARAMOUNT
OBJECT, TO SAVE THE UNION, AND NOT EITHER TO SAVE OR DESTROY SLAVERY”–
VISIT TO THE WHITE HOUSE OF A RELIGIOUS DEPUTATION FROM CHICAGO–
MEMORIAL ASKING FOR IMMEDIATE EMANCIPATION, BY PROCLAMATION–THE
PRESIDENT’S REPLY TO THE DEPUTATION–“THE POPE’S BULL AGAINST THE
COMET”–VARIOUS OBJECTIONS STATED TENTATIVELY–“A PROCLAMATION OF
LIBERTY TO THE SLAVES” IS “UNDER ADVISEMENT”–THE PROCLAMATION OF
EMANCIPATION ISSUED–ITS POPULAR RECEPTION–MEETING OF LOYAL GOVERNORS
AT ALTOONA–THEIR STIRRING ADDRESS–HOMAGE TO OUR SOLDIERS–PLEDGED
SUPPORT FOR VIGOROUS PROSECUTION OF THE WAR TO TRIUMPHANT END–PRESIDENT
LINCOLN’S HISTORICAL RESUME AND DEFENSE OF EMANCIPATION–HE SUGGESTS TO
CONGRESS, PAYMENT FOR SLAVES AT ONCE EMANCIPATED BY BORDER STATES–
ACTION OF THE HOUSE, ON RESOLUTIONS SEVERALLY REPREHENDING AND ENDORSING
THE PROCLAMATION–SUPPLEMENTAL EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION OF JAN. 1, 1863
CHAPTER XIX.
HISTORICAL REVIEW.
COURSE OF SOUTHERN OLIGARCHS THROUGHOUT–THEIR EVERLASTING GREED AND
RAPACITY–BROKEN COVENANTS AND AGGRESSIVE METHODS–THEIR UNIFORM GAINS
UNTIL 1861–UPS AND DOWNS OF THE TARIFF–FREE TRADE, SLAVERY, STATES-
RIGHTS, SECESSION, ALL PARTS OF ONE CONSPIRACY–“INDEPENDENCE” THE FIRST
OBJECT OF THE WAR–DREAMS, AMBITIONS, AND PLANS OF THE CONSPIRATORS–
LINCOLN’S FAITH IN NORTHERN NUMBERS AND ENDURANCE–“RIGHT MAKES MIGHT”–
THE SOUTH SOLIDLY-CEMENTED BY BLOOD–THE 37TH CONGRESS–ITS WAR
MEASURES–PAVING THE WAY TO DOWNFALL OF SLAVERY AND REBELLION
CHAPTER XX.
LINCOLN’S TROUBLES AND TEMPTATIONS.
INTERFERENCE WITH SLAVERY FORCED BY THE WAR–EDWARD EVERETT’S OPINION–
BORDER-STATES DISTRUST OF LINCOLN–IMPOSSIBILITY OF SATISFYING THEIR
REPRESENTATIVES–THEIR JEALOUS SUSPICIONS AND CONGRESSIONAL ACTION–
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE OF KINDLY WARNING–STORMY CONTENTION IN CONGRESS–
CRITTENDEN’S ARGUMENT ON “PROPERTY” IN MAN–BORDER–STATES “BID” FOR
MR. LINCOLN–THE “NICHE IN THE TEMPLE OF FAME” OFFERED HIM–LOVEJOY’S
ELOQUENT COUNTERBLAST–SUMNER (JUNE, 1862,) ON LINCOLN AND EMANCIPATION
–THE PRESIDENT HARRIED AND WORRIED–SNUBBED BY BORDER STATESMEN–
MCCLELLAN’S THREAT–ARMY-MISMANAGEMENT–ARMING THE BLACKS–HOW THE
EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION WAS WRITTEN–CABINET SUGGESTIONS–MILITARY
SITUATION–REBEL ADVANCE NORTHWARD–LINCOLN, AND THE BREAST-WORKS–
WASHINGTON AND BALTIMORE MENACED–ANTIETAM, AND THE FIAT OF FREEDOM–
BORDER-STATE DENUNCIATION–KNIGHTS OF THE GOLDEN CIRCLE, ETC.
CHAPTER XXI.
THE ARMED–NEGRO.
“WHO WOULD BE FREE, HIMSELF MUST STRIKE THE BLOW!”–THE COLORED TROOPS
AT PORT HUDSON–THEIR HEROISM–STIRRING INCIDENTS–AT MILLIKEN’S BEND–
AT FORT WAGNER–AT PETERSBURG AND ABOUT RICHMOND–THE REBEL CONSPIRATORS
FURIOUS–OUTLAWRY OF GENERAL BUTLER, ETC.–JEFFERSON DAVIS’S MESSAGE TO
THE REBEL CONGRESS–ATROCIOUS, COLD-BLOODED RESOLUTIONS OF THAT BODY–
DEATH OR SLAVERY TO THE ARMED FREEMAN–PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S RETALIATORY
ORDER–THE BLOODY BUTCHERY AT FORT PILLOW–SAVAGE MALIGNITY OF THE REBELS–
A COMMON ERROR, CORRECTED–ARMING OF NEGROES COMMENCED BY THE REBELS–
SIMILAR SCHEME OF A REVOLUTIONARY HERO, IN 1778–REBEL CONGRESSIONAL ACT,
CONSCRIPTING NEGROES–JEFFERSON DAVIS’S POSITION–GENERAL LEE’S LETTER
TO BARKSDALE ON THE SUBJECT
CHAPTER XXII.
FREEDOM’S SUN STILL RISING.
DEFINITE CONGRESSIONAL ACTION, ON EMANCIPATION, GERMINATING–GLORIOUS
NEWS FROM THE WEST AND EAST–FALL OF VICKSBURG–GETTYSBURG–LINCOLN’S
GETTYSBURG ORATION–THE DRAFT–THE REBEL “FIRE IN THE REAR”–DRAFT RIOTS
IN NEW YORK–LINCOLN’S LETTER, AUGUST, 1863, ON THE SITUATION–
CHATTANOOGA–THE CHEERING FALL-ELECTIONS–VALLANDIGHAM’S DEFEAT–
EMANCIPATION AS A “POLITICAL” MEASURE–“THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT” REPORTED
IN THE SENATE–THADDEUS STEVENS’S RESOLUTIONS, AND TEST VOTE IN THE
HOUSE–LOVEJOY’S DEATH–ELOQUENT TRIBUTES OF ARNOLD, WASHBURNE,
GRINNELL, THADDEUS STEVENS, AND SUMNER
CHAPTER XXIII.
“THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT” IN THE SENATE.
GREAT DEBATE IN THE U. S. SENATE, ON EMANCIPATION–THE WHOLE VILLANOUS
HISTORY OF SLAVERY, LAID BARE–SPEECHES OF TRUMBULL, HENRY WILSON,
HARLAN, SHERMAN, CLARK, HALL, HENDERSON, SUMNER, REVERDY JOHNSON,
MCDOUGALL, SAULSBURY, GARRETT DAVIS, POWELL, AND HENDRICKS–BRILLIANT
ARRAIGNMENT AND DEFENSE OF “THE INSTITUTION”–U. S. GRANT, NOW “GENERAL
IN CHIEF”–HIS PLANS PERFECTED, HE GOES TO THE VIRGINIA FRONT–MR.
LINCOLN’S SOLICITUDE FOR THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT–BORDER–STATE
OBSTRUCTIVE MOTIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND SUBSTITUTES, ALL VOTED DOWN–MR.
LINCOLN’S LETTER TO HODGES, OF KENTUCKY, REVIEWING EMANCIPATION AS A WAR
MEASURE–THE DECISIVE FIELD-DAY (APRIL 8, 1864)–THE DEBATE ABLY CLOSED
–THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PASSED BY THE SENATE
CHAPTER XXIV.
TREASON IN THE NORTHERN CAMPS.
EMANCIPATION TEST–VOTES IN THE HOUSE–ARNOLD’S RESOLUTION–BLUE
PROSPECTS FOR THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT–LINCOLN’S ANXIETY–CONGRESSIONAL
COPPERHEADS–THINLY-DISGUISED TREASON–SPEECHES OF VOORHEES, WASHBURNE,
AND KELLEY–SPRINGFIELD COPPERHEAD PEACE-CONVENTION–“THE UNION AS IT
WAS”–PEACE ON ANY TERMS–VALLANDIGHAM’S LIEUTENANTS–ATTITUDE OF COX,
DAVIS, SAULSBURY, WOOD, LONG, ALLEN, HOLMAN, AND OTHERS–NORTHERN
ENCOURAGEMENT TO REBELS–CONSEQUENT SECOND INVASION, OF THE NORTH, BY
LEE–500,000 TREASONABLE NORTHERN “SONS OF LIBERTY”–RITUAL AND OATHS OF
THE “K. G. C.” AND “O. A. K.”–COPPERHEAD EFFORTS TO SPLIT THE NORTH
AND WEST, ON TARIFF-ISSUES–SPALDING AND THAD. STEVENS DENOUNCE
TREASON-BREEDING COPPERHEADS
CHAPTER XXV.
THE “FIRE IN THE REAR.”
THE REBEL MANDATE–“AGITATE THE NORTH!”–OBEDIENT COPPERHEADS–THEIR
DENUNCIATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT–BROOKS, FERNANDO WOOD, AND WHITE, ON
THE “FOLLY” OF THE WAR FOR THE UNION–EDGERTON’S PEACE RESOLUTIONS–
ECKLEY, ON COPPERHEAD MALIGNITY–ALEXANDER LONG GOES “A BOW-SHOT BEYOND
THEM ALL”–HE PROPOSES THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SOUTHERN INDEPENDENCE–
GARFIELD ELOQUENTLY DENOUNCES LONG’S TREASON–LONG DEFIANTLY REITERATES
IT–SPEAKER COLFAX OFFERS A RESOLUTION TO EXPEL LONG–COX AND JULIAN’S
VERBAL DUEL–HARRIS’S TREASONABLE BID FOR EXPULSION–EXTRAORDINARY SCENE
IN THE HOUSE–FERNANDO WOOD’S BID–HE SUBSEQUENTLY “WEAKENS”–EXCITING
DEBATE–LONG AND HARRIS VOTED “UNWORTHY MEMBERS” OF THE HOUSE
CHAPTER XXVI.
“THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT” DEFEATED IN THE HOUSE.
GLANCE AT THE MILITARY SITUATION–“BEGINNING OF THE END”–THE
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT–HOLMAN “OBJECTS” TO “SECOND READING”–KELLOGG
SCORES THE COPPERHEAD-DEMOCRACY–CONTINUOUS “FIRE IN THE REAR” IN BOTH
HOUSES–THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT ATTACKED–THE ADMINISTRATION ATTACKED–
THE TARIFF ATTACKED–SPEECHES OF GARRETT DAVIS, AND COX–PEACE-
RESOLUTIONS OF LAZEAR AND DAVIS–GRINNELL AND STEVENS, SCORE COX AND
WOOD–HENDRICKS ON THE DRAFT–“ON” TO RICHMOND AND ATLANTA–VIOLENT
DIATRIBES OF WOOD, AND HOLMAN–FARNSWORTH’S REPLY TO ROSS, PRUYN, AND
OTHERS–ARNOLD, ON THE ETHICS OF SLAVERY–INGERSOLL’S ELOQUENT BURST–
RANDALL, ROLLINS, AND PENDLETON, CLOSING THE DEBATE–THE THIRTEENTH
AMENDMENT DEFEATED–ASHLEY’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER–CONGRESS ADJOURNS
CHAPTER XXVII.
SLAVERY DOOMED AT THE POLLS.
THE ISSUE BETWEEN FREEDOM AND SLAVERY–MR. LINCOLN’S RENOMINATION–
ENDORSED, AT ALL POINTS, BY HIS PARTY–HIS FAITH IN THE PEOPLE–HORATIO
SEYMOUR’S COPPERHEAD DECLARATIONS–THE NATIONAL DEMOCRACY DECLARE THE
WAR “A FAILURE”–THEIR COPPERHEAD PLATFORM, AND UNION CANDIDATE–
MCCLELLAN THEIR NOMINEE–VICTORIES AT ATLANTA AND MOBILE–FREMONT’S
THIRD PARTY–SUCCESSES OF GRANT AND SHERIDAN–DEATH OF CHIEF-JUSTICE
TANEY–MARYLAND BECOMES “FREE”–MORE UNION VICTORIES–REPUBLICAN “TIDAL-
WAVE” SUCCESS–LINCOLN RE-ELECTED–HIS SERENADE-SPEECHES–AMAZING
CONGRESSIONAL-RETURNS–THE DEATH OF SLAVERY INSURED–IT BECOMES SIMPLY A
MATTER OF TIME
CHAPTER XXVIII.
FREEDOM AT LAST ASSURED.
THE WINTER OF 1864–THE MILITARY SITUATION–THE “MARCH TO THE SEA”–
THOMAS AND HOOD–LOGAN’S INTERVIEW WITH THE PRESIDENT–VICTORIES OF
NASHVILLE AND SAVANNAH–MR. LINCOLN’S MESSAGE TO CONGRESS, ON THIRTEENTH
AMENDMENT–CONGRESSIONAL RECESS–PRESIDENT LINCOLN STILL WORKING WITH,
THE BORDER-STATE REPRESENTATIVES–ROLLINS’S INTERVIEW WITH HIM–THE
THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT UP, IN THE HOUSE, AGAIN–VIGOROUS AND ELOQUENT
DEBATE–SPEECHES OF COX, BROOKS, VOORHEES, MALLORY, HOLMAN, WOOD, AND
PENDLETON, AGAINST THE AMENDMENT–SPEECHES OF CRESWELL, SCOFIELD,
ROLLINS, GARFIELD, AND STEVENS, FOR IT–RECONSIDERATION OF ADVERSE VOTE
–THE AMENDMENT ADOPTED–EXCITING SCENE IN THE HOUSE–THE GRAND SALUTE TO
LIBERTY–SERENADE TO MR. LINCOLN–“THIS ENDS THE JOB”
CHAPTER XXIX.
LINCOLN’S SECOND INAUGURATION.
REBELLION ON ITS “LAST LEGS”–PEACE COMMISSIONS AND PROPOSITIONS–
EFFORTS OF GREELEY, JACQUES, GILMORE, AND BLAIR–LINCOLN’S ADVANCES–
JEFFERSON DAVIS’S DEFIANT MESSAGE TO HIM–THE PRESIDENT AND THE REBEL
COMMISSIONERS AT HAMPTON ROADS–VARIOUS ACCOUNTS, OF THE SECRET
CONFERENCE, BY PARTICIPANTS THE PROPOSITIONS ON BOTH SIDES–FAILURE–THE
MILITARY OUTLOOK–THE REBEL CAUSE DESPERATE–REBEL DESERTIONS–
“MILITARY” PEACE-CONVENTION PROPOSED BY REBELS–DECLINED–CORRESPONDENCE
BETWEEN GRANT AND LEE, ETC.–THE SECOND INAUGURATION OF PRESIDENT
LINCOLN–A STRANGE OMEN–HIS IMMORTAL SECOND-INAUGURAL
CHAPTER XXX.
COLLAPSE OF THE ARMED CONSPIRACY.
PROGRESS OF THE WAR–CAMPAIGN OF THE CAROLINAS, 1865–MEETING, AT CITY
POINT, OF LINCOLN, GRANT, AND SHERMAN–SHERMAN’S ACCOUNT OF WHAT PASSED
–GRANT NOW FEELS “LIKE ENDING THE MATTER”–THE BATTLES OF DINWIDDIE
COURT HOUSE AND FIVE FORKS–UNION ASSAULT ON THE PETERSBURG WORKS–UNION
VICTORY EVERYWHERE–PETERSBURG AND RICHMOND EVACUATED–LEE’S RETREAT CUT
OFF BATTLE OF SAILOR’S CREEK–GRANT ASKS LEE TO SURRENDER–LEE DELAYS–
SHERIDAN CATCHES HIM, AND HIS ARMY, IN A TRAP–THE REBELS SURRENDER, AT
APPOMATTOX–GRANT’S GENEROUS AND MAGNANIMOUS TERMS–THE STARVING REBELS
FED WITH UNION RATIONS–SURRENDER OF JOHNSTON’S ARMY–OTHER REBEL FORCES
SURRENDER–THE REBELLION STAMPED OUT–CAPTURE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS–THE
REBELS “YIELD EVERYTHING THEY HAD FOUGHT FOR”–THEY CRAVE PARDON AND
OBLIVION FOR THEIR OFFENCES
CHAPTER XXXI.
ASSASSINATION!
PRESIDENT LINCOLN AT RICHMOND–HIS RECEPTIONS AT JEFFERSON DAVIS’S
MANSION–RETURN TO WASHINGTON–THE NEWS OF LEE’S SURRENDER–LINCOLN’S
LAST PUBLIC SPEECH–HIS THEME, “RECONSTRUCTION”–GRANT ARRIVES AT THE
NATIONAL CAPITAL–PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S LAST CABINET MEETING–HIS FOND
HOPES OF THE FUTURE–AN UNHEEDED PRESENTIMENT–AT FORD’S THEATRE–THE
LAST ACCLAMATION OF THE PEOPLE–THE PISTOL SHOT THAT HORRIFIED THE
WORLD–SCULKING, RED HANDED TREASON–THE ASSASSINATION PLOT-COMPLICITY
OF THE REBEL AUTHORITIES, BELIEVED BY THE BEST INFORMED MEN–TESTIMONY
AS TO THREE ATTEMPTS TO KILL LINCOLN–THE CHIEF REBEL-CONSPIRATORS
“RECEIVE PROPOSITIONS TO ASSASSINATE”–A NATION’S WRATH–ANDREW
JOHNSON’S VEHEMENT ASSEVERATIONS–“TREASON MUST BE MADE ODIOUS”–
RECONSTRUCTION
CHAPTER XXXII.
TURNING BACK THE HANDS
“RECONSTRUCTION” OF THE SOUTH–MEMORIES OF THE WAR, DYING OUT–THE
FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH AMENDMENTS–THE SOUTHERN STATES REHABILITATED
BY ACCEPTANCE OF AMENDMENTS, ETC.–REMOVAL OF REBEL DISABILITIES–
CLEMENCY OF THE CONQUERORS–THE OLD CONSPIRATORS HATCH A NEW CONSPIRACY
–THE “LOST CAUSE” TO BE REGAINED–THE MISSISSIPPI SHOT-GUN PLAN–FRAUD,
BARBARITY, AND MURDERS, EFFECT THE PURPOSE–THE “SOUTH” CEMENTED “SOLID”
BY BLOOD–PEONAGE REPLACES SLAVERY–THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1876–
THE TILDEN “BARREL,” AND “CIPHER DISPATCHES”–THE “FRAUD” CRY–THE OLD
LEADERS DICTATE THE DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE OF 1880–THEIR FREE-
TRADE ISSUE TO THE FRONT AGAIN–SUCCESSIVE DEMOCRATIC EFFORTS TO FORCE
FREE-TRADE THROUGH THE HOUSE, SINCE REBELLION–EFFECT OF SUCH EFFORTS–
REPUBLICAN MODIFICATIONS OF THEIR OWN PROTECTIVE TARIFF–THE “SOLID
SOUTH” SUCCEEDS, AT LAST, IN “ELECTING” ITS CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT–IS
THIS STILL A REPUBLIC, OR IS IT AN OLIGARCHY?
CHAPTER XXXIII.
WHAT NEXT?
THE PRESENT OUTLOOK–COMMERCIAL PROSPECTS, BRIGHT–WHAT THE PEOPLE OF
THE NORTHERN AND WESTERN STATES SEE–WHAT IS A “REPUBLICAN FORM OF
GOVERNMENT?”–WHAT DID THE FATHERS MEAN BY IT–THE REASON FOR THE
GUARANTEE IN THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTION–PURPOSES OF “THE PEOPLE” IN
CREATING THIS REPUBLIC–THE “SOLID-SOUTHERN” OLIGARCHS DEFEAT THOSE
PURPOSES–THE REPUBLICAN PARTY NOT BLAMELESS FOR THE PRESENT CONDITION
OF THINGS–THE OLD REBEL-CHIEFTAINS AND COPPERHEADS, IN CONTROL–THEY
GRASP ALMOST EVERYTHING THAT WAS LOST BY THE REBELLION–THEIR GROWING
AGGRESSIVENESS–THE FUTURE–“WATCHMAN, WHAT OF THE NIGHT?”
PORTRAITS.
MAPS.
SEAT OF WAR IN VIRGINIA.
FIRST BULL RUN BATTLE-FIELD.
FIRST BULL RUN BATTLE-FIELD, SHOWING POSITION OF ARMIES.
EDWARD D. BAKER,
BENJ. F. BUTLER,
J. C. BRECKINRIDGE,
JOHN C. CALHOUN,
HENRY CLAY,
J. J. CRITTENDEN,
HENRY WINTER DAVIS,
JEFFERSON DAVIS,
SIMON CAMERON,
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS,
JOHN C. FREMONT,
H. W. HALLECK,
ISAAC W. HAYNE,
PATRICK HENRY,
DAVID HUNTER,
THOMAS JEFFERSON,
ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
GEO. B. MCCLELLAN,
THAD. STEVENS,
WM. H. SEWARD,
LYMAN TRUMBULL,
BENJ. F. WADE,
DANIEL WEBSTER,
LOUIS T. WIGFALL.
CHAPTER I.
A PRELIMINARY RETROSPECT.
To properly understand the condition of things preceding the great war
of the Rebellion, and the causes underlying that condition and the war
itself, we must glance backward through the history of the Country to,
and even beyond, that memorable 30th of November, 1782, when the
Independence of the United States of America was at last conceded by
Great Britain. At that time the population of the United States was
about 2,500,000 free whites and some 500,000 black slaves. We had
gained our Independence of the Mother Country, but she had left fastened
upon us the curse of Slavery. Indeed African Slavery had already in
1620 been implanted on the soil of Virginia before Plymouth Rock was
pressed by the feet of the Pilgrim Fathers, and had spread, prior to the
Revolution, with greater or less rapidity, according to the surrounding
adaptations of soil, production and climate, to every one of the
thirteen Colonies.
But while it had thus spread more or less throughout all the original
Colonies, and was, as it were, recognized and acquiesced in by all, as
an existing and established institution, yet there were many, both in
the South and North, who looked upon it as an evil–an inherited evil–
and were anxious to prevent the increase of that evil. Hence it was
that even as far back as 1699, a controversy sprang up between the
Colonies and the Home Government, upon the African Slavery question–a
controversy continuing with more or less vehemence down to the
Declaration of Independence itself.
It was this conviction that it was not alone an evil but a dangerous
evil, that induced Jefferson to embody in his original draft of that
Declaration a clause strongly condemnatory of the African Slave Trade–a
clause afterward omitted from it solely, he tells us, “in complaisance
to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never* attempted to restrain the
importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to
continue it,” as well as in deference to the sensitiveness of Northern
people, who, though having few slaves themselves, “had been pretty
considerable carriers of them to others” a clause of the great
indictment of King George III., which, since it was not omitted for any
other reason than that just given, shows pretty conclusively that where
the fathers in that Declaration affirmed that “all men are created
equal,” they included in the term “men,” black as well as white, bond as
well as free; for the clause ran thus: “Determined to keep open a market
where MEN should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for
suppressing every Legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this
execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no
fact of distinguished dye, he is now exciting those very people to rise
in arms among us, and purchase that liberty of which he has deprived
them, by murdering the people on whom he also obtruded them; thus paying
of former crimes committed against the LIBERTIES of our people with
crimes which he urges them to commit against the LIVES of another.”
Royal Colony, the holding of slaves within its limits was expressly
prohibited by law; and the Darien (Ga.) resolutions of 1775
declared not only a “disapprobation and abhorrence of the unnatural
practice of Slavery in America” as “a practice founded in injustice
and cruelty, and highly dangerous to our Liberties (as well as
lives) but a determination to use our utmost efforts for the
manumission of our slaves in this colony upon the most safe and
equitable footing for the masters and themselves.”] During the war of the Revolution following the Declaration of
Independence, the half a million of slaves, nearly all of them in the
Southern States, were found to be not only a source of weakness, but,
through the incitements of British emissaries, a standing menace of
peril to the Slaveholders. Thus it was that the South was overrun by
hostile British armies, while in the North-comparatively free of this
element of weakness–disaster after disaster met them. At last,
however, in 1782, came the recognition of our Independence, and peace,
followed by the evacuation of New York at the close of 1783.
The lessons of the war, touching Slavery, had not been lost upon our
statesmen. Early in 1784 Virginia ceded to the United States her claims
of jurisdiction and otherwise over the vast territory north-west of the
Ohio; and upon its acceptance, Jefferson, as chairman of a Select
Committee appointed at his instance to consider a plan of government
therefor, reported to the ninth Continental Congress an Ordinance to
govern the territory ceded already, or to be ceded, by individual States
to the United States, extending from the 31st to the 47th degree of
north latitude, which provided as “fundamental conditions between the
thirteen original States and those newly described” as embryo States
thereafter–to be carved out of such territory ceded or to be ceded to
the United States, not only that “they shall forever remain a part of
the United States of America,” but also that “after the year 1800 of the
Christian era, there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude
in any of the said States”–and that those fundamental conditions were
“unalterable but by the joint consent of the United States in Congress
assembled, and of the particular State within which such alteration
is proposed to be made.”
But now a signal misfortune befell. Upon a motion to strike out the
clause prohibiting Slavery, six States: New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York and Pennsylvania, voted to retain
the prohibitive clause, while three States, Maryland, Virginia and South
Carolina, voted not to retain it. The vote of North Carolina was
equally divided; and while one of the Delegates from New Jersey voted to
retain it, yet as there was no other delegate present from that State,
and the Articles of Confederation required the presence of “two or more”
delegates to cast the vote of a State, the vote of New Jersey was lost;
and, as the same Articles required an affirmative vote of a majority of
all the States–and not simply of those present–the retention of the
clause prohibiting Slavery was also lost. Thus was lost the great
opportunity of restricting Slavery to the then existing Slave States,
and of settling the question peaceably for all time. Three years
afterward a similar Ordinance, since become famous as “the Ordinance of
’87,” for the government of the North-west Territory (from which the
Free States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin have
since been carved and admitted to the Union) was adopted in Congress by
the unanimous vote of all the eight States present. And the sixth
article of this Ordinance, or “Articles of Compact,” which it was
stipulated should “forever remain unalterable, unless by common
consent,” was in these words:
“Art. 6. There shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude in
the said Territory, otherwise than in punishment of crimes, whereof the
party shall have been duly convicted; provided always that any person
escaping into the same from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in
any one of the original States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed,
and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor, or service, as
aforesaid.”
But this Ordinance of ’87, adopted almost simultaneously with the
framing of our present Federal Constitution, was essentially different
from the Ordinance of three years previous, in this: that while the
latter included the territory south of the Ohio River as well as that
north-west of it, this did not; and as a direct consequence of this
failure to include in it the territory south of that river, the States
of Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi, which were taken out of it, were
subsequently admitted to the Union as Slave States, and thus greatly
augmented their political power. And at a later period it was this
increased political power that secured the admission of still other
Slave States–as Florida, Louisiana and Texas–which enabled the Slave
States to hold the balance of such power as against the original States
that had become Free, and the new Free States of the North-west.
Hence, while in a measure quieting the great question of Slavery for the
time being, the Ordinance of ’87 in reality laid the ground-work for the
long series of irritations and agitations touching its restrictions and
extension, which eventually culminated in the clash of arms that shook
the Union from its centre to its circumference. Meanwhile, as we have
seen–while the Ordinance of 1787 was being enacted in the last Congress
of the old Confederation at New York–the Convention to frame the
present Constitution was sitting at Philadelphia under the Presidency of
George Washington himself. The old Confederation had proved itself to
be “a rope of sand.” A new and stronger form of government had become a
necessity for National existence.
To create it out of the discordant elements whose harmony was essential
to success, was an herculean task, requiring the utmost forbearance,
unselfishness, and wisdom. And of all the great questions, dividing the
framers of that Constitution, perhaps none of them required a higher
degree of self abnegation and patriotism than those touching human
Slavery.
The situation was one of extreme delicacy. The necessity for a closer
and stronger Union of all the States was apparently absolute, yet this
very necessity seemed to place a whip in the hands of a few States, with
which to coerce the greater number of States to do their bidding. It
seemed that the majority must yield to a small minority on even vital
questions, or lose everything.
Thus it was, that instead of an immediate interdiction of the African
Slave Trade, Congress was empowered to prohibit it after the lapse of
twenty years; that instead of the basis of Congressional Representation
being the total population of each State, and that of direct taxation
the total property of each State, a middle ground was conceded, which
regarded the Slaves as both persons and property, and the basis both of
Representation and of Direct Taxation was fixed as being the total Free
population “plus three-fifths of all other persons” in each State; and
that there was inserted in the Constitution a similar clause to that
which we have seen was almost simultaneously incorporated in the
Ordinance of ’87, touching the reclamation and return to their owners of
Fugitive Slaves from the Free States into which they may have escaped.
The fact of the matter is, that the Convention that framed our
Constitution lacked the courage of its convictions, and was “bulldozed”
by the few extreme Southern Slave-holding States–South Carolina and
Georgia especially. It actually paltered with those convictions and
with the truth itself. Its convictions–those at least of a great
majority of its delegates–were against not only the spread, but the
very existence of Slavery; yet we have seen what they unwillingly agreed
to in spite of those convictions; and they were guilty moreover of the
subterfuge of using the terms “persons” and “service or labor” when they
really meant “Slaves” and “Slavery.” “They did this latter,” Mr.
Madison says, “because they did not choose to admit the right of
property in man,” and yet in fixing the basis of Direct Taxation as well
as Congressional Representation at the total Free population of each
State with “three-fifths of all other persons,” they did admit the right
of property in man! As was stated by Mr. Iredell to the North Carolina
Ratification Convention, when explaining the Fugitive Slave clause:
“Though the word ‘Slave’ is not mentioned, this is the meaning of it.”
And he added: “The Northern delegates, owing to their peculiar scruples
on the subject of Slavery, did not choose the word ‘Slave’ to be
mentioned.”
In March, 1789, the first Federal Congress met at New York. It at once
enacted a law in accordance with the terms of the Ordinance of ’87–
adapting it to the changed order of things under the new Federal
Constitution–prohibiting Slavery in the Territories of the North-west;
and the succeeding Congress enacted a Fugitive-Slave law.
In the same year (1789) North Carolina ceded her western territory (now
Tennessee) south of the Ohio, to the United States, providing as one of
the conditions of that cession, “that no regulation made, or to be made,
by Congress, shall tend to emancipate Slaves.” Georgia, also, in 1802,
ceded her superfluous territorial domain (south of the Ohio, and now
known as Alabama and Mississippi), making as a condition of its
acceptance that the Ordinance of ’87 “shall, in all its parts, extend to
the territory contained in the present act of cession, the article only
excepted which forbids Slavery.”
Thus while the road was open and had been taken advantage of, at the
earliest moment, by the Federal Congress to prohibit Slavery in all the
territory north-west of the Ohio River by Congressional enactment,
Congress considered itself barred by the very conditions of cession from
inhibiting Slavery in the territory lying south of that river. Hence it
was that while the spread of Slavery was prevented in the one Section of
our outlying territories by Congressional legislation, it was stimulated
in the other Section by the enforced absence of such legislation. As a
necessary sequence, out of the Territories of the one Section grew more
Free States and out of the other more Slave States, and this condition
of things had a tendency to array the Free and the Slave States in
opposition to each other and to Sectionalize the flames of that Slavery
agitation which were thus continually fed.
Upon the admission of Ohio to Statehood in 1803, the remainder of the
North-west territory became the Territory of Indiana. The inhabitants
of this Territory (now known as the States of Indiana, Illinois,
Michigan and Wisconsin), consisting largely of settlers from the Slave
States, but chiefly from Virginia and Kentucky, very persistently (in
1803, 1806 and 1807) petitioned Congress for permission to employ Slave
Labor, but–although their petitions were favorably reported in most
cases by the Committees to which they were referred–without avail,
Congress evidently being of opinion that a temporary suspension in this
respect of the sixth article of the Ordinance of ’87 was “not
expedient.” These frequent rebuffs by Congress, together with the
constantly increasing emigration from the Free States, prevented the
taking of any further steps to implant Slavery on the soil of that
Territory.
Meanwhile the vast territory included within the Valley of the
Mississippi and known at that day as the “Colony of Louisiana,” was, in
1803, acquired to the United States by purchase from the French–to whom
it had but lately been retroceded by Spain. Both under Spanish and
French rule, Slavery had existed throughout this vast yet sparsely
populated region. When we acquired it by purchase, it was already
there, as an established “institution;” and the Treaty of acquisition
not only provided that it should be “incorporated into the Union of the
United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the
principles of the Federal Constitution,” but that its inhabitants in the
meantime “should be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of
their liberty, property, and the religion which they professed”–and,
as “the right of property in man” had really been admitted in practice,
if not in theory, by the framers of that Constitution itself–that
institution was allowed to remain there. Indeed the sparseness of its
population at the time of purchase and the amazing fertility of its soil
and adaptability of its climate to Slave Labor, together with the then
recent invention by Eli Whitney, of Massachusetts, of that wonderful
improvement in the separation of cotton-fibre from its seed, known as
the “cotton-gin”–which with the almost simultaneous inventions of
Hargreaves, and Arkwright’s cotton-spinning machines, and Watt’s
application of his steam engine, etc., to them, marvelously increased
both the cotton supply and demand and completely revolutionized the
cotton industry–contributed to rapidly and thickly populate the whole
region with white Slave-holders and black Slaves, and to greatly enrich
and increase the power of the former.
When Jefferson succeeded in negotiating the cession of that vast and
rich domain to the United States, it is not to be supposed that either
the allurements of territorial aggrandizement on the one hand, or the
impending danger to the continued ascendency of the political party
which had elevated him to the Presidency, threatening it from all the
irritations with republican France likely to grow out of such near
proximity to her Colony, on the other, could have blinded his eyes to
the fact that its acquisition must inevitably tend to the spread of that
very evil, the contemplation of which, at a later day, wrung from his
lips the prophetic words, “I tremble for my Country when I reflect that
God is just.” It is more reasonable to suppose that, as he believed the
ascendency of the Republican party of that day essential to the
perpetuity of the Republic itself, and revolted against being driven
into an armed alliance with Monarchical England against what he termed
“our natural friend,” Republican France, he reached the conclusion that
the preservation of his Republican principles was of more immediate
moment than the question of the perpetuation and increase of human
Slavery. Be that as it may, it none the less remains a curious fact
that it was to Jefferson, the far-seeing statesman and hater of African
Slavery and the author of the Ordinance of 1784–which sought to exclude
Slavery from all the Territories of the United States south of, as well
as north-west of the Ohio River–that we also owe the acquisition of the
vast territory of the Mississippi Valley burdened with Slavery in such
shape that only a War, which nearly wrecked our Republic, could get rid
of!
Out of that vast and fertile, but Slave-ridden old French Colony of
“Louisiana” were developed in due time the rich and flourishing Slave
States of Louisiana, Missouri and Arkansas.
It will have been observed that this acquisition of the Colony of
Louisiana and the contemporaneous inventions of the cotton-gin, improved
cotton-spinning machinery, and the application to it of steam power, had
already completely neutralized the wisdom of the Fathers in securing, as
they thought, the gradual but certain extinction of Slavery in the
United States, by that provision in the Constitution which enabled
Congress, after an interval of twenty years, to prohibit the African
Slave Trade; and which led the Congress, on March 22, 1794, to pass an
Act prohibiting it; to supplement it in 1800 with another Act in the
same direction; and on March 2, 1807, to pass another supplemental Act–
to take effect January 1, 1808–still more stringent, and covering any
such illicit traffic, whether to the United States or with other
countries. Never was the adage that, “The best laid schemes o’ mice an’
men gang aft agley,” more painfully apparent. Slaves increased and
multiplied within the land, and enriched their white owners to such a
degree that, as the years rolled by, instead of compunctions of
conscience on the subject of African Slavery in America, the Southern
leaders ultimately persuaded themselves to the belief that it was not
only moral, and sanctioned by Divine Law, but that to perpetuate it was
a philanthropic duty, beneficial to both races! In fact one of them
declared it to be “the highest type of civilization.”
In 1812, the State of Louisiana, organized from the purchased Colony of
the same name, was admitted to the Union, and the balance of the
Louisiana purchase was thereafter known as the Territory of Missouri.
In 1818 commenced the heated and protracted struggle in Congress over
the admission of the State of Missouri–created from the Territory of
that name–as a Slave State, which finally culminated in 1820 in the
settlement known thereafter as the “Missouri Compromise.”
Briefly stated, that struggle may be said to have consisted in the
efforts of the House on the one side, to restrict Slavery in the State
of Missouri, and the efforts of the Senate on the other, to give it free
rein. The House insisted on a clause in the Act of admission providing,
“That the introduction of Slavery or involuntary servitude be
prohibited, except for the punishment of crimes whereof the party has
been duly convicted; and that all children born within the said State,
after the admission thereof into the Union, shall be declared Free at
the age of twenty-five years.” The Senate resisted it–and the Bill
fell. In the meantime, however, a Bill passed both Houses forming the
Territory of Arkansas out of that portion of the Territory of Missouri
not included in the proposed State of Missouri, without any such
restriction upon Slavery. Subsequently, the House having passed a Bill
to admit the State of Maine to the Union, the Senate amended it by
tacking on a provision authorizing the people of Missouri to organize a
State Government, without restriction as to Slavery. The House
decidedly refused to accede to the Senate proposition, and the result of
the disagreement was a Committee of Conference between the two Houses,
and the celebrated “Missouri Compromise,” which, in the language of
another–[Hon. John Holmes of Massachusetts, of said Committee on
Conference, March 2, 1820.]–, was: “that the Senate should give up its
combination of Missouri with Maine; that the House should abandon its
attempt to restrict Slavery in Missouri; and that both Houses should
concur in passing the Bill to admit Missouri as a State, with” a
“restriction or proviso, excluding Slavery from all territory north and
west of the new State”–that “restriction or proviso” being in these
words: “That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States
under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees,
thirty minutes north latitude, excepting only such part thereof as is
included within the limits of the State contemplated by this act,
Slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of
crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall be and is
hereby forever prohibited; Provided always, that any person escaping
into the same, from whom labor and service is lawfully claimed in any
State or Territory of the United States, such Fugitive may be lawfully
reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or
service, as aforesaid.” At a subsequent session of Congress, at which
Missouri asked admission as a State with a Constitution prohibiting her
Legislature from passing emancipation laws, or such as would prevent the
immigration of Slaves, while requiring it to enact such as would
absolutely prevent the immigration of Free Negroes or Mulattoes, a
further Compromise was agreed to by Congress under the inspiration of
Mr. Clay, by which it was laid down as a condition precedent to her
admission as a State–a condition subsequently complied with–that
Missouri must pledge herself that her Legislature should pass no act “by
which any of the citizens of either of the States should be excluded
from the enjoyment of the privileges and immunities to which they are
entitled under the Constitution of the United States.”
This, in a nut-shell, was the memorable Missouri Struggle, and the
“Compromise” or Compromises which settled and ended it. But during that
struggle–as during the formation of the Federal Constitution and at
various times in the interval when exciting questions had arisen–the
bands of National Union were more than once rudely strained, and this
time to such a degree as even to shake the faith of some of the firmest
believers in the perpetuity of that Union. It was during this bitter
struggle that John Adams wrote to Jefferson: “I am sometimes Cassandra
enough to dream that another Hamilton, another Burr, may rend this
mighty fabric in twain, or perhaps into a leash, and a few more choice
spirits of the same stamp might produce as many Nations in North America
as there are in Europe.”
It is true that we had “sown the wind,” but we had not yet “reaped the
whirlwind.”
CHAPTER II.
PROTECTION AND FREE TRADE.
We have seen that the first Federal Congress met at New York in March,
1789. It organized April 6th. None knew better than its members that
the war of the Americana Revolution chiefly grew out of the efforts of
Great Britain to cripple and destroy our Colonial industries to the
benefit of the British trader, and that the Independence conquered, was
an Industrial as well as Political Independence; and none knew better
than they, that the failure of the subsequent political Confederation of
States was due mainly to its failure to encourage and protect the
budding domestic manufactures of those States. Hence they hastened,
under the leadership of James Madison, to pass “An Act laying a duty on
goods, wares and merchandize imported into the United States,” with a
preamble, declaring it to be “necessary” for the “discharge of the debt
of the United States and the encouragement and protection of
manufactures.” It was approved by President Washington July 4, 1789–a
date not without its significance–and levied imports both specific and
ad valorem. It was not only our first Tariff Act, but, next to that
prescribing the oath used in organizing the Government, the first Act of
the first Federal Congress; and was passed in pursuance of the
declaration of President Washington in his first Message, that “The
safety and interest of the People” required it. Under the inspiration
of Alexander Hamilton the Tariff of 1790 was enacted at the second
session of the same Congress, confirming the previous Act and increasing
some of the protective duties thereby imposed.
An analysis of the vote in the House of Representatives on this Tariff
Bill discloses the fact that of the 39 votes for it, 21 were from
Southern States, 13 from the Middle States, and 5 from New England
States; while of the 13 votes against it, 9 were from New England
States, 3 from Southern States, and 1 from Middle States. In other
words, while the Southern States were for the Bill in the proportion of
21 to 3, and the Middle States by 13 to 1, New England was against it by
9 to 5; or again, while 10 of the 13 votes against it were from the New
England and Middle States, 21 (or more than half) of the 39 votes for it
were from Southern States.
It will thus be seen-singularly enough in view of subsequent events–
that we not only mainly owe our first steps in Protective Tariff
legislation to the almost solid Southern vote, but that it was thus
secured for us despite the opposition of New England. Nor did our
indebtedness to Southern statesmen and Southern votes for the
institution of the now fully established American System of Protection
cease here, as we shall presently see.
That Jefferson, as well as Washington and Madison, agreed with the views
of Alexander Hamilton on Protection to our domestic manufactures as
against those of foreign Nations, is evident in his Annual Message of
December 14, 1806, wherein-discussing an anticipated surplus of Federal
revenue above the expenditures, and enumerating the purposes of
education and internal improvement to which he thinks the “whole surplus
of impost” should during times of peace be applied; by which application
of such surplus he prognosticates that “new channels of communication
will be opened between the States; the lines of separation will
disappear; their interests will be identified, and their Union cemented
by new and indissoluble ties”–he says: “Shall we suppress the impost
and give that advantage to foreign over domestic manufactures. On a few
articles of more general and necessary use, the suppression in due
season, will doubtless be right; but the great mass of the articles on
which impost is paid is foreign luxuries, purchased by those only who
are rich enough to afford themselves the use of them.” But his embargo
and other retaliatory measures, put in force in 1807 and 1808, and the
War of 1812-15 with Great Britain, which closely followed, furnished
Protection in another manner, by shutting the door to foreign imports
and throwing our people upon their own resources, and contributed
greatly to the encouragement and increase of our home manufactures–
especially those of wool, cotton, and hemp.
At the close of that War the traders of Great Britain determined, even
at a temporary loss to themselves, to glut our market with their goods
and thus break down forever, as they hoped, our infant manufactures.
Their purpose and object were boldly announced in the House of Commons
by Mr. Brougham, when he said: “Is it worth while to incur a loss upon
the first importation, in order by the glut to stifle in the cradle
those rising manufactures in the United States which the War had forced
into existence contrary to the natural course of things.” Against this
threatened ruin, our manufacturers all over the United States–the sugar
planters of Louisiana among them–clamored for Protection, and Congress
at once responded with the Tariff Act of 1816.
This law greatly extended and increased specific duties on, and
diminished the application of the ad valorem principle to, foreign
imports; and it has been well described as “the practical foundation of
the American policy of encouragement of home manufactures–the practical
establishment of the great industrial system upon which rests our
present National wealth, and the power and the prosperity and happiness
of our whole people.” While Henry Clay of Kentucky, William Loundes of
South Carolina, and Henry St. George Tucker of Virginia supported the
Bill most effectively, no man labored harder and did more effective
service in securing its passage than John C. Calhoun of South Carolina.
The contention on their part was not for a mere “incidental protection”
–much less a “Tariff for revenue only”–but for “Protection” in its
broadest sense, and especially the protection of their cotton
manufactures. Indeed Calhoun’s defense of Protection, from the assaults
of those from New England and elsewhere who assailed it on the narrow
ground that it was inimical to commerce and navigation, was a notable
one. He declared that:
“It (the encouragement of manufactures) produced a system strictly
American, as much so as agriculture, in which it had the decided
advantage of commerce and navigation. The country will from this derive
much advantage. Again it is calculated to bind together more closely
our wide-spread Republic. It will greatly increase our mutual
dependence and intercourse, and will, as a necessary consequence, excite
an increased attention to internal improvements–a subject every way so
intimately connected with the ultimate attainment of national strength
and the perfection of our political institutions.”
He regarded the fact that it would make the parts adhere more closely;
that it would form a new and most powerful cement far outweighing any
political objections that might be urged against the system. In his
opinion “the liberty and the union of the country were inseparably
united; that as the destruction of the latter would most certainly
involve the former, so its maintenance will with equal certainty
preserve it;” and he closed with an impressive warning to the Nation of
a “new and terrible danger” which threatened it, to wit: “disunion.”
Nobly as he stood up then–during the last term of his service in the
House of Representatives–for the great principles of, the American
System of Protection to manufactures, for the perpetuity of the Union,
and for the increase of “National strength,” it seems like the very
irony of fate that a few years later should find him battling against
Protection as “unconstitutional,” upholding Nullification as a “reserved
right” of his State, and championing at the risk of his neck that very
“danger” to the “liberties” and life of his Country against which his
prophetic words had already given solemn warning.
Strange was it also, in view of the subsequent attitudes of the South
and New England, that this essentially Protective Tariff Act of 1816
should have been vigorously protested and voted against by New England,
while it was ably advocated and voted for by the South–the 25 votes of
the latter which secured its passage being more than sufficient to have
secured its defeat had they been so inclined.
The Tariff Acts of 1824 and 1828 followed the great American principle
of Protection laid down and supported by the South in the Act of 1816,
while widening, increasing, and strengthening it. Under their
operation-especially under that of 1828, with its high duties on wool,
hemp, iron, lead, and other staples–great prosperity smiled upon the
land, and particularly upon the Free States.
In the cotton-growing belt of the South, however, where the prosperity
was relatively less, owing to the blight of Slavery, the very contrast
bred discontent; and, instead of attributing it to the real cause, the
advocates of Free Trade within that region insisted that the Protective
Tariff was responsible for the condition of things existing there.
A few restless and discontented spirits in the South had indeed agitated
the subject of Free Trade as against Protected manufactures as early as
1797, and, hand in hand with it, the doctrine of States Rights. And
Jefferson himself, although, as we have already seen, attached to the
American System of Protection and believing in its Constitutionality,
unwittingly played into the hands of these Free Traders by drawing up
the famous Kentucky Resolutions of ’98 touching States Rights, which
were closely followed by the Virginia Resolutions of 1799 in the same
vein by Madison, also an out-and-out Protectionist. It was mainly in
condemnation of the Alien and Sedition Laws, then so unpopular
everywhere, that these resolutions were professedly fulminated, but they
gave to the agitating Free Traders a States-Rights-Secession-weapon of
which they quickly availed themselves.
Their drift may be gathered from the first of the Kentucky Resolutions
of ’98, which was in these words: “Resolved, That the several States
composing the United States of America are not united on the principle
of unlimited submission to their General Government, but that, by a
compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United
States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government
for special purposes–delegated to that Government certain definite
powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to
their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government
assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of
no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and as an
integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party;
that the Government created by this compact was not made the exclusive
or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since
that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the
measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among
powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge
for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of
redress.”
The Resolutions, after enumerating the Alien and Sedition and certain
other laws as in point, conclude by calling upon the other States to
join Kentucky in her opposition to such Federal usurpations of power as
thus embodied, and express confidence: “That they will concur with this
Commonwealth in considering the said Acts as so palpably against the
Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that
compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General
Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States,
of all powers whatsoever; that they will view this as seizing the rights
of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General
Government, with the power assumed to bind the States (not merely as to
the cases made federal (casus foederis) but) in all cases whatsoever, by
laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent;
that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen,
and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from
our authority; and that the co-States, returning to their natural rights
in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these Acts void and
of no force, and will each take measures of its own in providing that
neither these Acts, nor any others of the General Government, not
plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be
exercised within their respective territories.”
The doctrine of States Rights as formulated in these Resolutions,
including the assumed right of a State to nullify laws of the General
Government, naturally led up, as we shall see, not only to threats of
disunion, but ultimately to a dreadful sectional War waged in the effort
to secure it. That Jefferson, when he penned them, foresaw the terrible
results to flow from these specious and pernicious doctrines, is not to
be supposed for an instant; but that his conscience troubled him may be
fairly inferred from the fact that he withheld from the World for twenty
years afterward the knowledge that he was their author. It is probable
that in this case, as in others, he was a victim of that casuistry which
teaches that “the end justifies the means;” that he hoped and believed
that the assertion of these baleful doctrines would act solely as a
check upon any tendency to further centralization of power in the
General Government and insure that strict construction of the
Constitution.
Though afterward violated by himself at the same time that he for the
moment threw aside his scruples touching African slavery, when he added
to our domain the great French Slave Colony of Louisiana–was none the
less the great aim of his commanding intellect; and that he fortuitously
believed in the “saving common sense” of his race and country as capable
of correcting an existing evil when it shall have developed into ill
effects.
his letter, 1803, to Wilson C. Nichols in the Louisiana Colony
purchase case, when, after proving by his own strict construction
of the Constitution that there was no power in that instrument to
make such purchase, and confessing the importance in that very case
of setting “an example against broad construction,” he concludes:
“If, however, our friends shall think differently, certainly I
shall acquiesce with satisfaction; confiding that the good sense of
the country will correct the evil of construction when it shall
produce ill ejects.”]
Be that as it may, however, the fact remains that the seeds thus sown by
the hands of Jefferson on the “sacred soil” of Virginia and Kentucky,
were dragon’s teeth, destined in after years to spring up as legions of
armed men battling for the subversion of that Constitution and the
destruction of that Union which he so reverenced, and which he was so
largely instrumental in founding–and which even came back in his own
life to plague him and Madison during his embargo, and Madison’s war of
1812-15, in the utterances and attitude of some of the New England
Federalists.
The few Free Traders of the South–the Giles’s and John Taylor’s and men
of that ilk–made up for their paucity in numbers by their unscrupulous
ingenuity and active zeal. They put forth the idea that the American
Protective Policy was a policy of fostering combinations by Federal
laws, the effect of which was to transfer a considerable portion of the
profits of slave labor from the Slave States to other parts of the Union
where it was massed in the hands of a few individuals, and thus created
a moneyed interest which avariciously influenced the General Government
to the detriment of the entire community of people, who, made restive by
the exactions of this power working through the Federal Government, were
as a consequence driven to consider a possible dissolution of the Union,
and make “estimates of resources and means of defense.” As a means also
of inflaming both the poor whites and Southern slave-holders by arousing
the apprehensions of the latter concerning the “peculiar institution” of
Slavery, they craftily declared that “If the maxim advanced by the
advocates of the protecting duty system will justify Congress in
assuming, or rather in empowering a few capitalists to assume, the
direction of manufacturing labor, it also invests that body with a power
of legislating for the direction of every other species of labor and
assigning all occupations whatsoever to the care of the intelligence of
mercenary combinations”–and hence untold misery to labor.
They charged as a further means of firing the Southern heart, that this
moneyed power, born of Protection, “works upon the passion of the States
it has been able to delude by computations of their physical strength
and their naval superiority; and by boasting of an ability to use the
weakening circumstance of negro slavery to coerce the defrauded and
discontented States into submission.” And they declared as fundamental
truths upon which they rested that “The Federal is not a National
Government; it is a league between nations. By this league, a limited
power only over persons and property was given to the representatives of
the united nations. This power cannot be further extended, under the
pretext of national good, because the league does not create a national
government.”
It was the passage of the Tariff of 1824 that gave these crafty Free
Traders their first great success in spreading their doctrine of Free
Trade by coupling it with questions of slave labor, States Rights, and
nullification, as laid down in the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions.
These arguments created great excitement throughout the South–
especially in South Carolina and Georgia–which was still further
increased by the passage of the Tariff of 1828, since declared by
eminent authority to have been “the highest and most protective ever
adopted in this country.”
Prior to the passage of this Tariff Act, excited assemblages met in some
of the Southern States, and protested against it as an outrage upon
their rights–arraying the South in seditious and treasonable attitude
against not only the North but the Union, with threats of Secession. At
one of these meetings in South Carolina, in 1827, one of their leaders–
[Dr. Thomas Cooper, President of South Carolina College.]–declared that
“a drilled and managed majority” in the House of Representatives had
determined “at all hazards to support the claims of the Northern
manufacturers, and to offer up the planting interest on the altar of
monopoly.” He denounced the American system of Protection exemplified
in that Tariff measure as “a system by which the earnings of the South
are to be transferred to the North–by which the many are to be
sacrificed to the few–under which powers are usurped that were never
conceded–by which inequality of rights, inequality of burthens,
inequality of protection, unequal laws, and unequal taxes are to be
enacted and rendered permanent–that the planter and the farmer under
this system are to be considered as inferior beings to the spinner, the
bleacher, and the dyer–that we of the South hold our plantations under
this system, as the serfs and operatives of the North, subject to the
orders and laboring for the benefit of the master-minds of
Massachusetts, the lords of the spinning jenny and peers of the power-
loom, who have a right to tax our earnings for their emolument, and to
burthen our poverty and to swell their riches;” and after characterizing
Protection as “a system of fraud, robbery and usurpation,” he continued
“I have said that we shall ere long be compelled to calculate the value
of our Union; and to enquire of what use to us is this most unequal
alliance, by which the South has always been the loser and the North
always the gainer. Is it worth our while to continue this union of
States, where the North demands to be our masters and we are required to
be their tributaries? who with the most insulting mockery call the yoke
they put upon our necks the ‘American system!’ The question, however,
is fast approaching the alternative of submission or separation.”
Only a few days after this inflammatory speech at Columbus, S. C.,
inciting South Carolinians to resist the pending Protective Tariff even
to the lengths of Secession, during a grand banquet at Richmond, Va.,
William B. Giles–another Free Trade leader–proposed, and those present
drank a toast to the “Tariff Schemer” in which was embodied a
declaration that “The Southerners will not long pay tribute.” Despite
these turbulent and treasonable mutterings, however, the “Jacksonian
Congress” passed the Act–a majority of members from the Cotton and New
England States voting against, while the vote of the Middle and Western
Free States was almost solidly for, it.
At a meeting held soon after the enactment of the Tariff of 1828, at
Walterborough Court House, S. C., an address was adopted and issued
which, after reciting the steps that had been taken by South Carolina
during the previous year to oppose it, by memorials and otherwise, and
stating that, despite their “remonstrances and implorations,” a Tariff
Bill had passed, not indeed, such as they apprehended, but “ten-fold
worse in all its oppressive features,” proceeded thus:
“From the rapid step of usurpation, whether we now act or not, the day
of open opposition to the pretended powers of the Constitution cannot be
far off, and it is that it may not go down in blood that we now call
upon you to resist. We feel ourselves standing underneath its mighty
protection, and declaring forth its free and recorded spirit, when we
say we must resist. By all the great principles of liberty–by the
glorious achievements of our fathers in defending them–by their noble
blood poured forth like water in maintaining them–by their lives in
suffering, and their death in honor and in glory;–our countrymen! we
must resist. Not secretly, as timid thieves or skulking smugglers–not
in companies and associations, like money chafferers or stock jobbers–
not separately and individually, as if this was ours and not our
country’s cause–but openly, fairly, fearlessly, and unitedly, as
becomes a free, sovereign and independent people. Does timidity ask
WHEN? We answer NOW!”
These inflammatory utterances, in South Carolina especially, stirred the
Southern heart more or less throughout the whole cotton belt; and the
pernicious principles which they embodied found ardent advocates even in
the Halls of Congress. In the Senate, Mr. Hayne, of South Carolina, was
their chief and most vehement spokesman, and in 1830 occurred that
memorable debate between him and Daniel Webster, which forever put an
end to all reasonable justification of the doctrine of Nullification,
and which furnished the ground upon which President Jackson afterward
stood in denouncing and crushing it out with the strong arm of the
Government.
In that great debate Mr. Hayne’s propositions were that the Constitution
is a “compact between the States,” that “in case of a plain, palpable
violation of the Constitution by the General Government, a State may
interpose; and that this interposition is constitutional”–a proposition
with which Mr. Webster took direct issue, in these words: “I say, the
right of a State to annul a law of Congress cannot be maintained, but on
the ground of the inalienable right of man to resist oppression; that is
to say, upon the ground of revolution. I admit that there is an
ultimate violent remedy, above the Constitution and in defiance of the
Constitution, which may be resorted to when a revolution is to be
justified. But I do not admit that, under the Constitution, and in
conformity with it, there is any mode in which a State Government, as a
member of the Union, can interfere and stop the progress of the general
movement by force of her own laws under any circumstances whatever.”
Mr. Webster insisted that “one of two things is true: either the laws of
the Union are beyond the discretion and beyond the control of the
States, or else we have no Constitution of General Government, and are
thrust back again to the days of the Confederation;” and, in concluding
his powerful argument, he declared that “even supposing the Constitution
to be a compact between the States,” Mr. Hayne’s doctrine was “not
maintainable, because, first, the General Government is not a party to
the compact, but a Government established by it, and vested by it with
the powers of trying and deciding doubtful questions; and secondly,
because, if the Constitution be regarded as a compact, not one State
only, but all the States are parties to that compact, and one can have
no right to fix upon it her own peculiar construction.”
While the comparatively miserable condition of the cotton-growing States
of the South was attributed by most of the Southern Free Traders solely
to the Protective Tariff of 1828, yet there were some Southerners
willing to concede–as did Mr. Hayne, in the Senate (1832)–that there
were “other causes besides the Tariff” underlying that condition, and to
admit that “Slaves are too improvident, too incapable of that minute,
constant, delicate attention, and that persevering industry which are
essential to manufacturing establishments,” the existence of which would
have made those States prosperous. But such admissions were unwilling
ones, and the Cotton-lords held only with the more tenacity to the view
that the Tariff was the chief cause of their condition.
The Tariff Act of 1832, essentially modifying that of 1828, was passed
with a view, in part, to quiet Southern clamor. But the Southern Cotton
States refused to be mollified. On the contrary, the Free Traders of
South Carolina proceeded to extreme measures, putting in action that
which they had before but threatened. On November 19, 1832, the leading
men of South Carolina met in Convention, and a few days thereafter–
[November 24,1882]–unanimously passed an Ordinance of Nullification
which declared the Tariff Acts of 1828 and 1832 “Unauthorized by the
Constitution,” and “null, void, and no law, nor binding on this State,
its officers, or citizens.” The people of the State were forbidden by
it to pay, after the ensuing February 1st, the import-duties therein
imposed. Under the provisions of the Ordinance, the State Legislature
was to pass an act nullifying these Tariff laws, and any appeal to the
United States Supreme Court against the validity of such nullifying act
was prohibited. Furthermore, in the event of the Federal Government
attempting to enforce these Tariff laws, the people of South Carolina
would thenceforth consider themselves out of the Union, and will
“forthwith proceed to organize a separate Government, and do all other
acts and things which sovereign and independent States may of right do.”
At the subsequent meeting of the Legislature, Mr. Hayne, who had been a
member of the Convention, having resigned his seat in the United States
Senate, was elected Governor of the State. He declared in his message
that he recognized “No allegiance as paramount to that which the
citizens of South Carolina owe to the State of their birth or their
adoption”–that doctrine of “paramount allegiance to the State” which in
after-years gave so much trouble to the Union and to Union-loving
Southerners–and declared that he held himself “bound by the highest of
all obligations to carry into effect, not only the Ordinance of the
Convention, but every act of the Legislature, and every judgment of our
own Courts, the enforcement of which may devolve upon the Executive,”
and “if,” continued he, “the sacred soil of Carolina should be polluted
by the footsteps of an invader, or be stained with the blood of her
citizens, shed in her defense, I trust in Almighty God * * * even should
she stand alone in this great struggle for constitutional liberty,
encompassed by her enemies, that there will not be found, in the wide
limits of the State, one recreant son who will not fly to the rescue,
and be ready to lay down his life in her defense.” In support of the
contemplated treason, he even went to the length of calling for an
enrolling of volunteer forces and of holding them ready for service.
But while South Carolina stood in this treasonable and defiant attitude,
arming for war against the Union, there happened to be in the
Presidential chair one of her own sons–General Jackson. Foreseeing
what was coming, he had, prior to the meeting of the Convention that
framed the Nullification Ordinance, ordered General Scott to Charleston
to look after “the safety of the ports of the United States”
thereabouts, and had sent to the Collector of that port precise
instructions as to his duty to resist in all ways any and all attempts
made under such Ordinance to defeat the operation of the Tariff laws
aforesaid. Having thus quietly prepared the arm of the General
Government for the exercise of its power, he issued in December a
Proclamation declaring his unalterable resolution to treat Nullification
as Treason–and to crush it.
In that famous document President Jackson said of Nullification: “If
this doctrine had been established at an earlier day, the Union would
have been dissolved in its infancy. The Excise law in Pennsylvania, the
Embargo and Non-intercourse law in the Eastern States, the Carriage-tax
in Virginia, were all deemed unconstitutional, and were more unequal in
their operation than any of the laws now complained of; but fortunately,
none of those States discovered that they had the right now claimed by
South Carolina. * * * The discovery of this important feature in our
Constitution was reserved for the present day. To the statesmen of
South Carolina belongs the invention, and upon the citizens of that
State will unfortunately fall the evils of reducing it to practice. * *
* I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States,
assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union,
contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized
by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded
and destructive of the great object for which it was formed. * * * To
say that any State may at pleasure secede from the Union, is to say that
the United States are not a Nation, because it would be a solecism to
contend that any part of a Nation might dissolve its connection with the
other parts, to their injury or ruin, without committing any, offense.”
Farther on, in his moving appeal to the South Carolinians, he bids them
beware of their leaders: “Their object is disunion; be not deceived by
names. Disunion, by armed force, is Treason.” And then, reminding them
of the deeds of their fathers in the Revolution, he proceeds: “I adjure
you, as you honor their memory, as you love the cause of freedom to
which they dedicated their lives, as you prize the peace of your
country, the lives of its best citizens, and your own fair fame, to
retrace your steps. Snatch from the archives of your State the
disorganizing edict of its Convention–bid its members to reassemble and
promulgate the decided expression of your will to remain in the path
which alone can conduct you to safety, prosperity, and honor–tell them
that, compared to disunion, all other evils are light, because that
brings with it an accumulation of all–declare that you will never take
the field unless the Star-spangled banner of your country shall float
over you–that you will not be stigmatized when dead, and dishonored and
scorned while you live, as the authors of the first attack on the
Constitution of your country! Its destroyers you cannot be.”
After asserting his firm “determination to execute the laws-to preserve
the Union by all constitutional means”–he concludes with the prayer,
“May the great Ruler of Nations grant, that the signal blessings with
which He has favored, ours may not, by the madness of party, or personal
ambition be disregarded and lost; and may His wise providence bring
those who have produced this crisis to see the folly before they feel
the misery, of civil strife; and inspire a returning veneration for that
Union, which, if we may dare to penetrate His designs, He has chosen as
the only means of attaining the high destinies to which we may
reasonably aspire.”
The firm attitude of General Jackson, together with the wise
precautionary measures he had already taken, and the practical unanimity
with which his declaration to crush out the Treason was hailed in most
of the Southern as well as the Northern States, almost at once broke the
back of Nullification.
[In this connection the following letter, written at that time by
the great Chief Justice Marshall, to a cousin of his, on the
subject of State Sovereignty, is of interest, as showing how
clearly his penetrating intellect perceived the dangers to the
Union hidden in the plausible doctrine of State Rights:
RICHMOND, May 7, 1833.
“MY DEAR SIR:
“I am much indebted to you for your pamphlet on Federal Relations,
which I have read with much satisfaction. No subject, as it seems
to me, is more misunderstood or more perverted. You have brought
into view numerous important historical facts which, in my
judgment, remove the foundation on which the Nullifiers and
Seceders have erected that superstructure which overshadows our
Union. You have, I think, shown satisfactorily that we never have
been perfectly distinct, independent societies, sovereign in the
sense in which the Nullifiers use the term. When colonies we
certainly were not. We were parts of the British empire, and
although not directly connected with each other so far as respected
government, we were connected in many respects, and were united to
the same stock. The steps we took to effect separation were, as
you have fully shown, not only revolutionary in their nature, but
they were taken conjointly. Then, as now, we acted in many
respects as one people. The representatives of each colony acted
for all. Their resolutions proceeded from a common source, and
operated on the whole mass. The army was a continental army
commanded by a continental general, and supported from a
continental treasury. The Declaration of Independence was made by
a common government, and was made for all the States.
“Everything has been mixed. Treaties made by Congress have been
considered as binding all the States. Some powers have been
exercised by Congress, some by the States separately. The lines
were not strictly drawn. The inability of Congress to carry its
legitimate powers into execution has gradually annulled those
powers practically, but they always existed in theory.
Independence was declared `in the name and by the authority of the
good people of these colonies.’ In fact we have always been united
in some respects, separate in others. We have acted as one people
for some purposes, as distinct societies for others. I think you
have shown this clearly, and in so doing have demonstrated the
fallacy of the principle on which either nullification or the right
of peaceful, constitutional secession is asserted.
“The time is arrived when these truths must be more generally
spoken, or our Union is at an end. The idea of complete
sovereignty of the State converts our government into a league,
and, if carried into practice, dissolves the Union.
“I am, dear sir,
“Yours affectionately,
“J. MARSHALL.
“HUMPHREY MARSHALL, ESQ.,
“FRANKFORT, KY.”]
The Nullifiers hailed with pretended satisfaction the report from the
House Committee on Ways and Means of a Bill making great reductions and
equalizations of Tariff duties, as a measure complying with their
demands, and postponed the execution of the Ordinance of Nullification
until the adjournment of Congress; and almost immediately afterward Mr.
Clay’s Compromise Tariff Act of 1833 “whereby one tenth of the excess
over twenty per cent. of each and every existing impost was to be taken
off at the close of that year; another tenth two years thereafter; so
proceeding until the 30th of June, 1842, when all duties should be
reduced to a maximum of twenty per cent.”–[Says Mr. Greeley, in his
History aforesaid.]–agreed to by Calhoun and other Nullifiers, was
passed, became a law without the signature of President Jackson, and
South Carolina once more became to all appearances a contented, law-
abiding State of the Union.
But after-events proved conclusively that the enactment of this
Compromise Tariff was a terrible blunder, if not a crime. Jackson had
fully intended to hang Calhoun and his nullifying coadjutors if they
persisted in their Treason. He knew that they had only seized upon the
Tariff laws as a pretext with which to justify Disunion, and prophesied
that “the next will be the Slavery or Negro question.” Jackson’s
forecast was correct. Free Trade, Slavery and Secession were from that
time forward sworn allies; and the ruin wrought to our industries by the
disasters of 1840, plainly traceable to that Compromise Tariff measure
of 1833, was only to be supplemented by much greater ruin and disasters
caused by the Free Trade Tariff of 1846–and to be followed by the armed
Rebellion of the Free Trade and Pro-Slavery States of the South in 1861,
in a mad attempt to destroy the Union.
CHAPTER III.
GROWTH OF THE SLAVERY QUESTION.
It will be remembered that during the period of the Missouri Struggle,
1818-1820, the Territory of Arkansas was formed by an Act of Congress
out of that part of the Missouri Territory not included in the proposed
State of Missouri, and that the Act so creating the Territory of
Arkansas contained no provision restricting Slavery. Early in 1836, the
people of Arkansas Territory met in Convention and formed a Constitution
under which, “and by virtue of the treaty of cession by France to the
United States, of the Province of Louisiana,” they asked admission to
the Union as a State. Among other provisions of that Constitution was a
section rendering the State Legislature powerless to pass laws for the
emancipation of slaves without the consent of the owners, or to prevent
emigrants to that State from bringing with them slaves. On June 15th of
the same year, Arkansas was, under that Constitution, admitted to the
Union as a Slave State, with the sole reservation, that nothing in the
Act of admission should be” construed as an assent by Congress to all or
any of the propositions contained” in the said Constitution.
Long ere this, all the Northern and Middle States had made provision for
the emancipation of such slaves as remained within their borders, and
only a few years previous (in 1829 and 1831-32) Virginia had made strong
but insufficient efforts toward the same end. The failure to free
Virginia of Slavery–the effort to accomplish which had been made by
some of the greatest of her statesmen–only served to rivet the chains
of human bondage more securely throughout all the Slave States, and from
that time on, no serious agitation occurred in any one of them, looking
toward even the most gradual emancipation. On the other hand, the
advocates of the extension of the Slave-Power by the expansion of Slave-
territory, were ever on the alert, they considered it of the last
importance to maintain the balance of power between the Slave States and
the Free States. Hence, while they had secured in 1819 the cession from
Spain to the United States of the Slave-holding Floridas, and the
organization of the Slave Territory of Florida in 1822–which
subsequently came in as a Slave State under the same Act (1845) that
admitted the Free State of Iowa–their greedy eyes were now cast upon
the adjoining rich territories of Mexico.
Efforts had (in 1827-1829) been made to purchase from Mexico the domain
which was known as Texas. They had failed. But already a part of Texas
had been settled by adventurous Americans under Mexican grants and
otherwise; and General Sam Houston, an adherent of the Slave Power,
having become a leading spirit among them, fomented a revolution. In
March, 1836, Texas, under his guidance, proclaimed herself a Republic
independent of Mexico.
The War that ensued between Texas and Mexico ended in the flight of the
Mexican Army and the capture of Santa Anna at San Jacinto, and a treaty
recognizing Texan independence. In October, 1836, General Houston was
inaugurated President of the Republic of Texas. Close upon this
followed (in August, 1837) a proposition to our Government from the
Texan envoy for the annexation of Texas to the United States. President
Van Buren declined the offer. The Northern friends of Freedom were as
much opposed to this annexation project as the advocates of Slavery were
anxious for it. Even such conservative Northern Statesmen as Daniel
Webster strongly opposed the project. In a speech delivered in New York
[1837], after showing that the chief aim of our Government in the
acquisition of the Territory of Louisiana was to gain command of the
mouths of the great rivers to the sea, and that in the acquisition of
the Floridas our policy was based on similar considerations, Mr. Webster
declared that “no such necessity, no such policy, requires the
annexation of Texas,” and that we ought “for numerous and powerful
reasons to be content with our present boundaries. He recognized that
Slavery already existed under the guarantees of the Constitution and
those guarantees must be fulfilled; that “Slavery, as it exists in the
States, is beyond the power of Congress. It is a concern of the States
themselves,” but “when we come to speak of admitting new States, the
subject assumes an entirely different aspect. Our rights and our duties
are then both different. The Free States, and all the States, are then
at liberty to accept or to reject;” and he added, “In my opinion the
people of the United States will not consent to bring into the Union a
new, vastly extensive and Slaveholding country, large enough for a half
a dozen or a dozen States. In my opinion, they ought not to consent to
it.”
Farther on, in the same speech–after alluding to the strong feeling in
the Northern States against the extension of Slavery, not only as a
question of politics, but of conscience and religious conviction as
well-he deems him a rash man indeed “who supposes that a feeling of this
kind is to be trifled with or despised.” Said he: “It will assuredly
cause itself to be respected. It may be reasoned with; it may be made
willing–I believe it is entirely willing–to fulfill all existing
engagements and all existing duties–to uphold and defend the
Constitution as it is established, with whatever regrets about some
provisions which it does actually contain. But to coerce it into
silence, to endeavor to restrain its free expression, to seek to
compress and confine it, warm as it is, and more heated as such
endeavors would inevitably render it,–should this be attempted, I know
nothing, even in the Constitution or in the Union itself, which would
not be endangered by the explosion which might follow.”
In 1840, General Harrison, the Whig candidate, was elected to the
Presidency, but died within a few weeks after his inauguration in 1841,
and was succeeded by John Tyler. The latter favored the Slave Power;
and on April 12th, 1844, John C. Calhoun, his Secretary of State,
concluded with Texas a treaty of annexation–which was, however,
rejected by the Senate. Meanwhile the public mind was greatly agitated
over the annexation and other, questions.
Davis’s agents to support the cause of the rebellious States, a
communication appeared during the early part of the war, Dec. 4,
1861, supposed to have been written by Mr. Mason, of Virginia, in
which he said: “To tell the Norths, the Butes, the Wedderburns of
the present day, that previous to the year 1839 the sovereign
States of the South had unalterably resolved on the specific ground
of the violation of the Federal Constitution by the tariff of
spoliation which the New England States had imposed upon them–to
secede from the Union; to tell them that in that year the leader of
the South, Calhoun, urged an English gentleman, to whom he had
fully explained the position of the South, and the intolerable
tyranny which the North inflicted upon it, to be the bearer of
credentials from the chief persons of the South, in order to invite
the attention of the British Government to the coming event; that
on his death-bed (Washington, March 31, 1850), he called around him
his political friends–one of whom is now in England–warned them
that in no event could the Union survive the Presidential election
of 1860, though it might possibly break up before that urged them
to be prepared; leaving with his dying words the sacred cause of
Southern secession a solemn legacy in their hands–to have told
this to the Norths and Dartmouths of the present day, with more and
even stronger evidence of the coming events of November, 1860,
would have been like speaking to the stones of the street. In
November, 1860, they were thoroughly ignorant of all the momentous
antecedents of secession–of their nature, their character, their
bearing, import, and consequences.”
In the same correspondence the distinguished Rebel emissary
substantially let out the fact that Calhoun was indirectly, through
himself (Mason), in secret communication with the British
Government as far back as 1841, with a view to securing its
powerful aid in his aforesaid unalterable resolve to Secede from
the Union; and then Mr. Mason pleads–but pleads in vain–for the
armed intervention of England at this later day. Said he:
“In the year 1841 the late Sir William Napier sent in two plans for
subduing the Union, to the War Office, in the first of which the
South was to be treated as an enemy, in the second as a friend and
ally. I was much consulted by him as to the second plan and was
referred to by name in it, as he showed by the acknowledgment of
this in Lord Fitzroy Somerset’s letter of reply. This plan fully
provided for the contingency of an invasion of Canada, and its
application would, in eighteen or twenty months, have reduced the
North to a much more impotent condition than it exhibits at
present. At this very moment the most difficult portion of that
plan has been perfectly accomplished by the South itself; and the
North, in accordance with Sir William Napier’s expectations, now
lies helpless before England, and at our absolute mercy. Nor is
there any doubt of this, and if Lord Palmerston is not aware of it
Mr. Seward certainly is. We have nothing remaining to do but to
stretch out our arm in the way Sir William Napier proposed, and the
Northern power–power as we ignorantly call it–must come to an
end. Sir William knew and well estimated the elements of which
that quasi power consisted; and he knew how to apply the
substantive power of England to dissolve it. In the best interest
of humanity, I venture to say that it is the duty of England to
apply this power without further delay–its duty to itself, to its
starving operatives, to France, to Europe, and to humanity. And in
the discharge of this great duty to the world at large there will
not even be the dignity of sacrifice or danger.”]
Threats and counter-threats of Disunion were made on either hand by the
opponents and advocates of Slavery-extension through annexation; nor was
it less agitated on the subject of a Protective Tariff.
The Compromise Tariff of 1833, together with President Jackson’s
upheaval of our financial system, produced, as has already been hinted,
terrible commercial disasters. “In 1840,” says competent authority, “all
prices had ruinously fallen; production had greatly diminished, and in
many departments of industry had practically ceased; thousands of
working men were idle, with no hope of employment, and their families
suffering from want. Our farmers were without markets, their products
rotted in their barns, and their lands, teeming with rich harvests, were
sold by the sheriff for debts and taxes. The Tariff, which robbed our
industries of Protection failed to supply Government with its necessary
revenues. The National Treasury in consequence was bankrupt, and the
credit of the Nation had sunk very low.”
Mr. Clay himself stated “the average depression in the value of property
under that state of things which existed before the Tariff of 1842 came
to the rescue of the country, at fifty per cent.” And hence it was that
Protection was made the chief issue of the Presidential campaign of
1840, which eventuated in the election of Harrison and Tyler, and in the
Tariff Act of August 30, 1842, which revived our trade and industries,
and brought back to the land a full measure of prosperity. With those
disasters fresh in the minds of the people, Protection continued to be a
leading issue in the succeeding Presidential campaign of 1844–but
coupled with the Texas-annexation issue. In that campaign Henry Clay
was the candidate of the Whig party and James K. Polk of the Democratic
party. Polk was an ardent believer in the annexation policy and stood
upon a platform declaring for the “re-occupation of Oregon and the re-
annexation of Texas at the earliest practicable moment”–as if the
prefix “re” legitimatized the claim in either case; Clay, on the other
hand, held that we had “fairly alienated our title to Texas by solemn
National compacts, to the fulfilment of which we stand bound by good
faith and National honor;” that “Annexation and War with Mexico are
identical,” and that he was “not willing to involve this country in a
foreign War for the object of acquiring Texas.”
Intelligencer.]
As to the Tariff issue also, Clay was the acknowledged champion of the
American system of Protection, while Polk was opposed to it, and was
supported by the entire Free-trade sentiment, whether North or South.
As the campaign progressed, it became evident that Clay would be
elected. Then occurred some of those fatalities which have more than
once, in the history of Presidential campaigns, overturned the most
reasonable expectations and defeated the popular will. Mr. Clay
committed a blunder and Mr. Polk an equivocation–to use the mildest
possible term. Mr. Clay was induced by Southern friends to write a
letter–[Published in the North Alabamian, Aug. 16, 1844.]–in which,
after stating that “far from having any personal objection to the
annexation of Texas, I should be glad to see it–without dishonor,
without War, with the common consent of the Union, and upon just and
fair terms,” he added: “I do not think that the subject of Slavery ought
to affect the question, one way or the other.” Mr. Polk, on the other
hand, wrote a letter in which he declared it to be “the duty of the
Government to extend, as far as it may be practicable to do so, by its
revenue laws and all other means within its power, fair and just
Protection to all the great interests of the whole Union, embracing
Agriculture, Manufactures, the Mechanic Arts, Commerce and Navigation.”
This was supplemented by a letter (August 8, 1844) from Judge Wilson
McCandless of Pennsylvania, strongly upholding the Protective principle,
claiming that Clay in his Compromise Tariff Bill had abandoned it, and
that Polk and Dallas had “at heart the true interests of Pennsylvania.”
Clay, thus betrayed by the treachery of Southern friends, was greatly
weakened, while Polk, by his beguiling letter, backed by the false
interpretation put upon it by powerful friends in the North, made the
North believe him a better Protectionist than Clay.
Polk was elected, and rewarded the misplaced confidence by making Robert
J. Walker his Secretary of the Treasury, and, largely through that
great Free Trader’s exertions, secured a repeal by Congress of the
Protective Tariff of 1842 and the enactment of the ruinous Free Trade
Tariff of 1846. Had Clay carried New York, his election was secure. As
it happened, Polk had a plurality in New York of but 5,106 in an immense
vote, and that slim plurality was given to him by the Abolitionists
throwing away some 15,000 on Birney. And thus also it curiously
happened that it was the Abolition vote which secured the election of
the candidate who favored immediate annexation and the extension of the
Slave Power!
Emboldened and apparently sustained by the result of the election, the
Slave Power could not await the inauguration of Mr. Polk, but proceeded
at once, under whip and spur, to drive the Texas annexation scheme
through Congress; and two days before the 4th of March, 1845, an Act
consenting to the admission of the Republic of Texas as a State of the
Union was approved by President Tyler.
In that Act it was provided that “New States of convenient size, not
exceeding four in number, in addition to the said State of Texas, and
having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said
State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled
to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution; and such
States as may be formed out of that portion of said territory lying
south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly
known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union
with or without Slavery, as the people of each State asking admission
may desire. And in such State or States as shall be formed out of said
territory north of said Missouri Compromise line, Slavery or involuntary
servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.” As has been lucidly
stated by another,–[Greeley’s History]–“while seeming to curtail and
circumscribe Slavery north of the above parallel (that of 36 30′ north
latitude), this measure really extended it northward to that parallel,
which it had not yet approached, under the flag of Texas, within
hundreds of miles. But the chief end of this sham Compromise was the
involving of Congress in an indirect indorsement of the claim of Texas
to the entire left bank of the Rio Grande, from its mouth to its source;
and this was effected.”
Texas quickly consented to the Act of annexation, and in December, 1845,
a Joint Resolution formally admitting her as a State of the Union,
reported by Stephen A. Douglas, was duly passed.
In May, 1846, the American forces under General Taylor, which had been
dispatched to protect Texas from threatened assault, were attacked by
the Mexican army, which at Palo Alto was badly defeated and at Resaca de
la Palma driven back across the Rio Grande.
Congress immediately declared that by this invasion a state of War
existed between Mexico and the United States. Thus commenced the War
with Mexico–destined to end in the triumph of the American Army, and
the acquisition of large areas of territory to the United States. In
anticipation of such triumph, President Polk lost little time in asking
an appropriation of over two million dollars by Congress to facilitate
negotiations for peace with, and territorial cession from, Mexico. And
a Bill making such appropriation was quickly passed by the House of
Representatives–but with the following significant proviso attached,
which had been offered by Mr. Wilmot: “Provided. That as an express and
fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the
Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty that
may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the
moneys herein appropriated, neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude
shall ever exist in any part of said territory, except for crime,
whereof the party shall first be duly convicted.”
The debate in the Senate upon the Wilmot proviso, which immediately
ensued, was cut short by the expiration of the Session of Congress–and
the Bill accordingly failed of passage.
In February, 1848, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was made between
Mexico and the United States, and Peace reigned once more. About the
same time a Bill was passed by the Senate providing Territorial
Governments for Oregon, California and New Mexico, which provided for
the reference of all questions touching Slavery in such Territories to
the United States Supreme Court, for arbitration. The Bill, however,
failed in the House. The ensuing Presidential campaign resulted in the
election of General Taylor, the Whig candidate, who was succeeded upon
his death, July 10, 1850, by Fillmore. Meanwhile, on the Oregon
Territory Bill, in 1848, a strong effort had been made by Mr. Douglas
and others to incorporate a provision extending to the Pacific Ocean the
Missouri Compromise line of 36 30′ of north latitude and extending to
all future organizations of Territories of the United States the
principles of said Compromise. This provision was adopted by the
Senate, but the House struck it from the Bill; the Senate receded, and
Oregon was admitted as a Free Territory. But the conflict in Congress
between those who would extend and those who would restrict Slavery
still continued, and indeed gathered vehemence with time. In 1850,
California was clamoring for admission as a Free State to the Union, and
New Mexico and Utah sought to be organized under Territorial
Governments.
In the heated discussions upon questions growing out of bills for these
purposes, and to rectify the boundaries of Texas, it was no easy matter
to reach an agreement of any sort. Finally, however, the Compromise of
1850, offered by Mr. Clay, was practically agreed to and carried out,
and under it: California was admitted as a Free State; New Mexico and
Utah were admitted to Territorial organization without a word pro or con
on the subject of Slavery; the State of Texas was awarded a pecuniary
compensation for the rectification of her boundaries; the Slave Trade in
the District of Columbia was abolished; and a more effectual Fugitive
Slave Act passed.
By both North and South, this Compromise of 1850, and the measures
growing out of it, were very generally acquiesced in, and for a while it
seemed as though a permanent settlement of the Slavery question had been
reached. But in the Fugitive Slave law, thus hastily enacted, lay
embedded the seed for further differences and excitements, speedily to
germinate. In its operation it proved not only unnecessarily cruel and
harsh, in the manner of the return to bondage of escaped slaves, but
also afforded a shield and support to the kidnapping of Free Negroes
from Northern States. The frequency of arrests in the Northern States,
and the accompanying circumstances of cruelty and brutality in the
execution of the law, soon made it especially odious throughout the
North, and created an active feeling of commiseration for the unhappy
victims of the Slave Power, which greatly intensified and increased the
growing Anti-Slavery sentiment in the Free States.
In 1852-53, an attempt was made in Congress to organize into the
Territory of Nebraska, the region of country lying west of Iowa and
Missouri. Owing to the opposition of the South the Bill was defeated.
In 1853-4 a similar Bill was reported to the Senate by Mr. Douglas, but
afterward at his own instance recommitted to the Committee on
Territories, and reported back by him again in such shape as to create,
instead of one, two Territories, that portion directly west of Missouri
to be called Kansas, and the balance to be known as Nebraska–one of the
sections of the Bill enacting:
“That in order to avoid all misconstruction it is hereby declared to be
the true intent and meaning of this Act, so far as the question of
Slavery is concerned, to carry into practical operation the following
propositions and principles, established by the Compromise measures of
1850, to wit:
“First, That all questions pertaining to Slavery in the Territories, and
the new States to be formed therefrom, are to be left to the decision of
the people residing therein through their appropriate representatives.
“Second, That ‘all cases involving title to slaves,’ and ‘questions of
personal freedom,’ are referred to the adjudication of the local
tribunals with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United
States.
“Third, That the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the United
States, in respect to fugitives from service, are to be carried into
faithful execution in all the `organized Territories,’ the same as in
the States.”
The sections authorizing Kansas and Nebraska to elect and send delegates
to Congress also prescribed:
“That the Constitution, and all laws of the United States which are not
locally inapplicable, shall have the same force and effect within the
said Territory, as elsewhere in the United States, except the section of
the Act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into the Union,
approved March 6th, 1820, which was superseded by the principles of the
Legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, and is
declared inoperative.”
And when “explaining this Kansas-Nebraska Bill” Mr. Douglas announced
that, in reporting it, “The object of the Committee was neither to
legislate Slavery in or out of the Territories; neither to introduce nor
exclude it; but to remove whatever obstacle Congress had put there, and
apply the doctrine of Congressional Non-intervention in accordance with
the principles of the Compromise Measures of 1850, and allow the people
to do as they pleased upon this as well as all other matters affecting
their interests.”
A vigorous and able debate ensued. A motion by Mr. Chase to strike out
the words “which was superseded by the principles of the legislation of
1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures,” was defeated decisively.
Subsequently Mr. Douglas moved to strike out the same words and insert
in place of them, these: “which being inconsistent with the principles
of Non-intervention by Congress with Slavery in the States and
Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850 (commonly called
the Compromise Measures), is hereby declared inoperative and void; it
being the true intent and meaning of this Act not to legislate Slavery
into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave
the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic
institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the
United States”–and the motion was agreed to by a vote of 35 yeas to 10
nays. Mr. Chase immediately moved to add to the amendment just adopted
these words: “Under which, the people of the Territory, through their
appropriate representatives, may, if they see fit, prohibit the
existence of Slavery therein;” but this motion was voted down by 36 nays
to 10 yeas. This developed the rat in the meal-tub. The people were to
be “perfectly free” to act either way on the subject of Slavery, so long
as they did not prohibit Slavery! In this shape the Bill passed the
Senate.
Public sentiment in the North was greatly stirred by this direct attempt
to repeal the Missouri Compromise. But by the superior parliamentary
tactics of Southern Representatives in the House, whereby the radical
friends of Freedom were shut out from the opportunity of amendment, a
House Bill essentially the same as the Senate Bill was subsequently
passed by the House, under the previous question, and afterward rapidly
passed the Senate, and was approved by the President. At once commenced
that long and terrible struggle between the friends of Free-Soil and the
friends of Slavery, for the possession of Kansas, which convulsed the
whole Country for years, and moistened the soil of that Territory with
streams of blood, shed in numerous “border-ruffian” conflicts.
The Territorial Government of Kansas was organized late in 1854, and an
“election” for Delegate held, at which the Pro-Slavery candidate
(Whitfield) was fraudulently elected. On March 30, 1855, a Territorial
Legislature was similarly chosen by Pro-Slavery voters “colonized” from
Missouri. That Legislature, upon its meeting, proceeded at once to
enact most outrageous Pro-Slavery laws, which being vetoed by the Free-
Soil Governor (Reeder), were passed over the veto, and the Free-Soil
Governor had to give place to one who favored Slavery in Kansas. But
the Free-Soil settlers of Kansas, in Mass Convention at Big Springs,
utterly repudiated the bogus Legislature and all its acts, to which they
refused submission.
In consequence of these radical differences, two separate elections for
Delegate in Congress were held by the opposing factions, at one of which
was elected the Pro-Slavery Whitfield, and at the other the Free-Soiler
Reeder. Furthermore, under a call issued by the Big Springs Convention,
a Free-State Constitutional Convention was held in October, 1855, at
Topeka, which framed a Free-State Constitution, and asked admission
under it to the Union.
In 1856, the House of Representatives–which, after a protracted
struggle, had elected N. P. Banks Speaker–passed a Bill, by a bare
majority, admitting Kansas under her Topeka Constitution; but the Senate
defeated it. July 4, 1856, by order of President Pierce, the Free-State
Legislature, chosen under the Topeka Constitution to meet at Topeka, was
dispersed by United States Troops. Yet, despite all oppositions,
discouragements, and outrages, the Free-State population of
Kansas continued to increase from immigration.
In 1857, the Pro-Slavery Legislature elected by the Pro-Slavery voters
at their own special election–the Free-State voters declining to
participate–called a Constitutional Convention at Lecompton, which
formed a Pro-Slavery Constitution. This was submitted to the people in
such dexterous manner that they could only vote “For the Constitution
with Slavery” or “For the Constitution without Slavery”–and, as the
Constitution prescribed that “the rights of property in Slaves now in
the Territory, shall in no manner be interfered with,” to vote “for the
Constitution Without Slavery” was an absurdity only paralleled by the
course of the United States Senate in refusing to permit the people of
Kansas “to prohibit Slavery” while at the same time declaring them
“perfectly free to act” as they chose in the matter.
The Constitution, with Slavery, was thus adopted by a vote of over
6,000. But in the meanwhile, at another general election held for the
purpose, and despite all the frauds perpetrated by the Pro-Slavery men,
a Free-State Legislature, and Free-State Delegate to Congress had been
elected; and this Legislature submitted the Lecompton Pro-Slavery
Constitution to the people, January 4, 1858, so that they could vote:
“For the Lecompton Constitution with Slavery,” “For the Lecompton
Constitution without Slavery,” or “Against the Lecompton Constitution.”
The consequence was that the Lecompton Constitution was defeated by a
majority of over 10,000 votes–the Missouri Pro-Slavery colonists
declining to recognize the validity of any further election on the
subject.
Meanwhile, in part upon the issues growing out of this Kansas conflict,
the political parties of the Nation had passed through another
Presidential campaign (1856), in which the Democratic candidate Buchanan
had been elected over Fremont the “Republican,” and Fillmore the
“American,” candidates. Both Houses of Congress being now Democratic,
Mr. Buchanan recommended them to accept and ratify the Lecompton Pro-
Slavery Constitution.
In March, 1858, the Senate passed a Bill–against the efforts of Stephen
A. Douglas–accepting it. In the House, however, a substitute offered
by Mr. Montgomery (Douglas Democrat) known as the Crittenden-Montgomery
Compromise, was adopted. The Senate refused to concur, and the report
of a Committee of Conference–providing for submitting to the Kansas
people a proposition placing limitations upon certain public land
advantages stipulated for in the Lecompton Constitution, and in case
they rejected the proposition that another Constitutional Convention
should be held–was adopted by both Houses; and the proposition being
rejected by the people of Kansas, the Pro-Slavery Lecompton Constitution
fell with it.
In 1859 a Convention, called by the Territorial Legislature for the
purpose, met at Wyandot, and framed a Free State Constitution which was
adopted by the people in October of that year, and at the ensuing State
election in December the State went Republican. In April, 1860, the
House of Representatives passed a Bill admitting Kansas as a State under
that Constitution, but the Democratic Senate adjourned without action on
the Bill; and it was not until early in 1861 that Kansas was at last
admitted.
In the meantime, the Free Trade Tariff of 1846 had produced the train of
business and financial disasters that its opponents predicted. Instead
of prosperity everywhere in the land, there was misery and ruin. Even
the discovery and working of the rich placer mines of California and the
consequent flow, in enormous volume, of her golden treasure into the
Eastern States, could not stay-the wide-spread flood of disaster.
President Fillmore, who had succeeded General Taylor on the latter’s
death, frequently called the attention of Congress to the evils produced
by this Free Trade, and to the necessity of protecting our manufactures
“from ruinous competition from abroad.” So also with his successor,
President Buchanan, who, in his Message of 1857, declared that “In the
midst of unsurpassed plenty in all the productions and in all the
elements of national wealth, we find our manufactures suspended, our
public works retarded, our private enterprises of different kinds
abandoned, and thousands of useful laborers thrown out of employment and
reduced to want.” Further than this, the financial credit of the Nation
was at zero. It was financially bankrupt before the close of Buchanan’s
Presidential term.
CHAPTER IV.
POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY.
But now occurred the great Presidential struggle of 1860 –which
involved not alone the principles of Protection, but those of human
Freedom, and the preservation of the Union itself-between Abraham
Lincoln of Illinois, the candidate of the Republican party, as against
Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, the National or Douglas-Democratic
candidate, John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, the Administration or
Breckinridge-Democratic candidate, and John Bell of Tennessee, the
candidate of the Bell-Union party. The great preliminary struggle which
largely influenced the determination of the Presidential political
conflict of 1860, had, however, taken place in the State of Illinois,
two years previously. To that preliminary political contest of 1858,
therefore, we will now turn our eyes–and, in order to fully understand
it, it may be well to glance back over a few years. In 1851 the
Legislature of Illinois had adopted–[The vote in the House being 65
yeas to 4 nays.]–the following resolution: “Resolved, That our Liberty
and Independence are based upon the right of the people to form for
themselves such a government as they may choose; that this great
principle, the birthright of freemen, the gift of Heaven, secured to us
by the blood of our ancestors, ought to be secured to future
generations, and no limitation ought to be applied to this power in the
organization of any Territory of the United States, of either
Territorial Government or State Constitution, provided the government so
established shall be Republican and in conformity with the Constitution
of the United States.” This resolution was a practical endorsement of
the course of Stephen A. Douglas in supporting the Compromise measures
of 1850, which he had defended as being “all founded upon the great
principle that every people ought to possess the right to form and
regulate their own domestic institutions in their own way,” and that
“the same principle” should be “extended to all of the Territories of
the United States.”
In accordance with his views and the resolution aforesaid, Mr. Douglas
in 1854, as we have already seen, incorporated in the Kansas-Nebraska
Bill a clause declaring it to be “the true intent and meaning of the Act
not to legislate Slavery into any State or Territory, or to exclude it
therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and
regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to
the Constitution of the United States.”
His position, as stated by himself, was, substantially that the
Lecompton Pro-Slavery Constitution was a fraud upon the people of
Kansas, in that it did not embody the will of that people; and he denied
the right of Congress to force a Constitution upon an unwilling people–
without regard, on his part, to whether that Constitution allowed or
prohibited Slavery or any other thing, whether good or bad. He held
that the people themselves were the sole judges of whether it is good or
bad, and whether desirable or not.
The Supreme Court of the United States had in the meantime made a
decision in a case afterward known as the “Dred Scott case,” which was
held back until after the Presidential election of 1856 had taken place,
and added fuel to the political fire already raging. Dred Scott was a
Negro Slave. His owner voluntarily took him first into a Free State,
and afterward into a Territory which came within the Congressional
prohibitive legislation aforesaid. That decision in brief was
substantially that no Negro Slave imported from Africa, nor his
descendant, can be a citizen of any State within the meaning of the
Constitution; that neither the Congress nor any Territorial Legislature
has under the Constitution of the United States, the power to exclude
Slavery from any Territory of the United States; and that it is for the
State Courts of the Slave State, into which the negro has been conveyed
by his master, and not for the United States Courts, to decide whether
that Negro, having been held to actual Slavery in a Free State, has, by
virtue of residence in such State, himself become Free.
Now it was, that the meaning of the words, “subject only to the
Constitution,” as used in the Kansas-Nebraska Act, began to be
discerned. For if the people of a Territory were to be “perfectly
free,” to deal with Slavery as they chose, “subject only to the
Constitution” they were by this Judicial interpretation of that
instrument “perfectly free” to deal with Slavery in any way so long as
they did not attempt “to exclude” it! The thing was all one-sided. Mr.
Douglas’s attitude in inventing the peculiar phraseology in the Kansas-
Nebraska Act–which to some seemed as if expressly “made to order” for
the Dred Scott decision–was criticized with asperity; the popularity,
however, of his courageous stand against President Buchanan on the
Lecompton fraud, seemed to make it certain that, his term in the United
States Senate being about to expire, he would be overwhelmingly re-
elected to that body.
But at this juncture occurred something, which for a long time held the
result in doubt, and drew the excited attention of the whole Nation to
Illinois as the great battle-ground. In 1858 a Republican State
Convention was held at Springfield, Ill., which nominated Abraham
Lincoln as the Republican candidate for United States Senator to succeed
Senator Douglas in the National Legislature. On June 16th–after such
nomination–Mr. Lincoln made to the Convention a speech–in which, with
great and incisive power, he assailed Mr. Douglas’s position as well as
that of the whole Democratic Pro-Slavery Party, and announced in compact
and cogent phrase, from his own point of view, the attitude, upon the
Slavery question, of the Republican Party.
In that remarkable speech–which at once attracted the attention of the
Country–Mr. Lincoln said: “We are now far into the fifth year, since a
policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident promise, of
putting an end to Slavery agitation. Under the operation of that
policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly
augmented. In my opinion it will not cease, until a crisis shall have
been reached and passed. ‘A House divided against itself cannot stand.’
I believe this Government cannot endure permanently half Slave and half
Free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved–I do not expect the
House to fall–but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will
become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of Slavery
will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind
shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate
extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become
alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as well as
South.”
made four months later.]
He then proceeded to lay bare and closely analyze the history of all
that had been done, during the four years preceding, to produce the
prevailing condition of things touching human Slavery; describing it as
resulting from that, “now almost complete legal combination-piece of
machinery, so to speak–compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred
Scott decision.” After stating the several points of that decision, and
that the doctrine of the “Sacred right of self-government” had been
perverted by the Nebraska “Squatter Sovereignty,” argument to mean that,
“if any one man chose to enslave another, no third man shall be allowed
to object,” he proceeded to show the grounds upon which he charged “pre-
concert” among the builders of that machinery. Said he: “The people
were to be left perfectly free, ‘subject only to the Constitution.’
What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders could not see.
Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche for the Dred Scott
decision to afterward come in and declare the perfect freedom of the
people to be just no freedom at all. Why was the amendment, expressly
declaring the right of the people, voted down? Plainly enough now, the
adoption of it would have spoiled the niche for the Dred Scott decision.
Why was the Court decision held up? Why even a Senator’s individual
opinion withheld, till after the Presidential election? Plainly enough
now: the speaking out then would have damaged the ‘perfectly free’
argument upon which the election was to be carried. Why the outgoing
President’s felicitation on the indorsement? Why the delay of a re-
argument? Why the incoming President’s advance exhortation in favor of
the decision? These things look like the cautious patting and petting
of a spirited horse, preparatory to mounting him, when it is dreaded
that he may give the rider a fall. And why the hasty after-indorsement
of the decision, by the President and others? We cannot absolutely know
that all these exact adaptations are the result of pre-concert. But
when we see a lot of framed timbers, different portions of which we know
have been gotten out at different times and places and by different
workmen–Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James–[Douglas, Pierce, Taney
and Buchanan.]–for instance–and when we see these timbers joined
together, and see they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all
the tenons and mortices exactly fitting, and all the lengths and
proportions of the different pieces exactly adapted to their respective
places, and not a piece too many or too few–not omitting even the
scaffolding, or, if a single piece be lacking, we see the place in the
frame exactly fitted and prepared yet to bring such piece in–in such a
case, we find it impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and
Roger and James all understood one another from the beginning, and all
worked upon a common plan or draft drawn up before the first blow was
struck.”
He drew attention also to the fact that by the Nebraska Bill the people
of a State, as well as a Territory, were to be left “perfectly free,”
“subject only to the Constitution,” and that the object of lugging a
“State” into this merely Territorial law was to enable the United States
Supreme Court in some subsequent decision to declare, when the public
mind had been sufficiently imbued with Judge Douglas’s notion of not
caring “whether Slavery be voted up or voted down,” that “the
Constitution of the United States does not permit a State to exclude
Slavery from its limits”–which would make Slavery “alike lawful in all
the States.” That, he declared to be Judge Douglas’s present mission:–
“His avowed mission is impressing the ‘public heart’ to care nothing
about it.” Hence Mr. Lincoln urged Republicans to stand by their cause,
which must be placed in the hands of its friends, “Whose hands are free,
whose hearts are in the work–who do care for the result;” for he held
that “a living dog is better than a dead lion.”
On the evening of July 9, 1858, at Chicago, Mr. Douglas (Mr. Lincoln
being present) spoke to an enthusiastic assemblage, which he fitly
described as a “vast sea of human faces,” and, after stating that he
regarded “the Lecompton battle as having been fought and the victory
won, because the arrogant demand for the admission of Kansas under the
Lecompton Constitution unconditionally, whether her people wanted it or
not, has been abandoned, and the principle which recognizes the right of
the people to decide for themselves has been submitted in its place,” he
proceeded to vindicate his position throughout; declared that he opposed
“the Lecompton monstrosity solely on the ground than it was a violation
of the fundamental principles of free government; on the ground that it
was not the act and deed of the people of Kansas; that it did not embody
their will; that they were averse to it;” and hence he “denied the right
of Congress to force it upon them, either as a Free State or a Slave
State.”
Said he: “I deny the right of Congress to force a Slaveholding State
upon an unwilling people. I deny their right to force a Free State upon
an unwilling people. I deny their right to force a good thing upon a
people who are unwilling to receive it. The great principle is the
right of every community to judge and decide for itself, whether a thing
is right or wrong, whether it would be good or evil for them to adopt
it; and the right of free action, the right of free thought, the right
of free judgment upon the question is dearer to every true American than
any other under a free Government. * * * It is no answer to this
argument to say that Slavery is an evil, and hence should not be
tolerated. You must allow the people to decide for themselves whether
it is good or evil.” He then adverted to the arraignment of himself by
Mr. Lincoln, and took direct issue with that gentleman on his
proposition that, as to Freedom and Slavery, “the Union will become all
one thing or all the other;” and maintained on the contrary, that “it is
neither desirable nor possible that there should be uniformity in the
local institutions and domestic regulations of the different States of
this Union.”
Upon the further proposition of Mr. Lincoln, which Mr. Douglas described
as “a crusade against the Supreme Court of the United States on account
of the Dred Scott decision,” and as “an appeal from the decision” of
that Court “upon this high Constitutional question to a Republican
caucus sitting in the country,” he also took “direct and distinct issue
with him.” To “the reason assigned by Mr. Lincoln for resisting the
decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case * * * because it
deprives the Negro of the privileges, immunities and rights of
citizenship which pertain, according to that decision, only to the White
man,” Mr. Douglas also took exception thus: “I am free to say to you
that in my opinion this Government of ours is founded on the White
basis. It was made by the White man for the benefit of the White man,
to be administered by White men, in such manner as they should
determine. It is also true that a Negro, an Indian, or any other man of
inferior race to a White man, should be permitted to enjoy, and humanity
requires that he should have, all the rights, privileges, and immunities
which he is capable of exercising consistent with the safety of society.
* * * But you may ask me what are these rights and these privileges?
My answer is, that each State must decide for itself the nature and
extent of these rights. * * * Without indorsing the wisdom of that
decision, I assert that Virginia has the same power by virtue of her
sovereignty to protect Slavery within her limits, as Illinois has to
banish it forever from our own borders. I assert the right of each
State to decide for itself on all these questions, and I do not
subscribe to the doctrine of my friend, Mr. Lincoln, that uniformity is
either desirable or possible. I do not acknowledge that the States must
all be Free or must all be Slave. I do not acknowledge that the Negro
must have civil and political rights everywhere or nowhere. * * * I do
not acknowledge any of these doctrines of uniformity in the local and
domestic regulations in the different States. * * * Mr. Lincoln goes
for a warfare upon the Supreme Court of the United States because of
their judicial decision in the Dred Scott case. I yield obedience to
the decisions in that Court–to the final determination of the highest
judicial tribunal known to our Constitution. He objects to the Dred
Scott decision because it does not put the Negro in the possession of
the rights of citizenship on an equality with the White man. I am
opposed to Negro equality. * * * I would extend to the Negro, and the
Indian, and to all dependent races every right, every privilege, and
every immunity consistent with the safety and welfare of the White
races; but equality they never should have, either political or social,
or in any other respect whatever. * * * My friends, you see that the
issues are distinctly drawn.”
On the following evening (July 10th) at Chicago, Mr. Lincoln addressed
another enthusiastic assemblage, in reply to Mr. Douglas; and, after
protesting against a charge that had been made the previous night by the
latter, of an “unnatural and unholy” alliance between Administration
Democrats and Republicans to defeat him, as being beyond his own
knowledge and belief, proceeded: “Popular Sovereignty! Everlasting
Popular Sovereignty! Let us for a moment inquire into this vast matter
of Popular Sovereignty. What is Popular Sovereignty? We recollect at
an early period in the history of this struggle there was another name
for the same thing–Squatter Sovereignty. It was not exactly Popular
Sovereignty, but Squatter Sovereignty. What do those terms mean? What
do those terms mean when used now? And vast credit is taken by our
friend, the Judge, in regard to his support of it, when he declares the
last years of his life have been, and all the future years of his life
shall be, devoted to this matter of Popular Sovereignty. What is it?
Why it is the Sovereignty of the People! What was Squatter Sovereignty?
I suppose if it had any significance at all, it was the right of the
people to govern themselves, to be sovereign in their own affairs while
they were squatted down in a country not their own–while they had
squatted on a territory that did not belong to them in the sense that a
State belongs to the people who inhabit it–when it belonged to the
Nation–such right to govern themselves was called ‘Squatter
Sovereignty.’
“Now I wish you to mark. What has become of that Squatter Sovereignty?
What has become of it? Can you get anybody to tell you now that the
people of a Territory have any authority to govern themselves, in regard
to this mooted question of Slavery, before they form a State
Constitution? No such thing at all, although there is a general running
fire and although there has been a hurrah made in every speech on that
side, assuming that that policy had given the people of a Territory the
right to govern themselves upon this question; yet the point is dodged.
To-day it has been decided–no more than a year ago it was decided by
the Supreme Court of the United States, and is insisted upon to-day,
that the people of a Territory have no right to exclude Slavery from a
Territory, that if any one man chooses to take Slaves into a Territory,
all the rest of the people have no right to keep them out. This being
so, and this decision being made one of the points that the Judge
(Douglas) approved, * * * he says he is in favor of it, and sticks to
it, and expects to win his battle on that decision, which says there is
no such thing as Squatter Sovereignty; but that any man may take Slaves
into a Territory and all the other men in the Territory may be opposed
to it, and yet by reason of the Constitution they cannot prohibit it;
when that is so, how much is left of this vast matter of Squatter
Sovereignty, I should like to know? Again, when we get to the question
of the right of the people to form a State Constitution as they please,
to form it with Slavery or without Slavery–if that is anything new, I
confess I don’t know it * * *.
“We do not remember that, in that old Declaration of Independence, it is
said that ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted
among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.’
There, is the origin of Popular Sovereignty. Who, then, shall come in
at this day and claim that he invented it? The Lecompton Constitution
connects itself with this question, for it is in this matter of the
Lecompton Constitution that our friend, Judge Douglas, claims such vast
credit. I agree that in opposing the Lecompton Constitution, so far as
I can perceive, he was right. * * * All the Republicans in the Nation
opposed it, and they would have opposed it just as much without Judge
Douglas’s aid as with it. They had all taken ground against it long
before he did. Why, the reason that he urges against that Constitution,
I urged against him a year before. I have the printed speech in my hand
now. The argument that he makes, why that Constitution should not be
adopted, that the people were not fairly represented nor allowed to
vote, I pointed out in a speech a year ago which I hold in my hand now,
that no fair chance was to be given to the people. * * * The Lecompton
Constitution, as the Judge tells us, was defeated. The defeat of it was
a good thing or it was not. He thinks the defeat of it was a good
thing, and so do I, and we agree in that. Who defeated it? [A voice–
‘Judge Douglas.’] Yes, he furnished himself, and if you suppose he
controlled the other Democrats that went with him, he furnished three
votes, while the Republicans furnished twenty. That is what he did to
defeat it. In the House of Representatives he and his friends furnished
some twenty votes, and the Republicans furnished ninety odd. Now, who
was it that did the work? * * * Ground was taken against it by the
Republicans long before Douglas did it. The proportion of opposition to
that measure is about five to one.”
Mr. Lincoln then proceeded to take up the issues which Mr. Douglas had
joined with him the previous evening. He denied that he had said, or
that it could be fairly inferred from what he had said, in his
Springfield speech, that he was in favor of making War by the North upon
the South for the extinction of Slavery, “or, in favor of inviting the
South to a War upon the North, for the purpose of nationalizing
Slavery.” Said he: “I did not even say that I desired that Slavery
should be put in course of ultimate extinction. I do say so now,
however; so there need be no longer any difficulty about that. * * * I
am tolerably well acquainted with the history of the Country and I know
that it has endured eighty-two years half Slave and half Free. I
believe–and that is what I meant to allude to there–I believe it has
endured, because during all that time, until the introduction of the
Nebraska Bill, the public mind did rest all the, time in the belief that
Slavery was in course of ultimate extinction. That was what gave us the
rest that we had through that period of eighty-two years; at least, so I
believe.
“I have always hated Slavery, I think, as much as any Abolitionist–I
have been an Old Line Whig–I have always hated it, but I have always
been quiet about it until this new era of the introduction of the
Nebraska Bill began. I always believed that everybody was against it,
and that it was in course of ultimate extinction. * * * The great mass
of the Nation have rested in the belief that Slavery was in course of
ultimate extinction. They had reason so to believe. The adoption of
the Constitution and its attendant history led the People to believe so,
and that such was the belief of the framers of the Constitution itself.
Why did those old men about the time of the adoption of the Constitution
decree that Slavery should not go into the new territory, where it had
not already gone? Why declare that within twenty years the African
Slave Trade, by which Slaves are supplied, might be cut off by Congress?
Why were all these acts? I might enumerate more of these acts–but
enough. What were they but a clear indication that the framers of the
Constitution intended and expected the ultimate extinction of that
institution?
“And now, when I say, as I said in my speech that Judge Douglas has
quoted from, when I say that I think the opponents of Slavery will
resist the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind
shall rest with the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction,
I only mean to say, that they will place it where the founders of this
Government originally placed it. I have said a hundred times, and I
have now no inclination to take it back, that I believe there is no
right, and ought to be no inclination in the people of the Free States,
to enter into the Slave States, and interfere with the question of
Slavery at all. I have said that always; Judge Douglas has heard me say
it–if not quite a hundred times, at least as good as a hundred times;
and when it is said that I am in favor of interfering with Slavery where
it exists, I know that it is unwarranted by anything I have ever
intended, and as I believe, by anything I have ever said. If, by any
means, I have ever used language which could fairly be so construe (as,
however, I believe I never have) I now correct it. So much, then, for
the inference that Judge Douglas draws, that I am in favor of setting
the Sections at War with one another.
“Now in relation to his inference that I am in favor of a general
consolidation of all the local institutions of the various States * * *
I have said, very many times in Judge Douglas’s hearing, that no man
believed more than I in the principle of self-government from beginning
to end. I have denied that his use of that term applies properly. But
for the thing itself, I deny that any man has ever gone ahead of me in
his devotion to the principle, whatever he may have done in efficiency
in advocating it. I think that I have said it in your hearing–that I
believe each individual is naturally entitled to do as he pleases with
himself and the fruit of his labor, so far as it in no wise interferes
with any other man’s rights–that each community, as a State, has a
right to do exactly as it pleases with all the concerns within that
State that interfere with the rights of no other State, and that the
General Government, upon principle, has no right to interfere with
anything other than that general class of things that does concern the
whole. I have said that at all times.
“I have said, as illustrations, that I do not believe in the right of
Illinois to interfere with the cranberry laws of Indiana, the oyster
laws of Virginia, or the liquor laws of Maine. I have said these things
over and over again, and I repeat them here as my sentiments. * * *
What can authorize him to draw any such inference? I suppose there
might be one thing that at least enabled him to draw such an inference
that would not be true with me or many others, that is, because he looks
upon all this matter of Slavery as an exceedingly little thing–this
matter of keeping one-sixth of the population of the whole Nation in a
state of oppression and tyranny unequaled in the World.
“He looks upon it as being an exceedingly little thing only equal to the
cranberry laws of Indiana–as something having no moral question in it–
as something on a par with the question of whether a man shall pasture
his land with cattle, or plant it with tobacco–so little and so small a
thing, that he concludes, if I could desire that anything should be done
to bring about the ultimate extinction of that little thing, I must be
in favor of bringing about an amalgamation of all the other little
things in the Union.
“Now it so happens–and there, I presume, is the foundation of this
mistake–that the Judge thinks thus; and it so happens that there is a
vast portion of the American People that do not look upon that matter as
being this very little thing. They look upon it as a vast moral evil;
they can prove it as such by the writings of those who gave us the
blessings of Liberty which we enjoy, and that they so looked upon it,
and not as an evil merely confining itself to the States where it is
situated; while we agree that, by the Constitution we assented to, in
the States where it exists we have no right to interfere with it,
because it is in the Constitution; and we are by both duty and
inclination to stick by that Constitution in all its letter and spirit,
from beginning to end. * * * The Judge can have no issue with me on a
question of establishing uniformity in the domestic regulations of the
States. * * *
“Another of the issues he says that is to be made with me, is upon his
devotion to the Dred Scott decision, and my opposition to it. I have
expressed heretofore, and I now repeat, my opposition to the Dred Scott
decision; but I should be allowed to state the nature of that
opposition. * * * What is fairly implied by the term Judge Douglas has
used, ‘resistance to the decision?’ I do not resist it. If I wanted to
take Dred Scott from his master, I would be interfering with property
and that terrible difficulty that Judge Douglas speaks of, of
interfering with property, would arise. But I am doing no such thing as
that, but all that I am doing is refusing to obey it, as a political
rule. If I were in Congress, and a vote should come up on a question
whether Slavery should be prohibited in a new Territory, in spite of the
Dred Scott decision, I would vote that it should. That is what I would
do.
“Judge Douglas said last night, that before the decision he might
advance his opinion, and it might be contrary to the decision when it
was made; but after it was made, he would abide by it until it was
reversed. Just so! We let this property abide by the decision, but we
will try to reverse that decision. We will try to put it where Judge
Douglas would not object, for he says he will obey it until it is
reversed. Somebody has to reverse that decision, since it is made, and
we mean to reverse it, and we mean to do it peaceably.
“What are the uses of decisions of Courts? They have two uses. As
rules of property they have two uses. First, they decide upon the
question before the Court. They decide in this case that Dred Scott is
a Slave. Nobody resists that. Not only that, but they say to everybody
else, that persons standing just as Dred Scott stands, are as he is.
That is, they say that when a question comes up upon another person, it
will be so decided again, unless the Court decides in another way–
unless the Court overrules its decision.–Well, we mean to do what we
can to have the Court decide the other way. That is one thing we mean
to try to do.
“The sacredness that Judge Douglas throws around this decision is a
degree of sacredness that has never before been thrown around any other
decision. I have never heard of such a thing. Why, decisions
apparently contrary to that decision, or that good lawyers thought were
contrary to that decision, have been made by that very Court before. It
is the first of its kind; it is an astonisher in legal history. It is a
new wonder of the world. It is based upon falsehood in the main as to
the facts–allegations of facts upon which it stands are not facts at
all in many instances; and no decision made on any question–the first
instance of a decision made under so many unfavorable circumstances–
thus placed, has ever been held by the profession as law, and it has
always needed confirmation before the lawyers regarded it as settled
law. But Judge Douglas will have it that all hands must take this
extraordinary decision, made under these extraordinary circumstances,
and give their vote in Congress in accordance with it, yield to it and
obey it in every possible sense.
“Circumstances alter cases. Do not gentlemen remember the case of that
same Supreme Court, some twenty-five or thirty years ago, deciding that
a National Bank was Constitutional? * * * The Bank charter ran out,
and a recharter was granted by Congress. That re-charter was laid
before General Jackson. It was urged upon him, when he denied the
Constitutionality of the Bank, that the Supreme Court had decided that
it was Constitutional; and General Jackson then said that the Supreme
Court had no right to lay down a rule to govern a co-ordinate branch of
the Government, the members of which had sworn to support the
Constitution–that each member had sworn to support that Constitution as
he understood it. I will venture here to say, that I have heard Judge
Douglas say that he approved of General Jackson for that act. What has
now become of all his tirade about ‘resistance to the Supreme Court?'”
After adverting to Judge Douglas’s warfare on “the leaders” of the
Republican party, and his desire to have “it understood that the mass of
the Republican party are really his friends,” Mr. Lincoln said: “If you
indorse him, you tell him you do not care whether Slavery be voted up or
down, and he will close, or try to close, your mouths with his
declaration repeated by the day, the week, the month, and the year. Is
that what you mean? * * * Now I could ask the Republican party, after
all the hard names that Judge Douglas has called them by, all his
repeated charges of their inclination to marry with and hug negroes–all
his declarations of Black Republicanism–by the way, we are improving,
the black has got rubbed off–but with all that, if he be indorsed by
Republican votes, where do you stand? Plainly, you stand ready saddled,
bridled, and harnessed, and waiting to be driven over to the Slavery-
extension camp of the Nation–just ready to be driven over, tied
together in a lot–to be driven over, every man with a rope around his
neck, that halter being held by Judge Douglas. That is the question.
If Republican men have been in earnest in what they have done, I think
that they has better not do it. * * *
“We were often–more than once at least–in the course of Judge
Douglas’s speech last night, reminded that this Government was made for
White men–that he believed it was made for White men. Well, that is
putting it in a shape in which no one wants to deny it; but the Judge
then goes into his passion for drawing inferences that are not
warranted. I protest, now and forever, against that counterfeit logic
which presumes that because I do not want a Negro woman for a Slave I do
necessarily want her for a wife. My understanding is that I need not
have her for either; but, as God has made us separate, we can leave one
another alone, and do one another much good thereby. There are White
men enough to marry all the White women, and enough Black men to marry
all the Black women, and in God’s name let them be so married. The
Judge regales us with the terrible enormities that take place by the
mixture of races; that the inferior race bears the superior down. Why,
Judge, if we do not let them get together in the Territories, they won’t
mix there.
” * * * Those arguments that are made, that the inferior race are to be
treated with as much allowance as they are capable of enjoying; that as
much is to be done for them as their condition will allow–what are
these arguments? They are the arguments that Kings have made for
enslaving the People in all ages of the World. You will find that all
the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always
bestrode the necks of the People, not that they wanted to do it, but
because the People were better off for being ridden! That is their
argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old Serpent that
says: you work, and I eat; you toil, and I will enjoy the fruits of it.
“Turn it whatever way you will–whether it come from the mouth of a
King, an excuse for enslaving the People of his Country, or from the
mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another
race, it is all the same old Serpent; and I hold, if that course of
argumentation that is made for the purpose of convincing the public mind
that we should not care about this, should be granted, it does not stop
with the Negro.
“I should like to know, taking this old Declaration of Independence,
which declares that all men are equal upon principle, and making
exceptions to it, where will it stop? If one man says it does not mean
a Negro, why not say it does not mean some other man? If that
Declaration is not the truth, let us get the Statute Book, in which we
find it, and tear it out! Who is so bold as to do it? If it is not
true, let us tear it out!” [Cries of “No, no.”] “Let us stick to it
then; let us stand firmly by it, then. * * *
” * * * The Saviour, I suppose, did not expect that any human creature
could be perfect as the Father in Heaven; but He said, ‘As your Father
in Heaven is perfect, be ye also perfect.’ He set that up as a
standard, and he who did most toward reaching that standard, attained
the highest degree of moral perfection. So I say, in relation to the
principle that all men are created equal–let it be as nearly reached as
we can. If we cannot give Freedom to every creature, let us do nothing
that will impose Slavery upon any other creature. Let us then turn this
Government back into the channel in which the framers of the
Constitution originally placed it. Let us stand firmly by each other.
* * * Let us discard all this quibbling * * * and unite as one People
throughout this Land, until we shall once more stand up declaring that
all men are created equal.”
At Bloomington, July 16th (Mr. Lincoln being present), Judge Douglas
made another great speech of vindication and attack. After sketching
the history of the Kansas-Nebraska struggle, from the introduction by
himself of the Nebraska Bill in the United States Senate, in 1854, down
to the passage of the “English” Bill–which prescribed substantially
that if the people of Kansas would come in as a Slave-holding State,
they should be admitted with but 35,000 inhabitants; but if they would
come in as a Free State, they must have 93,420 inhabitants; which unfair
restriction was opposed by Judge Douglas, but to which after it became
law he “bowed in deference,” because whatever decision the people of
Kansas might make on the coming third of August would be “final and
conclusive of the whole question”–he proceeded to compliment the
Republicans in Congress, for supporting the Crittenden-Montgomery Bill–
for coming “to the Douglas platform, abandoning their own, believing (in
the language of the New York Tribune), that under the peculiar
circumstances they would in that mode best subserve the interests of the
Country;” and then again attacked Mr. Lincoln for his “unholy and
unnatural alliance” with the Lecompton-Democrats to defeat him, because
of which, said he: “You will find he does not say a word against the
Lecompton Constitution or its supporters. He is as silent as the grave
upon that subject. Behold Mr. Lincoln courting Lecompton votes, in
order that he may go to the Senate as the representative of Republican
principles! You know that the alliance exists. I think you will find
that it will ooze out before the contest is over.” Then with many
handsome compliments to the personal character of Mr. Lincoln, and
declaring that the question for decision was “whether his principles are
more in accordance with the genius of our free institutions, the peace
and harmony of the Republic” than those advocated by himself, Judge
Douglas proceeded to discuss what he described as “the two points at
issue between Mr. Lincoln and myself.”
Said he: “Although the Republic has existed from 1789 to this day,
divided into Free States and Slave States, yet we are told that in the
future it cannot endure unless they shall become all Free or all Slave.
* * * He wishes to go to the Senate of the United States in order to
carry out that line of public policy which will compel all the States in
the South to become Free. How is he going to do it? Has Congress any
power over the subject of Slavery in Kentucky or Virginia or any other
State of this Union? How, then, is Mr. Lincoln going to carry out that
principle which he says is essential to the existence of this Union, to
wit: That Slavery must be abolished in all the States of the Union or
must be established in them all? You convince the South that they must
either establish Slavery in Illinois and in every other Free State, or
submit to its abolition in every Southern State and you invite them to
make a warfare upon the Northern States in order to establish Slavery
for the sake of perpetuating it at home. Thus, Mr. Lincoln invites, by
his proposition, a War of Sections, a War between Illinois and Kentucky,
a War between the Free States and the Slave States, a War between the
North and South, for the purpose of either exterminating Slavery in
every Southern State or planting it in every Northern State. He tells
you that the safety of the Republic, that the existence of this Union,
depends upon that warfare being carried on until one Section or the
other shall be entirely subdued. The States must all be Free or Slave,
for a house divided against itself cannot stand. That is Mr. Lincoln’s
argument upon that question. My friends, is it possible to preserve
Peace between the North and the South if such a doctrine shall prevail
in either Section of the Union?
“Will you ever submit to a warfare waged by the Southern States to
establish Slavery in Illinois? What man in Illinois would not lose the
last drop of his heart’s blood before lie would submit to the
institution of Slavery being forced upon us by the other States against
our will? And if that be true of us, what Southern man would not shed
the last drop of his heart’s blood to prevent Illinois, or any other
Northern State, from interfering to abolish Slavery in his State? Each
of these States is sovereign under the Constitution; and if we wish to
preserve our liberties, the reserved rights and sovereignty of each and
every State must be maintained. * * * The difference between Mr.
Lincoln and myself upon this point is, that he goes for a combination of
the Northern States, or the organization of a sectional political party
in the Free States, to make War on the domestic institutions of the
Southern States, and to prosecute that War until they all shall be
subdued, and made to conform to such rules as the North shall dictate to
them.
“I am aware that Mr. Lincoln, on Saturday night last, made a speech at
Chicago for the purpose, as he said, of explaining his position on this
question. * * * His answer to this point which I have been arguing,
is, that he never did mean, and that I ought to know that he never
intended to convey the idea, that he wished the people of
the Free States to enter into the Southern States and interfere with
Slavery. Well, I never did suppose that he ever dreamed of entering
into Kentucky, to make War upon her institutions, nor will any
Abolitionist ever enter into Kentucky to wage such War. Their mode of
making War is not to enter into those States where Slavery exists, and
there interfere, and render themselves responsible for the consequences.
Oh, no! They stand on this side of the Ohio River and shoot across.
They stand in Bloomington and shake their fists at the people of
Lexington; they threaten South Carolina from Chicago. And they call
that bravery! But they are very particular, as Mr. Lincoln says, not to
enter into those States for the purpose of interfering with the
institution of Slavery there. I am not only opposed to entering into
the Slave States, for the purpose of interfering with their
institutions, but I am opposed to a sectional agitation to control the
institutions of other States. I am opposed to organizing a sectional
party, which appeals to Northern pride, and Northern passion and
prejudice, against Southern institutions, thus stirring up ill feeling
and hot blood between brethren of the same Republic. I am opposed to
that whole system of sectional agitation, which can produce nothing but
strife, but discord, but hostility, and finally disunion. * * *
“I ask Mr. Lincoln how it is that he purposes ultimately to bring about
this uniformity in each and all the States of the Union? There is but
one possible mode which I can see, and perhaps Mr. Lincoln intends to
pursue it; that is, to introduce a proposition into the Senate to change
the Constitution of the United States in order that all the State
Legislatures may be abolished, State Sovereignty blotted out, and the
power conferred upon Congress to make local laws and establish the
domestic institutions and police regulations uniformly throughout the
United States.
“Are you prepared for such a change in the institutions of your country?
Whenever you shall have blotted out the State Sovereignties, abolished
the State Legislatures, and consolidated all the power in the Federal
Government, you will have established a Consolidated Empire as
destructive to the Liberties of the People and the Rights of the Citizen
as that of Austria, or Russia, or any other despotism that rests upon
the neck of the People. * * * There is but one possible way in which
Slavery can be abolished, and that is by leaving a State, according to
the principle of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, perfectly free to form and
regulate its institutions in its own way. That was the principle upon
which this Republic was founded, and it is under the operation of that
principle that we have been able to preserve the Union thus far under
its operation. Slavery disappeared from New Hampshire, from Rhode
Island, from Connecticut, from New York, from New Jersey, from
Pennsylvania, from six of the twelve original Slave-holding States; and
this gradual system of emancipation went on quietly, peacefully, and
steadily, so long as we in the Free States minded our own business, and
left our neighbors alone.
“But the moment the Abolition Societies were organized throughout the
North, preaching a violent crusade against Slavery in the Southern
States, this combination necessarily caused a counter-combination in the
South, and a sectional line was drawn which was a barrier to any further
emancipation. Bear in mind that emancipation has not taken place in any
one State since the Free Soil Party was organized as a political party
in this country. Emancipation went on gradually, in State after State,
so long as the Free States were content with managing their own affairs
and leaving the South perfectly free to do as they pleased; but the
moment the North said we are powerful enough to control you of the
South, the moment the North proclaimed itself the determined master of
the South, that moment the South combined to resist the attack, and thus
sectional parties were formed and gradual emancipation ceased in all the
Slave-holding States.
“And yet Mr. Lincoln, in view of these historical facts, proposes to
keep up this sectional agitation, band all the Northern States together
in one political Party, elect a President by Northern votes alone, and
then, of course, make a Cabinet composed of Northern men, and administer
the Government by Northern men only, denying all the Southern States of
this Union any participation in the administration of affairs
whatsoever. I submit to you, my fellow-citizens, whether such a line of
policy is consistent with the peace and harmony of the Country? Can the
Union endure under such a system of policy? He has taken his position
in favor of sectional agitation and sectional warfare. I have taken
mine in favor of securing peace, harmony, and good-will among all the
States, by permitting each to mind its own business, and
discountenancing any attempt at interference on the part of one State
with the domestic concerns of the others. * * *
“Mr. Lincoln tells you that he is opposed to the decision of the Supreme
Court in the Dred Scott case. Well, suppose he is; what is he going to
do about it? * * * Why, he says he is going to appeal to Congress. Let
us see how he will appeal to Congress. He tells us that on the 8th of
March, 1820, Congress passed a law called the Missouri Compromise,
prohibiting Slavery forever in all the territory west of the Mississippi
and north of the Missouri line of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes;
that Dred Scott, a slave in Missouri, was taken by his master to Fort
Snelling, in the present State of Minnesota, situated on the west branch
of the Mississippi River, and consequently in the Territory where
Slavery was prohibited by the Act of 1820; and that when Dred Scott
appealed for his Freedom in consequence of having been taken into that
Territory, the Supreme Court of the United States decided that Dred
Scott did not become Free by being taken into that Territory, but that
having been carried back to Missouri, was yet a Slave.
“Mr. Lincoln is going to appeal from that decision and reverse it. He
does not intend to reverse it as to Dred Scott. Oh, no! But he will
reverse it so that it shall not stand as a rule in the future. How will
he do it? He says that if he is elected to the Senate he will introduce
and pass a law just like the Missouri Compromise, prohibiting Slavery
again in all the Territories. Suppose he does re-enact the same law
which the Court has pronounced unconstitutional, will that make it
Constitutional? * * * Will it be any more valid? Will he be able to
convince the Court that the second Act is valid, when the first is
invalid and void? What good does it do to pass a second Act? Why, it
will have the effect to arraign the Supreme Court before the People, and
to bring them into all the political discussions of the Country. Will
that do any good? * * *
“The functions of Congress are to enact the Statutes, the province of
the Court is to pronounce upon their validity, and the duty of the
Executive is to carry the decision into effect when rendered by the
Court. And yet, notwithstanding the Constitution makes the decision of
the Court final in regard to the validity of an Act of Congress, Mr.
Lincoln is going to reverse that decision by passing another Act of
Congress. When he has become convinced of the Folly of the proposition,
perhaps he will resort to the same subterfuge that I have found others
of his Party resort to, which is to agitate and agitate until he can
change the Supreme Court and put other men in the places of the present
incumbents.”
After ridiculing this proposition at some length, he proceeded:
“Mr. Lincoln is alarmed for fear that, under the Dred Scott decision,
Slavery will go into all the Territories of the United States. All I
have to say is that, with or without this decision, Slavery will go just
where the People want it, and not an inch further. * * * Hence, if the
People of a Territory want Slavery, they will encourage it by passing
affirmatory laws, and the necessary police regulations, patrol laws and
Slave Code; if they do not want it, they will withhold that legislation,
and, by withholding it, Slavery is as dead as if it was prohibited by a
Constitutional prohibition, especially if, in addition, their
legislation is unfriendly, as it would be if they were opposed to it.”
Then, taking up what he said was “Mr. Lincoln’s main objection to the
Dred Scott decision,” to wit: “that that decision deprives the Negro of
the benefits of that clause of the Constitution of the United States
which entitles the citizens of each State to all the privileges and
immunities of citizens of the several States,” and admitting that such
would be its effect, Mr. Douglas contended at some length that this
Government was “founded on the White basis” for the benefit of the
Whites and their posterity. He did “not believe that it was the design
or intention of the signers of the Declaration of Independence or the
frames of the Constitution to include Negroes, Indians, or other
inferior races, with White men as citizens;” nor that the former “had
any reference to Negroes, when they used the expression that all men
were created equal,” nor to “any other inferior race.” He held that,
“They were speaking only of the White race, and never dreamed that their
language would be construed to apply to the Negro;” and after ridiculing
the contrary view, insisted that, “The history of the Country shows that
neither the signers of the Declaration, nor the Framers of the
Constitution, ever supposed it possible that their language would be
used in an attempt to make this Nation a mixed Nation of Indians,
Negroes, Whites, and Mongrels.”
The “Fathers proceeded on the White basis, making the White people the
governing race, but conceding to the Indian and Negro, and all inferior
races, all the rights and all the privileges they could enjoy consistent
with the safety of the society in which they lived. That,” said he, “is
my opinion now. I told you that humanity, philanthropy, justice, and
sound policy required that we should give the Negro every right, every
privilege, every immunity consistent with the safety and welfare of the
State. The question, then, naturally arises, what are those rights and
privileges, and what is the nature and extent of them? My answer is,
that that is a question which each State and each Territory must decide
for itself. * * * I am content with that position. My friend Lincoln
is not. * * * He thinks that the Almighty made the Negro his equal and
his brother. For my part I do not consider the Negro any kin to me, nor
to any other White man; but I would still carry my humanity and my
philanthropy to the extent of giving him every privilege and every
immunity that he could enjoy, consistent with our own good.”
After again referring to the principles connected with non-interference
in the domestic institutions of the States and Territories, and to the
devotion of all his energies to them “since 1850, when,” said he, “I
acted side by side with the immortal Clay and the god-like Webster, in
that memorable struggle in which Whigs and Democrats united upon a
common platform of patriotism and the Constitution, throwing aside
partisan feelings in order to restore peace and harmony to a distracted
Country”–he alluded to the death-bed of Clay, and the pledges made by
himself to both Clay and Webster to devote his own life to the
vindication of the principles of that Compromise of 1850 as a means of
preserving the Union; and concluded with this appeal: “This Union can
only be preserved by maintaining the fraternal feeling between the North
and the South, the East and the West. If that good feeling can be
preserved, the Union will be as perpetual as the fame of its great
founders. It can be maintained by preserving the sovereignty of the
States, the right of each State and each Territory to settle its
domestic concerns for itself, and the duty of each to refrain from
interfering with the other in any of its local or domestic institutions.
Let that be done, and the Union will be perpetual; let that be done, and
this Republic, which began with thirteen States and which now numbers
thirty-two, which when it began, only extended from the Atlantic to the
Mississippi, but now reaches to the Pacific, may yet expand, North and
South, until it covers the whole Continent, and becomes one vast ocean-
bound Confederacy. Then, my friends, the path of duty, of honor, of
patriotism, is plain. There are a few simple principles to be
preserved. Bear in mind the dividing line between State rights and
Federal authority; let us maintain the great principles of Popular
Sovereignty, of State rights and of the Federal Union as the
Constitution has made it, and this Republic will endure forever.”
On the next evening, July 17th, at Springfield, both Douglas and Lincoln
addressed separate meetings.
After covering much the same ground with regard to the history of the
Kansas-Nebraska struggle and his own attitude upon it, as he did in his
previous speech, Mr. Douglas declined to comment upon Mr. Lincoln’s
intimation of a Conspiracy between Douglas, Pierce, Buchanan, and Taney
for the passage of the Nebraska Bill, the rendition of the Dred Scott
decision, and the extension of Slavery, but proceeded to dilate on the
“uniformity” issue between himself and Mr. Lincoln, in much the same
strain as before, tersely summing up with the statement that “there is a
distinct issue of principles–principles irreconcilable–between Mr.
Lincoln and myself. He goes for consolidation and uniformity in our
Government. I go for maintaining the Confederation of the Sovereign
States under the Constitution, as our fathers made it, leaving each
State at liberty to manage its own affairs and own internal
institutions.”
He then ridiculed, at considerable length, Mr. Lincoln’s proposed
methods of securing a reversal by the United States Supreme Court of the
Dred Scott decision–especially that of an “appeal to the People to
elect a President who will appoint judges who will reverse the Dred
Scott decision,” which he characterized as “a proposition to make that
Court the corrupt, unscrupulous tool of a political party,” and asked,
“when we refuse to abide by Judicial decisions, what protection is there
left for life and property? To whom shall you appeal? To mob law, to
partisan caucuses, to town meetings, to revolution? Where is the remedy
when you refuse obedience to the constituted authorities?” In other
respects the speech was largely a repetition of his Bloomington speech.
Mr. Lincoln in his speech, the same night, at Springfield, opened by
contrasting the disadvantages under which, by reason of an unfair
apportionment of State Legislative representation and otherwise, the
Republicans of Illinois labored in this fight. Among other
disadvantages–whereby he said the Republicans were forced “to fight
this battle upon principle and upon principle alone”–were those which
he said arose “out of the relative positions of the two persons who
stand before the State as candidates for the Senate.”
Said he: “Senator Douglas is of world-wide renown. All the anxious
politicians of his Party, or who have been of his Party for years past,
have been looking upon him as certainly, at no distant day, to be the
President of the United States. They have seen in his round, jolly,
fruitful face, Post-offices, Land-offices, Marshalships, and Cabinet
appointments, Chargeships and Foreign Missions, bursting and sprouting
out in wonderful exuberance, ready to be laid hold of by their greedy
hands. And as they have been gazing upon this attractive picture so
long, they cannot, in the little distraction that has taken place in the
party, bring themselves to give up the charming hope; but with greedier
anxiety they rush about him, sustain him, and give him marches,
triumphal entries, and receptions, beyond what even in the days of his
highest prosperity they could have brought about in his favor. On the
contrary, nobody has ever expected me to be President. In my poor,
lean, lank face, nobody has ever seen that any cabbages were sprouting
out.”
Then he described the main points of Senator Douglas’s plan of campaign
as being not very numerous. “The first,” he said, “is Popular
Sovereignty. The second and third are attacks upon my speech made on
the 16th of June. Out of these three points-drawing within the range of
Popular Sovereignty the question of the Lecompton Constitution–he makes
his principal assault. Upon these his successive speeches are
substantially one and the same.” Touching the first point, “Popular
Sovereignty”–“the great staple” of Mr. Douglas’s campaign–Mr. Lincoln
affirmed that it was “the most arrant Quixotism that was ever enacted
before a community.”
He said that everybody understood that “we have not been in a
controversy about the right of a People to govern themselves in the
ordinary matters of domestic concern in the States and Territories;”
that, “in this controversy, whatever has been said has had reference to
the question of Negro Slavery;” and “hence,” said he, “when hereafter I
speak of Popular Sovereignty, I wish to be understood as applying what I
say to the question of Slavery only; not to other minor domestic matters
of a Territory or a State.”
Having cleared away the cobwebs, Mr. Lincoln proceeded:
“Does Judge Douglas, when he says that several of the past years of his
life have been devoted to the question of ‘Popular Sovereignty’ * * *
mean to say that he has been devoting his life to securing the People of
the Territories the right to exclude Slavery from the Territories? If
he means so to say, he means to deceive; because he and every one knows
that the decision of the Supreme Court, which he approves, and makes
special ground of attack upon me for disapproving, forbids the People of
a Territory to exclude Slavery.
“This covers the whole ground from the settlement of a Territory till it
reaches the degree of maturity entitling it to form a State
Constitution. * * * This being so, the period of time from the first
settlement of a Territory till it reaches the point of forming a State
Constitution, is not the thing that the Judge has fought for, or is
fighting for; but, on the contrary, he has fought for, and is fighting
for, the thing that annihilates and crushes out that same Popular
Sovereignty. Well, so much being disposed of, what is left? Why, he is
contending for the right of the People, when they come to make a State
Constitution, to make it for themselves, and precisely as best suits
themselves. I say again, that is Quixotic. I defy contradiction when I
declare that the Judge can find no one to oppose him on that
proposition. I repeat, there is nobody opposing that proposition on
principle. * * * Nobody is opposing, or has opposed, the right of the
People when they form a State Constitution, to form it for themselves.
Mr. Buchanan and his friends have not done it; they, too, as well as the
Republicans and the Anti-Lecompton Democrats, have not done it; but on
the contrary, they together have insisted on the right of the People to
form a Constitution for themselves. The difference between the Buchanan
men, on the one hand, and the Douglas men and the Republicans, on the
other, has not been on a question of principle, but on a question of
fact * * * whether the Lecompton Constitution had been fairly formed by
the People or not. * * * As to the principle, all were agreed.
“Judge Douglas voted with the Republicans upon that matter of fact. He
and they, by their voices and votes, denied that it was a fair emanation
of the People. The Administration affirmed that it was. * * * This
being so, what is Judge Douglas going to spend his life for? Is he
going to spend his life in maintaining a principle that no body on earth
opposes? Does he expect to stand up in majestic dignity and go through
his apotheosis and become a god, in the maintaining of a principle which
neither man nor mouse in all God’s creation is opposing?”
After ridiculing the assumption that Judge Douglas was entitled to all
the credit for the defeat of the Lecompton Constitution in the House of
Representatives–when the defeating vote numbered 120, of which 6 were
Americans, 20 Douglas (or Anti-Lecompton) Democrats, and 94 Republicans
–and hinting that perhaps he placed “his superior claim to credit, on
the ground that he performed a good act which was never expected of
him,” or “upon the ground of the parable of the lost sheep,” of which it
had been said, “that there was more rejoicing over the one sheep that
was lost and had been found, than over the ninety and nine in the fold–
” he added: “The application is made by the Saviour in this parable,
thus: ‘Verily, I say unto you, there is more rejoicing in Heaven over
one sinner that repenteth, than over ninety and nine just persons that
need no repentance.’ And now if the Judge claims the benefit of this
parable, let him repent. Let him not come up here and say: ‘I am the
only just person; and you are the ninety-nine sinners!’ Repentance
before forgiveness is a provision of the Christian system, and on that
condition alone will the Republicans grant his forgiveness.”
After complaining that Judge Douglas misrepresented his attitude as
indicated in his 16th of June speech at Springfield, in charging that he
invited “a War of Sections;”–that he proposed that “all the local
institutions of the different States shall become consolidated and
uniform,” Mr. Lincoln denied that that speech could fairly bear such
construction.
In that speech he (Mr. L.) had simply expressed an expectation that
“either the opponents of Slavery will arrest the further spread of it,
and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is
in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it
forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well
as new, North as well as South.” Since then, at Chicago, he had also
expressed a “wish to see the spread of Slavery arrested, and to see it
placed where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the
course of ultimate extinction”–and, said he: “I said that, because I
supposed, when the public mind shall rest in that belief, we shall have
Peace on the Slavery question. I have believed–and now believe–the
public mind did rest on that belief up to the introduction of the
Nebraska Bill. Although I have ever been opposed to Slavery, so far I
rested in the hope and belief that it was in the course of ultimate
extinction. For that reason, it had been a minor question with me. I
might have been mistaken; but I had believed, and now believe, that the
whole public mind, that is, the mind of the great majority, had rested
in that belief up to the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise. But upon
that event, I became convinced that either I had been resting in a
delusion, or the institution was being placed on a new basis–a basis
for making it Perpetual, National, and Universal. Subsequent events
have greatly confirmed me in that belief.
“I believe that Bill to be the beginning of a Conspiracy for that
purpose. So believing, I have since then considered that question a
paramount one. So believing, I thought the public mind would never rest
till the power of Congress to restrict the spread of it shall again be
acknowledged and exercised on the one hand, or, on the other, all
resistance be entirely crushed out. I have expressed that opinion and I
entertain it to-night.”
Having given some pieces of evidence in proof of the “tendency,” he had
discovered, to the Nationalization of Slavery in these States, Mr.
Lincoln continued: “And now, as to the Judge’s inference, that because I
wish to see Slavery placed in the course of ultimate extinction–placed
where our fathers originally placed it–I wish to annihilate the State
Legislatures–to force cotton to grow upon the tops of the Green
Mountains–to freeze ice in Florida–to cut lumber on the broad Illinois
prairies–that I am in favor of all these ridiculous and impossible
things! It seems to me it is a complete answer to all this, to ask if,
when Congress did have the fashion of restricting Slavery from Free
Territory; when Courts did have the fashion of deciding that taking a
Slave into a Free, Country made him Free–I say it is a sufficient
answer to ask, if any of this ridiculous nonsense, about consolidation
and uniformity, did actually follow? Who heard of any such thing,
because of the Ordinance of ’87? because of the Missouri Restriction
because of the numerous Court decisions of that character?
“Now, as to the Dred Scott decision; for upon that he makes his last
point at me. He boldly takes ground in favor of that decision. This is
one-half the onslaught and one-third of the entire plan of the campaign.
I am opposed to that decision in a certain sense, but not in the sense
which he puts on it. I say that in so far as it decided in favor of
Dred Scott’s master, and against Dred Scott and his family, I do not
propose to disturb or resist the decision. I never have proposed to do
any such thing. I think, that in respect for judicial authority, my
humble history would not suffer in comparison with that of Judge
Douglas. He would have the citizen conform his vote to that decision;
the member of Congress, his; the President, his use of the veto power.
He would make it a rule of political action for the People and all the
departments of the Government. I would not. By resisting it as a
political rule, I disturb no right of property, create no disorder,
excite no mobs.”
After quoting from a letter of Mr. Jefferson (vol. vii., p. 177, of his
Correspondence,) in which he held that “to consider the judges as the
ultimate arbiters of all Constitutional questions,” is “a very dangerous
doctrine indeed; and one which would place us under the despotism of an
Oligarchy,” Mr. Lincoln continued: “Let us go a little further. You
remember we once had a National Bank. Some one owed the Bank a debt; he
was sued, and sought to avoid payment on the ground that the Bank was
unconstitutional. The case went to the Supreme Court, and therein it
was decided that the Bank was Constitutional. The whole Democratic
party revolted against that decision. General Jackson himself asserted
that he, as President, would not be bound to hold a National Bank to be
Constitutional, even though the Court had decided it to be so. He fell
in, precisely, with the view of Mr. Jefferson, and acted upon it under
his official oath, in vetoing a charter for a National Bank.
“The declaration that Congress does not possess this Constitutional
power to charter a Bank, has gone into the Democratic platform, at their
National Conventions, and was brought forward and reaffirmed in their
last Convention at Cincinnati. They have contended for that
declaration, in the very teeth of the Supreme Court, for more than a
quarter of a century. In fact, they have reduced the decision to an
absolute nullity. That decision, I repeat, is repudiated in the
Cincinnati platform; and still, as if to show that effrontery can go no
further, Judge Douglas vaunts in the very speeches in which he denounces
me for opposing the Dred Scott decision, that he stands on the
Cincinnati platform.
“Now, I wish to know what the Judge can charge upon me, with respect to
decisions of the Supreme Court, which does not lie in all its length,
breadth, and proportions, at his own door? The plain truth is simply
this: Judge Douglas is for Supreme Court decisions when he likes, and
against them when he does not like them. He is for the Dred Scott
decision because it tends to Nationalize Slavery–because it is a part
of the original combination for that object. It so happens, singularly
enough, that I never stood opposed to a decision of the Supreme Court
till this. On the contrary, I have no recollection that he was ever
particularly in favor of one till this. He never was in favor of any,
nor (I) opposed to any, till the present one, which helps to Nationalize
Slavery. Free men of Sangamon–Free men of Illinois, Free men
everywhere–judge ye between him and me, upon this issue!
“He says this Dred Scott case is a very small matter at
most–that it has no practical effect; that at best, or rather I suppose
at worst, it is but an abstraction. * * * How has the planting of
Slavery in new countries always been effected? It has now been decided
that Slavery cannot be kept out of our new Territories by any legal
means. In what do our new Territories now differ in this respect from
the old Colonies when Slavery was first planted within them?
“It was planted, as Mr. Clay once declared, and as history proves true,
by individual men in spite of the wishes of the people; the Mother-
Government refusing to prohibit it, and withholding from the People of
the Colonies the authority to prohibit it for themselves. Mr. Clay says
this was one of the great and just causes of complaint against Great
Britain by the Colonies, and the best apology we can now make for having
the institution amongst us. In that precise condition our Nebraska
politicians have at last succeeded in placing our own new Territories;
the Government will not prohibit Slavery within them, nor allow the
People to prohibit it.”
Alluding to that part of Mr. Douglas’s speech the previous night
touching the death-bed scene of Mr. Clay, with Mr. Douglas’s promise to
devote the remainder of his life to “Popular Sovereignty”–and to his
relations with Mr. Webster–Mr. Lincoln said: “It would be amusing, if
it were not disgusting, to see how quick these Compromise breakers
administer on the political effects of their dead adversaries. If I
should be found dead to-morrow morning, nothing but my insignificance
could prevent a speech being made on my authority, before the end of
next week. It so happens that in that ‘Popular Sovereignty’ with which
Mr. Clay was identified, the Missouri Compromise was expressly reserved;
and it was a little singular if Mr. Clay cast his mantle upon Judge
Douglas on purpose to have that Compromise repealed. Again, the Judge
did not keep faith with Mr. Clay when he first brought in the Nebraska
Bill. He left the Missouri Compromise unrepealed, and in his report
accompanying the Bill, he told the World he did it on purpose. The
manes of Mr. Clay must have been in great agony, till thirty days later,
when ‘Popular Sovereignty’ stood forth in all its glory.”
Touching Mr. Douglas’s allegations of Mr. Lincoln’s disposition to make
Negroes equal with the Whites, socially and politically, the latter
said: “My declarations upon this subject of Negro Slavery may be
misrepresented, but cannot be misunderstood. I have said that I do not
understand the Declaration (of Independence) to mean that all men were
created equal in all respects. They are not equal in color; but I
suppose that it does mean to declare that all men are equal in some
respects; they are equal in their right to ‘Life, Liberty, and the
pursuit of Happiness.’ Certainly the Negro is not our equal in color–
perhaps not in many other respects; still, in the right to put into his
mouth the bread that his own hands have earned, he is the equal of every
other man, White or Black. In pointing out that more has been given
you, you cannot be justified in taking away the little which has been
given him. All I ask for the Negro is that if you do not like him, let
him alone. If God gave him but little, that little let him enjoy.
“The framers of the Constitution,” continued Mr. Lincoln, “found the
institution of Slavery amongst their other institutions at the time.
They found that by an effort to eradicate it, they might lose much of
what they had already gained. They were obliged to bow to the
necessity. They gave Congress power to abolish the Slave Trade at the
end of twenty years. They also prohibited it in the Territories where
it did not exist. They did what they could, and yielded to the
necessity for the rest. I also yield to all which follows from that
necessity. What I would most desire would be the separation of the
White and Black races.”
Mr. Lincoln closed his speech by referring to the “New Departure” of
the Democracy–to the charge he had made, in his 16th of June speech,
touching “the existence of a Conspiracy to Perpetuate and Nationalize
Slavery”–which Mr. Douglas had not contradicted–and, said he, “on his
own tacit admission I renew that charge. I charge him with having been
a party to that Conspiracy, and to that deception, for the sole purpose
of Nationalizing Slavery.”
This closed the series of preliminary speeches in the canvass. But they
only served to whet the moral and intellectual and political appetite of
the public for more. It was generally conceded that, at last, in the
person of Mr. Lincoln, the “Little Giant” had met his match.
On July 24, Mr. Lincoln opened a correspondence with Mr. Douglas, which
eventuated in an agreement between them, July 31st, for joint-
discussions, to take place at Ottawa, Freeport, Jonesboro, Charleston,
Galesburgh, Quincy, and Alton, on fixed dates in August, September and
October–at Ottawa, Mr. Douglas to open and speak one hour, Mr. Lincoln
to have an hour and a half in reply, and Mr. Douglas to close in a half
hour’s speech; at Freeport, Mr. Lincoln to open and speak for one hour,
Mr. Douglas to take the next hour and a half in reply, and Mr. Lincoln
to have the next half hour to close; and so on, alternating at each
successive place, making twenty-one hours of joint political debate.
To these absorbingly interesting discussions, vast assemblages listened
with breathless attention; and to the credit of all parties be it said,
with unparalleled decorum. The People evidently felt that the greatest
of all political principles–that of Human Liberty–was hanging on the
issue of this great political contest between intellectual giants, thus
openly waged before the World–and they accordingly rose to the dignity
and solemnity of the occasion, vindicating by their very example the
sacredness with which the Right of Free Speech should be regarded at all
times and everywhere.
CHAPTER V.
THE PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST OF 1860–
THE CRISIS APPROACHING.
The immediate outcome of the remarkable joint-debate between the two
intellectual giants of Illinois was, that while the popular vote stood
124,698 for Lincoln, to 121,130 for Douglas–showing a victory for
Lincoln among the People–yet, enough Douglas-Democrats were elected to
the Legislature, when added to those of his friends in the Illinois
Senate, who had been elected two years before, and “held over,” to give
him, in all, 54 members of both branches of the Legislature on joint
ballot, against 46 for Mr. Lincoln. Lincoln had carried the people, but
Douglas had secured the Senatorial prize for which they had striven–and
by that Legislative vote was elected to succeed himself in the United
States Senate. This result was trumpeted throughout the Union as a
great Douglas victory.
During the canvass of Illinois, Douglas’s friends had seen to it that
nothing on their part should be wanting to secure success. What with
special car trains, and weighty deputations, and imposing processions,
and flag raisings, the inspiration of music, the booming of cannon, and
the eager shouts of an enthusiastic populace, his political journey
through Illinois had been more like a Royal Progress than anything the
Country had yet seen; and now that his reelection was accomplished, they
proposed to make the most of it–to extend, as it were, the sphere of
his triumph, or vindication, so that it would include not the State
alone, but the Nation–and thus so accentuate and enhance his
availability as a candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination
of 1860, as to make his nomination and election to the Presidency of the
United States an almost foregone conclusion.
The programme was to raise so great a popular tidal-wave in his
interest, as would bear him irresistibly upon its crest to the White
House. Accordingly, as the idol of the Democratic popular heart,
Douglas, upon his return to the National Capital, was triumphantly
received by the chief cities of the Mississippi and the Atlantic sea-
board. Hailed as victor in the great political contest in Illinois-upon
the extended newspaper reports of which, the absorbed eyes of the entire
nation, for months, had greedily fed–Douglas was received with much
ostentation and immense enthusiasm at St. Louis, Memphis, New Orleans,
New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington. Like the “Triumphs”
decreed by Rome, in her grandest days, to the greatest of her victorious
heroes, Douglas’s return was a series of magnificent popular ovations,
In a speech made two years before this period, Mr. Lincoln, while
contrasting his own political career with that of Douglas, and modestly
describing his own as “a flat failure” had said: “With him it has been
one of splendid success. His name fills the Nation, and is not unknown
even in foreign lands. I affect no contempt for the high eminence he
has reached. So reached, that the oppressed of my species might have
shared with me in the elevation, I would rather stand on that eminence
than wear the richest crown that ever pressed a monarch’s brow.” And
now the star of Douglas had reached a higher altitude, nearing its
meridian splendor. He had become the popular idol of the day.
But Douglas’s partial victory–if such it was–so far from settling the
public mind and public conscience, had the contrary effect. It added to
the ferment which the Pro-Slavery Oligarchists of the South–and
especially those of South Carolina–were intent upon increasing, until
so grave and serious a crisis should arrive as would, in their opinion,
furnish a justifiable pretext in the eyes of the World for the
contemplated Secession of the Slave States from the Union.
Under the inspiration of the Slave Power, and in the direct line of the
Dred Scott decision, and of the “victorious” doctrine of Senator
Douglas, which he held not inconsistent therewith, that the people of
any Territory of the United States could do as they pleased as to the
institution of Slavery within their own limits, and if they desired the
institution, they had the right by local legislation to “protect and
encourage it,” the Legislature of the Territory of New Mexico at once
(1859) proceeded to enact a law “for the protection of property in
Slaves,” and other measures similar to the prevailing Slave Codes in the
Southern States.
The aggressive attitude of the South–as thus evidenced anew–naturally
stirred, to their very core, the Abolition elements of the North; on the
other hand, the publication of Hinton Rowan Helper’s “Impending Crisis,”
which handled the Slavery question without gloves, and supported its
views with statistics which startled the Northern mind, together with
its alleged indorsement by the leading Republicans of the North,
exasperated the fiery Southrons to an intense degree. Nor was the
capture, in October, 1859, of Harper’s Ferry, Virginia, by John Brown
and his handful of Northern Abolitionist followers, and his subsequent
execution in Virginia, calculated to allay the rapidly intensifying
feeling between the Freedom-loving North and the Slaveholding South.
When, therefore, the Congress met, in December, 1859, the sectional
wrath of the Country was reflected in the proceedings of both branches
of that body, and these again reacted upon the People of both the
Northern and Southern States, until the fires of Slavery Agitation were
stirred to a white heat.
The bitterness of feeling in the House at this time, was shown, in part,
by the fact that not until the 1st of February, 1860, was it able, upon
a forty-fourth ballot, to organize by the election of a Speaker, and
that from the day of its meeting on the 5th of December, 1859, up to
such organization, it was involved in an incessant and stormy wrangle
upon the Slavery question.
So also in the Democratic Senate, the split in the Democratic Party,
between the Lecompton and Anti-Lecompton Democracy, was widened, at the
same time that the Republicans of the North were further irritated, by
the significantly decisive passage of a series of resolutions proposed
by Jefferson Davis, which, on the one hand, purposely and deliberately
knifed Douglas’s “Popular Sovereignty” doctrine and read out of the
Party all who believed in it, by declaring “That neither Congress nor a
Territorial Legislature, whether by direct legislation, or legislation
of an indirect and unfriendly character, possesses power to annul or
impair the Constitutional right of any citizen of the United States to
take his Slave-property into the common Territories, and there hold and
enjoy the same while the Territorial condition remains,” and, on the
other, purposely and deliberately slapped in the face the Republicans of
the North, by declaring-among other things “That in the adoption of the
Federal Constitution, the States adopting the same, acted severally as
Free and Independent sovereignties, delegating a portion of their powers
to be exercised by the Federal Government for the increased security of
each against dangers, domestic as well as foreign; and that any
intermeddling by any one or more States or by a combination of their
citizens, with the domestic institutions of the others, on any pretext
whatever, political, moral, or religious, with a view to their
disturbance or subversion, is in violation of the Constitution,
insulting to the States so interfered with, endangers their domestic
peace and tranquillity–objects for which the Constitution was formed–
and, by necessary consequence, tends to weaken and destroy the Union
itself.”
Another of these resolutions declared Negro Slavery to be recognized in
the Constitution, and that all “open or covert attacks thereon with a
view to its overthrow,” made either by the Non-Slave-holding States or
their citizens, violated the pledges of the Constitution, “are a
manifest breach of faith, and a violation of the most solemn
obligations.”
This last was intended as a blow at the Freedom of Speech and of the
Press in the North; and only served, as was doubtless intended, to still
more inflame Northern public feeling, while at the same time endeavoring
to place the arrogant and aggressive Slave Power in an attitude of
injured innocence. In short, the time of both Houses of Congress was
almost entirely consumed during the Session of 1859-60 in the heated,
and sometimes even furious, discussion of the Slavery question; and
everywhere, North and South, the public mind was not alone deeply
agitated, but apprehensive that the Union was founded not upon a rock,
but upon the crater of a volcano, whose long-smouldering energies might
at any moment burst their confines, and reduce it to ruin and
desolation.
On the 23rd of April, 1860, the Democratic National Convention met at
Charleston, South Carolina. It was several days after the permanent
organization of the Convention before the Committee on Resolutions
reported to the main body, and not until the 30th of April did it reach
a vote upon the various reports, which had in the meantime been
modified. The propositions voted upon were three:
First, The Majority Report of the Committee, which reaffirmed the
Cincinnati platform of 1856–with certain “explanatory” resolutions
added, which boldly proclaimed: That the Government of a Territory
organized by an Act of Congress, is provisional and temporary; and,
during its existence, all citizens of the United States have an equal
right to settle with their property in the Territory, without their
rights, either of person or property, being destroyed or impaired by
Congressional or Territorial Legislation;” that “it is the duty of the
Federal Government, in all its departments, to protect, when necessary,
the rights of persons and property in the Territories, and wherever else
its Constitutional authority extends;” that “when the settlers in a
Territory, having an adequate population, form a State Constitution, the
right of Sovereignty commences, and, being consummated by admission into
the Union, they stand on an equal footing with the people of other
States, and the State thus organized ought to be admitted into the
Federal Union, whether its Constitution prohibits or recognizes the
institution of Slavery;” and that “the enactments of State Legislatures
to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile
in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in
effect.” The resolutions also included a declaration in favor of the
acquisition of Cuba, and other comparatively minor matters.
Second, The Minority Report of the Committee, which, after re-affirming
the Cincinnati platform, declared that “Inasmuch as differences of
opinion exist in the Democratic party as to the nature and extent of the
powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to the powers and duties of
Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, over the
institution of Slavery within the Territories * * * the Democratic Party
will abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on
the questions of Constitutional law.”
Third, The recommendation of Benjamin F. Butler, that the platform
should consist simply of a re-affirmation of the Cincinnati platform,
and not another word.
The last proposition was first voted on, and lost, by 105 yeas to 198
nays. The Minority platform was then adopted by 165 yeas to 138 nays.
The aggressive Slave-holders (Majority) platform, and the Butler
Compromise do-nothing proposition, being both defeated, and the Douglas
(Minority) platform adopted, the Alabama delegation, under instructions
from their State Convention to withdraw in case the National Convention
refused to adopt radical Territorial Pro-Slavery resolutions, at once
presented a written protest and withdrew from the Convention, and were
followed, in rapid succession, by; the delegates from Mississippi,
Louisiana (all but two), South Carolina, Florida, Texas, Arkansas (in
part), Delaware (mostly), and Georgia (mostly)–the seceding delegates
afterwards organizing in another Hall, adopting the above Majority
platform, and after a four days’ sitting, adjourning to meet at
Richmond, Virginia, on the 11th of June.
Meanwhile, the Regular Democratic National Convention had proceeded to
ballot for President–after adopting the two-thirds rule. Thirty-seven
ballots having been cast, that for Stephen A. Douglas being, on the
thirty-seventh, 151, the Convention, on the 3d of May, adjourned to meet
again at Baltimore, June 18th.
After re-assembling, and settling contested election cases, the
delegates (in whole or in part) from Virginia, North Carolina,
Tennessee, California, Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland and Massachusetts,
withdrew from the Convention, the latter upon the ground mainly that
there had been “a withdrawal, in part, of a majority of the States,”
while Butler, who had voted steadily for Jefferson Davis throughout all
the balloting at Charleston, gave as an additional ground personal to
himself, that “I will not sit in a convention where the African Slave
Trade–which is piracy by the laws of my Country–is approvingly
advocated”–referring thereby to a speech, that had been much applauded
by the Convention at Charleston, made by a Georgia delegate (Gaulden),
in which that delegate had said: “I would ask my friends of the South to
come up in a proper spirit; ask our Northern friends to give us all our
rights, and take off the ruthless restrictions which cut off the supply
of Slaves from foreign lands. * * * I tell you, fellow Democrats, that
the African Slave Trader is the true Union man (cheers and laughter). I
tell you that the Slave Trading of Virginia is more immoral, more
unchristian in every possible point of view, than that African Slave
Trade which goes to Africa and brings a heathen and worthless man here,
makes him a useful man, Christianizes him, and sends him and his
posterity down the stream of Time, to enjoy the blessings of
civilization. (Cheers and laughter.) * * * I come from the first
Congressional District of Georgia. I represent the African Slave Trade
interest of that Section. (Applause.) I am proud of the position I
occupy in that respect. I believe that the African Slave Trader is a
true missionary, and a true Christian. (Applause.) * * * Are you
prepared to go back to first principles, and take off your
unconstitutional restrictions, and leave this question to be settled by
each State? Now, do this, fellow citizens, and you will have Peace in
the Country. * * * I advocate the repeal of the laws prohibiting the
African Slave Trade, because I believe it to be the true Union movement.
* * * I believe that by re-opening this Trade and giving us Negroes to
populate the Territories, the equilibrium of the two Sections will be
maintained.”
After the withdrawal of the bolting delegates at Baltimore, the
Convention proceeded to ballot for President, and at the end of the
second ballot, Mr. Douglas having received “two-thirds of all votes
given in the Convention” (183) was declared the “regular nominee of the
Democratic Party, for the office of President of the United States.”
An additional resolution was subsequently adopted as a part of the
platform, declaring that “it is in accordance with the true
interpretation of the Cincinnati platform, that, during the existence of
the Territorial Governments, the measure of restriction, whatever it may
be, imposed by the Federal Constitution on the power of the Territorial
Legislatures over the subject of the domestic relations, as the same has
been, or shall hereafter be, finally determined by the Supreme Court of
the United States, should be respected by all good citizens, and
enforced with promptness and fidelity by every branch of the General
Government.”
On the 11th of June, pursuant to adjournment, the Democratic Bolters’
Convention met at Richmond, and, after adjourning to meet at Baltimore,
finally met there on the 28th of that month–twenty-one States being, in
whole or in part, represented. This Convention unanimously readopted
the Southern-wing platform it had previously adopted at Charleston, and,
upon the first ballot, chose, without dissent, John C. Breckinridge of
Kentucky, as its candidate for the Presidential office.
In the meantime, however, the National Conventions of other Parties had
been held, viz.: that of the Republican Party at Chicago, which, with a
session of three days, May 16-18, had nominated Abraham Lincoln of
Illinois and Hannibal Hamlin of Maine, for President and Vice-President
respectively; and that of the “Constitutional Union” (or Native
American) Party which had severally nominated (May 19) for such
positions, John Bell of Tennessee, and Edward Everett of Massachusetts.
The material portion of the Republican National platform, adopted with
entire unanimity by their Convention, was, so far as the Slavery and
Disunion questions were concerned, comprised in these declarations:
First, That the history of the nation, during the last four years, has
fully established the propriety and necessity of the organization and
perpetuation of the Republican Party; and that the causes which called
it into existence are permanent in their nature, and now, more than ever
before, demand its peaceful and Constitutional triumph.
Second, That the maintenance of the principle, promulgated in the
Declaration of Independence, and embodied in the Federal Constitution,
“that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain inalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty and
the pursuit of Happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are
instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed,” is essential to the preservation of our Republican
institutions; and that the Federal Constitution, the Rights of the
States, and the Union of the States must and shall be preserved.
Third, That to the Union of the States, this Nation owes its
unprecedented increase in population, its surprising development of
material resources, its rapid augmentation of wealth, its happiness at
home, and its honor abroad; and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for
Disunion, come from whatever source they may: And we congratulate the
Country that no Republican member of Congress has uttered or
countenanced the threats of Disunion, so often made by Democratic
members, without rebuke, and with applause, from their political
associates; and we denounce those threats of Disunion, in case of a
popular overthrow of their ascendancy, as denying the vital principles
of a free Government, and as an avowal of contemplated Treason, which it
is the imperative duty of an indignant People, sternly to rebuke and
forever silence.
Fourth, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and
especially the right of each State, to order and control its own
domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is
essential to that balance of powers on which the perfection and
endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless
invasion, by armed force, of any State or Territory, no matter under
what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.
Fifth, That the present Democratic Administration has far exceeded our
worst apprehensions, in its measureless subserviency to the exactions of
a Sectional interest, as especially evinced in its desperate exertions
to force the infamous Lecompton Constitution upon the protesting people
of Kansas; in construing the personal relation between master and
servant to involve an unqualified property in persons; in its attempted
enforcement, everywhere, on land and sea, through the intervention of
Congress and of the Federal Courts, of the extreme pretensions of a
purely local interest; and in its general and unvarying abuse of the
power intrusted to it by a confiding People.
* * * * * * *
Seventh, That the new dogma that the Constitution, of its own force,
carries Slavery into any or all of the Territories of the United States,
is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit
provisions of that instrument itself, with contemporaneous exposition,
and with legislation and judicial precedent; is revolutionary in its
tendency and subversive of the peace and harmony of the Country.
Eighth, That the normal condition of all the territory of the United
States is that of Freedom; that as our Republican fathers, when they had
abolished Slavery in all our National Territory, ordained that “No
person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law,” it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such
legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Constitution
against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of
Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any individuals, to give
legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States.
Ninth, That we brand the recent re-opening of the African Slave-trade
under the cover of our National flag, aided by perversions of judicial
power, as a crime against humanity and a burning shame to our Country
and Age; and we call upon Congress to take prompt and efficient measures
for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.
Tenth, That in the recent vetoes, by their Federal Governors, of the
acts of the Legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska, prohibiting Slavery in
those Territories, we find a practical illustration of the boasted
Democratic principle of Non-Intervention and Popular Sovereignty
embodied in the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, and a demonstration of the
deception and fraud involved therein.
Eleventh, That Kansas should, of right, be immediately admitted as a
State, under the Constitution recently formed and adopted by the House
of Representatives.
* * * * * * * * * *
The National platform of the “Constitutional Union” Party, was adopted,
unanimously, in these words:
“Whereas, experience has demonstrated that platforms adopted by the
partisan Conventions of the Country have had the effect to mislead and
deceive the People, and at the same time to widen the political
divisions of the Country, by the creation and encouragement of
geographical and Sectional parties; therefore,
“Resolved, That it is both the part of patriotism and of
duty to recognize no political principle other than the Constitution of
the Country, the Union of the States, and the Enforcement of the Laws,
and that, as representatives of the Constitutional Union men of the
Country, in National Convention assembled, we hereby pledge ourselves to
maintain, protect, and defend, separately and unitedly, these great
principles of public liberty and national safety, against all enemies,
at home and abroad; believing that thereby peace may once more be
restored to the Country, the rights of the people and of the States re-
established, and the Government again placed in that condition of
justice, fraternity, and equality which, under the example and
Constitution of our fathers, has solemnly bound every citizen of the
United States to maintain a more perfect Union, establish justice,
insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote
the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves
and our posterity.”
Thus, by the last of June, 1860, the four National Parties with their
platforms and candidates were all in the political field prepared for
the onset.
Briefly, the attitude of the standard-bearers representing the platform-
principles of their several Parties, was this:
Lincoln, representing the Republicans, held that Slavery is a wrong, to
be tolerated in the States where it exists, but which must be excluded
from the Territories, which are all normally Free and must be kept Free
by Congressional legislation, if necessary; and that neither Congress,
nor the Territorial Legislature, nor any individual, has power to give
to it legal existence in such Territories.
Breckinridge, representing the Pro-Slavery wing of the Democracy, held
that Slavery is a right, which, when transplanted from the Slave-States
into the Territories, neither Congressional nor Territorial legislation
can destroy or impair, but which, on the contrary, must, when necessary,
be protected everywhere by Congress and all other departments of the
Government.
Douglas, representing the Anti-Lecompton wing of Democracy, held that
whether Slavery be right or wrong, the white inhabitants of the
Territories have the sole right to determine whether it shall or shall
not exist within their respective limits, subject to the Constitution
and Supreme Court decisions thereon; and that neither Congress nor any
State, nor any outside persons, must interfere with that right.
Bell, representing the remaining political elements, held that it was
all wrong to have any principles at all, except “the Constitution of the
Country, the Union of the States, and the Enforcement of the Laws”–a
platform which Horace Greeley well described as “meaning anything in
general, and nothing in particular.”
The canvass that ensued was terribly exciting–Douglas alone, of all the
Presidential candidates, bravely taking the field, both North and South,
in person, in the hope that the magnetism of his personal presence and
powerful intellect might win what, from the start–owing to the adverse
machinations, in the Northern States, of the Administration or
Breckinridge-Democratic wing–seemed an almost hopeless fight. In the
South, the Democracy was almost a unit in opposition to Douglas,
holding, as they did, that “Douglas Free-Soilism” was “far more
dangerous to the South than the election of Lincoln; because it seeks to
create a Free-Soil Party there; while, if Lincoln triumphs, the result
cannot fail to be a South united in her own defense;” while the old Whig
element of the South was as unitedly for Bell. In the North, the
Democracy were split in twain, three-fourths of them upholding Douglas,
and the balance, powerful beyond their numbers in the possession of
Federal Offices, bitterly hostile to him, and anxious to beat him, even
at the expense of securing the election of Lincoln.
Douglas’s fight was that the candidacy and platform of Bell were
meaningless, those of both Lincoln and Breckinridge, Sectional, and that
he alone bore aloft the standard of the entire Union; while, on the
other hand, the supporters of Lincoln, his chief antagonist, claimed
that–as the burden of the song from the lips of Douglas men, Bell men,
and Breckinridge men alike, was the expression of a “fear that,” in the
language of Mr. Seward, “if the people elected Mr. Lincoln to the
Presidency, they would wake up and find that they had no Country for him
to preside over”–“therefore, all three of the parties opposing Mr.
Lincoln were in the same boat, and hence the only true Union party, was
the party which made no threats of Disunion, to wit, the Republican
party.”
The October elections of 1860 made it plain that Mr. Lincoln would be
elected. South Carolina began to “feel good” over the almost certainty
that the pretext for Secession for which her leaders had been hoping in
vain for thirty years, was at hand. On the 25th of October, at Augusta,
South Carolina, the Governor, the Congressional delegation, and other
leading South Carolinians, met, and decided that in the event of Mr.
Lincoln’s election, that State would secede. Similar meetings, to the
same end, were also held about the same time, in others of the Southern
States. On the 5th of November–the day before the Presidential
election–the Legislature of South Carolina met at the special call of
Governor Gist, and, having organized, received a Message from the
Governor, in which, after stating that he had convened that Body in
order that they might on the morrow “appoint the number of electors of
President and Vice-President to which this State is entitled,” he
proceeded to suggest “that the Legislature remain in session, and take
such action as will prepare the State for any emergency that may arise.”
He went on to “earnestly recommend that, in the event of Abraham
Lincoln’s election to the Presidency, a Convention of the people of this
State be immediately called, to consider and determine for themselves
the mode and measure of redress,” and, he continued: “I am constrained
to say that the only alternative left, in my judgment, is the Secession
of South Carolina from the Federal Union. The indications from many of
the Southern States justify the conclusion that the Secession of South
Carolina will be immediately followed, if not adopted simultaneously, by
them, and ultimately by the entire South. The long-desired cooperation
of the other States having similar institutions, for which so many of
our citizens have been waiting, seems to be near at hand; and, if we are
true to ourselves, will soon be realized. The State has, with great
unanimity declared that she has the right peaceably to Secede, and no
power on earth can rightfully prevent it.”
of South Carolina, November 24, 1832, growing out of the Tariff Act
of 1832–wherein it was declared that, in the event of the Federal
Government uudertaking to enforce the provisions of that Act: “The
people of this State will thenceforth hold themselves absolved from
all further obligation to maintain or preserve their political
connection with the people of the other States, and will forthwith
proceed to organize a separate government, and do all other acts
and things which Sovereign and independent States may of right
do.”]
He proceeded to say that “If, in the exercise of arbitrary power, and
forgetful of the lessons of history, the Government of the United States
should attempt coercion, it will become our solemn duty to meet force by
force”–and promised that the decision of the aforesaid Convention
“representing the Sovereignty of the State, and amenable to no earthly
tribunal,” should be, by him, “carried out to the letter.” He
recommended the thorough reorganization of the Militia; the arming of
every man in the State between the ages of eighteen and forty-five; and
the immediate enrollment of ten thousand volunteers officered by
themselves; and concluded with a confident “appeal to the Disposer of
all human events,” in whose keeping the “Cause” was to be entrusted.
That same evening (November 5), being the eve of the election, at
Augusta, South Carolina, in response to a serenade, United States
Senator Chestnut made a speech of like import, in which, after
predicting the election of Mr. Lincoln, he said: “Would the South submit
to a Black Republican President, and a Black Republican Congress, which
will claim the right to construe the Constitution of the Country, and
administer the Government in their own hands, not by the law of the
instrument itself, nor by that of the fathers of the Country, nor by the
practices of those who administered seventy years ago, but by rules
drawn from their own blind consciences and crazy brains? * * * The
People now must choose whether they would be governed by enemies, or
govern themselves.”
He declared that the Secession of South Carolina was an “undoubted
right,” a “duty,” and their “only safety” and as to himself, he would
“unfurl the Palmetto flag, fling it to the breeze, and, with the spirit
of a brave man, live and die as became” his “glorious ancestors, and
ring the clarion notes of defiance in the ears of an insolent foe!”
So also, in Columbia, South Carolina, Representative Boyce of that
State, and other prominent politicians, harangued an enthusiastic crowd
that night–Mr. Boyce declaring: “I think the only policy for us is to
arm, as soon as we receive authentic intelligence of the election of
Lincoln. It is for South Carolina, in the quickest manner, and by the
most direct means, to withdraw from the Union. Then we will not submit,
whether the other Southern States will act with us or with our enemies.
They cannot take sides with our enemies; they must take sides with us.
When an ancient philosopher wished to inaugurate a great revolution, his
motto was to dare! to dare!”
CHAPTER VI.
THE GREAT CONSPIRACY MATURING.
THE 6th of November, 1860, came and passed; on the 7th, the prevailing
conviction that Lincoln would be elected had become a certainty, and
before the close of that day, the fact had been heralded throughout the
length and breadth of the Republic. The excitement of the People was
unparalleled. The Republicans of the North rejoiced that at last the
great wrong of Slavery was to be placed “where the People could rest in
the belief that it was in the course of ultimate extinction!” The
Douglas Democracy, naturally chagrined at the defeat of their great
leader, were filled with gloomy forebodings touching the future of their
Country; and the Southern Democracy, or at least a large portion of it,
openly exulted that at last the long-wished-for opportunity for a revolt
of the Slave Power, and a separation of the Slave from the Free States,
was at hand. Especially in South Carolina were the “Fire-eating”
Southrons jubilant over the event.
bonfires and processions.” p. 172, Arnold’s “Life of Abraham
Lincoln.”
“There was great joy in Charleston, and wherever ‘Fire Eaters’ most
did congregate, on the morning of November 7th. Men rushed to
shake hands and congratulate each other on the glad tidings of
Lincoln’s election. * * * Men thronged the streets, talking,
laughing, cheering, like mariners long becalmed on a hateful,
treacherous sea, whom a sudden breeze had swiftly wafted within
sight of their longed-for haven.” p. 332, vol. i., Greeley’s
American Conflict.]
Meanwhile any number of joint resolutions looking to the calling of a
Secession Convention, were introduced in the South Carolina Legislature,
sitting at Columbia, having in view Secession contingent upon the
“cooperation” of the other Slave States, or looking to immediate and
“unconditional” Secession.
On the evening of November 7th, Edmund Ruffin of Virginia–a Secession
fanatic who had come from thence in hot haste–in response to a
serenade, declared to the people of Columbia that: “The defense of the
South, he verily believed, was only to be secured through the lead of
South Carolina;” that, “old as he was, he had come here to join them in
that lead;” and that “every day delayed, was a day lost to the Cause.”
He acknowledged that Virginia was “not as ready as South Carolina;” but
declared that “The first drop of blood spilled on the soil of South
Carolina would bring Virginia, and every Southern State, with them.” He
thought “it was perhaps better that Virginia, and all other border
States, remain quiescent for a time, to serve as a guard against the
North. * * * By remaining in the Union for a time, she would not only
prevent coercive legislation in Congress, but any attempt for our
subjugation.”
That same evening came news that, at Charleston, the Grand Jury of the
United States District Court had refused to make any presentments,
because of the Presidential vote just cast, which, they said, had “swept
away the last hope for the permanence, for the stability, of the Federal
Government of these Sovereign States;” and that United States District
Judge Magrath had resigned his office, saying to the Grand Jury, as he
did so: “In the political history of the United States, an event has
happened of ominous import to fifteen Slave-holding States. The State
of which we are citizens has been always understood to have deliberately
fixed its purpose whenever that event should happen. Feeling an
assurance of what will be the action of the State, I consider it my
duty, without delay, to prepare to obey its wishes. That preparation is
made by the resignation of the office I have held.”
The news of the resignations of the Federal Collector and District
Attorney at Charleston, followed, with an intimation that that of the
Sub-Treasurer would soon be forthcoming. On November 9th, a joint
resolution calling an unconditional Secession Convention to meet at
Columbia December 17th, was passed by the Senate, and on the 12th of
November went through the House; and both of the United States Senators
from South Carolina had now resigned their seats in the United States
Senate.
Besides all these and many other incitements to Secession was the fact
that at Milledgeville, Georgia, Governor Brown had, November 12th,
addressed a Georgian Military Convention, affirming “the right of
Secession, and the duty of other Southern States to sustain South
Carolina in the step she was then taking,” and declaring that he “would
like to see Federal troops dare attempt the coercion of a seceding
Southern State! For every Georgian who fell in a conflict thus incited,
the lives of two Federal Soldiers should expiate the outrage on State
Sovereignty”–and that the Convention aforesaid had most decisively
given its voice for Secession.
It was about this time, however, that Alexander H. Stephens vainly
sought to stem the tide of Secession in his own State, in a speech
(November 14) before the Georgia Legislature, in which he declared that
Mr. Lincoln “can do nothing unless he is backed by power in Congress.
The House of Representatives is largely in the majority against him. In
the Senate he will also be powerless. There will be a majority of four
against him.” He also cogently said: “Many of us have sworn to support
it (the Constitution). Can we, therefore, for the mere election of a
man to the Presidency–and that too, in accordance with the prescribed
forms of the Constitution–make a point of resistance to the Government,
and, without becoming the breakers of that sacred instrument ourselves,
withdraw ourselves from it? Would we not be in the wrong?”
But the occasional words of wisdom that fell from the lips of the few
far-seeing statesmen of the South, were as chaff before the storm of
Disunion raised by the turbulent Fire-eaters, and were blown far from
the South, where they might have done some good for the Union cause,
away up to the North, where they contributed to aid the success of the
contemplated Treason and Rebellion, by lulling many of the people there,
into a false sense of security. Unfortunately, also, even the ablest of
the Southern Union men were so tainted with the heretical doctrine of
States-Rights, which taught the “paramount allegiance” of the citizen to
the State, that their otherwise powerful appeals for the preservation of
the Union were almost invariably handicapped by the added protestation
that in any event–and however they might deplore the necessity–they
would, if need be, go with their State, against their own convictions of
duty to the National Union.
Hence in this same speech we find that Mr. Stephens destroyed the whole
effect of his weighty and logical appeal against Secession from the
Union, by adding to it, that, “Should Georgia determine to go out of the
Union I shall bow to the will of her people. Their cause is my cause,
and their destiny is my destiny; and I trust this will be the ultimate
course of all.”–and by further advising the calling of a Convention of
the people to decide the matter; thus, in advance, as it were, binding
himself hand and foot, despite his previous Union utterances, to do the
fell bidding of the most rampant Disunionists. And thus, in due time,
it befell, as we shall see, that this “saving clause” in his “Union
speech,” brought him at the end, not to that posture of patriotic
heroism to which he aspired when he adjured his Georgian auditors to
“let us be found to the last moment standing on the deck (of the
Republic), with the Constitution of the United States waving over our
heads,” but to that of an imprisoned traitor and defeated rebel against
the very Republic and Constitution which he had sworn to uphold and
defend!
The action of the South Carolina Legislature in calling an Unconditional
Secession Convention, acted among the Southern States like a spark in a
train of gunpowder. Long accustomed to incendiary resolutions of Pro-
Slavery political platforms, as embodying the creed of Southern men;
committed by those declarations to the most extreme action when, in
their judgment, the necessity should arise; and worked up during the
Presidential campaign by swarming Federal officials inspired by the
fanatical Secession leaders; the entire South only needed the spark from
the treasonable torch of South Carolina, to find itself ablaze, almost
from one end to the other, with the flames of revolt.
Governor after Governor, in State after State, issued proclamation after
proclamation, calling together their respective Legislatures, to
consider the situation and whether their respective States should join
South Carolina in seceding from the Union. Kentucky alone, of them all,
seemed for a time to keep cool, and look calmly and reasonably through
the Southern ferment to the horrors beyond. In an address issued by
Governor Magoffin of that State, to the people, he said:
“To South Carolina and such other States as may wish to secede from the
Union, I would say: The geography of this Country will not admit of a
division; the mouth and sources of the Mississippi River cannot be
separated without the horrors of Civil War. We cannot sustain you in
this movement merely on account of the election of Mr. Lincoln. Do not
precipitate by premature action into a revolution or Civil War, the
consequences of which will be most frightful to all of us. It may yet
be avoided. There is still hope, faint though it be. Kentucky is a
Border State, and has suffered more than all of you. * * * She has a
right to claim that her voice, and the voice of reason, and moderation
and patriotism shall be heard and heeded by you. If you secede, your
representatives will go out of Congress and leave us at the mercy of a
Black Republican Government. Mr. Lincoln will have no check. He can
appoint his Cabinet, and have it confirmed. The Congress will then be
Republican, and he will be able to pass such laws as he may suggest.
The Supreme Court will be powerless to protect us. We implore you to
stand by us, and by our friends in the Free States; and let us all, the
bold, the true, and just men in the Free and Slave States, with a united
front, stand by each other, by our principles, by our rights, our
equality, our honor, and by the Union under the Constitution. I believe
this is the only way to save it; and we can do it.”
But this “still small voice” of conscience and of reason, heard like a
whisper from the mouths of Stephens in Georgia, and Magoffin in
Kentucky, was drowned in the clamor and tumult of impassioned harangues
and addresses, and the drumming and tramp of the “minute men” of South
Carolina, and other military organizations, as they excitedly prepared
throughout the South for the dread conflict at arms which they
recklessly invited, and savagely welcomed.
We have seen how President Andrew Jackson some thirty years before, had
stamped out Nullification and Disunion in South Carolina, with an iron
heel.
But a weak and feeble old man–still suffering from the effects of the
mysterious National Hotel poisoning–was now in the Executive Chair at
the White House. Well-meaning, doubtless, and a Union man at heart, his
enfeebled intellect was unable to see, and hold firm to, the only true
course. He lacked clearness of perception, decision of character, and
nerve. He knew Secession was wrong, but allowed himself to be persuaded
that he had no Constitutional power to prevent it. He had surrounded
himself in the Cabinet with such unbending adherents and tools of the
Slave-Power, as Howell Cobb of Georgia, his Secretary of the Treasury,
John B. Floyd of Virginia, as Secretary of War, Jacob Thompson of
Mississippi, as Secretary of the Interior, and Isaac Toucy of
Connecticut, as Secretary of the Navy, before whose malign influence the
councils of Lewis Cass of Michigan, the Secretary of State, and other
Union men, in and out of the Cabinet, were quite powerless.
When, therefore, the Congress met (December 3, 1860) and he transmitted
to it his last Annual Message, it was found that, instead of treating
Secession from the Jacksonian standpoint, President Buchanan feebly
wailed over the threatened destruction of the Union, weakly apologized
for the contemplated Treason, garrulously scolded the North as being to
blame for it, and, while praying to God to “preserve the Constitution
and the Union throughout all generations,” wrung his nerveless hands in
despair over his own powerlessness–as he construed the Constitution–to
prevent Secession! Before writing his pitifully imbecile Message,
President Buchanan had secured from his Attorney-General (Jeremiah S.
Black of Pennsylvania) an opinion, in which the latter, after touching
upon certain cases in which he believed the President would be justified
in using force to sustain the Federal Laws, supposed the case of a State
where all the Federal Officers had resigned and where there were neither
Federal Courts to issue, nor officers to execute judicial process, and
continued: “In that event, troops would certainly be out of place, and
their use wholly illegal. If they are sent to aid the Courts and
Marshals there must be Courts and Marshals to be aided. Without the
exercise of these functions, which belong exclusively to the civil
service, the laws cannot be executed in any event, no matter what may be
the physical strength which the Government has at its command. Under
such circumstances, to send a military force into any State, with orders
to act against the people, would be simply making War upon them.”
Resting upon that opinion of Attorney-General Black, President Buchanan,
in his Message, after referring to the solemn oath taken by the
Executive “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” and
stating that there were now no longer any Federal Officers in South
Carolina, through whose agency he could keep that oath, took up the laws
of February 28, 1795, and March 3, 1807, as “the only Acts of Congress
on the Statute-book bearing upon the subject,” which “authorize the
President, after he shall have ascertained that the Marshal, with his
posse comitatus, is unable to execute civil or criminal process in any
particular case, to call out the Militia and employ the Army and Navy to
aid him in performing this service, having first, by Proclamation,
commanded the insurgents to ‘disperse and retire peaceably to their
respective abodes, within a limited time'”–and thereupon held that
“This duty cannot, by possibility, be performed in a State where no
judicial authority exists to issue process, and where there is no
Marshal to execute it; and where even if there were such an officer, the
entire population would constitute one solid combination to resist him.”
And, not satisfied with attempting to show as clearly as he seemed to
know how, his own inability under the laws to stamp out Treason, he
proceeded to consider what he thought Congress also could not do under
the Constitution. Said he: “The question fairly stated, is: Has the
Constitution delegated to Congress the power to coerce into submission a
State which is attempting to withdraw, or has actually withdrawn, from
the Confederacy? If answered in the affirmative, it must be on the
principle that the power has been conferred upon Congress to declare and
make War against a State. After much serious reflection, I have arrived
at the conclusion that no such power has been delegated to Congress or
to any other department of the Federal Government.” And further:
“Congress possesses many means of preserving it (the Union) by
conciliation; but the sword was not placed in their hands to preserve it
by force.”
Thus, in President Buchanan’s judgment, while, in another part of his
Message, he had declared that no State had any right, Constitutional or
otherwise, to Secede from that Union, which was designed for all time–
yet, if any State concluded thus wrongfully to Secede, there existed no
power in the Union, by the exercise of force, to preserve itself from
instant dissolution! How imbecile the reasoning, how impotent the
conclusion, compared with that of President Jackson, thirty years
before, in his Proclamation against Nullification and Secession, wherein
that sturdy patriot declared to the South Carolinians. that “compared
to Disunion, all other evils are light, because that brings with it an
accumulation of all;” that “Disunion by armed force, is Treason;” and
that he was determined “to execute the Laws,” and “to preserve the
Union!”
President Buchanan’s extraordinary Message–or so much of it as related
to the perilous condition of the Union–was referred, in the House of
Representatives, to a Select Committee of Thirty-three, comprising one
member from each State, in which there was a very large preponderance of
such as favored Conciliation without dishonor. But the debates in both
Houses, in which the most violent language was indulged by the Southern
Fire-eaters, as well as other events, soon proved that there was a
settled purpose on the part of the Slave-Power and its adherents to
resist and spit upon all attempts at placation.
In the Senate also (December 5), a Select Committee of Thirteen was
appointed, to consider the impending dangers to the Union, comprising
Senators Powell of Kentucky, Hunter of Virginia, Crittenden of Kentucky,
Seward of New York, Toombs of Georgia, Douglas of Illinois, Collamer of
Vermont, Davis of Mississippi, Wade of Ohio, Bigler of Pennsylvania,
Rice of Minnesota, Doolittle of Wisconsin, and Grimes of Iowa. Their
labors were alike without practical result, owing to the irreconcilable
attitude of the Southrons, who would accept nothing less than a total
repudiation by the Republicans of the very principles upon which the
recent Presidential contest had by them been fought and won. Nor would
they even accept such a repudiation unless carried by vote of the
majority of the Republicans. The dose that they insisted upon the
Republican Party swallowing must not only be as noxious as possible, but
must absolutely be mixed by that Party itself, and in addition, that
Party must also go down on its knees, and beg the privilege of so mixing
and swallowing the dose! That was the impossible attitude into which,
by their bullying and threats, the Slave Power hoped to force the
Republican Party–either that or “War.”
Project after project in both Houses of Congress looking to Conciliation
was introduced, referred, reported, discussed, and voted on or not, as
the case might be, in vain. And in the meantime, in New York, in
Philadelphia, and elsewhere in the North, the timidity of Capital showed
itself in great Conciliation meetings, where speeches were applauded and
resolutions adopted of the most abject character, in behalf of “Peace,
at any price,” regardless of the sacrifice of honor and principles and
even decency. In fact the Commercial North, with supplicating hands and
beseeching face, sank on its knees in a vain attempt to propitiate its
furious creditor, the South, by asking it not only to pull its nose, but
to spit in its face, both of which it humbly and even anxiously offered
for the purpose!*
at the call of the Mayor, in Independence Square, Mayor Henry led
off the speaking–which was nearly all in the same line-by saying:
“I tell you that if in any portion of our Confederacy, sentiments
have been entertained and cherished which are inimical to the civil
rights and social institutions of any other portion, those
sentiments should be relinquished.” Another speaker, Judge George
W. Woodward, sneeringly asked: “Whence came these excessive
sensibilities that cannot bear a few slaves in a remote Territory
until the white people establish a Constitution?” Another, Mr.
Charles E. Lex (a Republican), speaking of the Southern People,
said: “What, then, can we say to them? what more than we have
expressed in the resolutions we have offered? If they are really
aggrieved by any laws upon our Statute-books opposed to their
rights–if upon examination any such are found to be in conflict
with the Constitution of these United States–nay, further, if they
but serve to irritate our brethren of the South, whether
Constitutional or not, I, for one, have no objection that they
should instantly be repealed.” Another said, “Let us repeal our
obnoxious Personal Liberty bills * * *; let us receive our brother
of the South, if he will come among us for a little time, attended
by his servant, and permit him thus to come.” And the resolutions
adopted were even still more abject in tone than the speeches.]
But the South at present was too busy in perfecting its long-cherished
plans for the disruption of the Union, to more than grimly smile at this
evidence of what it chose to consider “a divided sentiment” in the
North. While it weakened the North, it strengthened the South, and
instead of mollifying the Conspirators against the Union, it inspired
them with fresh energy in their fell purpose to destroy it.
The tone of the Republican press, too, while more dignified, was
thoroughly conciliatory. The Albany Evening Journal,–[November 30,
1860]–the organ of Governor Seward, recognizing that the South, blinded
by passion, was in dead earnest, but also recognizing the existence of
“a Union sentiment there, worth cherishing,” suggested “a Convention of
the People, consisting of delegates appointed by the States, in which it
would not be found unprofitable for the North and South, bringing their
respective griefs, claims, and proposed reforms, to a common
arbitrament, to meet, discuss, and determine upon a future”–before a
final appeal to arms. So, too, Horace Greeley, in the New York
Tribune,–[November 9, 1860.]–after weakly conceding, on his own part,
the right of peaceable Secession, said: “But while we thus uphold the
practical liberty, if not the abstract right, of Secession, we must
insist that the step be taken, if it ever shall be, with the
deliberation and gravity befitting so momentous an issue. Let ample
time be given for reflection; let the subject be fully canvassed before
the People; and let a popular vote be taken in every case, before
Secession is decreed.” Other leading papers of the Northern press, took
similar ground for free discussion and conciliatory action.
In the Senate, as well as the House of Representatives–as also was
shown by the appointment, heretofore mentioned, of Select Committees to
consider the gravity of the situation, and suggest a remedy–the same
spirit of Conciliation and Concession, and desire for free and frank
discussion, was apparent among most of the Northern and Border-State
members of those Bodies. But these were only met by sneers and threats
on the part of the Fire-eating Secession members of the South. In the
Senate, Senator Clingman of North Carolina, sneeringly said: “They want
to get up a free debate, as the Senator (Mr. Seward) from New York
expressed it, in one of his speeches. But a Senator from Texas told me
the other day that a great many of these free debaters were hanging from
the trees of that country;” and Senator Iverson, of Georgia, said:
“Gentlemen speak of Concession, of the repeal of the Personal Liberty
bills. Repeal them all to-morrow, and you cannot stop this revolution.”
After declaring his belief that “Before the 4th of March, five States
will have declared their independence” and that “three other States will
follow as soon as the action of the people can be had;” he proceeded to
allude to the refusal of Governor Houston of Texas to call together the
Texas Legislature for action in accord with the Secession sentiment, and
declared that “if he will not yield to that public sentiment, some Texan
Brutus will arise to rid his country of this hoary-headed incubus that
stands between the people and their sovereign will!” Then, sneering at
the presumed cowardice of the North, he continued: “Men talk about their
eighteen millions (of Northern population); but we hear a few days
afterwards of these same men being switched in the face, and they
tremble like sheep-stealing dogs! There will be no War. The North,
governed by such far-seeing Statesmen as the Senator (Mr. Seward) from
New York, will see the futility of this. In less than twelve months, a
Southern Confederacy will be formed; and it will be the most successful
Government on Earth. The Southern States, thus banded together, will be
able to resist any force in the World. We do not expect War; but we
will be prepared for it–and we are not a feeble race of Mexicans
either.”
On the other hand, there were Republicans in that Body who sturdily met
the bluster of the Southern Fire-eaters with frank and courageous words
expressing their full convictions on the situation and their belief that
Concessions could not be made and that Compromises were mere waste
paper. Thus, Senator Ben Wade of Ohio, among the bravest and manliest
of them all, in a speech in the Senate, December 17, the very day on
which the South Carolina Secession Convention was to assemble, said to
the Fire-eaters: “I tell you frankly that we did lay down the principle
in our platform, that we would prohibit, if we had the power, Slavery
from invading another inch of the Free Soil of this Government. I stand
to that principle to-day. I have argued it to half a million of people,
and they stand by it; they have commissioned me to stand by it; and, so
help me God, I will! * * * On the other hand, our platform repudiates
the idea that we have any right, or harbor any ultimate intention to
invade or interfere with your institutions in your own States. * * *
It is not, by your own confessions, that Mr. Lincoln is expected to
commit any overt act by which you may be injured. You will not even
wait for any, you say; but, by anticipating that the Government may do
you an injury, you will put an end to it–which means, simply and
squarely, that you intend to rule or ruin this Government. * * * As to
Compromises, I supposed that we had agreed that the Day of Compromises
was at an end. The most solemn we have made have been violated, and are
no more. * * * We beat you on the plainest and most palpable issue
ever presented to the American people, and one which every man
understood; and now, when we come to the Capital, we tell you that our
candidates must and shall be inaugurated–must and shall administer this
Government precisely as the Constitution prescribes. * * * I tell you
that, with that verdict of the people in my pocket, and standing on the
platform on which these candidates were elected, I would suffer anything
before I would Compromise in any way.”
In the House of Representatives, on December 10, 1860, a number of
propositions looking to a peaceful settlement of the threatened danger,
were offered and referred to the Select Committee of Thirty-three. On
the following Monday, December 17, by 154 yeas to 14 nays, the House
adopted a resolution, offered by Mr. Adrian of New Jersey, in these
words:
“Resolved, That we deprecate the spirit of disobedience to the
Constitution, wherever manifested; and that we earnestly recommend the
repeal of all Statutes by the State Legislatures in conflict with, and
in violation of, that sacred instrument, and the laws of Congress passed
in pursuance thereof.”
On the same day, the House adopted, by 135 yeas to no nays, a resolution
offered by Mr. Lovejoy of Illinois, in these words:
“Whereas, The Constitution of the United States is the Supreme law of
the Land, and ready and faithful obedience to it a duty of all good and
law-abiding citizens; Therefore:
“Resolved, That we deprecate the spirit of disobedience to the
Constitution, wherever manifested; and that we earnestly recommend the
repeal of all Nullification laws; and that it is the duty of the
President of the United States to protect and defend the property of the
United States.”
be the duty of all citizens, whether “good and law abiding” or not,
to yield obedience to the Constitution, as will be seen by
referring to the proceedings in the Globe of that date, where the
following appears:
“Mr. LOGAN. I hope there will be no objection on this side of the
House to the introduction of the [Lovejoy] resolution. I can see
no difference myself, between this resolution and the one
[Adrian’s] just passed, except in regard to verbiage. I can find
but one objection to the resolution, and that is in the use of the
words declaring that all’ law abiding’ citizens should obey the
Constitution. I think that all men should do so.
“Mr. LOVEJOY. I accept the amendment suggested by my Colleague.
“Mr. LOGAN. It certainly should include members of Congress; but
if it is allowed to remain all ‘good and law abiding’ citizens, I
do not think it will include them. [Laughter.]
“The resolution was modified by the omission of those words.”]
It also adopted, by 115 yeas to 44 nays, a resolution offered by Mr.
Morris of Illinois, as follows:
“Resolved by the House of Representatives: That we properly estimate the
immense value of our National Union to our collective and individual
happiness; that we cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment
to it; that we will speak of it as the palladium of our political safety
and prosperity; that we will watch its preservation with jealous
anxiety; that we will discountenance whatever may suggest even a
suspicion that it can, in any event, be abandoned, and indignantly frown
upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our
Country from the rest, or enfeeble the sacred ties which now link
together the various parts; that we regard it as a main pillar in the
edifice of our real independence, the support of tranquillity at home,
our peace abroad, our safety, our prosperity, and that very liberty
which we so highly prize; that we have seen nothing in the past, nor do
we see anything in the present, either in the election of Abraham
Lincoln to the Presidency of the United States, or from any other
existing cause, to justify its dissolution; that we regard its
perpetuity as of more value than the temporary triumph of any Party or
any man; that whatever evils or abuses exist under it ought to be
corrected within the Union, in a peaceful and Constitutional way; that
we believe it has sufficient power to redress every wrong and enforce
every right growing out of its organization, or pertaining to its proper
functions; and that it is a patriotic duty to stand by it as our hope in
Peace and our defense in War.”
CHAPTER VII.
SECESSION ARMING.
While Congress was encouraging devotion to the Union, and its Committees
striving for some mode by which the impending perils might be averted
without a wholesale surrender of all just principles, the South Carolina
Convention met (December 17, 1860) at Columbia, and after listening to
inflammatory addresses by commissioners from the States of Alabama and
Mississippi, urging immediate and unconditional Secession, unanimously
and with “tremendous cheering” adopted a resolution: “That it is the
opinion of the Convention that the State of South Carolina should
forthwith Secede from the Federal Union, known as the United States of
America,”–and then adjourned to meet at Charleston, South Carolina.
The next day, and following days, it met there, at “Secession Hall,”
listening to stimulating addresses, while a committee of seven worked
upon the Ordinance of Secession. Among the statements made by orators,
were several clear admissions that the rebellious Conspiracy had existed
for very many years, and that Mr. Lincoln’s election was simply the
long-sought-for pretext for Rebellion. Mr. Parker said: “It is no
spasmodic effort that has come suddenly upon us; it has been gradually
culminating for a long period of thirty years. At last it has come to
that point where we may say, the matter is entirely right.” Mr. Inglis
said: “Most of us have had this matter under consideration for the last
twenty years; and I presume that we have by this time arrived at a
decision upon the subject.” Mr. Keitt said: “I have been engaged in
this movement ever since I entered political life; * * * we have
carried the body of this Union to its last resting place, and now we
will drop the flag over its grave.” Mr. Barnwell Rhett said: “The
Secession of South Carolina is not an event of a day. It is not
anything produced by Mr. Lincoln’s election, or by the non-execution of
the Fugitive Slave Law. It has been a matter which has been gathering
head for thirty years.” Mr. Gregg said: “If we undertake to set forth
all the causes, do we not dishonor the memory of all the statesmen of
South Carolina, now departed, who commenced forty years ago a war
against the tariff and against internal improvement, saying nothing of
the United States Bank, and other measures which may now be regarded as
obsolete.”
On the 20th of December, 1860–the fourth day of the sittings–the
Ordinance of Secession was reported by the Committee, and was at once
unanimously passed, as also was a resolution that “the passage of the
Ordinance be proclaimed by the firing of artillery and ringing of the
bells of the city, and such other demonstrations as the people may deem
appropriate on the passage of the great Act of Deliverance and Liberty;”
after which the Convention jubilantly adjourned to meet, and ratify,
that evening. At the evening session of this memorable Convention, the
Governor and Legislature attending, the famous Ordinance was read as
engrossed, signed by all the delegates, and, after announcement by the
President that “the State of South Carolina is now and henceforth a Free
and Independent Commonwealth;” amid tremendous cheering, the Convention
adjourned. This, the first Ordinance of Secession passed by any of the
Revolting States, was in these words:
“An Ordinance to dissolve the Union between the State of South Carolina
and other States united with her, under the compact entitled the
‘Constitution of the United States of America.’
“We the people of the State of South Carolina in Convention assembled,
do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, that the
Ordinance adopted by us in Convention on the 23rd day of May, in the
year of our Lord 1788, whereby the Constitution of the United States of
America was ratified, and also all Acts and parts of Acts of the General
Assembly of this State ratifying the amendments of the said
Constitution, are hereby repealed; and that the Union now subsisting
between South Carolina and other States, under the name of the United
States of America, is hereby dissolved.”
Thus, and in these words, was joyously adopted and ratified, that solemn
Act of Separation which was doomed to draw in its fateful train so many
other Southern States, in the end only to be blotted out with the blood
of hundreds of thousands of their own brave sons, and their equally
courageous Northern brothers.
State after State followed South Carolina in the mad course of Secession
from the Union. Mississippi passed a Secession Ordinance, January 9,
1861. Florida followed, January 10th; Alabama, January 11th; Georgia,
January 18th; Louisiana, January 26th; and Texas, February 1st;
Arkansas, North Carolina, and Virginia held back until a later period;
while Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware, abstained
altogether from taking the fatal step, despite all attempts to bring
them to it.
In the meantime, however, South Carolina had put on all the dignity of
a Sovereign and Independent State. Her Governor had a “cabinet”
comprising Secretaries of State, War, Treasury, the Interior, and a
Postmaster General. She had appointed Commissioners, to proceed to the
other Slave-holding States, through whom a Southern Congress was
proposed, to meet at Montgomery, Alabama; and had appointed seven
delegates to meet the delegates from such other States in that proposed
Southern Congress. On the 21st of December, 1860, three Commissioners
(Messrs. Barnwell, Adams, and Orr) were also appointed to proceed to
Washington, and treat for the cession by the United States to South
Carolina, of all Federal property within the limits of the latter. On
the 24th, Governor Pickens issued a Proclamation announcing the adoption
of the Ordinance of Secession, declaring “that the State of South
Carolina is, as she has a right to be, a separate sovereign, free and
independent State, and as such, has a right to levy war, conclude peace,
negotiate treaties, leagues or covenants, and to do all acts whatsoever
that rightfully appertain to a free and independent State;” the which
proclamation was announced as “Done in the eighty-fifth year of the
Sovereignty and Independence of South Carolina.” On the same day (the
Senators from that State in the United States Senate having long since,
as we have seen, withdrawn from that body) the Representatives of South
Carolina in the United States House of Representatives withdrew.
Serious dissensions in the Cabinet of President Buchanan, were now
rapidly disintegrating the “official family” of the President. Lewis
Cass, the Secretary of State, disgusted with the President’s cowardice
and weakness, and declining to be held responsible for Mr. Buchanan’s
promise not to reinforce the garrisons of the National Forts, under
Major Anderson, in Charleston harbor, retired from the Cabinet December
12th–Howell Cobb having already, “because his duty to Georgia required
it,” resigned the Secretaryship of the Treasury, and left it bankrupt
and the credit of the Nation almost utterly destroyed.
On the 26th of December, Major Anderson evacuated Fort Moultrie,
removing all his troops and munitions of war to Fort Sumter–whereupon a
cry went up from Charleston that this was in violation of the
President’s promise to take no step looking to hostilities, provided the
Secessionists committed no overt act of Rebellion, up to the close of
his fast expiring Administration. On the 29th, John B. Floyd, Secretary
of War, having failed to secure the consent of the Administration to an
entire withdrawal of the Federal garrison from the harbor of Charleston,
also resigned, and the next day–he having in the meantime escaped in
safety to Virginia–was indicted by the Grand Jury at Washington, for
malfeasance and conspiracy to defraud the Government in the theft of
$870,000 of Indian Trust Bonds from the Interior Department, and the
substitution therefor of Floyd’s acceptances of worthless army-
transportation drafts on the Treasury Department.
Jacob Thompson, Secretary of the Interior, also resigned, January 8th,
1861, on the pretext that “additional troops, he had heard, have been
ordered to Charleston” in the “Star of the West.”–[McPherson’s History
of the Rebellion, p. 28.]
Several changes were thus necessitated in Mr. Buchanan’s cabinet, by
these and other resignations, so that by the 18th of January, 1861,
Jeremiah S. Black was Secretary of State; General John A. Dix, Secretary
of the Treasury; Joseph Holt, Secretary of War; Edwin M. Stanton,
Attorney General; and Horatio King, Postmaster General. But before
leaving the Cabinet, the conspiring Southern members of it, and their
friends, had managed to hamstring the National Government, by scattering
the Navy in other quarters of the World; by sending the few troops of
the United States to remote points; by robbing the arsenals in the
Northern States of arms and munitions of war, so as to abundantly supply
the Southern States at the critical moment; by bankrupting the Treasury
and shattering the public credit of the Nation; and by other means no
less nefarious. Thus swindled, betrayed, and ruined, by its degenerate
and perfidious sons, the imbecile Administration stood with dejected
mien and folded hands helplessly awaiting the coming catastrophe.
On December 28th, 1860, the three Commissioners of South Carolina having
reached Washington, addressed to the President a communication, in
which–after reciting their powers and duties, under the Ordinance of
Secession, and stating that they had hoped to have been ready to proceed
to negotiate amicably and without “hostile collision,” but that “the
events–[The removal, to Fort Sumter, of Major Anderson’s command, and
what followed.]–of the last twenty-four hours render such an assurance
impossible”–they declared that the troops must be withdrawn from
Charleston harbor, as “they are a standing menace which render
negotiation impossible,” threatening speedily to bring the questions
involved, to “a bloody issue.”
To this communication Mr. Buchanan replied at considerable length,
December 30th, in an apologetic, self-defensive strain, declaring that
the removal by Major Anderson of the Federal troops under his command,
from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter was done “upon his own responsibility,
and without authority,” and that he (the President) “had intended to
command him to return to his former position,” but that events had so
rapidly transpired as to preclude the giving of any such command;
Castle Pinckney and Fort Moultrie; the simultaneous raising of that
flag over the Federal Custom House and Post Office at Charleston;
the resignation of the Federal Collector, Naval Officer and
Surveyor of that Port–all of which occurred December 27th; and the
seizure “by force of arms,” December 30th, of the United States
Arsenal at that point.]
and concluding, with a very slight stiffening of backbone, by saying:
“After this information, I have only to add that, whilst it is my duty
to defend Fort Sumter as a portion of the public property of the United
States against hostile attacks, from whatever quarter they may come, by
such means as I may possess for this purpose, I do not perceive how such
a defense can be construed into a menace against the city of
Charleston.” To this reply of the President, the Commissioners made
rejoinder on the 1st of January, 1861; but the President “declined to
receive” the communication.
From this time on, until the end of President Buchanan’s term of office,
and the inauguration of Mr. Lincoln as President, March 4th, 1861,
events crowded each other so hurriedly, that the flames of Rebellion in
the South were continually fanned, while the public mind in the North
was staggered and bewildered, by them.
On January 2nd, prior to the Secession of Georgia, Forts Pulaski and
Jackson, commanding Savannah, and the Federal Arsenal at Augusta,
Georgia, with two 12 pound howitzers, two cannon, 22,000 muskets and
rifles, and ammunition in quantity, were seized by Rebel militia. About
the same date, although North Carolina had not seceded, her Governor
(Ellis) seized the Federal Arsenal at Fayetteville, Fort Macon, and
other fortifications in that State, “to preserve them” from mob-seizure.
January 4th, anticipating Secession, Alabama State troops seized Fort
Morgan, with 5,000 shot and shell, and Mount Vernon Arsenal at Mobile,
with 2,000 stand of arms, 150, 000 pounds of powder, some pieces of
cannon, and a large quantity of other munitions of war. The United
States Revenue cutter, “Lewis Cass,” was also surrendered to Alabama.
On the 5th, the Federal steamer “Star of the West,” with reinforcements
and supplies for Fort Sumter, left New York in the night–and Secretary
Jacob Thompson notified the South Carolina Rebels of the fact.
On the 9th, the “Star of the West” appeared off Charleston bar, and
while steaming toward Fort Sumter, was fired upon by Rebel batteries at
Fort Moultrie and Morris Island, and struck by a shot, whereupon she
returned to New York without accomplishing her mission. That day the
State of Mississippi seceded from the Union.
On the 10th, the Federal storeship “Texas,” with Federal guns and
stores, was seized by Texans. On the same day Florida seceded.
On the 11th, Forts Jackson and St. Philip, commanding the mouth of the
Mississippi River, and Fort Pike, dominating Lake Pontchartrain, were
seized by Louisiana troops; also the Federal Arsenal at Baton Rouge,
with 50,000 small arms, 4 howitzers, 20 heavy pieces of ordnance, 2
batteries, 300 barrels of powder, and other stores. The State of
Alabama also seceded the same day.
On the 12th–Fort Marion, the coast surveying schooner “Dana,” the
Arsenal at St. Augustine, and that on the Chattahoochee, with 500,000
musket cartridges, 300,000 rifle cartridges and 50,000 pounds of powder,
having previously been seized–Forts Barrancas and McRae, and the Navy
Yard at Pensacola, were taken by Rebel troops of Florida, Alabama and
Mississippi. On the same day, Colonel Hayne, of South Carolina, arrived
at Washington as Agent or Commissioner to the National Government from
Governor Pickens of that State.
On the 14th, the South Carolina Legislature resolved “that any attempt
by the Federal Government to reinforce Fort Sumter will be regarded as
an act of open hostility, and a Declaration of War.”
On the 16th, Colonel Hayne, of South Carolina, developed his mission,
which was to demand of the President the surrender of Fort Sumter to the
South Carolina authorities–a demand that had already been made upon,
and refused by, Major Anderson.
The correspondence concerning this demand, between Colonel Hayne and ten
Southern United States Senators;–[Senators Wigfall, Hemphill, Yulee,
Mallory, Jeff. Davis, C. C. Clay, Fitzgerald, Iverson, Slidell, and
Benjamin.]–the reply of the President, by Secretary Holt, to those
Senators; Governor Pickens’s review of the same; and the final demand;
consumed the balance of the month of January; and ended, February 6th,
in a further reply, through the Secretary of War, from the President,
asserting the title of the United States to that Fort, and declining the
demand, as “he has no Constitutional power to cede or surrender it.”
Secretary Holt’s letter concluded by saying: “If, with all the
multiplied proofs which exist of the President’s anxiety for Peace, and
of the earnestness with which he has pursued it, the authorities of that
State shall assault Fort Sumter, and peril the lives of the handful of
brave and loyal men shut up within its walls, and thus plunge our Common
Country into the horrors of Civil War, then upon them and those they
represent, must rest the responsibility.”
But to return from this momentary diversion: On the 18th of January,
Georgia seceded; and on the 20th, the Federal Fort at Ship Island,
Mississippi, and the United States Hospital on the Mississippi River
were seized by Mississippi troops.
On the 26th, Louisiana seceded. On the 28th, Louisiana troops seized
all the quartermaster’s and commissary stores held by Federal officials;
and the United States Revenue cutter “McClelland” surrendered to the
Rebels.
On February 1st, the Louisiana Rebels seized the National Mint and
Custom House at New Orleans, with $599,303 in gold and silver. On the
same day the State of Texas seceded.
On February 8th, the National Arsenal at Little Rock, Arkansas, with
9,000 small arms, 40 cannon, and quantities of ammunition, was seized;
and the same day the Governor of Georgia ordered the National Collector
of the Port of Savannah to retain all collections and make no further
payments to the United States Government.*
[It was during this eventful month that, certain United States
troops having assembled at the National Capital, and the House of
Representatives having asked the reason therefor, reply was made by
the Secretary of War as follows:
“WAR DEPARTMENT, February 18, 1861.
[Congressional Globe, August 8, 1861, pp. 457,458]
“SIR: On the 11th February, the House of Representatives adopted a
resolution requesting the President, if not incompatible with the
public interests, to communicate ‘the reasons that had induced him
to assemble so large a number of troops in this city, and why they
are kept here; and whether he has any information of a Conspiracy
upon the part of any portion of the citizens of this Country to
seize upon the Capital and prevent the Inauguration of the
President elect.’
“This resolution having been submitted to this Department for
consideration and report, I have the honor to state, that the body
of troops temporarily transferred to this city is not as large as
is assumed by the resolution, though it is a well-appointed corps
and admirably adapted for the preservation of the public peace.
The reasons which led to their being assembled here will now be
briefly stated.
“I shall make no comment upon the origin of the Revolution which,
for the last three months, has been in progress in several of the
Southern States, nor shall I enumerate the causes which have
hastened its advancement or exasperated its temper. The scope of
the questions submitted by the House will be sufficiently met by
dealing with the facts as they exist, irrespective of the cause
from which they have proceeded. That Revolution has been
distinguished by a boldness and completeness of success rarely
equaled in the history of Civil Commotions. Its overthrow of the
Federal authority has not only been sudden and wide-spread, but has
been marked by excesses which have alarmed all and been sources of
profound humiliation to a large portion of the American People.
Its history is a history of surprises and treacheries and ruthless
spoliations. The Forts of the United States have been captured and
garrisoned, and hostile flags unfurled upon their ramparts. Its
arsenals have been seized, and the vast amount of public arms they
contained appropriated to the use of the captors; while more than
half a million dollars, found in the Mint at New Orleans, has been
unscrupulously applied to replenish the coffers of Louisiana.
Officers in command of revenue cutters of the United States have
been prevailed on to violate their trusts and surrender the
property in their charge; and instead of being branded for their
crimes, they, and the vessels they betrayed, have been cordially
received into the service of the Seceded States. These movements
were attended by yet more discouraging indications of immorality.
It was generally believed that this Revolution was guided and urged
on by men occupying the highest positions in the public service,
and who, with the responsibilities of an oath to support the
Constitution still resting upon their consciences, did not hesitate
secretly to plan and openly to labor for, the dismemberment of the
Republic whose honors they enjoyed and upon whose Treasury they
were living. As examples of evil are always more potent than those
of good, this spectacle of demoralization on the part of States and
statesmen could not fail to produce the most deplorable
consequences. The discontented and the disloyal everywhere took
courage. In other States, adjacent to and supposed to sympathize
in sense of political wrong with those referred to, Revolutionary
schemes were set on foot, and Forts and arms of the United States
seized. The unchecked prevalence of the Revolution, and the
intoxication which its triumphs inspired, naturally suggested
wilder and yet more desperate enterprises than the conquest of
ungarrisoned Forts, or the plunder of an unguarded Mint. At what
time the armed occupation of Washington City became a part of the
Revolutionary Programme, is not certainly known. More than six
weeks ago, the impression had already extensively obtained that a
Conspiracy for the accomplishment of this guilty purpose was in
process of formation, if not fully matured. The earnest endeavors
made by men known to be devoted to the Revolution, to hurry
Virginia and Maryland out of the Union, were regarded as
preparatory steps for the subjugation of Washington. This plan was
in entire harmony with the aim and spirit of those seeking the
subversion of the Government, since no more fatal blow at its
existence could be struck than the permanent and hostile possession
of the seat of its power. It was in harmony, too, with the avowed
designs of the Revolutionists, which looked to the formation of a
Confederacy of all the Slave States, and necessarily to the
Conquest of the Capital within their limits. It seemed not very
indistinctly prefigured in a Proclamation made upon the floor of
the Senate, without qualification, if not exultingly, that the
Union was already dissolved–a Proclamation which, however
intended, was certainly calculated to invite, on the part of men of
desperate fortunes or of Revolutionary States, a raid upon the
Capital. In view of the violence and turbulent disorders already
exhibited in the South, the public mind could not reject such a
scheme as at all improbable. That a belief in its existence was
entertained by multitudes, there can be no doubt, and this belief I
fully shared. My conviction rested not only on the facts already
alluded to, but upon information, some of which was of a most
conclusive character, that reached the Government from many parts
of the Country, not merely expressing the prevalence of the opinion
that such an organization had been formed, but also often
furnishing the plausible grounds on which the opinion was based.
Superadded to these proofs, were the oft-repeated declarations of
men in high political positions here, and who were known to have
intimate affiliations with the Revolution–if indeed they did not
hold its reins in their hands–to the effect that Mr. Lincoln would
not, or should not be inaugurated at Washington. Such
declarations, from such men, could not be treated as empty bluster.
They were the solemn utterances of those who well understood the
import of their words, and who, in the exultation of the temporary
victories gained over their Country’s flag in the South, felt
assured that events would soon give them the power to verify their
predictions. Simultaneously with these prophetic warnings, a
Southern journal of large circulation and influence, and which is
published near the city of Washington, advocated its seizure as a
possible political necessity.
“The nature and power of the testimony thus accumulated may be best
estimated by the effect produced upon the popular mind.
Apprehensions for the safety of the Capital were communicated from
points near and remote, by men unquestionably reliable and loyal.
The resident population became disquieted, and the repose of many
families in the city was known to be disturbed by painful
anxieties. Members of Congress, too-men of calm and comprehensive
views, and of undoubted fidelity to their Country–frankly
expressed their solicitude to the President and to this Department,
and formally insisted that the defenses of the Capital should be
strengthened. With such warnings, it could not be forgotten that,
had the late Secretary of War heeded the anonymous letter which he
received, the tragedy at Harper’s Ferry would have been avoided;
nor could I fail to remember that, had the early admonitions which
reached here in regard to the designs of lawless men upon the Forts
of Charleston Harbor been acted on by sending forward adequate
reinforcements before the Revolution began, the disastrous
political complications that ensued might not have occurred.
“Impressed by these circumstances and considerations, I earnestly
besought you to allow the concentration, at this city, of a
sufficient military force to preserve the public peace from all the
dangers that seemed to threaten it. An open manifestation, on the
part of the Administration, of a determination, as well as of the
ability, to maintain the laws, would, I was convinced, prove the
surest, as also the most pacific, means of baffling and dissolving
any Conspiracy that might have been organized. It was believed too
that the highest and most solemn responsibility resting upon a
President withdrawing from the Government, was to secure to his
successor a peaceful Inauguration. So deeply, in my judgment, did
this duty concern the whole Country and the fair fame of our
Institutions, that, to guarantee its faithful discharge, I was
persuaded no preparation could be too determined or too complete.
The presence of the troops alluded to in the resolution is the
result of the conclusion arrived at by yourself and Cabinet, on the
proposition submitted to you by this Department. Already this
display of life and loyalty on the part of your Administration, has
produced the happiest effects. Public confidence has been
restored, and the feverish apprehension which it was so mortifying
to contemplate has been banished. Whatever may have been the
machinations of deluded, lawless men, the execution of their
purpose has been suspended, if not altogether abandoned in view of
preparations which announce more impressively than words that this
Administration is alike able and resolved to transfer in peace, to
the President elect, the authority that, under the Constitution,
belongs to him. To those, if such there be, who desire the
destruction of the Republic, the presence of these troops is
necessarily offensive; but those who sincerely love our
Institutions cannot fail to rejoice that, by this timely precaution
they have possibly escaped the deep dishonor which they must have
suffered had the Capital, like the Forts and Arsenals of the South,
fallen into the hands of the Revolutionists, who have found this
great Government weak only because, in the exhaustless beneficence
of its spirit, it has refused to strike, even in its own defense,
lest it should wound the aggressor.
“I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
“J. HOLT.
“Secretary of War,
“THE PRESIDENT.”]
On February 20th, Forts Chadbourne and Belknap were seized by the Texan
Rebels; and on the 22nd, the Federal General Twiggs basely surrendered
to them all the fortifications under his control, his little Army, and
all the Government stores in his possession–comprising $55,000 in
specie, 35,000 stand of arms, 26 pieces of mounted artillery, 44
dismounted guns, and ammunition, horses, wagons, forage, etc., valued at
nearly $2,000,000.
On the 2nd of March, the Texan Rebels seized the United States Revenue
cutter “Dodge” at Galveston; and on the 6th, Fort Brown was surrendered
to them.
Thus, with surrender after surrender, and seizure after
seizure, of its revenue vessels and fortifications and troops and arms
and munitions of war in the Southern States–with Fort Sumter invested
and at the mercy of any attack, and Fortress Monroe alone of all the
National strongholds yet safe–with State after State seceding–what
wonder that, while these events gave all encouragement to the Southern
Rebels, the Patriots of the North stood aghast at the appalling
spectacle of a crumbling and dissolving Union!
During this period of National peril, the debates in both branches of
Congress upon propositions for adjustment of the unfortunate differences
between the Southern Seceders and the Union, as has been already hinted,
contributed still further to agitate the public mind. Speech after
speech by the ablest and most brilliant Americans in public life, for or
against such propositions, and discussing the rightfulness or
wrongfulness of Secession, were made in Congress day after day, and, by
means of the telegraph and the press, alternately swayed the Northern
heart with feelings of hope, chagrin, elation or despair.
The Great Debate was opened in the Senate on almost the very first day
of its session (December 4th, 1860), by Mr. Clingman, of North Carolina,
who, referring to South Carolina, declared that “Instead of being
precipitate, she and the whole South have been wonderfully patient.” A
portion of that speech is interesting even at this time, as showing how
certain phases of the Tariff and Internal Improvement questions entered
into the consideration of some of the Southern Secession leaders. Said
he, “I know there are intimations that suffering will fall upon us of
the South, if we secede. My people are not terrified by any such
considerations. * * * They have no fears of the future if driven to
rely on themselves. The Southern States have more territory than all
the Colonies had when they Seceded from Great Britain, and a better
territory. Taking its position, climate, and fertility into
consideration, there is not upon Earth a body of territory superior to
it. * * * The Southern States have, too, at this day, four times the
population the Colonies had when they Seceded from Great Britain. Their
exports to the North and to Foreign Countries were, last year, more than
$300,000,000; and a duty of ten per cent. upon the same amount of
imports would give $30,000,000 of revenue–twice as much as General
Jackson’s administration spent in its first year. Everybody can see,
too, how the bringing in of $300,000,000 of imports into Southern ports
would enliven business in our seaboard towns. I have seen with some
satisfaction, also, Mr. President, that the war made upon us has
benefitted certain branches of industry in my State. There are
manufacturing establishments in North Carolina, the proprietors of which
tell me that they are making fifty per cent. annually on their whole
capital, and yet cannot supply one tenth of the demand for their
production. The result of only ten per cent. duties in excluding
products from abroad, would give life and impetus to mechanical and
manufacturing industry, throughout the entire South. Our people
understand these things, and they are not afraid of results, if forced
to declare Independence. Indeed I do not see why Northern Republicans
should wish to continue a connection with us upon any terms. * * *
They want High Tariff likewise. They may put on five hundred per cent.
if they choose, upon their own imports, and nobody on our side will
complain. They may spend all the money they raise on railroads, or
opening harbors, or anything on earth they desire, without interference
from us; and it does seem to me that if they are sincere in their views
they ought to welcome a separation.”
From the very commencement of this long three-months debate, it was the
policy of the Southern leaders to make it appear that the Southern
States were in an attitude of injured innocence and defensiveness
against Northern aggression. Hence, it was that, as early as December
5th, on the floor of the Senate, through Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, they
declared: “All we ask is to be allowed to depart in Peace. Submit we
will not; and if, because we will not submit to your domination, you
choose to make War upon us, let God defend the Right!”
At the same time it was esteemed necessary to try and frighten the North
into acquiescence with this demand to be “let alone.” Hence such
utterances as those of Clingman and Iverson, to which reference has
already been made, and the especially defiant close of the latter’s
speech, when–replying to the temperate but firm Union utterances of Mr.
Hale–the Georgia Senator said: “Sir, I do not believe there will be any
War; but if War is to come, let it come; we will meet the Senator from
New Hampshire and all the myrmidons of Abolitionism and Black
Republicanism everywhere upon our own soil; and, in the language of a
distinguished member from Ohio in relation to the Mexican War, we will
‘welcome you with bloody hands to hospitable graves.'”
On the other hand, in order to encourage the revolting States to the
speedy commission of overt acts of Rebellion and violence, that would
precipitate War without a peradventure, utterances fell from Southern
lips, in the National Senate Chamber, like those of Mr. Wigfall, when he
said, during this first day of the debate: “Frederick the Great, on one
occasion, when he had trumped up an old title to some of the adjacent
territory, quietly put himself in possession and then offered to treat.
Were I a South Carolinian, as I am a Texan, and I knew that my State was
going out of the Union, and that this Government would attempt to use
force, I would, at the first moment that that fact became manifest,
seize upon the Forts and the arms and the munitions of war, and raise
the cry ‘To your tents, O Israel, and to the God of battles be this
issue!”
And, as we have already seen, the Rebels of the South were not slow in
following the baleful advice to the letter. But it was not many days
after this utterance when the Conspirators against the Union evidently
began to fear that the ground for Rebellion, upon which they had planted
themselves, would be taken from under their feet by the impulse of
Compromise and Concession which stirred so strongly the fraternal spirit
of the North. That peaceful impulse must be checked and exasperated by
sneers and impossible demands. Hence, on December 12th we find one of
the most active and favorite mouthpieces of Treason, Mr. Wigfall,
putting forth such demands, in his most offensive manner.
Said he: “If the two Senators from New York (Seward and King), the
Senator from Ohio (Wade), the two Senators from Illinois (Douglas and
Trumbull), the Senator from New Hampshire (Hale), the Senator from
Maine, and others who are regarded as representative men, who have
denied that by the Constitution of the United States, Slaves are
recognized as Property; who have urged and advocated those acts which we
regard as aggressive on the part of the People–if they will rise here,
and say in their places, that they desire to propose amendments to the
Constitution, and beg that we will vote for them; that they will, in
good faith, go to their respective constituencies and urge the
ratification; that they believe, if these Gulf States will suspend their
action, that those amendments will be ratified and carried out in good
faith; that they will cease preaching this ‘irrepressible conflict’; and
if, in those amendments, it is declared that Slaves are Property, that
they shall be delivered up upon demand; and that they will assure us
that Abolition societies shall be abolished; that Abolition speeches
shall no longer be made; that we shall have peace and quiet; that we
shall not be called cut-throats and pirates and murderers; that our
women shall not be slandered–these things being said in good faith, the
Senators begging that we will stay our hand until an honest effort can
be made, I believe that there is a prospect of giving them a fair
consideration!”
Small wonder is it, that this labored and ridiculous piece of
impertinence was received with ironical laughter on the Republican side
of the Senate Chamber. And it was in reference to these threats, and
these preposterous demands–including the suppression of the right of
Free Discussion and Liberty of the Press–that, in the same chamber
(January 7, 1861) the gallant and eloquent Baker said:
“Your Fathers had fought for that right, and more than that, they had
declared that the violation of that right was one of the great causes
which impelled them to the Separation. * * * Sir, the Liberty of the
Press is the highest safeguard to all Free Government. Ours could not
exist without it. It is with us, nay, with all men, like a great
exulting and abounding river, It is fed by the dews of Heaven, which
distil their sweetest drops to form it. It gushes from the rill, as it
breaks from the deep caverns of the Earth. It is fed by a thousand
affluents, that dash from the mountaintop to separate again into a
thousand bounteous and irrigating rills around. On its broad bosom it
bears a thousand barks. There, Genius spreads its purpling sail.
There, Poetry dips its silver oar. There, Art, Invention, Discovery,
Science, Morality, Religion, may safely and securely float. It wanders
through every land. It is a genial, cordial source of thought and
inspiration, wherever it touches, whatever it surrounds. Sir, upon its
borders, there grows every flower of Grace and every fruit of Truth. I
am not here to deny that that Stream sometimes becomes a dangerous
Torrent, and destroys towns and cities upon its bank; but I am here to
say that without it, Civilization, Humanity, Government, all that makes
Society itself, would disappear, and the World would return to its
ancient Barbarism.
“Sir, if that were to be possible, or so thought for a moment, the fine
conception of the great Poet would be realized. If that were to be
possible, though but for a moment, Civilization itself would roll the
wheels of its car backward for two thousand years. Sir, if that were
so, it would be true that:
‘As one by one in dread Medea’s train,
Star after Star fades off th’ ethereal plain,
Thus at her fell approach and secret might,
Art after art goes out, and all is night.
Philosophy, that leaned on Heaven before,
Sinks to her second cause, and is no more.
Religion, blushing, veils her sacred fires,
And, unawares, Morality expires.’
“Sir, we will not risk these consequences, even for Slavery; we will not
risk these consequences even for Union; we will not risk these
consequences to avoid that Civil War with which you threaten us; that
War which, you announce so deadly, and which you declare to be
inevitable. * * * I will never yield to the idea that the great
Government of this Country shall protect Slavery in any Territory now
ours, or hereafter to be acquired. It is, in my opinion, a great
principle of Free Government, not, to be surrendered.
“It is in my judgment, the object of the great battle which we have
fought, and which we have won. It is, in my poor opinion, the point
upon which there is concord and agreement between the great masses of
the North, who may agree in no other political opinion whatever. Be he
Republican, or Democrat, or Douglas man, or Lincoln man; be he from the
North, or the West, from Oregon, or from Maine, in my judgment nine-
tenths of the entire population of the North and West are devoted, in
the very depths of their hearts, to the great Constitutional idea that
Freedom is the rule, that Slavery is the exception, that it ought not to
be extended by virtue of the powers of the Government of the United
States; and, come weal, come woe, it never shall be.
“But, sir, I add one other thing. When you talk to me about Compromise
or Concession, I am not sure that I always understand you. Do you mean
that I am to give up my convictions of right? Armies cannot compel that
in the breast of a Free People. Do you mean that I am to concede the
benefits of the political struggle through which we have passed,
considered politically, only? You are too just and too generous to ask
that. Do you mean that we are to deny the great principle upon which
our political action has been based? You know we cannot. But if you
mean by Compromise and Concession to ask us to see whether we have not
been hasty, angry, passionate, excited, and in many respects violated
your feelings, your character, your right of property, we will look;
and, as I said yesterday, if we have, we will undo it. Allow me to say
again, if there be any lawyer or any Court that will advise us that our
laws are unconstitutional, we will repeal them.
“Now as to territory. I will not yield one inch to Secession; but there
are things that I will yield, and there are things to which I will
yield. It is somewhere told that when Harold of England received a
messenger from a brother with whom he was at variance, to inquire on
what terms reconciliation and peace could be effected between brothers,
he replied in a gallant and generous spirit in a few words, ‘the, terms
I offer are the affection of a brother; and the Earldom of
Northumberland.’ And, said the Envoy, as he marched up the Hall amid
the warriors that graced the state of the King, ‘if Tosti, thy brother,
agree to this, what terms will you allow to his ally and friend,
Hadrada, the giant.’ ‘We will allow,’ said Harold, ‘to Hadrada, the
giant, seven feet of English ground, and if he be, as they say, a giant,
some few inches more!’ and, as he spake, the Hall rang with acclamation.
“Sir, in that spirit I speak. I follow, at a humble distance, the ideas
and the words of Clay, illustrious, to be venerated, and honored, and
remembered, forever. * * * He said–I say: that I will yield no inch,
no word, to the threat of Secession, unconstitutional, revolutionary,
dangerous, unwise, at variance with the heart and the hope of all
mankind save themselves. To that I yield nothing; but if States loyal
to the Constitution, if people magnanimous and just, desiring a return
of fraternal feeling, shall come to us and ask for Peace, for permanent,
enduring peace and affection, and say, ‘What will you grant? I say to
them, ‘Ask all that a gentleman ought to propose, and I will yield all
that a gentleman ought to offer.’ Nay, more: if you are galled because
we claim the right to prohibit Slavery in territory now Free, or in any
Territory which acknowledges our jurisdiction, we will evade–I speak
but for myself–I will aid in evading that question; I will agree to
make it all States, and let the People decide at once. I will agree to
place them in that condition where the prohibition of Slavery will never
be necessary to justify ourselves to our consciences or to our
constituents. I will agree to anything which is not to force upon me
the necessity of protecting Slavery in the name of Freedom. To that I
never can and never will yield.”
The speeches of Seward, of Douglas, of Crittenden, of Andrew Johnson, of
Baker, and others, in behalf of the Union, and those of Benjamin, Davis,
Wigfall, Lane, and others, in behalf of Secession, did much toward
fixing the responsibility for the approaching bloody conflict where it
belonged. The speeches of Andrew Johnson of Tennessee–who, if he at a
subsequent period of the Nation’s history, proved himself not the
worthiest son of the Republic, at this critical time, at all events, did
grand service in the National Senate–especially had great and good
effect on the public mind in the Northern and Border States. They were,
therefore, gall and wormwood to the Secession leaders, who hoped to drag
the Border States into the great Southern Confederacy of States already
in process of formation.
Their irritation was shown in threats of personal violence to Mr.
Johnson, as when Wigfall–replying February 7th, 1861, to the latter’s
speech, said, “Now if the Senator wishes to denounce Secession and
Nullification eo nomine, let him go back and denounce Jefferson; let him
denounce Jackson, if he dare, and go back and look that Tennessee
Democracy in the face, and see whether they will content themselves with
riddling his effigy!”
It would seem also, from another part of Wigfall’s reply, that the
speeches of Union Senators had been so effective that a necessity was
felt on the part of the Southern Conspirators to still further attempt
to justify Secession by shifting the blame to Northern shoulders, for,
while referring to the Presidential canvass of 1860–and the attitude of
the Southern Secession leaders during that exciting period–he said:
“We (Breckinridge-Democrats) gave notice, both North and South, that if
Abraham Lincoln was elected, this Union was dissolved. I never made a
speech during the canvass without asserting that fact. * * * Then, I
say, that our purpose was not to dissolve the Union; but the dire
necessity has been put upon us. The question is, whether we shall live
longer in a Union in which a Party, hostile to us in every respect, has
the power in Congress, in the Executive department, and in the Electoral
Colleges–a Party who will have the power even in the Judiciary. We
think it is not safe. We say that each State has the clear indisputable
right to withdraw if she sees fit; and six of the States have already
withdrawn, and one other State is upon the eve of withdrawing, if she
has not already done so. How far this will spread no man can tell!”
As tending to show the peculiar mixture of brag, cajolery, and threats,
involved in the attitude of the South, as expressed by the same favorite
Southern mouthpiece, toward the Border-States on the one hand, and the
Middle and New England States on the other, a further extract from this
(February 7th) speech of the Texan Senator may be of interest. Said he:
“With exports to the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars, our
imports must be the same. With a lighter Tariff than any people ever
undertook to live under, we could have larger revenue. We would be able
to stand Direct Taxation to a greater extent than any people ever could
before, since the creation of the World. We feel perfectly competent to
meet all issues that may be presented, either by hostility from abroad
or treason at home. So far as the Border-States are concerned, it is a
matter that concerns them alone. Should they confederate with us,
beyond all doubt New England machinery will be worked with the water
power of Tennessee, of Kentucky, of Virginia and of Maryland; the Tariff
laws that now give New England the monopoly in the thirty-three States,
will give to these Border States a monopoly in the Slave-holding States.
Should the non-Slave-holding States choose to side against us in
organizing their Governments, and cling to their New England brethren,
the only result will be, that the meat, the horses, the hemp, and the
grain, which we now buy in Pennsylvania, in Ohio, in Indiana and
Illinois, will be purchased in Kentucky and in Western Virginia and in
Missouri. Should Pennsylvania stand out, the only result will be, that
the iron which is now dug in Pennsylvania, will be dug in the mountains
of Tennessee and of Virginia and of Kentucky and of North Carolina.
These things we know.
“We feel no anxiety at all, so far as money or men are concerned. We
desire War with nobody; we intend to make no War; but we intend to live
under just such a Government as we see fit. Six States have left this
Union, and others are going to leave it simply because they choose to do
it; that is all. We do not ask your consent; we do not wish it. We
have revoked our ratification of the Treaty commonly known as the
Constitution of the United States; a treaty for common defense and
general welfare; and we shall be perfectly willing to enter into another
Treaty with you, of peace and amity. Reject the olive branch and offer
us the sword, and we accept it; we have not the slightest objection.
Upon that subject we feel as the great William Lowndes felt upon another
important subject, the Presidency, which he said was neither to be
sought nor declined. When you invade our soil, look to your own
borders. You say that you have too many people, too many towns, too
dense a population, for us to invade you. I say to you Senators, that
there is nothing that ever stops the march of an invading force, except
a desert. The more populous a country, the more easy it is to subsist
an army.”
After declaring that–“Not only are our non-Slaveholders loyal, but even
our Negroes are. We have no apprehensions whatever of insurrection–not
the slightest. We can arm our negroes, and leave them at home, when we
are temporarily absent”–Mr. Wigfall proceeded to say: “We may as well
talk plainly about this matter. This is probably the last time I shall
have an opportunity of addressing you. There is another thing that an
invading army cannot do. It cannot burn up plantations. You can pull
down fences, but the Negroes will put them up the next morning. The
worst fuel that ever a man undertook to make fire with, is dirt; it will
not burn. Now I have told you what an invading army cannot do. Suppose
I reverse the picture and tell you what it can do. An invading army in
an enemy’s country, where there is a dense population, can subsist
itself at a very little cost; it does not always pay for what it gets.
An invading army can burn down towns; an invading army can burn down
manufactories; and it can starve operatives. It can do all these
things. But an Invading army, and an army to defend a Country, both
require a military chest. You may bankrupt every man south of North
Carolina, so that his credit is reduced to such a point that he could
not discount a note for thirty dollars, at thirty days; but the next
autumn those Cotton States will have just as much money and as much
credit as they had before. They pick money off the cotton plant. Every
time that a Negro touches a cotton-pod with his hand, he pulls a piece
of silver out of it, and he drops it into the basket in which it is
carried to the gin-house. It is carried to the packing screw. A bale
of cotton rolls out-in other words, five ten-dollar pieces roll out-
covered with canvas. We shall never again make less than five million
bales of cotton. * * * We can produce five million bales of cotton,
every bale worth fifty dollars, which is the lowest market price it has
been for years past. We shall import a bale of something else, for
every bale of cotton that we export, and that bale will be worth fifty
dollars. We shall find no difficulty under a War-Tariff in raising an
abundance of money. We have been at Peace for a very long time, We are
very prosperous. Our planters use their cotton, not to buy the
necessaries of life, but for the superfluities, which they can do
without. The States themselves have a mine of wealth in the loyalty and
the wealth of their citizens. Georgia, Mississippi, any one of those
States can issue its six per cent. bonds tomorrow, and receive cotton in
payment to the extent almost of the entire crop. They can first borrow
from their own citizens; they can tax them to an almost unlimited
extent; and they can raise revenue from a Tariff to an almost unlimited
extent.
“How will it be with New England? where will their revenue come from?
From your Custom-houses? what do you export? You have been telling us
here for the last quarter of a century, that you cannot manufacture,
even for the home market, under the Tariffs which we have given you.
When this Tariff ceases to operate in your favor, and you have to pay
for coming into our markets, what will you export? When your machinery
ceases to move, and your operatives are turned out, will you tax your
broken capitalist or your starving operative? When the navigation laws
cease to operate, what will become of your shipping interest? You are
going to blockade our ports, you say. That is a very innocent game; and
you suppose we shall sit quietly down and submit to a blockade. I speak
not of foreign interference, for we look not for it. We are just as
competent to take Queen Victoria and Louis Napoleon under our
protection, as they are to take us; and they are a great deal more
interested to-day in receiving cotton from our ports than we are in
shipping it. You may lock up every bale of cotton within the limits of
the eight Cotton States, and not allow us to export one for three years,
and we shall not feel it further than our military resources are
concerned. Exhaust the supply of cotton in Europe for one week, and all
Europe is in revolution.
“These are facts. You will blockade us! Do you suppose we shall do
nothing, even upon the sea? How many letters of marque and reprisal
would it take to put the whole of your ships up at your wharves to rot?
Will any merchant at Havre, or Liverpool, or any other portion of the
habitable globe, ship a cargo upon a New England, or New York, or
Philadelphia clipper, or other ship, when he knows that the seas are
swarming with letters of marque and reprisal? Why the mere apprehension
of such a thing will cut you out of the Carrying Trade of the civilized
World. * * * I speak not of the absurdity of the position that you can
blockade our ports, admitting at the same time that we are in the Union.
Blockade is a remedy, as all writers on International law say, against a
Foreign Power with whom you are at War. You cannot use a blockade
against your own people. An embargo even, you cannot use. That is a
remedy against a Foreign Nation with whom you expect to be at War. You
must treat us as in the Union, or out of it. We have gone out. We are
willing to live at peace with you; but, as sure as fate, whenever any
flag comes into one of our ports, that has thirty-three stars upon it,
that flag will be fired at. Displaying a flag with stars which we have
plucked from that bright galaxy, is an insult to the State within whose
waters that flag is displayed. You cannot enforce the laws without
Coercion, and you cannot Coerce without War.
“These matters, then, can be settled. How? By withdrawing your troops;
admitting our right to Self-government clearly, unqualifiedly. Do this,
and there is no difficulty about it. You say that you will not do it.
Very well; we have no objection–none whatever. That is Coercion. When
you have attempted it, you will find that you have made War. These,
Senators, are facts. I come here to plead for Peace; but I have seen so
much and felt so much, that I am becoming at last, to tell the plain
truth of the matter, rather indifferent as to which way the thing turns.
If you want War, you can have it. If you want Peace, you can get it;
but I plead not for Peace.”
Meanwhile the Seceding States of the South were strengthening their
attitude by Confederation. On February 4, 1861, the Convention of
Seceding States, called by the South Carolina Convention at the time of
her Secession, met, in pursuance of that call, at Montgomery, Alabama,
and on the 9th adopted a Provisional Constitution and organized a
Provisional Government by the election of Jefferson Davis of
Mississippi, as President, and Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia, as
Vice-President; to serve until a Presidential election could be held by
the people of the Confederacy.
“Confederate States” was adopted, and, in the Fall of the same
year, Messrs. Davis and Stephens were elected by popular vote, for
the term of six years ensuing, as President and Vice-President,
respectively, of the Confederacy.]
Mr. Davis almost at once left Jackson, Mississippi, for Montgomery,
where he arrived and delivered his Inaugural, February 17, having
received on his road thither a succession of ovations from the
enthusiastic Rebels, to which he had responded with no less than twenty-
five speeches, very similar in tone to those made in the United States
Senate by Mr. Wigfall and others of that ilk-breathing at once defiance
and hopefulness, while admitting the difficulties in the way of the new
Confederacy.
“It may be,” said he, at Jackson, “that we will be confronted by War;
that the attempt will be made to blockade our ports, to starve us out;
but they (the Union men of the North) know little of the Southern heart,
of Southern endurance. No amount of privation could force us to remain
in a Union on unequal terms. England and France would not allow our
great staple to be dammed up within our present limits; the starving
thousands in their midst would not allow it. We have nothing to
apprehend from Blockade. But if they attempt invasion by land, we must
take the War out of our territory. If War must come, it must be upon
Northern, and not upon Southern soil. In the meantime, if they were
prepared to grant us Peace, to recognize our equality, all is well.”
And, in his speech at Stevenson, Alabama, said he “Your Border States
will gladly come into the Southern Confederacy within sixty days, as we
will be their only friends. England will recognize us, and a glorious
future is before us. The grass will grow in the Northern cities, where
the pavements have been worn off by the tread of Commerce. We will
carry War where it is easy to advance–where food for the sword and
torch await our Armies in the densely populated cities; and though they
may come and spoil our crops, we can raise them as before; while they
cannot rear the cities which took years of industry and millions of
money to build.”
Very different in tone to these, were the kindly and sensible utterances
of Mr. Lincoln on his journey from Springfield to Washington, about the
same time, for Inauguration as President of the United States. Leaving
Springfield, Illinois, February 11th, he had pathetically said:
“My friends: No one, not in my position, can realize the sadness I feel
at this parting. To this people I owe all that I am. Here I have lived
more than a quarter of a century. Here my children were born, and here
one of them lies buried. I know not how soon I shall see you again. I
go to assume a task more difficult than that which has devolved upon any
other man since the days of Washington. He never would have succeeded
except for the aid of Divine Providence, upon which he at all times
relied. I feel that I cannot succeed without the same Divine blessing
which sustained him; and on the same Almighty Being I place my reliance
for support. And I hope you, my friends, will all pray that I may
receive that Divine assistance, without which I cannot succeed, but with
which success is certain. Again I bid you an affectionate farewell.”
At Indianapolis, that evening, the eve of his birthday anniversary,
after thanking the assembled thousands for their “magnificent welcome,”
and defining the words “Coercion” and “Invasion”–at that time so
loosely used–he continued: “But if the United States should merely hold
and retake her own Forts and other property, and collect the duties on
foreign importation, or even withhold the mails from places where they
were habitually violated, would any or all of these things be ‘Invasion’
or ‘Coercion’? Do our professed lovers of the Union, who spitefully
resolve that they will resist Coercion and Invasion, understand that
such things as these on the part of the United States would be
‘Coercion’ or ‘Invasion’ of a State? If so, their idea of means to
preserve the object of their great affection would seem to be
exceedingly thin and airy.”
At Columbus, Ohio, he spoke in a like calm, conservative, reasoning way
–with the evident purpose of throwing oil on the troubled waters–when
he said: “I have not maintained silence from any want of real anxiety.
It is a good thing that there is no more than anxiety; for there is
nothing going wrong. It is a consoling circumstance that, when we look
out, there is nothing that really hurts anybody. We entertain different
views upon political questions; but nobody is suffering anything. This
is a consoling circumstance; and from it we may conclude that all we
want is time, patience, and a reliance on that God who has never
forsaken this People.”
So, too, at Pittsburg, Pa., February 15th, he said, of “our friends,” as
he termed them, the Secessionists: “Take even their own views of the
questions involved, and there is nothing to justify the course they are
pursuing. I repeat, then, there is no crisis, except such an one as may
be gotten up at any time by turbulent men, aided by designing
politicians. My advice to them, under the circumstances, is to keep
cool. If the great American People only keep their temper both sides of
the line, the trouble will come to an end, and the question which now
distracts the Country be settled, just as surely as all other
difficulties, of a like character, which have been originated in this
Government, have been adjusted. Let the people on both sides keep their
self-possession, and, just as other clouds have cleared away in due
time, so will this great Nation continue to prosper as heretofore.”
And toward the end of that journey, on the 22nd of February–
Washington’s Birthday–in the Independence Hall at Philadelphia, after
eloquently affirming his belief that “the great principle or idea that
kept this Confederacy so long together was * * * that sentiment in the
Declaration of Independence which gave Liberty not alone to the People
of this Country, but” he hoped “to the World, for all future time * * *
which gave promise that, in due time, the weight would be lifted from
the shoulders of all men”–he added, in the same firm, yet temperate and
reassuring vein: “Now, my friends, can this Country be saved on that
basis? If it can, I will consider myself one of the happiest men in the
world, if I can help to save it. If it cannot be saved on that basis,
it will be truly awful. But, if this Country cannot be saved without
giving up that principle, I was about to say I would rather be
assassinated on this spot than surrender it. Now in my view of the
present aspect of affairs, there need be no bloodshed or War. There is
no necessity for it. I am not in favor of such a course; and I may say,
in advance, that there will be no bloodshed, unless it be forced upon
the Government, and then it will be compelled to act in self-defense. *
* * I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by, and, if it be
the pleasure of Almighty God, to die by.”
Thus, as he progressed on that memorable journey from his home in
Illinois, through Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Columbus, Pittsburgh,
Cleveland, Erie, Buffalo, Albany, New York, Trenton, Newark,
Philadelphia, and Harrisburg-amid the prayers and blessings and
acclamations of an enthusiastic and patriotic people–he uttered words
of wise conciliation and firm moderation such as beseemed the high
functions and tremendous responsibilities to which the voice of that
liberty–and-union-loving people had called him, and this too, with a
full knowledge, when he made the Philadelphia speech, that the enemies
of the Republic had already planned to assassinate him before he could
reach Washington.
The prudence of his immediate friends, fortunately defeated the
murderous purpose–and by the simple device of taking the regular night
express from Philadelphia instead of a special train next day–to
Washington, he reached the National Capital without molestation early on
the morning of the 23rd of February.
That morning, after Mr. Lincoln’s arrival, in company with Mr. Lovejoy,
the writer visited him at Willard’s Hotel. During the interview both
urged him to “Go right along, protect the property of the Country, and
put down the Rebellion, no matter at what cost in men and money.” He
listened with grave attention, and said little, but very clearly
indicated his approval of all the sentiments thus expressed–and then,
with the same firm and manly and cheerful faith in the outcome, he
added: “As the Country has placed me at the helm of the Ship, I’ll try
to steer her through.”
The spirit in which he proposed to accomplish this superhuman task, was
shown when he told the Southern people through the Civic authorities of
Washington on the 27th of February–When the latter called upon him–
that he had no desire or intention to interfere with any of their
Constitutional rights–that they should have all their rights under the
Constitution, “not grudgingly, but fully and fairly.” And what was the
response of the South to this generous and conciliatory message?
Personal sneers–imputations of Northern cowardice–boasts of Southern
prowess–scornful rejection of all compromise–and an insolent challenge
to the bloody issue of arms!
Said Mr. Wigfall, in the United States Senate, on March 2d, alluding to
Mr. Lincoln, “I do not think that a man who disguises himself in a
soldier’s cloak and a Scotch cap (a more thorough disguise could not be
assumed by such a man) and makes his entry between day and day, into the
Capital of the Country that he is to govern–I hardly think that he is
going to look War sternly in the face.
future and behold the downfall of the Southern Rebellion, the
flight of its Chieftains, and the capture of Jefferson Davis while
endeavoring to escape, with his body enclosed in a wrapper and a
woman’s shawl over his head, as stated by Lieutenant-Colonel Stuart
of Jefferson Davis’s Staff, p. 756, vol. ii., Greeley’s American
Conflict–he would hardly have retailed this slander.]
“I look for nothing else than that the Commissioners from the
Confederated States will be received here and recognized by Abraham
Lincoln. I will now predict that this Republican Party that is going to
enforce the Laws, preserve the Union, and collect Revenue, will never
attempt anything so silly; and that instead of taking Forts, the troops
will be withdrawn from those which we now have. See if this does not
turn out to be so, in less than a week or ten days.”
In the same insulting diatribe, he said: “It is very easy for men to
bluster who know there is going to be no danger. Four or five million
people living in a territory that extends from North Carolina down to
the Rio Grande, who have exports to above three hundred million dollars,
whose ports cannot be blockaded, but who can issue letters of marque and
reprisal, and sweep your commerce from the seas, and who will do it, are
not going to be trifled with by that sensible Yankee nation. Mark my
words. I did think, at one time, there was going to be War; I do not
think so now. * * * The Star of the West swaggered into Charleston
harbor, received a blow planted full in the face, and staggered out.
Your flag has been insulted; redress it if you dare! You have submitted
to it for two months, and you will submit to it for ever. * * * We
have dissolved the Union; mend it if you can; cement it with blood; try
the experiment! we do not desire War; we wish to avoid it. * * * This
we say; and if you choose to settle this question by the Sword, we feel,
we know, that we have the Right. We interfere with you in no way. We
ask simply that you will not interfere with us. * * * You tell us you
will keep us in the Union. Try the experiment!”
And then, with brutal frankness, he continued: “Now, whether what are
called The Crittenden Resolutions will produce satisfaction in some of
these Border States, or not, I am unaware; but I feel perfectly sure
they would not be entertained upon the Gulf. As to the Resolutions
which the Peace Congress has offered us, we might as well make a clean
breast of it. If those Resolutions were adopted, and ratified by three
fourths of the States of this Union, and no other cause ever existed, I
make the assertion that the seven States now out of the Union, would go
out upon that.”
CHAPTER VIII.
THE REJECTED OLIVE BRANCH.
While instructive, it will also not be devoid of interest, to pause
here, and examine the nature of the Crittenden Resolutions, and also the
Resolutions of the Peace Congress, which, we have seen, were spurned by
the Secession leaders, through their chief mouthpiece in the United
States Senate.
The Crittenden Compromise Resolutions * were in these words:
“A Joint Resolution proposing certain Amendments to the Constitution of
the United States:
“Whereas, serious and alarming dissensions have arisen between the
Northern and the Southern States, concerning the Rights and security of
the Rights of the Slaveholding States, and especially their Rights in
the common territory of the United States; and whereas, it is eminently
desirable and proper that these dissensions, which now threaten the very
existence of this Union, should be permanently quieted and settled by
Constitutional provisions which shall do equal justice to all Sections,
and thereby restore to the People that peace and good-will which ought
to prevail between all the citizens of the United States; Therefore:
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America, in Congress assembled, (two thirds of both Houses
concurring), the following articles be, and are hereby proposed and
submitted as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, which
shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of said
Constitution, when ratified by Conventions of three-fourths of the
several States:
“Article I. In all the territory of the United States now held, or
hereafter to be acquired, situate north of latitude 36 30′, Slavery or
involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, is prohibited,
while such territory shall remain under Territorial government. In all
the territory south of said line of latitude, Slavery of the African
race is hereby recognized as existing, and shall not be interfered with
by Congress, but shall be protected as Property by all the departments
of the Territorial government during its continuance. And when any
Territory, north or south of said line, within such boundaries as
Congress may prescribe, shall contain the population requisite for a
member of Congress, according to the then Federal ratio of
representation of the People of the United States, it shall, if its own
form of government be republican, be admitted into the Union, on an
equal footing with the original States; with or without Slavery, as the
Constitution of such new State may provide.
“Article II. Congress shall have no power to abolish Slavery in places
under its exclusive jurisdiction, and situate within the limits of
States that permit the holding of Slaves.
“Article III. Congress shall have no power to abolish Slavery within
the District of Columbia; so long as it exists in the adjoining States
of Virginia and Maryland, or either, nor without the consent of the
inhabitants, nor without just compensation first made to such owners of
Slaves as do not consent to such abolishment. Nor shall Congress, at
any time, prohibit officers of the Federal government, or members of
Congress whose duties require them to be in said District, from bringing
with them their Slaves, and holding them as such during the time their
duties may require them to remain there, and afterward taking them from
the District.
“Article IV. Congress shall have no power to prohibit or hinder the
Transportation of Slaves from one State to another, or to a Territory in
which Slaves are, by law, permitted to be held, whether that
transportation be by land, navigable rivers, or by the sea.
“Article V. That in addition to the provisions of the third paragraph
of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the
United States, Congress shall have power to provide by law, and it shall
be its duty to provide, that the United States shall pay to the owner
who shall apply for it, the full value of his Fugitive Slaves in all
cases where the Marshal, or other officer whose duty it was to arrest
said Fugitive, was prevented from so doing by violence or intimidation,
or where, after arrest, said Fugitive was rescued by force, and the
owner thereby prevented and obstructed in the pursuit of his remedy for
the recovery of his Fugitive Slave under the said clause of the
Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof.
thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any Law or
Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but
shall be delivered up on claim of the Party to whom such Service or
Labour may be due.”–Art. IV., Sec. 2, P 3, U. S. Constitution.]
“And in all such cases, when the United States shall pay for such
Fugitive, they shall have the Right, in their own name, to sue the
county in which said violence, intimidation, or rescue, was committed,
and recover from it, with interest and damages, the amount paid by them
for said Fugitive Slave. And the said county, after it has paid said
amount to the United States, may, for its indemnity, sue and recover
from the wrong-doers or rescuers by whom the owner was prevented from
the recovery of his Fugitive Slave, in like manner as the owner himself
might have sued and recovered.
“Article VI. No future amendment of the Constitution shall affect the
five preceding articles; nor the third paragraph of the second section
of the first article of the Constitution, nor the third paragraph of
the second section of the fourth article of said Constitution; and no
amendment shall be made to the Constitution which shall authorize or
give to Congress any power to abolish or interfere with Slavery in any
of the States by whose laws it is or may be, allowed or permitted.
several States which may be included within this Union, according
to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to
the whole Number of Free Persons, including those bound to Service
for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not Taxed, three-fifths
of all Other Persons,” etc.–Art. 1., Sec. 2, P 3, U. S.
Constitution.]
“And whereas, also, besides those causes of dissension embraced in the
foregoing amendments proposed to the Constitution of the United States,
there are others which come within the jurisdiction of Congress, and may
be remedied by its legislative power; And whereas it is the desire of
Congress, as far as its power will extend, to remove all just cause for
the popular discontent and agitation which now disturb the peace of the
Country and threaten the stability of its Institutions; Therefore:
“1. Resolved by the Senate and house of Representatives in Congress
assembled, that the laws now in force for the recovery of Fugitive
Slaves are in strict pursuance of the plain and mandatory provisions of
the Constitution, and have been sanctioned as valid and Constitutional
by the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States; that the
Slaveholding States are entitled to the faithful observance and
execution of those laws; and that they ought not to be repealed, or so
modified or changed as to impair their efficiency; and that laws ought
to be made for the punishment of those who attempt, by rescue of the
Slave, or other illegal means, to hinder or defeat the due execution of
said laws.
“2. That all State laws which conflict with the Fugitive Slave Acts of
Congress, or any other Constitutional Acts of Congress, or which, in
their operation, impede, hinder, or delay, the free course and due
execution of any of said Acts, are null and void by the plain provisions
of the Constitution of the United States; yet those State laws, void as
they are, have given color to practices, and led to consequences, which
have obstructed the due administration and execution of Acts of
Congress, and especially the Acts for the delivery of Fugitive Slaves;
and have thereby contributed much to the discord and commotion now
prevailing. Congress, therefore, in the present perilous juncture, does
not deem it improper, respectfully and earnestly, to recommend the
repeal of those laws to the several States which have enacted them, or
such legislative corrections or explanations of them as may prevent
their being used or perverted to such mischievous purposes.
“3. That the Act of the 18th of September, 1850, commonly called the
Fugitive Slave Law, ought to be so amended as to make the fee of the
Commissioner, mentioned in the eighth section of the Act, equal in
amount in the cases decided by him, whether his decision be in favor of,
or against the claimant. And, to avoid misconstruction, the last clause
of the fifth section of said Act, which authorizes the person holding a
warrant for the arrest or detention of a Fugitive Slave to summon to his
aid the posse comitatus, and which declares it to be the duty of all
good citizens to assist him in its execution, ought to be so amended as
to expressly limit the authority and duty to cases in which there shall
be resistance, or danger of resistance or rescue.
“4. That the laws for the suppression of the African Slave Trade, and
especially those prohibiting the importation of Slaves into the United
States, ought to be more effectual, and ought to be thoroughly executed;
and all further enactments necessary to those ends ought to be promptly
made.”
The Peace Conference, or “Congress,” it may here be mentioned, was
called, by action of the Legislature of Virginia, to meet at Washington,
February 4, 1861. The invitation was extended to all of such “States of
this Confederacy * * * whether Slaveholding or Non-Slaveholding, as are
willing to unite with Virginia in an earnest effort to adjust the
present unhappy controversies in the spirit in which the Constitution
was originally formed, and consistently with its principles, so as to
afford to the people of the Slaveholding States adequate guarantees for
the security of their rights”–such States to be represented by
Commissioners “to consider, and, if practicable, agree upon some
suitable adjustment.”
The Conference, or “Congress,” duly convened, at that place and time,
and organized by electing ex-President John Tyler, of Virginia, its
President. This Peace Congress–which comprised 133 Commissioners,
representing the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin and Kansas–remained in session until
February 27, 1861–and then submitted the result of its labors to
Congress, with the request that Congress “will submit it to Conventions
in the States, as Article Thirteen of the Amendments to the Constitution
of the United States, in the following shape:
“Section 1. In all the present territory of the United States, north of
the parallel of 36 30′ of north latitude, Involuntary Servitude, except
in punishment of crime, is prohibited. In all the present territory
south of that line, the status of Persons held to Involuntary Service or
Labor, as it now exists, shall not be changed; nor shall any law be
passed by Congress or the Territorial Legislature to hinder or prevent
the taking of such Persons from any of the States of this Union to said
Territory, nor to impair the Rights arising from said relation; but the
same shall be subject to judicial cognizance in the Federal Courts,
according to the course of the common law. When any Territory north or
south of said line, within such boundary as Congress may prescribe,
shall contain a population equal to that required for a member of
Congress, it shall, if its form of government be republican, be admitted
into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, with or
without Involuntary Servitude, as the Constitution of such State may
provide.
“Section 2. No territory shall be acquired by the United States, except
by discovery and for naval and commercial stations, depots, and transit
routes, without the concurrence of a majority of all the Senators from
States which allow Involuntary Servitude, and a majority of all the
Senators from States which prohibit that relation; nor shall Territory
be acquired by treaty, unless the votes of a majority of the Senators
from each class of States hereinbefore mentioned be cast as a part of
the two-thirds majority necessary to the ratification of such treaty.
“Section 3. Neither the Constitution, nor any amendment thereof, shall
be construed to give Congress power to regulate, abolish, or control,
within any State, the relation established or recognized by the laws
thereof touching Persons held to Labor or Involuntary Service therein,
nor to interfere with or abolish Involuntary Service in the District of
Columbia without the consent of Maryland, and without the consent of the
owners, or making the owners who do not consent just compensation; nor
the power to interfere with or prohibit Representatives and others from
bringing with them to the District of Columbia, retaining, and taking
away, Persons so held to Labor or Service; nor the power to interfere
with or abolish Involuntary Service in places under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the United States within those States and Territories
where the same is established or recognized; nor the power to prohibit
the removal or transportation of Persons held to Labor or Involuntary
Service in any State or Territory of the United States to any other
State or Territory thereof where it is established or recognized by law
or usage; and the right during transportation, by sea or river, of
touching at ports, shores, and landings, and of landing in case of
distress, shall exist; but not the right of transit in or through any
State or Territory, or of sale or traffic, against the laws thereof.
Nor shall Congress have power to authorize any higher rate of taxation
on Persons held to Labor or Service than on land. The bringing into the
District of Columbia of Persons held to Labor or Service, for sale, or
placing them in depots to be afterwards transferred to other places for
sale as merchandize, is prohibited.
“Section 4. The third paragraph of the second section of the fourth
article of the Constitution shall not be construed to prevent any of the
States, by appropriate legislation, and through the action of their
judicial and ministerial officers, from enforcing the delivery of
Fugitives from Labor to the person to whom such Service or Labor is due.
“Section 5. The Foreign Slave Trade is hereby forever prohibited; and
it shall be the duty of Congress to pass laws to prevent the importation
of Slaves, Coolies, or Persons held to Service or Labor, into the United
States and the Territories from places beyond the limits thereof.
“Section 6. The first, third, and fifth sections, together with this
section of these amendments, and the third paragraph of the second
section of the first article of the Constitution, and the third
paragraph of the second section of the fourth article thereof, shall not
be amended or abolished without the consent of all the States.
“Section 7. Congress shall provide by law that the United States shall
pay to the owner the full value of the Fugitive from Labor, in all cases
where the Marshal, or other officer, whose duty it was to arrest such
Fugitive, was prevented from so doing by violence or intimidation from
mobs or riotous assemblages, or when, after arrest, such Fugitive was
rescued by like violence or intimidation, and the owner thereby deprived
of the same; and the acceptance of such payment shall preclude the owner
from further claim to such Fugitive. Congress shall provide by law for
securing to the citizens of each State the privileges and immunities of
citizens in the several States.”
To spurn such propositions as these–with all the concessions to the
Slave Power therein contained–was equivalent to spurning any and all
propositions that could possibly be made; and by doing this, the
Seceding States placed themselves–as they perhaps desired–in an
utterly irreconcilable attitude, and hence, to a certain extent, which
had not entered into their calculations, weakened their “Cause” in the
eyes of many of their friends in the North, in the Border States, and in
the World. They had become Implacables. Practically considered, this
was their great mistake. The Crittenden Compromise Resolutions covered
and yielded to the Slaveholders of the South all and even more than they
had ever dared seriously to ask or hope for, and had they been open to
Conciliation, they could have undoubtedly carried that measure through
both Houses of Congress and three-fourths of the States.
People in its favor, and clamored for its submission to a direct
popular vote. Had such a submission been accorded, it is very
likely that the greater number of those who voted at all would have
voted to ratify it. * * * The ‘Conservatives,’ so called, were
still able to establish this Crittenden Compromise by their own
proper strength, had they been disposed so to do. The President
was theirs; the Senate strongly theirs; in the House, they had a
small majority, as was evidenced in their defeat of John Sherman
for Speaker. Had they now come forward and said, with authority:
‘Enable us to pass the Crittenden Compromise, and all shall be
peace and harmony,’ they would have succeeded without difficulty.
It was only through the withdrawal of pro-slavery members that the
Republicans had achieved an unexpected majority in either House.
Had those members chosen to return to the seats still awaiting
them, and to support Mr. Crittenden’s proposition, they could have
carried it without difficulty.”–Vol. 360, Greeley’s Am. Conflict.]
But no, they wilfully withdrew their Congressional membership, State by
State, as each Seceded, and refused all terms save those which involved
an absolute surrender to them on all points, including the impossible
claim of the “Right of Secession.”
Let us now briefly trace the history of the Compromise measures in the
two Houses of Congress.
The Crittenden-Compromise Joint-Resolution had been introduced in the
Senate at the opening of its session and referred to a Select Committee
of Thirteen, and subsequently, January 16th, 1861, having been reported
back, came up in that body for action. On that day it was amended by
inserting the words “now held or hereafter to be acquired” after the
words “In all the territory of the United States,” in the first line of
Article I., so that it would read as given above. This amendment–by
which not only in all territory then belonging to the United States, but
also by implication in all that might thereafter be acquired, Slavery
South of 36 30′ was to be recognized–was agreed to by 29 yeas to 21
nays, as follows:
YEAS.–Messrs. Baker, Bayard, Benjamin, Bigler, Bragg, Bright,
Clingman, Crittenden, Douglas, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hemphill, Hunter,
Iverson, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce,
Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury, Sebastian, Slidell and Wigfall–29.
NAYS.–Messrs. Anthony, Bingham, Cameron, Chandler, Clark, Collamer,
Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan,
King, Latham, Seward, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade and
Wilson–24.
The question now recurred upon an amendment, in the nature of a
substitute, offered by Mr. Clark, to strike out the preamble of the
Crittenden proposition and all of the resolutions after the word
“resolved,” and insert:
“That the provisions of the Constitution are ample for the preservation
of the Union, and the protection of all the material interests of the
Country; that it needs to be obeyed rather than amended; and that an
extrication from our present dangers is to be looked for in strenuous
efforts to preserve the peace, protect the public property, and enforce
the laws, rather than in new Guarantees for particular interests,
Compromises for particular difficulties, or Concessions to unreasonable
demands.
“Resolved, That all attempts to dissolve the present Union, or overthrow
or abandon the present Constitution, with the hope or expectation of
constructing a new one, are dangerous, illusory, and destructive; that
in the opinion of the Senate of the United States no such Reconstruction
is practicable; and, therefore, to the maintenance of the existing Union
and Constitution should be directed all the energies of all the
departments of the Government, and the efforts of all good citizens.”
Before reaching a vote on this amendment, Mr. Anthony, (January 16th)
made a most conciliatory speech, pointing out such practical objections
to the Crittenden proposition as occurred to his mind, and then,
continuing, said: “I believe, Mr. President, that if the danger which
menaces us is to be avoided at all, it must be by Legislation; which is
more ready, more certain, and more likely to be satisfactory, than
Constitutional Amendment. The main difficulty is the Territorial
question. The demand of the Senators on the other side of the Chamber,
and of those whom they represent, is that the territory south of the
line of the Missouri Compromise shall be open to their peculiar
Property. All this territory, except the Indian Reservation, is within
the limits of New Mexico; which, for a part of its northern boundary,
runs up two degrees above that line. This is now a Slave Territory;
made so by Territorial Legislation; and Slavery exists there, recognized
and protected. Now, I am willing, as soon as Kansas can be admitted, to
vote for the admission of New Mexico as a State, with such Constitution
as the People may adopt. This disposes of all the territory that is
adapted to Slave Labor or that is claimed by the South. It ought to
settle the whole question. Surely if we can dispose of all the
territory that we have, we ought not to quarrel over that which we have
not, and which we have no very honest way of acquiring. Let us settle
the difficulties that threaten us now, and not anticipate those which
may never come. Let the public mind have time to cool * * *. In
offering to settle this question by the admission of New Mexico, we of
the North who assent to it propose a great Sacrifice, and offer a large
Concession.
“* * * But we make the offer in a spirit of Compromise and good
feeling, which we hope will be reciprocated. * * * I appeal to
Senators on the other side, when we thus offer to bridge over full
seven-eighths of the frightful chasm that separates us, will you not
build the other eighth? When, with outstretched arms, we approach you
so near that, by reaching out your hands you can clasp ours in the
fraternal grasp from which they should never be separated, will you,
with folded arms and closed eyes, stand upon extreme demands which you
know we cannot accept, and for which, if we did, we could not carry our
constituents? * * * Together our Fathers achieved the Independence of
their Country; together they laid the foundations of its greatness and
its glory; together they constructed this beautiful system under which
it is our privilege to live, which it is our duty to preserve and to
transmit. Together we enjoy that privilege; together we must perform
that duty. I will not believe that, in the madness of popular folly and
delusion, the most benignant Government that ever blessed humanity is to
be broken up. I will not believe that this great Power which is
marching with giant steps toward the first place among the Nations of
the Earth, is to be turned ‘backward on its mighty track.’ There are no
grievances, fancied or real, that cannot be redressed within the Union
and under the Constitution. There are no differences between us that
may not be settled if we will take them up in the spirit of those to
whose places we have succeeded, and the fruits of whose labors we have
inherited.”
And to this more than fair proposition to the Southerners–to this
touching appeal in behalf of Peace–what was the response? Not a word!
It seemed but to harden their hearts.
motion was made by Mr. Collamer to postpone the Crittenden
Resolutions and take up the Kansas Admission Bill. Here was the
chance at once offered to them to respond to that appeal–to make a
first step, as it were. They would not make it. The motion was
defeated by 25 yeas to 30 nays–Messrs. Benjamin and Slidell of
Louisiana, Hemphill and Wigfall of Texas, Iverson of Georgia, and
Johnson of Arkansas, voting “nay.” The question at once recurred
on the amendment of Mr. Clark–being a substitute for the
Crittenden Resolutions, declaring in effect all Compromise
unnecessary. To let that substitute be adopted, was to insure the
failure of the Crittenden proposition. Yet these same six Southern
Senators though present, refused to vote, and permitted the
substitute to be adopted by 25 yeas to 23 nays. The vote of Mr.
Douglas, who had been “called out for an instant into the ante-
room, and deprived of the opportunity of voting “–as he afterwards
stated when vainly asking unanimous consent to have his vote
recorded among the nays-would have made it 25 yeas to 24 nays, had
he been present and voting, while the votes of the six Southern
Senators aforesaid, had they voted, would have defeated the
substitute by 25 yeas to 30 nays. Then upon a direct vote on the
Crittenden Compromise there would not only have been the 30 in its
favor, but the vote of at least one Republican (Baker) in addition,
to carry it, and, although that would not have given the necessary
two-thirds, yet it would have been a majority handsome enough to
have ultimately turned the scales, in both Houses, for a peaceful
adjustment of the trouble, and have avoided all the sad
consequences which so speedily befell the Nation. But this would
not have suited the Treasonable purposes of the Conspirators. Ten
days before this they had probably arranged the Programme in this,
as well as other matters. Very certain it is that no time was lost
by them and their friends in making the best use for their Cause of
this vote, in the doubtful States of Missouri and North Carolina
especially. In the St. Louis journals a Washington dispatch,
purporting (untruly however) to come from Senators Polk and Green,
was published to this effect.
“The Crittenden Resolutions were lost by a vote of 25 to 23. A
motion of Mr. Cameron to reconsider was lost; and thus ends all
hope of reconciliation. Civil War is now considered inevitable,
and late accounts declare that Fort Sumter will be attacked without
delay. The Missouri delegation recommend immediate Secession.”
This is but a sample of other similar dispatches sent elsewhere.
And the following dispatch, signed by Mr. Crittenden, and published
in the Raleigh, N. C., Register, to quiet the excitement raised by
the telegrams of the Conspirators, serves also to indicate that the
friends of Compromise were not disheartened by their defeat:
“WASHINGTON, Jan. 17th, 9 P. M.
“In reply the vote against my resolutions will be reconsidered.
Their failure was the result of the refusal of six Southern
Senators to vote. There is yet good hope of success.
“JOHN J. CRITTENDEN.”
There is instruction also to be drawn from the speeches of Senators
Saulsbury, and Johnson of Tennessee, made fully a year afterward
(Jan. 29-31, 1862) in the Senate, touching the defeat of the
Crittenden Compromise by the Clark substitute at this time.
Speaking of the second session of the Thirty-sixth Congress, Mr.
Saulsbury said:
“At that session, while vainly striving with others for the
adoption of those measures, I remarked in my place in the Senate
that–
“‘If any Gibbon should hereafter write the Decline and Fall of the
American Republic, he would date its fall from the rejection by the
Senate of the propositions submitted by the Senator from Kentucky.’
“I believed so then, and I believe so now. I never shall forget,
Mr. President, how my heart bounded for joy when I thought I saw a
ray of hope for their adoption in the fact that a Republican
Senator now on this floor came to me and requested that I should
inquire of Mr. Toombs, who was on the eve of his departure for
Georgia to take a seat in the Convention of that State which was to
determine the momentous question whether she should continue a
member of the Union or withdraw from it, whether, if the Crittenden
propositions were adopted, Georgia would remain in the Union.
“Said Mr. Toombs:
“‘Tell him frankly for me that if those resolutions are adopted by
the vote of any respectable number of Republican Senators,
evidencing their good faith to advocate their ratification by their
people, Georgia will not Secede. This is the position I assumed
before the people of Georgia. I told them that if the party in
power gave evidence of an intention to preserve our rights in the
Union, we were bound to wait until their people could act.’
“I communicated the answer. The Substitute of the Senator from New
Hampshire [Mr. Clark] was subsequently adopted, and from that day
to this the darkness and the tempest and the storm have thickened,
until thousands like myself, as good and as true Union men as you,
Sir, though you may question our motives, have not only despaired
but are without hope in the future.”
To this speech, Mr. Johnson of Tennessee subsequently replied as
follows in the United States Senate (Jan. 31, 1862)
“Sir, it has been said by the distinguished Senator from Delaware
[Mr. Saulsbury] that the questions of controversy might all have
been settled by Compromise. He dealt rather extensively in the
Party aspect of the case, and seemingly desired to throw the onus
of the present condition of affairs entirely on one side. He told
us that, if so and so had been done, these questions could have
been settled, and that now there would have been no War. He
referred particularly to the resolution offered during the last
Congress by the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Clark], and upon
the vote on that he based his argument. * * * The Senator told us
that the adoption of the Clark amendment to the Crittenden
Resolutions defeated the settlement of the questions of
controversy; and that, but for that vote, all could have been peace
and prosperity now. We were told that the Clark amendment defeated
the Crittenden Compromise, and prevented a settlement of the
controversy. On this point I will read a portion of the speech of
my worthy and talented friend from California [Mr. Latham]; and
when I speak of him thus, I do it in no unmeaning sense I intend
that he, not I, shall answer the Senator from Delaware. * * * As
I have said, the Senator from Delaware told us that the Clark
amendment was the turning point in the whole matter; that from it
had flowed Rebellion, Revolution, War, the shooting and
imprisonment of people in different States–perhaps he meant to
include my own. This was the Pandora’s box that has been opened,
out of which all the evils that now afflict the Land have flown. *
* * My worthy friend from California [Mr. Latham], during the last
session of Congress, made one of the best speeches he ever made. *
* * In the course of that speech, upon this very point he made use
of these remarks:
“‘Mr. President, being last winter a careful eye-witness of all
that occurred, I soon became satisfied that it was a deliberate,
wilful design, on the part of some representatives of Southern
States, to seize upon the election of Mr. Lincoln merely as an
excuse to precipitate this revolution upon the Country. One
evidence, to my mind, is the fact that South Carolina never sent
her Senators here.’
“Then they certainly were not influenced by the Clark amendment.
“‘An additional evidence is, that when gentlemen on this floor, by
their votes, could have controlled legislation, they refused to
cast them for fear that the very Propositions submitted to this
body might have an influence in changing the opinions of their
constituencies. Why, Sir, when the resolutions submitted by the
Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Clark], were offered as an
amendment to the Crittenden Propositions, for the manifest purpose
of embarrassing the latter, and the vote taken on the 16th of
January, 1861, I ask, what did we see? There were fifty-five
Senators at that time upon this floor, in person. The Globe of the
second Session, Thirty-Sixth Congress, Part I., page 409, shows
that upon the call of the yeas and nays immediately preceding the
vote on the substituting of Mr. Clark’s amendment, there were
fifty-five votes cast. I will read the vote from the Globe:
“‘YEAS–Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bingham, Cameron, Chandler, Clark,
Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster,
Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck,
Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, and Wilson–25.
“NAYS–Messrs. Bayard, Benjamin, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Clingman,
Crittenden, Douglas, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hemphill, Hunter, Iverson,
Johnson of Arkansas, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham,
Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury,
Sebastian, Slidell and Wigfall–30.
“The vote being taken immediately after, on the Clark Proposition,
was as follows:
“YEAS–Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bingham, Cameron, Chandler, Clark,
Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster,
Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck,
Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson and Wilson–25.
“NAYS-Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Clingman, Crittenden,
Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennefly, Lane,
Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice,
Saulsbury and Sebastian-23.
“‘Six senators retained their seats and refused to vote, thus
themselves allowing the Clark Proposition to supplant the
Crittenden Resolution by a vote of twenty-five to twenty-three.
Mr. Benjamin of Louisiana, Mr. Hemphill and Mr. Wigfall of Texas,
Mr. Iverson of Georgia, Mr. Johnson of Arkansas, and Mr. Slidell of
Louisiana, were in their seats, but refused to cast their votes.’
“I sat right behind Mr. Benjamin, and I am not sure that my worthy
friend was not close by, when he refused to vote, and I said to
him, ‘Mr. Benjamin, why do you not vote? Why not save this
Proposition, and see if we cannot bring the Country to it?’ He
gave me rather an abrupt answer, and said he would control his own
action without consulting me or anybody else. Said I: ‘Vote, and
show yourself an honest man.’ As soon as the vote was taken, he
and others telegraphed South, ‘We cannot get any Compromise.’ Here
were six Southern men refusing to vote, when the amendment would
have been rejected by four majority if they had voted. Who, then,
has brought these evils on the Country? Was it Mr. Clark? He was
acting out his own policy; but with the help we had from the other
side of the chamber, if all those on this side had been true to the
Constitution and faithful to their constituents, and had acted with
fidelity to the Country, the amendment of the Senator from New
Hampshire could have been voted down, the defeat of which the
Senator from Delaware says would have saved the Country. Whose
fault was it? Who is responsible for it? * * * Who did it?
SOUTHERN TRAITORS, as was said in the speech of the Senator from
California. They did it. They wanted no Compromise. They
accomplished their object by withholding their votes; and hence the
Country has been involved in the present difficulty. Let me read
another extract from this speech of the Senator from California
“‘I recollect full well the joy that pervaded the faces of some of
those gentlemen at the result, and the sorrow manifested by the
venerable Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Crittenden]. The record shows
that Mr. Pugh, from Ohio, despairing of any Compromise between the
extremes of ultra Republicanism and Disunionists, working
manifestly for the same end, moved, immediately after the vote was
announced, to lay the whole subject on the table. If you will turn
to page 443, same volume, you will find, when, at a late period,
Mr. Cameron, from Pennsylvania, moved to reconsider the vote,
appeals having been made to sustain those who were struggling to
preserve the Peace of the Country, that the vote was reconsidered;
and when, at last, the Crittenden Propositions were submitted on
the 2d day of March, these Southern States having ‘nearly all
Seceded, they were then lost but by one vote. Here is the vote:
“YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bright, Crittenden, Douglas, Gwin,
Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason,
Nicholson, Polk, Pugh, Rice, Sebastian, Thomson and Wigfall–19.
“‘NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Bingham, Chandler, Clark, Dixon,
Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Harlan, King,
Morrill, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson and Wilson–
20.
“‘If these Seceding Southern senators had remained, there would
have passed, by a large vote (as it did without them), an
amendment, by a two-third vote, forbidding Congress ever
interfering with Slavery in the States. The Crittenden Proposition
would have been indorsed by a majority vote, the subject finally
going before the People, who have never yet, after consideration,
refused Justice, for any length of time, to any portion of the
Country.
“‘I believe more, Mr. President, that these gentlemen were acting
in pursuance of a settled and fixed plan to break up and destroy
this Government.’
“When we had it in our power to vote down the amendment of the
Senator from New Hampshire, and adopt the Crittenden Resolutions,
certain Southern Senators prevented it; and yet, even at a late day
of the session, after they had Seceded, the Crittenden Proposition
was only lost by one vote. If Rebellion and bloodshed and murder
have followed, to whose skirts does the responsibility attach?
“What else was done at the very same session? The House of
Representatives passed, and sent to this body, a Proposition to
amend the Constitution of the United States, so as to prohibit
Congress from ever hereafter interfering with the Institution of
Slavery in the States, making that restriction a part of the
Organic law of the Land. That Constitutional Amendment came here
after the Senators from seven States had Seceded; and yet it was
passed by a two-third vote in the Senate. Have you ever heard of
any one of the States which had then Seceded, or which has since
Seceded, taking up that Amendment to the Constitution, and saying
they would ratify it, and make it a part of that instrument? No.
Does not the whole history of this Rebellion tell you that it was
Revolution that the Leaders wanted, that they started for, that
they intended to have? The facts to which I have referred show how
the Crittenden Proposition might have been carried; and when the
Senators from the Slave States were reduced to one-fourth of the
members of this body, the two Houses passed a Proposition to Amend
the Constitution, so as to guarantee to the States perfect security
in regard to the Institution of Slavery in all future time, and
prohibiting Congress from legislating on the subject.
“But what more was done? After Southern Senators had treacherously
abandoned the Constitution and deserted their posts here, Congress
passed Bills for the Organization of three new Territories: Dakota,
Nevada, and Colorado; and in the sixth section of each of those
Bills, after conferring, affirmatively, power on the Territorial
Legislature, it went on to exclude certain powers by using a
negative form of expression; and it provided, among other things,
that the Legislature should have no power to legislate so as to
impair the right to private property; that it should lay no tax
discriminating against one description of Property in favor of
another; leaving the power on all these questions, not in the
Territorial Legislature, but in the People when they should come to
form a State Constitution.
“Now, I ask, taking the Amendment to the Constitution, and taking
the three Territorial Bills, embracing every square inch of
territory in the possession of the United States, how much of the
Slavery question was left? What better Compromise could have been
made? Still we are told that matters might have been Compromised,
and that if we had agreed to Compromise, bloody Rebellion would not
now be abroad in the Land. Sir, Southern Senators are responsible
for it. They stood here with power to accomplish the result, and
yet treacherously, and, I may say, tauntingly they left this
chamber, and announced that they had dissolved their connection
with the Government. Then, when we were left in the hands of those
whom we had been taught to believe would encroach upon our Rights,
they gave us, in the Constitutional Amendment and in the three
Territorial Bills, all that had ever been asked; and yet gentlemen
talked Compromise!
“Why was not this taken and accepted? No; it was not Compromise
that the Leaders wanted; they wanted Power; they wanted to Destroy
this Government, so that they might have place and emolument for
themselves. They had lost confidence in the intelligence and
virtue and integrity of the People, and their capacity to govern
themselves; and they intended to separate and form a government,
the chief corner-stone of which should be Slavery, disfranchising
the great mass of the People, of which we have seen constant
evidence, and merging the Powers of Government in the hands of the
Few. I know what I say. I know their feelings and their
sentiments. I served in the Senate here with them. I know they
were a Close Corporation, that had no more confidence in or respect
for the People than has the Dey of Algiers. I fought that Close
Corporation here. I knew that they were no friends of the People.
I knew that Slidell and Mason and Benjamin and Iverson and Toombs
were the enemies of Free Government, and I know so now. I
commenced the war upon them before a State Seceded; and I intend to
keep on fighting this great battle before the Country, for the
perpetuity of Free Government. They seek to overthrow it, and to
establish a Despotism in its place. That is the great battle which
is upon our hands. * * * Now, the Senator from Delaware tells us
that if that (Crittenden) Compromise had been made, all these
consequences would have been avoided. It is a mere pretense; it is
false. Their object was to overturn the Government. If they could
not get the Control of this Government, they were willing to divide
the Country and govern part of it.”]
The Clark substitute was then agreed to, by 25 (Republican) yeas to 23
Democratic and Conservative (Bell-Everett) nays–6 Pro-Slavery Senators
not voting, although present; and then, without division, the Crittenden
Resolutions were tabled–Mr. Cameron, however, entering a motion to
reconsider. Subsequently the action of the Senate, both on the
Resolutions and Substitute, was reconsidered, and March 2d the matter
came up again, as will hereafter appear.
Two days prior to this action in the Senate, Mr. Corwin, Chairman of the
Select Committee of Thirty-three, reported to the House (January 14th),
from a majority of that Committee, the following Joint Resolution:
“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That all attempts on the parts
of the Legislatures of any of the States to obstruct or hinder the
recovery and surrender of Fugitives from Service or Labor, are in
derogation of the Constitution of the United States, inconsistent with
the comity and good neighborhood that should prevail among the several
States, and dangerous to the Peace of the Union.
“Resolved, That the several States be respectfully requested to cause
their Statutes to be revised, with a view to ascertain if any of them
are in conflict with or tend to embarrass or hinder the execution of the
Laws of the United States, made in pursuance of the second section of
the Fourth Article of the Constitution of the United States for the
delivery up of Persons held to Labor by the laws of any State and
escaping therefrom; and the Senate and House of Representatives
earnestly request that all enactments having such tendency be forthwith
repealed, as required by a just sense of Constitutional obligations, and
by a due regard for the Peace of the Republic; and the President of the
United States is requested to communicate these resolutions to the
Governors of the several States, with a request that they will lay the
same before the Legislatures thereof respectively.
“Resolved, That we recognize Slavery as now existing in fifteen of the
United States by the usages and laws of those States; and we recognize
no authority, legally or otherwise, outside of a State where it so
exists, to interfere with Slaves or Slavery in such States, in disregard
of the Rights of their owners or the Peace of society.
“Resolved, That we recognize the justice and propriety of a faithful
execution of the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, on
the subject of Fugitive Slaves, or Fugitives from Service or Labor, and
discountenance all mobs or hindrances to the execution of such laws, and
that citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and
immunities of citizens in the several States.
“Resolved, That we recognize no such conflicting elements in its
composition, or sufficient cause from any source, for a dissolution of
this Government; that we were not sent here to destroy, but to sustain
and harmonize the Institutions of the Country, and to see that equal
justice is done to all parts of the same; and finally, to perpetuate its
existence on terms of equality and justice to all the States.
“Resolved, That a faithful observance, on the part of all the States, of
all their Constitutional obligations to each other and to the Federal
Government, is essential to the Peace of the Country.
“Resolved, That it is the duty of the Federal Government to enforce the
Federal Laws, protect the Federal property, and preserve the Union of
these States.
“Resolved, That each State be requested to revise its Statutes, and, if
necessary, so to amend the same as to secure, without Legislation by
Congress, to citizens of other States traveling therein, the same
protection as citizens of such States enjoy; and also to protect the
citizens of other States traveling or sojourning therein against popular
violence or illegal summary punishment, without trial in due form of
law, for imputed crimes.
“Resolved, That each State be also respectfully requested to enact such
laws as will prevent and punish any attempt whatever in such State to
recognize or set on foot the lawless invasion of any other State or
Territory.
“Resolved, That the President be requested to transmit copies of the
foregoing resolutions to the Governors of the several States, with a
request that they be communicated to their respective Legislatures.”
This Joint Resolution, with amendments proposed to the same, came up in
the House for action, on the 27th of February, 1861–the same day upon
which the Peace Congress or Conference concluded its labors at
Washington.
The Proposition of Mr. Burch, of California, was the first acted upon.
It was to amend the Select Committee’s resolutions, as above given, by
adding to them another resolution at the end thereof, as follows:
“Resolved, etc., That it be, and is hereby, recommended to the several
States of the Union that they, through their respective Legislatures,
request the Congress of the United States to call a Convention of all
the States, in accordance with Article Fifth of the Constitution, for
the purpose of amending said Constitution in such manner and with regard
to such subjects as will more adequately respond to the wants, and
afford more sufficient Guarantees to the diversified and growing
Interests of the Government and of the People composing the same.”
This (Burch) amendment, however, was defeated by 14 yeas to 109 nays.
A Proposition of Mr. Kellogg, of Illinois, came up next for action. It
was a motion to strike out all after the first word “That” in the
Crittenden Proposition–which had been offered by Mr. Clemens as a
substitute for the Committee Resolutions–and insert the following:
“The following articles be, and are hereby, proposed and submitted as
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be
valid, to all intents and purposes as part of said Constitution, when
ratified by Conventions of three-fourths of the several States.
“Article XIII. That in all the territory now held by the United States
situate north of latitude 36 30′ Involuntary Servitude, except in the
punishment for crime, is prohibited while such territory shall remain
under a Territorial government; that in all the territory now held south
of said line, neither Congress nor any Territorial Legislature shall
hinder or prevent the emigration to said territory of Persons; held to
Service from any State of this Union, when that relation exists by
virtue of any law or usage of such State, while it shall remain in a
Territorial condition; and when any Territory north or south of said
line, within such boundaries as Congress may prescribe, shall contain
the population requisite for a member of Congress, according to the then
Federal ratio of representation of the People of the United States, it
may, if its form of government be Republican, be admitted into the Union
on an equal footing with the original States, with or without the
relation of Persons held to Service and Labor, as the Constitution of
such new State may provide.
“Article XIV. That nothing in the Constitution of the United States, or
any amendment thereto, shall be so construed as to authorize any
Department of the Government to in any manner interfere with the
relation of Persons held to Service in any State where that relation
exists, nor in any manner to establish or sustain that relation in any
State where it is prohibited by the Laws or Constitution of such State.
And that this Article shall not be altered or amended without the
consent of every State in the Union.
“Article XV. The third paragraph of the second section of the Fourth
Article of the Constitution shall be taken and construed to authorize
and empower Congress to pass laws necessary to secure the return of
Persons held to Service or Labor under the laws of any State, who may
have escaped therefrom, to the party to whom such Service or Labor may
be due.
“Article XVI. The migration or importation of Persons held to Service
or Involuntary Servitude, into any State, Territory, or place within the
United States, from any place or country beyond the limits of the United
States or Territories thereof, is forever prohibited.
“Article XVII. No territory beyond the present limits of the United
States and the Territories thereof, shall be annexed to or be acquired
by the United States, unless by treaty, which treaty shall be ratified
by a vote of two-thirds of the Senate.”
The Kellogg Proposition was defeated by 33 yeas to 158
nays.
The Clemens Substitute was next voted on. This embraced the whole of
the Crittenden Compromise Proposition, as amended in the Senate by
inserting the provision as to all territory “hereafter acquired,” with
the addition of another proposed Article of Amendment to the
Constitution, as follows:
“Article VII. Section I. The elective franchise and the Right to hold
office, whether Federal, State, Territorial, or Municipal, shall not be
exercised by Persons who are, in whole or in part, of the African Race.
“Section II. The United States shall have power to acquire from time to
time districts of country in Africa and South America, for the
colonization, at expense of the Federal Treasury, of such Free Negroes
and Mulattoes as the several States may wish to have removed from their
limits, and from the District of Columbia, and such other places as may
be under the jurisdiction of Congress.”
The Clemens Substitute (or Crittenden Measure, with the addition of said
proposed Article VII.), was defeated by 80 yeas to 113 nays, and then
the Joint Resolution of the Select Committee as heretofore given–after
a vain attempt to table it–was passed by 136 yeas to 53 nays.
Immediately after this action, a Joint Resolution to amend the
Constitution of the United States, which had also been previously
reported by the Select Committee of Thirty-three, came before the House,
as follows:
“Be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of both Houses
concurring), That the following Article be proposed to the Legislatures
of the several States as an Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, which, when ratified by three-fourths of said Legislatures,
shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as a part of the said
Constitution, namely:
“Article XII. No amendment of this Constitution having for its object
any interference within the States with the relation between their
citizens and those described in Section II. of the First Article of the
Constitution as ‘all other persons,’ shall originate with any State that
does not recognize that relation within its own limits, or shall be
valid without the assent of every one of the States composing the
Union.”
Mr. Corwin submitted an Amendment striking out all the words after
“namely;” and inserting the following:
“Article XII. No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will
authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within
any State, with the Domestic Institutions thereof, including that of
Persons held to Labor or Service by the laws of said State.”
Amid scenes of great disorder, the Corwin Amendment was adopted by 120
yeas to 61 nays, and then the Joint Resolution as amended, was defeated
(two-thirds not voting in the affirmative) by 123 yeas to 71 nays. On
the following day (February 28th), amid still greater confusion and
disorder, which the Speaker, despite frequent efforts, was unable to
quell, that vote was reconsidered, and the Joint Resolution passed by
133 yeas to 65 nays–a result which, when announced was received with
“loud and prolonged applause, both on the floor, and in the galleries.”
On the 2d of March, the House Joint Resolution just given, proposing an
Amendment to the Constitution, prohibiting Congress from touching
Slavery within any State where it exists, came up in the Senate for
action.
Mr. Pugh moved to substitute for it the Crittenden Proposition.
Mr. Doolittle moved to amend the proposed substitute (the Crittenden
Proposition), by the insertion of the following, as an additional
Article:
“Under this Constitution, as originally adopted, and as it now exists,
no State has power to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the United
States; but this Constitution, and all laws passed in pursuance of its
delegated powers, are the Supreme Law of the Land, anything contained in
any Constitution, Ordinance, or Act of any State, to the contrary
notwithstanding.”
Mr. Doolittle’s amendment was lost by 18 yeas to 28 nays.
Mr. Pugh’s substitute (the Crittenden Proposition), was lost by 14 yeas
to 25 nays.
Mr. Bingham moved to amend the House Joint Resolution, by striking out
all after the word “resolved,” and inserting the words of the Clark
Proposition as heretofore given, but the amendment was rejected by 13
yeas to 25 nays.
Mr. Grimes moved to strike out all after the word “whereas” in the
preamble of the House Joint Resolution, and insert the following:
“The Legislatures of the States of Kentucky, New Jersey, and Illinois
have applied to Congress to call a Convention for proposing Amendments
to the Constitution of the United States: Therefore,
“Be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Legislatures of the
other States be invited to take the subject of such a Convention into
consideration, and to express their will on that subject to Congress, in
pursuance of the Fifth Article of the Constitution.”
This amendment was also rejected, by 14 yeas to 25 nays.
Mr. Johnson, of Arkansas, offered, as an amendment to the House Joint
Resolution, the propositions submitted by the Peace Congress or
Conference, but the amendment was disagreed to by 3 yeas to 34 nays.
The House Joint Resolution was then adopted by 24 yeas to 12 nays.
Subsequently the Crittenden Proposition came up again as a separate
order, with the Clark substitute to it (once carried, but reconsidered),
pending. The Clark substitute was then rejected by 14 yeas to 22 nays.
Mr. Crittenden then offered the Propositions of the Peace
Congress, as a substitute for his own-and they were rejected by 7 yeas
to 28 nays.
The Crittenden Proposition itself was then rejected, by
19 yeas to 20 nays.
CHAPTER IX.
SLAVERY’S SETTING, AND FREEDOM’S DAWN.
On that long last night of the 36th Congress–and of the Democratic
Administration–to the proceedings of which reference was made in the
preceding Chapter, several notable speeches were made, but there was
substantially nothing done, in the line of Compromise. The only thing
that had been accomplished was the passage, as we have seen, by two-
thirds majority in both Houses, of the Joint Resolution proposing a
Constitutional Amendment prohibiting Congress from meddling with Slavery
in Slave States. There was no Concession nor Compromise in this,
because Republicans, as well as Democrats, had always held that Congress
had no such power. It is true that the Pro-slavery men had charged the
Republicans with ultimate designs, through Congress, upon Slavery in the
Slave States; and Mr. Crittenden pleaded for its passage as exhibiting a
spirit, on their part, of reconciliation; that was all.
In his speech that night–that memorable and anxious night preceding the
Inauguration of President Lincoln–the venerable Mr. Crittenden,
speaking before the Resolution was agreed to, well sketched the
situation when he said in the Senate: “It is an admitted fact that our
Union, to some extent, has already been dismembered; and that further
dismemberment is impending and threatened. It is a fact that the
Country is in danger. This is admitted on all hands. It is our duty,
if we can, to provide a remedy for this. We are, under the Constitution
and by the election of the People, the great guardians, as well as the
administrators of this Government. To our wisdom they have trusted this
great chart. Remedies have been proposed; resolutions have been
offered, proposing for adoption measures which it was thought would
satisfy the Country, and preserve as much of the Union as remained to us
at least, if they were not enough at once to recall the Seceding States
to the Union. We have passed none of these measures. The differences
of opinion among Senators have been such that we have not been able to
concur in any of the measures which have been proposed, even by bare
majorities, much less by that two-thirds majority which is necessary to
carry into effect some of the pacific measures which have been proposed.
We are about to adjourn. We have done nothing. Even the Senate of the
United States, beholding this great ruin around them, beholding
Dismemberment and Revolution going on, and Civil War threatened as the
result, have been able to do nothing; we have absolutely done nothing.
Sir, is not this a remarkable spectacle? * * * How does it happen that
not even a bare majority here, when the Country trusted to our hands is
going to ruin, have been competent to devise any measure of public
safety? How does it happen that we have not had unanimity enough to
agree on any measure of that kind? Can we account for it to ourselves,
gentlemen? We see the danger; we acknowledge our duty, and yet, with
all this before us, we are acknowledging before the world that we can do
nothing; acknowledging before the world, or appearing to all the world,
as men who do nothing! Sir, this will make a strange record in the
history of Governments and in the history of the world. Some are for
Coercion; yet no army has been raised, no navy has been equipped. Some
are for pacification; yet they have been able to do nothing; the dissent
of their colleagues prevents them; and here we are in the midst of a
falling Country, in the midst of a falling State, presenting to the eyes
of the World the saddest spectacle it has ever seen. Cato is
represented by Addison as a worthy spectacle, ‘a great man falling with
a falling State,’ but he fell struggling. We fall with the ignominy on
our heads of doing nothing, like the man who stands by and sees his
house in flames, and says to himself, ‘perhaps the fire will stop before
it consumes all.'”
One of the strong pleas made in the Senate that night, was by Mr.
Douglas, when he said: “The great issue with the South has been that
they would not submit to the Wilmot proviso. The Republican Party
affirmed the doctrine that Congress must and could prohibit Slavery in
the Territories. The issue for ten years was between Non-intervention
on the part of Congress, and prohibition by Congress. Up to two years
ago, neither the Senator (Mason) from Virginia, nor any other Southern
Senator, desired affirmative legislation to protect Slavery. Even up to
this day, not one of them has proposed affirmative legislation to
protect it. Whenever the question has come up, they have decided that
affirmative legislation to protect it was unnecessary; and hence, all
that the South required on the Territorial question was ‘hands off;
Slavery shall not be prohibited by Act of Congress.’ Now, what do we
find? This very session, in view of the perils which surround the
Country, the Republican Party, in both Houses of Congress, by a
unanimous vote, have backed down from their platform and abandoned the
doctrine of Congressional prohibition. This very week three Territorial
Bills have been passed through both Houses of Congress without the
Wilmot proviso, and no man proposed to enact it; not even one man on the
other side of the Chamber would rise and propose the Wilmot proviso.”
“In organizing three Territories,” continued he, “two of them South of
the very line where they imposed the Wilmot proviso twelve years ago, no
one on the other side of the Chamber proposed it. They have abandoned
the doctrine of the President-elect upon that point. He said, and it is
on record, that he had voted for the Wilmot proviso forty-two times, and
would do it forty-two times more if he ever had a chance. Not one of
his followers this year voted for it once. The Senator from New York
(Mr. Seward) the embodiment of the Party, sat quietly and did not
propose it. What more? Last year we were told that the Slave Code of
New Mexico was to be repealed. I denounced the attempted interference.
The House of Representatives passed the Bill, but the Bill remains on
your table; no one Republican member has proposed to take it up and pass
it. Practically, therefore, the Chicago platform is abandoned; the
Philadelphia platform is abandoned; the whole doctrine for which the
Republican Party contended, as to the Territories, is abandoned,
surrendered, given up. Non-intervention is substituted in its place.
Then, when we find that, on the Territorial question, the Republican
Party, by a unanimous vote, have surrendered to the South all they ask,
the Territorial question ought to be considered pretty well settled.
The only question left was that of the States; and after having
abandoned their aggressive policy as to the Territories, a portion of
them are willing to unite with us, and deprive themselves of the power
to do it in the States.”
“I submit,” said he, “that these two great facts–these startling,
tremendous facts–that they have abandoned their aggressive policy in
the Territories, and are willing to give guarantees in the States, ought
to be accepted as an evidence of a salutary change in Public Opinion at
the North. All I would ask now of the Republican Party is, that they
would insert in the Constitution the same principle that they have
carried out practically in the Territorial Bills for Colorado, Dakota,
and Nevada, by depriving Congress of the power hereafter to do what
there cannot be a man of them found willing to do this year; but we
cannot ask them to back down too much. I think they have done quite as
much within one year, within three months after they have elected a
President, as could be expected.”
That Douglas and his followers were also patriotically willing to
sacrifice a favorite theory in the face of a National peril, was brought
out, at the same time, by Mr. Baker, when he said to Mr. Douglas: “I
desire to suggest (and being a little of a Popular Sovereignty man, it
comes gracefully from me) that others of us have backed down too, from
the idea that Congress has not the power to prohibit Slavery in the
Territories; and we are proposing some of us in the Crittenden
proposition, and some in the Amendment now before the Senate–to
prohibit Slavery by the Constitution itself, in the Territories;”–and
by Mr. Douglas, when he replied: “I think as circumstances change, the
action of public men ought to change in a corresponding degree. * * * I
am willing to depart from my cherished theory, by an Amendment to the
Constitution by which we shall settle this question on the principles
prescribed in the Resolutions of the Senator from Kentucky.”
In the House, Mr. Logan, had, on the 5th of February, 1861, said:
“Men, Sir, North and South, who love themselves far better than
their Country, have brought us to this unhappy condition. * * *
Let me say to gentlemen, that I will go as far as any man in the
performance of a Constitutional duty to put down Rebellion, to
suppress Insurrection, and to enforce the laws; but when we
undertake the performance of these duties, let us act in such a
manner as will be best calculated to preserve and not destroy the
Government, and keep ourselves within the bounds of the
Constitution. * * * Sir, I have always denied, and do yet deny,
the Right of Secession. There is no warrant for it in the
Constitution. It is wrong, it is unlawful, unconstitutional, and
should be called by the right name, Revolution. No good, Sir, can
result from it, but much mischief may. It is no remedy for any
grievance.
“I hold that all grievances can be much easier redressed inside the
Union than out of it. * * * If a collision must ensue between
this Government and any of our own people, let it come when every
other means of settlement has been tried and exhausted; and not
then, except when the Government shall be compelled to repel
assaults for the protection of its property, flag, and the honor of
the Country. * * *
“I have been taught to believe that the preservation of this
glorious Union, with its broad flag waving over us, as the shield
for our protection on land and on sea, is paramount to all the
Parties and platforms that ever have existed, or ever can exist. I
would, to-day, if I had the power, sink my own Party, and every
other one, with all their platforms, into the vortex of ruin,
without heaving a sigh or shedding a tear, to save the Union, or
even stop the Revolution where it is.”
After enumerating the various propositions for adjustment, then
pending in the House, to wit: that of Senator Crittenden; that of
Senator Douglas; that of the Committee of Thirty-three; that of the
Border States; and those of Representatives McClernand, Kellogg,
and Morris, of Illinois, Mr. Logan took occasion to declare that
“in a crisis like this” he was “willing to give his support to any
of them,” but his preference was for that of Mr. Morris.
Said he: “He (Morris) proposes that neither Congress nor a
Territorial Legislature shall interfere with Slavery in the
Territories at all; but leaves the people, when they come to form
their State Constitution, to determine the question for themselves.
I think this is the best proposition, because it is a fair
concession on all sides. The Republicans give up their
Congressional intervention; those who are styled ‘Squatter
Sovereigns’ give up their Territorial legislative policy; and the
Southern (Slave) protectionists give up their protection-
intervention policy; thus every Party yields something. With this
proposition as an Article in the Constitution, it would satisfy
every conservative man in this Union, both North and South, I do
seriously and honestly believe.
“Having indicated my preference of these propositions, and my
reasons for that preference, I have said all I desire to say on the
point, except to repeat again, that I will willingly vote for any
of them, or make any other sacrifice necessary to save the Union.
It makes no kind of difference to me what the sacrifice; if it will
save my Country, I am ready to make it.” * * *
“There are some in this Hall,” said he, “that are almost ready to
strike the Party fetters from their limbs, and assist in measures
of Peace. Halt not; take the step; be independent and free at
once! Let us overcome Party passion and error; allow virtue and
good sense in this fateful hour to be triumphant; let us invoke
Deity to interpose and prepare the way for our Country’s escape
from the perils by which we are now surrounded; and in view of our
present greatness and future prospects, our magnificent and growing
cities, our many institutions of learning, our once happy and
prosperous People, our fruitful fields and golden forests, our
enjoyment of all civil and religious blessings–let Parties die
that these be preserved. Such noble acts of patriotism and
concession, on your part, would cause posterity to render them
illustrious, and pause to contemplate the magnitude of the events
with which they were connected. * * * In the name of the patriotic
sires who breasted the storms and vicissitudes of the Revolution;
by all the kindred ties of this Country; in the name of the many
battles fought for your Freedom; in behalf of the young and the
old; in behalf of the Arts and Sciences, Civilization, Peace,
Order, Christianity, and Humanity, I appeal to you to strike from
your limbs the chains that bind them! Come forth from that
loathsome prison, Party Caucus; and in this hour–the most gloomy
and disheartening to the lovers of Free Institutions that has ever
existed during our Country’s history–arouse the drooping spirits
of our countrymen, by putting forth your good strong arms to assist
in steadying the rocking pillars of the mightiest Republic that has
ever had an existence.”
“Mr. Speaker,” continued he, “a word or two more, and I am done.
Revolution stalks over the Land. States have rebelled against the
constituted authorities of the Union, and now stand, sword in hand,
prepared to vindicate their new nationality. Others are preparing
to take a similar position. Rapidly transpiring events are
crowding on us with fearful velocity. Soon, circumstances may
force us into an unnatural strife, in which the hand of brother
shall be uplifted against brother, and father against son. My God,
what a spectacle! If all the evils and calamities that have ever
happened since the World began, could be gathered in one great
Catastrophe, its horrors could not eclipse, in their frightful
proportions, the Drama that impends over us. Whether this black
cloud that drapes in mourning the whole political heavens, shall
break forth in all the frightful intensity of War, and make
Christendom weep at the terrible atrocities that will be enacted–
or, whether it will disappear, and the sky resume its wonted
serenity, and the whole Earth be irradiated by the genial sunshine
of Peace once more–are the alternatives which this Congress, in my
judgment, has the power to select between.”
In this same broad spirit, Mr. Seward, in his great speech of January
12th, had said: “Republicanism is subordinate to Union, as everything
else is and ought to be–Republicanism, Democracy, every other political
name and thing; all are subordinate-and they ought to disappear in the
presence of the great question of Union.” In another part of it, he had
even more emphatically said: “I therefore * * * avow my adherence to the
Union in its integrity and with all its parts, with my friends, with my
Party, with my State, with my Country, or without either, as they may
determine, in every event, whether of Peace or War, with every
consequence of honor or dishonor, of life or death. Although I lament
the occasion, I hail with cheerfulness the duty of lifting up my voice
among distracted debates, for my whole Country and its inestimable
Union.” And as showing still more clearly the kindly and conciliatory
attitude of the great Republican leader, when speaking of those others
who seemed to be about to invoke revolutionary action to oppose–and
overthrow the Government–he said: “In such a case I can afford to meet
prejudice with Conciliation, exaction with Concession which surrenders
no principle, and violence with the right hand of Peace.”
In the House of Representatives, too, the voice of patriotism was often
heard through the loud clamor and disorder of that most disorderly and
Treason-uttering session–was heard from the lips of statesmen, who rose
high above Party, in their devotion to the Union. The calm,
dispassionate recital by Henry Winter Davis (of Maryland), of the
successive steps by which the Southern leaders had themselves created
that very “North” of whose antagonism they complained, was one of the
best of these, in some respects. He was one of the great Select
Committee of Thirty-three, and it was (February 5th) after the
Resolutions, heretofore quoted, had been reported by it, that he
condensed the history of the situation into a nutshell, as follows:
“We are at the end of the insane revel of partisan license which, for
thirty years, has, in the United States, worn the mask of Government.
We are about to close the masquerade by the dance of death. The Nations
of the World look anxiously to see if the People, ere they tread that
measure, will come to themselves.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
“Southern politicians have created a North. Let us trace the process
and draw the moral.
“The laws of 1850 calmed and closed the Slavery agitation; and President
Pierce, elected by the almost unanimous voice of the States, did not
mention Slavery in his first two Messages. In 1854, the repeal of the
Missouri Compromise, at the instance of the South, reopened the
agitation.
“Northern men, deserted by Southern Whigs, were left to unite for self-
defense.
“The invasion of Kansas, in 1855 and 1856, from Missouri; the making a
Legislature and laws for that Territory, by the invaders; still further
united the Northern people. The election of 1856 measured its extent.
“The election of Mr. Buchanan and his opening policy in Kansas, soothed
the irritation, and was rapidly demoralizing the new Party, when the
Pro-Slavery Party in Kansas perpetrated, and the President and the South
accepted, the Lecompton fraud, and again united the North more
resolutely in resistance to that invasion of the rights of self-
government.
“The South for the first time failed to dictate terms; and the People
vindicated by their votes the refusal of the Constitution.
“Ere this result was attained, the opinions of certain Judges of the
Supreme Court scattered doubts over the law of Slavery in the
Territories; the South, while repudiating other decisions, instantly
made these opinions the criterion of faithfulness to the Constitution;
while the North was agitated by this new sanction of the extremest
pretensions of their opponents.
“The South did not rest satisfied with their Judicial triumph.
“Immediately the claim was pressed for protection by Congress to
Slavery, declared by the Supreme Court, they said, to exist in all the
Territories.
“This completed the union of the Free States in one great defensive
league; and the result was registered in November. That result is now
itself become the starting point of new agitation–the demand of new
rights and new guarantees. The claim to access to the Territories was
followed by the claim to Congressional protection, and that is now
followed by the hitherto unheard of claim to a Constitutional Amendment
establishing Slavery, not merely in territory now held, but in all
hereafter held from the line of 36 30′ to Cape Horn, while the debate
foreshadows in the distance the claim of the right of transit and the
placing of property in Slaves in all respects on the footing of other
property–the topics of future agitation. How long the prohibition of
the importation of Slaves will be exempted from the doctrine of
equality, it needs no prophet to tell.
“In the face of this recital, let the imputation of autocratic and
tyrannical aspirations cease to be cast on the people of the Free
States; let the Southern people dismiss their fears, return to their
friendly confidence in their fellow-citizens of the North, and accept,
as pledges of returning Peace, the salutary amendments of the law and
the Constitution offered as the first fruits of Reconciliation.”
But calmness, kindness, and courtesy were alike thrown away in both
Houses upon the implacable Southern leaders. As the last day of that
memorable session, which closed in the failure of all peaceful measures
to restore the Union, slowly dawned–with but a few hours lacking of the
time when Mr. Lincoln would be inaugurated President of the United
States–Mr. Wigfall thought proper, in the United States Senate, to
sneer at him as “an ex-rail-splitter, an ex-grocery keeper, an ex-
flatboat captain, and an ex-Abolition lecturer”–and proceeded to scold
and rant at the North with furious volubility.
“Then, briefly,” said he, “a Party has come into power that represents
the antagonism to my own Section of the Country. It represents two
million men who hate us, and who, by their votes for such a man as they
have elected, have committed an overt act of hostility. That they have
done.”
“You have won the Presidency,” said he, to the Republicans, “and you are
now in the situation of the man who had won the elephant at a raffle.
You do not know what to do with the beast now that you have it; and one-
half of you to-day would give your right arms if you had been defeated.
But you succeeded, and you have to deal with facts. Our objection to
living in this Union, and therefore the difficulty of reconstructing it,
is not your Personal Liberty bills, not the Territorial question, but
that you utterly and wholly misapprehend the Form of Government.”
“You deny,” continued he, “the Sovereignty of the States; you deny the
right of self-government in the People; you insist upon Negro Equality;
your people interfere impertinently with our Institutions and attempt to
subvert them; you publish newspapers; you deliver lectures; you print
pamphlets, and you send them among us, first, to excite our Slaves to
insurrection against their masters, and next, to array one class of
citizens against the other; and I say to you, that we cannot live in
peace, either in the Union or out of it, until you have abolished your
Abolition societies; not, as I have been misquoted, abolish or destroy
your school-houses; but until you have ceased in your schoolhouses
teaching your children to hate us; until you have ceased to convert your
pulpits into hustings; until you content yourselves with preaching
Christ, and Him crucified, and not delivering political harangues on the
Sabbath; until you have ceased inciting your own citizens to make raids
and commit robberies; until you have done these things we cannot live in
the same Union with you. Until you do these things, we cannot live out
of the Union at Peace.”
Such were the words–the spiteful, bitter words–with which this chosen
spokesman of the South saluted the cold and cloudy dawn of that day
which was to see the sceptre depart from the hands of the Slave Power
forever.
A few hours later, under the shadow of the main Pastern Portico of the
Capitol at Washington–with the retiring President and Cabinet, the
Supreme Court Justices, the Foreign Diplomatic Corps, and hundreds of
Senators, Representatives and other distinguished persons filling the
great platform on either side and behind them–Abraham Lincoln stood
bareheaded before full thirty thousand people, upon whose uplifted faces
the unveiled glory of the mild Spring sun now shone–stood reverently
before that far greater and mightier Presence termed by himself, “My
rightful masters, the American People”–and pleaded in a manly, earnest,
and affectionate strain with “such as were dissatisfied,” to listen to
the “better angels” of their nature.
Temperate, reasonable, kindly, persuasive–it seems strange that Mr.
Lincoln’s Inaugural Address did not disarm at least the personal
resentment of the South toward him, and sufficiently strengthen the
Union-loving people there, against the red-hot Secessionists, to put the
“brakes” down on Rebellion. Said he:
“Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States,
that by the accession of a Republican Administration, their Property and
their Peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never
been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample
evidence to the contrary has all the while existed, and been open to
their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of
him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches,
when I declare that ‘I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to
interfere with the Institution of Slavery in the States where it
exists.’ I believe I have no lawful right to do so; and I have no
inclination to do so. Those who nominated and elected me, did so with
the full knowledge that I had made this, and many similar declarations,
and had never recanted them. * * *
“I now reiterate these sentiments; and in doing so, I only press upon
the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is
susceptible, that the Property, Peace, and Security of no Section are to
be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add,
too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution
and the laws, can be given, will be cheerfully given to all the States,
when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause–as cheerfully to one Section
as to another.
“I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations, and with
no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws by any hypercritical
rules. * * *
“A disruption of the Federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now
formidably attempted. I hold that, in contemplation of Universal Law,
and of the Constitution, the Union of these States is perpetual.
Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all
National Governments. It is safe to assert that no Government proper
ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination.
Continue to execute all the express provisions of our National
Constitution, and the Union will endure forever–it being impossible to
destroy it, except by some action not provided for in the instrument
itself.
“Again, if the United States be not a Government proper, but an
Association of States in the nature of a contract merely, can it, as a
contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it?
One party to a contract may violate it–break it, so to speak; but does
it not require all, to lawfully rescind it?
“Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that,
in legal contemplation, the Union is perpetual, confirmed by the history
of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It
was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was
matured and continued in the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It
was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States
expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the
Articles of Confederation, in 1778; and, finally, in 1787, one of the
declared objects, for ordaining and establishing the Constitution, was
‘to form a more perfect Union.’ But, if destruction of the Union by
one, or by a part only, of the States, be lawfully possible, the Union
is less perfect than before, the Constitution having lost the vital
element of perpetuity.
“It follows, from these views, that no State, upon its own mere motion,
can lawfully get out of the Union; that Resolves and Ordinances to that
effect, are legally void; and that acts of violence within any State or
States against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary
or revolutionary, according to circumstances.
“I therefore consider that, in view of the Constitution and the laws,
the Union is unbroken, and, to the extent of my ability, I shall take
care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the
laws of the Union shall be faithfully executed in all the States. * * *
“I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared
purpose of the Union, that it will Constitutionally defend and maintain
itself.
“In doing this, there need be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall
be none, unless it is forced upon the National Authority.
“The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the
property and places belonging to the Government, and to collect the
duties and imposts; but, beyond what may be necessary for these objects,
there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the People
anywhere.
“The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts
of the Union.
* * * * * * *
“Is there such perfect identity of interests among the States to compose
a new Union, as to produce harmony only, and prevent renewed Secession?
Plainly, the central idea of Secession is the essence of anarchy. A
majority, held in restraint by Constitutional checks and limitations and
always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and
sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a Free People. Whoever
rejects it, does, of necessity, fly to anarchy, or to despotism.
Unanimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent
arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority
principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left.
* * * * * * *
“Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot remove our
respective Sections from each other, nor build an impassable wall
between them. A husband and wife may be divorced, and go out of the
presence and beyond the reach of each other; but the different parts of
our Country cannot do this. They cannot but remain face to face; and
intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is
it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more
satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties,
easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully
enforced between aliens, than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to
War, you cannot fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides,
and no gain on either you cease fighting, the identical old questions,
as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you.
“This Country, with its Institutions, belongs to the People who inhabit
it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can
exercise their Constitutional right of amending it, or their
Revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I cannot be ignorant
of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of
having the National Constitution amended. While I make no
recommendations of Amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority
of the People over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the
modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing
circumstances, favor, rather than oppose, a fair opportunity being
afforded the People to act upon it. * * *
“The Chief Magistrate derives all his authority from the People, and
they have conferred none upon him to fix terms for the separation of the
States. The People themselves can do this also, if they choose; but the
Executive, as such, has nothing to do with it. His duty is to
administer the present Government, as it came to his hands, and to
transmit it, unimpaired by him, to his successor.
* * * * * * *
” * * * While the People retain their virtue and vigilance, no
Administration, by any extreme of weakness or folly, can very seriously
injure the Government in the short space of four years.
“My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole
subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an
object to hurry any of you, in hot haste, to a step which you would
never take deliberately, that object will be frustrated by taking time;
but no good object can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now
dissatisfied, still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the
sensitive point, the laws of your own framing under it; while the new
Administration will have no immediate power, if it would, to change
either. If it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied, hold the
right side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for
precipitate action. Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm
reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored Land, are still
competent to adjust, in the best way, all our present difficulty.
“In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is
the momentous issue of Civil War. The Government will not assault you.
You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You
have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the Government, while I
shall have the most solemn one to ‘preserve, protect, and defend it’.
“I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be
enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds
of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every
battle-field and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone,
all over this broad Land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when
again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our
nature.”
Strange, indeed, must have been the thoughts that crowded through the
brain and oppressed the heart of Abraham Lincoln that night–his first
at the White House!
The city of Washington swarmed with Rebels and Rebel sympathizers, and
all the departments of Government were honey-combed with Treason and
shadowed with treachery and espionage. Every step proposed or
contemplated by the Government would be known to the so-called
Government of the Confederate States almost as soon as thought of. All
means, to thwart and delay the carrying out of the Government’s
purposes, that the excuses of routine and red-tape admitted of, would be
used by the Traitors within the camp, to aid the Traitors without.
No one knew all this, better than Mr. Lincoln. With no Army, no Navy,
not even a Revenue cutter left–with forts and arsenals, ammunition and
arms in possession of the Rebels, with no money in the National
Treasury, and the National credit blasted–the position must, even to
his hopeful nature, have seemed at this time desperate. To be sure,
despite threats, neither few nor secret, which had been made, that he
should not live to be inaugurated, he had passed the first critical
point–had taken the inaugural oath–and was now duly installed in the
White House. That was something, of course, to be profoundly thankful
for. But the matter regarded by him of larger moment–the safety of the
Union–how about that?
How that great, and just, and kindly brain, in the dim shadows of that
awful first night at the White House, must have searched up and down and
along the labyrinths of history and “corridors of time,” everywhere in
the Past, for any analogy or excuse for the madness of this Secession
movement–and searched in vain!
With his grand and abounding faith in God, how Abraham Lincoln must have
stormed the very gates of Heaven that night with prayer that he might be
the means of securing Peace and Union to his beloved but distracted
Country! How his great heart must have been racked with the
alternations of hope and foreboding–of trustfulness and doubt!
Anxiously he must have looked for the light of the morrow, that he might
gather from the Press, the manner in which his Inaugural had been
received. Not that he feared the North–but the South; how would the
wayward, wilful, passionate South, receive his proffered olive-branch?
Surely, surely,–thus ran his thoughts–when the brave, and gallant, and
generous people of that Section came to read his message of Peace and
Good-will, they must see the suicidal folly of their course! Surely
their hearts must be touched and the mists of prejudice dissolved, so
that reason would resume her sway, and Reconciliation follow! A little
more time for reflection would yet make all things right. The young men
of the South, fired by the Southern leaders’ false appeals, must soon
return to reason. The prairie fire is terrible while it sweeps along,
but it soon burns out. When the young men face the emblem of their
Nation’s glory–the flag of the land of their birth–then will come the
reaction and their false leaders will be hurled from place and power,
and all will again be right. Yea, when it comes to firing on the old,
old flag, they will not, cannot, do it! Between the Compromise within
their reach, and such Sacrilege as this, they cannot waver long.
So, doubtless, all the long night, whether waking or sleeping, the mind
of this true-hearted son of the West, throbbed with the mighty weight of
the problem entrusted to him for solution, and the vast responsibilities
which he had just assumed toward his fellow-men, his Nation, and his
God.
And when, at last, the long lean frame was thrown upon the couch, and
“tired Nature’s sweet restorer” held him briefly in her arms, the smile
of hopefulness on the wan cheek told that, despite all the terrible
difficulties of the situation, the sleeper was sustained by a strong and
cheerful belief in the Providence of God, the Patriotism of the People,
and the efficacy of his Inaugural Peace-offering to the South. But alas,
and alas, for the fallibility of human judgment and human hopes!
Instead of a message of Peace, the South chose to regard it as a message
of Menace;* and it was not received in a much better spirit by some of
the Northern papers, which could see no good in it–“no Union spirit in
it”–but declared that it breathed the spirit of Sectionalism and
mischief, and “is the knell and requiem of the Union, and the death of
hope.”
proffering of the olive branch to the South; the Conspirators
everywhere interpreted it as a challenge to War.”–Greeley’s Am.
Conflict, vol. i., p. 428.] Bitter indeed must have been President Lincoln’s disappointment and
sorrow at the reception of his Inaugural. With the heartiest
forgiveness, in the noblest spirit of paternal kindness, he had
generously held out his arms, as far as they could reach, to clasp to
his heart–to the great heart of the Union–the rash children of the
South, if they would but let him. It was more with sorrow, than in
anger, that he looked upon their contemptuous repulsion of his advances;
and his soul still reproachfully yearned toward these his Southern
brethren, as did that of a higher than he toward His misguided brethren,
when He cried: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets,
and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have
gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens
under her wings, and ye would not!”
On the day following his Inauguration, President Lincoln sent to the
United States Senate the names of those whom he had chosen to constitute
his Cabinet, as follows: William H. Seward, of New York, Secretary of
State; Salmon P. Chase, of Ohio, Secretary of the Treasury; Simon
Cameron, of Pennsylvania, Secretary of War; Gideon Welles, of
Connecticut, Secretary of the Navy; Caleb B. Smith, of Indiana,
Secretary of the Interior; Edward Bates, of Missouri, Attorney General;
and Montgomery Blair, of Maryland, Postmaster General.
On the other hand, the President of the rebellious Confederacy,
Jefferson Davis, had partly constituted his Cabinet already, as follows:
Robert Toombs, of Georgia, Secretary of State; Charles G. Memminger, of
South Carolina, Secretary of the Treasury; Leroy Pope Walker, of
Alabama, Secretary of War; to whom he afterwards added: Stephen R.
Mallory, of Florida, Secretary of the Navy; and John H. Reagan, of
Texas, Postmaster-General.
CHAPTER X.
THE WAR-DRUM “ON TO WASHINGTON”
Scarcely one week had elapsed after the Administration of Mr. Lincoln
began, when (March 11th) certain “Commissioners of the Southern
Confederacy” (John Forsyth, of Alabama, and Martin J. Crawford, of
Georgia), appeared at Washington and served a written request upon
the State Department to appoint an early day when they might present to
the President of the United States their credentials “from the
Government of the Confederate States of America” to the Government of
the United States, and open “the objects of the mission with which they
are charged.”
Secretary Seward, with the President’s sanction, declined official
intercourse with Messrs. Forsyth and Crawford, in a “Memorandum” (March
15th) reciting their request, etc., in which, after referring to
President Lincoln’s Inaugural Address–forwarded to them with the
“Memorandum” he says: “A simple reference will be sufficient to satisfy
those gentlemen that the Secretary of State, guided by the principles
therein announced, is prevented altogether from admitting or assuming
that the States referred to by them have, in law or in fact, withdrawn
from the Federal Union, or that they could do so in the manner described
by Messrs. Forsyth and Crawford, or in any other manner than with the
consent and concert of the People of the United States, to be given
through a National Convention, to be assembled in conformity with the
provisions of the Constitution of the United States. Of course, the
Secretary of State cannot act upon the assumption, or in any way admit,
that the so-called Confederate States constitute a Foreign Power, with
whom diplomatic relations ought to be established.”
On the 9th of April, Messrs. Forsyth, Crawford and Roman–as
“Commissioners of the Southern Confederacy”–addressed to Secretary
Seward a reply to the “Memorandum” aforesaid, in which the following
passage occurs:
“The undersigned, like the Secretary of State, have no purpose to
‘invite or engage in discussion’ of the subject on which their two
Governments are so irreconcilably at variance. It is this variance that
has broken up the old Union, the disintegration of which has only begun.
“It is proper, however, to advise you that it were well to dismiss the
hopes you seem to entertain that, by any of the modes indicated, the
people of the Confederate States will ever be brought to submit to the
authority of the Government of the United States. You are dealing with
delusions, too, when you seek to separate our people from our
Government, and to characterize the deliberate, Sovereign act of that
people as a ‘perversion of a temporary and partisan excitement.’ If you
cherish these dreams, you will be awakened from them, and find them as
unreal and unsubstantial as others in which you have recently indulged.
“The undersigned would omit the performance of an obvious duty were they
to fail to make known to the Government of the United States that the
people of the Confederate States have declared their independence with a
full knowledge of all the responsibilities of that act, and with as firm
a determination to maintain it by all the means with which nature has
endowed them as that which sustained their fathers when they threw off
the authority of the British Crown.
“The undersigned clearly understand that you have declined to appoint a
day to enable them to lay the objects of the mission with which they are
charged, before the President of the United States, because so to do
would be to recognize the independence and separate nationality of the
Confederate States. This is the vein of thought that pervades the
memorandum before us.
“The truth of history requires that it should distinctly appear upon the
record, that the undersigned did not ask the Government of the United
States to recognize the independence of the Confederate States. They
only asked audience to adjust, in a spirit of amity and peace, the new
relations springing from a manifest and accomplished revolution in the
Government of the late Federal Union.
“Your refusal to entertain these overtures for a peaceful solution, the
active naval and military preparation of this Government, and a formal
notice to the Commanding General of the Confederate forces in the harbor
of Charleston that the President intends to provision Fort Sumter by
forcible means, if necessary, are viewed by the undersigned, and can
only be received by the World, as a Declaration of War against the
Confederate States; for the President of the United States knows that
Fort Sumter cannot be provisioned without the effusion of blood.
“The undersigned, in behalf of their Government and people, accept the
gage of battle thus thrown down to them, and, appealing to God and the
judgment of mankind for the righteousness of their Cause, the people of
the Confederate States will defend their liberties to the last, against
this flagrant and open attempt at their subjugation to Sectional power.”
Let us now, for a moment, glance at the condition of Fort Sumter, and of
the Government with regard to it:
On the 5th of March, the day after President Lincoln had taken his oath
of office, there was placed in his hands a letter of Major Anderson,
commanding at Fort Sumter, in which that officer, under date of the 28th
of February, expressed the opinion that “reinforcements could not be
thrown into that fort within the time for his relief rendered necessary
by the limited supply of provisions, and with a view of holding
possession of the same, with a force of less than twenty thousand good
and well-disciplined men.”
Lieutenant-General Winfield Scott concurred in that opinion, and as the
provisions in the Fort would be exhausted before any such force could be
raised and brought to the ground, evacuation and safe withdrawal of the
Federal garrison from the Fort became a Military necessity, and was so
regarded by the Administration.
“It was believed, however”–in the language of Mr. Lincoln himself, in
his first Message to Congress–“that to so abandon that position, under
the circumstances, would be utterly ruinous: that the necessity under
which it was to be done would not be fully understood; that by many it
would be construed as a part of a voluntary policy; that at home it
would discourage the friends of the Union, embolden its adversaries, and
go far to insure to the latter a recognition abroad; that in fact it
would be our National destruction consummated. This could not be
allowed. Starvation was not yet upon the garrison; and ere it would be
reached, Fort Pickens might be reinforced. This last would be a clear
indication of policy, and would better enable the country to accept the
evacuation of Fort Sumter as a Military necessity.”
Owing to misconception or otherwise, an order to reinforce Fort Pickens
was not carried out, and an expedition to relieve Fort Sumter was then
ordered to be dispatched. On the 8th of April President Lincoln, by
messenger, notified Governor Pickens of South Carolina, “that he might
expect an attempt would be made to provision the fort; and that if the
attempt should not be resisted there would be no effort to throw in men,
arms, or ammunition, without further notice, or in case of an attack
upon the fort.”
A crisis was evidently approaching, and public feeling all over the
Country was wrought up to the highest degree of tension and stood tip-
toe with intense expectancy. The test of the doctrine of Secession was
about to be made there, in the harbor of Charleston, upon which the eyes
of Patriot and Rebel were alike feverishly bent.
There, in Charleston harbor, grimly erect, stood the octagon-shaped Fort
Sumter, mid-way of the harbor entrance, the Stars and Stripes proudly
waving from its lofty central flagstaff, its guns bristling on every
side through the casemates and embrasures, as if with a knowledge of
their defensive power.
About equidistant from Fort Sumter on either side of the harbor-
entrance, were the Rebel works at Fort Moultrie and Battery Bee on
Sullivan’s Island, on the one side, and Cummings Point Battery, on
Morris Island, on the other-besides a number of other batteries facing
seaward along the sea-coast line of Morris Island. Further in, on the
same side of the harbor, and but little further off from Fort Sumter,
stood Fort Johnson on James Island, while Castle Pinckney and a Floating
Battery were between the beleagured Fort and the city of Charleston.
Thus, the Federal Fort was threatened with the concentrated fire of
these well-manned Rebel fortifications on all sides, and in its then
condition was plainly doomed; for, while the swarming Rebels, unmolested
by Fort Sumter, had been permitted to surround that Fort with frowning
batteries, whose guns outnumbered those of the Fort, as ten to one, and
whose caliber was also superior, its own condition was anything but that
of readiness for the inevitable coming encounter.
That the officers’ quarters, barracks, and other frame-work wooden
buildings should have been permitted to remain as a standing invitation
to conflagration from bombardment, can only be accounted for on the
supposition that the gallant officer in command, himself a Southerner,
would not believe it possible that the thousands of armed Americans by
whom he was threatened and encircled, could fire upon the flag of their
own native Country. He and his garrison of seventy men, were soon to
learn the bitter truth, amid a tempest of bursting shot and shell, the
furnace-heat of crackling walls, and suffocating volumes of dense smoke
produced by an uncontrollable conflagration.
The Rebel leaders at Washington had prevented an attack in January upon
the forts in the harbor of Charleston, and at Pensacola.–[McPherson’s
History of the Rebellion, p. 112.]–In consequence of which failure to
proceed to the last extremity at once, the energies of the Rebellion had
perceptibly diminished.
Said the Mobile Mercury: “The country is sinking into a fatal apathy,
and the spirit and even the patriotism of the people is oozing out,
under this do-nothing policy. If something is not done pretty soon,
decisive, either evacuation or expulsion, the whole country will become
so disgusted with the sham of Southern independence that the first
chance the people get at a popular election they will turn the whole
movement topsy-turvy so bad that it never on Earth can be righted
again.”
After the inauguration of Mr. Lincoln, however, the Rebel authorities at
Montgomery lost no time, but strained every nerve to precipitate War.
They felt that there was danger to the cause of Secession in delay; that
there were wavering States outside the Confederacy, like Virginia, that
might be dragged into the Confederacy by prompt and bloody work; and
wavering States within, like Alabama, that must be kept in by similar
means. Their emissaries were busy everywhere in the South, early in
April, preaching an instant crusade against the old flag–inciting the
people to demand instant hostilities against Fort Sumter–and to cross a
Rubicon of blood, over which there could be no return.
Many of the Rebel leaders seemed to be haunted by the fear (no doubt
well founded) that unless blood was shed–unless an impassable barrier,
crimsoned with human gore, was raised between the new Confederacy and
the old Union–there would surely be an ever-present danger of that
Confederacy falling to pieces. Hence they were now active in working
the people up to the required point of frenzy.
As a specimen of their speeches, may be quoted that of Roger A. Pryor,
of Virginia, who, at Charleston, April 10, 1861, replying to a serenade,
said:–[Charleston Mercury’s report.]
‘Gentlemen, I thank you, especially that you have at last annihilated
this accursed Union [Applause] reeking with corruption, and insolent
with excess of tyranny. Thank God, it is at last blasted and riven by
the lightning wrath of an outraged and indignant people. [Loud
applause.] Not only is it gone, but gone forever. [Cries of, ‘You’re
right,’ and applause.] In the expressive language of Scripture, it is
water spilt upon the ground, which cannot be gathered up. [Applause.]
Like Lucifer, son of the morning, it has fallen, never to rise again.
[Continued applause.]
“For my part, gentlemen,” he continued, as soon as he could be heard,
“if Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to-morrow were to abdicate their
offices and were to give me a blank sheet of paper to write the
condition of re-annexation to the defunct Union, I would scornfully
spurn the overture. * * * I invoke you, and I make it in some sort a
personal appeal–personal so far as it tends to our assistance in
Virginia–I do invoke you, in your demonstrations of popular opinion, in
your exhibitions of official intent, to give no countenance to this idea
of reconstruction. [Many voices, emphatically, ‘never,’ and applause.]
“In Virginia,” resumed he, “they all say, if reduced to the dread
dilemma of this memorable alternative, they will espouse the cause of
the South as against the interest of the Northern Confederacy, but they
whisper of reconstruction, and they say Virginia must abide in the
Union, with the idea of reconstructing the Union which you have
annihilated. I pray you, gentlemen, rob them of that idea. Proclaim to
the World that upon no condition, and under no circumstances, will South
Carolina ever again enter into political association with the
Abolitionists of New England. [Cries of ‘never,’ and applause.]
“Do not distrust Virginia,” he continued; “as sure as tomorrow’s sun
will rise upon us, just so sure will Virginia be a member of this
Southern Confederation. [Applause.] And I will tell you, gentlemen,
what will put her in the Southern Confederacy in less than an hour by
Shrewsbury clock–STRIKE A BLOW! [Tremendous applause.] The very
moment that blood is shed, old Virginia will make common cause with her
sisters of the South. [Applause.] It is impossible she should do
otherwise.”
The question of the necessity of “Striking a Blow”–of the immediate
“shedding of blood”–was not only discussed before the Southern people
for the purpose of inflaming their rebellious zeal, but was also the
subject of excited agitation in the Confederate Cabinet at this time.
In a speech made by ex-United States Senator Clemens of Alabama, at
Huntsville, Alabama, at the close of the Rebellion, he told the
Alabamians how their State, which, as we have seen, was becoming
decidedly shaky in its allegiance to the “Sham of Southern
Independence,” was kept in the Confederacy.
Said he: “In 1861, shortly after the Confederate Government was put in
operation, I was in the city of Montgomery. One day (April 11, 1861) I
stepped into the office of the Secretary of War, General Walker, and
found there, engaged in a very excited discussion, Mr. Jefferson Davis
(the President), Mr. Memminger (Secretary of the Treasury), Mr. Benjamin
(Attorney-General), Mr. Gilchrist, a member of our Legislature from
Loundes county, and a number of other prominent gentlemen. They were
discussing the propriety of immediately opening fire on Fort Sumter, to
which General Walker, the Secretary of War, appeared to be opposed. Mr.
Gilchrist said to him, ‘Sir, unless you sprinkle blood in the face of
the people of Alabama, they will be back in the old Union in less than
ten days!’ THE NEXT DAY GENERAL BEAUREGARD OPENED HIS BATTERIES ON
SUMTER, AND ALABAMA WAS SAVED TO THE CONFEDERACY.”
On the 8th of April, G. T. Beauregard, “Brigadier General Commanding”
the “Provisional Army C. S. A.” at Charleston, S. C., notified the
Confederate Secretary of War (Walker) at Montgomery, Ala., that “An
authorized messenger from President Lincoln has just informed Gov.
Pickens and myself that provisions will be sent to Fort Sumter
peaceably, or otherwise by force.”
On the 10th, Confederate Secretary Walker telegraphed to Beauregard: “If
you have no doubt of the authorized character of the agent who
communicated to, you the intention of the Washington Government to
supply Fort Sumter by force, you will at once demand its evacuation,
and, if this is refused, proceed, in such manner as you may determine,
to reduce it.” To this Beauregard at once replied: “The demand will be
made to-morrow at 12 o’clock.” Thereupon the Confederate Secretary
telegraphed again: “Unless there are special reasons connected with your
own condition, it is considered proper that you should make the demand
at an earlier hour.” And Beauregard answered: “The reasons are special
for 12 o’clock.”
On the 11th General Beauregard notified Secretary Walker: “The demand
was sent at 2 P. M., and until 6 was allowed for the answer.” The
Secretary desiring to have the reply of Major Anderson, General
Beauregard telegraphed: “Major Anderson replies: ‘I have the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of your communication demanding the evacuation
of this Fort, and to say in reply thereto that it is a demand with which
I regret that my sense of honor and of my obligation to my Government
prevent my compliance.’ He adds, verbally, ‘I will await the first
shot, and, if you do not batter us to pieces, we will be starved out in
a few days.'”
To this, the Confederate Secretary at once responded with: “Do not
desire needlessly to bombard Fort Sumter. If Major Anderson will state
the time at which, as indicated by himself, he will evacuate, and agree
that, in the mean time, he will not use his guns against us unless ours
should be employed against Fort Sumter, you are authorized thus to avoid
the effusion of blood. If this or its equivalent be refused, reduce the
Fort, as your judgment decides to be the most practicable.”
At 11 o’clock that night (April 11) General Beauregard sent to Major
Anderson, by the hands of his aides-de-camp, Messrs. Chesnut and Lee, a
further communication, in which, after alluding to the Major’s verbal
observation, the General said: “If you will state the time at which you
will evacuate Fort Sumter, and agree that in the mean time you will not
use your guns against us unless ours shall be employed against Fort
Sumter, we shall abstain from opening fire upon you. Col. Chesnut and
Capt. Lee are authorized by me to enter into such an agreement with you.
You are therefore requested to communicate to them an open answer.”
To this, Major Robert Anderson, at 2.30 A.M. of the 12th, replied “that,
cordially uniting with you in the desire to avoid the useless effusion
of blood, I will, if provided with the necessary means of
transportation, evacuate Fort Sumter by noon on the 15th inst., should I
not receive prior to that time, controlling instructions from my
Government, or additional supplies, and that I will not in the mean time
open my fire upon your forces unless compelled to do so by some hostile
act against this Fort or the flag of my Government, by the forces under
your command, or by some portion of them, or by the perpetration of some
act showing a hostile intention on your part against this Fort or the
flag it bears.” Thereupon General Beauregard telegraphed Secretary
Walker: “He would not consent. I write to-day.”
At 3.20 A.M., Major Anderson received from Messrs. Chesnut and Lee a
notification to this effect: “By authority of Brigadier General
Beauregard, commanding the Provisional Forces of the Confederate States,
we have the honor to notify you that he will open the fire of his
batteries on Fort Sumter in one hour from this time.” And a later
dispatch from General Beauregard to Secretary Walker, April 12,
laconically stated: “WE OPENED FIRE AT 4.30.”
At last the hour and the minute had come, for which the Slave Power of
the South had for thirty years so impatiently longed. At last the
moment had come, when all the long-treasured vengeance of the South–
outgrown from questions of Tariff, of Slavery, and of Secession–was to
be poured out in blood and battle; when the panoplied powers and forces
of rebellious confederated States, standing face to face with the
resolute patriotism of an outraged Union, would belch forth flame and
fury and hurtling missiles upon the Federal Fort and the old flag
floating o’er it.
And whose the sacrilegious hand that dared be first raised against his
Country and his Country’s flag? Stevens’s mortar battery at Sullivan’s
Island is ready to open, when a lean, long-haired old man, with eyes
blazing in their deep fanatical sockets, totters hastily forward and
ravenously seizing in his bony hands a lanyard, pulls the string, and,
with a flash and roar, away speeds the shrieking shell on its mission of
destruction; and, while shell after shell, and shot after shot, from
battery after battery, screams a savage accompaniment to the boom and
flash and bellow of the guns, that lean old man works his clutched
fingers in an ecstasy of fiendish pleasure, and chuckles: “Aye, I told
them at Columbia that night, that the defense of the South is only to be
secured through the lead of South Carolina; and, old as I am, I had come
here to join them in that lead–and I have done it.”
Carolina leading, had long been held, as in the following, first
published in the New York Tribune, July 3, 1862, which, among other
letters, was found in the house of William H. Trescot, on
Barnwell’s Island, South Carolina, when re-occupied by United
States troops:
“VIRGINIA CONVENTION, May 3, 1851
“My DEAR, SIR:–You misunderstood my last letter, if you supposed
that I intended to visit South Carolina this Spring. I am
exceedingly obliged to you for your kind invitations, and it would
afford me the highest pleasure to interchange in person, sentiments
with a friend whose manner of thinking so closely agrees with my
own. But my engagements here closely confine me to this city, and
deny me such a gratification.
“I would be especially glad to be in Charleston next week, and
witness the proceedings of your Convention of Delegates from the
Southern Rights Associations. The condition of things in your
State deeply interests me. Her wise foresight and manly
independence have placed her, as the head of the South, to whom
alone true-hearted men can look with any hope or pleasure.
“Momentous are the consequences which depend upon your action.
Which party will prevail? The immediate Secessionists, or those
who are opposed to separate State action at this time? For my part
I forbear to form a wish. Were I a Carolinian, it would be very
different; but when I consider the serious effects the decision may
have on your future weal or woe, I feel that a citizen of a State
which has acted as Virginia, has no right to interfere, even by a
wish.
“If the General Government allows you peaceably and freely to
Secede, neither Virginia, nor any other Southern State, would, in
my opinion, follow you at present. But what would be the effect
upon South Carolina? Some of our best friends have supposed that
it would cut off Charleston from the great Western trade, which she
is now striking for, and would retard very greatly the progress of
your State. I confess that I think differently. I believe
thoroughly in our own theories, and that, even if Charleston did
not grow quite as fast in her trade with other States, yet the
relief from Federal taxation would vastly stimulate your
prosperity. If so, the prestige of the Union would be destroyed,
and you would be the nucleus for a Southern Confederation at no
distant day.
“But I do not doubt, from all I have been able toe to learn that the
Federal Government would use force, beginning with the form most
embarrassing to you, and least calculated to excite sympathy. I
mean a naval blockade. In that event, could you stand the reaction
feeling which the suffering commerce of Charleston would probably
manifest? Would you not lose that in which your strength consists,
the union of your people? I do not mean to imply an opinion, I
only ask the question.
“If you could force this blockade, and bring the Government to
direct force, the feeling in Virginia would be very great. I trust
in God it would bring her to your aid. But it would be wrong in me
to deceive you by speaking certainly. I cannot express the deep
mortification I have felt at her course this Winter. But I do not
believe that the course of the Legislature is a fair expression of
popular feeling. In the East, at least, the great majority
believes in the right of Secession, and feels the deepest sympathy
with Carolina in her opposition to measures which they regard as
she does. But the West–Western Virginia–there is the rub! Only
60,000 slaves to 494,000 whites! When I consider this fact, and
the kind of argument which has been heard in this body, I cannot
but regard with the greatest fear the question whether Virginia
would assist Carolina in such an issue.
“I must acknowledge, my dear sir, that I look to the future with
almost as much apprehension as hope. You well object to the term
Democrat. Democracy, in its original philosophical sense, is
indeed incompatible with Slavery and the whole system of Southern
society. Yet, if you look back, what change will you find made in
any of your State Constitutions, or in our legislation–that is, in
its general course–for the last fifty years, which was not in the
direction of this Democracy? Do not its principles and theories
become daily more fixed in our practice? (I had almost said in the
opinions of our people, did I not remember with pleasure the great
improvement of opinion in regard to the abstract question of
Slavery). And if such is the case, what are we to hope in the
future? I do not hesitate to say that if the question is raised
between Carolina and the Federal Government, and the latter
prevails, the last hope of republican government, and, I fear, of
Southern civilization, is gone. Russia will then be a better
government than ours.
“I fear that the confusion and interruptions amid which I write
have made this rather a rambling letter. Do you visit the North in
the Summer? I would be very happy to welcome you to the Old
Dominion.
“I am much obliged to you for the offer to send me Hammond’s Eulogy
on Calhoun, but I am indebted to the author for a copy.
“With esteem and friendship, yours truly,
“M. R. H. GARNETT.
“WM. H. TRESCOT, ESQ.”]
Next morning’s New York herald, in its Charleston dispatch of April 12,
announced to the World that “The first shot [fired at Fort Sumter] from
Stevens’s battery was fired by the venerable Edmund Ruffin, of
Virginia,” and added, “That ball will do more for the cause of
Secession, in Virginia, than volumes of stump speeches.”
“Soon,” says Greeley in his History, “the thunder of fifty heavy
breaching cannon, in one grand volley, followed by the crashing and
crumbling of brick, stone, and mortar around and above them, apprized
the little garrison that their stay must necessarily be short.”
Says an eye-witness of the bombardment: “Shells burst with the greatest
rapidity in every portion of the work, hurling the loose brick and stone
in all directions, breaking the windows and setting fire to whatever
woodwork they burst against. * * * The firing from the batteries on
Cumming’s Point was scattered over the whole of the gorge or rear of the
Fort, till it looked like a sieve. The explosion of shells, and the
quantity of deadly missiles that were hurled in every direction and at
every instant of time, made it almost certain death to go out of the
lower tier of casemates, and also made the working of the barbette or
upper (uncovered) guns, which contained all our heaviest metal, and by
which alone we could throw shells, quite impossible.
“During the first day there was hardly an instant of time that there was
a cessation of the whizzing of balls, which were sometimes coming half a
dozen at once. There was not a portion of the work which was not taken
in reverse from mortars. * * * During Friday, the officers’ barracks
were three times set on fire by the shells and three times put out under
the most galling and destructive cannonade.
“For the fourth time, the barracks were set on fire early on Saturday
morning, and attempts were made to extinguish the flames; but it was
soon discovered that red-hot shot were being thrown into the Fort with
fearful rapidity, and it became evident that it would be impossible to
put out the conflagration. The whole garrison was then set to work, or
as many as could be spared, to remove the powder from the magazines,
which was desperate work, rolling barrels of powder through the fire. *
* * After the barracks were well on fire, the batteries directed upon
Fort Sumter increased their cannonading to a rapidity greater than had
been attained before.”
“About this time, the shells and ammunition in the upper service-
magazines exploded, scattering the tower and upper portions of the
building in every direction. The crash of the beams, the roar of the
flames, and the shower of fragments of the Fort, with the blackness of
the smoke, made the scene indescribably terrific and grand. This
continued for several hours. * * * ”
=== Gutchecked to here
“There was not a portion of the Fort where a breath of air could be got
for hours, except through a wet cloth. The fire spread to the men’s
quarters on the right hand and on the left, and endangered the powder
which had been taken out of the magazines. The men went through the
fire, and covered the barrels with wet cloths, but the danger of the
Fort’s blowing up became so imminent that they were obliged to heave the
barrels out of the embrasures.”
Major Anderson’s official report tells the whole story briefly and well,
in these words:
“STEAMSHIP BALTIC, OFF SANDY HOOK
“April 18, 1861, 10.30 A.M., VIA NEW YORK.
“Having defended Fort Sumter for thirty-four hours, until the quarters
were entirely burnt, the main gates destroyed by fire, the gorge walls
seriously injured, the magazine surrounded by flames, and its door
closed from the effects of heat; four barrels and three cartridges of
powder only being available, and no provisions remaining but pork, I
accepted terms of evacuation offered by General Beauregard–being the
same offered by him on the 11th inst., prior to the commencement of
hostilities–and marched out of the Fort on Sunday afternoon, the 14th
instant, with colors flying and drums beating, bringing away company and
private property, and saluting my flag with fifty guns.
“ROBERT ANDERSON,
“Major 1st Artillery, Commanding.
“HON. SIMON CAMERON,
“Secretary of War, Washington.”
During all this thirty-four hours of bombardment, the South rejoiced
with exceeding great joy that the time had come for the vindication of
its peculiar ideas of State and other rights, even though it be with
flames and the sword. At Charleston, the people were crazy with
exultation and wine-feasting and drinking being the order of the day and
night. But for the surrender, Fort Sumter would have been stormed that
Sunday night. As it was, Sunday was turned into a day of general
jubilation, and while the people cheered and filled the streets, all the
Churches of Charleston celebrated, with more or less devotional fervor
and ceremony, the bloodless victory.
At Montgomery, the Chiefs of the Confederate Government were serenaded.
“Salvos of artillery were fired, and the whole population seemed to be
in an ecstasy of triumph.”–[McPherson’s History of the Rebellion, p.
114]
The Confederate Secretary of War, flushed with the success, predicted
that the Confederate flag “will, before the first of May, float over the
dome of the old Capitol at Washington” and “will eventually float over
Faneuil Hall, in Boston.”
From Maryland to Mexico, the protests of Union men of the South were
unheard in the fierce clamor of “On to Washington!”
The Richmond Examiner said: “There never was half the unanimity among
the people before, nor a tithe of the zeal upon any subject, that is now
manifested to take Washington. From the mountain tops and valleys to
the shores of the sea, there is one wild shout of fierce resolve to
capture Washington City at all and every human hazard.”
So also, the Mobile Advertiser enthusiastically exclaimed:
“We are prepared to fight, and the enemy is not. Now is the time for
action, while he is yet unprepared. Let the fife sound ‘Gray Jackets
over the Border,’ and let a hundred thousand men, with such arms as they
can snatch, get over the border as quickly as they can. Let a division
enter every Northern border State, destroy railroad connection to
prevent concentration of the enemy, and the desperate strait of these
States, the body of Lincoln’s country, will compel him to a peace–or
compel his successor, should Virginia not suffer him to escape from his
doomed capital.”
It was on Friday morning, the 12th of April, as we have seen, that the
first Rebel shot was fired at Fort Sumter. It was on Saturday afternoon
and evening that the terms of surrender were agreed to, and on Sunday
afternoon that the Federal flag was saluted and hauled down, and the
surrender completed. On Monday morning, being the 15th of April, in all
the great Northern Journals of the day appeared the following:
“PROCLAMATION.
“WHEREAS, the laws of the United States have been for some time past,
and now are, opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the
States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi,
Louisiana, and Texas, by Combinations too powerful to be suppressed by
the ordinary course of Judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in
the Marshals by law; now, therefore I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the
United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution
and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth,
the Militia of the several States of the Union to the aggregate number
of 75,000, in order to suppress said Combinations, and to cause the laws
to be duly executed.
“The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the
State authorities through the War Department. I appeal to all loyal
citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the
honor, the integrity, and existence of our National Union, and the
perpetuity of popular government, and to redress wrongs already long
enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned
to the forces hereby called forth, will probably be to repossess the
forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and
in every event the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the
objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or
interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens of
any part of the Country; and I hereby command the persons composing the
Combinations aforesaid, to disperse and retire peaceably to their
respective abodes, within twenty days from this date.
“Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an
extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested
by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. The Senators and
Representatives are, therefore, summoned to assemble at their respective
chambers at twelve o’clock, noon, on Thursday, the 4th day of July next,
then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their
wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.
“In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.
“Done at the city of Washington, this fifteenth day of April, in the
year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the
independence of the United States the eighty-fifth.
“By the President: ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
“WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.”
While in the North the official responses to this Call for troops were
prompt and patriotic, in the Border and Slave States, not yet in
Rebellion, they were anything but encouraging.
The reply of Governor Burton, of Delaware, was by the issue of a
proclamation “recommending the formation of volunteer companies for the
protection of the lives and property of the people of Delaware against
violence of any sort to which they may be exposed; the companies not
being subject to be ordered by the Executive into the United States
service–the law not vesting him with such authority–but having the
option of offering their services to the General Government for the
defense of its capital and the support of the Constitution and laws of
the Country.”
Governor Hicks, of Maryland, in like manner, issued a proclamation for
Maryland’s quota of the troops, but stated that her four regiments would
be detailed to serve within the limits of Maryland–or, for the defense
of the National Capital.
Governor Letcher, of Virginia, replied: “The militia of Virginia will
not be furnished to the powers at Washington for any such use or purpose
as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate the Southern States,
and a requisition made upon me for such an object–an object, in my
judgment, not within the purview of the Constitution or the Act of 1795
–will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate Civil War,
and having done so, we will meet it in a spirit as determined as the
Administration has exhibited toward the South.”
Governor Ellis, of North Carolina, replied to Secretary Cameron: “Your
dispatch is received, and, if genuine–which its extraordinary character
leads me to doubt–I have to say in reply that I regard the levy of
troops made by the Administration, for the purpose of subjugating the
States of the South, as in violation of the Constitution and a
usurpation of power. I can be no party to this wicked violation of the
laws of the country, and to this War upon the liberties of a free
people. You can get no troops from North Carolina. I will reply more
in detail when your Call is received by mail.”
Governor Magoffin, of Kentucky, replied: “Your dispatch is received. In
answer I say emphatically, Kentucky will furnish no troops for the
wicked purpose of subduing her sister Southern States.”
Governor Harris, of Tennessee, replied: “Tennessee will not furnish a
single man for Coercion, but fifty thousand, if necessary, for the
Defense of our rights or those of our Southern brethren.”
Governor Jackson, of Missouri, replied: “Your requisition is illegal,
unconstitutional, revolutionary, inhuman, diabolical and cannot be
complied with.”
Governor Rector, of Arkansas, replied: “None will be furnished. The
demand is only adding insult to injury.”
Discouraging and even insulting as were most of these replies, the
responses of the Governors of the Free States were, on the other hand,
full of the ring of true martial Patriotism evoked by the fall of Sumter
and the President’s first call for troops. Twenty millions of Northern
hearts were stirred by that Call, as they had never before been stirred.
Party and faction became for the moment, a thing of the past.
The Governors of the Free States made instant proclamation for
volunteers, and the People responded not by thousands but by hundreds of
thousands. New York, the Empire State, by her Governor and her
Legislature placed all her tremendous resources at the service of the
Union; and the great State of Pennsylvania, through Governor Curtin, did
the same. Nor were the other States at all behind.
The Loyal North felt that Law, Order, Liberty, the existence of the
Nation itself was in peril, and must be both saved and vindicated. Over
half a million of men–from the prairies of the West and the hills and
cities of the East–from farms and counting houses, from factories and
mines and workshops–sprang to arms at the Call, and begged to be
enrolled. The merchants and capitalists throughout the North proffered
to the Government their wealth and influence and best services. The
press and the people responded as only the press and people of a Free
land can respond–with all their heart and soul. “Fort Sumter,” said
one of the journals, “is lost, but Freedom is saved. Henceforth, the
Loyal States are a unit in uncompromising hostility to Treason, wherever
plotted, however justified. Fort Sumter is temporarily lost, but the
Country is saved. Live the Republic!”
This, in a nutshell, was the feeling everywhere expressed, whether by
the great crowds that marched through the streets of Northern cities
with drums beating and banners flying–cheering wildly for the Union,
singing Union songs, and compelling those of doubtful loyalty to throw
out to the breeze from their homes the glorified Stars and Stripes–by
the great majority of newspapers–by the pulpit, by the rostrum, by the
bench, by all of whatever profession or calling in Northern life. For
the moment, the voice of the Rebel-sympathizer was hushed in the land,
or so tremendously overborne that it seemed as if there was an absolute
unanimity of love for the Union.
Of course, in Border-States, bound to the South by ties of lineage and
intermarriage and politics and business association, the feeling could
not be the same as elsewhere. There, they were, so to speak, drawn both
ways at once, by the beckoning hands of kindred on the one side, and
Country on the other! Thus they long waited and hesitated, praying that
something might yet happen to save the Union of their fathers, and
prevent the shedding of brothers’ blood, by brothers-hoping against
hope-waited, in the belief that a position of armed neutrality might be
permitted to them; and grieved, when they found this could not be.
Each side to the great Conflict-at-arms naturally enough believed itself
right, and that the other side was the first aggressor; but the judgment
of Mankind has placed the blame where it properly belonged–on the
shoulders of the Rebels. The calm, clear statement of President
Lincoln, in his July Message to Congress, touching the assault and its
preceding history–together with his conclusions–states the whole
matter in such authentic and convincing manner that it may be said to
have settled the point beyond further controversy. After stating that
it “was resolved to notify the Governor of South Carolina that he might
expect an attempt would be made to provision the Fort; and that if the
attempt should not be resisted there would be no effort to throw in men,
arms, or ammunition, without further notice, or in case of an attack on
the Fort,” Mr. Lincoln continues: “This notice was accordingly given;
whereupon the Fort was attacked and bombarded to its fall, without even
awaiting the arrival of the provisioning expedition.”
The President then proceeds: “It is thus seen that the assault upon and
reduction of Fort Sumter was, in no sense, a matter of self-defense on
the part of the assailants. They well knew that the garrison in the
Fort could, by no possibility, commit aggression upon them. They knew–
they were expressly notified–that the giving of bread to the few brave
and hungry men of the garrison was all which would on that occasion be
attempted, unless themselves, by resisting so much, should provoke more.
They knew that this Government desired to keep the garrison in the Fort
–not to assail them–but merely to maintain visible possession, and
thus to preserve the Union from actual and immediate dissolution–
trusting, as hereinbefore stated, to time, discussion, and the ballot-
box for final adjustment; and they assailed and reduced the Fort for
precisely the reverse object–to drive out the visible authority of the
Federal Union, and thus force it to immediate dissolution.
“That this was their object, the Executive well understood; and, having
said to them, in the Inaugural Address, ‘you can have no conflict
without being yourselves the aggressors,’ he took pains not only to keep
this declaration good, but also to keep the case so free from the power
of ingenious sophistry as that the World should not be able to
misunderstand it.
“By the affair at Fort Sumter, with its surrounding circumstances, that
point was reached. Then and thereby the assailants of the Government
began the Conflict of arms, without a gun in sight or in expectancy to
return their fire, save only the few in the Fort sent to that harbor
years before for their own protection, and still ready to give that
protection in whatever was lawful. In this act, discarding all else,
they have forced upon the Country, the distinct issue: ‘Immediate
dissolution or blood.’
“And this issue embraces more than the fate of these United States. It
presents to the whole family of Man the question whether a
Constitutional Republic or Democracy–a government of the People by the
same People–can or cannot maintain its territorial integrity against
its own domestic foes. It presents the question whether discontented
individuals, too few in numbers to control administration according to
organic law in any case, can always, upon the pretences made in this
case, or on any other pretences, or arbitrarily without any pretence,
break up their Government, and thus practically put an end to free
government upon the earth. It forces us to ask: ‘Is there in all
republics, this inherent and fatal weakness?’ ‘Must a Government of
necessity be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak
to maintain its own existence?’
“So viewing the issue, no choice was left but to call out the War power
of the Government; and so to resist force, employed for its destruction,
by force, for its preservation.”
The Call for Troops was made, as we have seen, on the 15th day of April.
On the evening of the following day several companies of a Pennsylvania
Regiment reported for duty in Washington. On the 18th, more
Pennsylvania Volunteers, including a company of Artillery, arrived
there.
On the 19th of April, the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment–whose progress
through New York city had been triumphal-was suddenly and unexpectedly
assailed, in its passage through Baltimore, to the defense of the
National Capital, by a howling mob of Maryland Secessionists–worked up
to a pitch of States-rights frenzy by Confederate emissaries and
influential Baltimore Secession-sympathizers, by news of the sudden
evacuation of the Federal Arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, and other exciting
tidings–and had to fight its way through, leaving three soldiers of
that regiment dead, and a number wounded, behind it.
Square, Baltimore, the previous evening, says Greeley’s History of
the American Conflict, page 462, “None of the speakers directly
advocated attacks on the Northern troops about to pass through the
city; but each was open in his hostility to ‘Coercion,’ and
ardently exhorted his hearers to organize, arm and drill, for the
Conflict now inevitable. Carr (Wilson C. N. Carr) said: ‘I do not
care how many Federal troops are sent to Washington; they will soon
find themselves surrounded by such an army from Virginia and
Maryland, that escape to their homes will be impossible; and when
the 75,000 who are intended to invade the South shall have polluted
that soil with their touch, the South will extermninate and sweep
them from the Earth.’ (Frantic cheering and yelling). The meeting
broke up with stentorian cheers for ‘the South’ and for ‘President
Davis.”‘]
Ten companies of Philadelphia troops, reaching Baltimore at the same
time, unarmed, were also violently assailed by the crazy mob, and, after
a two hours’ fight, reached the cars and returned to Philadelphia.
Washington City–already, by the Secession of Virginia, cut off from the
South–was thus practically cut off from the North as well; and to
isolate it more completely, the telegraph wires were cut down and the
railroad bridges burned. A mere handful of regulars, the few volunteers
that had got through before the outbreak in Baltimore, and a small
number of Union residents and Government department clerks–these, under
General Winfield Scott, constituted the paltry force that, for ten days
after the Call for troops, held the National Capital.
Informed, as the Rebels must have been, by their swarming spies, of the
weakness of the Federal metropolis, it seems absolutely marvelous that
instant advantage was not taken of it.
The Richmond Examiner, of April 23d, said: “The capture of Washington
City is perfectly within the power of Virginia and Maryland, if Virginia
will only make the effort with her constituted authorities; nor is there
a single moment to lose. * * * The fanatical yell for the immediate
subjugation of the whole South is going up hourly from the united voices
of all the North; and, for the purpose of making their work sure, they
have determined to hold Washington City as the point whence to carry on
their brutal warfare. Our people can take it–they will take it–and
Scott, the arch-traitor, and Lincoln, the Beast, combined, cannot
prevent it. The just indignation of an outraged and deeply injured
people will teach the Illinois Ape to repeat his race and retrace his
journey across the borders of the Free Negro States still more rapidly
than he came. * * * Great cleansing and purification are needed and
will be given to that festering sink of iniquity, that wallow of Lincoln
and Scott–the desecrated city of Washington; and many indeed will be
the carcasses of dogs and caitiff that will blacken the air upon the
gallows before the great work is accomplished. So let it be!”
But despite all this fanfaronade of brutal bluster, and various
movements that looked somewhat threatening, and this complete isolation
for more than a week from the rest of the World, the city of Washington
was not seized by the Rebels, after all.
This nervous condition of affairs, however, existed until the 25th–and
to General Benjamin F. Butler is due the chief credit of putting an end
to it. It seems he had reached the Susquehanna river at Perryville,
with his Eighth Massachusetts Regiment on the 20th–the day after the
Sixth Massachusetts had been mobbed at Baltimore–and, finding his
further progress to Washington via Baltimore, barred by the destruction
of the bridge across the Susquehanna, etc., he at once seized a large
ferry steamer, embarked his men on her, steamed down the river and
Chesapeake Bay to Annapolis, the capital of Maryland, took possession of
the frigate Constitution, the Naval Academy, and the city itself,
gathered supplies, and being reinforced by the arrival by water of the
famous New York Seventh, and other regiments, repaired the branch
railroad to Annapolis Junction (on the main line of railroad between
Baltimore and Washington), and transferred his column from thence, by
cars, on the 25th, to the National Capital–soon thereafter also taking
military possession of Baltimore, which gave no further trouble to the
Union Cause. In the meantime, however, other untoward events to that
Cause had happened.
Two days after the Call for troops, the Virginia Convention (April 17th)
secretly voted to Secede from the Union. An expedition of Virginia
troops was almost at once started to capture the Federal Arsenal at
Harper’s Ferry, which, as has already been intimated, was evacuated
hastily on the night of the 18th, by the handful of Union regulars
garrisoning it, after a futile effort to destroy the public property and
stores it held. Another expedition was started to seize the Federal
Navy Yard at Norfolk–a rich prize, containing as it did, between 2,000
and 3,000 pieces of heavy ordnance (300 of them Dahlgrens), three old
line-of-battle ships and a number of frigates, including the Cumberland
and the fine forty-gun steam frigate Merrimac, together with thousands
of kegs of powder and immense stores of other munitions of war, and
supplies–that had cost in all some $10,000,000. Without an enemy in
sight, however, this fine Navy Yard was shamefully evacuated, after
partly scuttling and setting fire to the vessels–the Cumberland alone
being towed away–and spiking the guns, and doing other not very
material damage.
So also, in North Carolina, Rebel influence was equally active. On the
20th of April Governor Ellis seized the Federal Branch Mint at,
Charlotte, and on the 22d the Federal Arsenal at Fayetteville. A few
days thereafter his Legislature authorized him to tender to Virginia–
which had already joined the Confederacy–or to the Government of the
Confederate States itself, the volunteer forces of North Carolina. And,
although at the end of January the people of that State had decided at
the polls that no Secession Convention be held, yet the subservient
Legislature did not hesitate, on demand, to call one together which met
in May and ordained such Secession.
Thus, by the end of May, 1861, the Confederacy had grown to comprise
nine instead of seven States, and the Confederate troops were
concentrating on Richmond–whither the Rebel Government was soon to
remove, from Montgomery.
By this time also not only had the ranks of the regular Union Army been
filled and largely added to, but 42,000 additional volunteers had been
called out by President Lincoln; and the blockade of the Southern ports
(including those of Virginia and North Carolina) that had been
proclaimed by him, was, despite all obstacles, now becoming effectual
and respected.
Washington City and its suburbs, by the influx of Union volunteers, had
during this month become a vast armed camp; the Potomac river had been
crossed and the Virginia hills (including Arlington heights) which
overlooked the Federal Capital, had been occupied and fortified by Union
troops; the young and gallant Colonel Ellsworth had been killed by a
Virginia Rebel while pulling down a Rebel flag in Alexandria; and
General Benjamin F. Butler, in command at Fortress Monroe, had by an
inspiration, solved one of the knottiest points confronting our armies,
by declaring of three Negroes who had fled from their master so as to
escape working on Rebel fortifications, that they should not be returned
to that master–under the Fugitive Slave Law, as demanded by a Rebel
officer with a flag of truce–but were confiscated “property,” and would
be retained, as “contraband of war.”
It was about this time, too, that the New Orleans Picayune fell into
line with other unscrupulous Rebel sheets, by gravely declaring that:
“All the Massachusetts troops now in Washington are Negroes, with the
exception of two or three drummer boys. General Butler, in command, is
a native of Liberia. Our readers may recollect old Ben, the barber, who
kept a shop in Poydras street, and emigrated to Liberia with a small
competence. General Butler is his son.” Little did the writer of that
paragraph dream how soon New Orleans would crouch at the very feet of
that same General!
And now, while the armed hosts on either side are assembling in hostile
array, or resting on their arms, preliminary to the approaching fray of
battle, let us glance at the alleged causes underlying this great
Rebellion against the Union.
CHAPTER XI.
THE CAUSES OF SECESSION.
In preceding Chapters of this work, it has been briefly shown, that from
the very hour in which the Republic of the United States was born, there
have not been wanting, among its own citizens, those who hated it, and
when they could not rule, were always ready to do what they could, by
Conspiracy, Sedition, Mutiny, Nullification, Secession, or otherwise, to
weaken and destroy it. This fact, and the processes by which the
Conspirators worked, is very well stated, in his documentary “History of
the Rebellion,” by Edward McPherson, when he says: “In the Slaveholding
States, a considerable body of men have always been disaffected to the
Union. They resisted the adoption of the National Constitution, then
sought to refine away the rights and powers of the General Government,
and by artful expedients, in a series of years, using the excitements
growing out of passing questions, finally perverted the sentiments of
large masses of men, and prepared them for Revolution.”
Before giving further incontestable proofs establishing this fact, and
before endeavoring to sift out the true cause or causes of Secession,
let us first examine such evidences as are submitted by him in support
of his proposition.
The first piece of testimony, is an extract from an unpublished journal
of U. S. Senator Maclay of Pennsylvania, from March 4, 1789, to March 3,
1791–the period of the First Congress under the Federal Constitution.
It runs thus:
“1789, June 9.–In relation to the Tariff Bill, the affair of confining
the East India Trade to the citizens of America had been negatived, and
a committee had been appointed to report on this business. The report
came in with very high duties, amounting to a prohibition. But a new
phenomenon had made its appearance in the House (meaning the Senate)
since Friday.
“Pierce Butler, from South Carolina, had taken his seat, and flamed like
a meteor. He arraigned the whole Impost law, and then charged
(indirectly) the whole Congress with a design of oppressing South
Carolina. He cried out for encouraging the Danes and Swedes, and
foreigners of every kind, to come and take away our produce. In fact he
was for a Navigation Act reversed.
“June 11.–Attended at the hall as usual.
“Mr. Ralph Izard and Mr. Butler opposed the whole of the drawbacks in
every shape whatever.
“Mr. (William) Grayson, of Virginia, warm on this subject, said we were
not ripe for such a thing. We were a new Nation, and had no business
for any such regulations–a Nation /sui generis/.
“Mr. (Richard Henry) Lee (of Virginia) said drawbacks were right, but
would be so much abused, he could not think of admitting them.
“Mr. (Oliver) Ellsworth (of Connecticut) said New England rum would be
exported, instead of West India, to obtain the drawback.
“I thought it best to say a few words in reply to each. We were a new
Nation, it was true, but we were not a new People. We were composed of
individuals of like manners, habits, and customs with the European
Nations. What, therefore, had been found useful among them, came well
recommended by experience to us. Drawbacks stand as an example in this
point of view to us. If the thing was right in itself, there could be
no just argument drawn against the use of a thing from the abuse of it.
It would be the duty of Government to guard against abuses, by prudent
appointments and watchful attention to officers. That as to changing
the kind of rum, I thought the collection Bill would provide for this,
by limiting the exportation to the original casks and packages. I said
a great deal more, but really did not feel much interest either way.
But the debates were very lengthy.
“Butler flamed away, and THREATENED A DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION, with
regard to his State, as sure as God was in the firmament. He scattered
his remarks over the whole Impost bill, calling it partial, oppressive,
etc., and solely calculated to oppress South Carolina, and yet ever and
anon declaring how clear of local views and how candid and dispassionate
he was. He degenerates into mere declamation. His State would live
free, or die glorious.”
The next piece of evidence is General Jackson’s letter to Rev. A. J.
Crawford, as follows:
“WASHINGTON, May 1, 1833.
“MY DEAR SIR: * * * I have had a laborious task here, but Nullification
is dead; and its actors and courtiers will only be remembered by the
People to be execrated for their wicked designs to sever and destroy the
only good Government on the globe, and that prosperity and happiness we
enjoy over every other portion of the World. Haman’s gallows ought to
be the fate of all such ambitious men who would involve their Country in
Civil War, and all the evils in its train, that they might reign and
ride on its whirlwinds and direct the storm. The Free People of these
United States have spoken, and consigned these wicked demagogues to
their proper doom. Take care of your Nullifiers; you have them among
you; let them meet with the indignant frowns of every man who loves his
Country. The Tariff, it is now known, was a mere pretext–its burden
was on your coarse woolens. By the law of July, 1832, coarse woolen was
reduced to five per cent., for the benefit of the South. Mr. Clay’s
Bill takes it up and classes it with woolens at fifty per cent., reduces
it gradually down to twenty per cent., and there it is to remain, and
Mr. Calhoun and all the Nullifiers agree to the principle. The cash
duties and home valuation will be equal to fifteen per cent. more, and
after the year 1842, you pay on coarse woolens thirty-five per cent. If
this is not Protection, I cannot understand; therefore the Tariff was
only the pretext, and Disunion and a Southern Confederacy the real
object. The next pretext will be the Negro or Slavery question.
“My health is not good, but is improving a little. Present me kindly to
your lady and family, and believe me to be your friend. I will always
be happy to hear from you.
“ANDREW JACKSON.”
Another evidence is given in the following extract from Benton’s “Thirty
Years in the Senate,” vol. ii., as follows:
“The regular inauguration of this Slavery agitation dates from the year
1835; but it had commenced two years before, and in this way:
Nullification and Disunion had commenced in 1830, upon complaint against
Protective Tariff. That, being put down in 1833 under President
Jackson’s proclamation and energetic measures, was immediately
substituted by the Slavery agitation. Mr. Calhoun, when he went home
from Congress in the spring of that year, told his friends that ‘the
South could never be united against the North on the Tariff question–
that the sugar interest of Louisiana would keep her out–and that the
basis of Southern Union must be shifted to the Slave question.’ Then
all the papers in his interest, and especially the one at Washington,
published by Mr. Duff Green, dropped Tariff agitation, and commenced
upon Slavery, and in two years had the agitation ripe for inauguration,
on the Slavery question. And in tracing this agitation to its present
stage, and to comprehend its rationale, it is not to be forgotten that
it is a mere continuation of old Tariff Disunion, and preferred because
more available.”
Again, from p. 490 of his private correspondence, Mr. Clay’s words to an
Alabamian, in 1844, are thus given:
“From the developments now being made in South Carolina, it is perfectly
manifest that a Party exists in that State seeking a Dissolution of the
Union, and for that purpose employ the pretext of the rejection of Mr.
Tyler’s abominable treaty. South Carolina, being surrounded by Slave
States, would, in the event of a Dissolution of the Union, suffer only
comparative evils; but it is otherwise with Kentucky. She has the
boundary of the Ohio extending four hundred miles on three Free States.
What would our condition be in the event of the greatest calamity that
could befall this Nation?”
Allusion is also made to a letter written by Representative Nathan
Appleton, of Boston, December 15, 1860, in which that gentleman said
that when he was in Congress–in 1832-33–he had “made up his mind that
Messrs. Calhoun, Hayne, McDuffie, etc., were desirous of a separation of
the Slave States into a separate Confederacy, as more favorable to the
security of Slave Property.”
After mentioning that “About 1835, some South Carolinians attempted a
Disunion demonstration,” our authority says: It is thus described by ex-
Governor Francis Thomas of Maryland, in his speech in Baltimore, October
29, 1861:
“Full twenty years ago, when occupying my seat in the House of
Representatives, I was surprised one morning, after the assembling of
the House, to observe that all the members from the Slaveholding States
were absent. Whilst reflecting on this strange occurrence, I was asked
why I was not in attendance on the Southern Caucus assembled in the room
of the Committee on Claims. I replied that I had received no
invitation.
“I then proposed to go to the Committee-room to see what was being done.
When I entered, I found that little cock-sparrow, Governor Pickens, of
South Carolina, addressing the meeting, and strutting about like a
rooster around a barn-yard coop, discussing the following resolution:
“‘ Resolved, That no member of Congress, representing a Southern
constituency, shall again take his seat until a resolution is passed
satisfactory to the South on the subject of Slavery.’
“I listened to his language, and when he had finished, I obtained the
floor, asking to be permitted to take part in the discussion. I
determined at once to kill the Treasonable plot hatched by John C.
Calhoun, the Catiline of America, by asking questions. I said to Mr.
Pickens, ‘What next do you propose we shall do? are we to tell the
People that Republicanism is a failure? If you are for that, I am not.
I came here to sustain and uphold American institutions; to defend the
rights of the North as well as the South; to secure harmony and good
fellowship between all Sections of our common Country.’ They dared not
answer these questions. The Southern temper had not then been gotten
up. As my questions were not answered, I moved an adjournment of the
Caucus /sine die/. Mr. Craig, of Virginia, seconded the motion, and the
company was broken up. We returned to the House, and Mr. Ingersoll, of
Pennsylvania, a glorious patriot then as now, introduced a resolution
which temporarily calmed the excitement.”
The remarks upon this statement, made November 4, 1861, by the National
Intelligencer, were as follows:
“However busy Mr. Pickens may have been in the Caucus after it met, the
most active man in getting it up and pressing the Southern members to go
into it, was Mr. R. B. Rhett, also a member from South Carolina. The
occasion, or alleged cause of this withdrawal from the House into secret
deliberation was an anti-Slavery speech of Mr. Slade, of Vermont, which
Mr. Rhett violently denounced, and proposed to the Southern members to
leave the House and go into Conclave in one of the Committee-rooms,
which they generally did, if not all of them. We are able to state,
however, what may not have been known to Governor Thomas, that at least
three besides himself, of those who did attend it, went there with a
purpose very different from an intention to consent to any Treasonable
measure. These three men were Henry A. Wise, Balie Peyton, and William
Cost Johnson. Neither of them opened his lips in the Caucus; they went
to observe; and we can assure Governor Thomas, that if Mr. Pickens or
Mr. Calhoun, (whom he names) or any one else had presented a distinct
proposition looking to Disunion, or Revolt, or Secession, he would have
witnessed a scene not soon to be forgotten. The three whom we have
mentioned were as brave as they were determined. Fortunately, perhaps,
the man whom they went particularly to watch, remained silent and
passive.”
Let us, however, pursue the inquiry a little further. On the 14th of
November, 1860, Alexander H. Stephens addressed the Legislature of
Georgia, and in a portion of that address–replying to a speech made
before the same Body the previous evening by Mr. Toombs, in which the
latter had “recounted the evils of this Government”–said:
“The first [of these evils] was the Fishing Bounties, paid mostly to the
sailors of New England. Our friend stated that forty-eight years of our
Government was under the administration of Southern Presidents. Well,
these Fishing Bounties began under the rule of a Southern President, I
believe. No one of them, during the whole forty-eight years, ever set
his Administration against the principle or policy of them. * * *
“The next evil which my friend complained of, was the Tariff. Well, let
us look at that for a moment. About the time I commenced noticing
public matters, this question was agitating the Country almost as
fearfully as the Slave question now is. In 1832, when I was in college,
South Carolina was ready to Nullify or Secede from the Union on this
account. And what have we seen? The Tariff no longer distracts the
public counsels. Reason has triumphed! The present Tariff was voted
for by Massachusetts and South Carolina. The lion and the lamb lay down
together–every man in the Senate and House from Massachusetts and South
Carolina, I think, voted for it, as did my honorable friend himself.
And if it be true, to use the figure of speech of my honorable friend,
that every man in the North that works in iron, and brass and wood, has
his muscle strengthened by the protection of the Government, that
stimulant was given by his vote and I believe (that of) every other
Southern man.
“Mr. TOOMBS–The Tariff lessened the duties.
“Mr. STEPHENS–Yes, and Massachusetts with unanimity voted with the
South to lessen them, and they were made just as low as Southern men
asked them to be, and that is the rate they are now at. If reason and
argument, with experience, produced such changes in the sentiments of
Massachusetts from 1832 to 1857, on the subject of the Tariff, may not
like changes be effected there by the same means–reason and argument,
and appeals to patriotism on the present vexed question? And who can
say that by 1875 or 1890, Massachusetts may not vote with South Carolina
and Georgia upon all those questions that now distract the Country and
threaten its peace and existence.
“Another matter of grievance alluded to by my honorable friend was the
Navigation Laws. This policy was also commenced under the
Administration of one of these Southern Presidents who ruled so well,
and has been continued through all of them since. * * * One of the
objects (of these) was to build up a commercial American marine by
giving American bottoms the exclusive Carrying Trade between our own
ports. This is a great arm of national power. This object was
accomplished. We have now an amount of shipping, not only coastwise,
but to foreign countries, which puts us in the front rank of the Nations
of the World. England can no longer be styled the Mistress of the Seas.
What American is not proud of the result? Whether those laws should be
continued is another question. But one thing is certain; no President,
Northern or Southern, has ever yet recommended their repeal. * * *
“These then were the true main grievances or grounds of complaint
against the general system of our Government and its workings–I mean
the administration of the Federal Government. As to the acts of the
federal States I shall speak presently: but these three were the main
ones used against the common head. Now, suppose it be admitted that all
of these are evils in the system; do they overbalance and outweigh the
advantages and great good which this same Government affords in a
thousand innumerable ways that cannot be estimated? Have we not at the
South, as well as the North, grown great, prosperous, and happy under
its operations? Has any part of the World ever shown such rapid
progress in the development of wealth, and all the material resources of
national power and greatness, as the Southern States have under the
General Government, notwithstanding all its defects?
“Mr. TOOMBS–In spite of it.
“Mr. STEPHENS–My honorable friend says we have, in spite of the General
Government; that without it, I suppose he thinks, we might have done as
well, or perhaps better, than we have done in spite of it. * * *
Whether we of the South would have been better off without the
Government, is, to say the least, problematical. On the one side we can
only put the fact, against speculation and conjecture on the other. * *
* The influence of the Government on us is like that of the atmosphere
around us. Its benefits are so silent and unseen that they are seldom
thought of or appreciated.
“We seldom think of the single element of oxygen in the air we breathe,
and yet let this simple, unseen and unfelt agent be withdrawn, this
life-giving element be taken away from this all-pervading fluid around
us, and what instant and appalling changes would take place in all
organic creation.
“It may be that we are all that we are ‘in spite of the General
Government,’ but it may be that without it we should have been far
different from what we are now. It is true that there is no equal part
of the Earth with natural resources superior perhaps to ours. That
portion of this Country known as the Southern States, stretching from
the Chesapeake to the Rio Grande, is fully equal to the picture drawn by
the honorable and eloquent Senator last night, in all natural
capacities. But how many ages and centuries passed before these
capacities were developed to reach this advanced age of civilization.
There these same hills, rich in ore, same rivers, same valleys and
plains, are as they have been since they came from the hand of the
Creator; uneducated and uncivilized man roamed over them for how long no
history informs us.
“It was only under our institutions that they could be developed. Their
development is the result of the enterprise of our people, under
operations of the Government and institutions under which we have lived.
Even our people, without these, never would have done it. The
organization of society has much to do with the development of the
natural resources of any Country or any Land. The institutions of a
People, political and moral, are the matrix in which the germ of their
organic structure quickens into life–takes root, and develops in form,
nature, and character. Our institutions constitute the basis, the
matrix, from which spring all our characteristics of development and
greatness. Look at Greece. There is the same fertile soil, the same
blue sky, the same inlets and harbors, the same AEgean, the same
Olympus; there is the same land where Homer sung, where Pericles spoke;
it is in nature the same old Greece–but it is living Greece no more.
“Descendants of the same people inhabit the country; yet what is the
reason of this vast difference? In the midst of present degradation we
see the glorious fragments of ancient works of art-temples, with
ornaments and inscriptions that excite wonder and admiration–the
remains of a once high order of civilization, which have outlived the
language they spoke–upon them all, Ichabod is written–their glory has
departed. Why is this so? I answer, their institutions have been
destroyed. These were but the fruits of their forms of government, the
matrix from which their great development sprang; and when once the
institutions of a People have been destroyed, there is no earthly power
that can bring back the Promethean spark to kindle them here again, any
more than in that ancient land of eloquence, poetry and song.
“The same may be said of Italy. Where is Rome, once the mistress of the
World? There are the same seven hills now, the same soil, the same
natural resources; the nature is the same, but what a ruin of human
greatness meets the eye of the traveler throughout the length and
breadth of that most down-trodden land! why have not the People of that
Heaven-favored clime, the spirit that animated their fathers? Why this
sad difference?
“It is the destruction of their institutions that has caused it; and, my
countrymen, if we shall in an evil hour rashly pull down and destroy
those institutions which the patriotic hand of our fathers labored so
long and so hard to build up, and which have done so much for us and the
World, who can venture the prediction that similar results will not
ensue? Let us avoid it if we can. I trust the spirit is among us that
will enable us to do it. Let us not rashly try the experiment, for, if
it fails, as it did in Greece and Italy, and in the South American
Republics, and in every other place wherever liberty is once destroyed,
it may never be restored to us again.
“There are defects in our government, errors in administration, and
short-comings of many kinds; but in spite of these defects and errors,
Georgia has grown to be a great State. Let us pause here a moment.
“When I look around and see our prosperity in everything, agriculture,
commerce, art, science, and every department of education, physical and
mental, as well as moral advancement–and our colleges–I think, in the
face of such an exhibition, if we can, without the loss of power, or any
essential right or interest, remain in the Union, it is our duty to
ourselves and to posterity–let us not too readily yield to this
temptation–to do so. Our first parents, the great progenitors of the
human race, were not without a like temptation, when in the Garden of
Eden. They were led to believe that their condition would be bettered–
that their eyes would be opened–and that they would become as gods.
They in an evil hour yielded–instead of becoming gods they only saw
their own nakedness.
“I look upon this Country, with our institutions, as the Eden of the
World, the Paradise of the Universe. It may be that out of it we may
become greater and more prosperous, but I am candid and sincere in
telling you that I fear if we rashly evince passion, and without
sufficient cause shall take that step, that instead of becoming greater
or more peaceful, prosperous, and happy–instead of becoming gods, we
will become demons, and at no distant day commence cutting one another’s
throats. This is my apprehension.
“Let us, therefore, whatever we do, meet those difficulties, great as
they are, like wise and sensible men, and consider them in the light of
all the consequences which may attend our action. Let us see first
clearly where the path of duty leads, and then we may not fear to tread
therein.”
Said Senator Wigfall, of Texas, March 4, 1861, in the United States
Senate, only a few hours before Mr. Lincoln’s Inauguration:
“I desire to pour oil on the waters, to produce harmony, peace and quiet
here. It is early in the morning, and I hope I shall not say anything
that may be construed as offensive. I rise merely that we may have an
understanding of this question.
“It is not Slavery in the Territories, it is not expansion, which is the
difficulty. If the resolution which the Senator from Wisconsin
introduced here, denying the right of Secession, had been adopted by
two-thirds of each branch of this department of the Government, and had
been ratified by three-fourths of the States, I have no hesitation in
saying that, so far as the State in which I live and to which I owe my
allegiance is concerned, if she had no other cause for a disruption of
the Union taking place, she would undoubtedly have gone out.
Constitution, the following: “Under this Constitution, as
originally adopted, and as it now exists, no State has power to
withdraw from the jurisdiction of the United States: but this
Constitution, and all laws passed in pursuance of its delegated
powers, are the Supreme Law of the Land, anything contained in any
constitution, ordinance, or act of any State, to the contrary
notwithstanding.”]
“The moment you deny the right of self-government to the free White men
of the South, they will leave the Government. They believe in the
Declaration of Independence. They believe that:
“‘Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from
the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government
becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to
alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its
foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as
to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.’
“That principle of the Declaration of Independence is the one upon which
the free White men of the South predicated their devotion to the present
Constitution of the United States; and it was the denial of that, as
much as anything else, that has created the dissatisfaction in that
Section of the Country.
“There is no instrument of writing that has ever been written that has
been more misapprehended and misunderstood and misrepresented than this
same unfortunate Declaration of Independence, and no set of gentlemen
have ever been so slandered as the fathers who drew and signed that
Declaration.
“If there was a thing on earth that they did not intend to assert, it
was that a Negro was a White man. As I said here, a short time ago, one
of the greatest charges they made against the British Government was,
that old King George was attempting to establish the fact practically
that all men were created Free and Equal. They charged him in the
Declaration of Independence with inciting their Slaves to insurrection.
That is one of the grounds upon which they threw off their allegiance to
the British Parliament.
“Another great misapprehension is, that the men who drafted that
Declaration of Independence had any peculiar fancy for one form of
government rather than another. They were not fighting to establish a
Democracy in this country; they were not fighting to establish a
Republican form of government in this Country. Nothing was further from
their intention.
“Alexander Hamilton, after he had fought for seven years, declared that
the British form of government was the best that the ingenuity of man
had ever devised; and when John Adams said to him, ‘without its
corruptions;’ ‘Why,’ said he, ‘its corruptions are its greatest
excellence; without the corruptions, it would be nothing.’
“In the Declaration of Independence, they speak of George III., after
this fashion. They say:
“‘A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define
a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free People.’
“Now, I ask any plain common-sense man what was the meaning of that?
Was it that they were opposed to a Monarchical form of government? Was
it that they believed a Monarchical form of government was incompatible
with civil liberty? No, sir; they entertained no such absurd idea.
None of them entertained it; but they say that George III, was a prince
whose character was ‘marked by every act which may define a tyrant’ and
that therefore he was ‘unfit to be the ruler of a free People.’ Had his
character not been so marked by every quality which would define a
tyrant, he might have been the fit ruler of a free People; ergo, a
monarchical form of Government was not incompatible with civil liberty.
“That was clearly the opinion of those men. I do not advocate it now;
for I have said frequently that we are wiser than our fathers, and our
children will be wiser than we are. One hundred years hence, men will
understand their own affairs much better than we do. We understand our
affairs better than those who preceded us one hundred years. But what I
assert is, that the men of the Revolution did not believe that a
Monarchical form of Government was incompatible with civil liberty.
“What I assert is, that when they spoke of ‘all men being created
equal,’ they were speaking of the White men who then had unsheathed
their swords–for what purpose? To establish the right of self-
government in themselves; and when they had achieved that, they
established, not Democracies, but Republican forms of Government in the
thirteen sovereign, separate and independent Colonies. Yet the
Declaration of Independence is constantly quoted to prove Negro
equality. It proves no such thing; it was intended to prove no such
thing.
“The ‘glittering generalities’ which a distinguished former Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Choate) spoke of, as contained in the Declaration of
Independence, one of them at least, about all men being created equal–
was not original with Mr. Jefferson. I recollect seeing a pamphlet
called the Principles of the Whigs and Jacobites, published about the
year 1745, when the last of the Stuarts, called ‘the Pretender,’ was
striking a blow that was fatal to himself, but a blow for his crown, in
which pamphlet the very phraseology is used, word for word and letter
for letter. I have not got it here to-night. I sent the other day to
the Library to try and find it, but could not find it; it was burnt, I
believe, with the pamphlets that were burnt some time ago.
“That Mr. Jefferson copied it or plagiarized it, is not true, I suppose,
any more than the charge that the distinguished Senator from New York
plagiarized from the Federalist in preparing his celebrated compromising
speech which was made here a short time ago. It was the cant phrase of
the day in 1745, which was only about thirty years previous to the
Declaration of Independence. This particular pamphlet, which I have
read, was published; others were published at the same time. That sort
of phraseology was used.
“There was a war of classes in England; there were men who were
contending for legitimacy; who were contending for the right of the
Crown being inherent and depending on the will of God, ‘the divine right
of Kings,’ for maintaining an hereditary landed-aristocracy; there was
another Party who were contending against this doctrine of legitimacy,
and the right of primogeniture. These were called the Whigs; they
established this general phraseology in denouncing the divine right and
the doctrine of legitimacy, and it became the common phraseology of the
Country; so that in the obscure county of Mecklenburg, in North
Carolina, a declaration containing the same assertions was found as in
this celebrated Declaration of Independence, written by the immortal
Jefferson.
“Which of us, I ask, is there upon this floor who has not read and re-
read whatever was written within the last twenty-five or thirty years by
the distinguished men of this country? But enough of that.
“As I said before, there ought not have been, and there did not
necessarily result from our form of Government, any irrepressible
conflict between the Slaveholding and the non-Slaveholding States.
Nothing of the sort was necessary.
“Strike out a single clause in the Constitution of the United States,
that which secures to each State a Republican form of Government, and
there is no reason why, under precisely such a Constitution as we have,
States that are Monarchical and States that are Republican, could not
live in peace and quiet. They confederate together for common defense
and general welfare, each State regulating its domestic concerns in its
own way; those which preferred a Republican form of Government
maintaining it, and those which preferred a Monarchical form of
Government maintaining it.
“But how long could small States, with different forms of Government,
live together, confederated for common defense and general welfare, if
the people of one Section were to come to the conclusion that their
institutions were better than those of the other, and thereupon
straightway set about subverting the institutions of the other?”
In the reply of the Rebel “Commissioners of the Southern Confederacy”
to Mr. Seward, April 9, 1861, they speak of our Government as being
“persistently wedded to those fatal theories of construction of the
Federal Constitution always rejected by the statesmen of the South, and
adhered to by those of the Administration school, until they have
produced their natural and often-predicted result of the destruction of
the Union, under which we might have continued to live happily and
gloriously together, had the spirit of the ancestry who framed the
common Constitution animated the hearts of all their sons.”
In the “Address of the people of South Carolina, assembled in
Convention, to the people of the Slaveholding States of the United
States,” by which the attempt was made to justify the passage of the
South Carolina Secession Ordinance of 1860, it is declared that:
“Discontent and contention have moved in the bosom of the Confederacy,
for the last thirty-five years. During this time South Carolina has
twice called her people together in solemn Convention, to take into
consideration, the aggressions and unconstitutional wrongs, perpetrated
by the people of the North on the people of the South. These wrongs
were submitted to by the people of the South, under the hope and
expectation that they would be final. But such hope and expectation
have proved to be vain. Instead of producing forbearance, our
acquiescence has only instigated to new forms of aggressions and
outrage; and South Carolina, having again assembled her people in
Convention, has this day dissolved her connection with the States
constituting the United States.
“The one great evil from which all other evils have flowed, is the
overthrow of the Constitution of the United States. The Government of
the United States, is no longer the Government of Confederated
Republics, but of a consolidated Democracy. It is no longer a free
Government, but a Despotism. It is, in fact, such a Government as Great
Britain attempted to set over our Fathers; and which was resisted and
defeated by a seven years struggle for Independence.
“The Revolution of 1776, turned upon one great principle, self-
government,–and self-taxation, the criterion of self-government.
“The Southern States now stand exactly in the same position towards the
Northern States, that the Colonies did towards Great Britain. The
Northern States, having the majority in Congress, claim the same power
of omnipotence in legislation as the British Parliament. ‘The General
Welfare’ is the only limit to the legislation of either; and the
majority in Congress, as in the British Parliament, are the sole judges
of the expediency of the legislation this ‘General Welfare’ requires.
Thus the Government of the United States has become a consolidated
Government; and the people of the Southern States are compelled to meet
the very despotism their fathers threw off in the Revolution of 1776.
“The consolidation of the Government of Great Britain over the Colonies,
was attempted to be carried out by the taxes. The British Parliament
undertook to tax the Colonies to promote British interests. Our fathers
resisted this pretension. They claimed the right of self-taxation
through their Colonial Legislatures. They were not represented in the
British Parliament, and, therefore, could not rightly be taxed by its
legislation. The British Government, however, offered them a
representation in Parliament; but it was not sufficient to enable them
to protect themselves from the majority, and they refused the offer.
Between taxation without any representation, and taxation without a
representation adequate to protection, there was no difference. In
neither case would the Colonies tax themselves. Hence, they refused to
pay the taxes laid by the British Parliament.
“And so with the Southern States, towards the Northern States, in the
vital matter of taxation. They are in a minority in Congress. Their
representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust
taxation; and they are taxed by the people of the North for their
benefit, exactly as the people of Great Britain taxed our ancestors in
the British Parliament for their benefit. For the last forty years, the
taxes laid by the Congress of the United States have been laid with a
view of subserving the interests of the North. The people of the South
have been taxed by duties on imports, not for revenue, but for an object
inconsistent with revenue–to promote, by prohibitions, Northern
interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures.
“There is another evil, in the condition of the Southern towards the
Northern States, which our ancestors refused to bear towards Great
Britain. Our ancestors not only taxed themselves, but all the taxes
collected from them were expended amongst them. Had they submitted to
the pretensions of the British Government, the taxes collected from
them, would have been expended in other parts of the British Empire.
They were fully aware of the effect of such a policy in impoverishing
the people from whom taxes are collected, and in enriching those who
receive the benefit of their expenditure.
“To prevent the evils of such a policy, was one of the motives which
drove them on to Revolution, yet this British policy has been fully
realized towards the Southern States, by the Northern States. The
people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the
Northern States, but after the taxes are collected, three fourths of
them are expended at the North. This cause, with others, connected with
the operation of the General Government, has made the cities of the
South provincial. Their growth is paralyzed; they are mere suburbs of
Northern cities. The agricultural productions of the South are the
basis of the foreign commerce of the United States; yet Southern cities
do not carry it on. Our foreign trade is almost annihilated. * * *
“No man can for a moment believe, that our ancestors intended to
establish over their posterity, exactly the same sort of Government they
had overthrown. * * * Yet by gradual and steady encroachments on the
part of the people of the North, and acquiescence on the part of the
South, the limitations in the Constitution have been swept away; and the
Government of the United States has become consolidated, with a claim of
limitless powers in its operations. * * *
“A majority in Congress, according to their interested and perverted
views, is omnipotent. * * * Numbers with them, is the great element of
free Government. A majority is infallible and omnipotent. ‘The right
divine to rule in Kings,’ is only transferred to their majority. The
very object of all Constitutions, in free popular Government, is to
restrain the majority. Constitutions, therefore, according to their
theory, must be most unrighteous inventions, restricting liberty. None
ought to exist; but the body politic ought simply to have a political
organization, to bring out and enforce the will of the majority. This
theory is a remorseless despotism. In resisting it, as applicable to
ourselves, we are vindicating the great cause of free Government, more
important, perhaps, to the World, than the existence of all the United
States.”
In his Special Message to the Confederate Congress at Montgomery, April
29, 1861, Mr. Jefferson Davis said:
“From a period as early as 1798, there had existed in all the States a
Party, almost uninterruptedly in the majority, based upon the creed that
each State was, in the last resort, the sole judge, as well of its
wrongs as of the mode and measure of redress. * * * The Democratic
Party of the United States repeated, in its successful canvas of 1836,
the declaration, made in numerous previous political contests, that it
would faithfully abide by and uphold the principles laid down in the
Kentucky and Virginia Legislatures of [1798 and] 1799, and that it
adopts those principles as constituting one of the main foundations of
its political creed.”
In a letter addressed by the Rebel Commissioners in London (Yancey, Rost
and Mann), August 14, 1861, to Lord John Russell, Secretary of Foreign
Affairs, it appears that they said: “It was from no fear that the Slaves
would be liberated, that Secession took place. The very Party in power
has proposed to guarantee Slavery forever in the States, if the South
would but remain in the Union.” On the 4th of May preceding, Lord John
had received these Commissioners at his house; and in a letter of May
11, 1861, wrote, from the Foreign Office, to Lord Lyons, the British
Minister at Washington, a letter, in which, alluding to his informal
communication with them, he said: “One of these gentlemen, speaking for
the others, dilated on the causes which had induced the Southern States
to Secede from the Northern. The principal of these causes, he said,
was not Slavery, but the very high price which, for the sake of
Protecting the Northern manufacturers, the South were obliged to pay for
the manufactured goods which they required. One of the first acts of
the Southern Congress was to reduce these duties, and to prove their
sincerity he gave as an instance that Louisiana had given up altogether
that Protection on her sugar which she enjoyed by the legislation of the
United States. As a proof of the riches of the South. He stated that
of $350,000,000 of exports of produce to foreign countries $270,000,000
were furnished by the Southern States.” * * * They pointed to the new
Tariff of the United States as a proof that British manufactures would
be nearly excluded from the North, and freely admitted in the South.
This may be as good a place as any other to say a few words touching
another alleged “cause” of Secession. During the exciting period just
prior to the breaking out of the great War of the Rebellion, the Slave-
holding and Secession-nursing States of the South, made a terrible
hubbub over the Personal Liberty Bills of the Northern States. And when
Secession came, many people of the North supposed these Bills to be the
prime, if not the only real cause of it. Not so. They constituted, as
we now know, only a part of the mere pretext. But, none the less, they
constituted a portion of the history of that eventful time, and cannot
be altogether ignored.
In order then, that the reader may quickly grasp, not only the general
nature, but also the most important details of the Personal Liberty
Bills (in force, in 1860, in many of the Free States) so frequently
alluded to in the Debates of Congress, in speeches on the stump, and in
the fulminations of Seceding States and their authorized agents,
commissioners, and representatives, it may be well now, briefly to refer
to them, and to state that no such laws existed in California, Illinois,
Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, New York, Ohio and Oregon.
Those of Maine provided that no officer of the State should in any way
assist in the arrest or detention of a Fugitive Slave, and made it the
duty of county attorneys to defend the Fugitive Slave against the claim
of his master. A Bill to repeal these laws passed the Maine Senate, but
failed in the House.
That of Massachusetts provided for commissioners in each county to
defend alleged Fugitives from Service or Labor; for payment by the
Commonwealth of all expenses of defense; prohibited the issue or service
of process by State officers for arrest of alleged Fugitives, or the use
of any prisons in the State for their detention, or that of any person
aiding their escape; prohibited the kidnapping or removal of alleged
Fugitive Slaves by any person; prohibited all officers within the State,
down to Town officers, from arresting, imprisoning, detaining or
returning to Service “any Person for the reason that he is claimed or
adjudged to be a Fugitive from Service or Labor”–all such prohibitions
being enforced by heavy fines and imprisonment. The Act of March 25,
1861, materially modified and softened the above provisions.
New Hampshire’s law, provided that all Slaves entering the State with
consent of the master shall be Free, and made the attempt to hold any
person as a Slave within the State a felony.
Vermont’s, prescribed that no process under the Fugitive Slave Law
should be recognized by any of her Courts, officers, or citizens; nor
any aid given in arresting or removing from the State any Person claimed
as a Fugitive Slave; provided counsel for alleged Fugitives; for the
issue of habeas corpus and trial by jury of issues of fact between the
parties; ordained Freedom to all within the State who may have been held
as Slaves before coming into it, and prescribed heavy penalties for any
attempt to return any such to Slavery. A bill to repeal these laws,
proposed November, 1860, in the Vermont House of Representatives, was
beaten by two to one.
Connecticut’s, provided that there must be two witnesses to prove that a
Person is a Slave; that depositions are not evidence; that false
testifying in Fugitive Slave cases shall be punishable by fine of $5,000
and five years in State prison.
In New Jersey, the only laws touching the subject, permitted persons
temporarily sojourning in the State to bring and hold their Slaves, and
made it the duty of all State officers to aid in the recovery of
Fugitives from Service.
In Pennsylvania, barring an old dead-letter Statute, they simply
prohibited any interference by any of the Courts, Aldermen, or Justices
of the Peace, of the Commonwealth, with the functions of the
Commissioner appointed under the United States Statute in Fugitive Slave
cases.
In Michigan, the law required States’ attorneys to defend Fugitive
Slaves; prescribed the privileges of habeas corpus and jury trial for
all such arrested; prohibited the use of prisons of the State for their
detention; required evidence of two credible witnesses as to identity;
and provided heavy penalties of fine and imprisonment for the seizure of
any Free Person, with intent to have such Person held in Slavery. A
Bill to repeal the Michigan law was defeated in the House by about two
to one.
Wisconsin’s Personal Liberty law was similar to that of Michigan, but
with this addition, that no judgment recovered against any person in
that State for violating the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 should be
enforced by sale or execution of any real or personal property in that
State.
That of Rhode Island, forbade the carrying away of any Person by force
out of the State; forbade the official aiding in the arrest or detention
of a Fugitive Slave; and denied her jails to the United States for any
such detention.
Apropos of this subject, and before leaving it, it may be well to quote
remarks of Mr. Simons of Rhode Island, in the United States Senate.
Said he: “Complaint has been made of Personal Liberty Bills. Now, the
Massachusetts Personal Liberty Bill was passed by a Democratic House, a
Democratic Senate, and signed by a Democratic Governor, a man who was
afterwards nominated by Mr. Polk for the very best office in New
England, and was unanimously confirmed by a Democratic United States
Senate. Further than this, the very first time the attention of the
Massachusetts Legislature was called to the propriety of a repeal of
this law was by a Republican Governor. Now, on the other hand, South
Carolina had repealed a law imprisoning British colored sailors, but
retained the one imprisoning those coming from States inhabited by her
own brethren!”
These Personal Liberty Bills were undoubtedly largely responsible for
some of the irritation on the Slavery question preceding open
hostilities between the Sections. But President Lincoln sounded the
real depths of the Rebellion when he declared it to be a War upon the
rights of the People. In his First Annual Message, December 3, 1861, he
said:
“It continues to develop that the insurrection is largely, if not
exclusively, a War upon the first principle of popular government–the
rights of the People. Conclusive evidence of this is found in the most
grave and maturely considered public documents, as well as in the
general tone of the insurgents. In those documents we find the
abridgment of the existing right of suffrage, and the denial to the
People of all right to participate in the selection of public officers,
except the legislative, boldly advocated, with labored arguments to
prove that large control of the People in government is the source of
all political evil. Monarchy itself is sometimes hinted at as a
possible refuge from the power of the People.
“In my present position, I could scarcely be justified were I to omit
raising a warning voice against this approach of returning despotism.
“It is not needed, nor fitting here, that a general argument should be
made in favor of popular institutions; but there is one point, with its
connections, not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask brief
attention. It is the effort to place Capital on an equal footing with,
if not above Labor, in the structure of the Government.
“It is assumed that Labor is available only in connection with Capital;
that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning Capital, somehow by the
use of it induces him to labor. This assumed, it is next considered
whether it is best that Capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce
them to work by their own consent, or buy them, and drive them to it
without their consent. Having proceeded so far, it is naturally
concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers, or what we call
Slaves. And further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer
is fixed in that condition for life.
“Now, there is no such relation between Capital and Labor as assumed;
nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life, in the
condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all
inferences from them are groundless.
“Labor is prior to, and independent of Capital. Capital is only the
fruit of Labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first
existed. Labor is the superior of Capital, and deserves much the higher
consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of
protection as any other rights. Nor is it denied that there is, and
probably always will be, a relation between Labor and Capital, producing
mutual benefits. The error is in assuming that the whole Labor of the
community exists within that relation.
“A few men own Capital, and that few, avoid labor themselves, and with
their Capital hire or buy another few to labor for them. A large
majority belong to neither class–neither work for others, nor have
others working for them.
“In most of the Southern States, a majority of the whole people of all
colors are neither Slaves nor masters; while in the Northern, a large
majority are neither hirers nor hired. Men with their families–wives,
sons, and daughters–work for themselves, on their farms, in their
houses, and in their shops, taking the whole product to themselves, and
asking no favors of Capital on the one hand, nor of hired laborers or
Slaves on the other.
“It is not forgotten that a considerable number of persons mingle their
own Labor with Capital–that is they labor with their own hands, and
also buy or hire others to labor for them; but this is only a mixed, and
not a distinct class. No principle stated is disturbed by the existence
of this mixed class.
“Again, as has already been said, there is not, of necessity, any such
thing as the free hired-laborer being fixed to that condition for life.
Many independent men everywhere in these States, a few years back in
their lives, were hired laborers.
“The prudent, penniless beginner in the World, labors for wages awhile,
saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself, then labors
on his own account another while, and at length hires another new
beginner to help him. This is the just and generous and prosperous
system, which opens the way to all, gives hope to all, and consequent
energy and progress, and improvement of condition to all.
“No men living are more worthy to be trusted than those who toil up from
poverty–none less inclined to take or touch aught which they have not
honestly earned. Let them beware of surrendering a political power
which they already possess, and which, if surrendered, will surely be
used to close the door of advancement against such as they, and to fix
new disabilities and burdens upon them, till all of Liberty shall be
lost. * * * The struggle of to-day is not altogether for to-day-it is
a vast future also. * * * ”
So too, Andrew Johnson, in his speech before the Senate, January 31,
1862, spake well and truly when he said that “there has been a
deliberate design for years to change the nature and character and
genius of this Government.” And he added: “Do we not know that these
schemers have been deliberately at work, and that there is a Party in
the South, with some associates in the North, and even in the West, that
have become tired of Free Government, in which they have lost
confidence.”
Said he: “They raise an outcry against ‘Coercion,’ that they may
paralyze the Government, cripple the exercise of the great powers with
which it was invested, finally to change its form and subject us to a
Southern despotism. Do we not know it to be so? Why disguise this
great truth? Do we not know that they have been anxious for a change of
Government for years? Since this Rebellion commenced it has manifested
itself in many quarters.
“How long is it since the organ of the Government at Richmond, the
Richmond Whig, declared that rather than live under the Government of
the United States, they preferred to take the Constitutional Queen of
Great Britain as their protector; that they would make an alliance with
Great Britain for the purpose of preventing the enforcement of the Laws
of the United States. Do we not know this?”
Stephen A. Douglas also, in his great Union speech at Chicago, May 1,
1861–only a few days before his lamented death-said:
“The election of Mr. Lincoln is a mere pretext. The present Secession
movement is the result of an enormous Conspiracy formed more than a year
since formed by leaders in the Southern Confederacy more than twelve
months ago. They use the Slavery question as a means to aid the
accomplishment of their ends. They desired the election of a Northern
candidate by a Sectional vote, in order to show that the two Sections
cannot live together.
“When the history of the two years from the Lecompton question down to
the Presidential election shall be written, it will be shown that the
scheme was deliberately made to break up this Union.
“They desired a Northern Republican to be elected by a purely Northern
vote, and then assign this fact as a reason why the Sections cannot live
together. If the Disunion candidate–(Breckinridge) in the late
Presidential contest had carried the united South, their scheme was, the
Northern candidate successful, to seize the Capital last Spring, and by
a united South and divided North, hold it.
“Their scheme was defeated, in the defeat of the Disunion candidates in
several of the Southern States.
“But this is no time for a detail of causes. The Conspiracy is now
known; Armies have been raised. War is levied to accomplish it. There
are only two sides to the question.
“Every man must be for the United States, or against it. There can be
no Neutrals in this War; only Patriots or Traitors! [Cheer after
Cheer].”
In a speech made in the United States Senate, January 31, 1862, Senator
McDougall of California–conceded to be intellectually the peer of any
man in that Body–said:
“We are at War. How long have we been at War? We have been engaged in
a war of opinion, according to my historical recollection, since 1838.
There has been a Systematic organized war against the Institutions
established by our fathers, since 1832. This is known of all men who
have read carefully the history of our Country. If I had the leisure,
or had consulted the authorities, I would give it year by year, and date
by date, from that time until the present, how men adversary to our
Republican Institutions have been organizing War against us, because
they did not approve of our Republican Institutions.
“Before the Mexican War, it is well known that General Quitman, then
Governor of Mississippi, was organizing to produce the same condition of
things (and he hoped a better condition of things, for he hoped a
successful Secession), to produce this same revolution that is now
disturbing our whole Land. The War with Mexico, fighting for a Southern
proposition, for which I fought myself, made the Nation a unit until
1849; and then again they undertook an Organization to produce
Revolution. These things are history. This statement is true, and
cannot be denied among intelligent men anywhere, and cannot be denied in
this Senate.
“The great men who sat in Council in this Hall, the great men of the
Nation, men whose equals are not, and I fear will not be for many years,
uniting their judgments, settled the controversy in 1850. They did not
settle it for the Conspirators of the South, for they were not parties
to the compact. Clay and Webster, and the great men who united with
them, had no relation with the extremes of either extreme faction. The
Compromise was made, and immediately after it had been effected, again
commenced the work of organization. I had the honor to come from my
State on the Pacific into the other branch of the Federal Congress, and
there I learned as early as 1853, that the work of Treason was as
industriously pursued as it is being pursued to-day. I saw it; I felt
it; I knew it. I went home to the shores of the Pacific instructed
somewhat on this subject.
“Years passed by. I engaged in my duties as a simple professional man,
not connected with public affairs. The question of the last
Presidential election arose before the Country–one of those great
questions that are not appreciated, I regret from my heart, by the
American Nation, when we elect a President, a man who has more power for
his time than any enthroned Monarch in Europe. We organize a Government
and place him in front as the head and the Chief of the Government.
That question came before the American People.
“At that time I was advised of this state of feeling–and I will state
it in as exact form of words as I can state it, that it may be
understood by Senators: Mr. Douglas is a man acceptable to the South.
Mr. Douglas is a man to whom no one has just cause of exception
throughout the South. Mr. Douglas is more acceptable to Mississippi and
Louisiana than Mr. Breckinridge. Mr. Breckinridge is not acceptable to
the South; or at least, if he is so, he is not in the same degree with
Mr. Douglas. Mr. Douglas is the accepted man of a great National Party,
and if he is brought into the field he will be triumphantly elected.
THAT MUST NOT BE DONE, because THE ORGANIZATION FOR SECESSION IS
MATURED. EVERYTHING IS PREPARED, and the election of Mr. Douglas would
only postpone it for four years; and Now when we are PREPARED to carry
out these things WE MUST INDULGE IN STRATAGEM, and the nomination of Mr.
Breckinridge is a mere strategic movement to divide the great
conservative Party of the Nation into two, so as to elect a Republican
candidate AND CONSOLIDATE THE SOUTH BY THE CRY OF ‘ABOLITIONIST!’
“That is a mere simple statement of the truth, and it cannot be
contradicted. Now, in that scheme all the men of counsel of that Party
were engaged. * * * I, on the far shores of the Pacific understood
those things as long ago as a year last September (1860). I was advised
about this policy and well informed of it. * * *
“I was at war, in California, in January (1861) last; in the maintenance
of the opinions that I am now maintaining, I had to go armed to protect
myself from violence. The country, whenever there was controversy, was
agitated to its deepest foundations. That is known, perhaps, not to
gentlemen who live up in Maine or Massachusetts, or where you are
foreign to all this agitation; but known to all people where disturbance
might have been effective in consequences. I felt it, and had to carry
my life in my hand by the month, as did my friends surrounding me.
“I say that all through last winter (that of 1860-61) War had been
inaugurated in all those parts of the Country where disturbed elements
could have efficient result. In January (1861), a year ago, I stood in
the hall of the House of Representatives of my State, and there was War
then, and angry faces and hostile men were gathered; and we knew then
well that the Southern States had determined to withdraw themselves from
the Federal Union.
“I happened to be one of those men who said, ‘they shall not do it;’ and
it appears to me that the whole argument is between that class of men
and the class of men who said they would let them do it. * * * When
this doctrine was started here of disintegrating the Cotton States from
the rest of the Confederacy, I opposed it at once. I saw immediately
that War was to be invoked. * * *
“I will not say these things were understood by gentlemen of the
Republican Party * * * but I, having been accepted and received as a
Democrat of the old school from the olden time, and HAVING FAST SOUTHERN
SYMPATHIES, I DID KNOW ALL ABOUT THEM. * * * I KNOW THAT SECESSION WAS A
THING DETERMINED UPON. * * * I was advised of and understood the whole
programme, KNEW HOW IT WAS TO BE DONE IN ITS DETAILS; and I being
advised, made war against it. * * *
“War had been, in fact, inaugurated. What is War? Was it the firing on
our flag at Sumter? Was that the first adversary passage? To say so,
is trifling with men’s judgments and information. No, sir; when they
organized a Government, and set us at defiance, they commenced War; and
the various steps they took afterwards, by organizing their troops, and
forming their armies, and advancing upon Sumter; all these were merely
acts of War; but War was inaugurated whenever they undertook to say they
would maintain themselves as a separate and independent government; and,
after that time, every man who gave his assistance to them was a
Traitor, according to the highest Law.”
The following letter, written by one of the most active of the Southern
conspirators in 1858, during the great Douglas and Lincoln Debate of
that year, to which extended reference has already been made, is of
interest in this connection, not only as corroborative evidence of the
fact that the Rebellion of the Cotton States had been determined on long
before Mr. Lincoln was elected President, but as showing also that the
machinery for “firing the Southern heart” and for making a “solid South”
was being perfected even then. The subsequent split in the Democratic
Party, and nomination of Breckinridge by the Southern wing of it, was
managed by this same Yancey, simply as parts of the deliberate programme
of Secession and Rebellion long before determined on by the Cotton Lords
of the Cotton States.
“MONTGOMERY, June 15, 1858.
“DEAR SIR:–Your kind favor of the 13th is received.
“I hardly agree with you that a general movement can be made that will
clean out the Augean Stable. If the Democracy were overthrown it would
result in giving place to a greedier and hungrier swarm of flies.
“The remedy of the South is not in such a process. It is in a diligent
organization of her true men for prompt resistance to the next
aggression. It must come in the nature of things. No National Party
can save us. No Sectional Party can ever do it. But if we could do as
our fathers did–organize ‘Committees of Safety’ all over the Cotton
States (and it is only in them that we can hope for any effective
movement), we shall fire the Southern heart, instruct the Southern mind,
give courage to each other, and at the proper moment, by one organized,
concerted action, we can precipitate the Cotton States into a
revolution.
“The idea has been shadowed forth in the South by Mr. Ruffin; has been
taken up and recommended in the Advertiser under the name of ‘League of
United Southerners,’ who, keeping up their old relations on all other
questions, will hold the Southern issues paramount, and influence
parties, legislatures and statesmen. I have no time to enlarge, but to
suggest merely.
“In haste, yours, etc.
“W. L. YANCEY.
“To JAMES S. SLAUGHTER.”
At Jackson, Mississippi, in the fall of the same year (1858) just after
the great Debate between Douglas and Lincoln had closed, Jefferson Davis
had already raised the standard of Revolution, Secession and Disunion,
during the course of a speech, in which he said: “If an Abolitionist be
chosen President of the United States, you will have presented to you
the question of whether you will permit the Government to pass into the
hands of your avowed and implacable enemies? Without pausing for an
answer, I will state my own position to be, that such a result would be
a species of revolution by which the purposes of the Government would be
destroyed, and the observance of its mere forms entitled to no respect.
In that event, in such a manner as should be most expedient, I should
deem it your duty to provide for your safety, outside of the Union with
those who have already shown the will, and would have acquired the power
to deprive you of your birthright, and to reduce you to worse than the
Colonial dependence of your fathers.”
The “birthright” thus referred to was of course, the alleged right to
have Slaves; but what was this “worse than Colonial dependence” to
which, in addition to the peril supposed to threaten the Southern
“birthright,” the Cotton States of Mississippi were reduced?
“Dependence” upon whom, and with regard to what? Plainly upon the
North; and with regard, not to Slavery alone–for Jefferson Davis held,
down to the very close of the War, that the South fought “not for
Slavery”–but as to Tariff Legislation also. There was the rub! These
Cotton Lords believed, or pretended to believe, that the High Tariff
Legislation, advocated and insisted upon both by the Whigs and
Republicans for the Protection of the American Manufacturer and working
man, built up and made prosperous the North, and elevated Northern
laborers; at the expense of the South, and especially themselves, the
Cotton Lords aforesaid.
We have already seen from the utterances of leading men in the South
Carolina, Secession Convention, “that”–as Governor Hicks, himself a
Southern man, said in his address to the people of Maryland, after the
War broke out “neither the election of Mr. Lincoln, nor the non-
execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, nor both combined, constitute their
grievances. They declare that THE REAL CAUSE of their discontent DATES
AS FAR BACK AS 1833.”
And what was the chief cause or pretext for discontent at that time?
Nothing less than the Tariff. They wanted Free Trade, as well as
Slavery. The balance of the Union wanted Protection, as well as
Freedom.
The subsequent War, then, was not a War waged for Slavery alone, but for
Independence with a view to Free Trade, as set forth in the “Confederate
Constitution,” as soon as that Independence could be achieved. And the
War on our part, while for the integrity of the Union in all its parts–
for the life of the Nation itself, and for the freedom of man, should
also have brought the triumph of the American idea of a Protective
Tariff, whose chief object is the building up of American manufactures
and the Protection of the Free working-man, in the essential matters of
education, food, clothing, rents, wages, and work.
It is mentioned in McPherson’s History of the Rebellion, p. 392, that in
a letter making public his reasons for going to Washington and taking
his seat in Congress, Mr. James L. Pugh, a Representative from Alabama,
November 24, 1860, said: “The sole object of my visit is to promote the
cause of Secession.”
From the manner in which they acted after reaching Washington, it is not
unreasonable to suppose that most of those persons representing, in both
branches of Congress, the Southern States which afterwards seceded, came
to the National Capital with a similar object in view–taking their
salaries and mileages for services supposed to be performed for the
benefit of the very Government they were conspiring to injure, and
swearing anew the sacred oath to support and defend the very
Constitution which they were moving heaven and earth to undermine and
destroy!
not without interest:
“OXFORD, December 24, 1860.
“MY DEAR SIR:–I regretted having to leave Washington without
having with you a full conference as to the great events whose
shadows are upon us. The result of the election here is what the
most sanguine among us expected; that is, its general result is so.
It is as yet somewhat difficult to determine the distinctive
complexion of the convention to meet on the 7th of January. The
friends of Southern Independence, of firm and bona fide resistance,
won an overwhelming victory; but I doubt whether there is any
precise plan.
“No doubt a large majority of the Convention will be for separate
Secession. But unless intervening events work important changes of
sentiment, not all of those elected as resistance men will be for
immediate and separate Secession. Our friends in Pontotoc, Tippah,
De Soto and Pauola took grounds which fell far short of that idea,
though their resolutions were very firm in regard to Disunion and
an ultimate result.
“In the meantime the Disunion sentiment among the people is growing
every day more intense.
“Upon the whole, you have great cause for gratification in the
action of your State.
“The submissionists are routed, horse, foot, and dragoons, and any
concession by the North will fail to restore that sacred attachment
to the Union which was once so deeply radicated in the hearts of
our people. What they want now, is wise and sober leading. I
think that there might be more of dignity and prudent foresight in
the action of our State than have marked the proceedings of South
Carolina. I have often rejoiced that we have you to rest upon and
confide in. I do not know what we could do without you. That God
may preserve you to us, and that your mind may retain all its vigor
to carry us through these perilous times, is my most fervent
aspiration.
“I am as ever, and forever, your supporter, ally and friend.
“L. Q. C. LAMAR.
“COL. JEFF. DAVIS, Washington, D. C.”]
This was but a part of the deliberate, cold-blooded plan mapped out in
detail, early in the session succeeding the election of Mr. Lincoln, in
a secret Caucus of the Chief Plotters of the Treason. It was a secret
conference, but the programme resolved on, soon leaked out.
The following, which appeared in the Washington National Intelligencer
on Friday, January 11, 1861, tells the story of this stage of the Great
Conspiracy pretty clearly:
“The subjoined communication, disclosing the designs of those who have
undertaken to lead the movement now threatening a permanent dissolution
of the Union, comes to us from a distinguished citizen of the South
[understood to be Honorable Lemuel D. Evans, Representative from Texas
in the 34th Congress, from March 4, 1855, to March 3, 1857] who formerly
represented his State with great distinction in the popular branch of
Congress.
“Temporarily sojourning in this city he has become authentically
informed of the facts recited in the subjoined letter, which he
communicates to us under a sense of duty, and for the accuracy of which
he makes himself responsible.
“Nothing but assurances coming from such an intelligent, reliable source
could induce us to accept the authenticity of these startling
statements, which so deeply concern not only the welfare but the honor
of the Southern people.
“To them we submit, without present comment, the programme to which they
are expected to yield their implicit adhesion, without any scruples of
conscience as without any regard for their own safety.
“‘WASHINGTON, January 9, 1861.
“‘I charge that on last Saturday night (January 5th), a Caucus was held
in this city by the Southern Secession Senators from Florida, Georgia,
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and Texas. It was then and
there resolved in effect to assume to themselves the political power of
the South, and, to control all political and military operations for the
present, they telegraphed to complete the plan of seizing forts,
arsenals, and custom-houses, and advised the Conventions now in session,
and soon to assemble, to pass Ordinances for immediate Secession; but,
in order to thwart any operations of the Government here, the
Conventions of the Seceding States are to retain their representations
in the Senate and the House.
“‘They also advised, ordered, or directed the assembling of a Convention
of delegates from the Seceding States at Montgomery on the 13th of
February. This can of course only be done by the revolutionary
Conventions usurping the powers of the people, and sending delegates
over whom they will lose all control in the establishment of a
Provisional Government, which is the plan of the dictators.
“‘This Caucus also resolved to take the most effectual means to dragoon
the Legislatures of Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, and
Virginia into following the Seceding States. Maryland is also to be
influenced by such appeals to popular passion as have led to the
revolutionary steps which promise a conflict with the State and Federal
Governments in Texas.
“‘They have possessed themselves of all the avenues of information in
the South–the telegraph, the press, and the general control of the
postmasters. They also confidently rely upon defections in the army and
navy.
“‘The spectacle here presented is startling to contemplate. Senators
entrusted with the representative sovereignty of the States, and sworn
to support the Constitution of the United States, while yet acting as
the privy councillors of the President, and anxiously looked to by their
constituents to effect some practical plan of adjustment, deliberately
conceive a Conspiracy for the overthrow of the Government through the
military organizations, the dangerous secret order, the ‘Knights of the
Golden Circle,’ ‘Committees of Safety,’ Southern leagues, and other
agencies at their command; they have instituted as thorough a military
and civil despotism as ever cursed a maddened Country.
“‘It is not difficult to foresee the form of government which a
Convention thus hurriedly thrown together at Montgomery will irrevocably
fasten upon a deluded and unsuspecting people. It must essentially be
‘a Monarchy founded upon military principles,’ or it cannot endure.
Those who usurp power never fail to forge strong chains.
“‘It may be too late to sound the alarm. Nothing may be able to arrest
the action of revolutionary tribunals whose decrees are principally in
‘secret sessions.’ But I call upon the people to pause and reflect
before they are forced to surrender every principle of liberty, or to
fight those who are becoming their masters rather than their servants.
“‘ EATON”
“As confirming the intelligence furnished by our informant we may cite
the following extract from the Washington correspondence of yesterday’s
Baltimore Sun:
“‘The leaders of the Southern movement are consulting as to the best
mode of consolidating their interests into a Confederacy under a
Provisional Government. The plan is to make Senator Hunter, of
Virginia, Provisional President, and Jefferson Davis Commander-in-Chief
of the army of defense. Mr. Hunter possesses in a more eminent degree
the philosophical characteristics of Jefferson than any other statesman
now living. Colonel Davis is a graduate of West Point, was
distinguished for gallantry at Buena Vista, and served as Secretary of
War under President Pierce, and is not second to General Scott in
military science or courage.’
“As further confirmatory of the above, the following telegraphic
dispatch in the Charleston Mercury of January 7, 1861, is given:
“‘[From our Own Correspondent.]
“‘WASHINGTON, January 6.–The Senators from those of the Southern States
which have called Conventions of their people, met in caucus last night,
and adopted the following resolutions:
“‘Resolved, That we recommend to our respective States immediate
Secession.
“‘Resolved, That we recommend the holding of a General Convention of the
said States, to be holden in the city of Montgomery, Alabama, at some
period not later than the 15th day of February, 1861.’
“These resolutions were telegraphed this evening to the Conventions of
Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida. A third resolution is also known to
have been adopted, but it is of a confidential character, not to be
divulged at present. There was a good deal of discussion in the caucus
on the question of whether the Seceding States ought to continue their
delegations in Congress till the 4th of March, to prevent unfriendly
legislation, or whether the Representatives of the Seceding States
should all resign together, and leave a clear field for the opposition
to pass such bills, looking to Coercion, as they may see fit. It is
believed that the opinion that they should remain prevailed.”
Furthermore, upon the capture of Fernandina, Florida, in 1862, the
following letter was found and published. Senator Yulee, the writer,
was present and participated as one of the Florida Senators, in the
traitorous “Consultation” therein referred to–and hence its especial
value:
“WASHINGTON, January 7, 1861.
“My DEAR SIR:–On the other side is a copy of resolutions adopted at a
consultation of the Senators from the Seceding States–in which Georgia,
Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Texas, Mississippi, and Florida were
present.
“The idea of the meeting was that the States should go out at once, and
provide for the early organization of a Confederate Government, not
later than 15th February. This time is allowed to enable Louisiana and
Texas to participate. It seemed to be the opinion that if we left here,
force, loan, and volunteer Bills might be passed, which would put Mr.
Lincoln in immediate condition for hostilities; whereas, by remaining in
our places until the 4th of March, it is thought we can keep the hands
of Mr. Buchanan tied, and disable the Republicans from effecting any
legislation which will strengthen the hands of the incoming
Administration.
“The resolutions will be sent by the delegation to the President of the
Convention. I have not been able to find Mr. Mallory (his Senatorial
colleague) this morning. Hawkins (Representative from Florida) is in
Connecticut. I have therefore thought it best to send you this copy of
the resolutions.
“In haste, yours truly
“D. L. YULEE.
“JOSEPH FINEGAN, Esq.,
“‘Sovereignty Convention,’ Tallahassee, Fla.”
The resolutions “on the other side” of this letter, to which he refers,
are as follows:
“Resolved, 1–That in our opinion each of the Southern States should, as
soon as may be, Secede from the Union.
“Resolved, 2–That provision should be made for a Convention to organize
a Confederacy of the Seceding States, the Convention to meet not later
than the 15th of February, at the city of Montgomery, in the State of
Alabama.
“Resolved, That in view of the hostile legislation that is threatened
against the Seceding States, and which may be consummated before the 4th
of March, we ask instructions whether the delegations are to remain in
Congress until that date for the purpose of defeating such legislation.
“Resolved, That a committee be and are hereby appointed, consisting of
Messrs. Davis, Slidell, and Mallory, to carry out the objects of this
meeting.”
In giving this letter to the World–from its correspondent accompanying
the expedition–the New York Times of March 15, 1862, made these
forcible and clear-headed comments:
“The telegraphic columns of the Times of January 7, 1861, contained the
following Washington dispatch: ‘The Southern Senators last night
(January 5th) held a conference, and telegraphed to the Conventions of
their respective States to advise immediate Secession.’ Now, the
present letter is a report by Mr. Yulee, who was present at this
‘consultation’ as he calls it, of the resolutions adopted on this
occasion, transmitted to the said Finegan, who by the way, was a member
of the ‘Sovereign Convention’ of Florida, then sitting in the town of
Tallahassee.
“It will thus be seen that this remarkable letter, which breathes
throughout the spirit of the Conspirator, in reality lets us into one of
the most important of the numerous Secret Conclaves which the Plotters
of Treason then held in the Capital. It was then, as it appears, that
they determined to strike the blow and precipitate their States into
Secession. But at the same time they resolved that it would be
imprudent for them openly to withdraw, as in that case Congress might
pass ‘force, loan, and volunteer bills,’ which would put Mr. Lincoln in
immediate condition for hostilities. No, no! that would not do. (So
much patriotic virtue they half suspected, half feared, was left in the
Country.) On the contrary, ‘by remaining in our places until the 4th of
March it is thought we can keep the hands of Mr. Buchanan tied, and
disable the Republicans from effecting any legislation which will
strengthen the hands of the incoming Administration.’ Ah what a tragic
back-ground, full of things unutterable, is there!
“It appears, however, that events were faster than they, and instead of
being able to retain their seats up to the 4th of March, they were able
to remain but a very few weeks. Mr. Davis withdrew on the 21st of
January, just a fortnight after this ‘consultation.’ But for the rest,
mark how faithfully the programme here drawn up by this knot of Traitors
in secret session was realized. Each of the named States represented by
this Cabal did, ‘as soon as may be, Secede from the Union’–the
Mississippi Convention passing its Ordinance on the heels of the receipt
of these resolutions, on the 9th of January; Florida and Alabama on the
11th; Louisiana on the 26th, and Texas on the 1st of February; while the
‘organization of the Confederate Government’ took place at the very time
appointed, Davis being inaugurated on the 18th of February.
“And here is another Plot of the Traitors brought to light. These very
men, on withdrawing from the Senate, urged that they were doing so in
obedience to the command of their respective States. As Mr. Davis put
it, in his parting speech, ‘the Ordinance of Secession having passed the
Convention of his State, he felt obliged to obey the summons, and retire
from all official connection with the Federal Government.’ This letter
of Mr. Yulee’s clearly reveals that they had themselves pushed their
State Conventions to the adoption of the very measure which they had the
hardihood to put forward as an imperious ‘summons’ which they could not
disobey. It is thus that Treason did its Work.”
CHAPTER XII.
COPPERHEADISM VS. UNION DEMOCRACY.
When we remember that it was on the night of the 5th of January, 1861,
that the Rebel Conspirators in the United States Senate met and plotted
their confederated Treason, as shown in the Yulee letter, given in the
preceding Chapter of this work, and that on the very next day, January
6, 1861, Fernando Wood, then Mayor of the great city of New York, sent
in to the Common Council of that metropolis, his recommendation that New
York city should Secede from its own State, as well as the United
States, and become “a Free City,” which, said he, “may shed the only
light and hope of a future reconstruction of our once blessed
Confederacy,” it is impossible to resist the conviction that this
extraordinary movement of his, was inspired and prompted, if not
absolutely directed, by the secret Rebel Conclave at Washington. It
bears within itself internal evidences of such prompting.
Thus, when Mayor Wood states the case in the following words, he seems
to be almost quoting word for word an instruction received by him from
these Rebel leaders–in connection with their plausible argument,
upholding it. Says he:
“Much, no doubt, can be said in favor of the justice and policy of a
separation. It may be said that Secession or revolution in any of the
United States would be subversive of all Federal authority, and, so far
as the central Government is concerned, the resolving of the community
into its original elements–that, if part of the States form new
combinations and, Governments, other States may do the same. Then it
may be said, why should not New York city, instead of supporting by her
contributions in revenue two-thirds of the expenses of the United
States, become also equally independent? As a Free City, with but
nominal duty on imports, her local Government could be supported without
taxation upon her people. Thus we could live free from taxes, and have
cheap goods nearly duty free. In this she would have the whole and
united support of the Southern States, as well as all the other States
to whose interests and rights under the Constitution she has always been
true.”
That is the persuasive casuistry peculiar to the minds of the Southern
Secession leaders. It is naturally followed by a touch of that self-
confident bluster, also at that time peculiar to Southern lips-as
follows:
“It is well for individuals or communities to look every danger square
in the face, and to meet it calmly and bravely. As dreadful as the
severing of the bonds that have hitherto united the States has been in
contemplation, it is now apparently a stern and inevitable fact. We
have now to meet it, with all the consequences, whatever they may be.
If the Confederacy is broken up the Government is dissolved, and it
behooves every distinct community, as well as every individual, to take
care of themselves.
“When Disunion has become a fixed and certain fact, why may not New York
disrupt the bands which bind her to a venal and corrupt master–to a
people and a Party that have plundered her revenues, attempted to ruin
her commerce, taken away the power of self-government, and destroyed the
Confederacy of which she was the proud Empire City? * * *”
After thus restating, as it were, the views and “arguments” of the Rebel
Junta, as we may presume them to have been pressed on him, he becomes
suddenly startled at the Conclave’s idea of meeting “all the
consequences, whatever they may be,” and, turning completely around,
with blanching pen, concludes:
“But I am not prepared to recommend the violence implied in these views.
In stating this argument in favor of freedom, ‘peaceably if we can,
forcibly if we must,’ let me not be misunderstood. The redress can be
found only in appeals to the magnanimity of the people of the whole
State.” * * *
If “these views” were his own, and not those of the Rebel Conclave, he
would either have been “prepared to recommend the violence implied in
them,” or else he would have suppressed them altogether. But his
utterance is that of one who has certain views for the first time placed
before him, and shrinks from the consequences of their advocacy–shrinks
from “the violence implied” in them–although for some reason he dares
not refuse to place those views before the people.
And, in carrying out his promise to do so–“In stating this argument,”
presumably of the Rebel Conclave, “in favor of freedom, ‘peaceably if we
can, forcibly if we must'”–the language used is an admission that the
argument is not his own. Were it his own, would he not have said in
“making” it, instead of in “stating” it? Furthermore, had he been
“making” it of his own accord, he would hardly have involved himself in
such singular contradictions and explanations as are here apparent. He
was plainly “stating” the Rebel Conclave’s argument, not making one
himself. He was obeying orders, under the protest of his fears. And
those fears forced his trembling pen to write the saving-clause which
“qualifies” the Conclave’s second-hand bluster preceding it.
That the Rebels hoped for Northern assistance in case of Secession, is
very clear from many speeches made prior to and soon after the election
of Mr. Lincoln to the Presidency–and from other sources of information.
Thus we find in a speech made by Representative L. M. Keitt, of South
Carolina, in Charleston, November, 1860, the following language,
reported by the Mercury:
“But we have been threatened. Mr. Amos Kendall wrote a letter, in which
he said to Colonel Orr, that if the State went out, three hundred
thousand volunteers were ready to march against her. I know little
about Kendall–and the less the better. He was under General Jackson;
but for him the Federal treasury seemed to have a magnetic attraction.
“Jackson was a pure man, but he had too many around him who made
fortunes far transcending their salaries. [Applause.] And this Amos
Kendall had the same good fortune under Van Buren. He (Kendall)
threatened us on the one side, and John Hickman on the other. John
Hickman said, defiantly, that if we went out of the Union, eighteen
millions of Northern men would bring us back.
“Let me tell you, there are a million of Democrats in the North who,
when the Black Republicans attempt to march upon the South, will be
found a wall of fire in the front. [Cries of ‘that’s so,’ and
applause.]”
Harper’s Weekly of May 28, 1864, commenting on certain letters of M. F.
Maury and others, then just come to light, said:
“How far Maury and his fellow-conspirators were justified in their hopes
of seducing New Jersey into the Rebellion, may be gathered from the
correspondence that took place, in the spring of 1861, between Ex-
Governor Price, of New Jersey, who was one of the representatives from
that State in the Peace Congress, and L. W. Burnet, Esq., of Newark.
“Mr. Price, in answering the question what ought New Jersey to do, says:
‘I believe the Southern confederation permanent. The proceeding has
been taken with forethought and deliberation–it is no hurried impulse,
but an irrevocable act, based upon the sacred, as was supposed, equality
of the States; and in my opinion every Slave State will in a short
period of time be found united in one Confederacy. * * * Before that
event happens, we cannot act, however much we may suffer in our material
interests. It is in that contingency, then, that I answer the second
part of your question:–What position for New Jersey will best accord
with her interests, honor, and the patriotic instincts of her people? I
say emphatically she would go with the South from every wise,
prudential, and patriotic reason.’
“Ex-Governor Price proceeds to say that he is confident the States of
Pennsylvania and New York will ‘choose also to cast their lot with the
South, and after them, the Western and Northwestern States.'”
The following resolution,* was adopted with others, by a meeting of
Democrats held January 16, 1861, at National Hall, Philadelphia, and has
been supposed to disclose “a plan, of which ex-Governor Price was likely
aware:”
“Twelfth–That in the deliberate judgment of the Democracy of
Philadelphia, and, so far as we know it, of Pennsylvania, the
dissolution of the Union by the separation of the whole South, a result
we shall most sincerely lament, may release this Commonwealth to a large
extent from the bonds which now connect her with the Confederacy, except
so far as for temporary convenience she chooses to submit to them, and
would authorize and require her citizens, through a Convention, to be
assembled for that purpose, to determine with whom her lot should be
cast, whether with the North and the East, whose fanaticism has
precipitated this misery upon us, or with our brethren of the South,
whose wrongs we feel as our own; or whether Pennsylvania should stand by
herself, as a distinct community, ready when occasion offers, to bind
together the broken Union, and resume her place of loyalty and
devotion.”
Senator Lane of Oregon, replying to Senator Johnson of Tennessee,
December 19, 1860, in the United States Senate, and speaking of and for
the Northern Democracy, said:
“They will not march with him under his bloody banner, or Mr. Lincoln’s,
to invade the soil of the gallant State of South Carolina, when she may
withdraw from a Confederacy that has refused her that equality to which
she is entitled, as a member of the Union, under the Constitution. On
the contrary, when he or any other gentleman raises that banner and
attempts to subjugate that gallant people, instead of marching with him,
we will meet him there, ready to repel him and his forces. He shall not
bring with him the Northern Democracy to strike down a people contending
for rights that have been refused them in a Union that ought to
recognize the equality of every member of the Confederacy. * * * I now
serve notice that, when War is made upon that gallant South for
withdrawing from a Union which refuses them their rights, the Northern
Democracy will not join in the crusade. THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WILL HAVE
WAR ENOUGH AT HOME. THE DEMOCRACY OF THE NORTH NEED NOT CROSS THE
BORDER TO FIND AN ENEMY.”
The following letter from Ex-President Pierce is in the same misleading
strain:
“CLARENDON HOTEL, January 6, 1860.–[This letter was captured, at Jeff.
Davis’s house in Mississippi, by the Union troops.]
“MY DEAR FRIEND:–I wrote you an unsatisfactory note a day or two since.
I have just had a pleasant interview with Mr. Shepley, whose courage and
fidelity are equal to his learning and talents. He says he would rather
fight the battle with you as the standard-bearer in 1860, than under the
auspices of any other leader. The feeling and judgment of Mr. S. in
this relation is, I am confident, rapidly gaining ground in New England.
Our people are looking for ‘the coming man,’ one who is raised by all
the elements of his character above the atmosphere ordinarily breathed
by politicians, a man really fitted for this exigency by his ability,
courage, broad statesmanship, and patriotism. Colonel Seymour (Thomas
H.) arrived here this morning, and expressed his views in this relation
in almost the identical language used by Mr. Shepley.
“It is true that, in the present state of things at Washington and
throughout the country, no man can predict what changes two or three
months may bring forth. Let me suggest that, in the running debates in
Congress, full justice seems to me not to have been done to the
Democracy of the North. I do not believe that our friends at the South
have any just idea of the state of feeling, hurrying at this moment to
the pitch of intense exasperation, between those who respect their
political obligations and those who have apparently no impelling power
but that which fanatical passion on the subject of Domestic Slavery
imparts.
“Without discussing the question of right, of abstract power to Secede,
I have never believed that actual disruption of the Union can occur
without blood; and if, through the madness of Northern Abolitionism,
that dire calamity must come, THE FIGHTING WILL NOT BE ALONG MASON’S AND
DIXON’S LINE MERELY. IT [WILL] BE WITHIN OUR OWN BORDERS, IN OUR OWN
STREETS, BETWEEN THE TWO CLASSES OF CITIZENS TO WHOM I HAVE REFERRED.
Those who defy law and scout Constitutional obligations will, if we ever
reach the arbitrament of arms, FIND OCCUPATION ENOUGH AT HOME.
“Nothing but the state of Mrs. Pierce’s health would induce me to leave
the Country now, although it is quite likely that my presence at home
would be of little service.
“I have tried to impress upon our people, especially in New Hampshire
and Connecticut, where the only elections are to take place during the
coming spring, that while our Union meetings are all in the right
direction, and well enough for the present, they will not be worth the
paper upon which their resolutions are written unless we can overthrow
political Abolitionism at the polls and repeal the Unconstitutional and
obnoxious laws which, in the cause of ‘personal liberty,’ have been
placed upon our statute-books. I shall look with deep interest, and not
without hope, for a decided change in this relation.
“Ever and truly your friend,
“FRANKLIN PIERCE.
“Hon. JEFF. DAVIS,
“Washington, D. C.”
But let us turn from contemplating the encouragements to Southern
Treason and Rebellion, held out by Northern Democratic Copperheads, to
the more pleasing spectacle of Loyalty and Patriotism exhibited by the
Douglas wing of Democracy.
Immediately after Sumter, and while the President was formulating his
Message, calling for 75,000 volunteers, Douglas called upon him at the
White House, regretted that Mr. Lincoln did not propose to call for
thrice as many; and on the 18th of April, having again visited the White
House, wrote, and gave the following dispatch to the Associated Press,
for circulation throughout the Country:
“April 18, 1861, Senator Douglas called on the President, and had an
interesting conversation on the present condition of the Country. The
substance of it was, on the part of Mr. Douglas, that while he was
unalterably opposed to the administration in all its political issues,
he was prepared to fully sustain the President in the exercise of all
his Constitutional functions, to preserve the Union, maintain the
Government, and defend the Federal Capital. A firm policy and prompt
action was necessary. The Capital was in danger and must be defended at
all hazards, and at any expense of men and money. He spoke of the
present and future without any reference to the past.”
It is stated of this meeting and its immediate results: “The President
was deeply gratified by the interview. To the West, Douglas
telegraphed, ‘I am for my Country and against all its assailants.’ The
fire of his patriotism spread to the masses of the North, and Democrat
and Republican rallied to the support of the flag. In Illinois the
Democratic and Republican presses vied with each other in the utterance
of patriotic sentiments. * * * Large and numerously attended Mass
meetings met, as it were with one accord, irrespective of parties, and
the people of all shades of political opinions buried their party
hatchets. Glowing and eloquent orators exhorted the people to ignore
political differences in the present crisis, join in the common cause,
and rally to the flag of the Union and the Constitution. It was a noble
truce. From the many resolutions of that great outpouring of patriotic
sentiment, which ignored all previous party ties, we subjoin the
following:
“‘Resolved, that it is the duty of all patriotic citizens of Illinois,
without distinction of party or sect, to sustain the Government through
the peril which now threatens the existence of the Union; and of our
Legislature to grant such aid of men and money as the exigency of the
hour and the patriotism of our people shall demand.’
“Governor Yates promptly issued his proclamation, dated the 15th of
April, convening the Legislature for the 23rd inst. in Extraordinary
Session.
* * * * * * *
“On the evening of the 25th of April, Mr. Douglas, who had arrived at
the Capital the day before, addressed the General Assembly and a densely
packed audience, in the Hall of Representatives, in that masterly
effort, which must live and be enshrined in the hearts of his countrymen
so long as our Government shall endure. Douglas had ever delighted in
the mental conflicts of Party strife; but now, when his Country was
assailed by the red hand of Treason, he was instantly divested of his
Party armor and stood forth panoplied only in the pure garb of a true
Patriot.
“He taught his auditory–he taught his Country, for his speeches were
telegraphed all over it–the duty of patriotism at that perilous hour of
the Nation’s Life. He implored both Democrats and Republicans to lay
aside their Party creeds and Platforms; to dispense with Party
Organizations and Party Appeals; to forget that they were ever divided
until they had first rescued the Government from its assailants. His
arguments were clear, convincing, and unanswerable; his appeals for the
Salvation of his Country, irresistible. It was the last speech, but
one, he ever made.”
Among other pithy and patriotic points made by him in that great speech
–[July 9, 1861.]–were these: “So long as there was a hope of a
peaceful solution, I prayed and implored for Compromise. I have spared
no effort for a peaceful solution of these troubles; I have failed, and
there is but one thing to do–to rally under the flag.” “The South has
no cause of complaint.” “Shall we obey the laws or adopt the Mexican
system of War, on every election.” “Forget Party–all remember only
your Country.” “The shortest road to Peace is the most tremendous
preparation for War.” “It is with a sad heart and with a grief I have
never before experienced, that I have to contemplate this fearful
Struggle. * * * But it is our duty to protect the Government and the
flag from every assailant, be he who he may.”
In Chicago, Douglas repeated his patriotic appeal for the preservation
of the Union, and tersely declared that “There can be no Neutrals in
this War–only Patriots and Traitors.” In that city he was taken with a
mortal illness, and expired at the Tremont House, June 3, 1861–just one
month prior to the meeting of the called Session of Congress.
The wonderful influence wielded by Douglas throughout the North, was
well described afterward by his colleague, Judge Trumbull, in the
Senate, when he said: “His course had much to do in producing that
unanimity in support of the Government which is now seen throughout the
Loyal States. The sublime spectacle of twenty million people rising as
one man in vindication of Constitutional Liberty and Free Government,
when assailed by misguided Rebels and plotting Traitors, is, to a
considerable extent due to his efforts. His magnanimous and patriotic
course in this trying hour of his Country’s destiny was the crowning act
of his life.”
And Senator McDougall of California–his life-long friend–in describing
the shock of the first intelligence that reached him, of his friend’s
sudden death, with words of even greater power, continued: “But, as,
powerless for the moment to resist the tide of emotions, I bowed my head
in silent grief, it came to me that the Senator had lived to witness the
opening of the present unholy War upon our Government; that, witnessing
it, from the Capital of his State, as his highest and best position, he
had sent forth a War-cry worthy of that Douglass, who, as ancient
legends tell, with the welcome of the knightly Andalusian King, was
told,
‘”Take thou the leading of the van,
And charge the Moors amain;
There is not such a lance as thine
In all the hosts of Spain.’
“Those trumpet notes, with a continuous swell, are sounding still
throughout all the borders of our Land. I heard them upon the mountains
and in the valleys of the far State whence I come. They have
communicated faith and strength to millions. * * * I ceased to grieve
for Douglas. The last voice of the dead Douglas I felt to be stronger
than the voice of multitudes of living men.”
And here it may not be considered out of place for a brief reference to
the writer’s own position at this time; especially as it has been much
misapprehended and misstated. One of the fairest of these statements*
runs thus:
175.]
“It is said that Logan did not approve the great speech made by Senator
Douglas, at Springfield, in April, 1861, wherein he took the bold ground
that in the contest which was then clearly imminent to him, between the
North and the South, that there could be but two parties, Patriots and
Traitors. But granting that there was a difference between Douglas and
Logan at that time, it did not relate to their adhesion to the Cause of
their Country Logan had fought for the Union upon the plains of Mexico,
and again stood ready to give his life, if need be, for his Country,
even amid the cowardly slanders that were then following his pathway.
“The difference between Douglas and Logan was this: Mr. Douglas was
fresh from an extended campaign in the dissatisfied Sections of the
Southern States, and he was fully apprised of their intention to attempt
the overthrow of the Union, and was therefore in favor of the most
stupendous preparations for War.
“Mr. Logan, on the other hand, believed in exhausting all peaceable
means before a resort to Arms, and in this he was like President
Lincoln; but when he saw there was no alternative but to fight, he was
ready and willing for armed resistance, and, resigning his seat in
Congress, entered the Army, as Colonel of the Thirty-first Illinois
Infantry, and remained in the field in active service until Peace was
declared.”
This statement is, in the main, both fair and correct.
It is no more correct, however, in intimating that “Logan did not
approve the great speech made by Senator Douglas, at Springfield, in
April, 1861, wherein he took the bold ground that in the contest which
was then clearly imminent to him, between the North and the South, that
there could be but two parties, Patriots and Traitors,” than others have
been in intimating that he was disloyal to the Union, prior to the
breaking out of hostilities–a charge which was laid out flat in the
Senate Chamber, April 19, 1881.
alluded to:
“In an early part of this work the base charge that Logan was not
loyal before the War has been briefly touched on. It may be well
here to touch on it more fully. As was then remarked, the only man
that ever dared insinuate to Logan’s face that he was a Secession
sympathizer before the War, was Senator Ben Hill of Georgia, in the
United States Senate Chamber, March 30, 1881; and Logan instantly
retorted: ‘Any man who insinuates that I sympathized with it at
that time insinuates what is false,’ and Senator Hill at once
retracted the insinuation.”
“Subsequently, April 19, 1881, Senator Logan, in a speech,
fortified with indisputable record and documentary evidence,
forever set at rest the atrocious calumny. From that record it
appears that on the 17th December, 1860, while still a Douglas
Democrat, immediately after Lincoln’s election, and long before his
inauguration, and before even the first gun of the war was fired,
Mr. Logan, then a Representative in the House, voted affirmatively
on a resolution, offered by Morris of Illinois, which declared an
‘immovable attachment’ to ‘our National Union,’ and ‘that it is our
patriotic duty to stand by it as our hope in peace and our defense
in war;’ that on the 7th January, 1861, Mr. Adrian having offered
the following ‘Resolved, That we fully approve of the bold and
patriotic act of Major Anderson in withdrawing from Fort Moultrie
to Fort Sumter, and of the determination of the President to
maintain that fearless officer in his present position; and that we
will support the President in all constitutional measures to
enforce the laws and preserve the Union’–Mr. Logan, in casting his
vote, said: ‘As the resolution receives my unqualified approval, I
vote Aye;’ and that further on the 5th of February, 1861, before
the inauguration of President Lincoln, in a speech made by Logan in
the House in favor of the Crittenden Compromise measures, he used
the following language touching Secession:
“‘Sir, I have always denied, and do yet deny, the right of
Secession. There is no warrant for it in the Constitution. It is
wrong, it is unlawful, unconstitutional, and should be called by
the right name–revolution. No good, sir, can result from it, but
much mischief may. It is no remedy for any grievances. I hold
that all grievances can be much easier redressed inside the Union
than out of it.’
“In that same speech he also * * * said:
“‘I have been taught that the preservation of this glorious Union,
with its broad flag waving over us as the shield for our protection
on land and on sea, is paramount to all the parties and platforms
that ever have existed or ever can exist. I would, to day, if I
had the power, sink my own party and every other one, with all
their platforms, into the vortex of ruin, without heaving a sigh or
shedding a tear, to save the Union, or even stop the revolution
where it is.’
“In this most complete speech of vindication–which Senator Logan
said he put upon record, ‘First, that my children, after me, may
not have these slanders thrown in their faces without the power of
dispelling or refuting them; and second, that they may endure in
this Senate Chamber, so that it may be a notice to Senators of all
parties and all creeds that hereafter, while I am here in the
Senate, no insinuation of that kind will be submitted to by me,’–
the proofs of the falsity of the charge were piled mountain-high,
and among them the following voluntary statements from two
Democratic Senators, who were with him before the War, in the House
of Representatives:
“‘United States Senate Chamber,
WASHINGTON, April 14, 1881.
“‘DEAR SIR: In a discussion in the Senate a few weeks since you
referred to the fact that a Southern Senator, who had served with
you in Congress before the War, could testify that during your term
of service there you gave no encouragement to the Secession of the
Southern States, adding, however, that you did not ask such
testimony. I was not sure at the time that your reference was to
me, as Senator Pugh of Alabama, was also a member of that Congress.
“‘Since then, having learned that your reference was to me, I
propose on the floor of the Senate, should suitable occasion offer,
to state what I know of your position and views at the time
referred to. But, as I may be absent from the Senate for some
time, I deem it best to give you this written statement, with full
authority to use it in any way that seems proper to you.
“‘When you first came to Congress in —-, you were a very ardent
and impetuous Democrat. In the division which took place between
Mr. Douglas and his friends, on the one hand, and the Southern
Democrats, on the other, you were a warm and uncompromising
supporter of Mr. Douglas; and in the course of that convention you
became somewhat estranged from your party associates in the South.
In our frequent discussions upon the subjects of difference, I
never heard a word of sympathy from your lips with Secession in
either theory or practice. On the contrary, you were vehement in
your opposition to it.’
“‘I remember well a conversation I had with you just before leaving
Washington to become a candidate for the Secession convention. You
expressed the deep regret you felt at my proposed action, and
deplored the contemplated movement in terms as strong as any I
heard from any Republican.’
Yours truly,
“‘L. Q. C. LAMAR
“‘Hon. JOHN A. LOGAN.
“United States Senate, Washington, D. C.’
“Senate Chamber, April 14, 1881.
“‘Having read the above statement of Senator Lamar, I fully concur
with him in my recollection of your expressions and action in
opposition to Secession.
Truly yours, J. L. PUGH.’
“At the conclusion of Senator Logan’s speech of refutation, Senator
Brown of Georgia (Democrat) said:
“‘Our newspapers may have misrepresented his position. I am now
satisfied they did. I have heard the Senator’s statement with
great interest, and I take pleasure in saying–for I had some idea
before that there was some shadow of truth in this report–that I
think his vindication’ is full, complete, and conclusive.’
“‘I recollect very well during the war, when I was Governor of my
State and the Federal army was invading it, to have had a large
force of militia aiding the Confederate army, and that Gen. Logan
was considered by us as one of the ablest, most gallant, and
skillful leaders of the Federal army. We had occasion to feel his
power, and we learned to respect him.’
“Senator Beck, of Kentucky (Democrat), referring to the fact that
he was kept out of the House at one time, and a great many
suggestions had been made to him as to General Logan, continued:
“‘As I said the other day, I never proposed to go into such things,
and never have done so; but at that time General Frank Blair was
here, and I submitted many of the papers I received to him,–I
never thought of using any of them,–and I remember the remark that
he made to me: Beck, John Logan was one of the hardest fighters of
the war; and when many men who were seeking to whistle him down the
wind because of his politics when the war began, were snugly fixed
in safe places, he was taking his life in his hand wherever the
danger was greatest–and I tore up every paper I got, and burnt it
in the fire before his eyes.’
“Senator Dawes of Massachusetts (Republican), also took occasion to
say:
“Mr. President, I do not know that anything which can be said on
this side would be of any consequence to the Senator from Illinois
in this matter. But I came into the House of Representatives at
the same session that the Senator did.
“‘He was at that time one of the most intense of Democrats, and I
was there with him when the Rebellion first took root and
manifested itself in open and flagrant war; and I wish to say as a
Republican of that day, when the Senator from Illinois was a
Democrat, that at the earliest possible moment when the Republican
Party was in anxiety as to the position of the Northern Democracy
on the question of forcible assault on the Union, nothing did they
hail with more delight than the early stand which the Senator from
Illinois, from the Democratic side of the House, took upon the
question of resistance to the Government of the United States.
“I feel that it is right that I should state that he was among the
first, if not the very first, of the Northern Democrats who came
out openly and declared, whatever may have been their opinion about
the doctrines of the Republican Party, that when it came to a
question of forcible resistance, they should be counted on the side
of the Government, and in co-operation with the Republican Party in
the attempt to maintain its authority.’
“‘I am very glad, whether it be of any service or not, to bear this
testimony to the early stand the Senator from Illinois took while
he was still a Democrat, and the large influence he exerted upon
the Northern Democracy, which kept it from being involved in the
condition and in the work of the Southern Democracy at that
time.'”]
So far from this being the case, the fact is–and it is here mentioned
in part to bring out the interesting point that, had he lived, Douglas
would have been no idle spectator of the great War that was about to be
waged–that when Douglas visited Springfield, Illinois, to make that
great speech in the latter part of April, 1861, the writer went there
also, to see and talk over with him the grave situation of affairs, not
only in the Nation generally, but particularly in Illinois. And on that
occasion Mr. Douglas said to him, substantially: “The time has now
arrived when a man must be either for or against his Country. Indeed so
strongly do I feel this, and that further dalliance with this question
is useless, that I shall myself take steps to join the Array, and fight
for the maintenance of the Union.”
To this the writer replied that he was “equally well convinced that each
and every man must take his stand,” and that he also “purposed at an
early day to raise a Regiment and draw the sword in that Union’s
defense.”
This was after Sumter, and only seventy days before Congress was to meet
in Called Session. When that session met, Douglas had, weeks before,
gone down to the grave amid the tears of a distracted Nation, with the
solemn injunction upon his dying lips: “Obey the Laws and Defend the
Constitution”–and the writer had returned to Washington, to take his
seat in Congress, with that determination still alive in his heart.
In fact there had been all along, substantial accord between Mr. Douglas
and the writer. There really was no “difference between Douglas and
Logan” as to “preparations for War,” or in “exhausting all Peaceable
means before a resort to Arms,” and both were in full accord with
President Lincoln on these points.
Let us see if this is not of record: Take the writer’s speech in the
House of Representatives, February 5, 1861, and it will be seen that he
said: “I will go as far as any man in the performance of a
Constitutional duty to put down Rebellion, to suppress Insurrection, and
to enforce the Laws.” Again, he said, “If all the evils and calamities
that have ever happened since the World began, could be gathered in one
Great Catastrophe, its horrors could not eclipse, in their frightful
proportions, the Drama that impends over us.”
From these extracts it is plain enough that even at this very early day
the writer fully understood the “frightful proportions” of the impending
struggle, and would “go as far as”–not only Mr. Douglas, but–“any man,
to put down Rebellion”–which necessarily involved War, and
“preparations for War.” But none the less, but rather the more, because
of the horrors which he foresaw must be inseparable from so terrible a
War, was he anxious by timely mutual Concessions–“by any sacrifice,” as
he termed it–if possible, to avert it.
He was ready to sink Party, self, and to accept any of the Propositions
to that end–Mr. Douglas’s among them.
In this attitude also he was in accord with Mr. Douglas, who, as well as
the writer, was ready to make any sacrifice, of Party or self; to
“exhaust every effort at peaceful adjustment,” before resorting to War.
The fact is they were much of the time in consultation, and always in
substantial accord.
In a speech made in the Senate, March 15, 1861, Mr. Douglas had reduced
the situation to the following three alternative points:
“1. THE RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION OF THE UNION by such Amendments to
the Constitution as will insure the domestic tranquillity, safety, and
equality of all the States, and thus restore peace, unity, and
fraternity, to the whole Country.
“2. A PEACEFUL DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION by recognizing the Independence
of such States as refuse to remain in the Union without such
Constitutional Amendments, and the establishment of a liberal system of
commercial and social intercourse with them by treaties of commerce and
amity.
“3. WAR, with a view to the subjugation and military occupation of those
States which have Seceded or may Secede from the Union.”
As a thorough Union man, he could never have agreed to a “Peaceful
Dissolution of the Union.” On the other hand he was equally averse to
War, because he held that “War is Disunion. War is final, eternal
Separation.” Hence, all his energies and talents were given to carrying
out his first-stated line of policy, and to persuading the Seceders to
accept what in that line was offered to them by the dominant party.
His speech in the Senate, March 25, 1861, was a remarkable effort in
that respect. Mr. Breckinridge had previously spoken, and had declared
that: “Whatever settlement may be made of other questions, this must be
settled upon terms that will give them [the Southern States] either a
right, in common with others, to emigrate into all the territory, or
will secure to them their rights on a principle of equitable division.”
Mr. Douglas replied: “Now, under the laws as they stand, in every
Territory of the United States, without any exception, a Southern man
can go with his Slave-property on equal terms with all other property.
* * * Every man, either from the North or South, may go into the
Territories with his property on terms of exact equality, subject to the
local law; and Slave-property stands on an equal footing with all other
kinds of property in the Territories of the United States. It now
stands on an equal footing in all the Territories for the first time.
“I have shown you that, up to 1859, little more than a year ago, it was
prohibited in part of the Territories. It is not prohibited anywhere
now. For the first time, under Republican rule, the Southern States
have secured that equality of rights in the Territories for their Slave-
property which they have been demanding so long.”
He held that the doctrine of Congressional prohibition in all the
Territories, as incorporated in the Wilmot proviso, had now been
repudiated by the Republicans of both Houses of Congress, who had “all
come over to Non-intervention and Popular Sovereignty;” that the “Wilmot
proviso is given up; that Congressional prohibition is given up; that
the aggressive policy is repudiated; and hereafter the Southern man and
the Northern man may move into the Territories with their Property on
terms of entire equality, without excepting Slaves or any other kind of
property.”
Continuing, he said: “What more do the Southern States want? What more
can any man demand? Non-intervention is all you asked. Will it be said
the South required in addition to this, laws of Congress to protect
Slavery in the Territories? That cannot be said; for only last May, the
Senate, by a nearly unanimous vote–a unanimous vote of the Southern
men, with one or two exceptions–declared that affirmative legislation
was not needed at this time. * * * What cause is there for further
alarm in the Southern States, so far as the Territories are concerned?
* * *
“I repeat, the South has got all they ever claimed in all the
Territories. * * * Then, sir, according to law, the Slaveholding
States have got equality in the Territories. How is it in fact. * * *
Now, I propose to show that they have got the actual equitable
partition, giving them more than they were disposed to demand.
“The Senator from Kentucky, * * * Mr. Crittenden, introduced a
proposition for an equitable partition. That proposition was, that
north of 36 30′ Slavery should be prohibited, and South of it should be
protected, by Territorial law. * * * What is now the case? It is true
the Crittenden proposition has not yet become part of the Constitution;
but it is also true that an equitable partition has been made by the
vote of the people themselves, establishing, maintaining, and protecting
Slavery in every inch of territory South of the thirty-seventh parallel,
giving the South half a degree more than the Crittenden Proposition.
“There stands your Slave-code in New Mexico protecting Slavery up to the
thirty-seventh degree as effectually as laws can be made to protect it.
There it stands the Law of the Land. Therefore the South has all below
the thirty-seventh parallel, while Congress has not prohibited Slavery
even North of it.
* * * * * *
“What more, then, is demanded? Simply that a Constitutional Amendment
shall be adopted, affirming–what? Precisely what every Republican in
both Houses of Congress has voted for within a month. Just do, by
Constitutional Amendment, what you have voted in the Senate and House of
Representatives, that is all. You are not even required to do that, but
merely to vote for a proposition submitting the question to the People
of the States whether they will make a Constitutional Amendment
affirming the equitable partition of the Territories which the People
have already made. * * *
“You may ask, why does the South want us to do it by Constitutional
Amendment, when we have just done it voluntarily by Law? The President
of the United States, in his Inaugural, has told you the reason. He has
informed you that all of these troubles grow out of the absence of a
Constitutional provision defining the power of Congress over the subject
of Slavery. * * * He thinks that the trouble has arisen from the
absence of such a Constitutional Provision, and suggests a National
Convention to enable the People to supply the defect, leaving the People
to say what it is, instead of dictating to them what it shall be.”
It may here be remarked that while Mr. Douglas held that “So far as the
doctrine of Popular Sovereignty and Nonintervention is concerned, the
Colorado Bill, the Nevada Bill, and the Dakota Bill, are identically the
same with the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, and in its precise language”–these
former Bills having been passed at the last Session of the 36th
Congress–the Republicans, on the contrary, held that neither in these
nor other measures had they abandoned any distinctive Republican
principle; while Breckinridge declared that they had passed those
Territorial Bills, without the Wilmot proviso, because they felt
perfectly secure in those Territories, with all the Federal patronage in
Republican hands.
However that may be, we have here, brought out in strong contrast, the
conciliatory feeling which inspired such Union men as Douglas, and the
strong and persistent efforts they made in behalf of Concession and
Peace up to a period only a few weeks before the bombardment of Sumter;
and the almost total revulsion in their sentiments after that event, as
to the only proper means to preserve the Union. For it was only then
that the truth, as it fell from Douglas’s lips at Springfield, was fully
recognized, to wit: that there was no half-way ground betwixt Patriotism
and Treason; that War was an existing fact; and that Patriots must arm
to defend and preserve the Union against the armed Traitors assailing
it.
At last, July 4, 1861, the Congress met, and proceeded at once with
commendable alacrity and patriotism, to the consideration and enactment
of measures sufficient to meet the extraordinary exigency, whether as
regards the raising and equipment of the vast bodies of Union volunteers
needed to put down Rebellion, or in the raising of those enormous
amounts of money which the Government was now, or might thereafter be,
called upon to spend like water in preserving the Union.
It was at this memorable Session, of little over one month, that the
chief of the great “War Measures” as they were termed, were enacted.
CHAPTER XIII.
THE STORM OF BATTLE
We have seen how Fort Sumter fell; how the patriotic North responded to
President Lincoln’s Call, for 75,000 three-months volunteers, with such
enthusiasm that, had there been a sufficiency of arms and accoutrements,
he might have had, within three months of that Call, an Army of 500,000
men in the field; how he had called for 42,000 three-years volunteers
early in May, besides swelling what little there was of a regular Army
by ten full regiments; and how a strict blockade of the entire Southern
Coast-line had not only been declared, but was now enforced and
respected.
General Butler, promoted Major-General for his Military successes at
Annapolis and Baltimore, was now in command of Fortress Monroe and
vicinity, with some 12,000 volunteers under him, confronted, on the
Peninsula, by a nearly equal number of Rebel troops, under Generals
Huger and Magruder–General Banks, with less than 10,000 Union troops,
occupying Baltimore, and its vicinage.
General Patterson, with some 20,000 Union troops–mostly Pennsylvania
militia–was at Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, with about an equal number
of the Enemy, under General Joseph E. Johnston, at Harper’s Ferry, on
the Potomac, watching him.
Some 50,000 Union troops were in camp, in and about Washington, on the
Virginia side, under the immediate command of Generals McDowell and
Mansfield–Lieutenant General Scott, at Washington, being in Chief-
command of the Union Armies–and, confronting these Union forces, in
Virginia, near the National Capital, were some 30,000 Rebel troops under
the command of General Beauregard, whose success in securing the
evacuation of Fort Sumter by its little garrison of half-starved Union
soldiers, had magnified him, in the eyes of the rebellious South, into
the proportions of a Military genius of the first order.
There had been no fighting, nor movements, worthy of special note, until
June 7th, when General Patterson advanced from Chambersburg,
Pennsylvania, to Hagerstown, Maryland. General Johnston at once
evacuated Harper’s Ferry, and retreated upon Winchester, Virginia.
General McClellan, in command of the Department of the Ohio, had,
however, crossed the Ohio river, and by the 4th of July, being at
Grafton, West Virginia, with his small Army of Union troops, to which a
greatly inferior Rebel force was opposed, commenced that successful
advance against it, which led, after Bull Run, to his being placed at
the head of all the Armies of the United States.
Subsequently Patterson crossed the Potomac, and after trifling away over
one month’s time, at last, on the 15th of July, got within nine miles of
Winchester and Johnston’s Army. Barring a spiritless reconnaissance,
Patterson–who was a fervent Breckinridge-Democrat in politics, and
whose Military judgment, as we shall see, was greatly influenced, if not
entirely controlled, by his Chief of staff, Fitz John Porter–never got
any nearer to the Enemy!
Instead of attacking the Rebel force, under Johnston, or at least
keeping it “employed,” as he was ordered to do by General Scott; instead
of getting nearer, and attempting to get between Winchester and the
Shenandoah River, as was suggested to him by his second in command,
General Sanford; and instead of permitting Sanford to go ahead, as that
General desired to, with his own 8,000 men, and do it himself; General
Patterson ordered him off to Charlestown–twelve miles to the Union left
and rear,–and then took the balance of his Army, with himself, to the
same place!
In other words, while he had the most positive and definite orders, from
General Scott, if not to attack and whip Johnston, to at least keep him
busy and prevent that Rebel General from forming a junction, via the
Manassas Gap railroad or otherwise, with Beauregard, Patterson
deliberately moved his Army further away from Winchester and gave to the
Enemy the very chance of escaping and forming that junction which was
essential to Rebel success in the vicinity of Manassas.
But for this disobedience of orders, Bull Run would doubtless have been
a great victory to the Union Arms, instead of a reverse, and the War,
which afterward lasted four years, might have been over in as many
months.
It is foreign to the design of this work, to present in it detailed
descriptions of the battles waged during the great War of the Rebellion
–it being the present intention of the writer, at some later day, to
prepare and publish another work devoted to such stirring Military
scenes. Yet, as it might seem strange and unaccountable for him to pass
by, at this time, without any description or comment, the first pitched
battle of the Rebellion, he is constrained to pause and view that
memorable contest. And first, it may be well to say a word of the
general topography of the country about the battle-field.
The Alleghany Mountains, or that part of them with which we have now to
do, stretch in three almost equidistant parallel ridges, from North-East
to South-West, through the heart of Old Virginia. An occasional pass,
or “Gap,” through these ridges, affords communication, by good roads,
between the enclosed parallel valleys and the Eastern part of that
State.
The Western of these Alleghany ridges bears the name of “Alleghany
Mountains” proper; the Eastern is called the “Blue Ridge;” while the
Middle Ridge, at its Northern end–which rests upon the Potomac, where
that river sweeps through three parallel ridges almost at right angles
to their own line of direction–is called the “Great North Mountain.”
The valley, between the Middle Ridge and the Blue Ridge, is known as the
Shenandoah Valley, taking its name from the Shenandoah River, which, for
more than one hundred miles, flows along the Western foot of the Blue
Ridge, toward the North-East, until it empties into the Potomac, at
Harper’s Ferry.
The Orange and Alexandria railroad runs from Alexandria,–on the
opposite bank of the Potomac from Washington, and a few miles below the
Capital,–in a general Southeasterly direction, to Culpepper Court-
House; thence Southerly to Gordonsville, where it joins the Virginia
Central–the Western branch of which runs thence through Charlotteville,
Staunton, and Covington, across the ridges and valleys of the
Alleghanies, while its Eastern branch, taking a general South-easterly
direction, crosses the Richmond and Fredricksburg railroad at Hanover
Junction, some twenty miles North of Richmond, and thence sweeps
Southerly to the Rebel capital.
It is along this Easterly branch of the Virginia Central that Rebel re-
enforcements will be hurried to Beauregard, from Richmond to
Gordonsville, and thence, by the Orange and Alexandria railroad, to
Manassas Junction.
Some twenty-five miles from Alexandria, a short railroad-feeder–which
runs from Strasburg, in the Shenandoah Valley, through the Blue Ridge,
at Manassas Gap, in an East-South-easterly direction–strikes the
Alexandria and Orange railroad. The point of contact is Manassas
Junction; and it is along this Manassas-Gap feeder that Johnston, with
his Army at Winchester–some twenty miles North-North-East of Strasburg-
expects, in case of attack by Patterson, to be re-enforced by
Beauregard; or, in case the latter is assailed, to go to his assistance,
after shaking off Patterson.
This little link of railroad, known as the Manassas Gap railroad, is
therefore an important factor in the game of War, now commencing in
earnest; and it had, as we shall see, very much to do, not only with the
advance of McDowell’s Union Army upon Bull Run, but also with the result
of the first pitched battle thereabout fought.
From Alexandria, some twelve miles to the Westward, runs a fine turnpike
road to Fairfax Court-House; thence, continuing Westward, but gradually
and slightly dipping award the South, it passes through Germantown,
Centreville, and Groveton, to Warrenton.
This “Warrenton Pike”–as it is termed–also plays a somewhat
conspicuous part, before, during, and after the Battle of Bull Run. For
most of its length, from Fairfax Court-House to Warrenton, the Warrenton
Pike pursues a course almost parallel with the Orange and Alexandria
railroad aforesaid, while the stream of Bull Run, pursuing a South-
easterly course, has a general direction almost parallel with that of
the Manassas Gap railroad.
We shall find that it is the diamond-shaped parallelogram, formed by the
obtuse angle junction of the two railroads on the South, and the
similarly obtuse-angled crossing of the stream of Bull Run by the
Warrenton Pike on the North, that is destined to become the historic
battle-field of the first “Bull Run,” or “Manassas;” and it is in the
Northern obtuse-angle of this parallelogram that the main fighting is
done, upon a spot not much more than one mile square, three sides of the
same being bounded respectively by the Bull Run stream, the Warrenton
Pike, which crosses it on a stone bridge, and the Sudley Springs road,
which crosses the Pike, at right-angles to it, near a stone house.
On the 3rd of June, 1861, General McDowell, in command of the Department
of North-Eastern Virginia, with head-quarters at Arlington, near
Washington, receives from Colonel Townsend, Assistant Adjutant-General
with Lieutenant-General Scott–who is in Chief command of all the Union
Forces, with Headquarters at Washington–a brief but pregnant
communication, the body of which runs thus: “General Scott desires you
to submit an estimate of the number and composition of a column to be
pushed toward Manassas Junction, and perhaps the Gap, say in four or
five days, to favor Patterson’s attack on Harper’s Ferry. The rumor is
that Arlington Heights will be attacked to-night.”
In response to this request, General McDowell submits, on the day
following, an estimate that “the actual entire force at the head of the
column should, for the purpose of carrying the position at Manassas and
of occupying both the road to Culpepper, and the one to the Gap, be as
much as 12,000 Infantry, two batteries of regular Artillery, and from
six to eight companies of Cavalry, with an available reserve, ready to
move forward from Alexandria by rail, of 5,000 Infantry and one heavy
field battery, rifled if possible; these numbers to be increased or
diminished as events may indicate.” This force of raw troops he
proposes to organize into field brigades under the command of “active
and experienced colonels” of the regular Army. And while giving this
estimate as to the number of troops necessary, he suggestively adds that
“in proportion to the numbers used will be the lives saved; and as we
have such numbers pressing to be allowed to serve, might it not be well
to overwhelm and conquer as much by the show of force as by the use of
it?”
Subsequently McDowell presents to General Scott, and Mr. Lincoln’s
Cabinet, a project of advance and attack, which is duly approved and
ordered to be put in execution. In that project or plan of operations,
submitted by verbal request of General Scott, near the end of June,–the
success of which is made contingent upon Patterson’s holding Johnston
engaged at Winchester in the Shenandoah Valley, and also upon Butler’s
holding the Rebel force near Fortress Monroe from coming to Beauregard’s
aid at Manassas Junction,–McDowell estimates Beauregard’s strength at
25,000, with a possible increase, bringing it up to 35,000 men. The
objective point in McDowell’s plan, is Manassas Junction, and he
proposes “to move against Manassas with a force of 30,000 of all arms,
organized into three columns, with a reserve of 10,000.”
McDowell is fully aware that the Enemy has “batteries in position at
several places in his front, and defensive works on Bull Run, and
Manassas Junction.” These batteries he proposes to turn. He believes
Bull Run to be “fordable at almost anyplace,”–an error which ultimately
renders his plan abortive,–and his proposition is, after uniting his
columns on the Eastern side of Bull Run, “to attack the main position by
turning it, if possible, so as to cut off communications by rail with
the South, or threaten to do so sufficiently to force the Enemy to leave
his intrenchments to guard them.”
In other words, assuming the Enemy driven back, by minor flanking
movements, or otherwise, upon his intrenched position at Bull Run, or
Manassas, the plan is to turn his right, destroy the Orange and
Alexandria railroad leading South, and the bridge at Bristol, so as to
cut off his supplies. This done, the Enemy–if nothing worse ensues for
him–will be in a “bad box.”
McDowell, however, has no idea that the Enemy will stand still to let
this thing be done. On the contrary, he is well satisfied that
Beauregard will accept battle on some chosen ground between Manassas
Junction and Washington.
On the afternoon of Tuesday, the 16th of July, the advance of McDowell’s
Army commences. That Army is organized into five divisions–four of
which accompany McDowell, while a fifth is left to protect the defensive
works of Washington, on the South bank of the Potomac. This latter, the
Fourth Division, commanded by Brigadier-General Theodore Runyon,
comprises eight unbrigaded New Jersey regiments of (three months, and
three years) volunteers–none of which take part in the ensuing
conflicts-at-arms.
The moving column consists of the First Division, commanded by
Brigadier-General Daniel Tyler, comprising four brigades, respectively
under Brigadier-General R. C. Schenck, and Colonels E. D. Keyes, W. T.
Sherman, and I. B. Richardson; the Second Division, commanded by Colonel
David Hunter, comprising two brigades, under Colonels Andrew Porter and
A. E. Burnside respectively; the Third Division, commanded by Colonel S.
P. Heintzelman, comprising three brigades, under Colonels W. B.
Franklin, O. B. Wilcox, and O. O. Howard, respectively; and the Fifth
Division, commanded by Colonel Dixon S. Miles, comprising two brigades,
under Colonels Lewis Blenker, and Thomas A. Davies, respectively.
Tyler’s Division leads the advance, moving along the Leesburg road to
Vienna, on our right, with orders to cross sharply to its left, upon
Fairfax Court House, the following (Wednesday) morning. Miles’s
Division follows the turnpike road to Annandale, and then moves, by the
Braddock road,–along which Braddock, a century before, had marched his
doomed army to disaster,–upon Fairfax Court House, then known to be
held by Bonham’s Rebel Brigade of South Carolinians. Hunter follows
Miles, to Annandale, and thence advances direct upon Fairfax, by the
turnpike road–McDowell’s idea being to bag Bonham’s Brigade, if
possible, by a simultaneous attack on the front and both flanks. But
the advance is too slow, and the Enemy’s outposts, both there and
elsewhere, have ample opportunity of falling safely back upon their main
position, behind the stream of Bull Run.
the War,” said: “At Fairfax Court House was the South Carolina
Brigade. And I do not suppose anything would have had a greater
cheering effect upon the troops, and perhaps upon the Country, than
the capture of that brigade. And if General Tyler could have got
down there any time in the forenoon instead of in the afternoon,
the capture of that brigade was beyond question. It was about
5,000 or 6,000 men, and Tyler had 12,000, at the same time that we
were pressing on in front. He did not get down there until in the
afternoon; none of us got forward in time.”]
This slowness is due to various causes. There is a pretty general
dread, for example, among our troops, of threatened ambuscades, and
hence the advance is more cautious than it otherwise would be. It is
thought the part of wisdom, as it were, to “feel the way.” The
marching, moreover, is new to our troops. General Scott had checked
McDowell when the latter undertook to handle eight regiments together,
near Washington, by intimating that he was “trying to make a show.”
Thus the very essential knowledge of how to manoeuvre troops in large
bodies, has been withheld from our Union generals, while the volunteer
regiments have either rusted in camp from inaction, or have been denied
the opportunity of acquiring that endurance and hardiness and discipline
which frequent movement of troops confers. Hence, all unused to the
discipline of the march, every moment some one falls out of line to
“pick blackberries, or to get water.” Says McDowell, in afterward
reporting this march: “They would not keep in the ranks, order as much
as you pleased. When they came where water was fresh, they would pour
the old water out of their canteens and fill them with fresh water; they
were not used to denying themselves much.”
Meantime, Heintzelman’s Division is also advancing, by cross-roads, more
to the left and South of the railroad line,–in accordance with
McDowell’s plan, which comprehends not only the bagging of Bonham, but
an immediate subsequent demonstration, by Tyler, upon Centreville and
beyond, while Heintzelman, supported by Hunter and Miles, shall swoop
across Bull Run, at Wolf Run Shoals, some distance below Union Mills,
turn the Enemy’s right, and cut off his Southern line of railroad
communications. Thus, by the evening of Wednesday, the 17th,
Heintzelman is at Sangster’s Station, while Tyler, Miles, and Hunter,
are at Fairfax.
It is a rather rough experience that now befalls the Grand Army of the
Union. All unused, as we have seen, to the fatigues and other hardships
of the march, the raw levies, of which it almost wholly consists, which
started bright and fresh, strong and hopeful, full of the buoyant ardor
of enthusiastic patriotism, on that hot July afternoon, only some thirty
hours back, are now dust-begrimed, footsore, broken down, exhausted by
the scorching sun, hungry, and without food,–for they have wasted the
rations with which they started, and the supply-trains have not yet
arrived. Thus, hungry and physically prostrated, “utterly played out,”
as many of them confess, and demoralized also by straggling and loss of
organization, they bivouac that night in the woods, and dream uneasy
dreams beneath the comfortless stars.
A mile beyond Fairfax Court House, on the Warrenton Turnpike, is
Germantown. It is here that Tyler’s Division has rested, on the night
of the 17th. At 7 o’clock on the morning of Thursday, the 18th, in
obedience to written orders from McDowell, it presses forward, on that
“Pike,” to Centreville, five miles nearer to the Enemy’s position behind
Bull Run–Richardson’s Brigade in advance–and, at 9 o’clock, occupies
it. Here McDowell has intended Tyler to remain, in accordance with the
plan, which he has imparted to him in conversation, and in obedience to
the written instructions to: “Observe well the roads to Bull Run and to
Warrenton. Do not bring on an engagement, but keep up the impression
that we are moving on Manassas,”–this advance, by way of Centreville,
being intended solely as a “demonstration” to mask the real movement,
which, as we have seen, is to be made by the other divisions across Wolf
Run Shoals, a point on Bull Run, some five or six miles below Union
Mills, and some seven miles below Blackburn’s Ford.
Upon the arrival of Richardson’s Brigade, Thursday morning, at
Centreville, it is found that, under cover of the darkness of the
previous night, the Enemy has retreated, in two bodies, upon Bull Run,
the one along the Warrenton Pike, the other (the largest) down the
ridge-road from Centreville to Blackburn’s Ford. Richardson’s Brigade
at once turns down the latter road and halts about a mile beyond
Centreville, at a point convenient to some springs of water. Tyler soon
afterward rides up, and, taking from that brigade two companies of light
Infantry and a squadron of Cavalry, proceeds, with Colonel Richardson,
to reconnoitre the Enemy, finding him in a strong position on the
opposite bank of Bull Run, at Blackburn’s Ford.
While this is going on, McDowell has ridden in a Southerly direction
down to Heintzelman’s Division, at Sangster’s Station, “to make
arrangements to turn the Enemy’s right, and intercept his communications
with the South,” but has found, owing to the narrowness and crookedness
of the roads, and the great distance that must be traversed in making
the necessary detour, that his contemplated movement is too risky to be
ventured. Hence he at once abandons his original plan of turning the
Enemy’s right, and determines on “going around his left, where the
country is more open, and the roads broad and good.”
McDowell now orders a concentration, for that night, of the four
divisions, with two days cooked rations in their haversacks, upon and
about Centreville,–the movement to commence as soon as they shall
receive expected commissariat supplies. But, later on the 18th,–
learning that his advance, under Tyler, has, against orders, become
engaged with the Enemy–he directs the concentration to be made at once.
Let us examine, for a moment, how this premature engagement comes about.
We left Tyler, accompanied by Richardson, with a squadron of Cavalry and
a battalion of light Infantry making a reconnaissance, on Thursday
morning the 18th, toward Blackburn’s Ford. They approach within a mile
of the ford, when they discover a Rebel battery on the farther bank of
Bull Run–so placed as to enfilade the road descending from their own
position of observation down to the ford,–strong Rebel infantry pickets
and skirmishing parties being in front.
Tyler at once orders up his two rifled guns, Ayres’ Battery, and
Richardson’s entire Brigade–and later, Sherman’s Brigade as a reserve.
As soon as they come up,–about noon-he orders the rifled guns into
battery on the crest of the hill, about one mile from, and looking down
upon, the Rebel battery aforesaid, and opens upon the Enemy; giving him
a dozen shells,–one of them making it lively for a body of Rebel
Cavalry which appears between the ford and Manassas.
The Rebel battery responds with half a dozen shots, and then ceases.
Tyler now orders Richardson to advance his brigade and throw out
skirmishers to scour the thick woods which cover the Bull Run bottom-
land. Richardson at once rapidly deploys the battalion of light
Infantry as skirmishers in advance of his brigade, pushes them forward
to the edge of the woods, drives in the skirmishers of the Enemy in fine
style, and supports their further advance into the woods, with the 1st
Massachusetts Regiment.
Meanwhile Tyler, discovering a favorable opening in the woods, “low down
on the bottom of the stream,” for a couple of howitzers in battery,
sends Captain Ayres of the 5th U. S. Artillery, and a detached section
(two 12-pound howitzers) of his battery, with orders to post it himself
on that spot, and sends Brackett’s squadron of the 2d Cavalry to his
support.
No sooner does Ayres open fire on the Enemy, than he awakens a Rebel
hornet’s-nest. Volley after volley of musketry shows that the Bull Run
bottom fairly swarms with Rebel troops, while another Rebel battery,
more to the Rebel right, opens, with that already mentioned, a
concentrated cross-fire upon him.
And now Richardson orders up the 12th New York, Colonel Walrath, to the
left of our battery. Forming it into line-of-battle, Richardson orders
it to charge through the woods upon the Enemy. Gallantly the regiment
moves forward, after the skirmishers, into the woods, but, being met by
a very heavy fire of musketry and artillery along the whole line of the
Enemy’s position, is, for the most part, thrown back in confusion–a
mere fragment* remaining in line, and retreating,–while the howitzers,
and Cavalry also, are withdrawn.
Meantime, however, Richardson has ordered up, and placed in line-of-
battle, on the right of our battery, the 1st Massachusetts, the 2d
Michigan (his own), and the 3d Michigan. The skirmishers in the woods
still bravely hold their ground, undercover, and these three regiments
are plucky, and anxious to assault the Enemy. Richardson proposes to
lead them in a charge upon the Enemy’s position, and drive him out of
it; but Tyler declines to give permission, on the ground that this being
“merely a reconnaissance,” the object of which–ascertaining the
strength and position of the Enemy–having been attained, a further
attack is unnecessary. He therefore orders Richardson to “fall back in
good order to our batteries on the hill,”–which he does.
Upon reaching these batteries, Richardson forms his 2d Michigan, in
“close column by division,” on their right, and the 1st Massachusetts
and 3d Michigan, in “line of battle,” on their left–the 12th New York
re-forming, under cover of the woods at the rear, later on. Then, with
our skirmishers thrown into the woods in front, their scattering fire,
and the musketry responses of the Rebels, are drowned in the volume of
sound produced by the deafening contest which ensues between our
Artillery, and that of the Enemy from his batteries behind Bull Run.
This artillery-duel continues about one hour; and then seems to cease by
mutual consent, about dusk–after 415 shots have been fired on the Union
side, and have been responded to by an equal number from the Rebel
batteries, “gun for gun”–the total loss in the engagement, on the Union
side, being 83, to a total loss among the Enemy, of Thursday night,
Richardson retires his brigade upon Centreville, in order to secure
rations and water for his hungry and thirsty troops,–as no water has
yet been found in the vicinity of the Union batteries aforesaid. On the
morrow, however, when his brigade re-occupies that position, water is
found in abundance, by digging for it.
This premature attack, at Blackburn’s Ford, by Tyler, against orders,
having failed, throws a wet blanket upon the martial spirit of
McDowell’s Army. In like degree is the morale of the Rebel Army
increased.
It is true that Longstreet, in command of the Rebel troops at
Blackburn’s Ford, has not had things all his own way; that some of his
artillery had to be “withdrawn;” that, as he acknowledges in his report,
his brigade of three Virginia regiments (the 1st, 11th, and 17th) had
“with some difficulty repelled” the Union assault upon his position;
that he had to call upon General Early for re-enforcements; that Early
re-enforced him with two Infantry regiments (the 7th Louisiana and 7th
Virginia) at first; that one of these (the 7th Virginia) was “thrown
into confusion;” that Early then brought up his own regiment (the 24th
Virginia) under Lieutenant Colonel Hairston, and the entire seven guns
of the “Washington Artillery;” and that but for the active “personal
exertions” of Longstreet, in “encouraging the men under his command,”
and the great numerical superiority of the Rebels, there might have been
no Union “repulse” at all. Yet still the attack has failed, and that
failure, while it dispirits the Patriot Army, inspires the Rebel Army
with renewed courage.
Under these circumstances, Friday, the 19th of July, is devoted to
reconnaissances by the Engineer officers of the Union Army; to the
cooking of the supplies, which have at last arrived; and to resting the
weary and road-worn soldiers of the Union.
Let us take advantage of this halt in the advance of McDowell’s “Grand
Army of the United States”–as it was termed–to view the Rebel position
at, and about Manassas, and to note certain other matters having an
important and even determining bearing upon the issue of the impending
shock-at-arms.
Beauregard has received early information of McDowell’s advance from
Arlington, and of his plans.
of the determination of the Enemy to advance on Manassas, my
advanced brigades, on the night of the 16th of July, were made
aware, from these headquarters, of the impending movement,”]
On Tuesday the 16th, he notifies his advanced brigades. On Wednesday,
he sends a dispatch from Manassas, to Jefferson Davis, at Richmond,
announcing that the Union troops have assailed his outposts in heavy
force; that he has fallen back before them, on the line of Bull Run; and
that he intends to make a stand at Mitchell’s Ford (close to Blackburn’s
Ford) on that stream,–adding: if his (McDowell’s) force is
overwhelming, “I shall retire to the Rappahannock railroad bridge,
saving my command for defense there, and future operations. Please
inform Johnston of this, via Staunton, and also Holmes. Send forward
any re-enforcements at the earliest possible instant, and by every
possible means.”
In the meantime, however, Beauregard loses no time in advantageously
posting his troops. On the morning of the 18th of July, when the Union
advance enters Centreville, he has withdrawn all his advanced brigades
within the Rebel lines of Bull Run, resting them on the South side of
that stream, from Union Mills Ford, near the Orange and Alexandria
railroad bridge, up to the stone bridge over which the Warrenton Pike
crosses the Run,–a distance of some six to eight miles.
Between the Rebel left, at Stone Bridge, and the Rebel right, at Union
Mills Ford, are several fords across Bull Run–the general course of the
stream being from the North-West to South-East, to its confluence with
the Occoquan River, some twelve miles from the Potomac River.
Mitchell’s Ford, the Rebel center, is about three miles to the South-
West of, and about the same distance North-East from, Manassas Junction.
But it may be well, right here, to locate all these fordable crossings
of the rocky, precipitous, and well-wooded Bull Run stream, between the
Stone Bridge and Union Mills Ford. Thus, half a mile below the Stone
Bridge is Lewis’s Ford; half a mile below that, Ball’s Ford; half a mile
below that, Island Ford; one and one-half miles below that, Mitchell’s
Ford–one mile below that.
Blackburn’s Ford; three-quarters of a mile farther down, McLean’s Ford;
and nearly two miles lower down the stream, Union Mills Ford.
By Thursday morning, the 18th of July, Beauregard has advantageously
posted the seven brigades into which he has organized his forces, at
these various positions along his extended front, as follows:
At the Stone Bridge, Brigadier-General N. G. Evans’s Seventh Brigade, of
one regiment and one battalion of Infantry, two companies of Cavalry,
and a battery of four six-pounders.
At Lewis’s, Balls, and Island Fords–Colonel P. St. George Cocke’s
Fifth Brigade, of three regiments of Infantry, one battery of Artillery,
and one company of Cavalry.
At Mitchell’s Ford, Brigadier-General M. L. Bonham’s First Brigade, of
four Infantry regiments, two batteries, and six companies of Cavalry.
At Blackburn’s Ford, Brigadier-General J. Longstreet’s Fourth Brigade,
of four Infantry regiments, with two 6-pounders.
At McLean’s Ford, Brigadier-General D. R. Jones’s Third Brigade of three
Infantry regiments, one Cavalry company, and two 6-pounders.
At Union Mills Ford, Brigadier-General R. S. Ewell’s Second Brigade, of
three Infantry regiments, three Cavalry companies, and four 12-powder
howitzers–Colonel Jubal A. Early’s Sixth Brigade, of three Infantry
regiments and three rifled pieces of Walton’s Battery, being posted in
the rear of, and as a support to, Ewell’s Brigade.
Gen. T. H. Holmes–comprising two regiments of Infantry, Walker’s
Battery of Artillery, and Scott’s Cavalry-with Early’s Brigade, “in
reserve, in rear of the right.”]
The disposition and strength of Beauregard’s forces at these various
points along his line of defense on Bull Run stream, plainly shows his
expectation of an attack on his right; but he is evidently suspicious
that it may come upon his centre; for, as far back as July 8th, he had
issued special orders to the effect that:
“Should the Enemy march to the attack of Mitchell’s Ford, via
Centreville, the following movements will be made with celerity:
“I. The Fourth Brigade will march from Blackburn’s Ford to attack him on
the flank and centre.
“II. The Third Brigade will be thrown to the attack of his centre and
rear toward Centreville.
“III. The Second and Sixth Brigades united will also push forward and
attack him in the rear by way of Centreville, protecting their own right
flanks and rear from the direction of Fairfax Station and Court House.
“IV. In the event of the defeat of the Enemy, the troops at Mitchell’s
Ford and Stone Bridge, especially the Cavalry and Artillery, will join
in the pursuit, which will be conducted with vigor but unceasing
prudence, and continued until he shall have been driven beyond the
Potomac.”
And it is not without interest to note Beauregard’s subsequent
indorsement on the back of these Special Orders, that: “The plan of
attack prescribed within would have been executed, with modifications
affecting First and Fifth Brigades, to meet the attack upon Blackburn’s
Ford, but for the expected coming of General Johnston’s command, which
was known to be en route to join me on [Thursday] the 18th of July.”
The knowledge thus possessed on Thursday, the 18th, by Beauregard, that
Johnston’s Army is on its way to join him, is of infinite advantage to
the former. On the other hand, the complete ignorance, at this time, of
McDowell on this point,–and the further fact that he has been lulled
into a feeling of security on the subject, by General Scott’s emphatic
assurance to him that “if Johnston joins Beauregard, he shall have
Patterson on his heels”–is a great disadvantage to the Union general.
Were McDowell now aware of the real Military situation, he would
unquestionably make an immediate attack, with the object of crushing
Beauregard before Johnston can effect a junction with him. It would
then be a mere matter of detail for the armies of McDowell, McClellan,
and Patterson, to bag Johnston, and bring the armed Rebellion to an
inglorious and speedy end. But Providence–through the plottings of
individuals within our own lines–wills it otherwise.
Long before this, Patterson has been informed by General Winfield Scott
of the proposed movement by McDowell upon Manassas,–and of its date.
On Saturday, July 13th, General Scott telegraphed to Patterson: “I
telegraphed to you yesterday, if not strong enough to beat the Enemy
early next week, make demonstrations so as to detain him in the Valley
of Winchester; but if he retreats in force toward Manassas, and it be
too hazardous to follow him, then consider the route via Keys Ferry,
Leesburg, etc.”
On Wednesday, the 17th, Scott telegraphs to Patterson: “I have nothing
official from you since Sunday (14th), but am glad to learn, through
Philadelphia papers, that you have advanced. Do not let the Enemy amuse
and delay you with a small force in front whilst he re-enforces the
Junction with his main body. McDowell’s first day’s work has driven the
Enemy beyond Fairfax Court House. The Junction will probably be carried
by to-morrow.”
On Thursday, the 18th, Patterson replies that to attack “the greatly
superior force at Winchester “when the three months volunteers’ time was
about up, and they were threatening to leave him–would be “most
hazardous” and then he asks: “Shall I attack?”
Scott answers the same day: “I have certainly been expecting you to beat
the Enemy. If not, to hear that you had felt him strongly, or, at
least, had occupied him by threats and demonstrations. You have been at
least his equal, and, I suppose, superior in numbers. Has he not stolen
a march and sent re-enforcements toward Manassas Junction? A week is
enough to win victories,” etc.
Patterson retorts, on the same day: “The Enemy has stolen no march upon
me. I have kept him actively employed, and by threats, and
reconnaissances in force, caused him to be re-enforced. I have
accomplished in this respect more than the General-in-Chief asked, or
could well be expected, in face of an Enemy far superior in numbers,
with no line of communication to protect.”
In another dispatch, to Assistant Adjutant-General Townsend (with
General Scott), he says, that same afternoon of Thursday, the 18th: “I
have succeeded, in accordance with the wishes of the General-in-Chief,
in keeping General Johnston’s Force at Winchester. A reconnaissance in
force, on Tuesday, caused him to be largely re-enforced from Strasburg.”
Again, on Friday, the 19th, he informs Colonel Townsend that: “The
Enemy, from last information, are still at Winchester, and being re-
enforced every night.”
It is not until Saturday, the 20th of July, that he telegraphs to
Townsend: “With a portion of his force, Johnston left Winchester, by the
road to Millwood, on the afternoon of the 18th.” And he adds the
ridiculous statement: “His whole force was about 35,200.”
Thus, despite all the anxious care of General Scott, to have Johnston’s
Army detained in the Shenandoah Valley, it has escaped Patterson so
successfully, and entirely, that the latter does not even suspect its
disappearance until the day before the pitched Battle of Bull Run is
fought! Its main body has actually reached Manassas twenty-four hours
before Patterson is aware that it has left Winchester!
And how is it, that Johnston gets away from Patterson so neatly? And
when does he do it?
period, when everything seemed to depend upon his exertions, was
afterward the subject of inquiry by the Joint-Committee on the
Conduct of the War. The testimony taken by that Committee makes it
clear, to any unprejudiced mind, that while Patterson himself may
have been loyal to the Union, he was weak enough to be swayed from
the path of duty by some of the faithless and unpatriotic officers
with whom he had partly surrounded himself–and especially by Fitz
John Porter, his Chief-of-staff. Let us examine the sworn
testimony of two or three witnesses on this point.
General CHARLES W. SANFORD, who was second in command under
Patterson, and in command of Patterson’s Left Wing, testified [see
pages 54-66, Report on Conduct of the War, Vol. 3, Part 2,] that he
was at a Council of War held at the White House, June 29th, when
the propriety of an attack on the Rebel lines at Manassas was
discussed; that he objected to any such movement until Patterson
was in such a position as to prevent the junction between General
Johnston’s Army and the troops at Manassas; that on the 6th of
July, he was sent by General Scott, with four picked New York
regiments, to Patterson, and (waiving his own seniority rank)
reported to that General, at Williamsport; that Patterson gave him
command of a division of 8,000 men (and two batteries) out of a
total in his Army of 22,000; that he “delivered orders from General
Scott to General Patterson, and urged a forward movement as soon as
possible;” that there was “Some delay at Martinsburg,
notwithstanding the urgency of our matter,” but they “left there on
[Monday] the 15th of July, and went in the direction of
Winchester,”–down to Bunker Hill,–Patterson with two divisions
going down the turnpike, and Sanford taking his division a little
in advance and more easterly on the side roads so as to be in a
position to flank Johnston’s right; that on that afternoon (Monday,
July 15) General Patterson rode up to where Sanford was locating
his camp.
Continuing his testimony, General Sanford said: “I was then within
about nine miles of Johnston’s fortified camp at Winchester.
Patterson was complimenting me upon the manner in which my
regiments were located, and inquiring about my pickets, which I had
informed him I had sent down about three miles to a stream below.
I had driven out the Enemy’s skirmishers ahead of us. They had
some cavalry there. In answer to his compliments about the
comfortable location I had made, I said: ‘Very comfortable,
General, when shall we move on?’ * * * He hesitated a moment or
two, and then said: ‘I don’t know yet when we shall move. And if I
did I would not tell my own father.’ I thought that was rather a
queer speech to make to me under the circumstances. But I smiled
and said: ‘General, I am only anxious that we shall get forward,
that the Enemy shall not escape us.’ He replied: ‘There is no
danger of that. I will have a reconnaissance to-morrow, and we
will arrange about moving at a very early period.’ He then took
his leave.
“The next day [Tuesday, July 16th], there was a reconnaissance on
the Winchester turnpike, about four or five miles below the
General’s camp. He sent forward a section of artillery and some
cavalry, and they found a post-and-log fence across the Winchester
turnpike, and some of the Enemy’s cavalry on the other side of it.
They gave them a round of grape. The cavalry scattered off, and
the reconnaissance returned. That was the only reconnaissance I
heard of while we were there. My own pickets went further than
that. But it was understood, the next afternoon, that we were to
march forward at daylight. I sent down Col. Morell, with 40 men,
to open a road down to Opequan Creek, within five miles of the camp
at Winchester, on the side-roads I was upon, which would enable me,
in the course of three hours, to get between Johnston and the
Shenandoah River, and effectually bar his way to Manassas. I had
my ammunition all distributed, and ordered my men to have 24 hours’
rations in their haversacks, independent of their breakfast. We
were to march at 4 o’clock the next morning. I had this road to
the Opequan completed that night. I had then with me, in addition
to my eight regiments amounting to about 8,000 men and a few
cavalry, Doubleday’s heavy United States battery of 20 and 30
pounders, and a very good Rhode Island battery. And I was willing
to take the risk, whether Gen. Patterson followed me up or not, of
placing myself between Johnston and the Shenandoah River, rather
than let Johnston escape. And, at 4 o’clock [July 17th] I should
have moved over that road for that purpose, if I had had no further
orders. But, a little after 12 o’clock at night [July 16th-17th,]
I received a long order of three pages from Gen. Patterson,
instructing me to move on to Charlestown, which is nearly at right
angles to the road I was going to move on, and twenty-two miles
from Winchester. This was after I had given my orders for the
other movement.”
* * * * * * * * * *
‘Question [by the Chairman].–And that left Johnston free?
“Answer–Yes, Sir; left him free to make his escape, which he did.
* * *”
‘Question.–In what direction would Johnston have had to move to
get by you?
“Answer–Right out to the Shenandoah River, which he forded. He
found out from his cavalry, who were watching us, that we were
actually leaving, and he started at 1 o’clock that same day, with
8,000 men, forded the Shenandoah where it was so deep that he
ordered his men to put their cartridge-boxes on their bayonets, got
out on the Leesburg road, and went down to Manassas.”
“Question [by the Chairman].–Did he [Patterson] assign any reason
for that movement?
“Answer.–I was, of course, very indignant about it, and so were
all my officers and men; so much so that when, subsequently, at
Harper’s Ferry, Patterson came by my camp, there was a universal
groan–against all discipline, of course, and we suppressed it as
soon as possible. The excuse given by Gen. Patterson was this:
that he had received intelligence that he could rely upon, that
Gen. Johnston had been re-enforced by 20,000 men from Manassas,
and was going to make an attack upon him; and in the order which I
received that night–a long order of three pages–I was ordered to
occupy all the communicating roads, turning off a regiment here,
and two or three regiments there, and a battery at another place,
to occupy all the roads from Winchester to the neighborhood of
Charlestown, and all the cross-roads, and hold them all that day,
until Gen. Patterson’s whole army went by me to Charlestown; and I
sat seven hours in the saddle near a place called Smithfield, while
Patterson, with his whole army, went by me on their way to
Charlestown, he being apprehensive, as he said, of an attack from
Johnston’s forces.”
“Question [by Mr. Odell].–You covered his movement?
“Answer–Yes, Sir. Now the statement that he made, which came to
me through Colonel Abercrombie, who was Patterson’s brother-in-law,
and commanded one division in that army, was, that Johnston had
been re-enforced; and Gen. Fitz-John Porter reported the same thing
to my officers. Gen. Porter was then the chief of Patterson’s
staff, and was a very excellent officer, and an accomplished
soldier. They all had got this story, which was without the
slightest shadow of foundation; for there had not a single man
arrived at the camp since we had got full information that their
force consisted of 20,000 men, of whom 1,800 were sick with the
measles. The story was, however, that they had ascertained, by
reliable information, of this re-enforcement. Where they got their
information, I do not know. None such reached me; and I picked up
deserters and other persons to get all the information I could; and
we since have learned, as a matter of certainty, that Johnston’s
forces never did exceed 20,000 men there. But the excuse Patterson
gave was, that Johnson had been re-enforced by 20,000 men from
Manassas, and was going to attack him. That was the reason he gave
then for this movement. But in this paper he has lately published,
he hints at another reason–another excuse–which was that it was
by order of Gen. Scott. Now, I know that the peremptory order of
Gen. Scott to Gen. Patterson, repeated over and over again, was
this–I was present on several occasions when telegraphic
communications went from Gen. Scott to Gen. Patterson: Gen. Scott’s
orders to Gen. Patterson were that, if he were strong enough, he
was to attack and beat Johnston. But if not, then he was to place
himself in such a position as to keep Johnston employed, and
prevent him from making a junction with Beauregard at Manassas.
That was the repeated direction of Gen. Scott to Gen. Patterson;
and it was because of Patterson’s hesitancy, and his hanging back,
and keeping so far beyond the reach of Johnston’s camp, that I was
ordered to go up there and re-enforce him, and assist him in any
operations necessary to effect that object. The excuse of Gen.
Patterson now is, that he had orders from Gen. Scott to move to
Charlestown. Now, that is not so. But this state of things
existed: Before the movement was made from Martinsburg, General
Patterson suggested to General Scott that Charlestown would be a
better base of operations than Martinsburg and suggested that he
had better move on Charlestown, and thence make his approaches to
Winchester; that it would be better to do that than to move
directly to Winchester from Martinsburg; and General Scott wrote
back to say that, if he found that movement a better one, he was at
liberty to make it. But Gen. Patterson had already commenced his
movement on Winchester direct from Martinsburg, and had got as far
as Bunker Hill; so that the movement which he had formerly
suggested, to Charlestown, was suppressed by his own act. But that
is the pretence now given in his published speech for making the
movement from Bunker Hill to Charlestown, which was a retreat,
instead of the advance which the movement to Charlestown he first
proposed to Gen. Scott was intended to be.”
* * * * * * * * * * * *
“Question [by the Chairman].–Was not that change of direction and
movement to Charlestown a total abandonment of the object which you
were pursuing?
“Answer.–Entirely an abandonment of the main principles of the
orders he was acting under.”
“Question.–And of course an abandonment of the purpose for which
you were there?
“Answer.–Yes, Sir.
“Question [by Mr. Odell].-Was it not your understanding in leaving
here, and was it not the understanding also of Gen. Scott, that
your purpose in going there was to check Johnston with direct
reference to the movement here?
“Answer–Undoubtedly. It was in consequence of the suggestion made
by me at the Council at the President’s house. * * * And upon the
suggestion of General Scott they wanted me to go up there and
assist Patterson in this movement against Johnston, so as to carry
out the point I had suggested of first checkmating Johnston before
the movement against Manassas was made here.”
* * * * * * * * *
Question [by the Chairman].–Would there have been any difficulty
in preventing Johnston from going to Manassas?
“Answer.–None whatever.”
* * * * * * * * *
“Question [by the Chairman.]–I have heard it suggested that he
(Patterson) undertook to excuse this movement on the ground that
the time of many of his troops had expired, and they refused to
accompany him.
“Answer.–That to my knowledge, is untrue. The time of none of
them had expired when this movement was made. All the troops that
were there were in the highest condition for the service. These
three-months’ men, it may be well to state to you who are not
Military men, were superior to any other volunteer troops that we
had, in point of discipline. They were the disciplined troops of
the Country. The three-months’ men were generally the organized
troops of the different States–New York, Pennsylvania, etc. We
had, for instance, from Patterson’s own city, Philadelphia, one of
the finest regiments in the service, which was turned over to me,
at their own request; and the most of my regiments were disciplined
and organized troops. They were all in fine condition, anxious,
zealous, and earnest for a fight. They thought they were going to
attack Johnston’s camp at Winchester. Although I had suggested to
Gen. Patterson that there was no necessity for that, the camp being
admirably fortified with many of their heavy guns from Norfolk, I
proposed to him to place ourselves between Johnston and the
Shenandoah, which would have compelled him to fight us there, or to
remain in his camp, either of which would have effected General
Scott’s object. If I had got into a fight, it was very easy, over
this road I had just been opening, for Patterson to have re-
enforced me and to have come up to the fight in time. The
proposition was to place ourselves between Johnston’s fortified
camp and the Shenandoah, where his fortified camp would have been
of no use to him.”
“Question.–Even if you had received a check there, it would have
prevented his junction with the forces at Manassas?
“Answer.–Yes, Sir; I would have risked a battle with my own
division rather than Johnston should have escaped. If he had
attacked me, I could have taken a position where I could have held
it, while Patterson could have fallen upon him and repulsed him.”
“Question [by Mr. Odell].–Had you any such understanding with
Patterson?
“Answer.–I told him I would move down on this side-road in
advance, leaving Gen. Patterson to sustain me if I got into a
fight. So, on the other hand, if he should attack Patterson, I was
near enough to fall upon Johnston’s flank and to support Patterson.
By using this communication of mine to pass Opequan Creek–where, I
had informed Patterson, I had already pushed forward my pickets,
[200 men in the day and 400 more at night,] to prevent the Enemy
from burning the bridge–it would have enabled me to get between
Johnston and the Shenandoah River. On the morning [Wednesday, July
17th] of our march to Charlestown, Stuart’s cavalry, which figured
so vigorously at Bull Run, was upon my flank all day. They were
apparently about 800 strong. I saw them constantly on my flank for
a number of miles. I could distinguish them, with my glass, with
great ease. Finally, they came within about a mile of the line of
march I was pursuing and I sent a battery around to head them off,
and the 12th Regiment across the fields in double-quick time to
take them in the rear. I thought I had got them hemmed in. But
they broke down the fences, and went across the country to
Winchester, and I saw nothing more of them. They were then about
eight miles from Winchester, and must have got there in the course
of a couple of hours. That day [Wednesday, the 17th] at 10
o’clock–as was ascertained from those who saw him crossing the
Shenandoah–Johnston started from Winchester with 8,000 men, forded
the Shenandoah, and got to Manassas on Friday night; and his second
in command started the next day with all the rest of the available
troops–something like 9,000 men; leaving only the sick, and a few
to guard them, in the camp at Winchester–and they arrived at the
battle-field in the midst of the fight, got out of the cars, rushed
on the battle-field, and turned the scale. I have no doubt that,
if we had intercepted Johnston, as we ought to have done, the
battle of Bull Run would have been a victory for us instead of a
defeat. Johnston was undoubtedly the ablest general they had in
their army.”
Colonel CRAIG BIDDLE, testified that he was General Patterson’s
aide-de-camp at the time. In answer to a question by the Chairman,
he continued:
“Answer.–I was present, of course, at all the discussions. The
discussion at Martinsburg was as to whether or not General
Patterson should go on to Winchester. General Patterson was very
full of that himself. He was determined to go to Winchester; but
the opinions of all the regular officers who were with him, were
against it. The opinions of all the men in whose judgment I had
any confidence, were against it. They seemed to have the notion
that General Patterson had got his Irish blood up by the fight we
had had at Falling Waters, and was bound to go ahead. He decided
upon going ahead, against the remonstrances of General [Fitz John]
Porter, who advised against it. He told me he considered he had
done his duty, and said no more. The movement was delayed in
consequence of General Stone’s command not being able to move right
away. It was then evident that there was so much opposition to it
that the General was induced to call a council of the general
officers in his command, at which I was present. They were
unanimously opposed to the advance. That was at Martinsburg.”
* * * * * * * * *
“Question.–While at Bunker Hill, the night before you left there,
were any orders issued to march in the evening?
“Answer.–I think there were such orders.”
“Question.–Did not General Patterson issue orders at Bunker Hill,
the night before you marched to Charlestown, for an attack on the
Enemy?
“Answer.-I think such orders were written. I do not think they
were issued. I think General Patterson was again persuaded not to
make an advance.”
Colonel R. BUTLER PRICE, Senior aide to Patterson, testified as
follows:
* * * * * * * * *
“Question [by Mr. Gooch].–Was it not the intention to move from
Bunker Hill to Winchester?
“Answer.–Yes, Sir. At one time General Patterson had given an
order to move from Bunker Hill to Winchester. He was very
unwilling to leave Johnston even at Winchester without attacking
him; and on the afternoon before we left Bunker Hill he decided to
attack him, notwithstanding his strong force.”
“Question.–Behind his intrenchments?
“Answer.–Yes, Sir; it went so far that his order was written by
his adjutant, General [Fitz John] Porter. It was very much against
the wishes of General [Fitz John] Porter; and he asked General
Patterson if he would send for Colonel Abercrombie and Colonel
Thomas and consult them on the movement. General Patterson
replied: No, Sir; for I know they will attempt to dissuade me from
it, and I have made up my mind to fight Johnston under all
circumstances. That was the day before we left Bunker Hill. Then
Colonel [Fitz John] Porter asked to have Colonel Abercrombie and
Colonel Thomas sent for and consulted as to the best manner to
carry out his wishes. He consented, and they came, and after half
an hour they dissuaded him from it.”
“Question.–At that time General Patterson felt it was so important
to attack Johnston that he had determined to do it?
“Answer.–Yes, Sir; the order was not published, but it was
written.”
“Question.–You understood General Patterson to be influenced to
make that attempt because he felt there was a necessity for
detaining Johnston?
“Answer.–Yes, Sir; to detain him as long as he possibly could.”
“Question.–That order was not countermanded until late on Tuesday,
the 16th, was it?
“Answer.–That order never was published. It was written; but, at
the earnest solicitation of Colonel [Fitz John] Porter, it was
withheld until he could have a consultation with Colonel
Abercrombie and Colonel Thomas.”]
It is about 1 o’clock on the morning of Thursday, July 18th,–that same
day which witnesses the preliminary Battle of Blackburn’s Ford–that
Johnston, being at Winchester, and knowing of Patterson’s peculiarly
inoffensive and timid movement to his own left and rear, on Charlestown,
receives from the Rebel Government at Richmond, a telegraphic dispatch,
of July 17th, in these words: “General Beauregard is attacked. To
strike the Enemy a decisive blow, a junction of all your effective force
will be needed. If practicable, make the movement. * * * In all the
arrangements exercise your discretion.”
Johnston loses no time in deciding that it is his duty to prevent, if
possible, disaster to Beauregard’s Army; that to do this he must effect
a junction with him; and that this necessitates either an immediate
fight with, and defeat of, Patterson,–which may occasion a fatal
delay–or else, that Union general must be eluded. Johnston determines
on the latter course.
Leaving his sick, with some militia to make a pretense of defending the
town in case of attack, Johnston secretly and rapidly marches his Army,
of 9,000 effective men, Southeasterly from Winchester, at noon of
Thursday, the 18th; across by a short cut, wading the Shenandoah River,
and then on through Asby’s Gap, in the Blue Ridge, that same night;
still on, in the same direction, to a station on the Manassas Gap
railroad, known as Piedmont, which is reached by the next (Friday)
morning,–the erratic movements of Stuart’s Cavalry entirely concealing
the manoeuvre from the knowledge of Patterson.
From Piedmont, the Artillery and Cavalry proceed to march the remaining
twenty-five miles, or so, to Manassas Junction, by the roads. The 7th
and 8th Georgia Regiments of Bartow’s Brigade, with Jackson’s Brigade,–
comprising the 2d, 4th, 5th, 27th and 33d Virginia Regiments–are
embarked on the cars, and hurriedly sent in advance, by rail, to
Manassas, reaching there on that same (Friday) afternoon and evening.
These are followed by General Johnston, with Bee’s Brigade–comprising
the 4th Alabama, 2d Mississippi, and a battalion of the 11th
Mississippi–which arrive at Manassas about noon of Saturday, the 20th
of July, the balance of Johnston’s Infantry being billed for arrival
that same day, or night.
Upon Johnston’s own arrival at Manassas, Saturday noon,–the very day
that Patterson ascertains that “the bird has flown,”–after assuming
command, by virtue of seniority, he proceeds to examine Beauregard’s
position. This he finds “too extensive, and the ground too densely
wooded and intricate,” to be learned quickly, and hence he is impelled
to rely largely upon Beauregard for information touching the strength
and positions of both the Rebel and Union Armies.
Beauregard has now 21,833 men, and 29 pieces of artillery of his own
“Army of the Potomac.” Johnston’s and Holmes’s junction with him has
raised the Rebel total to 32,000 effectives, and 55 guns. McDowell, on
the other hand, who started with 30,000 effectives, finds himself on the
19th–owing to the departure of one of his regiments and a battery of
Artillery, because of the expiration of their term of enlistment,–with
but “28,000 men at the utmost.”–[Comte de Paris.]
On the evening of Saturday, the 20th of July, Johnston and Beauregard
hold an important consultation. The former feels certain that
Patterson, with his more than 20,000 effectives, will now lose no time
in essaying a junction with McDowell’s Army, and that such junction will
probably be effected by July 22nd. Hence he perceives the necessity of
attacking McDowell, and if possible, with the combined Rebel Forces,
whipping him before Patterson can come up to his assistance.
At this consultation it is agreed by the two Rebel generals to assume
the offensive, at once. Beauregard proposes a plan of battle–which is
an immediate general advance of the Rebel centre and left,
concentrating, from all the fords of Bull Run, upon Centreville, while
the Rebel right advances toward Sangster’s cross-roads, ready to fall
either on Centreville, or upon Fairfax Court House, in its rear,
according to circumstances.
The plan proposed, is accepted at once by Johnston. The necessary order
is drawn up by Beauregard that night; and at half past four o’clock on
Sunday morning, July 21st, Johnston signs the written order. Nothing
now remains, apparently, but the delivery of the order to the Rebel
brigade commanders, a hurried preparation for the forward movement, and
then the grand attack upon McDowell, at Centreville.
Already, no doubt, the fevered brain of Beauregard pictures, in his
vivid imagination, the invincible thunders of his Artillery, the
impetuous advance of his Infantry, the glorious onset of his Cavalry,
the flight and rout of the Union forces, his triumphal entry into
Washington–Lincoln and Scott and the Congress crouching at his feet–
and the victorious South and conquered North acclaiming him Dictator!
The plan is Beauregard’s own, and Beauregard is to have command. Hence
all the glory of capturing the National Capital, must be Beauregard’s.
Why not? But “man proposes, and God disposes.” The advance and attack,
are, in that shape, never to be made.
McDowell, in the meantime, all unconscious of what has transpired in the
Shenandoah Valley, and between there and Manassas; never dreaming for an
instant that Patterson has failed to keep Johnson there–even if he has
not attacked and defeated him; utterly unsuspicious that his own
lessened Union Army has now to deal with the Forces of Johnston and
Beauregard combined–with a superior instead of an inferior force; is
executing a plan of battle which he has decided upon, and announced to
his general officers, on that same Saturday evening, at his Headquarters
in Centreville.
Instead of attempting to turn the Enemy’s right, and cut off his
communications with Richmond and the South, McDowell has now determined
to attack the Enemy’s left, cut his communication, via the Manassas Gap
railroad, with Johnston’s Army,–still supposed by him to be in the
Valley of the Shenandoah–and, taking him in the left flank and rear,
roll him upon Manassas, in disorder and defeat–with whatever might
follow.
That is the plan–in its general features. In executing it, Blenker’s
Brigade of Miles’s Division is to remain at Centreville as a reserve,
throwing up intrenchments about its Heights, upon which to fall back, in
case of necessity; Davies’s Brigade of the same Division, with
Richardson’s Brigade of Tyler’s Division–as the Left Wing–are to
demonstrate at Blackburn’s Ford, toward the Enemy’s right; Tyler’s other
three brigades, under Keyes, Schenck, and Sherman, are to feign an
attack on the Enemy’s left, posted behind the strongly-defended Stone
Bridge over which the Warrenton turnpike, running Westward, on its way
from Centreville to Warrenton, crosses Bull Run stream; while the strong
divisions under Hunter and Heintzelman–forming McDowell’s Right Wing–
are to follow Tyler’s Division Westward down the turnpike to a point
within one mile and a half of the Stone Bridge, thence, by cross-road,
diverge several miles to the North, then sweep around gradually to the
West, and then Southwardly over Bull Run at Sudley Springs Ford,
swooping down the Sudley road upon the Enemy’s left flank and rear, near
Stone Bridge, rolling it back toward his center, while Tyler’s remaining
three brigades cross the bridge and join in the assault. That is the
whole plan in a nutshell.
It has been McDowell’s intention to push forward, from Centreville along
the Warrenton Pike a few miles, on the evening of this Military
conference; but he makes his first mistake, in allowing himself to be
dissuaded from that, by those, who, in his own words, “have the greatest
distance to go,” and who prefer “starting early in the morning and
making but one move.”
The attacking divisions now have orders to march at 2:30 A. M., in order
“to avoid the heat,” which is excessive. Tyler’s three immediate
brigades–or some of them–are slow in starting Westward, along the
Warrenton Pike, to the Stone Bridge; and this leads to a two or three
hours delay of the divisions of Hunter and Heintzelman, before they can
follow that Pike beyond Centreville, and commence the secret detour to
their right, along the cross-road leading to Sudley Springs.
At 6:30 A.M., Tyler’s Artillery gets into position, to cannonade the
Enemy’s batteries, on the West Bank of Bull Run, commanding the Stone
Bridge, and opens fire. Half an hour before this, (at 6 A.M.), the
Rebel artillerists, posted on a hill South of the Pike, and 600 yards
West of the bridge, have caught sight of Tyler’s Union blue-jackets.
Those of the Rebel gunners whose eyes are directed to the North-East,
soon see, nearly a mile away, up the gradual slope, a puff of blue
smoke. Immediately the bang of a solitary rifle cannon is heard, and
the scream of a rifled shot as it passes over their heads. At
intervals, until past 9 A.M., that piece and others in the same
position, keep hammering away at the Rebel left, under Evans, at Stone
Bridge.
The Rebel response to this cannonade, is very feeble. McDowell observes
this. He suspects there has been a weakening of the Enemy’s force at
the bridge, in order to strengthen his right for some purpose. And what
can that purpose be, but to throw his augmented right upon our left, at
Blackburn’s Ford, and so, along the ridge-road, upon Centreville? Thus
McDowell guesses, and guesses well. To be in readiness to protect his
own left and rear, by reenforcing Miles’s Division, at Centreville and
along the ridge to Blackburn’s Ford, he temporarily holds back Howard’s
Brigade of Heintzelman’s Division at the point where the cross-road to
Sudley Springs Ford-along which Hunter’s Division, followed by the
Brigades of Franklin and Wilcox, of Heintzelman’s Division, have already
gone-intersects the Warrenton Pike.
It is 9 o’clock. Beauregard, as yet unaware of McDowell’s new plan,
sends an order to Ewell, on his right, to hold himself ready “to take
the offensive, at a moment’s notice,”–and directing that Ewell be
supported in his advance, toward Sangster’s cross-roads and the rear of
Centreville, by Holmes’s Brigade. In accordance with that order, Ewell,
who is “at Union Mills and its neighborhood,” gets his brigade ready,
and Holmes moves up to his support. After waiting two hours, Ewell
receives another order, for both Ewell and Holmes “to resume their
places.” Something must have occurred since 9 o’clock, to defeat
Beauregard’s plan of attack on Centreville–with all its glorious
consequences! What can it be? We shall see.
While Tyler’s Artillery has been cannonading the Rebel left, under
Evans, at Stone Bridge,–fully impressed with the prevailing Union
belief that the bridge is not only protected by strong masked batteries,
heavy supports of Infantry, and by abatis as well as other defenses, but
is also mined and ready to be blown up at the approach of our troops,
when in reality the bridge is not mined, and the Rebel force in men and
guns at that point has been greatly weakened in anticipation of
Beauregard’s projected advance upon Centreville,–the Union column,
under Hunter and Heintzelman, is advancing from Centreville, in the
scorching heat and suffocating dust of this tropical July morning,
slowly, but surely, along the Warrenton Pike and the cross-road to
Sudley Springs Ford–a distance of some eight miles of weary and
toilsome marching for raw troops in such a temperature–in this order:
Burnside’s Brigade, followed by Andrew Porter’s Brigade,–both of
Hunter’s Division; then Franklin’s Brigade, followed by Willcox’s
Brigade,–both of Heintzelman’s Division.
It is half past 9 o’clock; before Burnside’s Brigade has crossed the
Bull Run stream, at Sudley’s Ford, and the head of Andrew Porter’s
Brigade commences to ford it. The troops are somewhat slow in crossing.
They are warm, tired, thirsty, and as to dust,–their hair and eyes and
nostrils and mouths are full of it, while most of the uniforms, once
blue, have become a dirty gray. The sky is clear. The sun already is
fiercely hot. The men stop to drink and fill their canteens. It is
well they do.
McDowell, who has been waiting two or three hours at the turn, impatient
at the delay, has ridden over to the front of the Flanking column, and
now reaches Sudley’s Ford. He feels that much valuable time is already
lost. His plan has, in a measure, been frustrated by delay. He had
calculated on crossing Bull Run, at Sudley’s Ford, and getting to the
rear of the Enemy’s position, at Stone Bridge, before a sufficient Rebel
force could be assembled to contest the Union advance. He sends back an
aide with orders to the regimental commanders in the rear, to “break
from column, and hurry forward separately, as fast as possible.”
Another aide he sends, with orders to Howard to bring his brigade
across-fields. To Tyler he also sends orders to “press forward his
attack, as large bodies of the Enemy are passing in front of him to
attack the division (Hunter’s) which has passed over.”
It may here be explained, that the Sudley road, running about six miles
South-Southeasterly from Sudley Springs Ford to Manassas Junction, is
crossed at right angles, about two miles South of the Springs, by the
Warrenton Pike, at a point about one mile and a half West of the Stone
Bridge. For nearly a mile South of Sudley Ford, the Sudley road passes
through thick woods on the left, and alternate patches of wooded and
cleared lands on the right. The country farther South, opens into
rolling fields, occasionally cut by transverse gullies, and patched with
woods. This is what Burnside’s Brigade beholds, as it marches
Southward, along the Sudley road, this eventful morning.
Thus far, the cannonade of Tyler’s batteries, and the weak return-fire
of the Rebel Artillery, at Stone Bridge, over two miles South-East of
Sudley Ford, is about the only music by which the Union march has kept
time.
But now, as Burnside’s foremost regiment emerges from the woods, at half
past 10 o’clock, the Artillery of the Enemy opens upon it.
Let us see how this happens. Evans’s Brigade, defending the Stone
Bridge, and constituting the Enemy’s extreme left, comprises, as has
already been mentioned, Sloan’s 4th South Carolina Regiment, Wheat’s
Louisiana battalion, Terry’s squadron of Virginia Cavalry, and
Davidson’s section of Latham’s Battery of six-pounders.
Earlier in the morning Evans has supposed, from the cannonade of Tyler’s
batteries among the pines on the hills obliquely opposite the Enemy’s
left, as well as from the sound of the cannonade of the Union batteries
away down the stream on the Enemy’s right, near Blackburn’s Ford, that
McDowell is about to make an attack upon the whole front of the Rebel
line of defense along Bull Run-by way of the Stone Bridge, and the
various fords below it, which cross that stream. But by 10 o’clock,
that Rebel general begins to feel doubtful, suspicious, and uneasy.
Despite the booming of Tyler’s guns, he has caught in the distance the
rumbling sounds of Hunter’s Artillery wheels.
Evans finds himself pondering the meaning of those long lines of dust,
away to his left; and then, like a flash, it bursts upon him, that all
this Military hubbub in his front, and far away to his right, is but a
feint; that the real danger is somehow connected with that mysterious
far-away rumble, and those lines of yellow dust; that the main attack is
to be on the unprepared left and rear of the Rebel position!
No sooner has the Rebel brigade-commander thus divined the Union plan of
attack, than he prepares, with the limited force at his command, to
thwart it. Burnside and he are about equidistant, by this time, from
the intersection of the Sudley road, running South, with the Warrenton
Pike, running West. Much depends upon which of them shall be the first
to reach it,–and the instinctive, intuitive knowledge of this, spurs
Evans to his utmost energy. He leaves four of his fifteen companies,
and Rogers’s section of the Loudoun Artillery,–which has come up from
Cocke’s Brigade, at the ford below–to defend the approaches to the
Stone Bridge, from the East side of Bull Run,–and, with the other
eleven companies, and Latham’s half-battery, he hurries Westward, along
the Warrenton Pike, toward the Sudley road-crossing, to resist the
impending Union attack.
It is now 10:30 o’clock, and, as he hurries along, with anxious eyes,
scanning the woods at the North, he suddenly catches the glitter of
Burnside’s bayonets coming down through them, East of the Sudley road,
in “column of regiments” toward Young’s Branch–a small stream turning,
in a Northern and Southern loop, respectively above and below the
Warrenton Pike, much as the S of a prostrate dollar-mark twines above
and below its horizontal line, the vicinity of which is destined to be
hotly-contested ground ere night-fall.
who, with Captain Wright, guided the divisions of Hunter and
Heintzelman in making the detour to the upper part of Bull Run: “At
Sudley’s Mills we lingered about an hour to give the men and horses
water and a little rest before going into action, our advance guard
in the mean time going ahead about three quarters of a mile.
Resuming our march, we emerged from the woods about one mile South
of the ford, and came upon a beautiful open valley about one and a
quarter miles square, bounded on the right or West by a wooded
ridge, on the Fast by the rough spurs or bluffs of Bull Run, on the
North by an open plain and ridge, on which our troops began to
form, and on the South by another ridge, on which the Enemy was
strongly posted, with woods behind their backs. The Enemy was also
in possession of the bluffs of Bull Run on our left.”]
Sending word to Headquarters, Evans pushes forward and gaining Buck
Ridge, to the North of the Northern loop of Young’s Branch, forms his
line-of-battle upon that elevation–which somewhat compensates him for
the inferiority of his numbers–nearly at right angles to the Bull Run
line; rapidly puts his Artillery in position; the Rebel guns open on
Burnside’s advance–their hoarse roar soon supplemented by the rattle of
Rebel musketry, and the answering roar and rattle of the Union onset;
and the Battle of Bull Run has commenced!
It is after 10:30 A.M., and Beauregard and Johnston are upon an eminence
in the rear of the centre of the Enemy’s Bull Run line. They have been
there since 8 o’clock. An hour ago, or more, their Signal Officer has
reported a large body of Union troops crossing the Bull Run Valley, some
two or three miles above the Stone Bridge; upon the strength of which,
Johnston has ordered Bee’s Brigade from near Cocke’s position, with
Hampton’s Legion and Stonewall Jackson’s Brigade from near Bonham’s
left, to move to the Rebel left, at Stone Bridge; and these troops are
now hastening thither, guided by the sound of the guns.
The artillery-firing is also heard by Johnston and Beauregard, but
intervening wooded slopes prevent them from determining precisely whence
it comes. Beauregard, with a badly-organized staff, is chaffing over
the delay that has occurred in carrying out his own plan of battle. He
is waiting to hear of the progress of the attack which he has ordered
upon the Union Army,–supposed by him to be at Centreville,–and
especially as to the advance of his right toward Sangster’s Station. In
the meantime also,–from early morning,–the Rebel commanders have heard
heavy firing in the direction of Blackburn’s Ford, toward their right,
where the Artillery attached to the brigades of Davies and Richardson,
constituting McDowell’s Left Wing, is demonstrating in a lively manner,
in accordance with McDowell’s plan.
It is 11 o’clock. Beauregard has become satisfied that his orders for
the Rebel advance and attack on Centreville, have failed or miscarried.
His plan is abandoned, and the orders countermanded. At the same time
the growing volume of artillery-detonations upon the left of the Bull
Run line of defense–together with the clouds of dust which indicate the
route of march of Hunter’s and Heintzelman’s Divisions from near
Centreville to the point of conflict, satisfies both Johnston and
Beauregard, that a serious attack is imperilling the Rebel left.
Beauregard at once proposes to Johnston “a modification of the abandoned
plan,” viz.: “to attack with the” Rebel “right, while the left stands on
the defensive.” But rapidly transpiring events conspire to make even
the modified plan impracticable.
Johnston, convinced by the still growing volume of battlesounds on the
Rebel left, that the main attack of McDowell is being made there, urges
Beauregard to strengthen the left, as much as possible; and, after that
general has sent orders to this end,–to Holmes and Early to come up
with their Brigades from Union Mills Ford, moving “with all speed to the
sound of the firing,” and to Bonham to promptly send up, from Mitchell’s
Ford, a battery and two of his regiments–both he and Beauregard put
spurs to their horses, and gallop at full speed toward the firing, four
miles away on their left,–stopping on the way only long enough for
Johnston to order his Chief-of-artillery, Colonel Pendleton, to “follow,
with his own, and Alburtis’s Batteries.”
Meanwhile let us return and witness the progress of the battle, on the
Rebel left,–where we were looking on, at 10:30 o’clock. Evans had then
just posted his eleven companies of Infantry on Buck Ridge, with one of
his two guns on his left, near the Sudley road, and the other not far
from the Robinson House, upon the Northern spur of the elevated plateau
just South of Young’s Branch, and nearly midway between the Sudley road
and Stone Bridge.
The battle, as we have seen, has opened. As Burnside’s Brigade appears
on the slope, to the North of Buck Ridge (or Hill), it is received by a
rapid, well-sustained, and uncomfortable, but not very destructive fire,
from Evans’s Artillery, and, as the Union regiments press forward, in
column, full of impulsive ardor, the Enemy welcomes the head of the
column with a hot musketry-fire also, delivered from the crest of the
elevation behind which the Rebel Infantry lie flat upon the ground.
This defense by Evan’s demi-Brigade still continues, although half an
hour, or more, has elapsed. Burnside has not yet been able to dislodge
the Enemy from the position. Emboldened to temerity by this fact, Major
Wheat’s Louisiana battalion advances through the woods in front, upon
Burnside, but is hurled back by a galling fire, which throws it into
disorder and flight.
At this moment, however, the brigades of Bee and Bartow–comprising the
7th and 8th Georgia, 2nd Mississippi, 4th Alabama, 6th North Carolina,
and two companies of the 11th Mississippi, with Imboden’s Battery of
four pieces–recently arrived with Johnston from Winchester, come up,
form on the right of Sloan’s 4th South Carolina Regiment, while Wheat
rallies his remnant on Sloan’s left, now resting on the Sudley road, and
the whole new Rebel line opens a hot fire upon Burnside’s Brigade.
Hunter, for the purpose of better directing the Union attack, is at this
moment rapidly riding to the left of the Union line,–which is advancing
Southwardly, at right angles to Bull Run stream and the old line of
Rebel defense thereon. He is struck by the fragment of a shell, and
carried to the rear.
Colonel John S. Slocum’s, 2nd Rhode Island, Regiment, with Reynold’s
Rhode Island Battery (six 13-pounders), having been sent to the front of
Burnside’s left, and being closely pressed by the Enemy, Burnside’s own
regiment the 1st Rhode Island, is gallantly led by Major Balch to the
support of the 2nd, and together they handsomely repulse the Rebel
onset. Burnside now sends forward Martin’s 71st New York, with its two
howitzers, and Marston’s 2nd New Hampshire,–his whole Brigade, of four
regiments and a light artillery battery, being engaged with the heavy
masked battery (Imboden’s and two other pieces), and nearly seven full
regiments of the Enemy.
The regiments of Burnside’s Brigade are getting considerably cut up.
Colonels Slocum and Marston, and Major Balch, are wounded. There is
some confusion in the ranks, and the Rhode Island Battery is in danger
of capture, when General Andrew Porter–whose own brigade has just
reached the field and is deploying to the right of Burnside’s–succeeds
Hunter in command of the division, and rides over to his left. Burnside
asks him for Sykes’s battalion of regulars, which is accordingly
detached from the extreme right of Andrew Porter’s Division, rapidly
forms on the left, in support of the Rhode Island Battery, and opens a
hot and effective fire which, in connection with the renewed fire of
Burnside’s rallied regiments, and the opening artillery practice of
Griffin’s Battery–that has just come up at a gallop and gone into a
good position upon an eminence to the right of Porter’s Division, and to
the right of the Sudley road looking South–fairly staggers the Enemy.
And now the brigades of Sherman and Keyes, having been ordered across
Bull Run by General Tyler, are seen advancing from Poplar Ford, at the
rear of our left,–Sherman’s Brigade, headed by Corcoran’s 69th New York
Regiment, coming up on Burnside’s left, while Keves’s Brigade is
following, to the left again of, Sherman.
him of Tyler’s order to “cross over with the whole brigade to the
assistance of Colonel Hunter”–which he did, so far as the Infantry
was concerned, but left his battery under Ayres behind, on account
of the impassability of the bluff on the Western bank of Bull Run-
says: “Early in the day, when reconnoitering the ground, I had seen
a horseman descend from a bluff in our front, cross the stream, and
show himself in the open field, and, inferring we could cross over
at the same point, I sent forward a company as skirmishers, and
followed with the whole brigade, the New York Sixty-ninth leading.”
This is evidently the ford at the elbow of Bull Run, to the right
of Sherman’s front, which is laid down on the Army-maps as “Poplar
Ford,” and which McDowell’s engineers had previously discovered and
mapped; and to which Major Barnard of the U. S. Engineer Corps
alludes when, in his Official Report, he says: “Midway between the
Stone Bridge and Sudley Spring our maps indicated another ford,
which was said to be good.”
The Comte de Paris, at page 241, vol. I. of his admirable “History
of the Civil War in America,” and perhaps other Military
historians, having assumed and stated–upon the strength of this
passage in Sherman’s Report–that “the Military instinct” of that
successful soldier had “discovered” this ford; and the impression
being thus conveyed, however undesignedly, to their readers, that
McDowell’s Engineer corps, after spending two or three days in
reconnaissances, had failed to find the ford which Sherman had in a
few minutes “discovered” by “Military instinct;” it is surely due
to the truth of Military history, that the Engineers be fairly
credited with the discovery and mapping of that ford, the existence
of which should also have been known to McDowell’s brigade
commanders.
If, on the other hand, the Report of the Rebel Captain Arthur L.
Rogers, of the Loudoun Artillery, to General Philip St. George
Cocke, be correct, it would seem that Sherman attempted to cross
Bull Run lower down than Poplar Ford, which is “about one mile
above the Stone Bridge,” but was driven back by the fire of
Rogers’s guns to cross at that particular ford; for Rogers, in that
Report, says that about 11 o’clock A. M., the first section of the
Loudoun Artillery, under his command, “proceeded to the crest of
the hill on the West Side of Bull Run, commanding Stone Bridge. *
* * Here.” continues he, “I posted my section of Artillery, and
opened a brisk fire upon a column of the Enemy’s Infantry, supposed
to be two regiments, advancing towards me, and supported by his
battery of rifled cannon on the hills opposite. These poured into
my section a steady fire of shot and shell. After giving them some
fifty rounds, I succeeded in heading his column, and turned it up
Bull Run to a ford about one mile above Stone Bridge, where, with
the regiments which followed, they crossed, and proceeded to join
the rest of the Enemy’s forces in front of the main body of our
Army.”]
Before this developing, expanding, and advancing attack of the Union
forces, the Rebel General Bee, who–since his coming up to support
Evans, with his own and Bartow’s Brigades, to which had since been added
Hampton’s Legion,–has been in command of this new Rebel line of defense
upon the left of the Bull Run line, concludes that that attack is
getting too strong for him, and orders his forces to retreat to the
Southward, and re-form on a second line, parallel to their present line,
and behind the rising ground at their rear. They do so, somewhat faster
than he desires. The whole line of the Rebel centre gives way, followed
by the wings, as far as the victorious Union troops can see.
We must be blind if we cannot perceive that thus far, the outlook, from
the Union point of view,–despite numberless mistakes of detail, and
some, perhaps, more general in their character–is very good. The “Boys
in Blue” are irresistibly advancing, driving the “Rebel Gray” back and
back, without let or hindrance, over the Buck Hill ridge, over Young’s
Branch, back to, and even over, the Warrenton Pike. Time, to be sure,
is flying–valuable time; but the Enemy also is retiring.–There is some
slight confusion in parts of our own ranks; but there is much more in
his. At present, we have decidedly the best of it. McDowell’s plan has
been, thus far, successful. Will that success continue? We shall see.
Heintzelman’s Division is coming, up from the rear, to the Union right–
Franklin’s Brigade, made up of the 5th and 11th Massachusetts, and 1st
Minnesota, with Ricketts’s splendid battery of six 10-pounder Parrotts,
forming on the right of Andrew Porter’s Brigade and Division; while
Willcox’s demi-Brigade, with its 11th (“Fire Zouaves”) and 38th New
York–having left Arnold’s Battery of four pieces, with the 1st Michigan
as its support, posted on a hill commanding Sudley’s Ford–comes in, on
the right of Franklin, thus forming the extreme right of the advancing
Union line of attack.
As our re-enforcing brigades come up, on our right, and on our left, the
Enemy falls back, more and more discouraged and dismayed. It seems to
him, as it does to us, “as though nothing can stop us.” Jackson,
however, is now hurrying up to the relief of the flying and disordered
remnants of Bee’s, Bartow’s, and Evans’s Brigades; and these
subsequently rally, with Hampton’s Legion, upon Jackson’s strong brigade
of fresh troops, so that, on a third new line, to which they have been
driven back, they soon have–6,500 Infantry, 13 pieces of Artillery, and
Stuart’s cavalry-posted in a belt of pines which fringes the Southern
skirt of the Henry House plateau–in a line-of-battle which, with its
left resting upon the Sudley road, three-quarters of a mile South of its
intersection with the Warrenton Pike, is the irregular hypothenuse of a
right-angled triangle, formed by itself and those two intersecting
roads, to the South-East of such intersection. It is within this right-
angled triangular space that the battle, now proceeding, bids fair to
rage most fiercely.
Johnston and Beauregard, riding up from their rear, reach this new
(third) line to which the Rebel troops have been driven, about noon.
They find the brigades of Bee, Bartow, and Evans, falling back in great
disorder, and taking shelter in a wooded ravine, South of the Robinson
House and of the Warrenton Pike. Hampton’s Legion, which has just been
driven backward over the Pike, with great loss, still holds the Robinson
House. Jackson, however, has reached the front of this line of defense,
with his brigade of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 27th, and 33rd Virginia Infantry,
and Pendleton’s Battery–all of which have been well rested, since their
arrival, with other brigades of Johnston’s Army of the Shenandoah, from
Winchester, a day or two back.
As Jackson comes up, on the left of “the ravine and woods occupied by
the mingled remnants of Bee’s, Bartow’s and Evans’s commands,” he posts
Imboden’s, Stanard’s, and Pendleton’s Batteries in line, “below the brim
of the Henry House plateau,” perhaps one-eighth of a mile to the East-
Southeastward of the Henry House, at his centre; Preston’s 4th Virginia,
and Echol’s 27th Virginia, at the rear of the battery-line; Harper’s 5th
Virginia, with Radford’s Cavalry, at its right; and, on its left,
Allen’s 2nd Virginia; with Cumming’s 33rd Virginia to the left of that
again, and Stuart’s Cavalry covering the Rebel left flank.
It is about this time that the chief Rebel generals find their position
so desperate, as to necessitate extraordinary measures, and personal
exposure, on their part. Now it is, that Jackson earns the famous
sobriquet which sticks to him until he dies.
[Bee approaches Jackson–so goes the story, according to Swinton;
he points to the disordered remnants of his own brigade mingled
with those of the brigades of Bartow and Evans huddled together in
the woods, and exclaims: “General, they are beating us back!”
“Sir,” responds Jackson, drawing himself up, severely, “We’ll give
them the bayonet!” And Bee, rushing back among his confused troops,
rallies them with the cry: “There is Jackson, standing like a Stone
wall! Let us determine to die here, and we will conquer.”]
Now it is, that Johnston and Beauregard, accompanied by their staffs,
ride backward and forward among the Rebel ranks, rallying and
encouraging them. Now it is, that, Bee and Bartow and Hampton being
wounded, and the Lieutenant-Colonel of the Hampton Legion killed,
Beauregard leads a gallant charge of that legion in person. And now it
is, that Johnston himself, finding all the field-officers of the 4th
Alabama disabled, “impressively and gallantly charges to the front” with
the colors of that regiment at his side!
These conspicuous examples of bravery, inspire the Rebel troops with
fresh courage, at this admittedly “critical” moment.
Johnston now assigns to Beauregard the chief “command of the left” of
the Bull Run line,–that is to say, the chief command of the Enemy’s new
line of defense, which, as we have seen, is on the left of, and at right
angles to, the old Bull Run line–while he himself, riding back to the
Lewis House, resumes “the command of the whole field.”
On his way to his rear, Johnston orders Cocke to send reenforcements to
Beauregard. He also dispatches orders to hurry up to that Rebel
general’s support, the brigades of Holmes and Early from near the Union
Mills Ford, and that of Bonham from Mitchell’s Ford,–Ewell with his
brigade, being also directed to “follow with all speed” from Union
Mills Ford-making a total of over 10,000 fresh troops.
From the “commanding elevation” of the Lewis House, Johnston can observe
the position of the Union forces beyond Bull Run, at Blackburn’s Ford
and Stone Bridge; the coming of his own re-enforcing brigades from far
down the valley, toward Manassas; and the manoeuvres of our advancing
columns under McDowell.
As the battle proceeds, the Enemy’s strength on the third new line of
defense increases, until he has 22 guns, 260 Cavalry, and 12 regiments
of Infantry, now engaged. It is interesting to observe also, that, of
these, 16 of the guns, 9 of the regiments, and all of the Cavalry
(Stuart’s), belong to Johnston’s Army of the Shenandoah, while only 6
guns and 3 Infantry regiments thus engaged, belong to Beauregard’s Army
of the Potomac. Thus the burden of the battle has been, and is being,
borne by Johnston’s, and not Beauregard’s troops–in the proportion of
about three of the former, to one of the latter,–which, for over two
hours, maintain their position despite many successive assaults we make
upon them.
It is after 2 o’clock P.M., when Howard’s Brigade, of Heintzelman’s
Division, reaches the battle-field, almost broken down with exhaustion.
By order of Heintzelman it has moved at double-quick for a mile of the
way, until, under the broiling heat, it can do so no longer. The last
two miles of the weary tramp, while the head of the brigade has moved at
quick time, the rear, having lost distances, moves, much of the time, at
a double-quick. As a consequence, many of Howard’s men drop out, and
absolutely faint from exhaustion.
As Howard’s Brigade approaches the field, besides the ambulances and
litters, conveying to the rear the wounded and dying, crowds of
retreating stragglers meet and tell it to hurry along; that the Enemy
has been driven back a mile; but, as it marches along, its regiments do
not feel particularly encouraged by the disorganization so prevalent;
and the fact that as they come into action, the thunders of the Rebel
Artillery do not seem to meet an adequately voluminous response–from
the Union side, seems to them, a portent of evil. Weary and fagged out,
they are permitted to rest, for a while, under cover.
Up to this time, our line, increased, as it has been, by the brigades of
Sherman and Keyes, on the left of Burnside, and of Franklin and Wilcox,
on the right of Porter, has continued to advance victoriously. Our
troops are, to be sure, considerably scattered, having been “moved from
point to point” a good deal. On our left, the Enemy has been driven
back nearly a mile, and Keyes’s Brigade is pushing down Bull Run, under
shelter of the bluffs, trying to turn the right of the Enemy’s new line,
and give Schenck’s Brigade a better chance for crossing the Stone
Bridge, still commanded by some of the Rebel guns.
Having “nothing to do” there, “several of the Union regiments” are
coming over, from our left toward our right, with a view of overlapping,
and turning, the Enemy’s left.
It is about half past 2 o’clock. The batteries of Griffin and Ricketts
have already been advanced as far as the eminence, upon our right, upon
which stands the Dogan House. Supported by Lyons’s gallant 14th New
York Chasseurs, Griffin’s and Ricketts’s Batteries are still pouring a
terribly destructive fire into the batteries and columns of the Enemy,
now behind the brow of the Henry House hill, wherever exposed, while
Palmer’s seven companies of Union Cavalry are feeling the Enemy’s left
flank, which McDowell proposes to turn. The flags of eight Union
regiments, though “borne somewhat wearily” now point toward the hilly
Henry House plateau, beyond which “disordered masses of Rebels” have
been seen “hastily retiring.”
There is a lull in the battle. The terrible heat is exhausting to the
combatants on both sides. Griffin and Ricketts have wrought such havoc
with their guns, that “nothing remains to be fired at.” Victory seems
most surely to be ours.
Away down at his headquarters at the Lewis House, the Rebel General
Johnston stands watching the progress of the battle, as it goes against
him. Nervously he glances, every now and then, over his left shoulder,
as if expecting something. An officer is galloping toward him, from
Manassas. He comes from the office of Beauregard’s Adjutant-General, at
that point. He rides up and salutes. “General,” says he, breathlessly,
“a United States Army has reached the line of the Manassas Gap railroad,
and is now but three or four miles from our left flank!”
Johnston clenches his teeth nervously. Thick beads of perspiration
start from his forehead. He believes it is Patterson’s Army that has
followed “upon his heels” from before Winchester, faster than has been
anticipated; and, as he thinks of Kirby Smith, who should long since
have arrived with Elzey’s Brigade–all, of his own “Army of the
Shenandoah,” that has not yet followed him to Manassas,–the exclamation
involuntarily bursts from his lips: “Oh, for four regiments!”
Richmond Dispatch, from the battle-field, July 23d: “Between two
and three o’clock large numbers of men were leaving the field, some
of them wounded, others exhausted by the long struggle, who gave us
gloomy reports; but, as the firing on both sides continued
steadily, we felt sure that our brave Southerners had not been
conquered by the overwhelming hordes of the North. It is, however,
due to truth to say that the result at this hour hung trembling in
the balance. We had lost numbers of our most distinguished
officers. Gens. Barlow and Bee had been stricken down; Lieut; Col.
Johnson of the Hampton Legion had been killed; Col. Hampton had
been wounded. But there was at hand a fearless general whose
reputation was staked on this battle: Gen. Beauregard promptly
offered to lead the Hampton Legion into action, which he executed
in a style unsurpassed and unsurpassable. Gen. Beauregard rode up
and down our lines, between the Enemy and his own men, regardless
of the heavy fire, cheering and encouraging our troops. About this
time, a shell struck his horse, taking its head off, and killing
the horses of his aides, Messrs. Ferguson and Hayward. * * * Gen.
Johnston also threw himself into the thickest of the fight, seizing
the colors of a Georgia (Alabama) regiment, and rallying then to
the charge. * * * Your correspondent heard Gen. Johnston exclaim
to Gen. Cocke, just at the critical moment, ‘Oh, for four
regiments!’ His wish was answered; for in the distance our re-
enforcements appeared. The tide of battle was turned in our favor
by the arrival of Gen. Kirby Smith, from Winchester, with 4,000 men
of Gen. Johnston’s Division. Gen. Smith heard, while on the
Manassas Railroad cars, the roar of battle. He stopped the train,
and hurried his troops across the fields to the point just where he
was most needed. They were at first supposed to be the Enemy,
their arrival at that point of the field being entirely unexpected.
The Enemy fell back, and a panic seized them. Cheer after cheer
from our men went up, and we knew the battle had been won.”
Another Rebel correspondent who, as an officer of the Kentucky
battalion of General Johnston’s Division of the Rebel Army,
participated in the battle, wrote to the Louisville Courier from
Manassas, July 22, an account of it, in which, after mentioning
that the Rebel Army had been forced back for two miles, he
continues; “The fortunes of the day were evidently against us.
Some of our best officers had been slain, and the flower of our
Army lay strewn upon the field, ghastly in death or gaping with
wounds. At noon, the cannonading is described as terrific. It was
an incessant roar for more than two hours, the havoc and
devastation at this time being fear ful. McDowell * * * had nearly
outflanked us, and they were just in the act of possessing
themselves of the Railway to Richmond. Then all would have been
lost. But most opportunely–I may say Providentially–at this
juncture, Gen. Johnston, [Kirby Smith it should be] with the
remnant of Johnston’s Division–our Army, as we fondly call it, for
we have been friends and brothers in camp and field for three
months–reappeared, and made one other desperate struggle to obtain
the vantage-ground. Elzey’s Brigade of Marylanders and Virginians
led the charge; and right manfully did they execute the work,”]
“The prayer of the wicked availeth not,” ’tis said; yet never was the
prayer of the righteous more quickly answered than is that of the Rebel
General-in-chief! Johnston himself, alluding to this exigent moment,
afterward remarks, in his report: “The expected reenforcements appeared
soon after.” Instead of Patterson’s Union Army, it is Kirby Smith,
coming up, with Elzey’s Brigade, from Winchester!
Satisfied of the safe arrival of Kirby Smith, and ordering him up, with
Elzey’s Brigade, Johnston directs Kershaw’s 2nd and Cash’s 8th South
Carolina Regiments, which have just come up, with Kemper’s Battery, from
Bonham’s Brigade, to strengthen the Rebel left, against the attempt
which we are still making to reach around it, about the Sudley road, to
take it in reverse. Fisher’s 6th North Carolina Regiment arriving about
the same time, is also hurried along to help Beauregard.
But during the victorious lull, heretofore alluded to, something is
happening on our side, that is of very serious moment. Let us see what
it is:
The batteries of Griffin and Ricketts, at the Dogan House, having
nothing to fire at, as we have seen, are resting, pleased with the
consciousness of their brilliant and victorious service against the
Rebel batteries and Infantry columns, when they are ordered by McDowell
–who, with his staff, is upon elevated ground to the rear of our
right,–to advance 1,000 yards further to the front, “upon a hill near
the Henry House.”
Ricketts considers this a perilous job–but proceeds to execute the
order as to his own battery. A small ravine is in his front. With
Ricketts gallantly leading, the battery dashes across the ravine at full
gallop, breaking one wheel as it goes, which is at once replaced. A
fence lies across the way. The cannoniers demolish it. The battery
ascends the hill near the Henry House, which is full of the Enemy’s
sharpshooters.
Ricketts and others, before the Committee on the Conduct of the
War.]
Soon as Ricketts gets his guns in battery, his men and horses begin to
fall, under the fire of these sharpshooters. He turns his guns upon the
Henry House,–and “literally riddles it.” Amid the moans of the
wounded, the death scream of a woman is heard! The Enemy had permitted
her to remain in her doomed house!
But the execution is not all on one side, by any means. Ricketts is in
a very hot place–the hottest, he afterward declares, that he has ever
seen in his life–and he has seen fighting before this.
The Enemy is behind the woods, at the front and right of Ricketts’s
Battery. This, with the added advantage of the natural slope of the
ground, enables him to deliver upon the brave Union artillerists a
concentrated fire, which is terribly destructive, and disables so many
of Rickett’s horses that he cannot move, if he would. Rickett’s own
guns, however, are so admirably served, that a smooth-bore battery of
the Enemy, which has been stubbornly opposing him, is driven back,
despite its heavy supports.
And Griffin’s Battery now comes rapidly up into position on the left of,
and in line with, Ricketts. For Griffin also has been ordered from the
Dogan House hill, to this new, and dangerously exposed, position.
But when Major Barry, General McDowell’s Chief of Artillery, brings him
the order, Griffin hesitates–for he has no Infantry support.
“The Fire Zouaves–[The 11th New York]–will support you,” says Barry,”
They are just ready to follow you at the double-quick!”
“Then why not let them go and get in position on the hill,” says
Griffin; “then, let Ricketts’s and my batteries come into battery
behind; and then, let them (the Zouaves) fall back?”
Griffin advises, also, as a better position for his own battery, a hill
500 yards in the rear of the Henry House hill. But advice is thrown
away. His artillery-chief is inflexible.
“I tell you,” says Griffin again, “the Fire Zouaves won’t support us.”
“They will,” replies Barry. “At any rate it is General McDowell’s order
to go there!”
That settles the business. “I will go,” responds Griffin; “but mark my
words, they will not support us!”
Griffin’s Battery, indeed, starts first, but, owing to the mistake of
one of his officers, it has to be countermarched, so that Ricketts’s is
thrown to the front, and, as we have seen, first reaches the crest of
the Henry House hill.
Griffin, as he comes up with his guns, goes into battery on the left of
Ricketts, and at once opens briskly on the Enemy. One of Griffin’s guns
has a ball lodged in the bore, which cannot be got in or out. His other
five guns, with the six guns of Ricketts, make eleven pieces, which are
now side by side-all of them driving away at the Enemy’s (Stonewall
Jackson’s) strong batteries, not more than 300 yards away.
They have been at it half an hour perhaps, when Griffin moves two of his
pieces to the right of Ricketts, and commences firing with them. He has
hardly been there five minutes, when a Rebel regiment coming out of the
woods at Griffin’s right front, gets over a rail fence, its Colonel
steps out between his regiment (now standing up to the knees in rank
grass) and the battery, and commences a speech to his men!
Griffin orders one of his officers to load with canister, and let drive
at them. The guns are loaded, and ready to fire, when up gallops Barry,
exclaiming: “Captain, don’t fire there; those are your battery-
supports!”
At this supreme moment, Reynolds’s gorgeous looking Marines are sitting
down in close column, on the ground, to the left of the Union batteries.
The showy 11th New York “Fire Zouaves” are a little to the rear of the
right of the guns. The gallant 14th New York Chasseurs, in their dust-
covered red uniforms, who had followed Griffin’s Battery, at some
distance, have, only a little while since, pushed finely up, from the
ravine at the rear of our batteries, into the woods, to the right of
Griffin and Ricketts, at a double-quick. To the left of the batteries,
close to the battalion of Marines, Heintzelman bestrides his horse, near
some of his own Division.
To Major Barry’s startling declaration, Captain Griffin excitedly
shouts: “They are Confederates! Sure as the world, they are
Confederates!”
But Barry thinks he knows better, and hastily responds: “I know they are
your battery-support.”
Griffin spurs toward his pieces, countermands his previous order, and-
firing is resumed in the old direction.
Andew Porter, has just ridden up to Heintzelman’s side, and now catches
sight of the Rebel regiment. “What troops are those?” he asks of
General Hientzelman, pointing in their direction.
While Heintzelman is replying, and just as Averell drops his reins and
levels his field-glass at them, “down come their pieces-rifles and
muskets,–and probably,” as Averell afterward said, “there never was
such a destructive fire for a few minutes. It seemed as though every
man and horse of that battery just laid right down, and died right off!”
It is a dreadful mistake that has been made. And there seems to have
been no excuse for it either. The deliberateness of the Rebel colonel
has given Barry abundant time to have discovered his error. For Griffin
subsequently declared, under oath, that, “After the officer who had been
talking to the regiment had got through, he faced them to the left,
marched them about fifty yards to the woods, then faced them to the
right again, marched them about forty yards toward us, then opened fire
upon us–and that was the last of us!”
It is a terrible blunder. For, up to this moment, the battle is
undeniably ours. And, while the Rebel colonel has been haranguing his
brave men, there has been plenty of time to have “passed the word” along
the line of our batteries, and poured canister into the Rebel regiment
from the whole line of eleven guns, at point-blank range, which must
inevitably have cut it all to pieces. The fate of the day hung balanced
right there and then–with all the chances in favor of McDowell. But
those chances are now reversed. Such are the fickle changes in the
fortunes of battle!
Instead of our batteries cutting to pieces the Rebel Infantry regiment,
the Rebel Infantry regiment has mowed down the gallant artillerists of
our batteries. Hardly a man of them escapes. Death and destruction
reap a wondrous and instant harvest. Wounded, dying, or dead, lie the
brave cannoniers at their guns, officers and men alike hors du combat,
while wounded horses gallop wildly back, with bounding caissons, down
the gentle declivity, carrying disorder, and further danger, in their
mad flight.
The supporting Fire Zouaves and Marines, on the right and left of our
line of guns, stand, with staring eyes and dumb open-mouths, at the
sudden turn of affairs. They are absolutely paralyzed with
astonishment. They do not run at first. They stand, quaking and panic-
stricken. They are urged to advance upon the Rebel regiment–“to give
them a volley, and then try the bayonet.” In vain! They fire perhaps
100 scattering shots; and receive in return, as they break and run down
the hill to the rear, volley after volley, of deadly lead, from the
Rebel muskets.
But, as this Rebel regiment (Cummings’s 33rd Virginia) advances to seize
the crippled and defenceless guns, it is checked, and driven back, by
the 1st Michigan Regiment of Willcox’s Brigade, which has pushed forward
in the woods at our extreme right.
Meanwhile, having been ordered by McDowell to support Ricketts’s
Battery, Howard has formed his four tired regiments into two lines–
Berry’s 4th Maine, and Whitney’s 2nd Vermont, on the right and left of
the first; and Dunnell’s 5th, and his own 3rd Maine, under Staples, in
the second line. Howard himself leads his first line up the elevated
plateau of the Henry House. Reaching the crest, the line delivers its
fire, volley after volley, despite the concentrated hail of the Enemy’s
Artillery and muskets. As the second line advances, a Rebel cannon-
ball, and an unfortunate charge of our own Cavalry, scatters most of the
5th Maine. The 2nd Vermont, which has advanced 200 yards beyond the
crest, rapidly firing, while the Enemy retires, is now, in turn, forced
back by the Enemy’s hot fire, and is replaced by the 3rd Maine, while
the remnant of the 5th moves up to the extreme right of Howard’s now
single line. But the Rebel fire grows hotter and hotter, and owing to
this, and a misunderstood order, Howard’s line begins to dissolve, and
then retires in confusion,–Howard and others vainly striving to rally
his own utterly exhausted men.
Sherman’s Brigade, too, has come over from our left, and now advances
upon the deadly plateau, where lie the disabled Union batteries–the
prizes, in full sight of both Armies, for which each seems now to be so
desperately striving.
Quinby’s 13th New York Rifles, in column of companies, leads the
brigade, followed by Lieutenant-Colonel Peck’s 2d Wisconsin, Cameron’s
79th New York (Highlanders), and Corcoran’s 69th New York (Irish), “in
line of battle.” Down the slope, across the ravine, and up, on the
other side, steadily presses Quinby, till he reaches the crest. He
opens fire. An advancing Rebel regiment retires, as he pushes up to
where the Union batteries and cannoniers lie wounded and dying–the
other three regiments following in line-of-battle until near the crest,
when the fire of the Enemy’s rifles and musketry, added to his heavy
cannonading, grows so severe that the brigade is forced back to shelter
in a roadway leading up the plateau.
Peck’s 2nd Wisconsin, now emerges from this sheltered roadway, and
steadily mounts the elevation, in the face of the Enemy’s severe fire-
returning it, with spirit, as it advances. But the Rebel fire becomes
too galling. The gray-clad Wisconsin boys return to the sheltered road
again, while the cry goes up from Sherman’s ranks: “Our own men are
firing at them!” Rallying at the road, the 2nd Wisconsin again returns,
with desperate courage, to the crest of the hill, delivers its fire, and
then, unable to withstand the dreadful carnage, falls back once more, in
disorder.
At this, the 79th (Highland) Regiment springs forward, to mount the brow
of the fatal hill, swept as it is, with this storm of shot and shell and
musket-balls. Up, through the lowering smoke, lit with the Enemy’s
incessant discharges in the woods beyond, the brave Highlanders jauntily
march, and, with Cameron and their colors at their head, charge
impetuously across the bloody hill-crest, and still farther, to the
front. But it is not in human nature to continue that advance in the
teeth of the withering fire from Jackson’s batteries, strengthened, as
they are, by Pelham’s and Kemper’s. The gallant fellows fall back,
rally again, advance once more, retire again, and at last,–the heroic
Cameron being mortally wounded,–fall back, in confusion, under the
cover of the hill.
And now, while Quinby’s Regiment, on another ridge, more to the left, is
also again engaging the Enemy, the 69th New York, led by the fearless
Corcoran, dashes forward, up the Henry House hill, over the forbidding
brow, and beyond. As the brave Irishmen reach the abandoned batteries,
the hoarse roar of cannon, the sharp rattle of musketry-volleys, the
scream of shot and shell, and the whistling of bullets, is at once
deafening and appalling, while the air seems filled with the iron and
leaden sleet which sweeps across the scorched and blasted plateau of the
Henry House. Nobly the Irish Regiment holds its ground for a time; but,
at last, it too falls back, before the hurtling tempest.
The fortunes of the day are plainly turning against us. Time is also
against us–as it has been all along–while it is with the Enemy. It is
past 3 o’clock.
Since we last looked at Beauregard’s third new defensive line, there
have been material accessions to it. The remains of the brigades of
Bee, Evans, and Bartow, have been reformed on the right of Jackson’s
Brigade–Bee on his immediate right, Evans to the right of Bee, and
Bartow to the right of Evans, with a battery which has been engaging
Schenck’s Brigade on the other side of Bull Run near the Stone Bridge;
while Cocke’s Brigade watches Bull Run to the rear of Bartow. On the
left of Jackson’s. Brigade, is now to be seen a part of Bonham’s
Brigade (Kershaw’s 2nd South Carolina, and Cash’s 8th South Carolina)
with Kemper’s Battery on its left. Kirby Smith has reached the front,
from Manassas, and–in advancing from his position on the left of
Bonham’s demi-Brigade, just West of the Sudley road, with Elzey’s
Brigade, in a counter-attack upon our right-is wounded, and carried to
the rear, leaving his command to Elzey. Stuart’s Cavalry are in the
woods, still farther to the Enemy’s left, supporting Beckham’s Battery.
Early’s Brigade is also coming up, from Union Mills Ford, not far to the
rear of the Enemy’s left, with the design of coming into line between
Elzey’s Brigade and Beckham’s Battery, and out-flanking and attacking
our right. But let us bring our eyes back to the bloody contest, still
going on, for the possession of the batteries of Griffin and Ricketts.
Arnold’s Battery has raced up on our right, and is delivering shot,
shell, spherical case, and canister, with effect, although exposed to a
severe and accurate fire from the Enemy. Wilcox, with what is left of
the 1st Michigan, after once retaking the batteries on the plateau, from
the 7th Georgia, has got around the Enemy’s left flank and is actually
engaged with the Enemy’s rear, while that Enemy’s front is engaged with
Franklin and Sherman! But Hobart Ward’s 38th New York, which Wilcox has
ordered up to support the 1st Michigan, on our extreme right, in this
flanking movement, has been misdirected, and is now attacking the
Enemy’s centre, instead of his left; and Preston’s 28th Virginia–which,
with Withers’s 18th Virginia, has come up to the Rebel left, from
Cocke’s Brigade, on the Enemy’s right–finding the 1st Michigan broken,
in the woods, attacks it, and wounds and captures Wilcox. Withers’s
Regiment has, with a yell–the old “Rebel yell,” now rising everywhere
from Rebel throats, and so often heard afterward,–charged the 14th New
York Chasseurs, in the woods; and the Chasseurs, though retiring, have
fired upon it with such precision as to throw some of their assailants
into disorder.
left of our advance–having separated from Sherman on his right:–I
thought the day was won about 2 o’clock; but about half past 3
o’clock a sudden change in the firing took place, which, to my ear,
was very ominous. I knew that the moment the shout went up from
the other side, there appeared to be an instantaneous change in the
whole sound of the battle. * * * That, as far as I can learn, was
the shout that went up from the Enemy’s line when they found out
for certain that it was Johnston [Kirby Smith] and not Patterson,
that had come.”]
Meanwhile McDowell is making one more effort to retrieve the misfortunes
of the day. Lawrence’s 5th, and Clark’s 11th Massachusetts, with
Gorman’s 1st Minnesota,–all belonging to Franklin’s Brigade–together
with Corcoran’s 69th New York, of Sherman’s Brigade, have been brought
into line-of-battle, by the united efforts of Franklin, Averell, and
other officers, at our centre, and with the remnants of two or three
other regiments, are moving against the Enemy’s centre, to support the
attack of the Chasseurs-rallied and led forward again by Heintzelman
upon the Rebel left, and that of the 38th New York upon the Rebel left
centre,–in another effort to recapture the abandoned batteries.
Charge after charge, is made by our gallant regiments, and counter-
charge after counter-charge, is made by the fresh troops of the Enemy.
For almost half an hour, has the contest over the batteries rolled
backward and forward. Three several times have the batteries been
taken, and re-taken,–much of the determined and desperate struggle
going on, over the prostrate and bleeding bodies of the brave Union
artillerists,–but without avail. Regiment after regiment, has been
thrown back, by the deadly fusillade of the Enemy’s musketry from the
skirt of woods at his front and left, and the canister, case, and
bursting shells, of his rapidly-served Artillery.
It is now near upon 4 o’clock. Our last effort to recapture the
batteries has failed. The Union line of advance has been seriously
checked. Some of our own guns in those batteries are turned on us. The
Enemy’s Infantry make a rush over the blood-soaked brow of the fatal
plateau, pouring into our men a deadly fire, as they advance,–while
over to our right and rear, at the same moment, are seen the fresh
regiments of Early’s Brigade coming out of the woods–deploying rapidly
in several lines–with Stuart’s handful of Rebel Cavalry, while
Beckham’s guns, in the same quarter, open an oblique enfilading reverse
fire upon us, in a lively manner.
At once the minds of the fagged-out Union troops become filled with the
dispiriting idea that the exhausting fight which they have made all day
long, has been simply with Beauregard’s Army of the Potomac, and that
these fresh Rebel troops, on the Union right and rear, are the vanguard
of Johnston’s Army of the Shenandoah! After all the hard marching and
fighting they have done during the last thirteen hours,–with empty
stomachs, and parched lips, under a scorching sun that still, as it
descends in the West, glowers down upon them, through the murky air,
like a great, red, glaring eye,–the very thought is terrible!
Without fear, yet equally without hope, the Union troops crumble to
groups, and then to individuals. The attempt of McDowell to turn the
left of the Enemy’s Bull Run line, has failed.
McDowell and his officers heroically but vainly strive, at great
personal risk to themselves, to stem the tide of confusion, and
disorder. Sykes’s battalion of regulars, which has been at our left,
now steadily moves obliquely across the field of battle toward our
right, to a hill in the midground, which it occupies, and, with the aid
of Arnold’s Battery and Palmer’s Cavalry, holds, while the exhausted and
disorganized troops of the Union Army doggedly and slowly retire toward
Sudley Ford, their rear covered by an irregular square of Infantry,
which, mainly by the exertions of Colonel Corcoran, has been formed to
resist a threatened charge of Stuart’s Cavalry.
hour,” and not “helter-skelter,” as some narrators state.]
It is not fear, that has got the better of our Union troops. It is
physical exhaustion for one thing; it is thirst for another. Men must
drink,–even if they have foolishly thrown away their canteens,–and
many have retired to get water. It is the moral effect also–the
terrible disappointment–of seeing what they suppose are Johnston’s
fresh troops from the Shenandoah Valley, without Patterson “on their
heels,” suddenly appear on their flank and rear. It is not fear; though
some of them are panic-stricken, and, as they catch sight of Stuart’s
mounted men,–no black horse or uniform among them,–raise the cry of
“The Black Horse Cavalry!–The Black Horse Cavalry!”
The Union attack has been repulsed, it is true; but the Union soldiers,
though disorganized, discouraged, and disappointed, are not dismayed.
Their officers not yet having learned how to fight, and themselves
lacking the cohesion of discipline, the men have lost their regimental
organizations, and owing to the causes mentioned, slowly retire across
Sudley Ford of Bull Run, in a condition of disintegration, their retreat
being bravely covered by the 27th and 69th New York, (which have rallied
and formed there), Sykes’s Infantry battalion, Arnold’s Battery, and
Palmer’s Cavalry.
corps of Engineers, says: “It is not for me to give a history of
the battle. The Enemy was driven on our left, from cover to cover,
a mile and a half. Our position for renewing the action the next
morning was excellent; whence, then, our failure? It will not be
out of place, I hope, for me to give my own opinion of the cause of
this failure. An old soldier feels safe in the ranks, unsafe out
of the ranks, and the greater the danger the more pertinaciously he
clings to his place. The volunteer of three months never attains
this instinct of discipline. Under danger, and even under mere
excitement, he flies away from his ranks, and looks for safety in
dispersion. At four o’clock in the afternoon of the 21st, there
were more than twelve thousand volunteers on the battle-field of
Bull Run, who had entirely lost their regimental organizations.
They could no longer be handled as troops, for the officers and men
were not together. Men and officers mingled together
promiscuously; and it is worthy of remark that this disorganization
did not result from defeat or fear, for up to four o’clock we had
been uniformly successful. The instinct of discipline, which keeps
every man in his place, had not been acquired. We cannot suppose
that the troops of the Enemy had attained a higher degree of
discipline than our own, but they acted on the defensive, and were
not equally exposed to disorganization.”]
While the divisions of Hunter and Heintzelman, which came down in the
morning across Sudley Ford, are now, with one brigade (Sherman’s) of
Tyler’s Division, retiring again, in this disordered condition, by that
ford; two other brigades of Tyler’s Division, viz., that of Schenck–
which, at 4 o’clock, was just in the act of advancing upon, and across,
the Stone Bridge, to join in the Union attack, and of Keyes, which was,
at the same time, just succeeding in its effort to turn the right flank
of the Enemy’s third new line,–are withdrawing from the field, across
Bull Run stream, by the Warrenton Pike, and other roads leading them
directly toward Centreville. The brigades of both Keyes and Schenck are
retiring in good order; that of Keyes, at “an ordinary pace,” following
close after McDowell, who, with his staff, has ridden across the
battlefield and Bull Run; while part of that of Schenck, united with the
2nd Maine (of Keyes’ Brigade) and Ayres’s Battery, “promptly and
effectively” repulses a charge of the Enemy’s Cavalry, and covers the
rear of Tyler’s Division. Both of these brigades reach Centreville,
hungry and weary, but otherwise, for the most part, in good shape.
But during this grand all-day attack, by two of McDowell’s divisions,
directly aided by part of a third, upon the left of the Enemy’s original
Bull Run line of defense–which attack, while it has failed in its
purpose, has also utterly upset and defeated the Enemy’s purpose to
carry out Beauregard’s plan of attacking Centreville that same morning–
what has the Left Wing of McDowell’s Army been doing? Let us go back to
Sunday morning, and ascertain:
All the Army of McDowell, save his Left Wing–which, comprising the two
brigades (Blenker’s and Davies’s) of Miles’s Division, and Richardson’s
Brigade of Tyler’s Division that fought the preliminary battle of
Blackburn’s Ford, is now under the command of Miles,–moved away from
Centreville, down the Warrenton Pike, as we have seen, very early in the
morning.
Blenker remains with his brigade as a reserve, on the heights a little
East of Centreville, to throw up intrenchments; which, however, he does
not do, for lack of trenching implements. Richardson and Davies are to
make a feint, at Blackburn’s Ford, so as to draw the Enemy’s troops
there, while the heavy blow of McDowell’s Right Wing and Centre falls
upon the left flank and rear of the Enemy’s Bull Run line.
Richardson’s Brigade is already down the ridge, in his old position at
Blackburn’s Ford, when Davies with his brigade reaches it, from
Centreville, and, by virtue of seniority, takes command of the two
brigades. Leaving Richardson’s Brigade and Greene’s Battery exactly on
the battle-ground of the 18th July, Davies posts two regiments (the 18th
and 32nd New York) of his own brigade, with Hunt’s Battery, on the brow
of a hill, in an open wheat field, some eighty yards to the South-
Eastward of Richardson, distant some 1,500 yards from Longstreet’s
batteries on the Western side of Bull Run,–and commences a rapid fire,
upon the Enemy’s position at Blackburn’s Ford, from both of the Union
batteries.
At 10 o’clock, there is a lull in this Union fire. The Artillery
ammunition is running short. The demonstration, however, seems, thus
far, to be successful–judging by the movement of Rebel troops toward
Blackburn’s Ford. The lull continues until 11 o’clock. At that time
Miles arrives at his front, in a towering rage.
On his way down the ridge, that morning, early, Davies had made a
discovery. While passing a roadway, his guide had casually remarked:
“There is a road that leads around to the Enemy’s camp, direct.” “Ah!”
–said Davies–“and can they get through that road?” “Oh, yes,” replied
the guide. Davies had at once halted, and, after posting his 16th and
31st New York Regiments, with two guns of Hunt’s Battery, near this
road, at its junction with the ridge road running up to Centreville and
Black burn’s Ford, had proceeded, with the rest of his regiments and
guns, to the position where Miles finds him.
But Miles has discovered what Davies has done, in this matter of the
flanking roadway; and–without knowing, or apparently caring to know,
the reason underlying the posting of the two regiments and two guns in
its vicinity,–flies into “a terrible passion” because of it; in “no
very measured language,” gives Davies “a severe dressing down;” and
orders him to bring both regiments and guns down to the front. Davies
complies, and says nothing. Miles also orders him to continue the
firing from his batteries, without regard to the quantity of ammunition.
This order, also, Davies obeys–and the firing proceeds, for two solid
hours, until another order comes, about 1 o’clock P.M., to stop firing.
The fact is, that Miles is not at all himself–but is suffering under
such a strain of mental excitement, he afterward claims, that he is not
responsible.
Miles, however, returns to Centreville about noon; and no sooner is he
gone, than Davies at once sends back pioneers to obstruct that road
which would bring the Enemy around his left flank and rear, to
Centreville. These, work so industriously, that they cut down a quarter
of a mile of trees, and block the road up completely. Davies also posts
a few pickets there, in case of accidents. It is well he does so. It
is not long before the Enemy makes an attempt to get around to his rear,
by that road; but, finding it both obstructed and picketed, retires
again. Davies does not see the Rebels making that attempt, but catches
sight of them on their return, and gives them a severe shelling for
their pains.
Davies keeps up his firing, more or less-according to the condition of
the Enemy and of his own ammunition–until 4 o’clock, when the firing
occasioned by the Union flanking movement, six miles to his right,
ceases. Then there reaches him a note from Richardson, so badly
penciled that he can only make out the one word “beaten,”–but cannot,
for the life of him, make out, whether the beaten one is our Right Wing,
or the Enemy!
Of what followed, he tells the story himself,–under oath, before the
Committee on the Conduct of the War–so graphically, that the temptation
to give it, in his own words, is irresistible. “I saw unmistakable
evidence,” said he, “that we were going to be attacked on our Left Wing.
I got all ready for the attack, but did not change my front.
“About 5 o’clock, I think, the Rebels made their appearance back upon
this very road up which they had gone before; but instead of keeping up
the road, they turned past a farm-house, went through the farm-yard, and
came down and formed right in front of me, in a hollow, out of my sight.
Well, I let them all come down there, keeping a watch upon their
movements. I told the Artillery not to fire any shot at them until they
saw the rear column go down, so as to get them all down in the little
hollow or basin, there. There was a little basin there, probably a
quarter of a mile every way. I should think that, maybe, 3,000 men
filed down, before I changed front.
“We lay there, with two regiments back, and the Artillery in front,
facing Bull Run. As soon as about 3,000 of the Enemy got down in this
basin, I changed the front of the Artillery around to the left, in face
of the Enemy, and put a company of Infantry between each of the pieces
of Artillery, and then deployed the balance of the regiments right and
left, and made my line-of-battle.
“I gave directions to the Infantry not to fire a shot, under any
circumstances, until they got the word of command from me. I
furthermore said I would shoot the first man that fired a shot before I
gave the command to do so.
“I gave them orders all to lie down on their faces. They, (the Rebels)
were just over the brow of the hill, so that, if they came up in front
of us, they could not hit a man.
“As soon as I saw the rear column, I told * * * Lieutenant Benjamin to
fire. * * * He fired the first shot when the rear column presented
itself. It just went over their heads, and hit a horse and rider in
their rear. As soon as the first shot was fired, I gave the order for
the whole six pieces of Artillery to open with grape and canister. The
effect was terrible. They were all there, right before us, about 450
yards off, and had not suspected that we were going to fire at all,
though they did not know what the reason was. Hunt’s Battery (belonging
to Richardson–who had by mistake got Greene’s) performed so well, that,
in thirty minutes, we dispersed every one of them!
“I do not know how many were killed, but we so crippled their entire
force that they never came after us an inch. A man, who saw the effect
of the firing, in the valley, said it was just like firing into a wheat
field; the column gave way at once, before the grape and canister; they
were just within available distance. I knew very well that if they but
got into that basin, the first fire would cut them all to pieces; and it
did. We continued to fire for thirty minutes, when there was nothing
more to fire at, and no more shots were returned.”
At a later hour–while remaining victorious at their well defended
position, with the Enemy at their front, dispersed and silenced,–these
two brigades of the Left Wing, receive orders to fall back on
Centreville, and encamp. With the brigade of Richardson, and Greene’s
Battery in advance, Davies’s own brigade and Hunt’s Battery following,
they fall back on the heights of Centreville “without the least
confusion and in perfect order”–reaching them at 7 P.M.
Meantime Miles has been relieved from command, and McDowell has ordered
Blenker’s Brigade to take position a mile or more in advance of
Centreville, toward Bull Run, on both sides of the Warrenton Pike, to
protect the retreat, now being made, in “a few collected bodies,” but
mainly in great disorder–owing partly to the baggage-wagons choking the
road, along which both venturesome civilians and fagged-out troops are
retreating upon Centreville. This confused retreat passes through
Blenker’s lines until 9 o’clock P.M.–and then, all is secure.
At midnight, McDowell has decided to make no stand at Centreville, but
to retire upon the defensive works at Washington. The order to retreat,
is given, and, with the rear well guarded by Richardson’s and Blenker’s
Brigades, is carried out, the van of the retreat, with no Enemy
pursuing, degenerating finally into a “mob,” which carries more or less
panic into Washington itself, as well as terrible disappointment and
chagrin to all the Loyal States of the Union.
Knowing what we now do, concerning the Battle of Bull Run, it is
somewhat surprising, at this day, to read the dispatches sent by
McDowell to General Scott’s headquarters at Washington, immediately
after it. They are in these words:
“CENTREVILLE, July 21, 1861–5:45 P.M.
“We passed Bull Run, engaged the Enemy, who, it seems, had just been
re-enforced by General Johnston. We drove them for several hours, and
finally routed them.”
realize the consternation which the news of this discomfiture–
grossly exaggerated–diffused over the loyal portion of our
Country. Only the tidings which had reached Washington up to four
o’clock–all presaging certain and decisive victory–were permitted
to go North by telegraph that day and evening; so that, on Monday
morning, when the crowd of fugitives from our grand Army was
pouring into Washington, a heedless, harmless, worthless mob, the
Loyal States were exulting over accounts of a decisive triumph.
But a few hours brought different advices; and these were as much
worse than the truth as the former had been better: our Army had
been utterly destroyed-cut to pieces, with a loss of twenty-five to
thirty thousand men, besides all its artillery and munitions, and
Washington lay at the mercy of the Enemy, who were soon to advance
to the capture and sack of our great commercial cities. Never
before had so black a day as that black Monday lowered upon the
loyal hearts of the North; and the leaden, weeping skies reflected
and heightened, while they seemed to sympathize with, the general
gloom. It would have been easy, with ordinary effort and care, to
have gathered and remanded to their camps or forts around
Alexandria or Arlington, all the wretched stragglers to whom fear
had lent wings, and who, throwing away their arms and equipments,
and abandoning all semblance of Military order or discipline, had
rushed to the Capital to hide therein their shame, behind a cloud
of exaggerations and falsehoods. The still effective batteries,
the solid battalions, that were then wending their way slowly back
to their old encampments along the South bank of the Potomac,
depressed but unshaken, dauntless and utterly unassailed, were
unseen and unheard from; while the panic-stricken racers filled and
distended the general ear with their tales of impregnable
intrenchments and masked batteries, of regiments slaughtered,
brigades utterly cut to pieces, etc., making out their miserable
selves to be about all that was left of the Army. That these men
were allowed thus to straggle into Washington, instead of being
peremptorily stopped at the bridges and sent back to the
encampments of their several regiments, is only to be accounted for
on the hypothesis that the reason of our Military magnates had been
temporarily dethroned, so as to divest them of all moral
responsibility,” Greeley’s Am. Conflict, pp. 552-53., vol. I.]
“They rallied and repulsed us, but only to give us again the victory,
which seemed complete. But our men, exhausted with fatigue and thirst,
and confused by firing into each other, were attacked by the Enemy’s
reserves, and driven from the position we had gained, overlooking
Manassas. After this, the men could not be rallied, but slowly left the
field. In the meantime the Enemy outflanked Richardson at Blackburn’s
Ford, and we have now to hold Centreville till our men can get behind
it. Miles’s Division is holding the town. It is reported that Colonel
Cameron is killed, Hunter and Heintzelman wounded, neither dangerously.
“IRWIN MCDOWELL,
“Brigadier-General, Commanding.
“Lieutenant-Colonel TOWNSEND.”
“FAIRFAX COURT HOUSE, July 21, 1861.
“The men having thrown away their haversacks in the battle, and left
them behind, they are without food; have eaten nothing since breakfast.
We are without artillery ammunition. The larger part of the men are a
confused mob, entirely demoralized. It was the opinion of all the
commanders that no stand could be made this side of the Potomac. We
will, however, make the attempt at Fairfax Court House. From a prisoner
we learn that 20,000 from Johnston joined last night, and they march on
us to-night.
“IRWIN MCDOWELL.
“Colonel TOWNSEND”
“FAIRFAX COURT HOUSE, [July] 22, 1861.
“Many of the volunteers did not wait for authority to proceed to the
Potomac, but left on their own decision. They are now pouring through
this place in a state of utter disorganization. They could not be
prepared for action by to-morrow morning even were they willing. I
learn from prisoners that we are to be pressed here to-night and
tomorrow morning, as the Enemy’s force is very large, and they are
elated. I think we heard cannon on our rear-guard. I think now, as all
of my commanders thought at Centreville, there is no alternative but to
fall back to the Potomac, and I shall proceed to do so with as much
regularity as possible.
“IRWIN MCDOWELL.
“Colonel TOWNSEND.”
“ARLINGTON, July 22, 1861.
“I avail myself of the re-establishing of telegraph to report my
arrival. When I left the forks of the Little River turnpike and
Columbia turnpike, where I had been for a couple of hours turning
stragglers and parties of regiments upon this place and Alexandria, I
received intelligence that the rear-guard, under Colonel Richardson, had
left Fairfax Court House, and was getting along well. Had not been
attacked. I am now trying to get matters a little organized over here.
“IRWIN MCDOWELL.
“Brigadier-General.
“E. D. TOWNSEND.”
McDowell had unquestionably been repulsed, in his main attack, with his
Right Wing, and much of his Army was badly demoralized; but, on the
other hand, it may be well to repeat that the Enemy’s plan of attack
that same morning had been frustrated, and most of his forces so badly
shattered and demoralized that he dared not follow up the advantage
which, more by our own blunders than by his prowess, he had gained.
If the Union forces–or at least the Right Wing of them–were whipped,
the Enemy also was whipped. Jackson himself confesses that while he
had, at the last moment, broken our centre, our forces had turned both
of his flanks. The Enemy was, in fact, so badly used up, that he not
only dared not pursue us to Washington–as he would have down had he
been able–but he was absolutely afraid McDowell would resume the
attack, on the right of the original Bull Run line, that very night!
For, in a letter to General Beauregard; dated Richmond, Virginia, August
4, 1861, Jefferson Davis,–who was on the ground at Bull Run, July
21st,–alluding to the Battle of Bull Run, and Beauregard’s excuses for
not pursuing the Union troops, says:
“I think you are unjust to yourself in putting your failure to pursue
the Enemy to Washington, to the account of short supplies of subsistence
and transportation. Under the circumstances of our Army, and in the
absence of the knowledge since acquired–if, indeed, the statements be
true–it would have been extremely hazardous to have done more than was
performed. You will not fail to remember that, so far from knowing that
the Enemy was routed, a large part of our forces was moved by you, in
the night of the 21st, to repel a supposed attack upon our right, and
the next day’s operations did not fully reveal what has since been
reported of the Enemy’s panic.”
And Jefferson Davis’s statement is corroborated by the Report of Colonel
Withers, of the 18th Virginia, who, after starting with other regiments,
in an attempt to cut off the Union retreat, was recalled to the Stone
Bridge,–and who says: “Before reaching the point we designed to occupy
(near the Stone Bridge) we were met by another order to march
immediately to Manassas Junction, as an attack was apprehended that
night. Although it was now after sunset, and my men had had no food all
day, when the command to march to Manassas was given, they cheerfully
took the route to that place.”
Colonel Davies, who, as we have seen, commanded McDowell’s stubborn Left
Wing, was after all, not far wrong, when, in his testimony before the
Committee on the Conduct of the War, he declared, touching the story of
the Bull Run Battle: “It ought to have read that we were victorious with
the 13,000 troops of the Left Wing, and defeated in the 18,000 of the
Right Wing. That is all that Bull Run amounts to.”
In point of fact, the Battle of Bull Run–the first pitched battle of
the War–was a drawn battle.
War was now fully inaugurated–Civil War–a stupendous War between two
great Sections of one common Country; those of our People, on the one
side, fighting for the dissolution of the Union–and incidentally for
Free Trade, and for Slavery; those on the other side, fighting for the
preservation of the Union–and incidentally for Protection to our Free
Industries, and for the Freedom of the Slave.
As soon as the Republican Party controlled both Houses of Congress it
provided Protection to our Free Industries, and to the Free Labor
engaged in them, by the Morill Tariff Act of 1860–the foundation Act of
all subsequent enactments on the subject. In subsequent pages of this
work we shall see how the Freedom of the Slave was also accomplished by
the same great Party.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE COLORED CONTRABAND.
When the first gun was fired at Fort Sumter, its sullen echoes sounded
the funeral knell of Slavery. Years before, it had been foretold, and
now it was to happen. Years before, it bad been declared, by competent
authority, that among the implications of the Constitution was that of
the power of the General Government to Emancipate the Slaves, as a War
measure. Hence, in thus commencing the War of the Rebellion, the South
marched with open eyes upon this, as among other of the legitimate and
logical results of such a War.
Patrick Henry, in opposing the ratification by Virginia of the Federal
Constitution, had declared to the Slaveholders of that State that “Among
ten thousand implied powers” which Congress may assume, “they may, if we
be engaged in War, liberate every one of your Slaves, if they please, *
* * Have they not power to provide for the General Defense and Welfare?
May they not think that these call for the abolition of Slavery? May
they not pronounce all Slaves Free? and will they not be warranted by
that power? * * * They have the power, in clear, unequivocal terms,
and will clearly and certainly exercise it.”
So, too, in his great speech of May 25, 1836, in the House of
Representatives, John Quincy Adams had declared that in “the last great
conflict which must be fought between Slavery and Emancipation,”
Congress “must and will interfere” with Slavery, “and they will not only
possess the Constitutional power so to interfere, but they will be bound
in duty to do it, by the express provisions of the Constitution itself.”
And he followed this declaration with the equally emphatic words: “From
the instant that your Slave-holding States become the theatre of War-
civil, servile, or foreign–from that instant, the War powers of
Congress extend to interference with the Institution of Slavery in every
Way by which it can be interfered with.”
The position thus announced by these expounders of the Constitution–the
one from Virginia, the other from Massachusetts–was not to be shaken
even by the unanimous adoption, February 11, 1861, by the House of
Representatives on roll call, of the resolution of Mr. Sherman, of Ohio,
in these words:
“Resolved, That neither the Congress of the United States nor the people
or governments of the non-Slaveholding States have the Constitutional
right to legislate upon or interfere with Slavery in any of the
Slaveholding States in the Union.”
Ex-President J. Q. Adams’s cogent exposition of the Constitution,
twenty-five years before, in that same House, demonstrating not only
that Congress had the right but the Constitutional power to so
interfere–and his further demonstration April 15, 1842, of his
statement that under the laws of War, “when a Country is invaded, and
two hostile armies are set in martial array, the Commanders of both
Armies have power to Emancipate all the Slaves in the invaded
territory”–as not to be overcome by a mere vote of one House, however
unanimous. For the time being, however, it contributed, with other
circumstances, to confuse the public mind and conscience. Indeed as
early as May of 1861, the attitude of our Government and its troops
toward Negro Slaves owned or used by Rebels in rebellious States, began
to perturb the public, bother the Administration, and worry the Military
officers.
For instance, in Major-General McClellan’s proclamation to the Union men
of West Virginia, issued May 26, 1861, he said:
“The General Government cannot close its ears to the demand you have
made for assistance. I have ordered troops to cross the river. They
come as your friends and brothers–as enemies only to armed Rebels, who
are preying upon you; your homes, your families, and your property are
safe under our protection. All your rights shall be religiously
respected, notwithstanding all that has been said by the Traitors to
induce you to believe our advent among you will be signalized by an
interference with your Slaves. Understand one thing clearly: not only
will we abstain from all such interference, but we will, on the
contrary, with an iron hand crush any attempt at insurrection on their
part.”
On the other hand, the very next day, May 27, 1861, Major-General
Butler, in command of the “Department of A Virginia,” wrote to
Lieutenant-General Scott as follows:
“Since I wrote my last dispatch the question in regard to Slave property
is becoming one of very serious magnitude. The inhabitants of Virginia
are using their Negroes in the batteries, and are preparing to send the
women and children South. The escapes from them are very numerous, and
a squad has come in this morning to my pickets bringing their women and
children. Of course these cannot be dealt with upon the theory on which
I designed to treat the services of able-bodied men and women who might
come within my lines, and of which I gave you a detailed account in my
last dispatch. I am in the utmost doubt what to do with this species of
Property.
“Up to this time I have had come within my lines men and women with
their children, entire families, each family belonging to the same
owner. I have, therefore, determined to employ, as I can do very
profitably, the able-bodied persons in the party, issuing proper food
for the support of all, and charging against their services the expense
of care and sustenance of the non-laborers, keeping a strict and
accurate account as well of the services as of the expenditure, having
the worth of the services, and the cost of the expenditure, determined
by a Board of Survey, to be hereafter detailed. I know of no other
manner in which to dispose of this subject and the questions connected
therewith.
“As a matter of Property to the Insurgents, it will be of very great
moment, the number that I now have amounting, as I am informed, to what,
in good times, would be of the value of sixty thousand dollars. Twelve
of these Negroes, I am informed, have escaped from the batteries on
Sewall’s Point, which, this morning, fired upon my expedition as it
passed by out of range. As a means of offense, therefore, in the
Enemy’s hands, these Negroes, when able-bodied, are of the last
importance. Without them the batteries could not have been erected, at
least for many weeks.
“As a Military question it would seem to be a measure of necessity to
deprive their masters of their services. How can this be done? As a
political question and a question of humanity, can I receive the
services of a father and mother, and not take the children? Of the
humanitarian aspect I have no doubt. Of the political one I have no
right to judge. I therefore submit all this to your better judgment,
and as the questions have a political aspect, I have ventured, and I
trust I am not wrong in so doing, to duplicate the parts of my dispatch
relating to this subject, and forward them to the Secretary of War.”
In reply to the duplicate copy of this letter received by him, Secretary
Cameron thus answered:
“WASHINGTON, May 30, 1861.
“SIR: Your action in respect to the Negroes who came within your lines
from the service of the Rebels is approved. The Department is sensible
of the embarrassments which must surround officers conducting Military
operations in a State by the laws of which Slavery is sanctioned.
“The Government cannot recognize the rejection by any State of the
Federal obligations, nor can it refuse the performance of the Federal
obligations resting upon itself. Among these Federal obligations,
however, none can be more important than that of suppressing and
dispersing armed combinations formed for the purpose of overthrowing its
whole Constitutional authority.
“While, therefore, you will permit no interference by the persons under
your command, with the relations of Persons held to Service under the
laws of any State, you will, on the other hand, so long as any State,
within which your Military operations are conducted, is under the
control of such armed combinations, refrain from surrendering to alleged
masters any Person who may come within your lines.
“You will employ such Persons in the services to which they may be best
adapted, keeping an account of the labor by them performed, of the value
of it, and the expenses of their maintenance. The question of their
final disposition will be reserved for future determination.
“SIMON CAMERON,
“Secretary of War.
“To Major General BUTLER.”
Great tenderness, however, was exhibited by many of the Union Generals
for the doomed Institution. On June 3, 1861, from Chambersburg, Pa., a
proclamation signed “By order of Major General Patterson, F. J. Porter,
Asst. Adj. General,” was issued from “Headquarters Department of
Pennsylvania,” “To the United States troops of this Department,” in
which they are admonished “that, in the coming campaign in Virginia,
while it is your duty to punish Sedition, you must protect the Loyal,
and, should the occasion offer, at once suppress Servile Insurrection.”
“General Orders No. 33,” issued from “Headquarters Department of
Washington,” July 17, 1861, “By command of Brigadier General Mansfield,
Theo. Talbot, Assistant Adjutant General,” were to this effect:
“Fugitive Slaves will under no pretext whatever, be permitted to reside,
or be in any way harbored, in the quarters or camps of the troops
serving in this Department. Neither will such Slaves be allowed to
accompany troops on the march. Commanders of troops will be held
responsible for a strict observance of this order.” And early in August
a Military order was issued at Washington “that no Negroes, without
sufficient evidence of their being Free or of their right to travel, are
permitted to leave the city upon the cars.”
But Bull Run did much to settle the Military as well as public mind in
proper grooves on this subject.
Besides employing Negro Slaves to aid Rebellion, by the digging of
ditches, the throwing up of intrenchments, and the erection of
batteries, their Rebel masters placed in their hands arms with which to
shoot down Union soldiers at the Battle of Bull Run, which, as we have
seen, occurred on Sunday, July 21, 1861–and resulted in a check to the
Union Cause.
The terror and confusion and excitement already referred to, that
prevailed in Washington all that night and the next day, as the panic-
stricken crowd of soldiers and civilians poured over the Long Bridge,
footsore with running, faint with weariness, weak with hunger, and
parched with thirst and the dust of the rout, can hardly be described.
But, however panicky the general condition of the inhabitants of the
National Capital, the Congress bravely maintained its equanimity.
In the Senate, on the day following the disaster, a bill touching the
Confiscation of Property used for insurrectionary purposes being up for
consideration, the following amendment was offered to it:
“And be it further enacted, That whenever any person claiming to be
entitled to the Service or Labor of any other Person under the laws of
any State, shall employ such Person in aiding or promoting any
Insurrection, or in resisting the Laws of the United States, or shall
permit him to be so employed, he shall forfeit all right to such Service
or Labor, and the Person whose Labor or Service is thus claimed shall be
thenceforth discharged therefrom, any law to the contrary
notwithstanding.”
This amendment, emancipating Slaves employed by their masters to aid
Rebellion, was adopted by 33 yeas to 6 nays.
As showing the feeling expressed right upon the very heels of what
seemed to be a great disaster, and when rumor, at any rate, placed the
victorious Enemy at the very gates of the Capital City, a few lines from
the debate may be interesting.
Mr. Trumbull said: “I am glad the yeas and nays have been called to let
us see who is willing to vote that the Traitorous owner of a Negro shall
employ him to shoot down the Union men of the Country, and yet insist
upon restoring him to the Traitor that owns him. I understand that
Negroes were in the fight which has recently occurred. I take it that
Negroes who are used to destroy the Union, and to shoot down the Union
men by the consent of Traitorous masters, ought not to be restored to
them. If the Senator from Kentucky is in favor of restoring them, let
him vote against the amendment.”
Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, said: “I shall vote with more heart
than I vote for ordinary measures, for this proposition. I hope the
Senate and the House of Representatives will sustain it, and that this
Government will carry it out with an inflexibility that knows no change.
The idea that men who are in arms destroying their Country shall be
permitted to use others for that purpose, and that we shall stand by and
issue orders to our Commanders, that we should disgrace our Cause and
our Country, by returning such men to their Traitorous masters, ought
not longer to be entertained. The time has come for that to cease; and,
by the blessing of God, so far as I am concerned, I mean it shall cease.
“If there is anybody in this Chamber that chooses to take the other
path, let him do it; let him know what our purpose is. Our purpose is
to save this Government and save this Country, and to put down Treason;
and if Traitors use bondsmen to destroy this Country, my doctrine is
that the Government shall at once convert these bondsmen into men that
cannot be used to destroy our Country. I have no apologies to make for
this position, I take it proudly.
“I think the time has come when this Government, and the men who are in
arms under the Government, should cease to return to Traitors their
Fugitive Slaves, whom they are using to erect batteries to murder brave
men who are fighting under the flag of their Country. The time has come
when we should deal with the men who are organizing Negro companies, and
teaching them to shoot down loyal men for the only offence of upholding
the flag of their Country.
“I hope further, Sir, that there is a public sentiment in this Country
that will blast men who will rise, in the Senate or out it, to make
apologies for Treason, or to defend or to maintain the doctrine that
this Government is bound to protect Traitors in converting their Slaves
into tools for the destruction of the Republic.”
Senator McDougall, of California, said: “I regard this as a Confiscation
for Treason, and I am for the proposition.”
Mr. Ten Eyck, said: “No longer ago than Saturday last I voted in the
Judiciary Committee against this amendment, for two reasons: First, I
did not believe that persons in Rebellion against this Government would
make use of such means as the employment of Persons held to Labor or
Service, in their Armies; secondly, because I did not know what was to
become of these poor wretches if they were discharged. God knows we do
not want them in our Section of the Union. But, Sir, having learned and
believing that these persons have been employed with arms in their hands
to shed the blood of the Union-loving men of this Country, I shall now
vote in favor of that amendment with less regard to what may become of
these people than I had on Saturday. I will merely instance that there
is a precedent for this. If I recollect history aright, General
Jackson, in the Seminole War, declared that every Slave who was taken in
arms against the United States should be set Free,”
So, too, in the House of Representatives, the retrograde of a badly
demoralized Army, its routed fragments still coming in with alarming
stories of a pursuing Enemy almost at the gates of the city, had no
terrors for our legislators; and there was something of Roman dignity,
patriotism, and courage, in the adoption, on that painfully memorable
Blue Monday, (the first–[Offered by Mr. Crittenden, of Kentucky]–with
only two dissenting votes, on a yea and nay vote; and, the second–
[Offered by Mr. Vandever, of Iowa.]–with entire unanimity) of the
following Resolutions:
“Resolved by the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United
States, That the present deplorable Civil War has been forced upon the
Country by the Disunionists of the Southern States, now in arms against
the Constitutional Government, and in arms around the Capital; that in
this National emergency, Congress, banishing all feelings of mere
passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole
Country; that this War is not waged on their part in any spirit of
oppression, or for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, or purpose of
overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established Institutions
of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the
Constitution, and to preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality,
and rights of the several States unimpaired; and that as soon as these
objects are accomplished, the War ought to cease.”
“Resolved, That the maintenance of the Constitution, the preservation of
the Union, and the enforcement of the Laws, are sacred trusts which must
be executed; that no disaster shall discourage us from the most ample
performance of this high duty; and that we pledge to the Country and the
World, the employment of every resource, National and individual, for
the suppression, overthrow, and punishment of Rebels in arms.”
The first of these Resolutions was intended to calm the fears of the
Border States–excited by Rebel emissaries; the second, to restore
confidence and courage to the patriot hearts of Union-men, everywhere.
Both were effectual.
And here it will hardly be amiss to glance, for an instant, toward the
Senate Chamber; and especially at one characteristic incident. It was
the afternoon of August the 1st, 1861,–scarce ten days since the check
to the Union arms at Bull Run; and Breckinridge, of Kentucky, not yet
expelled from the United States Senate, was making in that Body his
great speech against the “Insurrection and Sedition Bill,” and upon “the
sanctity of the Constitution.”
Baker, of Oregon,–who, as Sumner afterward said: “with a zeal that
never tired, after recruiting men drawn by the attraction of his name,
in New York and Philadelphia and elsewhere, held his Brigade in camp,
near the Capitol, so that he passed easily from one to the other, and
thus alternated the duties of a Senator and a General,” having reached
the Capitol, direct from his Brigade-camp, entered the Senate Chamber,
in his uniform, while Breckinridge was speaking.
When the Kentucky Senator “with Treason in his heart, if not on his
lips,” resumed his seat, the gray-haired soldier-Senator at once rose to
reply. “He began,”–said Charles Sumner, in alluding to the incident–
“simply and calmly; but as he proceeded, his fervid soul broke forth in
words of surpassing power. As on a former occasion he had presented the
well-ripened fruits of study, so now he spoke with the spontaneous
utterance of his own mature and exuberant eloquence–meeting the
polished Traitor at every point with weapons keener and brighter than
his own.”
After demolishing Breckinridge’s position touching the alleged
Unconstitutionality of the measure, and characterzing his other
utterances as “reproof, malediction, and prediction combined,” the
Patriot from the Far-West turned with rising voice and flashing eye upon
the gloomy Kentuckian:
“I would ask him,” said he, “what would you have us do now–a
Confederate Army within twenty miles of us, advancing, or threatening to
advance, to overwhelm your Government; to shake the pillars of the
Union, to bring it around your head, if you stay here, in ruins? Are we
to stop and talk about an uprising sentiment in the North against the
War? Are we to predict evil, and retire from what we predict? Is it
not the manly part to go on as we have begun, to raise money, and levy
Armies, to organize them, to prepare to advance; when we do advance, to
regulate that advance by all the laws and regulations that civilization
and humanity will allow in time of battle? Can we do anything more? To
talk to us about stopping, is idle; we will never stop. Will the
Senator yield to Rebellion? Will he shrink from armed Insurrection?
Will his State justify it? Will its better public opinion allow it?
Shall we send a flag of Truce? What would he have? Or would he conduct
this War so feebly, that the whole World would smile at us in derision?”
And then cried the orator-his voice rising to a higher key, penetrating,
yet musical as the blast from a silver trumpet: “What would he have?
These speeches of his, sown broadcast over the Land, what clear distinct
meaning have they? Are they not intended for disorganization in our
very midst? Are they not intended to dull our weapons? Are they not
intended to destroy our zeal? Are they not intended to animate our
enemies? Sir, are they not words of brilliant, polished Treason, even
in the very Capitol of the Nation?
“What would have been thought, if, in another Capitol, in another
Republic, in a yet more martial age, a Senator as grave, not more
eloquent or dignified than the Senator from Kentucky, yet with the Roman
purple flowing over his shoulder, had risen in his place, surrounded by
all the illustrations of Roman glory, and declared that the cause of
advancing Hannibal was just, and that Carthage ought to be dealt with in
terms of peace? What would have been thought if, after the battle of
Cannae, a Senator there had risen in his place and denounced every levy
of the Roman People, every expenditure of its treasure, and every appeal
to the old recollections and the old glories?”
The speaker paused. The sudden and intent silence was broken by another
voice: “He would have been hurled from the Tarpeian rock.”
“Sir,” continued the soldier-orator, “a Senator, himself learned far
more than myself in such lore, [Mr. Fessenden,] tells me, in a voice
that I am glad is audible, that he would have been hurled from the
Tarpeian Rock! It is a grand commentary upon the American Constitution
that we permit these words [Senator Breckinridge’s] to be uttered.
“I ask the Senator to recollect, too, what, save to send aid and comfort
to the Enemy, do these predictions of his amount to? Every word thus
uttered falls as a note of inspiration upon every Confederate ear.
Every sound thus uttered is a word, (and, falling from his lips, a
mighty word) of kindling and triumph to a Foe that determines to
advance.
“For me, I have no such word as a Senator, to utter. For me”–and here
his eyes flashed again while his martial voice rang like a clarion-call
to battle–“amid temporary defeat, disaster, disgrace, it seems that my
duty calls me to utter another word, and that word is, bold, sudden,
forward, determined, WAR, according to the laws of War, by Armies, by
Military Commanders clothed with full power, advancing with all the past
glories of the Republic urging them on to conquest!
* * * * * *
“I tell the Senator,” continued the inspired Patriot, “that his
predictions, sometimes for the South, sometimes for the Middle States,
sometimes for the North-East, and then wandering away in airy visions
out to the Far Pacific, about the dread of our people, as for loss of
blood and treasure, provoking them to Disloyalty, are false in
sentiment, false in fact, and false in Loyalty. The Senator from
Kentucky is mistaken in them all.
“Five hundred million dollars! What then? Great Britain gave more than
two thousand million in the great Battle for Constitutional Liberty
which she led at one time almost single-handed against the World. Five
hundred thousand men! What then? We have them; they are ours; they are
the children of the Country; they belong to the whole Country; they are
our sons; our kinsmen; and there are many of us who will give them all
up before we will abate one word of our just demand, or will retreat one
inch from the line which divides right from wrong.
“Sir, it is not a question of men or of money in that sense. All the
money, all the men, are, in our judgment, well bestowed in such a cause.
When we give them, we know their value. Knowing their value well, we
give them with the more pride and the, more joy. Sir, how can we
retreat? Sir, how can we make Peace? Who shall treat? What
Commissioners? Who would go? Upon what terms? Where is to be your
boundary line? Where the end of the principles we shall have to give
up? What will become of Constitutional Government? What will become of
public Liberty? What of past glories? What of future hopes?
“Shall we sink into the insignificance of the grave–a degraded,
defeated, emasculated People, frightened by the results of one battle,
and scared at the visions raised by the imagination of the Senator from
Kentucky on this floor? No, Sir! a thousand times, no, Sir! We will
rally–if, indeed, our words be necessary–we will rally the People, the
Loyal People, of the whole Country. They will pour forth their
treasure, their money, their men, without stint, without measure. The
most peaceable man in this body may stamp his foot upon this Senate
Chamber floor, as of old a warrior and a Senator did, and from that
single tramp there will spring forth armed Legions.
“Shall one battle determine the fate of empire, or a dozen?–the loss of
one thousand men, or twenty thousand? or one hundred million or five
hundred million dollars? In a year’s Peace–in ten years, at most, of
peaceful progress–we can restore them all. There will be some graves
reeking with blood, watered by the tears of affection. There will be
some privation; there will be some loss of luxury; there will be
somewhat more need for labor to procure the necessaries of life. When
that is said, all is said. If we have the Country, the whole Country,
the Union, the Constitution, Free Government–with these there will
return all the blessings of well-ordered civilization; the path of the
Country will be a career of greatness and of glory such as, in the olden
time, our Fathers saw in the dim visions of years yet to come, and such
as would have been ours now, to-day, if it had not been for the Treason
for which the Senator too often seeks to apologize.”
This remarkable speech was the last utterance of that glorious and
courageous soul, in the National Senate. Within three months, his
lifeless body, riddled by Rebel rifle balls, was borne away from the
fatal field of Ball’s Bluff–away, amid the lamentations of a Nation–
away, across land and ocean–to lie beside his brave friend Broderick,
on that Lone Mountain whose solemn front looks out upon the calm
Pacific.
He had not lived in vain. In his great speech at the American Theatre
in San Francisco, after his election by Oregon (1860) to represent her
in the United States Senate, he had aroused the people to a sense of
shame, that, as he said: “Here, in a land of written Constitutional
Liberty it is reserved for us to teach the World that, under the
American Stars and Stripes, Slavery marches in solemn procession; that,
under the American flag, Slavery is protected to the utmost verge of
acquired territory; that under the American banner, the name of Freedom
is to be faintly heard, the songs of Freedom faintly sung; that, while
Garibaldi, Victor Emanuel, every great and good man in the World,
strives, struggles, fights, prays, suffers and dies, sometimes on the
scaffold, sometimes in the dungeon, often on the field of battle,
rendered immortal by his blood and his valor; that, while this triumphal
procession marches on through the arches of Freedom–we, in this land,
of all the World, shrink back trembling when Freedom is but mentioned!”
And never was a shamed people more suddenly lifted up from that shame
into a grand frenzy of patriotic devotion than were his auditors, when,
with the inspiration of his matchless genius, he continued:
“As for me, I dare not, will not, be false to Freedom. Where the feet
of my youth were planted, there, by Freedom, my feet shall ever stand.
I will walk beneath her banner. I will glory in her strength. I have
watched her in history struck down on an hundred chosen fields of
battle. I have seen her friends fly from her; her foes gather around
her. I have seen her bound to the stake; I have seen them give her
ashes to the winds. But when they turned to exult, I have seen her
again meet them face to face, resplendent in complete steel, brandishing
in her strong right hand a flaming sword, red with Insufferable light!
I take courage. The People gather around her. The genius of America
will, at last, lead her sons to Freedom.”
Never were grander utterances delivered by man in all the ages; never
was there exhibited a more sublime faith; never a truer spirit of
prophecy; never a more heroic spirit.
He was then on his way to Washington; on his way to perform the last
acts in the drama of his own career–on his way to death. He knew the
time had come, of which, ten years before, he had prophetically spoken
in the House of Representatives, when he said: “I have only to say that,
if the time should come when Disunion rules the hour, and discord is to
reign supreme, I shall again be ready to give the best blood in my veins
to my Country’s Cause. I shall be prepared to meet all antagonists with
lance in rest, to do battle in every land, in defense of the
Constitution of the Country which I have sworn to support, to the last
extremity, against Disunionists, and all its Enemies, whether of the
South or North; to meet them everywhere, at all times, with speech or
hand, with word or blow, until thought and being shall be no longer
mine.” And right nobly did he fulfil in all respects his promise; so
that at the end–as was afterward well said of him by Mr. Colfax–he had
mounted so high, that, “doubly crowned, as statesman, and as warrior–
‘From the top of Fame’s ladder he stepped to the Sky!'”
[This orator and hero was a naturalized Englishman, and commandedan American regiment in the Mexican War.] CHAPTER XV.
FREEDOM’S EARLY DAWN.
On the day following Baker’s great reply to Breckinridge, another
notable speech was made, in the House of Representatives–notable,
especially, in that it foreshadowed Emancipation, and, coming so soon
after Bull Run, seemed to accentuate a new departure in political
thought as an outgrowth of that Military reverse. It was upon the
Confiscation Act, and it was Thaddeus Stevens who made it. Said he:
“If we are justified in taking property from the Enemy in War, when you
have rescued an oppressed People from the oppression of that Enemy, by
what principle of the Law of Nations, by what principle of philanthropy,
can you return them to the bondage from which you have delivered them,
and again rivet the chains you have once broken? It is a disgrace to
the Party which advocates it. It is against the principle of the Law of
Nations. It is against every principle of philanthropy. I for one,
shall never shrink from saying when these Slaves are once conquered by
us, ‘Go and be Free.’ God forbid that I should ever agree that they
should be returned again to their masters! I do not say that this War
is made for that purpose. Ask those who made the War, what is its
object. Do not ask us. * * * Our object is to subdue the Rebels.
“But,” continued he, “it is said that if we hold out this thing, they
will never submit–that we cannot conquer them–that they will suffer
themselves to be slaughtered, and their whole country to be laid waste.
Sir, War is a grievous thing at best, and Civil War more than any other;
but if they hold this language, and the means which they have suggested
must be resorted to; if their whole country must be laid waste, and made
a desert, in order to save this Union from destruction, so let it be. I
would rather, Sir, reduce them to a condition where their whole country
is to be re-peopled by a band of freemen than to see them perpetrate the
destruction of this People through our agency. I do not say that it is
time to resort to such means, and I do not know when the time will come;
but I never fear to express my sentiments. It is not a question with me
of policy, but a question of principle.
“If this War is continued long, and is bloody, I do not believe that the
free people of the North will stand by and see their sons and brothers
and neighbors slaughtered by thousands and tens of thousands by Rebels,
with arms in their hands, and forbear to call upon their enemies to be
our friends, and to help us in subduing them; I for one, if it continues
long, and has the consequences mentioned, shall be ready to go for it,
let it horrify the gentleman from New York (Mr. Diven) or anybody else.
That is my doctrine, and that will be the doctrine of the whole free
people of the North before two years roll round, if this War continues.
“As to the end of the War, until the Rebels are subdued, no man in the
North thinks of it. If the Government are equal to the People, and I
believe they are, there will be no bargaining, there will be no
negotiation, there will be no truces with the Rebels, except to bury the
dead, until every man shall have laid down his arms, disbanded his
organization, submitted himself to the Government, and sued for mercy.
And, Sir, if those who have the control of the Government are not fit
for this task and have not the nerve and mind for it, the People will
take care that there are others who are–although, Sir, I have not a bit
of fear of the present Administration, or of the present Executive.
“I have spoken more freely, perhaps, than gentlemen within my hearing
might think politic, but I have spoken just what I felt. I have spoken
what I believe will be the result; and I warn Southern gentlemen, that
if this War is to continue, there will be a time when my friend from New
York (Mr. Diven) will see it declared by this free Nation, that every
bondman in the South–belonging to a Rebel, recollect; I confine it to
them–shall be called upon to aid us in War against their masters, and
to restore this Union.”
The following letter of instruction from Secretary Cameron, touching the
Fugitive Slave question, dated seven days after Thaddeus Stevens’
speech, had also an interesting bearing on the subject:
“WASHINGTON, August 8, 1861.
“GENERAL: The important question of the proper disposition to be made of
Fugitives from Service in States in Insurrection against the Federal
Government, to which you have again directed my attention in your letter
of July 30, has received my most attentive consideration.
“It is the desire of the President that all existing rights, in all the
States, be fully respected and maintained. The War now prosecuted on
the part of the Federal Government is a War for the Union, and for the
preservation of all Constitutional rights of States, and the citizens of
the States, in the Union. Hence, no question can arise as to Fugitives
from Service within the States and Territories in which the authority of
the Union is fully acknowledged. The ordinary forms of Judicial
proceeding, which must be respected by Military and Civil authorities
alike, will suffice for the enforcement of all legal claims.
“But in States wholly or partially under Insurrectionary control, where
the Laws of the United States are so far opposed and resisted that they
cannot be effectually enforced, it is obvious that rights dependent on
the execution of those laws must, temporarily, fail; and it is equally
obvious that rights dependent on the laws of the States within which
Military operations are conducted must be necessarily subordinated to
the Military exigences created by the Insurrection, if not wholly
forfeited by the Treasonable conduct of parties claiming them. To this
general rule, rights to Services can form no exception.
“The Act of Congress, approved August 6, 1861, declares that if Persons
held to Service shall be employed in hostility to the United States, the
right to their services shall be forfeited, and such Persons shall be
discharged therefrom. It follows, of necessity, that no claim can be
recognized by the Military authorities of the Union to the services of
such Persons when fugitives.
“A more difficult question is presented in respect to Persons escaping
from the Service of Loyal masters. It is quite apparent that the laws
of the State, under which only the services of such fugitives can be
claimed, must needs be wholly, or almost wholly, suspended, as to
remedies, by the Insurrection and the Military measures necessitated by
it. And it is equally apparent that the substitution of Military for
Judicial measures for the enforcement of such claims must be attended by
great inconveniences, embarrassments, and injuries.
“Under these circumstances it seems quite clear that the substantial
rights of Loyal masters will be best protected by receiving such
fugitives, as well as fugitives from Disloyal masters, into the service
of the United States, and employing them under such organizations and in
such occupations as circumstances may suggest or require.
“Of course a record should be kept showing the name and description of
the fugitives, the name and the character, as Loyal or Disloyal, of the
master, and such facts as may be necessary to a correct understanding of
the circumstances of each case after tranquillity shall have been
restored. Upon the return of Peace, Congress will, doubtless, properly
provide for all the persons thus received into the service of the Union,
and for just compensation to Loyal masters. In this way only, it would
seem, can the duty and safety of the Government and the just rights of
all be fully reconciled and harmonized.
“You will therefore consider yourself as instructed to govern your
future action, in respect to Fugitives from Service, by the principles
here stated, and will report from time to time, and at least twice in
each month, your action in the premises to this Department.
“You will, however, neither authorize, nor permit any interference, by
the troops under your command, with the servants of peaceful citizens in
house or field; nor will you, in any way, encourage such servants to
leave the lawful Service of their masters; nor will you, except in cases
where the Public Safety may seem to require, prevent the voluntary
return of any Fugitive, to the Service from which he may have escaped.”
“I am, General, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
“SIMON CAMERON,
“Secretary of War.
“Major-General B. F. BUTLER,
“Commanding Department of Virginia,
“Fortress Monroe.”
Whether or not inspired by the prophetic speech of Thaddeus Stevens,
aforesaid, the month of August was hardly out before its prophecy seemed
in a fair way of immediate fulfilment. Major-General John Charles
Fremont at that time commanded the Eastern Department–comprising the
States of Missouri, Kansas, Illinois, and Kentucky-and he startled the
Country by issuing the following Emancipation proclamation:
“HEADQUARTERS OF THE WESTERN DEPARTMENT.
“St. Louis, August 30, 1861.
“Circumstances, in my judgment, of sufficient urgency, render it
necessary that the commanding general of this Department should assume
the administrative powers of the State. Its disorganized condition, the
helplessness of the civil authority, the total insecurity of life, and
the devastation of property by bands of murderers and marauders, who
infest nearly every county of the State, and avail themselves of the
public misfortunes and the vicinity of a hostile force to gratify
private and neighborhood vengeance, and who find an enemy wherever they
find plunder, finally demand the severest measures to repress the daily
increasing crimes and outrages which are driving off the inhabitants and
ruining the State.
“In this condition, the public safety and the success of our arms
require unity of purpose, without let or hinderance, to the prompt
administration of affairs.
“In order, therefore, to suppress disorder, to maintain as far as now
practicable the public peace, and to give security and protection to the
persons and property of loyal citizens, I do hereby extend and declare
established Martial Law throughout the State of Missouri.
“The lines of the Army of Occupation in this State are for the present
declared to extend from Leavenworth by way of the posts of Jefferson
City, Rolla, and Ironton, to Cape Girardeau, on the Mississippi river.
“All persons who shall betaken with arms in their hands within these
lines shall be tried by Court-Martial, and if found guilty will be shot.
“The property, real and personal, of all persons, in the State of
Missouri, who shall take up arms against the United States, or who shall
be directly proven to have taken an active part with their Enemies in
the field, is declared to be confiscated to the public use, and their
Slaves, if any they have, are hereby declared Free men.
“All persons who shall be proven to have destroyed, after the
publication of this order, railroad tracks, bridges, or telegraphs,
shall suffer the extreme penalty of the law.
“All persons engaged in Treasonable correspondence, in giving or
procuring aid to the Enemies of the United States, in fomenting tumults,
in disturbing the public tranquillity by creating and circulating false
reports or incendiary documents, are in their own interests warned that
they are exposing themselves to sudden and severe punishment.
“All persons who have been led away from their allegiance, are required
to return to their homes forthwith; any such absence, without sufficient
cause, will be held to be presumptive evidence against them.
“The object of this declaration is to place in the hands of the Military
authorities the power to give instantaneous effect to existing laws, and
to supply such deficiencies as the conditions of War demand. But this
is not intended to suspend the ordinary Tribunals of the Country, where
the Law will be administered by the Civil officers in the usual manner,
and with their customary authority, while the same can be peaceably
exercised.
“The commanding general will labor vigilantly for the public Welfare,
and in his efforts for their safety hopes to obtain not only the
acquiescence, but the active support of the Loyal People of the Country.
“J. C. FREMONT,
“Major-General Commanding.”
Fremont’s Proclamation of Confiscation and Emancipation, was hailed with
joy by some Patriots in the North, but was by others looked upon as rash
and premature and inexpedient; while it bitterly stirred the anger of
the Rebels everywhere.
The Rebel Jeff. Thompson, then in command of the Rebel forces about St.
Louis, at once issued the following savage proclamation of retaliation:
“HEADQUARTERS FIRST MILITARY DISTRICT, M. S. G.
‘St. Louis, August 31, 1861.
“To all whom it may concern:
“Whereas Major-General John C. Fremont, commanding the minions of
Abraham Lincoln in the State of Missouri, has seen fit to declare
Martial Law throughout the whole State, and has threatened to shoot any
citizen-soldier found in arms within certain limits; also, to Confiscate
the property and Free the Negroes belonging to the members of the
Missouri State Guard:
“Therefore, know ye, that I, M. Jeff. Thompson, Brigadier-General of
the First Military District of Missouri, having not only the Military
authority of Brigadier-General, but certain police powers granted by
Acting-Governor Thomas C. Reynolds, and confirmed afterward by Governor
Jackson, do most solemnly promise that for every member of the Missouri
State Guard, or soldier of our allies, the Armies of the Confederate
States, who shall be put to death in pursuance of the said order of
General Fremont, I will hang, draw, and quarter a minion of said Abraham
Lincoln.
“While I am anxious that this unfortunate War shall be conducted, if
possible, upon the most liberal principles of civilized warfare–and
every order that I have issued has been with that object–yet, if this
rule is to be adopted (and it must first be done by our Enemies) I
intend to exceed General Fremont in his excesses, and will make all
tories that come within my reach rue the day that a different policy was
adopted by their leaders.
“Already mills, barns, warehouses, and other private property have been
wastefully and wantonly destroyed by the Enemy in this district, while
we have taken nothing except articles strictly contraband or absolutely
necessary. Should these things be repeated, I will retaliate ten-fold,
so help me God!”
“M. JEFF. THOMPSON,
“Brigadier-General Commanding.”
“President Lincoln, greatly embarrassed by the precipitate action of his
subordinate, lost no time in suggesting to General Fremont certain
modifications of his Emancipation proclamation-as follows:
“[PRIVATE.] “WASHINGTON, D. C., September 2, 1861.
“MY DEAR SIR: Two points in your proclamation of August 30th give me
some anxiety:
“First. Should you shoot a man according to the proclamation, the
Confederates would very certainly shoot our best man in their hands, in
retaliation; and so, man for man, indefinitely. It is, therefore, my
order that you allow no man to be shot under the proclamation without
first having my approbation or consent.
“Second. I think there is great danger that the closing paragraph, in
relation to the Confiscation of Property, and the liberating Slaves of
Traitorous owners, will alarm our Southern Union friends, and turn them
against us; perhaps ruin our rather fair prospect for Kentucky.
“Allow me, therefore, to ask that you will, as of your own motion,
modify that paragraph so as to conform to the first and fourth sections
of the Act of Congress entitled, ‘An Act to Confiscate Property used for
Insurrectionary purposes,’ approved August 6, 1861, a copy of which Act
I herewith send you.
“This letter is written in a spirit of caution, and not of censure.
“I send it by a special messenger, in that it may certainly and speedily
reach you.
“Yours very truly,
“A. LINCOLN.
“Major-General FREMONT.”
General Fremont replied to President Lincoln’s suggestions, as follows:
“HEADQUARTERS WESTERN DEPARTMENT,
“St. Louis, September 8, 1861.
“MY DEAR SIR: Your letter of the second, by special
messenger, I know to have been written before you had received my
letter, and before my telegraphic dispatches and the rapid developments
of critical conditions here had informed you of affairs in this quarter.
I had not written to you fully and frequently, first, because in the
incessant change of affairs I would be exposed to give you contradictory
accounts; and., secondly, because the amount of the subjects to be laid
before you would demand too much of your time.
“Trusting to have your confidence, I have been leaving it to events
themselves to show you whether or not I was shaping affairs here
according to your ideas. The shortest communication between Washington
and St. Louis generally involves two days, and the employment of two
days, in time of War, goes largely toward success or disaster. I
therefore went along according to my own judgment, leaving the result of
my movement to justify me with you.
“And so in regard to my proclamation of the thirtieth. Between the
Rebel Armies, the Provisional Government, and the home Traitors, I felt
the position bad, and saw danger. In the night I decided upon the
proclamation and the form of it–I wrote it the next morning and printed
it the same day. I did it without consultation or advice with any one,
acting solely with my best judgment to serve the Country and yourself,
and perfectly willing to receive the amount of censure which should be
thought due, if I had made a false movement.
“This is as much a movement in the War, as a battle, and, in going into
these, I shall have to act according to my judgment of the ground before
me, as I did on this occasion. If upon reflection, your better judgment
still decides that I am wrong in the article respecting the Liberation
of Slaves, I have to ask that you will openly direct me to make the
correction. The implied censure will be received as a soldier always
should the reprimand of his chief.
“If I were to retract of my own accord, it would imply that I myself
thought it wrong, and that I had acted without the reflection which the
gravity of the point demanded. But I did not. I acted with full
deliberation, and upon the certain conviction that it was a measure
right and necessary, and I think so still.
“In regard to the other point of the proclamation to which you refer, I
desire to say that I do not think the Enemy can either misconstrue or
urge anything against it, or undertake to make unusual retaliation. The
shooting of men who shall rise in arms against an Army in the Military
occupation of a Country, is merely a necessary measure of defense, and
entirely according to the usages of civilized warfare. The article does
not at all refer to prisoners of war, and certainly our Enemies have no
grounds for requiring that we should waive in their benefit any of the
ordinary advantages which the usages of War allow to us.
“As promptitude is itself an advantage in War, I have also to ask that
you will permit me to carry out upon the spot the provisions of the
proclamation in this respect.
“Looking at affairs from this point of view, I am satisfied that strong
and vigorous measures have now become necessary to the success of our
Arms; and hoping that my views may have the honor to meet your approval,
“I am, with respect and regard, very truly yours,
“J. C. FREMONT.
“THE PRESIDENT.”
President Lincoln subsequently rejoined, ordering a modification of the
proclamation. His letter ran thus:
“WASHINGTON, September 11, 1861.
“SIR: Yours of the 8th, in answer to mine of the 2d instant, is just
received. Assuming that you, upon the ground, could better judge of the
necessities of your position than I could at this distance, on seeing
your Proclamation of August 30th, I perceived no general objection to
it.
“The particular clause, however, in relation to the Confiscation of
Property and the Liberation of Slaves, appeared to me to be
objectionable in its non-conformity to the Act of Congress, passed the
6th of last August, upon the same subjects; and hence I wrote you
expressing my wish that that clause should be modified accordingly.
“Your answer, just received, expresses the preference, on your part,
that I should make an open order for the modification, which I very
cheerfully do.
“It is therefore Ordered, that the said clause of said proclamation be
so modified, held, and construed as to conform to, and not to transcend,
the provisions on the same subject contained in the Act of Congress
entitled, ‘An Act to Confiscate Property used for Insurrectionary
Purposes,’ approved August 6, 1861, and that said Act be published at
length with this Order.
“Your obedient servant,
“A. LINCOLN.
“Major-General JOHN C. FREMONT.”
In consequence, however, of the agitation on the subject, the extreme
delicacy with which it was thought advisable in the earliest stages of
the Rebellion to treat it, and the confusion of ideas among Military men
with regard to it, the War Department issued the following General
Instructions on the occasion of the departure of the Port Royal
Expedition, commanded by General T. W. Sherman:
“WAR DEPARTMENT, October 14, 1861.
“SIR: In conducting Military Operations within States declared by the
Proclamation of the President to be in a State of Insurrection, you will
govern yourself, so far as Persons held to Service under the laws of
such States are concerned, by the principles of the letters addressed by
me to Major-General Butler on the 30th of May and the 8th of August,
copies of which are herewith furnished to you.
“As special directions, adapted to special circumstances, cannot be
given, much must be referred to your own discretion as Commanding
General of the Expedition. You will, however, in general avail yourself
of the services of any Persons, whether Fugitives from Labor or not, who
may offer them to the National Government; you will employ such Persons
in such services as they may be fitted for, either as ordinary
employees, or, if special circumstances seem to require it, in any other
capacity with such organization, in squads, companies, or otherwise, as
you deem most beneficial to the service. This, however, not to mean a
general arming of them for Military service.
“You will assure all Loyal masters that Congress will provide just
compensation to them for the loss of the services of the Persons so
employed.
“It is believed that the course thus indicated will best secure the
substantial rights of Loyal masters, and the benefits to the United
States of the services of all disposed to support the Government, while
it avoids all interference with the social systems or local Institutions
of every State, beyond that which Insurrection makes unavoidable and
which a restoration of peaceful relations to the Union, under the
Constitution, will immediately remove.
“Respectfully,
“SIMON CAMERON,
“Secretary of War.
“Brigadier-General T. W. SHERMAN,
“Commanding Expedition to the Southern Coast.”
Brigadier-General Thomas W. Sherman, acting upon his own interpretation
of these instructions, issued a proclamation to the people of South
Carolina, upon occupying the Forts at Port Royal, in which he said:
“In obedience to the orders of the President of these United States of
America, I have landed on your shores with a small force of National
troops. The dictates of a duty which, under these circumstances, I owe
to a great sovereign State, and to a proud and hospitable people, among
whom I have passed some of the pleasantest days of my life, prompt me to
proclaim that we have come amongst you with no feelings of personal
animosity, no desire to harm your citizens, destroy your property, or
interfere with any of your lawful rights or your social or local
Institutions, beyond what the causes herein alluded to may render
unavoidable.”
Major-General Wool, at Fortress Monroe, where he had succeeded General
Butler, likewise issued a Special Order on the subject of Contrabands,
as follows:
“HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF VIRGINIA,
“FORT MONROE, October 14, 1861.
“[Special Orders No. 72.]
“All Colored Persons called Contrabands, employed as servants by
officers and others residing within Fort Monroe, or outside of the Fort
at Camp Hamilton and Camp Butler, will be furnished with their
subsistence and at least eight dollars per month for males, and four
dollars per month for females, by the officers or others thus employing
them.
“So much of the above-named sums, as may be necessary to furnish
clothing, to be decided by the Chief Quartermaster of the Department,
will be applied to that purpose, and the remainder will be paid into his
hands to create a fund for the support of those Contrabands who are
unable to work for their own support.
“All able-bodied Colored Persons who are under the protection of the
troops of this Department, and who are not employed as servants, will be
immediately put to work in either the Engineer’s or Quartermaster’s
Department.
“By command of Major-General Wool:
“[Signed] WILLIAM D. WHIPPLE,
“Assistant Adjutant General.”
He subsequently also issued the following General Order:
“HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF VIRGINIA,
“FORT MONROE, November 1, 1861.
“[General Orders No. 34.]
“The following pay and allowances will constitute the valuation of the
Labor of the Contrabands at work in the Engineer, Ordnance,
Quartermaster, Commissary, and Medical Departments at this Post, to be
paid as hereinafter mentioned;
“Class 1st.–Negro man over eighteen years of age, and able-bodied, ten
dollars per month, one ration and the necessary amount of clothing.
“Class 2d.–Negro boys from 12 to 18 years of age, and sickly and infirm
Negro men, five dollars per month, one ration, and the necessary amount
of clothing.
“The Quartermaster will furnish all the clothing. The Department
employing these men will furnish the subsistence specified above, and as
an incentive to good behavior (to be withheld at the direction of the
chiefs of the departments respectively), each individual of the first
class will receive $2 per month, and each individual of the second class
$1 per month, for their own use. The remainder of the money valuation
of their Labor, will be turned over to the Quartermaster, who will
deduct from it the cost of the clothing issued to them; the balance will
constitute a fund to be expended by the Quartermaster under the
direction of the Commanding officer of the Department of Virginia for
the support of the women and children and those that are unable to work.
“For any unusual amount of Labor performed, they may receive extra pay,
varying in amount from fifty cents to one dollar, this to be paid by the
departments employing them, to the men themselves, and to be for their
own use.
“Should any man be prevented from working, on account of sickness, for
six consecutive days, or ten days in any one month, one-half of the
money value will be paid. For being prevented from laboring for a
longer period than ten days in any one month all pay and allowances
cease.
“By command of Major-General Wool:
“[Signed] “WILLIAM D. WHIPPLE,
“Assistant Adjutant General.”
On November 13, 1861, Major-General Dix, in a proclamation addressed to
the people of Accomac and Northampton Counties, Va., ordered the
repulsion of Fugitive Slaves seeking to enter the Union lines, in these
words:
“The Military Forces of the United States are about to enter your
Counties as a part of the Union. They will go among you as friends, and
with the earnest hope that they may not, by your own acts, be forced to
become your enemies. They will invade no rights of person or property.
On the contrary, your Laws, your Institutions, your Usages, will be
scrupulously respected. There need be no fear that the quietude of any
fireside will be disturbed, unless the disturbance is caused by
yourselves.
“Special directions have been given not to interfere with the condition
of any Person held to domestic service; and, in order that there may be
no ground for mistake or pretext for misrepresent action, Commanders of
Regiments and Corps have been instructed not to permit any such Persons
to come within their lines.”
On the 20th of November, 1861, Major General Halleck issued the
following Genera., Order–which went even further, in that it expelled,
as well as repelled Fugitive Slaves from our lines:
“HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF MISSOURI,
“St. Louis, November 20, 1861.
“[General Orders No. 3.]
“I. It has been represented that important information respecting the
number and condition of our Forces, is conveyed to the Enemy by means of
Fugitive Slaves who are admitted within our lines. In order to remedy
this evil, it is directed that no such Persons be hereafter permitted to
enter the lines of any camp, or of any forces on the march; and that any
now within such lines be immediately excluded therefrom.”
This Order was subsequently explained in a letter, of December 8, 1861,
from General Halleck to Hon. F. P. Blair, in which he said:
” * * * Order No. 3 was in my mind, clearly a Military necessity.
Unauthorized persons, black or white, Free or Slaves, must be kept out
of our camps, unless we are willing to publish to the Enemy everything
we do or intend to do. It was a Military and not a political order. I
am ready to carry out any lawful instructions in regard to Fugitive
Slaves which my superiors may give me, and to enforce any law which
Congress may pass. But I cannot make law, and will not violate it. You
know my private opinion on the policy of Confiscating the Slave Property
of Rebels in Arms. If Congress shall pass it, you may be certain that I
shall enforce it. Perhaps my policy as to the treatment of Rebels and
their property is as well set out in Order No. 13, issued the day
(December 4, 1861), your letter was written, as I could now describe
it.”
It may be well also to add here, as belonging to this period of
doubtfulness touching the status of escaped Slaves, the following
communication sent by Secretary Seward to General McClellan, touching
“Contrabands” in the District of Columbia:
“DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
“WASHINGTON, December 4, 1861.
“To Major-General GEORGE B. MCCLELLAN, Washington:
“GENERAL: I am directed by the President to call your attention to the
following subject:
“Persons claimed to be held to Service or Labor under the laws of the
State of Virginia, and actually employed in hostile service against the
Government of the United States, frequently escape from the lines of the
Enemy’s Forces and are received within the lines of the Army of the
Potomac.
“This Department understands that such Persons afterward coming into the
city of Washington are liable to be arrested by the city police, upon
the presumption, arising from color, that they are Fugitives from
Service or Labor.
“By the 4th section of the Act of Congress approved August 6, 1861,
entitled, ‘An Act to Confiscate Property used for Insurrectionary
purposes,’ such hostile employment is made a full and sufficient answer
to any further claim to Service or Labor. Persons thus employed and
escaping are received into the Military protection of the United States,
and their arrest as Fugitives from Service or Labor should be
immediately followed by the Military arrest of the parties making the
seizure.
“Copies of this communication will be sent to the Mayor of the city of
Washington and to the Marshal of the District of Columbia, that any
collision between the Civil and Military authorities may be avoided.
“I am, General, your very obedient,
“WILLIAM H. SEWARD.”
CHAPTER XVI.
“COMPENSATED GRADUAL EMANCIPATION.”
Thus far the reader’s eye has been able to review in their successive
order some of the many difficulties and perplexities which beset the
pathway of President Lincoln as he felt his way in the dark, as it were,
toward Emancipation. It must seem pretty evident now, however, that his
chief concern was for the preservation of the Union, even though all
other things–Emancipation with them–had to be temporarily sacrificed.
Something definite, however, had been already gained. Congress had
asserted its right under the War powers of the Constitution, to release
from all claim to Service or Labor those Slaves whose Service or Labor
had been used in hostility to the Union. And while some of the Union
Generals obstructed the execution of the Act enforcing that right, by
repelling and even as we have seen, expelling, from the Union lines all
Fugitive Slaves–whether such as had or had not been used in hostility
to us–yet still the cause of Freedom to all, was slowly and silently
perhaps, yet surely and irresistibly, marching on until the time when,
becoming a chief factor in the determination of the question of “whether
we should have a Country at all,” it should triumph coincidently with
the preservation of the Republic.
But now a new phase of the Slave question arose–a question not
involving what to do with Fugitive Slaves of any sort, whether engaged
or not engaged in performing services hostile to the Union cause, but
what to do with Slaves whom their panic-stricken owners had, for the
time being, abandoned in the presence of our Armies.
This question was well discussed in the original draft of the report of
the Secretary of War, December 1, 1861 in which Secretary Cameron said:
“It has become a grave question for determination what shall be done
with the Slaves abandoned by their owners on the advance of our troops
into Southern territory, as in the Beaufort district of South Carolina.
The whole White population therein is six thousand, while the number of
Negroes exceeds thirty-two thousand. The panic which drove their
masters in wild confusion from their homes, leaves them in undisputed
possession of the soil. Shall they, armed by their masters, be placed
in the field to fight against us, or shall their labor be continually
employed in reproducing the means for supporting the Armies of
Rebellion?
“The War into which this Government has been forced by rebellious
Traitors is carried on for the purpose of repossessing the property
violently and treacherously seized upon by the Enemies of the
Government, and to re-establish the authority and Laws of the United
States in the places where it is opposed or overthrown by armed
Insurrection and Rebellion. Its purpose is to recover and defend what
is justly its own.
“War, even between Independent Nations, is made to subdue the Enemy, and
all that belongs to that Enemy, by occupying the hostile country, and
exercising dominion over all the men and things within its territory.
This being true in respect to Independent Nations at war with each
other, it follows that Rebels who are laboring by force of arms to
overthrow a Government, justly bring upon themselves all the
consequences of War, and provoke the destruction merited by the worst of
crimes. That Government would be false to National trust, and would
justly excite the ridicule of the civilized World, that would abstain
from the use of any efficient means to preserve its own existence, or to
overcome a rebellious and traitorous Enemy, by sparing or protecting the
property of those who are waging War against it.
“The principal wealth and power of the Rebel States is a peculiar
species of Property, consisting of the service or labor of African
Slaves, or the descendants of Africans. This Property has been
variously estimated at the value of from seven hundred million to one
thousand million dollars.
“Why should this Property be exempt from the hazards and consequences of
a rebellious War?
“It was the boast of the leader of the Rebellion, while he yet had a
seat in the Senate of the United States, that the Southern States would
be comparatively safe and free from the burdens of War, if it should be
brought on by the contemplated Rebellion, and that boast was accompanied
by the savage threat that ‘Northern towns and cities would become the
victims of rapine and Military spoil,’ and that ‘Northern men should
smell Southern gunpowder and feel Southern steel.’
“No one doubts the disposition of the Rebels to carry that threat into
execution. The wealth of Northern towns and cities, the produce of
Northern farms, Northern workshops and manufactories would certainly be
seized, destroyed, or appropriated as Military spoil. No property in
the North would be spared from the hands of the Rebels, and their rapine
would be defended under the laws of War. While the Loyal States thus
have all their property and possessions at stake, are the insurgent
Rebels to carry on warfare against the Government in peace and security
to their own property?
“Reason and justice and self-preservation forbid that such should be;
the policy of this Government, but demand, on the contrary, that, being
forced by Traitors and Rebels to the extremity of war, all the rights
and powers of war should be exercised to bring it to a speedy end.
“Those who war against the Government justly forfeit all rights of
property, privilege, or security, derived from the Constitution and
Laws, against which they are in armed Rebellion; and as the labor and
service of their Slaves constitute the chief Property of the Rebels,
such Property should share the common fate of War to which they have
devoted the property of Loyal citizens.
“While it is plain that the Slave Property of the South is justly
subjected to all the consequences of this Rebellious War, and that the
Government would be untrue to its trust in not employing all the rights
and powers of War to bring it to a speedy close, the details of the plan
for doing so, like all other Military measures, must, in a great degree,
be left to be determined by particular exigencies. The disposition of
other property belonging to the Rebels that becomes subject to our arms
is governed by the circumstances of the case.
“The Government has no power to hold Slaves, none to restrain a Slave of
his Liberty, or to exact his service. It has a right, however, to use
the voluntary service of Slaves liberated by War from their Rebel
masters, like any other property of the Rebels, in whatever mode may be
most efficient for the defense of the Government, the prosecution of the
War, and the suppression of Rebellion. It is clearly a right of the
Government to arm Slaves when it may become necessary, as it is to take
gunpowder from the Enemy; whether it is expedient to do so, is purely a
Military question. The right is unquestionable by the laws of War. The
expediency must be determined by circumstances, keeping in view the
great object of overcoming the Rebels, reestablishing the Laws, and
restoring Peace to the Nation.
“It is vain and idle for the Government to carry on this War, or hope to
maintain its existence against rebellious force, without employing all
the rights and powers of War. As has been said, the right to deprive
the Rebels of their Property in Slaves and Slave Labor is as clear and
absolute as the right to take forage from the field, or cotton from the
warehouse, or powder and arms from the magazine. To leave the Enemy in
the possession of such property as forage and cotton and military
stores, and the means of constantly reproducing them, would be madness.
It is, therefore, equal madness to leave them in peaceful and secure
possession of Slave Property, more valuable and efficient to them for
war than forage, cotton, military stores. Such policy would be National
suicide.
“What to do with that species of Property is a question that time and
circumstances will solve, and need not be anticipated further than to
repeat that they cannot be held by the Government as Slaves. It would
be useless to keep them as prisoners of War; and self-preservation, the
highest duty of a Government, or of individuals, demands that they
should be disposed of or employed in the most effective manner that will
tend most speedily to suppress the Insurrection and restore the
authority of the Government. If it shall be found that the men who have
been held by the Rebels as Slaves, are capable of bearing arms and
performing efficient Military service, it is the right, and may become
the duty, of this Government to arm and equip them, and employ their
services against the Rebels, under proper Military regulations,
discipline, and command.
“But in whatever manner they may be used by the Government, it is plain
that, once liberated by the rebellious act of their masters they should
never again be restored to bondage. By the master’s Treason and
Rebellion he forfeits all right to the labor and service of his Slave;
and the Slave of the rebellious master, by his service to the
Government, becomes justly entitled to Freedom and protection.
“The disposition to be made of the Slaves of Rebels, after the close of
the War, can be safely left to the wisdom and patriotism of Congress.
The Representatives of the People will unquestionably secure to the
Loyal Slaveholders every right to which they are entitled under the
Constitution of the Country.”
This original draft of the report was modified, at the instance of
President Lincoln, to the following–and thus appeared in Secretary
Cameron’s report of that date, as printed:
“It is already a grave question what shall be done with those Slaves who
were abandoned by their owners on the advance of our troops into
Southern territory, as at Beaufort district, in South Carolina. The
number left within our control at that point is very considerable, and
similar cases will probably occur. What should be done with them? Can
we afford to send them forward to their masters, to be by them armed
against us, or used in producing supplies to sustain the Rebellion?
“Their labor may be useful to us; withheld from the Enemy it lessens his
Military resources, and withholding them has no tendency to induce the
horrors of Insurrection, even in the Rebel communities. They constitute
a Military resource, and, being such, that they should not be turned
over to the Enemy is too plain to discuss. Why deprive him of supplies
by a blockade, and voluntarily give him men to produce them?
“The disposition to be made of the Slaves of Rebels, after the close of
the War, can be safely left to the wisdom and patriotism of Congress.
The Representatives of the People will unquestionably secure to the
Loyal Slaveholders every right to which they are entitled under the
Constitution of the Country.
SIMON CAMERON.
“Secretary of War.”
The language of this modification is given to show that the President,
at the close of the year 1861, had already reached a further step
forward toward Emancipation–and the sound reasoning upon which he made
that advance. He was satisfying his own mind and conscience as he
proceeded, and thus, while justifying himself to himself, was also
simultaneously carrying conviction to the minds and consciences of the
People, whose servant and agent he was.
That these abandoned Slaves would “constitute a Military resource” and
“should not be turned over to the Enemy” and that “their labor may be
useful to us” were propositions which could not be gainsaid. But to
quiet uncalled-for apprehensions, and to encourage Southern loyalty, he
added, in substance, that at the close of this War–waged solely for the
preservation of the Union–Congress would decide the doubtful status of
the Slaves of Rebels, while the rights of Union Slave-holders would be
secured.
The Contraband-Slave question, however, continued to agitate the public
mind for many months–owing to the various ways in which it was treated
by the various Military commanders, to whose discretion its treatment,
in their several commands, was left–a discretion which almost
invariably leaned toward the political bias of the commander. Thus, in
a proclamation, dated St. Louis, February 23, 1862, Halleck, commanding
the Department of Missouri, said:
“Soldiers! let no excess on your part tarnish the glory of our arms!
“The order heretofore issued in this department, in regard to pillaging
and marauding, the destruction of private property, and the stealing or
concealment of Slaves, must be strictly enforced. It does not belong to
the Military to decide upon the relation of Master and Slave. Such
questions must be settled by the civil Courts. No Fugitive Slaves will
therefore be admitted within our lines or camps, except when especially
ordered by the General Commanding. * * * ”
And Buell, commanding the Department of the Ohio, in response to a
communication on the subject from the Chairman of the Military Committee
of the Kentucky Legislature, wrote, March 6, 1862:
“It has come to my knowledge that Slaves sometimes make their way
improperly into our lines, and in some instances they may be enticed
there, but I think the number has been magnified by report. Several
applications have been made to me by persons whose servants have been
found in our camps, and in every instance that I know of the master has
recovered his servant and taken him away.”
Thus, while some of our Commanders, like Dix and Halleck, repelled or
even expelled the Fugitive Slave from their lines; and others, like
Buell and Hooker, facilitated the search for, and restoration to his
master, of the black Fugitive found within our lines; on the other hand,
Fremont, as we have seen, and Doubleday and Hunter, as we shall yet see,
took totally different ground on this question.
President Lincoln, however, harassed as he was by the extremists on both
sides of the Slavery question, still maintained that calm statesman-like
middle-course from which the best results were likely to flow. But he
now thought the time had come to broach the question of a compensated,
gradual Emancipation.
Accordingly, on March 6, 1862, he sent to Congress the following
message:
“Fellow citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives:
“I recommend the adoption of a joint Resolution by your honorable
bodies, which shall be substantially as follows:
“Resolved, That the United States ought to co-operate with any State
which may adopt gradual abolishment of Slavery, giving to such State
pecuniary aid, to be used by such State in its discretion, to compensate
for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such change of
system.
“If the proposition contained in the Resolution does not meet the
approval of Congress and the Country, there is the end; but if it does
command such approval, I deem it of importance that the States and
people immediately interested should be at once distinctly notified of
the fact, so that they may begin to consider whether to accept or reject
it, The Federal Government would find its highest interest in such a
measure, as one of the most efficient means of self preservation.
“The leaders of the existing Insurrection entertain the hope that this
Government will ultimately be forced to acknowledge the Independence of
some part of the disaffected region, and that all the Slave States North
of such part will then say, ‘the Union for which we have struggled being
already gone, we now choose to go with the Southern Section.’
“To deprive them of this hope, substantially ends the Rebellion; and the
initiation of Emancipation completely deprives them of it, as to all the
States initiating it. The point is not that all the States tolerating
Slavery would very soon, if at all, initiate Emancipation; but that,
while the offer is equally made to all, the more Northern shall, by such
initiation, make it certain to the more Southern that in no event will
the former ever join the latter in their proposed Confederacy. I say,
‘initiation,’ because in my judgment, gradual, and not sudden
Emancipation, is better for all.
“In the mere financial or pecuniary view, any member of Congress, with
the census tables and Treasury reports before him, can readily see for
himself how very soon the current expenditures of this War would
purchase, at fair valuation, all the Slaves in any named State.
“Such a proposition on the part of the General Government sets up no
claim of a right by Federal authority to interfere with Slavery within
State limits, referring, as it does, the absolute control of the subject
in each case to the State and its people immediately interested. It is
proposed as a matter of perfectly free choice with them.
“In the Annual Message last December, I thought fit to say, ‘the Union
must be preserved; and hence all indispensable means must be employed.’
I said this, not hastily, but deliberately. War has been made, and
continues to be an indispensable means to this end. A practical
reacknowledgment of the National authority would render the War
unnecessary, and it would at once cease. If, however, resistance
continues, the War must also continue; and it is impossible to foresee
all the incidents which may attend, and all the ruin which may follow
it. Such as may seem indispensable, or may obviously promise great
efficiency toward ending the struggle, must and will come.
“The proposition now made, though an offer only, I hope it may be
esteemed no offense to ask whether the pecuniary consideration tendered
would not be of more value to the States and private persons concerned,
than are the Institution, and Property in it, in the present aspect of
affairs?
“While it is true that the adoption of the proposed resolution would be
merely initiatory, and not within itself a practical measure, it is
recommended in the hope that it would soon lead to important practical
results. In full view of my great responsibility to my God and to my
Country, I earnestly beg the attention of Congress and the People to the
subject.
“March 6, 1862.”
In compliance with the above suggestion from the President, a Joint
Resolution, in the precise words suggested, was introduced into the
House, March 10, by Roscoe Conkling, and on the following day was
adopted in the House by 97 yeas to 36 nays.
Of the 36 members of the House who voted against this Resolution, were
34 Democrats, and among them were Messrs. Crisfield of Maryland, and
Messrs. Crittenden, Mallory, and Menzies of Kentucky. These gentleman
afterward made public a report, drawn by themselves, of an interesting
interview they had held with President Lincoln on this important
subject, in the words following:
“MEMORANDUM OF AN INTERVIEW BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND SOME BORDER SLAVE-
STATE REPRESENTATIVES MARCH 10, 1862.
“‘DEAR SIR:–I called, at the request of the President, to ask you to
come to the White House to-morrow morning, at nine o’clock, and bring
such of your colleagues as are in town.'”
“‘WASHINGTON, March 10, 1862.
“Yesterday on my return from church I found Mr. Postmaster General Blair
in my room, writing the above note, which he immediately suspended, and
verbally communicated the President’s invitation; and stated that the
President’s purpose was to have some conversation with the delegations
of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware, in explanation
of his Message of the 6th inst.
“This morning these delegations, or such of them as were in town,
assembled at the White House at the appointed time, and after some
little delay were admitted to an audience.
“After the usual salutations and we were seated, the President said, in
substance, that he had invited us to meet him to have some conversation
with us in explanation of his Message of the 6th; that since he had sent
it in, several of the gentlemen then present had visited him, but had
avoided any allusion to the Message, and he therefore inferred that the
import of the Message had been misunderstood, and was regarded as
inimical to the interests we represented; and he had resolved he would
talk with us, and disabuse our minds of that erroneous opinion.
“The President then disclaimed any intent to injure the interests or
wound the sensibilities of the Slave States. On the contrary, his
purpose was to protect the one and respect the other; that we were
engaged in a terrible, wasting, and tedious War; immense Armies were in
the field, and must continue in the field as long as the War lasts; that
these Armies must, of necessity, be brought into contact with Slaves in
the States we represented and in other States as they advanced; that
Slaves would come to the camps, and continual irritation was kept up;
that he was constantly annoyed by conflicting and antagonistic
complaints; on the one side, a certain class complained if the Slave was
not protected by the Army; persons were frequently found who,
participating in these views, acted in a way unfriendly to the
Slaveholder; on the other hand, Slaveholders complained that their
rights were interfered with, their Slaves induced to abscond, and
protected within the lines, these complaints were numerous, loud, and
deep; were a serious annoyance to him and embarrassing to the progress
of the War; that it kept alive a spirit hostile to the Government in the
States we represented; strengthened the hopes of the Confederates that
at some day the Border States would unite with them, and thus tend to
prolong the War; and he was of opinion, if this Resolution should be
adopted by Congress and accepted by our States, these causes of
irritation and these hopes would be removed, and more would be
accomplished towards shortening the War than could be hoped from the
greatest victory achieved by Union Armies; that he made this proposition
in good faith, and desired it to be accepted, if at all, voluntarily,
and in the same patriotic spirit in which it was made; that Emancipation
was a subject exclusively under the control of the States, and must be
adopted or rejected by each for itself; that he did not claim nor had
this Government any right to coerce them for that purpose; that such was
no part of his purpose in making this proposition, and he wished it to
be clearly understood; that he did not expect us there to be prepared to
give him an answer, but he hoped we would take the subject into serious
consideration; confer with one another, and then take such course as we
felt our duty and the interests of our constituents required of us.
“Mr. Noell, of Missouri, said that in his State, Slavery was not
considered a permanent Institution; that natural causes were there in
operation which would, at no distant day, extinguish it, and he did not
think that this proposition was necessary for that; and, besides that,
he and his friends felt solicitous as to the Message on account of the
different constructions which the Resolution and Message had received.
The New York Tribune was for it, and understood it to mean that we must
accept gradual Emancipation according to the plan suggested, or get
something worse.
“The President replied, he must not be expected to quarrel with the New
York Tribune before the right time; he hoped never to have to do it; he
would not anticipate events. In respect to Emancipation in Missouri, he
said that what had been observed by Mr. Noell was probably true, but the
operation of these natural causes had not prevented the irritating
conduct to which he had referred, or destroyed the hopes of the
Confederates that Missouri would at some time range herself alongside of
them, which, in his judgment, the passage of this Resolution by
Congress, and its acceptance by Missouri, would accomplish.
“Mr. Crisfield, of Maryland, asked what would be the effect of the
refusal of the State to accept this proposal, and desired to know if the
President looked to any policy beyond the acceptance or rejection of
this scheme.
“The President replied that he had no designs beyond the action of the
States on this particular subject. He should lament their refusal to
accept it, but he had no designs beyond their refusal of it.
“Mr. Menzies, of Kentucky, inquired if the President thought there was
any power, except in the States themselves, to carry out his scheme of
Emancipation?
“The President replied, he thought there could not be. He then went off
into a course of remark not qualifying the foregoing declaration, nor
material to be repeated to a just understanding of his meaning.
“Mr. Crisfield said he did not think the people of Maryland looked upon
Slavery as a permanent Institution; and he did not know that they would
be very reluctant to give it up if provision was made to meet the loss,
and they could be rid of the race; but they did not like to be coerced
into Emancipation, either by the direct action of the Government or by
indirection, as through the Emancipation of Slaves in this District, or
the Confiscation of Southern Property as now threatened; and he thought
before they would consent to consider this proposition they would
require to be informed on these points.
“The President replied that ‘unless he was expelled by the act of God or
the Confederate Armies, he should occupy that house for three years, and
as long as he remained there, Maryland had nothing to fear, either for
her Institutions or her interests, on the points referred to.’
“Mr. Crisfield immediately added: ‘Mr. President, what you now say could
be heard by the people of Maryland, they would consider your proposition
with a much better feeling than I fear without it they will be inclined
to do.’
“The President: ‘That (meaning a publication of what he said), will not
do; it would force me into a quarrel before the proper time;’ and again
intimating, as he had before done, that a quarrel with the ‘Greeley
faction’ was impending, he said, ‘he did not wish to encounter it before
the proper time, nor at all if it could be avoided.’
“Governor Wickliffe, of Kentucky, then asked him respecting the
Constitutionality of his scheme.
“The President replied: ‘As you may suppose, I have considered that; and
the proposition now submitted does not encounter any Constitutional
difficulty. It proposes simply to co-operate with any State by giving
such State pecuniary aid;’ and he thought that the Resolution, as
proposed by him, would be considered rather as the expression of a
sentiment than as involving any Constitutional question.
“Mr. Hall, of Missouri, thought that if this proposition was adopted at
all, it should be by the votes of the Free States, and come as a
proposition from them to the Slave States, affording them an inducement
to put aside this subject of discord; that it ought not to be expected
that members representing Slaveholding Constituencies should declare at
once, and in advance of any proposition to them, for the Emancipation of
Slaves.
“The President said he saw and felt the force of the objection; it was a
fearful responsibility, and every gentleman must do as he thought best;
that he did not know how this scheme was received by the Members from
the Free States; some of them had spoken to him and received it kindly;
but for the most part they were as reserved and chary as we had been,
and he could not tell how they would vote.
“And, in reply to some expression of Mr. Hall as to his own opinion
regarding Slavery, he said he did not pretend to disguise his Anti-
Slavery feeling; that he thought it was wrong and should continue to
think so; but that was not the question we had to deal with now.
Slavery existed, and that, too, as well by the act of the North, as of
the South; and in any scheme to get rid of it, the North, as well as the
South, was morally bound to do its full and equal share. He thought the
Institution, wrong, and ought never to have existed; but yet he
recognized the rights of Property which had grown out of it, and would
respect those rights as fully as similar rights in any other property;
that Property can exist, and does legally exist. He thought such a law,
wrong, but the rights of Property resulting must be respected; he would
get rid of the odious law, not by violating the right, but by
encouraging the proposition, and offering inducements to give it up.”
“Here the interview, so far as this subject is concerned, terminated by
Mr. Crittenden’s assuring the President that whatever might be our final
action, we all thought him solely moved by a high patriotism and sincere
devotion to the happiness and glory of his Country; and with that
conviction we should consider respectfully the important suggestions he
had made.
“After some conversation on the current war news we retired, and I
immediately proceeded to my room and wrote out this paper.
“J. W. CRISFIELD.”
“We were present at the interview described in the foregoing paper of
Mr. Crisfield, and we certify that the substance of what passed on the
occasion is in this paper, faithfully and fully given.
“J. W. MENZIES,
“J. J. CRITTENDEN,
“R. MALLORY.
“March 10, 1862.”
Upon the passage of the Joint-Resolution in the House only four
Democrats (Messrs. Cobb, Haight, Lehman, and Sheffield) voted in the
affirmative, and but two Republicans (Francis Thomas, and Leary) in the
negative. On the 2nd of April, it passed the Senate by a vote of 32
yeas–all Republicans save Messrs. Davis and Thomson–to 10 nays, all
Democrats.
Meantime the question of the treatment of the “Contraband” in our
Military camps, continued to grow in importance.
On March 26, 1862, General Hooker issued the following order touching
certain Fugitive Slaves and their alleged owners:
“HEADQUARTERS, HOOKER’S DIVISION, CAMP BAKER,
“LOWER POTOMAC, March 26, 1862.
“To BRIGADE AND REGIMENTAL COMMANDERS OF THIS DIVISION:
“Messrs. Nally, Gray, Dummington, Dent, Adams, Speake, Price, Posey,
and Cobey, citizens of Maryland, have Negroes supposed to be with some
of the regiments of this Division; the Brigadier General commanding
directs that they be permitted to visit all the camps of his command, in
search of their Property, and if found, that they be allowed to take
possession of the same, without any interference whatever. Should any
obstacle be thrown in their way by any officer or soldier in the
Division, they will be at once reported by the regimental commanders to
these headquarters.
“By command of Brigadier General Hooker;
“JOSEPH DICKINSON,
“Assistant Adjutant General.”
On the following day, by direction of General Sickles, the following
significant report was made touching the above order:
“HEADQUARTERS, SECOND REGIMENT, EXCELSIOR BRIGADE.
“CAMP HALL, March 27, 1862.
“LIEUTENANT:–In compliance with verbal directions from Brigadier
General D. E. Sickles, to report as to the occurrence at this camp on
the afternoon of the 26th instant, I beg leave to submit the following:
“At about 3:30 o’clock P. M., March 26, 1862, admission within our lines
was demanded by a party of horsemen (civilians), numbering, perhaps,
fifteen. They presented the lieutenant commanding the guard, with an
order of entrance from Brigadier General Joseph Hooker, Commanding
Division (copy appended), the order stating that nine men should be
admitted.
“I ordered that the balance of the party should remain without the
lines; which was done. Upon the appearance of the others, there was
visible dissatisfaction and considerable murmuring among the soldiers,
to so great an extent that I almost feared for the safety of the
Slaveholders. At this time General Sickles opportunely arrived, and
instructed me to order them outside the camp, which I did, amidst the
loud cheers of our soldiers.
“It is proper to add, that before entering our lines, and within about
seventy-five or one hundred yards of our camp, one of their number
discharged two pistol shots at a Negro, who was running past them, with
an evident intention of taking his life. This justly enraged our men.
“All of which is respectfully submitted.
“Your obedient servant,
“JOHN TOLEN.
“Major Commanding Second Regiment, E. B.
“To Lieutenant J. L. PALMER, Jr.,
“A. D. C. and A. A. A. General.”
On April 6, the following important dispatch, in the nature of an order,
was issued by General Doubleday to one of his subordinate officers:
“HEADQUARTERS MILITARY DEFENSES,
“NORTH OF THE POTOMAC,
“WASHINGTON, April 6, 1862.
“SIR:–I am directed by General Doubleday to say, in answer to your
letter of the 2d instant, that all Negroes coming into the lines of any
of the camps or forts under his command, are to be treated as persons,
and not as chattels.
“Under no circumstances has the Commander of a fort or camp the power of
surrendering persons claimed as Fugitive Slaves, as it cannot be done
without determining their character.
“The Additional Article of War recently passed by Congress positively
prohibits this.
“The question has been asked, whether it would not be better to exclude
Negroes altogether from the lines. The General is of the opinion that
they bring much valuable information, which cannot be obtained from any
other source. They are acquainted with all the roads, paths, fords, and
other natural features of the country, and they make excellent guides.
They also know and frequently have exposed the haunts of Secession spies
and Traitors and the existence of Rebel organizations. They will not,
therefore, be excluded.
“The General also directs me to say that civil process cannot be served
directly in the camps or forts of his command, without full authority be
obtained from the Commanding Officer for that purpose.
“I am very respectfully, your obedient servant,
“E. P. HALSTED,
“Assistant Adjutant General.
“Lieut. Col. JOHN D. SHANE,
“Commanding 76th Reg. N. Y. Vols.”
CHAPTER XVII.
BORDER-STATE OPPOSITION.
On April 3, 1862, the United States Senate passed a Bill to liberate all
Persons of African descent held to Service or Labor within the District
of Columbia, and prohibiting Slavery or involuntary servitude in the
District except as a punishment for crime–an appropriation being made
to pay to loyal owners an appraised value of the liberated Slaves not to
exceed $300 for each Slave. The vote on its passage in the Senate was
29 yeas to 14 nays–all the yeas being Republican, and all but two of
the nays Democratic.
April 11th, the Bill passed the House by 92 yeas to 39 nays–all the
yeas save 5 being Republican, and all the nays, save three, being
Democratic.
April 7, 1862, the House adopted a resolution, by 67 yeas to 52 nays–
all the yeas, save one, Republican, and all the nays, save 12,
Democratic–for the appointment of a Select Committee of nine, to
consider and report whether any plan could be proposed and recommended
for the gradual Emancipation of all the African Slaves, and the
extinction of Slavery in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Missouri, by the people or local authorities thereof, and
how far and in what way the Government of the United States could and
ought equitably to aid in facilitating either of those objects.
On the 16th President Lincoln sent the following Message to Congress:
“Fellow citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives:
“The Act entitled ‘An Act for the release of certain Persons held to
Service or Labor in the District of Columbia,’ has this day been
approved and signed.
“I have never doubted the Constitutional authority of Congress to
abolish Slavery in this District; and I have ever desired to see the
National Capital freed from the Institution in some satisfactory way.
Hence there has never been in my mind any question upon the subject
except the one of expediency, arising in view of all the circumstances.
“If there be matters within and about this Act which might have taken a
course or shape more satisfactory to my judgment, I do not attempt to
specify them. I am gratified that the two principles of compensation
and colonization are both recognized and practically applied in the Act.
“In the matter of compensation, it is provided that claims may be
presented within ninety days from the passage of the Act, ‘but not
thereafter;’ and there is no saving for minors, femmes covert, insane,
or absent persons. I presume this is an omission by mere oversight, and
I recommend that it be supplied by an amendatory or Supplemental Act.
“ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
“April 16, 1862.”
Subsequently, in order to meet the President’s views, such an amendatory
or Supplemental Act was passed and approved.
But now, Major General Hunter having taken upon himself to issue an
Emancipation proclamation, May 9, 1862, the President, May 19, 1862,
issued a proclamation rescinding it as follows:
“Whereas there appears in the public prints what purports to be a
proclamation of Major General Hunter, in the words and figures
following, to wit:
“‘HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE SOUTH,
‘HILTON HEAD, S. C., May 9, 1862.
‘[General Orders No. 11.]
‘The three States of Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina, comprising
the Military Department of the South, having deliberately declared
themselves no longer under the protection of the United States of
America, and having taken up arms against the said United States, it
becomes a Military necessity to declare them under Martial Law. This
was accordingly done on the 25th day of April, 1862. Slavery and
Martial Law, in a Free Country, are altogether incompatible; the Persons
in these three States–Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina-heretofore
held as Slaves, are therefore declared forever Free.
‘DAVID HUNTER,
‘Major-General Commanding.
‘Official:
ED. W. SMITH,
‘Acting Assistant Adjutant General.’
“And whereas the same is producing some excitement and misunderstanding,
“Therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, proclaim
and declare, that the Government of the United States had no knowledge,
information, or belief, of an intention on the part of General Hunter to
issue such a proclamation; nor has it yet any authentic information that
the document is genuine. And further, that neither General Hunter, nor
any other Commander, or person, has been authorized by the Government of
the United States to make proclamations declaring the Slaves of any
State Free; and that the supposed proclamation, now in question, whether
genuine or false, is altogether void, so far as respects such
declaration.
“I further make known that whether it be competent for me, as Commander-
in-Chief of the Army and Navy, to declare the Slaves of any State or
States free, and whether, at any time, in any case, it shall have become
a necessity indispensable to the maintenance of the Government, to
exercise such supposed power, are questions which, under my
responsibility, I reserve to myself, and which I cannot feel justified
in leaving to the decision of Commanders in the field. These are
totally different questions from those of police regulations in armies
and camps.
“On the sixth day of March last, by a Special Message, I recommended to
Congress the adoption of a Joint Resolution to be substantially as
follows:
“‘ Resolved, That the United States ought to co-operate with any State
which may adopt a gradual abolishment of Slavery, giving to such State
pecuniary aid, to be used by such State, in its discretion, to
compensate for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such
change of system.’
“The Resolution, in the language above quoted, was adopted by large
majorities in both branches of Congress, and now stands an authentic,
definite, and solemn proposal of the Nation to the States and people
most immediately interested in the subject-matter. To the people of
those States I now earnestly appeal–I do not argue–I beseech you to
make the argument for yourselves–you cannot, if you would, be blind to
the signs of the times–I beg of you a calm and enlarged consideration
of them, ranging, if it may be, far above personal and partisan
politics. This proposal makes common cause for a common object, casting
no reproaches upon any. It acts not the Pharisee. The changes it
contemplates would come gently as the dews of Heaven, not rending or
wrecking anything. Will you not embrace it? So much good has not been
done, by one effort, in all past time, as, in the providence of God, it
is now your high privilege to do. May the vast future not have to
lament that you have neglected it.
“In witness thereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.
“Done at the city of Washington this nineteenth day of May, in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, and of the
Independence of the United States the eighty-sixth.
“By the President. ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
“WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.”
On June 5th, 1862, General T. Williams issued the following Order:
“HEADQUARTERS SECOND BRIGADE,
“BATON ROUGE, June 5, 1862.
“[General Orders No. 46.]
“In consequence of the demoralizing and disorganizing tendencies to the
troops, of harboring runaway Negroes, it is hereby ordered that the
respective Commanders of the camps and garrisons of the several
regiments, Second Brigade, turn all such Fugitives in their camps or
garrisons out beyond the limits of their respective guards and
sentinels.
“By order of Brigadier-General T. Williams:
“WICKHAM HOFFMAN,
“Assistant-Adjutant General.”
Lieutenant-Colonel D. R. Anthony, of the Seventh Kansas Volunteers,
commanding a Brigade, issued the following order, at a date subsequent
to the Battle of Pittsburg Landing and the evacuation of Corinth:
“HEADQUARTERS MITCHELL’S BRIGADE,
“ADVANCE COLUMN, FIRST BRIGADE, FIRST DIVISION,
“GENERAL ARMY OF THE MISSISSIPPI,
“CAMP ETHERIDGE, TENNESSEE, June 18, 1862.
“[General Orders No. 26.]
“1. The impudence–and impertinence of the open and armed Rebels,
Traitors, Secessionists, and Southern-Rightsmen of this section of the
State of Tennessee, in arrogantly demanding the right to search our camp
for Fugitive Slaves, has become a nuisance, and will no longer be
tolerated. “Officers will see that this class of men, who visit our
camp for this purpose, are excluded from our lines.
“2. Should any such persons be found within our lines, they will be
arrested and sent to headquarters.
“3. Any officer or soldier of this command who shall arrest and deliver
to his master a Fugitive Slave, shall be summarily and severely
punished, according to the laws relative to such crimes.
“4. The strong Union sentiment in this Section is most gratifying, and
all officers and soldiers, in their intercourse with the loyal, and
those favorably disposed, are requested to act in their usual kind and
courteous manner and protect them to the fullest extent.
“By order of D. R. Anthony, Lieutenant-Colonel Seventh Kansas
Volunteers, commanding:
“W. W. H. LAWRENCE,
“Captain and Assistant-Adjutant General.”
Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony was subsequently placed under arrest for
issuing the above order.
It was about this time, also, that General McClellan addressed to
President Lincoln a letter on “forcible Abolition of Slavery,” and “a
Civil and Military policy”–in these terms:
“HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE POTOMAC,
“CAMP NEAR HARRISON’S LANDING, VA., July 7, 1862.
“MR. PRESIDENT:–You have been fully informed that the Rebel Army is in
the front, with the purpose of overwhelming us by attacking our
positions or reducing us by blocking our river communications. I cannot
but regard our condition as critical, and I earnestly desire, in view of
possible contingencies, to lay before your Excellency, for your private
consideration, my general views concerning the existing state of the
Rebellion, although they do not strictly relate to the situation of this
Army, or strictly come within the scope of my official duties. These
views amount to convictions, and are deeply impressed upon my mind and
heart.
“Our cause must never be abandoned; it is the cause of Free institutions
and Self-government. The Constitution and the Union must be preserved,
whatever may be the cost in time, treasure, and blood.
“If Secession is successful, other dissolutions are clearly to be seen
in the future. Let neither Military disaster, political faction, nor
Foreign War shake your settled purpose to enforce the equal operation of
the Laws of the United States upon the people of every State.
“The time has come when the Government must determine upon a Civil and
Military policy, covering the whole ground of our National trouble.
“The responsibility of determining, declaring, and supporting such Civil
and Military policy, and of directing the whole course of National
affairs in regard to the Rebellion, must now be assumed and exercised by
you, or our Cause will be lost. The Constitution gives you power, even
for the present terrible exigency.
“This Rebellion has assumed the character of a War; as such it should be
regarded, and it should be conducted upon the highest principles known
to Christian civilization. It should not be a War looking to the
subjugation of the people of any State, in any event. It should not be
at all a war upon population, but against armed forces and political
organizations. Neither Confiscation of property, political executions
of persons, territorial organizations of States, or forcible Abolition
of Slavery, should be contemplated for a moment.
“In prosecuting the War, all private property and unarmed persons should
be strictly protected, subject only to the necessity of Military
operations; all private property taken for Military use should be paid
or receipted for; pillage and waste should be treated as high crimes;
all unnecessary trespass sternly prohibited and offensive demeanor by
the military towards citizens promptly rebuked.
“Military arrests should not be tolerated, except in places where active
hostilities exist; and oaths, not required by enactments,
Constitutionally made, should be neither demanded nor received.
“Military Government should be confined to the preservation of public
order and the protection of political right. Military power should not
be allowed to interfere with the relations of Servitude, either by
supporting or impairing the authority of the master, except for
repressing disorder, as in other cases. Slaves, contraband under the
Act of Congress, seeking Military protection, should receive it.
“The right of the Government to appropriate permanently to its own
service claims to Slave-labor should be asserted, and the right of the
owner to compensation therefor should be recognized.
“This principle might be extended, upon grounds of Military necessity
and security, to all the Slaves of a particular State, thus working
manumission in such State; and in Missouri, perhaps in Western Virginia
also, and possibly even in Maryland, the expediency of such a measure is
only a question of time.
“A system of policy thus Constitutional, and pervaded by the influences
of Christianity and Freedom, would receive the support of almost all
truly Loyal men, would deeply impress the Rebel masses and all foreign
nations, and it might be humbly hoped that it would commend itself to
the favor of the Almighty.
“Unless the principles governing the future conduct of our Struggle
shall be made known and approved, the effort to obtain requisite forces
will be almost hopeless. A declaration of radical views, especially
upon Slavery, will rapidly disintegrate our present Armies.
“The policy of the Government must be supported by concentrations of
Military power. The National Forces should not be dispersed in
expeditions, posts of occupation, and numerous armies, but should be
mainly collected into masses, and brought to bear upon the Armies of the
Confederate States. Those Armies thoroughly defeated, the political
structure which they support would soon cease to exist,
“In carrying out any system of policy which you may form, you will
require a Commander-in-chief of the Army, one who possesses your
confidence, understands your views, and who is competent to execute your
orders, by directing the Military Forces of the Nation to the
accomplishment of the objects by you proposed. I do not ask that place
for myself, I am willing to serve you in such position as you may assign
me, and I will do so as faithfully as ever subordinate served superior.
“I may be on the brink of Eternity; and as I hope forgiveness from my
Maker, I have written this letter with sincerity towards you and from
love for my Country.
“Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
“GEORGE B. MCCLELLAN,
“Major-General Commanding.
“His Excellency A. LINCOLN, President.”
July 12, 1862, Senators and Representatives of the Border Slave-holding
States, having been specially invited to the White House for the
purpose, were addressed by President Lincoln, as follows:
“GENTLEMEN:–After the adjournment of Congress, now near, I shall have
no opportunity of seeing you for several months. Believing that you of
the Border States hold more power for good than any other equal number
of members, I feel it a duty which I cannot justifiably waive, to make
this appeal to you.
“I intend no reproach or complaint when I assure you that, in my
opinion, if you all had voted for the Resolution in the Gradual
Emancipation Message of last March, the War would now be substantially
ended. And the plan therein proposed is yet one of the most potent and
swift means of ending it. Let the States which are in Rebellion see
definitely and certainly that in no event will the States you represent
ever join their proposed Confederacy, and they cannot much longer
maintain the contest.
“But you cannot divest them of their hope to ultimately have you with
them so long as you show a determination to perpetuate the Institution
within your own States. Beat them at elections, as you have
overwhelmingly done, and nothing daunted, they still claim you as their
own. You and I know what the lever of their power is. Break that lever
before their faces, and they can shake you no more forever.
“Most of you have treated me with kindness and consideration, and I
trust you will not now think I improperly touch what is exclusively your
own, when, for the sake of the whole Country, I ask, ‘Can you, for your
States, do better than to take the course I urge?’ Discarding punctilio
and maxims adapted to more manageable times, and looking only to the
unprecedentedly stern facts of our case, can you do better in any
possible event?
“You prefer that the Constitutional relations of the States to the
Nation shall be practically restored without disturbance of the
Institution; and, if this were done, my whole duty, in this respect,
under the Constitution and my oath of office, would be performed. But
it is not done, and we are trying to accomplish it by War.
“The incidents of the War cannot be avoided. If the War continues long,
as it must, if the object be not sooner attained, the Institution in
your States will be extinguished by mere friction and abrasion–by the
mere incidents of the War. It will be gone, and you will have nothing
valuable in lieu of it. Much of its value is gone already.
“How much better for you and for your people to take the step which at
once shortens the War and secures substantial compensation for that
which is sure to be wholly lost in any other event! How much better to
thus save the money which else we sink forever in the War! How: much
better to do it while we can, lest the War ere long render us
pecuniarily unable to do it! How much better for you, as seller, and
the Nation, as buyer, to sell out and buy out that without which the War
could never have been, than to sink both the thing to be sold and the
price of it in cutting one another’s throats!
“I do not speak of Emancipation at once, but of a decision at once to
Emancipate gradually. Room in South America for colonization can be
obtained cheaply and in abundance, and when numbers shall be large
enough to be company and encouragement for one another, the freed people
will not be so reluctant to go.
“I am pressed with a difficulty not yet mentioned; one which threatens
division among those who, united, are none too strong. An instance of
it is known to you. General Hunter is an honest man. He was, and I
hope still is, my friend. I value him none the less for his agreeing
with me in the general wish that all men everywhere could be freed. He
proclaimed all men Free within certain States, and I repudiated the
proclamation. He expected more good and less harm from the measure than
I could believe would follow.
“Yet, in repudiating it, I gave dissatisfaction, if not offense, to many
whose support the Country cannot afford to lose. And this is not the
end of it. The pressure in this direction is still upon me, and is
increasing. By conceding what I now ask, you can relieve me, and, much
more, can relieve the Country in this important point.
“Upon these considerations I have again begged your attention to the
Message of March last. Before leaving the Capitol, consider and discuss
it among yourselves. You are Patriots and Statesmen, and as such I pray
you consider this proposition; and, at the least, commend it to the
consideration of your States and people. As you would perpetuate
popular Government for the best people in the World, I beseech you that
you do in nowise omit this.
“Our common Country is in great peril, demanding the loftiest views and
boldest action to bring a speedy relief. Once relieved, its form of
Government is saved to the World, its beloved history and cherished
memories are vindicated, and its happy future fully assured and rendered
inconceivable grand. To you, more than to any others, the privilege is
given to assure that happiness and swell that grandeur, and to link your
own names therewith forever.”
The gentlemen representing in Congress the Border-States, to whom this
address was made, subsequently met and discussed its subject matter, and
made written reply in the shape of majority and minority replies, as
follows:
THE MAJORITY REPLY:
“WASHINGTON, July 14, 1862.
“TO THE PRESIDENT:
“The undersigned, Representatives of Kentucky, Virginia, Missouri, and
Maryland, in the two Houses of Congress, have listened to your address
with the profound sensibility naturally inspired by the high source from
which it emanates, the earnestness which marked its delivery, and the
overwhelming importance of the subject of which it treats. We have
given it a most respectful consideration, and now lay before you our
response. We regret that want of time has not permitted us to make it
more perfect.
“We have not been wanting, Mr. President, in respect to you, and in
devotion to the Constitution and the Union. We have not been
indifferent to the great difficulties surrounding you, compared with
which all former National troubles have been but as the summer cloud;
and we have freely given you our sympathy and support. Repudiating the
dangerous heresies of the Secessionists, we believed, with you, that the
War on their part is aggressive and wicked, and the objects for which it
was to be prosecuted on ours, defined by your Message at the opening of
the present Congress, to be such as all good men should approve.
“We have not hesitated to vote all supplies necessary to carry it on
vigorously. We have voted all the men and money you have asked for, and
even more; we have imposed onerous taxes on our people, and they are
paying them with cheerfulness and alacrity; we have encouraged
enlistments, and sent to the field many of our best men; and some of our
number have offered their persons to the enemy as pledges of their
sincerity and devotion to the Country.
“We have done all this under the most discouraging circumstances, and in
the face of measures most distasteful to us and injurious to the
interests we represent, and in the hearing of doctrines avowed by those
who claim to be your friends, must be abhorrent to us and our
constituents.
“But, for all this, we have never faltered, nor shall we as long as we
have a Constitution to defend and a Government which protects us. And
we are ready for renewed efforts, and even greater sacrifices, yea, any
sacrifice, when we are satisfied it is required to preserve our
admirable form of Government and the priceless blessings of
Constitutional Liberty.
“A few of our number voted for the Resolution recommended by your
Message of the 6th of March last, the greater portion of us did not, and
we will briefly state the prominent reasons which influenced our action.
“In the first place, it proposed a radical change of our social system,
and was hurried through both Houses with undue haste, without reasonable
time for consideration and debate, and with no time at all for
consultation with our constituents, whose interests it deeply involved.
It seemed like an interference by this Government with a question which
peculiarly and exclusively belonged to our respective States, on which
they had not sought advice or solicited aid.
“Many of us doubted the Constitutional power of this Government to make
appropriations of money for the object designated, and all of us thought
our finances were in no condition to bear the immense outlay which its
adoption and faithful execution would impose upon the National Treasury.
If we pause but a moment to think of the debt its acceptance would have
entailed, we are appalled by its magnitude. The proposition was
addressed to all the States, and embraced the whole number of Slaves.
“According to the census of 1860 there were then nearly four million
Slaves in the Country; from natural increase they exceed that number
now. At even the low average of $300, the price fixed by the
Emancipation Act for the Slaves of this District, and greatly below
their real worth, their value runs up to the enormous sum of
$1,200,000,000; and if to that we add the cost of deportation and
colonization, at $100 each, which is but a fraction more than is
actually paid–by the Maryland Colonization Society, we have
$400,000,000 more.
“We were not willing to impose a tax on our people sufficient to pay the
interest on that sum, in addition to the vast and daily increasing debt
already fixed upon them by exigencies of the War, and if we had been
willing, the Country could not bear it. Stated in this form the
proposition is nothing less than the deportation from the Country of
$1,600,000,000 worth of producing labor, and the substitution, in its
place, of an interest-bearing debt of the same amount.
“But, if we are told that it was expected that only the States we
represent would accept the proposition, we respectfully submit that even
then it involves a sum too great for the financial ability of this
Government at this time. According to the census of 1860:
Slaves
Kentucky had ……….. 225,490
Maryland …………… 87,188
Virginia …………… 490,887
Delaware …………… 1,798
Missouri …………… 114,965
Tennessee ………….. 275,784
Making in the whole .. 1,196,112
At the same rate of valuation these would
amount to ……… $358,933,500
Add for deportation and colonization $100
each …………… 118,244,533
And we have the
enormous sum of … $478,038,133
“We did not feel that we should be justified in voting for a measure
which, if carried out, would add this vast amount to our public debt at
a moment when the Treasury was reeling under the enormous expenditure of
the War.
“Again, it seemed to us that this Resolution was but the annunciation of
a sentiment which could not or was not likely to be reduced to an actual
tangible proposition. No movement was then made to provide and
appropriate the funds required to carry it into effect; and we were not
encouraged to believe that funds would be provided. And our belief has
been fully justified by subsequent events.
“Not to mention other circumstances, it is quite sufficient for our
purpose to bring to your notice the fact that, while this resolution was
under consideration in the Senate, our colleague, the Senator from
Kentucky, moved an amendment appropriating $500,000 to the object
therein designated, and it was voted down with great unanimity.
“What confidence, then, could we reasonably feel that if we committed
ourselves to the policy it proposed, our constituents would reap the
fruits of the promise held out; and on what ground could we, as fair
men, approach them and challenge their support?
“The right to hold Slaves, is a right appertaining to all the States of
this Union. They have the right to cherish or abolish the Institution,
as their tastes or their interests may prompt, and no one is authorized
to question the right or limit the enjoyment. And no one has more
clearly affirmed that right than you have. Your Inaugural Address does
you great honor in this respect, and inspired the Country with
confidence in your fairness and respect for the Law. Our States are in
the enjoyment of that right.
“We do not feel called on to defend the Institution or to affirm it is
one which ought to be cherished; perhaps, if we were to make the
attempt, we might find that we differ even among ourselves. It is
enough for our purpose to know that it is a right; and, so knowing, we
did not see why we should now be expected to yield it.
“We had contributed our full share to relieve the Country at this
terrible crisis; we had done as much as had been required of others in
like circumstances; and we did not see why sacrifices should be expected
of us from which others, no more loyal, were exempt. Nor could we see
what good the Nation would derive from it.
“Such a sacrifice submitted to by us would not have strengthened the arm
of this Government or weakened that of the Enemy. It was not necessary
as a pledge of our Loyalty, for that had been manifested beyond a
reasonable doubt, in every form, and at every place possible. There was
not the remotest probability that the States we represent would join in
the Rebellion, nor is there now, or of their electing to go with the
Southern Section in the event of a recognition of the Independence of
any part of the disaffected region.
“Our States are fixed unalterably in their resolution to adhere to and
support the Union. They see no safety for themselves, and no hope for
Constitutional Liberty, but by its preservation. They will, under no
circumstances, consent to its dissolution; and we do them no more than
justice when we assure you that, while the War is conducted to prevent
that deplorable catastrophe, they will sustain it as long as they can
muster a man, or command a dollar.
“Nor will they ever consent, in any event, to unite with the Southern
Confederacy. The bitter fruits of the peculiar doctrines of that region
will forever prevent them from placing their security and happiness in
the custody of an association which has incorporated in its Organic Law
the seeds of its own destruction.
“We cannot admit, Mr. President, that if we had voted for the Resolution
in the Emancipation Message of March last, the War would now be
substantially ended. We are unable to see how our action in this
particular has given, or could give, encouragement to the Rebellion.
The Resolution has passed; and if there be virtue in it, it will be
quite as efficacious as if we had voted for it.
“We have no power to bind our States in this respect by our votes here;
and, whether we had voted the one way or the other, they are in the same
condition of freedom to accept or reject its provisions.
“No, Sir, the War has not been prolonged or hindered by our action on
this or any other measure. We must look for other causes for that
lamented fact. We think there is not much difficulty, not much
uncertainty, in pointing out others far more probable and potent in
their agencies to that end.
“The Rebellion derives its strength from the Union of all classes in the
Insurgent States; and while that Union lasts the War will never end
until they are utterly exhausted. We know that, at the inception of
these troubles, Southern society was divided, and that a large portion,
perhaps a majority, were opposed to Secession. Now the great mass of
Southern people are united.
“To discover why they are so, we must glance at Southern society, and
notice the classes into which it has been divided, and which still
distinguish it. They are in arms, but not for the same objects; they
are moved to a common end, but by different and even inconsistent
reasons.
“The leaders, which comprehend what was previously known as the State
Rights Party, and is much the lesser class, seek to break down National
Independence and set up State domination. With them it is a War against
Nationality.
“The other class is fighting, as it supposes, to maintain and preserve
its rights of Property and domestic safety, which it has been made to
believe are assailed by this Government. This latter class are not
Disunionists per se; they are so only because they have been made to
believe that this Administration is inimical to their rights, and is
making War on their domestic Institutions. As long as these two classes
act together they will never assent to a Peace.
“The policy, then, to be pursued, is obvious. The former class will
never be reconciled, but the latter may be. Remove their apprehensions;
satisfy them that no harm is intended to them and their Institutions;
that this Government is not making War on their rights of Property, but
is simply defending its legitimate authority, and they will gladly
return to their allegiance as soon as the pressure of Military dominion
imposed by the Confederate authority is removed from them.
“Twelve months ago, both Houses of Congress, adopting the spirit of your
Message, then but recently sent in, declared with singular unanimity the
objects of the War, and the Country instantly bounded to your side to
assist you in carrying it on. If the spirit of that Resolution had been
adhered to, we are confident that we should before now have seen the end
of this deplorable conflict. But what have we seen?
“In both Houses of Congress we have heard doctrines subversive of the
principles of the Constitution, and seen measure after measure, founded
in substance on those doctrines, proposed and carried through, which can
have no other effect than to distract and divide loyal men, and
exasperate and drive still further from us and their duty the people of
the rebellious States.
“Military officers, following these bad examples, have stepped beyond
the just limits of their authority in the same direction, until in
several instances you have felt the necessity of interfering to arrest
them. And even the passage of the Resolution to which you refer has
been ostentatiously proclaimed as the triumph of a principle which the
people of the Southern States regard as ruinous to them. The effect of
these measures was foretold, and may now be seen in the indurated state
of Southern feeling.
“To these causes, Mr. President, and not to our omission to vote for the
Resolution recommended by you, we solemnly believe we are to attribute
the terrible earnestness of those in arms against the Government, and
the continuance of the War. Nor do we (permit us to say, Mr. President,
with all respect to you) agree that the Institution of Slavery is ‘the
lever of their power,’ but we are of the opinion that ‘the lever of
their power’ is the apprehension that the powers of a common Government,
created for common and equal protection to the interests of all, will be
wielded against the Institutions of the Southern States.
“There is one other idea in your address we feel called on to notice.
After stating the fact of your repudiation of General Hunter’s
Proclamation, you add:
“‘Yet, in repudiating it, I gave dissatisfaction, if not offense, to
many whose support the Country cannot afford to lose. And this is not
the end of it. The pressure in this direction is still upon me and is
increasing. By conceding what I now ask, you can relieve me, and, much
more, can relieve the Country, in this important point,’
“We have anxiously looked into this passage to discover its true import,
but we are yet in painful uncertainty. How can we, by conceding what
you now ask, relieve you and the Country from the increasing pressure to
which you refer? We will not allow ourselves to think that the
proposition is, that we consent to give up Slavery, to the end that the
Hunter proclamation may be let loose on the Southern people, for it is
too well known that we would not be parties to any such measure, and we
have too much respect for you to imagine you would propose it.
“Can it mean that by sacrificing our interest in Slavery we appease the
spirit that controls that pressure, cause it to be withdrawn, and rid
the Country of the pestilent agitation of the Slavery question? We are
forbidden so to think, for that spirit would not be satisfied with the
liberation of 100,000 Slaves, and cease its agitation while 3,000,000
remain in bondage. Can it mean that by abandoning Slavery in our States
we are removing the pressure from you and the Country, by preparing for
a separation on the line of the Cotton States?
“We are forbidden so to think, because it is known that we are, and we
believe that you are, unalterably opposed to any division at all. We
would prefer to think that you desire this concession as a pledge of our
support, and thus enable you to withstand a pressure which weighs
heavily on you and the Country.
“Mr. President, no such sacrifice is necessary to secure our support.
Confine yourself to your Constitutional authority; confine your
subordinates within the same limits; conduct this War solely for the
purpose of restoring the Constitution to its legitimate authority;
concede to each State and its loyal citizens their just rights, and we
are wedded to you by indissoluble ties. Do this, Mr. President, and you
touch the American heart, and invigorate it with new hope. You will, as
we solemnly believe, in due time restore Peace to your Country, lift it
from despondency to a future of glory, and preserve to your countrymen,
their posterity, and man, the inestimable treasure of a Constitutional
Government.
“Mr. President, we have stated with frankness and candor the reasons on
which we forbore to vote for the Resolution you have mentioned; but you
have again presented this proposition, and appealed to us with an
earnestness and eloquence which have not failed to impress us, to
‘consider it, and at the least to commend it to the consideration of our
States and people.’
“Thus appealed to by the Chief Magistrate of our beloved Country, in the
hour of its greatest peril, we cannot wholly decline. We are willing to
trust every question relating to their interest and happiness to the
consideration and ultimate judgment of our own people.
“While differing from you as to the necessity of Emancipating the Slaves
of our States as a means of putting down the Rebellion, and while
protesting against the propriety of any extra-territorial interference
to induce the people of our States to adopt any particular line of
policy on a subject which peculiarly and exclusively belongs to them,
yet, when you and our brethren of the Loyal States sincerely believe
that the retention of Slavery by us is an obstacle to Peace and National
harmony, and are willing to contribute pecuniary aid to compensate our
States and people for the inconveniences produced by such a change of
system, we are not unwilling that our people shall consider the
propriety of putting it aside.
“But we have already said that we regard this Resolution as the
utterance of a sentiment, and we had no confidence that it would assume
the shape of a tangible practical proposition, which would yield the
fruits of the sacrifice it required. Our people are influenced by the
same want of confidence, and will not consider the proposition in its
present impalpable form. The interest they are asked to give up is, to
them, of immense importance, and they ought not to be expected even to
entertain the proposal until they are assured that when they accept it
their just expectations will not be frustrated.
“We regard your plan as a proposition from the Nation to the States to
exercise an admitted Constitutional right in a particular manner, and
yield up a valuable interest. Before they ought to consider the
proposition, it should be presented in such a tangible, practical,
efficient shape, as to command their confidence that its fruits are
contingent only upon their acceptance. We cannot trust anything to the
contingencies of future legislation.
“If Congress, by proper and necessary legislation, shall provide
sufficient funds and place them at your disposal to be applied by you to
the payment of any of our States, or the citizens thereof, who shall
adopt the Abolishment of Slavery, either gradual or immediate, as they
may determine, and the expense of deportation and colonization of the
liberated Slaves, then will our States and people take this proposition
into careful consideration, for such decision as in their judgment is
demanded by their interest, their honor, and their duty to the whole
Country. We have the honor to be, with great respect,
“C. A. WICKLIFFE, Ch’man,
CHAS. B. CALVERT,
GARRETT DAVIS,
C. L. L. LEARY,
R. WILSON,
EDWIN H. WEBSTER,
J. J. CRITTENDEN,
R. MALLORY,
JOHN S. CARLILE,
AARON HARDING,
J. W. CRISFIELD,
JAMES S. ROLLINS,
J. S. JACKSON,
J. W. MENZIES,
H. GRIDER,
THOMAS L. PRICE,
JOHN S. PHELPS,
G. W. DUNLAP,
FRANCIS THOMAS,
WILLIAM A. HALL.”
THE MINORITY REPLY.
“WASHINGTON, July 15, 1863.
“MR. PRESIDENT:–The undersigned, members of Congress from the Border
States, in response to your address of Saturday last, beg leave to say
that they attended a meeting, on the same day the address was delivered,
for the purpose of considering the same. The meeting appointed a
Committee to report a response to your address. That report was made on
yesterday, and the action of the majority indicated clearly that the
response, or one in substance the same, would be adopted and presented
to you.
“Inasmuch as we cannot, consistently with our own sense of duty to the
Country, under the existing perils which surround us, concur in that
response, we feel it to be due to you and to ourselves to make to you a
brief and candid answer over our own signatures.
“We believe that the whole power of the Government, upheld and sustained
by all the influences and means of all loyal men in all Sections, and of
all Parties, is essentially necessary to put down the Rebellion and
preserve the Union and the Constitution. We understand your appeal to
us to have been made for the purpose of securing this result.
“A very large portion of the People in the Northern States believe that
Slavery is the ‘lever-power of the Rebellion.’ It matters not whether
this belief be well-founded or not. The belief does exist, and we have
to deal with things as they are, and not as we would have them be.
“In consequence of the existence of this belief, we understand that an
immense pressure is brought to bear for the purpose of striking down
this Institution through the exercise of Military authority. The
Government cannot maintain this great struggle if the support and
influence of the men who entertain these opinions be withdrawn. Neither
can the Government hope for early success if the support of that element
called “Conservative” be withdrawn.
“Such being the condition of things, the President appeals to the
Border-State men to step forward and prove their patriotism by making
the first sacrifice. No doubt, like appeals have been made to extreme
men in the North to meet us half-way, in order that the whole moral,
political, pecuniary, and physical force of the Nation may be firmly and
earnestly united in one grand effort to save the Union and the
Constitution.
“Believing that such were the motives that prompted your Address, and
such the results to which it looked, we cannot reconcile it to our sense
of duty, in this trying hour, to respond in a spirit of fault-finding or
querulousness over the things that are past.
“We are not disposed to seek for the cause of present misfortunes in the
errors and wrongs of others who now propose to unite with us in a common
purpose.
“But, on the other hand, we meet your address in the spirit in which it
was made, and, as loyal Americans, declare to you and to the World that
there is no sacrifice that we are not ready to make to save the
Government and institutions of our fathers. That we, few of us though
there may be, will permit no man, from the North or from the South, to
go further than we in the accomplishment of the great work before us.
That, in order to carry out these views, we will, so far as may be in
our power, ask the people of the Border States calmly, deliberately, and
fairly to consider your recommendations.
“We are the more emboldened to assume this position from the fact, now
become history, that the leaders of the Southern Rebellion have offered
to abolish Slavery among them as a condition to foreign intervention in
favor of their Independence as a Nation.
“If they can give up Slavery to destroy the Union, we can surely ask our
people to consider the question of Emancipation to save the Union.
“With great respect, your obedient servants,
“JOHN W. NOELL,
“SAMUEL L. CASEY,
“GEORGE P. FISHER,
“A. J. CLEMENTS,
“WILLIAM G. BROWN,
“JACOB B. BLAIR,
“W. T. WILLEY.”
[The following separate replies, subsequently made, by
Representative Maynard of Tennessee, and Senator Henderson of
Missouri, are necessarily given to complete this part of the Border
State record.]
MR. MAYNARD’S REPLY.
“HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, July 16, 1862.
“SIR:–The magnitude and gravity of the proposition submitted by you to
Representatives from the Slave States would naturally occasion
diversity, if not contrariety, of opinion. You will not, therefore, be
surprised that I have not been able to concur in view with the majority
of them.
“This is attributable, possibly, to the fact that my State is not a
Border State, properly so called, and that my immediate constituents are
not yet disenthralled from the hostile arms of the Rebellion. This fact
is a physical obstacle in the way of my now submitting to their
consideration this, or any other proposition looking to political
action, especially such as, in this case, would require a change in the
Organic Law of the State.
“But do not infer that I am insensible to your appeal. I am not; you
are surrounded with difficulties far greater than have embarrassed any
of your predecessors. You need the support of every American citizen,
and you ought to have it–active, zealous and honest. The union of all
Union men to aid you in preserving the Union, is the duty of the time.
Differences as to policy and methods must be subordinated to the common
purpose.
“In looking for the cause of this Rebellion, it is natural that each
Section and each Party should ascribe as little blame as possible to
itself, and as much as possible to its opponent Section and Party.
Possibly you and I might not agree on a comparison of our views. That
there should be differences of opinion as to the best mode of conducting
our Military operations, and the best men to lead our Armies, is equally
natural. Contests on such questions weaken ourselves and strengthen our
enemies. They are unprofitable, and possibly unpatriotic. Somebody
must yield, or we waste our strength in a contemptible struggle among
ourselves.
“You appeal to the loyal men of the Slave States to sacrifice something
of feeling and a great deal of interest. The sacrifices they have
already made and the sufferings they have endured give the best
assurance that the appeal will not have been made in vain. He who is
not ready to yield all his material interests, and to forego his most
cherished sentiments and opinions for the preservation of his Country,
although he may have periled his life on the battle-field in her
defense, is but half a Patriot. Among the loyal people that I
represent, there are no half-patriots.
“Already the Rebellion has cost us much, even to our undoing; we are
content, if need be, to give up the rest, to suppress it. We have stood
by you from the beginning of this struggle, and we mean to stand by you,
God willing, till the end of it.
“I did not vote for the Resolution to which you allude, solely for the
reason that I was absent at the Capital of my own State. It is right.
“Should any of the Slave States think proper to terminate that
Institution, as several of them, I understand, or at least some of their
citizens propose, justice and a generous comity require that the Country
should interpose to aid in lessening the burden, public and private,
occasioned by so radical a change in its social and industrial
relations.
“I will not now speculate upon the effect, at home or abroad, of the
adoption of your policy, nor inquire what action of the Rebel leaders
has rendered something of the kind important. Your whole administration
gives the highest assurancee that you are moved, not so much from a
desire to see all men everywhere made free, as from a higher desire to
preserve free institutions for the benefit of men already free; not to
make Slaves, Freemen, but to prevent Freemen from being made Slaves; not
to destroy an Institution, which a portion of us only consider bad, but
to save institutions which we all alike consider good. I am satisfied
you would not ask from any of your fellow-citizens a sacrifice not, in
your judgment, imperatively required by the safety of the Country.
“This is the spirit of your appeal, and I respond to it in the same
spirit.
“I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
“HORACE MAYNARD.
“To the PRESIDENT.”
SENATOR HENDERSON’S REPLY.
“WASHINGTON CITY, July 21, 1862.
“MR. PRESIDENT:–The pressure of business in the Senate during the last
few days of the session prevented my attendance at the meeting of the
Border-State members, called to consider your proposition in reference
to gradual emancipation in our States.
“It is for this reason only, and not because I fail to appreciate their
importance or properly respect your suggestions, that my name does not
appear to any of the several papers submitted in response. I may also
add that it was my intention, when the subject came up practically for
consideration in the Senate, to express fully my views in regard to it.
This of course would have rendered any other response unnecessary. But
the want of time to consider the matter deprived me of that opportunity,
and, lest now my silence be misconstrued, I deem it proper to say to you
that I am by no means indifferent to the great questions so earnestly,
and as I believe so honestly, urged by you upon our consideration.
“The Border States, so far, are the chief sufferers by this War, and the
true Union men of those States have made the greatest sacrifices for the
preservation of the Government. This fact does not proceed from
mismanagement on the part of the Union authorities, or a want of regard
for our people, but it is the necessary result of the War that is upon
us.
“Our States are the battle-fields. Our people, divided among
themselves, maddened by the struggle, and blinded by the smoke of
battle, invited upon our soil contending armies–the one to destroy the
Government, the other to maintain it. The consequence to us is plain.
The shock of the contest upturns Society and desolates the Land. We
have made sacrifices, but at last they were only the sacrifices demanded
by duty, and unless we are willing to make others, indeed any that the
good of the Country, involved in the overthrow of Treason, may expect at
our hands, our title to patriotism is not complete.
“When you submitted your proposition to Congress, in March last, ‘that
the United States ought to co-operate with any State which may adopt a
gradual abolishment of Slavery, giving to such State pecuniary aid, to
be used by such State in its discretion, to compensate for the
inconveniences, public and private, produced by such change of system,’
I gave it a most cheerful support, and I am satisfied it would have
received the approbation of a large majority of the Border States
delegations in both Branches of Congress, if, in the first place, they
had believed the War, with its continued evils–the most prominent of
which, in a material point of view, is its injurious effect on the
Institution of Slavery in our States–could possibly have been
protracted for another twelve months; and if, in the second place, they
had felt assured that the party having the majority in Congress would,
like yourself, be equally prompt in practical action as in the
expression of a sentiment.
“While scarcely any one doubted your own sincerity in the premises, and
your earnest wish speedily to terminate the War, you can readily
conceive the grounds for difference of opinion where conclusions could
only be based on conjecture.
“Believing, as I did, that the War was not so near its termination as
some supposed, and feeling disposed to accord to others the same
sincerity of purpose that I should claim for myself under similar
circumstances, I voted for the proposition. I will suppose that others
were actuated by no sinister motives.
“In doing so, Mr. President, I desire to be distinctly understood by you
and by my constituents. I did not suppose at the time that I was
personally making any sacrifice by supporting the Resolution, nor that
the people of my State were called upon to make any sacrifices, either
in considering or accepting the proposition, if they saw fit.
“I agreed with you in the remarks contained in the Message accompanying
the Resolution, that ‘the Union must be preserved, and hence all
indispensable means must be employed. * * * War has been and continues
to be an indispensable means to this end. A practical reacknowledgment
of the National authority would render the War unnecessary, and it would
at once cease. If, however, resistance continues, the War must also
continue; and it is impossible to foresee all the incidents which may
attend and all the ruin which may follow it.’
“It is truly ‘impossible’ to foresee all the evils resulting from a War
so stupendous as the present. I shall be much rejoiced if something
more dreadful than the sale of Freedom to a few Slaves in the Border
States shall not result from it.
“If it closes with the Government of our Fathers secure, and
Constitutional Liberty in all its purity guaranteed to the White man,
the result will be better than that having a place in the fears of many
good men at present, and much better than the past history of such
revolutions can justify us in expecting.
“In this period of the Nation’s distress, I know of no human institution
too sacred for discussion; no material interest belonging to the citizen
that he should not willingly place upon the altar of his Country, if
demanded by the public good.
“The man who cannot now sacrifice Party and put aside selfish
considerations is more than half disloyal. Such a man does not deserve
the blessings of good government. Pride of opinion, based upon
Sectional jealousies, should not be permitted to control the decision of
any political question. These remarks are general, but apply with
peculiar force to the People of the Border States at present.
“Let us look at our condition. A desolating War is upon us. We cannot
escape it if we would. If the Union Armies were to-day withdrawn from
the Border States without first crushing the Rebellion in the South, no
rational man can doubt for a moment that the adherents of the Union
Cause in those States would soon be driven in exile from their homes by
the exultant Rebels, who have so long hoped to return and take vengeance
upon us.
“The People of the Border States understand very well the unfriendly and
selfish spirit exercised toward them by the leaders of this Cotton-State
Rebellion, beginning some time previous to its outbreak. They will not
fail to remember their insolent refusal to counsel with us, and their
haughty assumption of responsibility upon themselves for their misguided
action.
“Our people will not soon forget that, while declaiming against
Coercion, they closed their doors against the exportation of Slaves from
the Border States into the South, with the avowed purpose of forcing us
into Rebellion through fears of losing that species of Property. They
knew very well the effect to be produced on Slavery by a Civil War,
especially in those States into which hostile Armies might penetrate,
and upon the soil of which the great contests for the success of
Republican Government were to be decided.
“They wanted some intermediate ground for the conflict of arms-territory
where the population would be divided. They knew, also, that by keeping
Slavery in the Border States the mere ‘friction and abrasion’ to which
you so appropriately allude, would keep up a constant irritation,
resulting necessarily from the frequent losses to which the owners would
be subjected.
“They also calculated largely, and not without reason, upon the
repugnance of Non-Slaveholders in those States to a Free Negro
population. In the meantime they intended persistently to charge the
overthrow of Slavery to be the object of the Government, and hostility
to this Institution the origin of the War. By this means the
unavoidable incidents of the strife might easily he charged as the
settled purposes of the Government.
“Again, it was well understood, by these men, that exemplary conduct on
the part of every officer and soldier employed by the Government could
not in the nature of things be expected, and the hope was entertained,
upon the most reasonable grounds, that every commission of wrong and
every omission of duty would produce a new cause for excitement and a
new incentive to Rebellion.
“By these means the War was to be kept in the Border States, regardless
of our interests, until an exhausted Treasury should render it necessary
to send the tax-gatherer among our people, to take the little that might
be left them from the devastations of War.
“They then expected a clamor for Peace by us, resulting in the
interference of France and England, whose operatives in the meantime
would be driven to want, and whose aristocracy have ever been ready to
welcome a dissolution of the American Union.
“This cunningly-devised plan for securing a Gulf-Confederacy, commanding
the mouths of the great Western rivers, the Gulf of Mexico, and the
Southern Atlantic ocean, with their own territory unscathed by the
horrors of war, and surrounded by the Border States, half of whose
population would be left in sympathy with them, for many years to come,
owing to the irritations to which I have alluded, has, so far, succeeded
too well.
“In Missouri they have already caused us to lose a third or more of the
Slaves owned at the time of the last census. In addition to this, I can
make no estimate of the vast amount of property of every character that
has been destroyed by Military operations in the State. The loss from
general depreciation of values, and the utter prostration of every
business-interest of our people, is wholly beyond calculation.
“The experience of Missouri is but the experience of other Sections of
the Country similarly situated. The question is therefore forced upon
us, ‘How long is this War to continue; and, if continued, as it has
been, on our soil, aided by the Treason and folly of our own citizens,
acting in concert with the Confederates, how long can Slavery, or, if
you please, any other property-interest, survive in our States?’
“As things now are, the people of the Border-States yet divided, we
cannot expect an immediate termination of the struggle, except upon
condition of Southern Independence, losing thereby control of the lower
Mississippi. For this, we in Missouri are not prepared, nor are we
prepared to become one of the Confederate States, should the terrible
calamity of Dissolution occur.
“This, I presume, the Union men of Missouri would resist to the death.
And whether they should do so or not, I will not suppose for an instant,
that the Government of the United States would, upon any condition,
submit to the loss of territory so essential to its future commercial
greatness as is the State of Missouri.
“But should all other reasons fail to prevent such a misfortune to our
people of Missouri, there is one that cannot fail. The Confederates
never wanted us, and would not have us. I assume, therefore, that the
War will not cease, but will be continued until the Rebellion shall be
overcome. It cannot and will not cease, so far as the people of
Missouri are concerned, except upon condition of our remaining in the
Union, and the whole West will demand the entire control of the
Mississippi river to the Gulf.
“Our interest is therefore bound up with the interests of those States
maintaining the Union, and especially with the great States of the West
that must be consulted in regard to the terms of any Peace that may be
suggested, even by the Nations of Europe, should they at any time
unfortunately depart from their former pacific policy and determine to
intervene in our affairs.
“The War, then, will have to be continued until the Union shall be
practically restored. In this alone consists the future safety of the
Border-States themselves. A separation of the Union is ruinous to them.
The preservation of the Union can only be secured by a continuation of
the War. The consequences of that continuation may be judged of by the
experience of the last twelve months. The people of my State are as
competent to pass judgment in the premises as I am. I have every
confidence in their intelligence, their honesty, and their patriotism.
“In your own language, the proposition you make ‘sets up no claim of a
right by Federal authority to interfere with Slavery within State
limits,’ referring, as it does, the absolute control of the subject in
each case to the State and its people immediately interested. It is
proposed as a matter of perfectly free choice with them.
“In this view of the subject I can frankly say to you that, personally,
I never could appreciate the objections so frequently urged against the
proposition. If I understood you properly, it was your opinion, not
that Slavery should be removed in order to secure our loyalty to the
Government, for every personal act of your administration precludes such
an inference, but you believe that the peculiar species of Property was
in imminent danger from the War in which we were engaged, and that
common justice demanded remuneration for the loss of it.
“You then believe, and again express the opinion, that the peculiar
nature of the contest is such that its loss is almost inevitable, and
lest any pretext for a charge of injustice against the Government be
given to its enemies, you propose to extend to the people of those
States standing by the Union, the choice of payment for their Slaves or
the responsibility of loss, should it occur, without complaint against
the Government.
“Placing the matter in this light, (a mere remuneration for losses
rendered inevitable by the casualties of War), the objection of a
Constitutional character may be rendered much less formidable in the
minds of Northern Representatives whose constituents will have to share
in the payment of the money; and, so far as the Border States are
concerned, this objection should be most sparingly urged, for it being a
matter entirely of their ‘own free choice,’ in case of a desire to
accept, no serious argument will likely be urged against the receipt of
the money, or a fund for Colonization.
“But, aside from the power derived from the operations of war, there may
be found numerous precedents in the legislation of the past, such as
grants of land and money to the several States for specified objects
deemed worthy by the Federal Congress. And in addition to this may be
cited a deliberate opinion of Mr. Webster upon this very subject, in one
of the ablest arguments of his life.
“I allude to this question of power merely in vindication of the
position assumed by me in my vote for the Resolution of March last.
“In your last communication to us, you beg of us ‘to commend this
subject to the consideration of our States and people.’ While I
entirely differ with you in the opinion expressed, that had the members
from the Border States approved of your Resolution of March last ‘the
War would now be substantially ended,’ and while I do not regard the
suggestion ‘as one of the most potent and swift means of ending’ the
War, I am yet free to say that I have the most unbounded confidence in
your sincerity of purpose in calling our attention to the dangers
surrounding us.
“I am satisfied that you appreciate the troubles of the Border States,
and that your suggestions are intended for our good. I feel the force
of your urgent appeal, and the logic of surrounding circumstances brings
conviction even to an unwilling believer.
“Having said that, in my judgment, you attached too much importance to
this measure as a means for suppressing the Rebellion, it is due to you
that I shall explain.
“Whatever may be the status of the Border States in this respect, the
War cannot be ended until the power of the Government is made manifest
in the seceded States. They appealed to the sword; give them the sword.
They asked for War; let them see its evils on their own soil.
“They have erected a Government, and they force obedience to its
behests. This structure must be destroyed; this image, before which an
unwilling People have been compelled to bow, must be broken. The
authority of the Federal Government must be felt in the heart of the
rebellious district. To do this, let armies be marched upon them at
once, and let them feel what they have inflicted on us in the Border.
Do not fear our States; we will stand by the Government in this work.
“I ought not to disguise from you or the people of my State, that
personally I have fixed and unalterable opinions on the subject of your
communication. Those opinions I shall communicate to the people in that
spirit of frankness that should characterize the intercourse of the
Representative with his constituents.
“If I were to-day the owner of the lands and Slaves of Missouri, your
proposition, so far as that State is concerned, would be immediately
accepted. Not a day would be lost. Aside from public considerations,
which you suppose to be involved in the proposition, and which no
Patriot, I agree, should disregard at present, my own personal interest
would prompt favorable and immediate action.
“But having said this, it is proper that I say something more. The
Representative is the servant and not the master of the People. He has
no authority to bind them to any course of action, or even to indicate
what they will, or will not, do when the subject is exclusively theirs
and not his.
“I shall take occasion, I hope honestly, to give my views of existing
troubles and impending dangers, and shall leave the rest to them,
disposed, as I am, rather to trust their judgment upon the case stated
than my own, and at the same time most cheerfully to acquiesce in their
decision.
“For you, personally, Mr. President, I think I can pledge the kindest
considerations of the people of Missouri, and I shall not hesitate to
express the belief that your recommendation will be considered by them
in the same spirit of kindness manifested by you in its presentation to
us, and that their decision will be such as is demanded ‘by their
interests, their honor, and their duty to the whole Country.’
“I am very respectfully, your obedient servant,
“J. B. HENDERSON.
“To his Excellency,
“A. LINCOLN, PRESIDENT.”
CHAPTER XVIII.
FREEDOM PROCLAIMED TO ALL.
While mentally revolving the question of Emancipation–now, evidently
“coming to a head,”–no inconsiderable portion of Mr. Lincoln’s thoughts
centered upon, and his perplexities grew out of, his assumption that the
“physical difference” between the Black and White–the African and
Caucasian races, precluded the idea of their living together in the one
land as Free men and equals.
In his speeches during the great Lincoln-Douglas debate we have seen
this idea frequently advanced, and so, in his later public utterances as
President.
As in his appeal to the Congressional delegations from the Border-States
on the 12th of July, 1862, he had held out to them the hope that “the
Freed people will not be so reluctant to go” to his projected colony in
South America, when their “numbers shall be large enough to be company
and encouragement for one another,” so, at a later date–on the 14th of
August following–he appealed to the Colored Free men themselves to help
him found a proposed Negro colony in New Granada, and thus aid in the
solution of this part of the knotty problem, by the disenthrallment of
the new race from its unhappy environments here.
The substance of the President’s interesting address, at the White
House, to the delegation of Colored men, for whom he had sent, was thus
reported at the time:
“Having all been seated, the President, after a few preliminary
observations, informed them that a sum of money had been appropriated by
Congress, and placed at his disposition, for the purpose of aiding the
colonization in some country of the people, or a portion of them, of
African descent, thereby making it his duty, as it had for a long time
been his inclination, to favor that cause; and why, he asked, should the
people of your race be colonized, and where?
“Why should they leave this Country? This is perhaps the first question
for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have
between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two
races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss; but this
physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think.
Your race suffers very greatly, many of them by living among us, while
ours suffers from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If
this is admitted, it affords a reason, at least, why we should be
separated. You here are Freemen, I suppose?
“A VOICE–Yes, Sir.
“THE PRESIDENT–Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives.
Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on
any people. But even when you cease to be Slaves, you are yet far
removed from being placed on an equality with the White race. You are
cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoys. The
aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free; but on
this broad continent not a single man of your race is made the equal of
a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the best, and the ban is
still upon you. I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as
a fact, with which we have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It
is a fact about which we all think and feel alike, I and you. We look
to our condition.
“Owing to the existence of the two races on this continent, I need not
recount to you the effects upon White men, growing out of the
institution of Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the
White race. See our present condition–the Country engaged in War! our
white men cutting one another’s throats–none knowing how far it will
extend–and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your
race among us there could not be War, although many men engaged on
either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I
repeat, without the institution of Slavery, and the Colored race as a
basis, the War could not have an existence. It is better for us both,
therefore, to be separated.
“I know that there are Free men among you who, even if they could better
their condition, are not as much inclined to go out of the Country as
those who, being Slaves, could obtain their Freedom on this condition.
I suppose one of the principal difficulties in the way of colonization
is that the free colored man cannot see that his comfort would be
advanced by it. You may believe that you can live in Washington, or
elsewhere in the United States, the remainder of your life; perhaps more
so than you can in any foreign country, and hence you may come to the
conclusion that you have nothing to do with the idea of going to a
foreign country.
“This is, (I speak in no unkind sense) an extremely selfish view of the
case. But you ought to do something to help those who are not so
fortunate as yourselves. There is an unwillingness on the part of our
People, harsh as it may be, for you free Colored people to remain with
us. Now if you could give a start to the White people you would open a
wide door for many to be made free. If we deal with those who are not
free at the beginning, and whose intellects are clouded by Slavery, we
have very poor material to start with.
“If intelligent Colored men, such as are before me, could move in this
matter, much might be accomplished. It is exceedingly important that we
have men at the beginning capable of thinking as White men, and not
those who have been systematically oppressed. There is much to
encourage you.
“For the sake of your race you should sacrifice something of your
present comfort for the purpose of being as grand in that respect as the
White people. It is a cheering thought throughout life, that something
can be done to ameliorate the condition of those who have been subject
to the hard usages of the World. It is difficult to make a man
miserable while he feels he is worthy of himself and claims kindred to
the great God who made him.
“In the American Revolutionary War, sacrifices were made by men engaged
in it, but they were cheered by the future. General Washington himself
endured greater physical hardships than if he had remained a British
subject, yet he was a happy man, because he was engaged in benefiting
his race, in doing something for the children of his neighbors, having
none of his own.
“The Colony of Liberia has been in existence a long time. In a certain
sense it is a success. The old President of Liberia, Roberts, has just
been with me the first time I ever saw him. He says they have, within
the bounds of that Colony, between three and four hundred thousand
people, or more than in some of our old States, such as Rhode Island, or
Delaware, or in some of our newer States, and less than in some of our
larger ones. They are not all American colonists or their descendants.
Something less than 12,000 have been sent thither from this Country.
Many of the original settlers have died, yet, like people elsewhere,
their offspring outnumber those deceased.
“The question is, if the Colored people are persuaded to go anywhere,
why not there? One reason for unwillingness to do so is that some of
you would rather remain within reach of the country of your nativity. I
do not know how much attachment you may have toward our race. It does
not strike me that you have the greatest reason to love them. But still
you are attached to them at all events.
“The place I am thinking about having for a colony, is in Central
America. It is nearer to us than Liberia–not much more than one-fourth
as far as Liberia, and within seven days’ run by steamers. Unlike
Liberia, it is a great line of travel–it is a highway. The country is
a very excellent one for any people, and with great natural resources
and advantages, and especially because of the similarity of climate with
your native soil, thus being suited to your physical condition.
“The particular place I have in view, is to be a great highway from the
Atlantic or Caribbean Sea to the Pacific Ocean, and this particular
place has all the advantages for a colony. On both sides there are
harbors among the finest in the World. Again, there is evidence of very
rich coal mines. A certain amount of coal is valuable in any country.
Why I attach so much importance to coal is, it will afford an
opportunity to the inhabitants for immediate employment till they get
ready to settle permanently in their homes.
“If you take colonists where there is no good landing, there is a bad
show; and so, where there is nothing to cultivate, and of which to make
a farm. But if something is started so that you can get your daily
bread as soon as you reach there, it is a great advantage. Coal land is
the best thing I know of, with which to commence an enterprise.
“To return–you have been talked to upon this subject, and told that a
speculation is intended by gentlemen who have an interest in the
country, including the coal mines. We have been mistaken all our lives
if we do not know Whites, as well as Blacks, look to their self-
interest. Unless among those deficient of intellect, everybody you
trade with makes something. You meet with these things here and
everywhere. If such persons have what will be an advantage to them, the
question is, whether it cannot be made of advantage to you?
“You are intelligent, and know that success does not as much depend on
external help, as on self-reliance. Much, therefore, depends upon
yourselves. As to the coal mines, I think I see the means available for
your self-reliance. I shall, if I get a sufficient number of you
engaged, have provision made that you shall not be wronged. If you will
engage in the enterprise, I will spend some of the money intrusted to
me. I am not sure you will succeed. The Government may lose the money,
but we cannot succeed unless we try; but we think, with care, we can
succeed.
“The political affairs in Central America are not in quite as
satisfactory condition as I wish. There are contending factions in that
quarter; but it is true, all the factions are agreed alike on the
subject of colonization, and want it; and are more generous than we are
here. To your Colored race they have no objection. Besides, I would
endeavor to have you made equals, and have the best assurance that you
should be the equals of the best.
“The practical thing I want to ascertain is, whether I can get a number
of able-bodied men, with their wives and children, who are willing to
go, when I present evidence of encouragement and protection. Could I
get a hundred tolerably intelligent men, with their wives and children,
and able to ‘cut their own fodder’ so to speak? Can I have fifty? If I
could find twenty-five able-bodied men, with a mixture of women and
children–good things in the family relation, I think I could make a
successful commencement.
“I want you to let me know whether this can be done or not. This is the
practical part of my wish to see you. These are subjects of very great
importance–worthy of a month’s study, of a speech delivered in an hour.
I ask you, then, to consider seriously, not as pertaining to yourselves
merely, nor for your race, and ours, for the present time, but as one of
the things, if successfully managed, for the good of mankind–not
confined to the present generation, but as:
“From age to age descends the lay
To millions yet to be,
Till far its echoes roll away
Into eternity.”‘
President Lincoln’s well-meant colored colonization project, however,
fell through, owing partly to opposition to it in Central America, and
partly to the very natural and deeply-rooted disinclination of the
Colored free men to leave the land of their birth.
Meanwhile, limited Military Emancipation of Slaves was announced and
regulated, on the 22d July, 1862, by the following Executive
Instructions, which were issued from the War Department by order of the
President–the issue of which was assigned by Jefferson Davis as one
reason for his Order of August 1, 1862, directing “that the commissioned
officers of Pope’s and Steinwehr’s commands be not entitled, when
captured, to be treated as soldiers and entitled to the benefit of the
cartel of exchange:”
“WAR DEPARTMENT,
“WASHINGTON, D.C., July 22, 1862.
“First. Ordered that Military Commanders within the States of Virginia,
North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana,
Texas, and Arkansas, in an orderly manner seize and use any property,
real or personal, which may be necessary or convenient for their several
commands, for supplies, or for other Military purposes; and that while
property may be destroyed for proper Military objects, none shall be
destroyed in wantonness or malice.
“Second. That Military and Naval Commanders shall employ as laborers,
within and from said States, so many Persons of African descent as can
be advantageously used for Military or Naval purposes, giving them
reasonable wages for their labor.
“Third. That, as to both property, and Persons of African descent,
accounts shall be kept sufficiently accurate and in detail to show
quantities and amounts, and from whom both property and such Persons
shall have come, as a basis upon which compensation can be made in
proper cases; and the several departments of this Government shall
attend to and perform their appropriate parts towards the execution of
these orders.
“By Order of the President:
“EDWIN M. STANTON,
“Secretary of War.”
On the 9th of August, 1862, Major General McClellan promulgated the
Executive Order of July 22, 1862, from his Headquarters at Harrison’s
Landing, Va., with certain directions of his own, among which were the
following:
“Inhabitants, especially women and children, remaining peaceably at
their homes, must not be molested; and wherever commanding officers find
families peculiarly exposed in their persons or property to marauding
from this Army, they will, as heretofore, so far as they can do with
safety and without detriment to the service, post guards for their
protection.
“In protecting private property, no reference is intended to Persons
held to service or labor by reason of African Descent. Such Persons
will be regarded by this Army, as they heretofore have been, as
occupying simply a peculiar legal status under State laws, which
condition the Military authorities of the United States are not required
to regard at all in districts where Military operations are made
necessary by the rebellious action of the State governments.
“Persons subject to suspicion of hostile purposes, residing or being
near our Forces, will be, as heretofore, subject to arrest and
detention, until the cause or necessity is removed. All such arrested
parties will be sent, as usual, to the Provost-Marshal General, with a
statement of the facts in each case.
“The General Commanding takes this occasion to remind the officers and
soldiers of this Army that we are engaged in supporting the Constitution
and the Laws of the United States and suppressing Rebellion against
their authority; that we are not engaged in a War of rapine, revenge, or
subjugation; that this is not a contest against populations, but against
armed forces and political organizations; that it is a struggle carried
on with the United States, and should be conducted by us upon the
highest principles known to Christian civilization.
“Since this Army commenced active operations, Persons of African
descent, including those held to service or labor under State laws, have
always been received, protected, and employed as laborers at wages.
Hereafter it shall be the duty of the Provost-Marshal General to cause
lists to be made of all persons of African descent employed in this Army
as laborers for Military purposes–such lists being made sufficiently
accurate and in detail to show from whom such persons shall have come.
“Persons so subject and so employed have always understood that after
being received into the Military service of the United States, in any
capacity, they could never be reclaimed by their former holders. Except
upon such understanding on their part, the order of the President, as to
this class of Persons, would be inoperative. The General Commanding
therefore feels authorized to declare to all such employees, that they
will receive permanent Military protection against any compulsory return
to a condition of servitude.”
Public opinion was now rapidly advancing, under the pressure of Military
necessity, and the energetic efforts of the immediate Emancipationists,
to a belief that Emancipation by Presidential Proclamation would be wise
and efficacious as an instrumentality toward subduing the Rebellion;
that it must come, sooner or later–and the sooner, the better.
Indeed, great fault was found, by some of these, with what they
characterized as President Lincoln’s “obstinate slowness” to come up to
their advanced ideas on the subject. He was even accused of failing to
execute existing laws touching confiscation of Slaves of Rebels coming
within the lines of the Union Armies. On the 19th of August, 1862, a
letter was addressed to him by Horace Greeley which concluded thus:
“On the face of this wide Earth, Mr. President, there is not one
disinterested, determined, intelligent champion of the Union Cause who
does not feel that all attempts to put down the Rebellion, and at the
same time uphold its inciting cause, are preposterous and futile–that
the Rebellion, if crushed out to-morrow, would be renewed within a year
if Slavery were left in full vigor–that Army officers, who remain to
this day devoted to Slavery, can at best be but half-way loyal to the
Union–and that every hour of deference to Slavery is an hour of added
and deepened peril to the Union.
“I appeal to the testimony of your embassadors in Europe. It is freely
at your service, not mine. Ask them to tell you candidly whether the
seeming subserviency of your policy to the Slaveholding, Slavery-
upholding interest, is not the perplexity, the despair, of Statesmen of
all parties; and be admonished by the general answer.
“I close, as I began, with the statement that what an immense majority
of the loyal millions of your countrymen require of you, is a frank,
declared, unqualified, ungrudging execution of the Laws of the Land,
more especially of the Confiscation Act. That Act gives Freedom to the
Slaves of Rebels coming within our lines, or whom those lines may at any
time inclose. We ask you to render it due obedience by publicly
requiring all your subordinates to recognize and obey it.
“The Rebels are everywhere using the late Anti-Negro riots in the North
–as they have long used your officers’ treatment of Negroes in the
South–to convince the Slaves that they have nothing to hope from a
Union success–that we mean in that case to sell them into a bitter
Bondage to defray the cost of the War.
“Let them impress this as a truth on the great mass of their ignorant
and credulous Bondmen, and the Union will never be restored–never. We
can not conquer ten millions of people united in solid phalanx against
us, powerfully aided by Northern sympathizers and European allies.
“We must have scouts, guides, spies, cooks, teamsters, diggers, and
choppers, from the Blacks of the South–whether we allow them to fight
for us or not–or we shall be baffled and repelled.
“As one of the Millions who would gladly have avoided this struggle, at
any sacrifice but that of principle and honor, but who now feel that the
triumph of the Union is indispensable not only to the existence of our
Country, but to the well-being of mankind, I entreat you to render a
hearty and unequivocal obedience to the Law of the Land.
“Yours,
“HORACE GREELEY.”
To this letter, President Lincoln at once made the following memorable
reply:
“EXECUTIVE MANSION,
“WASHINGTON, Friday, August 22, 1862.
“HON. HORACE GREELEY
“DEAR SIR:–I have just read yours of the 19th inst. addressed to myself
through the New York Tribune.
“If there be in it any statements or assumptions of fact which I may
know to be erroneous, I do not now and here controvert them.
“If there be any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I
do not now and here argue against them.
“If there be perceptible in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I
waive it in deference to an old friend whose heart I have always
supposed to be right.
“As to the policy I ‘seem to be pursuing,’ as you say, I have not meant
to leave any one in doubt. I would save the Union. I would save it in
the shortest way under the Constitution.
“The sooner the National authority can be restored, the nearer the Union
will be–the Union as it was.
“If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the
same time save Slavery, I do not agree with them.
“If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the
same time destroy Slavery, I do not agree, with them.
“My paramount object is to save the Union and not either to save or
destroy Slavery.
“If I could save the Union without freeing any Slave, I would do it–and
if I could save it by freeing all the Slaves, I would do it–and if I
could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do
that.
“What I do about Slavery and the Colored race, I do because I believe it
helps to save the Union, and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not
believe it would help to save the Union.
“I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the
cause, and shall do more whenever I believe doing more will help the
cause.
“I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors, and I shall
adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
“I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty,
and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all
men everywhere could be free.
“Yours,
“A. LINCOLN.”
On the 13th of September, 1862, a deputation from all the religious
denominations of Chicago presented to President Lincoln a memorial for
the immediate issue of a Proclamation of Emancipation, to which, and the
Chairman’s remarks, he thus replied:
“The subject presented in the Memorial is one upon which I have thought
much for weeks past, and I may even say, for months. I am approached
with the most opposite opinions, and advice, and that by religious men,
who are equally certain that they represent the Divine will. I am sure
that either the one or the other class is mistaken in that belief, and
perhaps, in some respects, both. I hope it will not be irreverent for
me to say that if it is probable that God would reveal His will to
others, on a point so connected with my duty, it might be supposed He
would reveal it directly to me; for, unless I am more deceived in myself
than I often am, it is my earnest desire to know the will of Providence
in this matter. And if I can learn what it is, I will do it!
“These are not, however, the days of miracles, and I suppose it will be
granted that I am not to expect a direct Revelation; I must study the
plain physical aspects of the case, ascertain what is possible, and
learn what appears to be wise and right!
“The subject is difficult, and good men do not agree. For instance, the
other day, four gentlemen, of standing and intelligence, from New York,
called, as a delegation, on business connected with the War; but, before
leaving, two of them earnestly besought me to proclaim general
Emancipation, upon which the other two at once attacked them.
“You know also that the last Session of Congress had a decided majority
of Anti-Slavery men, yet they could not unite on this policy. And the
same is true of the religious people; why the Rebel soldiers are praying
with a great deal more earnestness, I fear, than our own troops, and
expecting God to favor their side; for one of our soldiers, who had been
taken prisoner, told Senator Wilson, a few days since, that he met
nothing so discouraging as the evident sincerity of those he was among,
in their prayers. But we will talk over the merits of the case.
“What good would a Proclamation of Emancipation from me do, especially
as we are now situated? I do not want to issue a document that the
whole World will see must necessarily be inoperative, like the Pope’s
Bull against the Comet! Would my word free the Slaves, when I cannot
even enforce the Constitution in the Rebel States? Is there a single
Court or Magistrate, or individual that would be influenced by it there?
And what reason is there to think it would have any greater effect upon
the Slaves than the late law of Congress, which I approved and which
offers protection and Freedom to the Slaves of Rebel masters who came
within our lines? Yet I cannot learn that that law has caused a single
Slave to come over to us.
“And suppose they could be induced by a Proclamation of Freedom from me
to throw themselves upon us, what should we do with them? How can we
feed and care for such a multitude? General Butler wrote me a few days
since that he was issuing more rations to the Slaves who have rushed to
him, than to all the White troops under his command. They eat, and that
is all; though it is true General Butler is feeding the Whites also, by
the thousand; for it nearly amounts to a famine there.
“If, now, the pressure of the War should call off our forces from New
Orleans to defend some other point, what is to prevent the masters from
reducing the Blacks to Slavery again; for I am told that whenever the
Rebels take any Black prisoners, Free or Slave, they immediately auction
them off! They did so with those they took from a boat that was aground
in the Tennessee river a few days ago.
“And then I am very ungenerously attacked for it! For instance, when,
after the late battles at and near Bull Run, an expedition went out from
Washington, under a flag of truce, to bury the dead and bring in the
wounded, and the Rebels seized the Blacks who went along to help, and
sent them into Slavery, Horace Greeley said in his paper that the
Government would probably do nothing about it. What could I do?
“Now, then, tell me, if you please, what possible result of good would
follow the issuing of such a Proclamation as you desire? Understand, I
raise no objections against it on legal or Constitutional grounds, for,
as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, in time of War, I suppose I
have a right to take any measure which may best subdue the Enemy, nor do
I urge objections of a moral nature, in view of possible consequences of
insurrection and massacre at the South. I view this matter as a
practical War measure, to be decided on according to the advantages or
disadvantages it may offer to the suppression of the Rebellion.
* * * * * * * * *
“I admit that Slavery is at the root of the Rebellion, or, at least, its
sine qua non. The ambition of politicians may have instigated them to
act, but they would have been impotent without Slavery as their
instrument. I will also concede that Emancipation would help us in
Europe, and convince them that we are incited by something more than
ambition. I grant, further, that it would help somewhat at the North,
though not so much, I fear, as you and those you represent imagine.
“Still, some additional strength would be added in that way to the War,
and then, unquestionably, it would weaken the Rebels by drawing off
their laborers, which is of great importance; but I am not so sure we
could do much with the Blacks. If we were to arm them, I fear that in
a few weeks the arms would be in the hands of the Rebels; and, indeed,
thus far, we have not had arms enough to equip our White troops.
“I will mention another thing, though it meet only your scorn and
contempt. There are 50,000 bayonets in the Union Army from the Border
Slave States. It would be a serious matter if, in consequence of a
Proclamation such as you desire, they should go over to the Rebels. I
do not think they all would–not so many, indeed, as a year ago, or as
six months ago–not so many to-day, as yesterday. Every day increases
their Union feeling. They are also getting their pride enlisted, and
want to beat the Rebels.
“Let me say one thing more: I think you should admit that we already
have an important principle to rally and unite the People, in the fact
that Constitutional Government is at stake. This is a fundamental idea
going down about as deep as anything!
* * * * * * * * *
“Do not misunderstand me because I have mentioned these objections.
They indicate the difficulties that have thus far prevented my action in
some such way as you desire.
“I have not decided against a Proclamation of Liberty to the Slaves, but
hold the matter under advisement. And I can assure you that the subject
is on my mind, by day and night, more than any other. Whatever shall
appear to be God’s will I will do.
“I trust that in the freedom with which I have canvassed your views I
have not in any respect injured your feelings.”
On the 22d day of September, 1862, not only the Nation, but the whole
World, was electrified by the publication–close upon the heels of the
Union victory of Antietam–of the Proclamation of Emancipation–weighted
with consequences so wide and far-reaching that even at this late day
they cannot all be discerned. It was in these words:
“I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States of America, and
Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof, do hereby proclaim and
declare that hereafter, as heretofore, the War will be prosecuted for
the object of practically restoring the Constitutional relation between
the United States and each of the States and the people thereof, in
which States that relation is or may be suspended or disturbed.
“That it is my purpose, upon the next meeting of Congress, to again
recommend the adoption of a practical measure tendering pecuniary aid to
the free acceptance or rejection of all Slave States, so called, the
people whereof may not then be in Rebellion against the United States,
and which States may then have voluntarily adopted, or thereafter may
voluntarily adopt, immediate or gradual abolishment of Slavery within
their respective limits; and that the effort to colonize Persons of
African descent with their consent upon this continent or elsewhere,
with the previously obtained consent of the Governments existing there,
will be continued.
“That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and sixty-three, all Persons held as Slaves within any
State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in
Rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and
forever Free; and the Executive Government of the United States,
including the Military and Naval authority thereof, will recognize and
maintain the Freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to
repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for
their actual Freedom.
“That the Executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by
Proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any, in which
the people thereof respectively, shall then be in Rebellion against the
United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof, shall
on that day be, in good faith, represented in the Congress of the United
States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the
qualified voters of such States shall have participated, shall, in the
absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive
evidence that such State, and the people thereof, are not in Rebellion
against the United States.
“That attention is hereby called to an Act of Congress entitled ‘An Act
to make an additional Article of War,’ approved March 31, 1862, and
which Act is in the words and figures following:
“‘Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That hereafter the following
shall be promulgated as an additional Article of War, for the government
of the Army of the United States, and shall be obeyed and observed as
such.
“ARTICLE–All officers or persons in the Military or Naval service of
the United States are prohibited from employing any of the forces under
their respective commands for the purpose of returning Fugitives from
service or labor who may have escaped from any persons to whom such
service or labor is claimed to be due, and any officer who shall be
found guilty by a court-martial of violating this article shall be
dismissed from the service.
“‘SECTION 2.–And be it further enacted, That this Act shall take effect
from and after its passage.’
“Also to the ninth and tenth sections of an Act entitled ‘An Act to
suppress Insurrection, to punish Treason and Rebellion, to seize and
confiscate property of Rebels, and for other purposes,’ approved July
17, 1862, and which sections are in the words and figures following:
“‘SEC. 9.–And be it further enacted, That all Slaves of persons who
shall hereafter be engaged in Rebellion against the Government of the
United States or who shall in any way give aid or comfort thereto,
escaping from such persons and taking refuge within the lines of the
Army; and all Slaves captured from such persons or deserted by them, and
coming under the control of the Government of the United States; and all
Slaves of such persons found on [or] being within any place occupied by
Rebel forces and afterward occupied by the forces of the United States,
shall be deemed captives of war, and shall be forever Free of their
servitude, and not again held as Slaves.
“‘SEC. 10.–And be it further enacted, That no Slave escaping into any
State, Territory, or the District of Columbia, from any other State,
shall be delivered up, or in any way impeded or hindered of his liberty,
except for crime, or some offense against the laws, unless the person
claiming said Fugitive shall first make oath that the person to whom the
labor or service of such Fugitive is alleged to be due is his lawful
owner, and has not borne arms against the United States in the present
Rebellion, nor in any way given aid and comfort thereto; and no person
engaged in the Military or Naval service of the United States shall,
under any pretense whatever, assume to decide on the validity of the
claim of any person to the service or labor of any other person, or
surrender up any such Person to the claimant, on pain of being dismissed
from the service.”
“And I do hereby enjoin upon and order all persons engaged in the
Military and Naval service of the United States to observe, obey, and
enforce, within their respective spheres of service, the Act and
sections above recited.
“And the Executive will in due time recommend that all
citizens of the United States who shall have remained loyal thereto
throughout the Rebellion shall (upon the restoration of the
Constitutional relation between the United States and their respective
States and people, if that relation shall have been suspended or
disturbed) be compensated for all losses by acts of the United States,
including the loss of Slaves.
“In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.
“Done at the city of Washington this twenty-second day of September, in
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, and of
the Independence of the United States the eighty-seventh.
“By the President:
“ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
“WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.”
This Proclamation, promising Freedom to an Enslaved race, was hailed
with acclamations everywhere save in the rebellious Southern-Slave
States, and in the Border-Slave States.
At a meeting of Governors of Loyal States, held at Altoona,
Pennsylvania, to take measures for the more active support of the
Government, an Address was adopted, on the very day that the
Proclamation was promulgated, which well expressed the general feeling
prevailing throughout the Northern States, at this time. It was in
these patriotic words:
“After nearly one year and a half spent in contest with an armed and
gigantic Rebellion against the National Government of the United States,
the duty and purpose of the Loyal States and people continue, and must
always remain as they were at its origin–namely to restore and
perpetuate the authority of this Government and the life of the Nation.
No matter what consequences are involved in our fidelity, this work of
restoring the Republic, preserving the institutions of democratic
Liberty, and justifying the hopes and toils of our Fathers, shall not
fail to be performed.
“And we pledge, without hesitation, to the President of the United
States, the most loyal and cordial support, hereter as heretofore, in
the exercise of the functions of his great office. We recognize in him
the chief Executive magistrate of the Nation, the Commander-in-Chief of
the Army and Navy of the United States, their responsible and
constitutional head, whose rightful authority and power, as well as the
Constitutional powers of Congress, must be rigorously and religiously
guarded and preserved, as the condition on which alone our form of
Government and the constitutional rights and liberties of the People
themselves can be saved from the wreck of anarchy or from the gulf
‘despotism.
“In submission to the laws which may have been or which may be duly
enacted, and to the lawful orders of the President, cooperating always
in our own spheres with the National Government, we mean to continue in
the most rigorous exercise of all our lawful and proper powers,
contending against Treason, Rebellion, and the public Enemies, and,
whether in public life or in private station, supporting the arms of the
Union, until its Cause shall conquer, until final victory shall perch
upon its standard, or the Rebel foe will yield a dutiful, rightful, and
unconditional submission. And, impressed with the conviction that an
Army of reserve ought, until the War shall end, to be constantly kept on
foot, to be raised, armed, equipped, and trained at home, and ready for
emergencies, we respectfully ask the President to call such a force of
volunteers for one year’s service, of not less than one hundred thousand
in the aggregate, the quota of each State to be raised after it shall
have led its quota of the requisitions already made, both for volunteers
and militia. We believe that this would be a Leasure of Military
prudence, while it would greatly promote the Military education of the
People.
“We hail with heartfelt gratitude and encouraged hope the Proclamation
of the President, issued on the 22nd instant, declaring Emancipated from
their bondage all Persons held to Service or Labor as Slaves in the
Rebel States, whose Rebellion shall last until the first day of January
next ensuing.
“The right of any person to retain authority to compel any portion of
the subjects of the National Government to rebel against it, or to
maintain its Enemies, implies in those who are allowed possession of
such authority the right to rebel themselves; and therefore, the right
to establish Martial Law or Military Government in a State or Territory
in Rebellion implies the right and the duty of the Government to
liberate the minds of all men living therein by appropriate
Proclamations and assurances of protection, in order that all who are
capable, intellectually and morally, of loyalty and obedience, may not
be forced into Treason as the unwilling tools of rebellious Traitors.
“To have continued indefinitely the most efficient cause, support, and
stay of the Rebellion, would have been, in our judgment, unjust to the
Loyal people whose treasure and lives are made a willing sacrifice on
the altar of patriotism–would have discriminated against the wife who
is compelled to surrender her husband, against the parent who is to
surrender his child, to the hardships of the camp and the perils of
battle, in favor of Rebel masters permitted to retain their Slaves. It
would have been a final decision alike against humanity, justice, the
rights and dignity of the Government, and against sound and wise
National policy.
“The decision of the President to strike at the root of the Rebellion
will lend new vigor to efforts, and new life and hope to the hearts of
the People. Cordially tendering to the President our respectful
assurances of personal and official confidence, we trust and believe
that the policy now inaugurated will be crowned with success, will give
speedy and triumphant victories over our enemies, and secure to this
Nation and this People the blessing and favor of Almighty God.
“We believe that the blood of the heroes who have already fallen, and
those who may yet give their lives to their Country, will not have been
shed in vain.
“The splendid valor of our soldiers, their patient endurance, their
manly patriotism, and their devotion to duty, demand from us and from
all their countrymen the homage of the sincerest gratitude and the
pledge of our constant reinforcement and support. A just regard for
these brave men, whom we have contributed to place in the field, and for
the importance of the duties which may lawfully pertain to us hereafter,
has called us into friendly conference.
“And now, presenting to our National Chief Magistrate this conclusion of
our deliberations, we devote ourselves to our Country’s service, and we
will surround the President with our constant support, trusting that the
fidelity and zeal of the Loyal States and People will always assure him
that he will be constantly maintained in pursuing, with the utmost
vigor, this War for the preservation of the National life and hope of
humanity.
“A. G. CURTIN,
“JOHN A. ANDREW,
“RICHARD YATES,
“ISRAEL WASHBURNE, Jr.,
“EDWARD SOLOMON,
“SAMUEL J. KIRKWOOD,
“O. P. MORTON,–By D. G. ROSE, his Representative,
“WM. SPRAGUE,
“F. H. PEIRPOINT,
“DAVID TOD,
“N. S. BERRY,
“AUSTIN BLAIR.”
Some two months after the issue of his great Proclamation of Liberty,
President Lincoln (in his Second Annual Message to Congress, December 1,
1862), took occasion again to refer to compensated Emancipation, and,
indeed, to the entire matter of Slavery and Freedom, in most instructive
and convincing manner, as follows:
“On the 22d day of September last, a Proclamation was issued by the
Executive, a copy of which is herewith submitted.
“In accordance with the purpose in the second paragraph of that paper, I
now respectfully recall your attention to what may be called
‘compensated Emancipation.’
“A Nation may be said to consist of its territory, its people, and its
laws. The territory is the only part which is of certain durability.
‘One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh, but the
Earth abideth forever.’ It is of the first importance to duly consider
and estimate this ever-enduring part.
“That portion of the Earth’s surface which is owned and inhabited by the
People of the United States, is well adapted to be the home of one
National family; and it is not well adapted for two, or more. Its vast
extent, and its variety of climate and productions, are of advantage, in
this age, for one People, whatever they might have been in former ages.
Steam, telegraphs, and intelligence, have brought these to be an
advantageous combination for one united People.
“In the Inaugural Address I briefly pointed out the total inadequacy of
Disunion, as a remedy for the differences between the people of the two
Sections. I did so in language which I cannot improve, and which,
therefore, I beg to repeat:
“‘One Section of our Country believes Slavery is right, and ought to be
extended, while the other believes it is wrong, and ought not to be
extended. This is the only substantial dispute. The Fugitive Slave
clause of the Constitution, and the law for the suppression of the
foreign Slave Trade, are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can
ever be in a community where the moral sense of the People imperfectly
supports the law itself.
“The great body of the People abide by the dry legal obligation in both
cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, cannot be perfectly
cured; and it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the
Sections, than before. The foreign Slave Trade, now imperfectly
suppressed, would be ultimately revived without restriction in one
Section; while Fugitive Slaves, now only partially surrendered, would
not be surrendered at all by the other.
“Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot remove our
respective Sections from each other, nor build an impassable wall
between them. A husband and wife may be divorced, and each go out of
the presence and beyond the reach of the other; but the different parts
of our Country cannot do this. They cannot but remain face to face; and
intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them.
“‘Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or
more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make
treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more
faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? suppose
you go to War, you cannot fight always; and when, after much loss on
both sides, and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old
questions as to terms of intercourse are again upon you.’
“There is no line, straight or crooked, suitable for a National boundary
upon which to divide. Trace through, from East to West, upon the line
between the Free and Slave Country, and we shall find a little more than
one third of its length are rivers, easy to be crossed, and populated,
or soon to be populated, thickly upon both sides; while nearly all its
remaining length are merely surveyors’ lines, over which people may walk
back and forth without any consciousness of their presence.
“No part of this line can be made any more difficult to pass, by writing
it down on paper or parchment as a National boundary. The fact of
separation, if it comes, gives up, on the part of the seceding Section,
the Fugitive Slave clause, along with all other Constitutional
obligations upon the Section seceded from, while I should expect no
treaty stipulations would ever be made to take its place.
“But there is another difficulty. The great interior region, bounded
East by the Alleghanies, North by the British dominions, West by the
Rocky Mountains, and South by the line along which the culture of corn
and cotton meets, and which includes part of Virginia, part of
Tennessee, all of Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin,
Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Minnesota, and the Territories of
Dakota, Nebraska, and part of Colorado, already has above ten million
people, and will have fifty millions within fifty years, if not
prevented by any political folly or mistake.
“It contains more than one-third of the country owned by the United
States-certainly more than one million square miles. Once half as
populous as Massachusetts already is, it would have more than seventy-
five million people. A glance at the map shows that, territorially
speaking, it is the great body of the Republic. The other parts are but
marginal borders to it, the magnificent region sloping West, from the
Rocky Mountains to the Pacific, being the deepest and also the richest
in undeveloped resources. In the production of provisions, grains,
grasses, and all which proceed from them, this great interior region is
naturally one of the most important in the World.
“Ascertain from the statistics the small proportion of the region which
has, as yet, been brought into cultivation, and also the large and
rapidly increasing amount of its products, and we shall be overwhelmed
with the magnitude of the prospect presented. And yet this region has
no sea coast, touches no ocean anywhere. As part of one Nation, its
people now find, and may forever find, their way to Europe by New York,
to South America and Africa by New Orleans, and to Asia by San
Francisco.
“But separate our common Country into two nations, as designed by the
present Rebellion, and every man of this great interior region is
thereby cut off from some one or more of these outlets, not, perhaps, by
a physical barrier, but by embarrassing and onerous trade regulations.
“And this is true, wherever a dividing or boundary line may be fixed.
Place it between the now Free and Slave country, or place it South of
Kentucky, or North of Ohio, and still the truth remains, that none South
of it can trade to any port or place North of it, and none North of it
can trade to any port or place South of it except upon terms dictated by
a Government foreign to them.
“These outlets, East, West, and South, are indispensable to the well-
being of the people inhabiting, and to inhabit, this vast interior
region. Which of the three may be the best, is no proper question.
All, are better than either; and all, of right belong to that People,
and to their successors forever. True to themselves, they will not ask
where a line of separation shall be, but will vow rather that there
shall be no such line.
“Nor are the marginal regions less interested in these communications to
and through them, to the great outside World. They too, and each of
them, must have access to this Egypt of the West without paying toll at
the crossing of any National boundary.
“Our National strife springs not from our permanent part; not from the
Land we inhabit; not from our National homestead. There is no possible
severing of this, but would multiply, and not mitigate, evils among us.
In all its adaptations and aptitudes it demands Union, and abhors
separation. In fact it would, ere long, force reunion, however much of
blood and treasure the separation might have cost.
“Our strife pertains to ourselves–to the passing generations of men;
and it can, without convulsion, be hushed forever–with the passing of
one generation.
“In this view I recommend the adoption of the following Resolution and
Articles Amendatory of the Constitution of the United States.
“‘Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America, in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of both Houses
concurring). That the following Articles be proposed to the
Legislatures (or Conventions) of the several States, as Amendments to
the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which Articles when
ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures (or Conventions) to
be valid as part or parts of the said Constitution, namely:
“‘ARTICLE–Every State wherein Slavery now exists, which shall abolish
the same therein, at any time, or times, before the first day of
January, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred, shall
receive compensation from the United States, as follows, to wit;
“‘The President of the United States shall deliver to every such State,
bonds of the United States, bearing interest at the rate of per cent.
per annum, to an amount equal to the aggregate sum of for each Slave
shown to have been therein by the eighth census of the United States,
said bonds to be delivered to such States by installments, or in one
parcel, at the completion of the abolishment, accordingly as the same
shall have been gradual, or at one time, within such State; and interest
shall begin to run upon any such bond only from the proper time of its
delivery as aforesaid. Any State having received bonds as aforesaid,
and afterward reintroducing or tolerating Slavery therein, shall refund
to the United States the bonds so received, or the value thereof, and
all interest paid thereon.
“‘ARTICLE–All Slaves who shall have enjoyed actual freedom by the
chances of the War at any time before the end of the Rebellion, shall be
forever Free; but all owners of such, who shall not have been disloyal,
shall be compensated for them, at the same rates as is provided for
States adopting abolishment of Slavery, but in such way that no Slave
shall be twice accounted for.
“‘ARTICLE–Congress may appropriate money, and otherwise provide for
colonizing Free Colored Persons, with their own consent, at any place or
places within the United States.’
“I beg indulgence to discuss these proposed Articles at some length.
Without Slavery the Rebellion could never have existed; without Slavery
it could not continue.
“Among the friends of the Union there is great diversity of sentiment
and of policy in regard to Slavery, and the African race among us. Some
would perpetuate Slavery; some would abolish it suddenly, without
compensation; some would abolish it gradually, and with compensation;
some would remove the Freed people from us; and some would retain them
with us; and there are yet other minor diversities. Because of these
diversities, we waste much strength in struggles among ourselves.
“By mutual Concession we should harmonize and act together. This would
be Compromise; but it would be Compromise among the friends, and not
with the enemies of the Union. These Articles are intended to embody a
plan of such mutual concessions. If the plan shall be adopted, it is
assumed that Emancipation will follow, at least, in several of the
States.
“As to the first Article, the main points are: first, the Emancipation;
secondly, the length of time for consummating it–thirty-seven years;
and, thirdly, the compensation.
“The Emancipation will be unsatisfactory to the advocates of perpetual
Slavery; but the length of time should greatly mitigate their
dissatisfaction. The time spares both races from the evils of sudden
derangement–in fact from the necessity of any derangement–while most
of those whose habitual course of thought will be disturbed by the
measure will have passed away before its consummation. They will never
see it.
“Another class will hail the prospect of Emancipation, but will
deprecate the length of time. They will feel that it gives too little
to the now living Slaves. But it really gives them much. It saves them
from the vagrant destitution which must largely attend immediate
Emancipation in localities where their numbers are very great; and it
gives the inspiring assurance that their posterity shall be Free
forever.
“The plan leaves to each State, choosing to act under it, to abolish
Slavery now, or at the end of the century, or at any intermediate time,
or by degrees, extending over the whole or any part of the period; and
it obliges no two States to proceed alike. It also provides for
compensation,–and generally, the mode of making it. This, it would
seem, must further mitigate the dissatisfaction of those who favor
perpetual Slavery, and especially of those who are to receive the
compensation. Doubtless some of those who are to pay, and not to
receive, will object. Yet the measure is both just and economical.
“In a certain sense, the liberation of Slaves is the destruction of
Property–Property acquired by descent, or by purchase, the same as any
other property. It is no less true for having been often said, that the
people of the South are not more responsible for the original
introduction of this Property than are the people of the North; and when
it is remembered how unhesitatingly we all use cotton and sugar, and
share the profits of dealing in them, it may not be quite safe to say
that the South has been more responsible than the North for its
continuance.
“If, then, for a common object, this Property is to be sacrificed, is it
not just that it be done at a common charge?
“And if, with less money, or money more easily paid, we can preserve the
benefits of the Union by this means than we can by the War alone, is it
not also economical to do it? Let us consider it then. Let us
ascertain the sum we have expended in the War since compensated
Emancipation was proposed last March, and consider whether, if that
measure had been promptly accepted, by even some of the Slave States,
the same sum would not have done more to close the War than has been
otherwise done. If so, the measure would save money, and, in that view,
would be a prudent and economical measure.
“Certainly it is not so easy to pay something as it is to pay nothing;
but it is easier to pay a large sum than it is to pay a larger one. And
it is easier to pay any sum when we are able, than it is to pay it
before we are able. The War requires large sums, and requires them at
once.
“The aggregate sum necessary for compensated Emancipation of course
would be large. But it would require no ready cash, nor the bonds,
even, any faster than the Emancipation progresses. This might not, and
probably would not, close before the end of the thirty-seven years. At
that time we shall probably have a hundred million people to share the
burden, instead of thirty-one millions, as now. And not only so, but
the increase of our population may be expected to continue, for a long
time after that period, as rapidly as before; because our territory will
not have become full.
“I do not state this inconsiderately. At the same ratio of increase
which we have maintained, on an average, from our first National census
in 1790, until that of 1860, we should, in 1900, have a population of
103,208,415. And why may we not continue that ratio far beyond that
period?
“Our abundant room–our broad National homestead–is our ample resource.
Were our territory as limited as are the British Isles, very certainly
our population could not expand as stated. Instead of receiving the
foreign born, as now, we should be compelled to send part of the Native-
born away.
“But such is not our condition. We have two million nine hundred and
sixty-three thousand square miles. Europe has three million and eight
hundred thousand, with a population averaging seventy-three and one-
third persons to the square mile. Why may not our Country at some time,
average as many? Is it less fertile? Has it more waste surface by
mountains, rivers, lakes, deserts, or other causes? Is it inferior to
Europe in any natural advantage?
“If, then, we are at some time to be as populous as Europe, how soon?
As to when this may be, we can judge by the past and the present; as to
when it will be, if ever, depends much on whether we maintain the Union.
“Several of our States are already above the average of Europe–seventy-
three and a third to the square mile. Massachusetts has 157; Rhode
Island, 133; Connecticut, 99; New York and New Jersey, each, 80. Also
two other great States, Pennsylvania and Ohio, are not far below, the
former having 63, and the latter 59. The States already above the
European average, except New York, have increased in as rapid a ratio,
since passing that point, as ever before; while no one of them is equal
to some other parts of our Country in natural capacity for sustaining a
dense population.
“Taking the Nation in the aggregate, and we find its population and
ratio of increase, for the several decennial periods, to be as follows:
YEAR. POPULATION. RATIO OF INCREASE
1790 3,929,827
1800 5,305,937 35.02 Per Cent.
1810 7,239,814 36.45
1820 9,638,131 33.13
1830 12,866,020 33.49
1840 17,069,453 32.67
1850 23,191,876 35.87
1860 31,443,790 35.58
“This shows an average Decennial Increase of 34.69 per cent. in
population through the seventy years from our first to our last census
yet taken. It is seen that the ratio of increase, at no one of these
seven periods, is either two per cent. below or two per cent. above the
average; thus showing how inflexible, and, consequently, how reliable,
the law of Increase, in our case, is.
“Assuming that it will continue, gives the following results:
YEAR. POPULATION.
1870 42,323,041
1880 56,967,216
1890 76,677,872
1900 103,208,415
1910 138,918,526
1920 186,984,335
1930 251,680,914
“These figures show that our Country may be as populous as Europe now is
at some point between 1920 and 1930–say about 1925–our territory, at
seventy-three and a third persons to the square mile, being of capacity
to contain 217,186,000.
“And we will reach this, too, if we do not ourselves relinquish the
chance by the folly and evils of Disunion or by long and exhausting War
springing from the only great element of National discord among us.
While it cannot be foreseen exactly how much one huge example of
Secession, breeding lesser ones indefinitely, would retard population,
civilization and prosperity, no one can doubt that the extent of it
would be very great and injurious.
“The proposed Emancipation would shorten the War, perpetuate Peace,
insure this increase of population, and proportionately the wealth of
the Country. With these, we should pay all the Emancipation would cost,
together with our other debt, easier than we should pay our other debt
without it.
“If we had allowed our old National debt to run at six per cent. per
annum, simple interest, from the end of our Revolutionary Struggle until
to-day, without paying anything on either principal or interest, each
man of us would owe less upon that debt now than each man owed upon it
then; and this because our increase of men through the whole period has
been greater than six per cent.; has run faster than the interest upon
the debt. Thus, time alone, relieves a debtor Nation, so long as its
population increases faster than unpaid interest accumulates on its
debt.
“This fact would be no excuse for delaying payment of what is justly
due, but it shows the great importance of time in this connection–the
great advantage of a policy by which we shall not have to pay until we
number a hundred millions, what, by a different policy, we would have to
pay now, when we number but thirty-one millions. In a word, it shows
that a dollar will be much harder to pay for the War, than will be a
dollar for Emancipation on the proposed plan. And then the latter will
cost no blood, no precious life. It will be a saving of both.
“As to the Second Article, I think it would be impracticable to return
to Bondage the class of Persons therein contemplated. Some of them,
doubtless, in the property sense, belong to loyal owners and hence
provision is made in this Article for compensating such.
“The Third Article relates to the future of the Freed people. It does
not oblige, but merely authorizes, Congress to aid in colonizing such as
may consent. This ought not to be regarded as objectionable on the one
hand or on the other, insomuch as it comes to nothing, unless by the
mutual consent of the people to be deported, and the American voters,
through their Representatives in Congress.
“I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I strongly favor
colonization. And yet I wish to say there is an objection urged against
free Colored persons remaining in the Country which is largely
imaginary, if not sometimes malicious.
“It is insisted that their presence would injure and displace White
labor and White laborers. If there ever could be a proper time for mere
catch arguments, that time surely is not now. In times like the present
men should utter nothing for which they would not willingly be
responsible through Time and in Eternity.
“Is it true, then, that Colored people can displace any more White labor
by being Free, than by remaining Slaves? If they stay in their old
places, they jostle no White laborers; if they leave their old places,
they leave them open to White laborers. Logically, there is neither
more nor less of it.
“Emancipation, even without deportation, would probably enhance the
wages of White labor, and, very surely would not reduce them. Thus, the
customary amount of labor would still have to be performed; the freed
people would surely not do more than their old proportion of it and,
very probably, for a time would do less, leaving an increased part to
White laborers, bringing their labor into greater demand, and
consequently enhancing the wages of it.
“With deportation, even to a limited extent, enhanced wages to White
labor is mathematically certain. Labor is like any other commodity in
the market-increase the demand for it and you increase the price of it.
Reduce the supply of Black labor by colonizing the Black laborer out of
the Country, and by precisely so much you increase the demand for and
wages of White labor.
“But it is dreaded that the freed people will swarm forth and cover the
whole Land! Are they not already in the Land? Will liberation make
them any more numerous? Equally distributed among the Whites of the
whole Country, there would be but one Colored, in seven Whites. Could
the one, in any way, greatly disturb the seven?
“There are many communities now, having more than one free Colored
person to seven Whites; and this, without any apparent consciousness of
evil from it. The District of Columbia, and the States of Maryland and
Delaware, are all in this condition. The District has more than one
free Colored to six Whites; and yet, in its frequent petitions to
Congress I believe it has never presented the presence of free Colored
persons as one of its grievances.
“But why should Emancipation South, send the freed people North? people
of any color, seldom run, unless there be something to run from.
Heretofore, Colored people, to some extent, have fled North from
bondage, and now, perhaps, from both bondage and destitution. But if
gradual Emancipation and deportation be adopted, they will have neither
to flee from.
“Their old masters will give them wages at least until new laborers can
be procured; and the freed men, in turn, will gladly give their labor
for the wages, till new homes can be found for them, in congenial
climes, and with people of their own blood and race.
“This proposition can be trusted on the mutual interests involved. And,
in any event, cannot the North decide for itself, whether to receive
them?
“Again, as practice proves more than theory, in any case, has there been
any irruption of Colored people Northward because of the abolishment of
Slavery in this District last Spring? What I have said of the
proportion of free Colored persons to the Whites in the District is from
the census of 1860, having no reference to persons called Contrabands,
nor to those made free by the Act of Congress abolishing Slavery here.
“The plan consisting of these Articles is recommended, not but that a
restoration of the National authority would be accepted without its
adoption.
“Nor will the War, nor proceedings under the Proclamation of September
22, 1862, be stayed because of the recommendation of this plan. Its
timely adoption, I doubt not, would bring restoration, and thereby stay
both.
“And, notwithstanding this plan, the recommendation that Congress
provides by law for compensating any State which may adopt Emancipation
before this plan shall have been acted upon, is hereby earnestly
renewed. Such would be only an advance part of the plan, and the same
arguments apply to both.
“This plan is recommended as a means, not in exclusion of, but
additional to, all others, for restoring and preserving the National
authority throughout the Union. The subject is presented exclusively in
its economical aspect.
“The plan would, I am confident, secure Peace more speedily, and
maintain it more permanently, than can be done by force alone; while all
it would cost, considering amounts, and manner of payment, and times of
payment, would be easier paid than will be the additional cost of the
War, if we rely solely upon force. It is much, very much, that it would
cost no blood at all.
“The plan is proposed as permanent Constitutional Law. It cannot become
such without the concurrence of, first, two-thirds of Congress, and
afterward, three-fourths of the Slave States. The requisite three-
fourths of the States will necessarily include seven of the Slave
States. Their concurrence, if obtained, will give assurance of their
severally adopting Emancipation at no very distant day upon the new
Constitutional terms. This assurance would end the struggle now and
save the Union forever.
“I do not forget the gravity which should characterize a paper addressed
to the Congress of the Nation by the Chief Magistrate of the Nation.
Nor do I forget that some of you are my seniors, nor that many of you
have more experience than I in the conduct of public affairs. Yet I
trust that in view of the great responsibility resting upon me, you will
perceive no want of respect to yourselves in any undue earnestness I may
seem to display.
“Is it doubted, then, that the plan I propose, if adopted, would shorten
the War, and thus lessen its expenditure of money and of blood? Is it
doubted that it would restore the National authority and National
prosperity, and perpetuate both indefinitely? Is it doubted that we
here–Congress and Executive–can secure its adoption; will not the good
people respond to a united and earnest appeal from us? Can we, can
they, by any other means so certainly or so speedily assure these vital
objects; we can succeed only by concert.
“It is not, ‘Can any of us imagine better?’ but,’Can we all do better?’
Object whatsoever is possible, still the question recurs, ‘Can we do
better? The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy
present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise
with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act
anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our
Country.
“Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We, of this Congress and
this Administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No
personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of
us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor
or dishonor, to the latest generation.
“We say we are for the Union. The World will not forget that we say
this. We know how to save the Union.
“The World knows we do know how to save it. We even we here–hold the
power, and bear the responsibility.
“In giving Freedom to the Slave, we assure Freedom to the Free-Honorable
alike in what we give and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or
meanly lose, the last, best hope of Earth. Other means may succeed;
this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just–a way
which, if followed, the World would forever applaud, and God must
forever bless.
“ABRAHAM LINCOLN.”
The popular Branch of Congress responded with heartiness to what Mr.
Lincoln had done. On December 11, 1862, resolutions were offered by Mr.
Yeaman in the House of Representatives, as follows:
“Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate Concurring), That
the Proclamation of the President of the United States, of date the 22d
of September, 1862, is not warranted by the Constitution.
“Resolved, That the policy of Emancipation as indicated in that
Proclamation, is not calculated to hasten the restoration of Peace, was
not well chosen as a War measure, and is an assumption of power
dangerous to the rights of citizens and to the perpetuity of a Free
People.”
These resolutions were laid on the table by 95 yeas to 47 nays–the yeas
all Republicans, save three, and the nays all Democrats save five.
On December 15, 1862, Mr. S. C. Fessenden, of Maine, offered resolutions
to the House, in these words:
“Resolved, That the Proclamation of the President of the United States,
of the date of 22d September, 1862, is warranted by the Constitution.
“Resolved, That the policy of Emancipation, as indicated in that
Proclamation, is well adapted to hasten the restoration of Peace, was
well chosen as a War measure, and is an exercise of power with proper
regard for the rights of the States, and the perpetuity of Free
Government.”
These resolutions were adopted by 78 yeas to 52 nays–the yeas all
Republicans, save two, and the nays all Democrats, save seven.
The Proclamation of September 22d, 1862, was very generally endorsed and
upheld by the People at large; and, in accordance with its promise, it
was followed at the appointed time, January 1st, 1863, by the
supplemental Proclamation specifically Emancipating the Slaves in the
rebellious parts of the United States–in the following terms:
“WHEREAS, On the twenty-second day of September, in the year of our Lord
one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, a Proclamation was issued by
the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the
following, to wit:
“‘That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and sixty-three, all Persons held as Slaves within any
State, or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be
in Rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward,
and forever Free; and the Executive Government of the United States,
including the Military and Naval Authority thereof, will recognize and
maintain the Freedom of such Persons, and will do no act or acts to
repress such Persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for
their actual Freedom.
“‘That the Executive will, on the First day of January aforesaid, by
Proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any, in which
the people thereof, respectively, shall then be in Rebellion against the
United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof, shall
on that day be in good faith represented in the Congress of the United
States, by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the
qualified voters of such States shall have participated, shall, in the
absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive
evidence that such State, and the people thereof, are not then in
Rebellion against the United States.’
“Now, therefore, I ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, by
virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and
Navy of the United States, in time of actual armed Rebellion against the
authority and Government of the United States, and as a fit and
necessary War measure for suppressing said Rebellion, do, on this First
day of January, in the Year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do, publicly
proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days from the day first
above mentioned, Order and designate as the States and parts of States
wherein the people thereof, respectively, are this day in Rebellion
against the United States, the following, to wit:
“Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana (except the parishes of St. Bernard,
Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James, Ascension,
Assumption, Terre Bonne, Lafouche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans,
including the City of New Orleans,) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the
forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties
of Berkeley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann,
and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth), and which
excepted parts are for the present left precisely as if this
Proclamation were not issued.
“And by virtue of the power and for the purpose aforesaid, I do Order
and declare that all Persons held as Slaves within said designated
States and parts of States are, and henceforward shall be, Free; and
that the Executive Government of the United States, including the
Military and Naval authorities thereof; will recognize and maintain the
Freedom of said Persons.
“And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be Free, to abstain
from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence; and I recommend to
them that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for
reasonable wages.
“And I further declare and make known that such Persons, of suitable
condition, will be received into the armed service of the United States
to garrison forts, positions, stations, and other places, and to man
vessels of all sorts in said service.
“And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice,
warranted by the Constitution upon Military necessity, I invoke the
considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God.
“In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.
“Done at the City of Washington, this First day of January, in the year
of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the eighty-seventh.
“By the President:
“ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
“WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.”
CHAPTER XIX.
HISTORICAL REVIEW.
Let us now refresh recollection by glancing backward over the history of
our Country, and we shall see, as recorded in these pages, that, from
the first, there existed in this Nation a class of individuals greedily
ambitious of power and determined to secure and maintain control of this
Government; that they left unturned no stone which would contribute to
the fostering and to the extension of African Slavery; that, hand in
hand with African Slavery–and as a natural corollary to it–they
advocated Free Trade as a means of degrading Free White labor to the
level of Black Slave labor, and thus increasing their own power; that
from the first, ever taking advantage of the general necessities of the
Union, they arrogantly demanded and received from a brow-beaten People,
concession after concession, and compromise after compromise; that every
possible pretext and occasion was seized by them to increase,
consolidate, and secure their power, and to extend the territorial
limits over which their peculiar Pro-Slavery and Pro-Free-Trade
doctrines prevailed; and that their nature was so exacting, and their
greed so rapacious, that it was impossible ever to satisfy them.
Nor were they burdened with over-much of that high sense of honor–a
quality of which they often vaunted themselves–which impelled others to
stand by their agreements. It seemed as though they considered the most
sacred promises and covenants of no account, and made only to be
trampled upon, when in the way of their Moloch.
We remember the bitter Slavery agitation in Congress over the admission
of the State of Missouri, and how it eventuated in the Missouri
Compromise. That compromise, we have seen, they afterward trod upon,
and broke, with as little compunction as they would have stepped upon
and crushed a toad.
They felt their own growing power, and gloried in their strength and
arrogance; and Northern timidity became a scoff and by-word in their
mouths.
The fact is, that from its very conception, as well as birth, they hated
and opposed the Union, because they disliked a Republican and preferred
a Monarchical form of Government. Their very inability to prevent the
consummation of that Union, imbittered them. Hence their determinaion
to seize every possible occasion and pretext afterward to destroy it,
believing, as they doubtless did, that upon the crumbled and mouldering
ruins of a dissevered Union and ruptured Republic, Monarchical ideas
might the more easily take root and grow. But experience had already
taught them that it would be long before their real object could even be
covertly hinted at, and that in the meantime it must be kept out of
sight by the agitation of other political issues. The formulation and
promulgation therefore, by Jefferson, in the Kentucky Resolutions of
1798, and by Madison, in the Virginia Resolutions of 1799, of the
doctrine of States Rights already referred to, was a perfect “God-send”
to these men. For it not only enabled them to keep from public view and
knowledge their ultimate aim and purpose, but constituted the whip which
they thenceforth everlastingly flourished and cracked over the shrinking
heads of other and more patriotic people–the whip with which, through
the litter of their broken promises, they ruthlessly rode into, and, for
so long a period of years held on to, supreme power and place in the
Land.
Including within the scope of States Rights, the threats of
Nullification, Disunion and Secession–ideas abhorrent to the Patriot’s
mind–small wonder is it that, in those days, every fresh demand made by
these political autocrats was tremblingly acceded to, until patience and
concession almost utterly exhausted themselves.
Originally disturbing only South Carolina and Georgia to any extent,
these ambitious men, who believed in anything rather than a Republic,
and who were determined to destroy the Union, gradually spread the
spirit of jealousy and discontent into other States of the South; their
immediate object being to bring the Southern States into the closest
possible relations the one with the other; to inspire them all with
common sympathies and purposes; to compact and solidify them, so that in
all coming movements against the other States of the Union, they might
move with proportionately increased power, and force, and effect,
because of such unity of aim and strength.
This spirit of Southern discontent, and jealousy of the Northern States,
was, as we have seen, artfully fanned by the Conspirators, in heated
discussions over the Tariff Acts of 1824, and 1828, and 1832, until, by
the latter date, the people of the Cotton-States were almost frantic,
and ready to fight over their imaginary grievances. Then it was that
the Conspirators thought the time had come, for which they had so long
and so earnestly prayed and worked, when the cotton Sampson should wind
his strong arms around the pillars of the Constitution and pull down the
great Temple of our Union–that they might rear upon its site another
and a stronger edifice, dedicated not to Freedom, but to Free-Trade and
to other false gods.
South Carolina was to lead off, and the other Cotton States would
follow. South Carolina did lead off–but the other Cotton-States did
not follow.
It has been shown in these pages how South Carolina declared the Tariff
Acts aforesaid, null and void, armed herself to resist force, and
declared that any attempt of the general Government to enforce those
Acts would cause her to withdraw from the Union. But Jackson as we know
throttled the treason with so firm a grip that Nullification and
Secession and Disunion were at once paralyzed.
The concessions to the domineering South, in Clay’s Compromise Tariff of
1833, let the Conspirators down easily, so to speak; and they pretended
to be satisfied. But they were satisfied only as are the thirsty sands
of Africa with the passing shower.
The Conspirators had, however, after all, made substantial gains. They
had established a precedent for an attempt to secede. That was
something. They had demonstrated that a single Southern State could
stand up, armed and threatening, strutting, blustering, and bullying,
and at least make faces at the general Government without suffering any
very dreadful consequences. That was still more.
They had also ascertained that, by adopting such a course, a single
Southern State could force concessions from the fears of the rest of the
United States. That was worth knowing, because the time might come,
when it might be desirable not only for one but for all the Southern
States to secede upon some other pretext, and when it would be awkward,
and would interfere with the Disunion programme, to have the other
States either offer or make concessions.
They had also learned the valuable lesson that the single issue of Free-
Trade was not sufficiently strong of itself to unite all the Southern
States in a determination to secede, and thus dissolve the Union. They
saw they must agitate some other issue to unify the South more
thoroughly and justify Disunion. On looking over the whole field they
concluded that the Slavery question would best answer their purpose, and
they adopted it.
It was doubtless a full knowledge of the fact that they had adopted it,
that led Jackson to make the declaration, heretofore in these pages
given, which has been termed “prophetic.” At any rate, thenceforth the
programme of the Conspirators was to agitate the Slavery question in all
ways possible, so as to increase, extend and solidify the influence and
strength of the Slave power; strain the bonds uniting them with the Free
States; and weaken the Free States by dividing them upon the question.
At the same time the Free-Trade question was to be pressed forward to a
triumphal issue, so that the South might be enriched and strengthened,
and the North impoverished and weakened, by the result.
That was their programme, in the rough, and it was relentlessly adhered
to. Free-Trade and Slavery by turns, if not together, from that time
onward, were ever at the front, agitating our People both North and
South, and not only consolidating the Southern States on those lines, as
the Conspirators designed, but also serving ultimately to consolidate,
to some extent–in a manner quite unlooked for by the Conspirators–
Northern sentiment, on the opposite lines of Protection and Freedom.
The Compromise Tariff Act of 1833–which Clay was weak enough to
concede, and even stout old Jackson to permit to become law without his
signature–gave to the Conspirators great joy for years afterward, as
they witnessed the distress and disaster brought by it to Northern homes
and incomes–not distress and disaster alone, but absolute and
apparently irreparable ruin.
The reaction occasioned by this widespread ruin having brought the Whigs
into power, led to the enactment of the Protective-Tariff of 1842 and–
to the chagrin of the Conspirators–industrial prosperity and plenty to
the Free North again ensued.
Even as Cain hated his brother Abel because his sacrifices were
acceptable in the sight of God, while his own were not, so the Southern
Conspirators, and other Slave-owners also, had, by this time, come to
hate the Northern free-thinking, free-acting, freedom-loving mechanic
and laboring man, because the very fact and existence of his Godgiven
Freedom and higher-resulting civilization was a powerful and perpetual
protest against the–abounding iniquities and degradations of Slavery as
practiced by themselves.
Hence, by trickery, by cajoling the People With his, and their own,
assurances that he was in favor of Protection–they secured the election
in 1844 of a Free-Trade President, the consequent repeal of the
Protective-Tariff of 1842–which had repaired the dreadful mischief
wrought by the Compromise Act of 1833–and the enactment of the infamous
Free-Trade Tariff of 1846, which blasted the manufacturing and farming
and trade industries of the Country again, as with fire.
The discovery of the great gold fields of California, and the enormous
amount of the precious metal poured by her for many succeeding years
into the lap of the Nation, alone averted what otherwise would
inevitably have been total ruin. As it was, in 1860, the National
credit had sunk to a lower point than ever before in all its history.
It was confessedly bankrupt, and ruin stalked abroad throughout the
United States.
But while, with rapid pen, the carrying out of that part of the Southern
Conspirators’ Disunion programme which related to Free-Trade, is thus
brought again to mind, the other part of that programme, which related
to Slavery, must not be neglected or overlooked. On this question they
had determined, as we have seen, to agitate without ceasing–having in
view, primarily, as already hinted, the extension of Slave territory and
the resulting increase of Slave power in the Land; and, ulteriorly, the
solidifying of that power, and Disunion of the Republic, with a view to
its conversion into an Oligarchy, if not a Monarchy.
The bitterness of the struggle over the admission of Missouri as a Slave
State in 1820, under the Missouri Compromise, was to be revived by the
Conspirators, at the earliest possible moment.
Accordingly in 1836–only three years after the failure of Nullification
in South Carolina, the Territory, of Arkansas was forced in as a Slave
State, and simultaneously the Slave-owning henchmen of the Conspirators,
previously settled there for the purpose, proclaimed the secession from
Mexico, and independence, of Texas. This was quickly followed, in 1844,
by Calhoun’s hastily negotiated treaty of annexation with Texas; its
miscarriage in the Senate; and the Act of March 2, 1845–with its sham
compromise–consenting to the admission of Texas to the Union of States.
Then came the War with Mexico; the attempt by means of the Wilmot
proviso to check the growing territorial-greed and rapacity of the
Slave-power; and the acquisition by the United States, of California and
New Mexico, under the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, which brought
Peace.
Then occurred the agitation over the organization of Territorial
governments for Oregon, California, and New Mexico, and the strong
effort to extend to the Pacific Ocean the Missouri-Compromise line of
36 30′, and to extend to all future Territorial organizations the
principles of that compromise.
Then came the struggle in 1850, over the admission of California as a
State, and New Mexico and Utah to Territorial organization–ending in
the passage of Clay’s Compromise measures of 1850.
Yet still the Southern Conspirators–whose forces, both in Congress and
out, were now well-disciplined, compacted, solidified, experienced, and
bigotedly enthusiastic and overbearing–were not satisfied. It was not
their intention to be satisfied with anything less than the destruction
of the Union and of our Republican form of Government. The trouble was
only beginning, and, so far, almost everything had progressed to their
liking. The work must proceed.
In 1852-3 they commenced the Kansas-Nebraska agitation; and, what with
their incessant political and colonizing movements in those Territories;
the frequent and dreadful atrocities committed by their tools, the
Border-ruffians; the incessant turmoil created by cruelties to their
Fugitive-slaves; their persistent efforts to change the Supreme Court to
their notions; these-with the decision and opinion of the Supreme Court
in the Dred Scott case–together worked the Slavery question up to a
dangerous degree of heat, by the year 1858.
And, by 1860–when the people of the Free States, grown sick unto death
of the rule of the Slave-power in the General Government, arose in their
political might, and shook off this “Old Man of the Sea,” electing,
beyond cavil and by the Constitutional mode, to the Presidential office,
a man who thoroughly represented in himself their conscience, on the one
hand, which instinctively revolted against human Slavery as a wrong
committed against the laws of God, and their sense of justice and equity
on the other, which would not lightly overlook, or interfere with vested
rights under the Constitution and the laws of man–the Conspirators had
reached the point at which they had been aiming ever since that failure
in 1832 of their first attempt at Disunion, in South Carolina.
They had now succeeded in irritating both the Free and the Slave-holding
Sections of our Country against each other, to an almost unbearable
point; had solidified the Southern States on the Slavery and Free-Trade
questions; and at last–the machinations of these same Conspirators
having resulted in a split in the Democratic Party, and the election of
the Republican candidate to the Presidency, as the embodiment of the
preponderating National belief in Freedom and equality to all before the
Law, with Protection to both Labor and Capital–they also had the
pretext for which they had both been praying and scheming and preparing
all those long, long years–they, and some of their fathers before them.
It cannot be too often repeated that to secure a Monarchy, or at least
an Oligarchy, over which the leading Conspirators should rule for life–
whether that Monarchy or that Oligarchy should comprise the States of
the South by themselves, or all the States on a new basis of Union–was
the great ultimate aim of the Conspirators; and this could be secured
only by first disrupting the then existing Republican Union of
Republican States.
The doctrine of the right of Secession had now long been taught, and had
become a part of the Southern Slave-holders’ Democratic creed, as fully
as had the desirability of Slavery and Free-Trade–and even many of the
Northern Democrats, and some Republicans as well, were not much inclined
to dispute, although they cared not to canvass, the point.
The programme of action was therefore much the same as had been laid
down in the first attempt in 1832:–first South Carolina would secede
and declare her independence; then the other Slave States in quick
succession would do likewise; then a new Constitution for a solid
Southern Union; then, if necessary, a brief War to cement it–which
would end, of course, in the independence of the South at least, but
more probably in the utter subjugation and humiliation of the Free
States.
When the time should come, during, or after this War–as come, in their
belief, it would–for a change in the form of Government, then they
could seize the first favorable occasion and change it. At present,
however, the cry must be for “independence.” That accomplished, the
rest would be easy. And until that independence was accomplished, no
terms of any sort, no settlement of any kind, were either to be proposed
or accepted by them.
These were their dreams, their ambitions, their plans; and the tenacious
courage with which they stuck to them “through thick and thin,” through
victory and disaster, were worthy of a better cause.
While, therefore, the pretexts for Secession were “Slavery” and “Free-
Trade”–both of which were alleged to be jeopardized in the election and
inauguration of Abraham Lincoln–yet, no sooner had hostilities
commenced between the seceding States and the Union, than they declared
to the World that their fight was not for Slavery, but for Independence.
They dared not acknowledge to the World that they fought for Slavery,
lest the sympathies of the World should be against them. But it was
well understood by the Southern masses, as well as the other people of
the Union, that both Slavery and Free-Trade were involved in the fight–
as much as independence, and the consequent downfall of the Union.
President Lincoln, however, had made up his mind to do all he properly
could to placate the South. None knew better than he, the history of
this Secession movement, as herein described. None knew better than he,
the fell purpose and spirit of the Conspirators. Yet still, his kindly
heart refused to believe that the madness of the Southern leaders was so
frenzied, and their hatred of Free men, Free labor, and Free
institutions, so implacable, that they would wilfully refuse to listen
to reason and ever insist on absolutely inadmissible terms of
reconcilation.
From the very beginning of his Administration, he did all that was
possible to mollify their resentment and calm their real or pretended
fears. Nor was this from any dread or doubt as to what the outcome of
an armed Conflict would be; for, in his speech at Cincinnati, in the
Autumn of 1859, he had said, while addressing himself to Kentuckians and
other Southern men: “Why, gentlemen, I think you are as gallant and as
brave men as live; that you can fight as bravely in a good cause, man
for man, as any other people living; that you have shown yourselves
capable of this upon various occasions; but man for man, you are not
better than we are, and there are not so many of you as there are of us.
You will never make much of a hand at whipping us. If we were fewer in
numbers than you, I think that you could whip us; if we were equal it
would likely be a drawn battle; but being inferior in numbers, you will
make nothing by attempting to master us.”
And early in 1860, in his famous New York Cooper Institute speech he had
said “Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let
us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it.” He plainly
believed to the end, that “right makes might;” and he believed in the
power of numbers–as also did Napoleon, if we may judge from his famous
declaration that “The God of battles is always on the side of the
heaviest battalions.” Yet, so believing, President Lincoln exerted
himself in all possible ways to mollify the South. His assurances,
however, were far from satisfying the Conspirators. They never had been
satisfied with anything in the shape of concession. They never would
be. They had been dissatisfied with and had broken all the compacts and
compromises, and had spit upon all the concessions, of the past; and
nothing would now satisfy them, short of the impossible.
They were not satisfied now with Lincoln’s promise that the Government
would not assail them–organized as, by this time, they were into a so-
called Southern “Confederacy” of States–and they proceeded accordingly
to assail that Government which would not assail them. They opened fire
on Fort Sumter.
This was done, as has duly appeared, in the hope that the shedding of
blood would not only draw the States of the Southern Confederacy more
closely together in their common cause, and prevent the return of any of
them to their old allegiance, but also to so influence the wavering
allegiance to the Union, of the Border States, as to strengthen that
Confederacy and equivalently weaken that Union, by their Secession.
Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas, of the Border States
that were wavering, were thus gathered into the Confederate fold, by
this policy of blood-spilling–carried bodily thither, by a desperate
and frenzied minority, against the wishes of a patriotic majority.
Virginia, especially, was a great accession to the Rebel cause. She
brought to it the prestige of her great name. To secure the active
cooperation of “staid old Virginia,” “the Mother of Statesmen,” in the
struggle, was, in the estimation of the Rebels, an assurance of victory
to their cause. And the Secession of Virginia for a time had a
depressing influence upon the friends of the Union everywhere.
The refusal of West Virginia to go with the rest of the State into
Rebellion, was, to be sure, some consolation; and the checkmating of the
Conspirators’ designs to secure to the Confederacy the States of
Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, helped the confidence of Union men. In
fact, as long as the National Capital was secure, it was felt that the
Union was still safe.
But while the Confederacy, by the firing upon Fort Sumter, and thus
assailing that Government which Lincoln had promised would not assail
the Rebels, had gained much in securing the aid of the States mentioned,
yet the Union Cause, by that very act, had gained more. For the echoes
of the Rebel guns of Fort Moultrie were the signal for such an uprising
of the Patriots of the North and West and Middle States, as, for the
moment, struck awe to the hearts of Traitors and inspired with courage
and hopefulness the hearts of Union men throughout the Land.
Moreover it put the Rebels in their proper attitude, in the eyes of the
World–as the first aggressors–and thus deprived them, to a certain
extent, of that moral support from the outside which flows from
sympathy.
Those echoes were the signal, not only of that call to arms which led to
such an uprising, but for the simultaneous calling together of the
Thirty-seventh Congress of the United States in Extra Session–the
Congress whose measures ultimately enabled President Lincoln and the
Union Armies to subdue the Rebellion and save the Union–the Congress
whose wise and patriotic deliberations resulted in the raising of those
gigantic Armies and Navies, and in supplying the unlimited means,
through the Tariff and National Bank Systems and otherwise, by which
those tremendous Forces could be both created and effectively operated–
the Congress which cooperated with President Lincoln and those Forces in
preparing the way for the destruction of the very corner-stone of the
Confederacy, Slavery itself.
CHAPTER XX.
LINCOLN’S TROUBLES AND TEMPTATIONS.
The Rebels themselves, as has already been noted, by the employment of
their Slaves in the construction of earthworks and other fortifications,
and even in battle, at Bull Run and elsewhere, against the Union Forces,
brought the Thirty-seventh Congress, as well as the Military Commanders,
and the President, to an early consideration of the Slavery question.
But it was none the less a question to be treated with the utmost
delicacy.
The Union men, as well as the Secession-sympathizers, of Kentucky and
Tennessee and Missouri and Maryland, largely believed in Slavery, or at
least were averse to any interference with it. These, would not see
that the right to destroy that unholy Institution could pertain to any
authority, or be justified by any exigency; much less that, as held by
some authorities, its existence ceased at the moment when its hands, or
those of the State in which it had existed, were used to assail the
General Government.
They looked with especial suspicion and distrust upon the guarded
utterances of the President upon all questions touching the future of
the Colored Race.
October of 1864:
“It is very doubtful whether any act of the Government of the
United States was necessary to liberate the Slaves in a State which
is in Rebellion. There is much reason for the opinion that, by the
simple act of levying War against the United States, the relation
of Slavery was terminated; certainly, so far as concerns the duty
of the United States to recognize it, or to refrain from
interfering with it.
“Not being founded on the Law of Nature, and resting solely on
positive Local Law–and that, not of the United States–as soon as
it becomes either the motive or pretext of an unjust War against
the Union–an efficient instrument in the hands of the Rebels for
carrying on the War–source of Military strength to the Rebellion,
and of danger to the Government at home and abroad, with the
additional certainty that, in any event but its abandonment, it
will continue, in all future time to work these mischiefs, who can
suppose it is the duty of the United States to continue to
recognize it.
“To maintain this would be a contradiction in terms. It would be
two recognize a right in a Rebel master to employ his Slave in acts
of Rebellion and Treason, and the duty of the Slave to aid and abet
his master in the commission of the greatest crime known to the
Law. No such absurdity can be admitted; and any citizen of the
United States, from thee President down, who should, by any overt
act, recognize the duty of a Slave to obey a Rebel master in a
hostile operation, would himself be giving aid and comfort to the
Enemy.”]
They believed that when Fremont issued the General Order-heretofore
given in full–in which that General declared that “The property, real
and personal, of all persons, in the State of Missouri, who shall take
up arms against the United States, or who shall be directly proven to
have taken an active part with their enemies in the field, is declared
to be confiscated to the public use, and their Slaves, if any they have,
are hereby declared Free men,” it must have been with the concurrence,
if not at the suggestion, of the President; and, when the President
subsequently, September 11,1861, made an open Order directing that this
clause of Fremont’s General Order, or proclamation, should be “so
modified, held, and construed, as to conform to, and not to transcend,
the provisions on the same subject contained in the Act of Congress
entitled ‘An Act to Confiscate Property used for Insurrectionary
Purposes,’ approved August 6, 1861,” they still were not satisfied.
first and fourth, which are in these words:
“That if, during the present or any future insurrection against the
Government of the United States, after the President of the United
States shall have declared, by proclamation, that the laws of the
United States are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, by
combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course
of judicial proceedings, or by the power vested in the marshals by
law, any person or persons, his, her, or their agent, attorney, or
employee, shall purchase or acquire, sell or give, any property of
whatsoever kind or description, with intent to use or employ the
same, or suffer the same to be used or employed, in aiding,
abetting, or promoting such insurrection or resistance to the laws,
or any persons engaged therein; or if any person or persons, being
the owner or owners of any such property, shall knowingly use or
employ, or consent to the use or employment of the same as
aforesaid, all such property is hereby declared to be lawful
subject of prize and capture wherever found; and it shall be the
duty of the President of the United States to cause the same to be
seized, confiscated and condemned.”
* * * * * * * *
“SEC. 4. That whenever hereafter, during the present insurrection
against the Government of the United States, any person claimed to
be held to Labor or Service under the law of any State shall be
required or permitted by the person to whom such Labor or Service
is claimed to be due, or by the lawful agent of such person, to
take up arms against the United States; or shall be required or
permitted by the person to whom such Labor or Service is claimed to
be due, or his lawful agent, to work or to be employed in or upon
any fort, navy-yard, dock, armory, ship, entrenchment, or in any
Military or Naval service whatsoever, against the Government and
lawful authority of the United States, then, and in every such
case, the person to whom such Labor or Service is claimed to be
due, shall forfeit his claim to such Labor, any law of the State or
of the United States to the contrary notwithstanding. And whenever
thereafter the person claiming such Labor or Service shall seek to
enforce his claim, it shall be a full and sufficient answer to such
claim that the person whose Service or Labor is claimed had been
employed in hostile service against the Government of the United
States, contrary to the provisions of this act.”
It seemed as impossible to satisfy these Border-State men as it had been
to satisfy the Rebels themselves.
The Act of Congress, to which President Lincoln referred
in his Order modifying Fremont’s proclamation, had itself been opposed
by them, under the lead of their most influential Representative and
spokesman, Mr. Crittenden, of Kentucky, in its passage through that
Body. It did not satisfy them.
Neither had they been satisfied, when, within one year and four days
after “Slavery opened its batteries of Treason, upon Fort Sumter,” that
National curse and shame was banished from the Nation’s Capital by
Congressional enactment.
They were not satisfied even with Mr. Lincoln’s conservative suggestions
embodied in the Supplemental Act.
Nor were they satisfied with the General Instructions, of October 14,
1861, from the War Department to its Generals, touching the employment
of Fugitive Slaves within the Union Lines, and the assurance of just
compensation to loyal masters, therein contained, although all avoidable
interference with the Institution was therein reprobated.
Nothing satisfied them. It was indeed one of the most curious of the
many phenomena of the War of the Rebellion, that when–as at the end of
1861–it had become evident, as Secretary Cameron held, that it “would
be National suicide” to leave the Rebels in “peaceful and secure
possession of Slave Property, more valuable and efficient to them for
War, than forage, cotton, and Military stores,” and that the Slaves
coming within our lines could not “be held by the Government as Slaves,”
and should not be held as prisoners of War–still the loyal people of
these Border-States, could not bring themselves to save that Union,
which they professed to love, by legislation on this tender subject.
On the contrary, they opposed all legislation looking to any
interference with such Slave property. Nothing that was proposed by Mr.
Lincoln, or any other, on this subject, could satisfy them.
Congress enacted a law, approved March 13, 1862, embracing an additional
Article of War, which prohibited all officers “from employing any of the
forces under their respective Commands for the purpose of returning
Fugitives from Service or Labor who may have escaped from
any persons to whom such Service or Labor is claimed to be due,” and
prescribed that “Any officer who shall be found guilty by Court-Martial
of violating this Article shall be dismissed from the Service.” In both
Houses, the loyal Border-State Representatives spoke and voted against
its passage.
One week previously (March 6, 1862), President Lincoln, in an admirable
Message, hitherto herein given at length, found himself driven to broach
to Congress the subject of Emancipation. He had, in his First Annual
Message (December, 1861), declared that “the Union must be preserved;
and hence all indispensable means must be employed;” but now, as a part
of the War Policy, he proposed to Congress the adoption of a Joint
Resolution declaring “That the United States ought to cooperate with any
State which may adopt gradual abolishment of Slavery, giving to such
State, pecuniary aid, to be used by such State in its discretion, to
compensate for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such
change of System.”
It was high time, he thought, that the idea of a gradual, compensated
Emancipation, should begin to occupy the minds of those interested, “so
that,” to use his own words, “they may begin to consider whether to
accept or reject it,” should Congress approve the suggestion.
Congress did approve, and adopt, the Joint-Resolution, as we know–
despite the opposition from the loyal element of the Border States–an
opposition made in the teeth of their concession that Mr. Lincoln, in
recommending its adoption, was “solely moved by a high patriotism and
sincere devotion to the glory of his Country.”
But, consistently with their usual course, they went to the House of
Representatives, fresh from the Presidential presence, and, with their
ears still ringing with the common-sense utterances of the President,
half of them voted against the Resolution, while the other half
refrained from voting at all. And their opposition to this wise and
moderate proposition was mainly based upon the idea that it carried with
it a threat–a covert threat.
It certainly was a warning, taking it in connection with the balance of
the Message, but a very wise and timely one.
These loyal Border-State men, however, could not see its wisdom, and at
a full meeting held upon the subject decided to oppose it, as they
afterward did. Its conciliatory spirit they could not comprehend; the
kindly, temperate warning, they would not heed. The most moderate of
them all,–[Mr. Crittenden of Kentucky.]–in the most moderate of his
utterances, could not bring himself to the belief that this Resolution
was “a measure exactly suited to the times.”
Border States, that not one of those Slave States had wisdom enough
to take the liberal offer thus made by the General Government, of
compensation. They afterward found their Slaves freed without
compensation.]
So, also, one month later, (April 11, 1862), when the Senate Bill
proposing Emancipation in the District of Columbia, was before the
House, the same spokesman and leader of the loyal Border-State men
opposed it strenuously as not being suited to the times. For, he
persuasively protested: “I do not say that you have not the power; but
would not that power be, at such a time as this, most unwisely and
indiscreetly exercised. That is the point. Of all the times when an
attempt was ever made to carry this measure, is not this the most
inauspicious? Is it not a time when the measure is most likely to
produce danger and mischief to the Country at large? So it seems to
me.”
It was not now, nor would it ever be, the time, to pass this, or any
other measure, touching the Institution of Slavery, likely to benefit
that Union to which these men professed such love and loyalty.
Their opposition, however, to the march of events, was of little avail–
even when backed, as was almost invariably the case, by the other
Democratic votes from the Free States. The opposition was obstructive,
but not effectual. For this reason it was perhaps the more irritating
to the Republicans, who were anxious to put Slavery where their great
leader, Mr. Lincoln, had long before said it should be placed–“in
course of ultimate extinction.”
This very irritation, however, only served to press such Anti-Slavery
Measures more rapidly forward. By the 19th of June, 1862, a Bill “to
secure Freedom to all persons within the Territories of the United
States”–after a more strenuous fight against it than ever, on the part
of Loyal and Copperhead Democrats, both from the Border and Free
States,–had passed Congress, and been approved by President Lincoln.
It provided, in just so many words, “That, from and after the passage of
this Act, there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude in
any of the Territories of the United States now existing, or which may
at any time hereafter be formed or acquired by the United States,
otherwise than in punishment of crime, whereof the party shall have been
duly convicted.”
Here, then, at last, was the great end and aim, with which Mr. Lincoln
and the Republican Party started out, accomplished. To repeat his
phrase, Slavery was certainly now in course of ultimate extinction.
But since that doctrine had been first enunciated by Mr. Lincoln, events
had changed the aspect of things. War had broken out, and the Slaves of
those engaged in armed Rebellion against the authority of the United
States Government, had been actually employed, as we have seen, on Rebel
works and fortifications whose guns were trailed upon the Armies of the
Union.
And now, the question of Slavery had ceased to be simply whether it
should be put in course of ultimate extinction, but whether, as a War
Measure–as a means of weakening the Enemy and strengthening the Union–
the time had not already come to extinguish it, so far, at least, as the
Slaves of those participating in the Rebellion, were concerned.
Congress, as has been heretofore noted, had already long and heatedly
debated various propositions referring to Slavery and African
Colonization, and had enacted such of them as, in its wisdom, were
considered necessary; and was now entering a further stormy period of
contention upon various other projects touching the Abolition of the
Fugitive Slave Laws, the Confiscation of Rebel Property, and the
Emancipation of Slaves–all of which, of course, had been, and would be,
vehemently assailed by the loyal Border-States men and their Free-State
Democratic allies.
This contention proceeded largely upon the lines of construction of that
clause in the Constitution of the United States and its Amendments,
which provides that no person shall be deprived of Life, Liberty, or
Property, without due process of Law, etc. The one side holding that,
since the beginning of our Government, Slaves had been, under this
clause, Unconstitutionally deprived of their Liberty; the other side
holding that Slaves being “property,” it would be Unconstitutional under
the same clause, to deprive the Slave-owner of his Slave property.
Mr. Crittenden, the leader of the loyal Border-States men in Congress,
was at this time especially eloquent on this latter view of the
Constitution. In his speech of April 23, 1862, in the House of
Representatives, he even undertook to defend American Slavery under the
shield of English Liberty!
Said he: “It is necessary for the prosperity of any Government, for
peace and harmony, that every man who acquires property shall feel that
he shall be protected in the enjoyment of it, and in his right to hold
it. It elevates the man; it gives him a feeling of dignity. It is the
great old English doctrine of Liberty. Said Lord Mansfield, the rain
may beat against the cabin of an Englishman, the snow may penetrate it,
but the King dare not enter it without the consent of its owner. That
is the true English spirit. It is the source of England’s power.”
And again: “The idea of property is deeply seated in our minds. By the
English Law and by the American Law you have the right to take the life
of any man who attempts, by violence, to take your property from you.
So far does the Spirit of these Laws go. Let us not break down this
idea of property. It is the animating spirit of the Country. Indeed it
is the Spirit of Liberty and Freedom.”
There was at this time, a growing belief in the minds of these loyal
Border-States men, that this question of Slavery-abolition was reaching
a crisis. They saw “the handwriting on the wall,” but left no stone
unturned to prevent, or at least to avert for a time, the coming
catastrophe. They egged Congress, in the language of the distinguished
Kentuckian, to “Let these unnecessary measures alone, for the present;”
and, as to the President, they now, not only volunteered in his defense,
against the attacks of others, but strove also to capture him by their
arch flatteries.
“Sir,”–said Mr. Crittenden, in one of his most eloquent bursts, in the
House of Representatives,–“it is not my duty, perhaps, to defend the
President of the United States. * * * I voted against Mr. Lincoln, and
opposed him honestly and sincerely; but Mr. Lincoln has won me to his
side. There is a niche in the Temple of Fame, a niche near to
Washington, which should be occupied by the statue of him who shall,
save this Country. Mr. Lincoln has a mighty destiny. It is for him, if
he will, to step into that niche. It is for him to be but President of
the People of the United States, and there will his statue be. But, if
he choose to be, in these times, a mere sectarian and a party man, that
niche will be reserved for some future and better Patriot. It is in his
power to occupy a place next Washington,–the Founder, and the
Preserver, side by side. Sir, Mr. Lincoln is no coward. His not doing
what the Constitution forbade him to do, is no proof of his cowardice.”
On the other hand, Owen Lovejoy, the fiery Abolitionist, the very next
day after the above remarks of Mr. Crittenden were delivered in the
House, made a great speech in reply, taking the position that “either
Slavery, or the Republic, must perish; and the question for us to decide
is, which shall it be?”
He declared to the House: “You cannot put down the rebellion and restore
the Union, without destroying Slavery.” He quoted the sublime language
of Curran touching the Spirit of the British Law, which consecrates the
soil of Britain to the genius of Universal Emancipation,
“I speak in the Spirit of the British law, which makes Liberty
commensurate with, and inseparable from, the British soil; which
proclaims even to the stranger and the sojourner the moment he sets
his foot upon British earth, that the ground on which he treads is
holy, and consecrated by the genius Of UNIVERSAL EMANCIPATION.
“No matter in what language his doom may have been pronounced; no
matter what complexion incompatible with Freedom, an Indian or an
African sun may have burnt upon him; no matter in what disastrous
battle his Liberty may have been cloven down; no matter with what
solemnities he may have been devoted upon the altar of Slavery; the
first moment he touches the sacred soil of Britain, the altar and
the god sink together in the dust; his Soul walks abroad in her own
majesty; his Body swells beyond the measure of his chains, that
burst from around him, and he stands redeemed, regenerated, and
disenthralled by the irresistible genius of UNIVERSAL
EMANCIPATION.”]
And Cowper’s verse, wherein the poet says:
“Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs
Receive our air, that moment they are Free,”
–and, after expressing his solicitude to have this true of America, as
it already was true of the District of Columbia, he proceeded to say:
“The gentleman from Kentucky says he has a niche for Abraham Lincoln.
Where is it? He pointed upward! But, Sir, should the President follow
the counsels of that gentleman, and become the defender and perpetuator
of human Slavery, he should point downward to some dungeon in the Temple
of Moloch, who feeds on human blood and is surrounded with fires, where
are forged manacles and chains for human limbs–in the crypts and
recesses of whose Temple, woman is scourged, and man tortured, and
outside whose walls are lying dogs, gorged with human flesh, as Byron
describes them stretched around Stamboul. That is a suitable place for
the statue of one who would defend and perpetuate human Slavery.”
And then–after saying that “the friends of American Slavery need not
beslime the President with their praise. He is an Anti-Slavery man. He
hates human Bondage “–the orator added these glowing words:
“I, too, have a niche for Abraham Lincoln; but it is in Freedom’s Holy
Fane, and not in the blood-besmeared Temple of human Bondage; not
surrounded by Slaves, fetters and chains, but with the symbols of
Freedom; not dark with Bondage, but radiant with the light of Liberty.
In that niche he shall stand proudly, nobly, gloriously, with shattered
fetters and broken chains and slave-whips beneath his feet. If Abraham
Lincoln pursues the path, evidently pointed out for him in the
providence of God, as I believe he will, then he will occupy the proud
position I have indicated. That is a fame worth living for; ay, more,
that is a fame worth dying for, though that death led through the blood
of Gethsemane and the agony of the Accursed Tree. That is a fame which
has glory and honor and immortality and Eternal Life. Let Abraham
Lincoln make himself, as I trust he will, the Emancipator, the
Liberator, as he has the opportunity of doing, and his name shall not
only be enrolled in this Earthly Temple, but it will be traced on the
living stones of that Temple which rears itself amid the Thrones and
Hierarchies of Heaven, whose top-stone is to be brought in with shouting
of ‘Grace, grace unto it!'”
We have seen how the loyal Border-State men, through their chosen
Representative–finding that their steady and unfaltering opposition to
all Mr. Lincoln’s propositions, while quite ineffectual, did not serve
by any means to increase his respect for their peculiar kind of loyalty
–offered him posthumous honors and worship if he would but do as they
desired. Had they possessed the power, no doubt they would have taken
him up into an exceeding high mountain and have offered to him all the
Kingdoms of the Earth to do their bidding. But their temptations were
of no avail.
President Lincoln’s duty, and inclination alike–no less than the
earnest importunities of the Abolitionists–carried him in the opposite
direction; but carried him no farther than he thought it safe, and wise,
to go. For, in whatever he might do on this burning question of
Emancipation, he was determined to secure that adequate support from the
People without which even Presidential Proclamations are waste paper.
But now, May 9, 1862, was suddenly issued by General Hunter, commanding
the “Department of the South,” comprising Georgia, Florida and South
Carolina, his celebrated Order announcing Martial Law, in those States,
as a Military Necessity, and–as “Slavery and Martial Law in a Free
Country are altogether incompatible”–declaring all Slaves therein,
“forever Free.”
This second edition, as it were, of Fremont’s performance, at once threw
the loyal Border-State men into a terrible ferment. Again, they, and
their Copperhead and other Democratic friends of the North, meanly
professed belief that this was but a part of Mr. Lincoln’s programme,
and that his apparent backwardness was the cloak to hide his Anti-
Slavery aggressiveness and insincerity.
How hurtful the insinuations, and even direct charges, of the day, made
by these men against President Lincoln, must have been to his honest,
sincere, and sensitive nature, can scarcely be conceived by those who
did not know him; while, on the other hand, the reckless impatience of
some of his friends for “immediate and universal Emancipation,” and
their complaints at his slow progress toward that goal of their hopes,
must have been equally trying.
True to himself, however, and to the wise conservative course which he
had marked out, and, thus far, followed, President Lincoln hastened to
disavow Hunter’s action in the premises, by a Proclamation, heretofore
given, declaring that no person had been authorized by the United States
Government to declare the Slaves of any State, Free; that Hunter’s
action in this respect was void; that, as Commander-in-chief he reserved
solely to himself, the questions, first, as to whether he had the power
to declare the Slaves of any State or States, Free, and, second, whether
the time and necessity for the exercise of such supposed power had
arrived. And then, as we may remember, he proceeded to cite the
adoption, by overwhelming majorities in Congress, of the Joint
Resolution offering pecuniary aid from the National Government to “any
State which may adopt a gradual abolishment of Slavery;” and to make a
most earnest appeal, for support, to the Border-States and to their
people, as being “the most interested in the subject matter.”
In his Special Message to Congress,–[Of March 6, 1862.]–recommending
the passage of that Joint Resolution, he had plainly and emphatically
declared himself against sudden Emancipation of Slaves. He had therein
distinctly said: “In my judgment, gradual, and not immediate,
Emancipation, is better for all.” And now, in this second appeal of his
to the Border-States men, to patriotically close with the proposal
embraced in that. Resolution, he said: “The changes it contemplates
would come gently as the dews of Heaven, not rending or wrecking
anything. Will you not embrace it? So much good has not been done, by
one effort, in all past time, as, in the providence of God, it is now
your high privilege to do! May the vast future not have to lament that
you have neglected it!”
the President’s friends, the confidence he inspired in others
nearer in his counsels, and how entirely, at this time, his mind
was absorbed in his project for gradual and compensated
Emancipation.]
“SENATE CHAMBER, June 5, 1862.
“MY DEAR SIR.–Your criticism of the President is hasty. I am
confident that, if you knew him as I do, you would not make it. Of
course the President cannot be held responsible for the
misfeasances of subordinates, unless adopted or at least tolerated
by him. And I am sure that nothing unjust or ungenerous will be
tolerated, much less adopted, by him.
“I am happy to let you know that he has no sympathy with Stanly in
his absurd wickedness, closing the schools, nor again in his other
act of turning our camp into a hunting ground for Slaves. He
repudiates both–positively. The latter point has occupied much of
his thought; and the newspapers have not gone too far in recording
his repeated declarations, which I have often heard from his own
lips, that Slaves finding their way into the National lines are
never to be Re-enslaved–This is his conviction, expressed without
reserve.
“Could you have seen the President–as it was my privilege often–
while he was considering the great questions on which he has
already acted–the invitation to Emancipation in the States,
Emancipation in the District of Columbia, and the acknowledgment of
the Independence of Hayti and Liberia–even your zeal would have
been satisfied, for you would have felt the sincerity of his
purpose to do what he could to carry forward the principles of the
Declaration of Independence.
“His whole soul was occupied, especially by the first proposition,
which was peculiarly his own. In familiar intercourse with him, I
remember nothing more touching than the earnestness and
completeness with which he embraced this idea. To his mind, it was
just and beneficent, while it promised the sure end of Slavery. Of
course, to me, who had already proposed a bridge of gold for the
retreating fiend, it was most welcome. Proceeding from the
President, it must take its place among the great events of
history.
“If you are disposed to be impatient at any seeming
shortcomings, think, I pray you, of what has been done in a brief
period, and from the past discern the sure promise of the future.
Knowing something of my convictions and of the ardor with which I
maintain them, you may, perhaps, derive some assurance from my
confidence; I may say to you, therefore, stand by the
Administration. If need be, help it by word and act, but stand by
it and have faith in it.
“I wish that you really knew the President, and had heard the
artless expression of his convictions on those questions which
concern you so deeply. You might, perhaps, wish that he were less
cautious, but you would be grateful that he is so true to all that
you have at heart. Believe me, therefore, you are wrong, and I
regret it the more because of my desire to see all our friends
stand firmly together.
“If I write strongly it is because I feel strongly; for my constant
and intimate intercourse with the President, beginning with the 4th
of March, not only binds me peculiarly to his Administration, but
gives me a personal as well as a political interest in seeing that
justice is done him.
“Believe me, my dear Sir, with much regard, ever faithfully yours,
“CHARLES SUMNER.”
But stones are not more deaf to entreaty than were the ears of the loyal
Border-State men and their allies to President Lincoln’s renewed appeal.
“Ephraim” was “wedded to his idols.”
McClellan too–immediately after his retreat from the Chickahominy to
the James River–seized the opportunity afforded by the disasters to our
arms, for which he was responsible, to write to President Lincoln a
letter (dated July 7, 1862) in which he admonished him that owing to the
“critical” condition of the Army of the Potomac, and the danger of its
being “overwhelmed” by the Enemy in front, the President must now
substantially assume and exercise the powers of a Dictator, or all would
be lost; that “neither Confiscation of property * * * nor forcible
Abolition of Slavery, should be contemplated for a moment;” and that “A
declaration of Radical views, especially upon Slavery, will rapidly
disintegrate our present Armies.”
Harried, and worried, on all sides,–threatened even by the Commander of
the Army of the Potomac,–it is not surprising, in view of the
apparently irreconcilable attitude of the loyal Border-State men to
gradual and compensated Emancipation, that the tension of President
Lincoln’s mind began to feel a measure of relief in contemplating
Military Emancipation in the teeth of all such threats.
He had long since made up his mind that the existence of Slavery was not
compatible with the preservation of the Union. The only question now
was, how to get rid of it? If the worst should come to the worst–
despite McClellan’s threat–he would have to risk everything on the turn
of the die–would have to “play his last card;” and that “last card” was
Military Emancipation. Yet still he disliked to play it. The time and
necessity for it had not yet arrived–although he thought he saw them
coming.
Hon. George S. Boutwell tells of an interview in “July or early
in August” of 1862, with President Lincoln, at which the latter
read two letters: one from a Louisiana man “who claimed to be a
Union man,” but sought to impress the President with “the dangers
and evils of Emancipation;” the other, Mr. Lincoln’s reply to him,
in which, says Mr. B., “he used this expression: ‘you must not
expect me to give up this Government without playing my last card.’
Emancipation was his last card.”]
Things were certainly, at this time, sufficiently unpromising to chill
the sturdiest Patriot’s heart. It is true, we had scored some important
victories in the West; but in the East, our arms seemed fated to
disaster after disaster. Belmont, Fort Henry, Fort Donelson, and
Pittsburg Landing, were names whose mention made the blood of Patriots
to surge in their veins; and Corinth, too, had fallen. But in the East,
McClellan’s profitless campaign against Richmond, and especially his
disastrous “change of base” by a “masterly” seven days’ retreat,
involving as many bloody battles, had greatly dispirited all Union men,
and encouraged the Rebels and Rebel-sympathizers to renewed hopes and
efforts.
And, as reverses came to the Union Arms, so seemed to grow
proportionately the efforts, on all sides, to force forward, or to stave
off, as the case might be, the great question of the liberation and
arming of the Slaves, as a War Measure, under the War powers of the
Constitution. It was about this time (July 12, 1862) that President
Lincoln determined to make a third, and last, attempt to avert the
necessity for thus emancipating and arming the Slaves. He invited all
the Senators and Representatives in Congress from the Border-States, to
an interview at the White House, and made to them the appeal, heretofore
in these pages given at length.
It was an earnest, eloquent, wise, kindly, patriotic, fatherly appeal in
behalf of his old proposition, for a gradual, compensated Emancipation,
by the Slave States, aided by the resources of the National Government.
At the very time of making it, he probably had, in his drawer, the rough
draft of the Proclamation which was soon to give Liberty to all the
Colored millions of the Land.
(Feb. 22, 1864), to Wm. Lloyd Garrison, in which the following
passage occurs:
“Recurring to the President, there are a great many reports
concerning him which seem to be reliable and authentic, which,
after all, are not so. It was currently reported among the Anti-
Slavery men of Illinois that the Emancipation Proclamation was
extorted from him by the outward pressure, and particularly by the
Delegation from the Christian Convention that met at Chicago.
“Now, the fact is this, as I had it from his own lips: He had
written the Proclamation in the Summer, as early as June, I think–
but will not be certain as to the precise time–and called his
Cabinet together, and informed them he had written it and meant to
make it, but wanted to read it to them for any criticism or remarks
as to its features or details.
“After having done so, Mr. Seward suggested whether it would not be
well for him to withhold its publication until after we had gained
some substantial advantage in the Field, as at that time we had met
with many reverses, and it might be considered a cry of despair.
He told me he thought the suggestion a wise one, and so held on to
the Proclamation until after the Battle of Antietam.]
Be that as it may, however, sufficient evidences exist, to prove that he
must have been fully aware, at the time of making that appeal to the
supposed patriotism of these Border-State men, how much, how very much,
depended on the manner of their reception of it.
To him, that meeting was a very solemn and portentous one. He had
studied the question long and deeply–not from the standpoint of his own
mere individual feelings and judgment, but from that of fair
Constitutional construction, as interpreted by the light of Natural or
General Law and right reason. What he sought to impress upon them was,
that an immediate decision by the Border-States to adopt, and in due
time carry out, with the financial help of the General Government, a
policy of gradual Emancipation, would simultaneously solve the two
intimately-blended problems of Slavery-destruction and Union-
preservation, in the best possible manner for the pockets and feelings
of the Border-State Slave-holder, and for the other interests of both
Border-State Slave-holder and Slave.
His great anxiety was to “perpetuate,” as well as to save, to the People
of the World, the imperiled form of Popular Government, and assure to it
a happy and a grand future.
He begged these Congressmen from the Border-States, to help him carry
out this, his beneficent plan, in the way that was best for all, and
thus at the same time utterly deprive the Rebel Confederacy of that
hope, which still possessed them, of ultimately gathering these States
into their rebellious fold. And he very plainly, at the same time,
confessed that he desired this relief from the Abolition pressure upon
him, which had been growing more intense ever since he had repudiated
the Hunter proclamation.
But the President’s earnest appeal to these loyal Representatives in
Congress from the Border-States, was, as we have seen, in vain. It
might as well have been made to actual Rebels, for all the good it did.
For, a few days afterward, they sent to him a reply signed by more than
two-thirds of those present, hitherto given at length in these pages, in
which-after loftily sneering at the proposition as “an interference by
this Government with a question which peculiarly and exclusively
belonged to” their “respective States, on which they had not sought
advice or solicited aid,” throwing doubts upon the Constitutional power
of the General Government to give the financial aid, and undertaking by
statistics to prove that it would absolutely bankrupt the Government to
give such aid,–they insultingly declared, in substance, that they could
not “trust anything to the contingencies of future legislation,” and
that Congress must “provide sufficient funds” and place those funds in
the President’s hands for the purpose, before the Border-States and
their people would condescend even to “take this proposition into
careful consideration, for such decision as in their judgment is
demanded by their interest, their honor, and their duty to the whole
Country.”
Very different in tone, to be sure, was the minority reply, which, after
stating that “the leaders of the Southern Rebellion have offered to
abolish Slavery among them as a condition to Foreign Intervention in
favor of their Independence as a Nation,” concluded with the terse and
loyal deduction: “If they can give up Slavery to destroy the Union, we
can surely ask our people to consider the question of Emancipation to
save the Union.”
But those who signed this latter reply were few, among the many.
Practically, the Border-State men were a unit against Mr. Lincoln’s
proposition, and against its fair consideration by their people. He
asked for meat, and they gave him a stone.
Only a few days before this interview, President Lincoln–alarmed by the
report of McClellan, that the magnificent Army of the Potomac under his
command, which, only three months before, had boasted 161,000 men, had
dwindled down to not more than “50,000 men left with their colors”–had
been to the front, at Harrison’s Landing, on the James river, and,
although he had not found things quite so disheartening as he had been
led to believe, yet they were bad enough, for only 86,000 men were found
by him on duty, while 75,000 were unaccounted for–of which number
34,4172 were afterward reported as “absent by authority.”
This condition of affairs, in connection with the fact that McClellan
was always calling for more troops, undoubtedly had its influence in
bringing Mr. Lincoln’s mind to the conviction, hitherto mentioned, of
the fast-approaching Military necessity for Freeing and Arming the
Slaves.
It was to ward this off, if possible, that he had met and appealed to
the Border-State Representatives. They had answered him with sneers and
insults; and nothing was left him but the extreme course of almost
immediate Emancipation.
Long and anxiously he had thought over the matter, but the time for
action was at hand.
And now, it cannot be better told, than in President Lincoln’s own
words, as given to the portrait-painter Carpenter, and recorded in the
latter’s, “Six months in the White House,” what followed:
“It had got to be,” said he, “midsummer, 1862. Things had gone on from
bad to worse, until I felt that we had reached the end of our rope on
the plan of operations we had been pursuing; that we had about played
our last card, and must change our tactics, or lose the game!
“I now determined upon the adoption of the Emancipation Policy; and,
without consultation with, or the knowledge of, the Cabinet, I prepared
the original draft of the Proclamation, and, after much anxious thought,
called a Cabinet meeting upon the subject. This was the last of July,
or the first part of the month of August, 1862.” (The exact date he did
not remember.)
“This Cabinet meeting took place, I think, upon a Saturday. All were
present, excepting Mr. Blair, the Postmaster-General, who was absent at
the opening of the discussion, but came in subsequently. I said to the
Cabinet, that I had resolved upon this step, and had not called them
together to ask their advice, but to lay the subject-matter of a
Proclamation before them; suggestions as to which would be in order,
after they had heard it read.
“Mr. Lovejoy was in error” when he stated “that it excited no comment,
excepting on the part of Secretary Seward. Various suggestions were
offered. Secretary Chase wished the language stronger, in reference to
the arming of the Blacks. Mr. Blair, after he came in, deprecated the
policy, on the ground that it would cost the Administration the fall
elections.
“Nothing, however, was offered, that I had not already
fully anticipated and settled in my own mind, until Secretary Seward
spoke. He said in substance: ‘Mr. President, I approve of the
Proclamation, but I question the expediency of its issue at this
juncture. The depression of the public mind, consequent upon our
repeated reverses, is so great that I fear the effect of so important a
step. It may be viewed as the last Measure of an exhausted Government,
a cry for help, the Government stretching forth its hands to Ethiopia,
instead of Ethiopia stretching forth her hands to the Government.’
“His idea,” said the President “was that it would be considered our last
shriek, on the retreat.” (This was his precise expression.) “‘ Now,’
continued Mr. Seward, ‘while I approve the Measure, I suggest, Sir, that
you postpone its issue, until you can give it to the Country supported
by Military success, instead of issuing it, as would be the case now,
upon the greatest disasters of the War!'”
Mr. Lincoln continued: “The wisdom of the view of the Secretary of
State, struck me with very great force. It was an aspect of the case
that, in all my thought upon the subject, I had entirely overlooked.
The result was that I put the draft of the Proclamation aside, as you do
your sketch for a picture, waiting for a victory.”
It may not be amiss to interrupt the President’s narration to Mr.
Carpenter, at this point, with a few words touching “the Military
Situation.”
After McClellan’s inexplicable retreat from before the Rebel Capital–
when, having gained a great victory at Malvern Hills, Richmond would
undoubtedly have been ours, had he but followed it up, instead of
ordering his victorious troops to retreat like “a whipped Army”–[See
General Hooker’s testimony before the Committee on the Conduct of the
War.]–his recommendation, in the extraordinary letter (of July 7th) to
the President, for the creation of the office of General-in-Chief, was
adopted, and Halleck, then at Corinth, was ordered East, to fill it.
Pope had previously been called from the West, to take
command of the troops covering Washington, comprising some 40,000 men,
known as the Army of Virginia; and, finding cordial cooperation with
McClellan impossible, had made a similar suggestion.
Soon after Halleck’s arrival, that General ordered the transfer of the
Army of the Potomac, from Harrison’s Landing to Acquia creek–on the
Potomac–with a view to a new advance upon Richmond, from the
Rappahannock river.
While this was being slowly accomplished, Lee, relieved from fears for
Richmond, decided to advance upon Washington, and speedily commenced the
movement.
On the 8th of August, 1862, Stonewall Jackson, leading the Rebel
advance, had crossed the Rapidan; on the 9th the bloody Battle of Cedar
Mountain had been fought with part of Pope’s Army; and on the 11th,
Jackson had retreated across the Rapidan again.
Subsequently, Pope having retired across the Rappahannock, Lee’s Forces,
by flanking Pope’s Army, again resumed their Northern advance. August
28th and 29th witnessed the bloody Battles of Groveton and Gainesville,
Virginia; the 30th saw the defeat of Pope, by Lee, at the second great
Battle of Bull Run, and the falling back of Pope’s Army toward
Washington; and the succeeding Battle of Chantilly took place September
1, 1862.
It is not necessary at this time to even touch upon the causes and
agencies which brought such misfortune to the Union Arms, under Pope.
It is sufficient to say here, that the disaster of the second Bull Run
was a dreadful blow to the Union Cause, and correspondingly elated the
Rebels.
Jefferson Davis, in transmitting to the Rebel Congress at Richmond,
Lee’s victorious announcements, said, in his message: “From these
dispatches it will be seen that God has again extended His shield over
our patriotic Army, and has blessed the cause of the Confederacy with a
second signal victory, on the field already memorable by the gallant
achievement of our troops.”
Flushed with victory, but wisely avoiding the fortifications of the
National Capital, Lee’s Forces now swept past Washington; crossed the
Potomac, near Point of Rocks, at its rear; and menaced both the National
Capital and Baltimore.
Yielding to the apparent necessity of the moment, the President again
placed. McClellan in command of the Armies about Washington, to wit:
the Army of the Potomac; Burnside’s troops that had come up from North
Carolina; what remained of Pope’s Army of Virginia; and the large
reinforcements from fresh levies, constantly and rapidly pouring in.
incident, touching Lincoln, McClellan, and the fortifications
around Washington, afterward told by General J. G. Barnard, then
Chief of Engineers on the staff of General George B. McClellan.–
See New York Tribune, October 21, 1885. It seems that the
fortifications having been completed, McClellan invited Mr. Lincoln
and his Cabinet to inspect them. “On the day appointed,” said
Barnard, “the Inspection commenced at Arlington, to the Southwest
of Washington, and in front of the Enemy. We followed the line of
the works southerly, and recrossed the Potomac to the easterly side
of the river, and continued along the line easterly of Washington
and into the heaviest of all the fortifications on the northerly
side of Washington. When we reached this point the President asked
General McClellan to explain the necessity of so strong a
fortification between Washington and the North.
“General McClellan replied: ‘Why, Mr. President, according to
Military Science it is our duty to guard against every possible or
supposable contingency that may arise. For example, if under any
circumstances, however fortuitous, the Enemy, by any chance or
freak, should, in a last resort, get in behind Washington, in his
efforts to capture the city, why, there the fort is to defend it.’
“‘Yes, that’s so General,’ said the President; ‘the precaution is
doubtless a wise one, and I’m glad to get so clear an explanation,
for it reminds me of an interesting question once discussed for
several weeks in our Lyceum, or Moot Court, at Springfield, Ill.,
soon after I began reading law.’
“‘Ah!’ says General McClellan. ‘What question was that, Mr.
President?’
“‘The question,’ Mr. Lincoln replied, ‘was, “Why does man have
breasts?”‘ and he added that after many evenings’ debate, the
question was submitted to the presiding Judge, who wisely decided
‘That if under any circumstances, however fortuitous, or by any
chance or freak, no matter of what nature or by what cause, a man
should have a baby, there would be the breasts to nurse it.'”]
Yet, it was not until the 17th of September that the Battle of Antietam
was fought, and Lee defeated–and then only to be allowed to slip back,
across the Potomac, on the 18th–McClellan leisurely following him,
across that river, on the 2nd of November!
Lincoln said of him: “With all his failings as a soldier, McClellan
is a pleasant and scholarly gentleman. He is an admirable
Engineer, but” he added, “he seems to have a special talent for a
stationary Engine.”]
On the 5th, McClellan was relieved,–Burnside taking the command,–and
Union men breathed more freely again.
But to return to the subject of Emancipation. President Lincoln’s own
words have already been given–in conversation with Carpenter–down to
the reading of the Proclamation to his Cabinet, and Seward’s suggestion
to “wait for a victory” before issuing it, and how, adopting that
advice, he laid the Proclamation aside, waiting for a victory.
“From time to time,” said Mr. Lincoln, continuing his narration, “I
added or changed a line, touching it up here and there, anxiously
waiting the progress of events. Well, the next news we had was of
Pope’s disaster at Bull Run. Things looked darker than ever. Finally,
came the week of the Battle of Antietam. I determined to wait no
longer.
“The news came, I think, on Wednesday, that the advantage was on our
side. I was then staying at the Soldiers’ Home (three miles out of
Washington.) Here I finished writing the second draft of the
preliminary Proclamation; came up on Saturday; called the Cabinet
together to hear it; and it was published the following Monday.”
It is not uninteresting to note, in this connection, upon the same
authority, that at the final meeting of the Cabinet prior to this issue
of the Proclamation, when the third paragraph was read, and the words of
the draft “will recognize the Freedom of such Persons,” were reached,
Mr. Seward suggested the insertion of the words “and maintain” after the
word “recognize;” and upon his insistance, the President said, “the
words finally went in.”
At last, then, had gone forth the Fiat–telegraphed and read throughout
the Land, on that memorable 22d of September, 1862–which, with the
supplemental Proclamation of January 1, 1863, was to bring joy and
Freedom to the millions of Black Bondsmen of the South.
Just one month before its issue, in answer to Horace Greeley’s Open
letter berating him for “the seeming subserviency” of his “policy to the
Slave-holding, Slave up-holding interest,” etc., President Lincoln had
written his famous “Union letter” in which he had conservatively said:
“My paramount object is to save the Union, and not either to save or
destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any Slave, I
would do it–and if I could save it by freeing all the Slaves, I would
do it–and if I could save it by freeing some, and leaving others alone,
I would also do that.”
No one outside of his Cabinet dreamed, at the time he made that answer,
that the Proclamation of Emancipation was already written, and simply
awaited a turn in the tide of battle for its issue!
Still less could it have been supposed, when, on the 13th of September–
only two days before Stonewall Jackson had invested, attacked, and
captured Harper’s Ferry with nearly 12,000 prisoners, 73 cannon, and
13,000 small arms, besides other spoils of War–Mr. Lincoln received the
deputation from the religious bodies of Chicago, bearing a Memorial for
the immediate issue of such a Proclamation.
The very language of his reply,–where he said to them: “It is my
earnest desire to know the will of Providence in this matter. And if I
can learn what it is, I will do it! These are not, however, the days of
miracles, and I suppose it will be granted that I am not to expect a
direct revelation. I must study the plain physical aspects of the case,
ascertain what is possible, and learn what appears to be wise and
right”–when taken in connection with the very strong argument with
which he followed it up, against the policy of Emancipation advocated in
the Memorial, and his intimation that a Proclamation of Emancipation
issued by him “must necessarily be inoperative, like the Pope’s Bull
against the Comet!”–would almost seem to have been adopted with the
very object of veiling his real purpose from the public eye, and leaving
the public mind in doubt. At all events, it had that effect.
Arnold, in his “Life of Lincoln,” says of this time, when General Lee
was marching Northward toward Pennsylvania, that “now, the President,
with that tinge of superstition which ran through his character, ‘made,’
as he said, ‘a solemn vow to God, that, if Lee was driven back, he would
issue the Proclamation;'” and, in the light of that statement, the
concluding words of Mr. Lincoln’s reply to the deputation aforesaid:–“I
can assure you that the subject is on my mind, by day and night, more
than any other. Whatever shall appear to be God’s will, I will do,”–
have a new meaning.
The Emancipation Proclamation, when issued, was a great surprise, but
was none the less generally well-received by the Union Armies, and
throughout the Loyal States of the Union, while, in some of them, its
reception was most enthusiastic.
It happened, too, as we have seen, that the Convention of the Governors
of the Loyal States met at Altoona, Penn., on the very day of its
promulgation, and in an address to the President adopted by these loyal
Governors, they publicly hailed it “with heartfelt gratitude and
encouraged hope,” and declared that “the decision of the President to
strike at the root of the Rebellion will lend new vigor to efforts, and
new life and hope to the hearts, of the People.”
On the other hand, the loyal Border-States men were dreadfully exercised
on the subject; and those of them in the House of Representatives
emphasized their disapproval by their votes, when, on the 11th and 15th
of the following December, Resolutions, respectively denouncing, and
endorsing, “the policy of Emancipation, as indicated in that
Proclamation,” of September 22, 1862, were offered and voted on.
In spite of the loyal Border-States men’s bitter opposition, however,
the Resolution endorsing that policy as a War Measure, and declaring the
Proclamation to be “an exercise of power with proper regard for the
rights of the States and the perpetuity of Free Government,” as we have
seen, passed the House.
Of course the Rebels themselves, against whom it was aimed, gnashed
their teeth in impotent rage over the Proclamation. But they lost no
time in declaring that it was only a proof of what they had always
announced: that the War was not for the preservation of the American
Union, but for the destruction of African Slavery, and the spoilation of
the Southern States.
Through their friends and emissaries, in the Border and other Loyal
States of the Union,–the “Knights of the Golden Circle,”–
Rebel organizations. It was “an auxiliary force to the Rebel
Army.” Its members took an obligation of the most binding
character, the violation of which was punishable by death, which
obligation, in the language of another, “pledged them to use every
possible means in their power to aid the Rebels to gain their
Independence; to aid and assist Rebel prisoners to escape; to vote
for no one for Office who was not opposed to the further
prosecution of the War; to encourage desertions from the Union
Army; to protect the Rebels in all things necessary to carry out
their designs, even to the burning and destroying of towns and
cities, if necessary to produce the desired result; to give such
information as they had, at all times, of the movements of our
Armies, and of the return of soldiers to their homes; and to try
and prevent their going back to their regiments at the front.”
In other words the duty of the Organization and of its members, was
to hamper, oppose, and prevent all things possible that were being
done at any time for the Union Cause, and to encourage, forward,
and help all things possible in behalf of the Rebel Cause.
It was to be a flanking force of the Enemy–a reverse fire–a fire
in the rear of the Union Army, by Northern men; a powerful
cooperating force–all the more powerful because secret–operating
safely because secretly and in silence–and breeding discontent,
envy, hatred, and other ill feelings wherever possible, in and out
of Army circles, from the highest to the lowest, at all possible
times, and on all possible occasions.]
–the “Order of American Knights” or “Sons of Liberty,” and other
Copperhead organizations, tainted with more or less of Treason–they
stirred up all the old dregs of Pro-Slavery feeling that could possibly
he reached; but while the venomous acts and utterances of such
organizations, and the increased and vindictive energy of the armed
Rebels themselves, had a tendency to disquiet the public mind with
apprehensions as to the result of the Proclamation, and whether, indeed,
Mr. Lincoln himself would be able to resist the pressure, and stand up
to his promise of that Supplemental Proclamation which would give
definiteness and practical effect to the preliminary one, the masses of
the people of the Loyal States had faith in him.
There was also another element, in chains, at the South, which at this
time must have been trembling with that mysterious hope of coming
Emancipation for their Race, conveyed so well in Whittier’s lines,
commencing: “We pray de Lord; he gib us signs, dat some day we be Free”
–a hope which had long animated them, as of something almost too good
for them to live to enjoy, but which, as the War progressed, appeared to
grow nearer and nearer, until now they seemed to see the promised Land,
flowing with milk and honey, its beautiful hills and vales smiling under
the quickening beams of Freedom’s glorious sun. But ah! should they
enter there?–or must they turn away again into the old wilderness of
their Slavery, and this blessed Liberty, almost within their grasp,
mockingly elude them?
They had not long to wait for an answer. The 1st of January, 1863,
arrived, and with it–as a precious New Year’s Gift–came the
Supplemental Proclamation, bearing the sacred boon of Liberty to the
Emancipated millions.
At last, at last, no American need blush to stand up and proclaim his
land indeed, and in truth, “the Land of Freedom.”
CHAPTER XXI.
THE ARMED-NEGRO.
Little over five months had passed, since the occurrence of the great
event in the history of the American Nation mentioned in the preceding
Chapter, before the Freed Negro, now bearing arms in defense of the
Union and of his own Freedom, demonstrated at the first attack on Port
Hudson the wisdom of emancipating and arming the Slave, as a War
measure. He seemed thoroughly to appreciate and enter into the spirit
of the words; “who would be Free, himself must strike the blow.”
At the attack (of May 27th, 1863), on Port Hudson, where it held the
right, the “Black Brigade” covered itself with glory.
At Baton Rouge, before starting for Port Hudson, the color-guard of
the First Louisiana Regiment–of the Black Brigade–received the
Regimental flags from their white colonel, (Col. Stafford,) then
under arrest, in a speech which ended with the injunction: “Color-
guard, protect, defend, die for, but do not surrender these flags;”
to which Sergeant Planciancois replied: “Colonel, I will bring
these colors to you in honor, or report to God the reason why!” He
fell, mortally wounded, in one of the many desperate charges at
Port Hudson, with his face to the Enemy, and the colors in his
hand.
Banks, in his Report, speaking of the Colored regiments, said: “Their
conduct was heroic. No troops could be more determined or more daring.
They made, during the day, three charges upon the batteries of the
Enemy, suffering very heavy losses, and holding their positions at
nightfall with the other troops on the right of our line. The highest
commendation is bestowed upon them by all the officers in command on the
right.”
The New York Times’ correspondent said:–“The deeds of heroism performed
by these Colored men were such as the proudest White men might emulate.
Their colors are torn to pieces by shot, and literally bespattered by
blood and brains. The color-sergeant of the 1st Louisiana, on being
mortally wounded (the top of his head taken off by a sixpounder), hugged
the colors to his breast, when a struggle ensued between the two color-
corporals on each side of him, as to who should have the honor of
bearing the sacred standard, and during this generous contention one was
seriously wounded.”
So again, on Sunday the 6th of June following, at Milliken’s Bend, where
an African brigade, with 160 men of the 23rd Iowa, although surprised in
camp by a largely superior force of the Enemy, repulsed him gallantly–
of which action General Grant, in his official Report, said: “In this
battle, most of the troops engaged were Africans, who had but little
experience in the use of fire-arms. Their conduct is said, however, to
have been most gallant.”
So, also, in the bloody assault of July 18th, on Fort Wagner, which was
led by the 54th Massachusetts (Colored) Regiment with intrepidity, and
where they planted, and for some time maintained, their Country’s flag
on the parapet, until they “melted away before the Enemy’s fire, their
bodies falling down the slope and into the ditch.”
And from that time on, through the War–at Wilson’s Wharf, in the many
bloody charges at Petersburg, at Deep Bottom, at Chapin’s Farm, Fair
Oaks, and numerous other battle-fields, in Virginia and elsewhere, right
down to Appomattox–the African soldier fought courageously, fully
vindicating the War-wisdom of Abraham Lincoln in emancipating and arming
the Race.
The promulgation of this New Year’s Proclamation of Freedom
unquestionably had a wonderful effect in various ways, upon the outcome
of the War.
It cleared away the cobwebs which the arguments of the loyal Border-
State men, and of the Northern Copperheads and other Disunion and Pro-
Slavery allies of the Rebels were forever weaving for the
discouragement, perplexity and ensnarement, of the thoroughly loyal out-
and-out Union men of the Land. It largely increased our strength in
fighting material. It brought to us the moral support of the World,
with the active sympathy of philanthropy’s various forces. And besides,
it correspondingly weakened the Rebels. Every man thus freed from his
Bondage, and mustered into the Union Armies, was not only a gain of one
man on the Union side, but a loss of one man to the Enemy. It is not,
therefore, surprising that the Disunion Conspirators–whether at the
South or at the North–were furious.
The Chief Conspirator, Jefferson Davis, had already, (December 23,
1862,) issued a proclamation of outlawry against General B. F. Butler,
for arming certain Slaves that had become Free upon entering his lines–
the two last clauses of which provided: “That all Negro Slaves captured
in arms, be at once delivered over to the Executive authorities of the
respective States to which they belong, to be dealt with according to
the laws of said States,” and “That the like orders be executed in all
cases with respect to all commissioned Officers of the United States,
when found serving in company with said Slaves in insurrection against
the authorities of the different States of this Confederacy.”
He now called the attention of the Rebel Congress to President Lincoln’s
two Proclamations of Emancipation, early in January of 1863; and that
Body responded by adopting, on the 1st of May of that year, a
Resolution, the character of which was so cold-bloodedly atrocious, that
modern Civilization might well wonder and Christianity shudder at its
purport.
“Resolved, by the Congress of the Confederate States of America, In
response to the Message of the President, transmitted to Congress
at the commencement of the present session, That, in the opinion of
Congress, the commissioned officers of the Enemy ought not to be
delivered to the authorities of the respective States, as suggested
in the said Message, but all captives taken by the Confederate
forces ought to be dealt with and disposed of by the Confederate
Government.
“SEC. 2.–That, in the judgment of Congress, the proclamations of
the President of the United States, dated respectively September
22, 1862, and January 1, 1863, and the other measures of the
Government of the United States and of its authorities, commanders,
and forces, designed or tending to emancipate slaves in the
Confederate States, or to abduct such slaves, or to incite them to
insurrection, or to employ negroes in war against the Confederate
States, or to overthrow the institution of African Slavery, and
bring on a servile war in these States, would, if successful,
produce atrocious consequences, and they are inconsistent with the
spirit of those usages which, in modern warfare, prevail among
civilized nations; they may, therefore, be properly and lawfully
repressed by retaliation.
“SEC. 3.–That in every case wherein, during the present war, any
violation of the laws or usages of war among civilized nations
shall be, or has been, done and perpetrated by those acting under
authority of the Government of the United States, on persons or
property of citizens of the Confederate States, or of those under
the protection or in the land or naval service of the Confederate
States, or of any State of the Confederacy, the President of the
Confederate States is hereby authorized to cause full and ample
retaliation to be made for every such violation, in such manner and
to such extent as he may think proper.
“SEC. 4.–That every white person, being a commissioned officer, or
acting as such, who, during the present war, shall command negroes
or mulattoes in arms against the Confederate States, or who shall
arm, train, organize, or prepare negroes or mulattoes for military
service against the Confederate States, or who shall voluntarily
aid negroes or mulattoes in any military enterprise, attack, or
conflict in such service, shall be deemed as inciting servile
insurrection, and shall, if captured, be put to death, or be
otherwise punished at the discretion of the Court.
“SEC. 5.–Every person, being a commissioned officer, or acting as
such in the service of the Enemy, who shall, during the present
war, excite, attempt to excite, or cause to be excited, a servile
insurrection, or who shall incite, or cause to be incited, a slave
to rebel, shall, if captured, be put to death, or be otherwise
punished at the discretion of the court.
“SEC. 6.–Every person charged with an offense punishable under the
preceding resolutions shall, during the present war, be tried
before the military court attached to the army or corps by the
troops of which he shall have been captured, or by such other
military court as the President may direct, and in such manner and
under such regulations as the President shall prescribe; and, after
conviction, the President may commute the punishment in such manner
and on such terms as he may deem proper.
“SEC. 7.–All negroes and mulattoes who shall be engaged in war, or
be taken in arms against the Confederate States, or shall give aid
or comfort to the enemies of the Confederate States, shall, when
captured in the Confederate States, be delivered to the authorities
of the State or States in which they shall be captured, to be dealt
with according to the present or future laws of such State or
States.”]
But atrocious as were the provisions of the Resolution, or Act
aforesaid, in that they threatened death or Slavery to every Black man
taken with Union arms in his hand, and death to every White commissioned
officer commanding Black soldiers, yet the manner in which they were
executed was still more barbarous.
At last it became necessary to adopt some measure by which captured
Colored Union soldiers might be protected equally with captured White
Union soldiers from the frequent Rebel violations of the Laws of War in
the cases of the former.
President Lincoln, therefore, issued an Executive Order prescribing
retaliatory measures.
“EXECUTIVE MANSION,
“WASHINGTON, July 30, 1863.
“It is the duty of every Government to give protection to its
citizens, of whatever class, color, or condition, and especially to
those who are duly organized as soldiers in the public service.
The Law of Nations, and the usages and customs of War, as carried
on by civilized Powers, permit no distinction as to color in the
treatment of prisoners of War, as public enemies.
“To sell or Enslave any captured person, on account of his Color,
and for no offense against the Laws of War, is a relapse into
barbarism, and a crime against the civilization of the age.
“The Government of the United States will give the same protection
to all its soldiers, and if the Enemy shall sell or Enslave any one
because of his color, the offense shall be punished by Retaliation
upon the Enemy’s prisoners in our possession.
“It is therefore Ordered, that, for every soldier of the United
States killed in violation of the Laws of War, a Rebel soldier
shall be executed; and for every one Enslaved by the Enemy or sold
into Slavery, a Rebel soldier shall be placed at hard work on the
public works, and continued at such labor until the other shall be
released and receive the treatment due to a prisoner of War.
“By order of the Secretary of War. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. E. D.
TOWNSEND, Assistant Adjutant-General.”]
It was hoped that the mere announcement of the decision of our
Government to retaliate, would put an instant stop to the barbarous
conduct of the Rebels toward the captured Colored Union troops, but the
hope was vain. The atrocities continued, and their climax was capped by
the cold-blooded massacres perpetrated by Forrest’s 5,000 Cavalry, after
capturing Fort Pillow, a short distance above Memphis, on the
Mississippi river.
The garrison of that Fort comprised less than 600 Union soldiers, about
one-half of whom were White, and the balance Black. These brave fellows
gallantly defended the Fort against eight times their number, from
before sunrise until the afternoon, when–having failed to win by fair
means, under the Laws of War,–the Enemy treacherously crept up the
ravines on either side of the Fort, under cover of flags of truce, and
then, with a sudden rush, carried it, butchering both Blacks and Whites
–who had thrown away their arms, and were striving to escape–until
night temporarily put an end to the sanguinary tragedy.
On the following morning the massacre was completed by the butchery and
torture of wounded remnants of these brave Union defenders–some being
buried alive, and others nailed to boards, and burned to death.
survivors before the Committee on Conduct and Expenditures of the
War. (H. R. Report, No. 65, 1st S. 38th Cong.)]
And all this murderous malignity, for what?–Simply, and only, because
one-half of the Patriot victims had Black skins, while the other half
had dared to fight by the side of the Blacks!
In the after-days of the War, the cry with which our Union Black
regiments went into battle:–“Remember Fort Pillow!”–inspired them to
deeds of valor, and struck with terror the hearts of the Enemy. On many
a bloody field, Fort Pillow was avenged.
It is a common error to suppose that the first arming of the Black man
was on the Union side. The first Black volunteer company was a Rebel
one, raised early in May, 1861, in the city of Memphis, Tenn.; and at
Charleston, S. C., Lynchburg, Va., and Norfolk, Va., large bodies of
Free Negroes volunteered, and were engaged, earlier than that, to do
work on the Rebel batteries.
On June 28th of the same year, the Rebel Legislature of Tennessee passed
an Act not only authorizing the Governor “to receive into the Military
service of the State all male Free persons of Color between the ages of
fifteen and fifty, or such number as may be necessary, who may be sound
in mind and body, and capable of actual service,” but also prescribing
“That in the event a sufficient number of Free persons of Color to meet
the wants of the State shall not tender their services, the Governor is
empowered, through the Sheriffs of the different counties, to press such
persons until the requisite number is obtained.”
At a review of Rebel troops, at New Orleans, November 23, 1861, “One
regiment comprised 1,400 Free Colored men.” Vast numbers of both Free
Negroes and Slaves were employed to construct Rebel fortifications
throughout the War, in all the Rebel States. And on the 17th of
February, 1864, the Rebel Congress passed an Act which provides in its
first section “That all male Free Negroes * * * resident in the
Confederate States, between the ages of eighteen and fifty years, shall
be held liable to perform such duties with the Army, or in connection
with the Military defenses of the Country, in the way of work upon the
fortifications, or in Government works for the production or preparation
of materials of War, or in Military hospitals, as the Secretary of War
or the Commanding General of the Trans-Mississippi Department may, from
time to time, prescribe:” while the third section provides that when the
Secretary of War shall “be unable to procure the service of Slaves in
any Military Department, then he is authorized to impress the services
of as many male Slaves, not to exceed twenty thousand, as may be
required, from time to time, to discharge the duties indicated in the
first section of the Act.”
And this Act of, the Rebel Congress was passed only forty days before
the fiendish massacre of the Union Whites and Blacks who together, at
Fort Pillow, were performing for the Union, “such duties with the Army,”
and “in connection with the Military defenses of the Country,” as had
been prescribed for them by their Commanding General!
Under any circumstances–and especially under this state of facts–
nothing could excuse or palliate that shocking and disgraceful and
barbarous crime against humanity; and the human mind is incapable of
understanding how such savagery can be accounted for, except upon the
theory that “He that nameth Rebellion nameth not a singular, or one only
sin, as is theft, robbery, murder, and such like; but he nameth the
whole puddle and sink of all sins against God and man; against his
country, his countrymen, his children, his kinsfolk, his friends, and
against all men universally; all sins against God and all men heaped
together, nameth he that nameth Rebellion.”
The inconsistency of the Rebels, in getting insanely and murderously
furious over the arming of Negroes for the defense of the imperiled
Union and the newly gained liberties of the Black Race, when they had
themselves already armed some of them and made them fight to uphold the
Slave-holders’ Rebellion and the continued Enslavement of their race, is
already plain enough.
Carolinian, for calling his attention to the “Singular coincidence,
that a South Carolinian should have proposed in 1778, what was
executed in 1863-64–the arming of Negroes for achieving their
Freedom”–as shown in the following very curious and interesting
letters written by the brave and gifted Colonel John Laurens, of
Washington’s staff, to his distinguished father:
HEAD QUARTERS, 14th Jan., 1778.
I barely hinted to you, my dearest father, my desire to augment the
Continental forces from an untried source. I wish I had any
foundation to ask for an extraordinary addition to those favours
which I have already received from you. I would solicit you to
cede me a number of your able bodied men slaves, instead of leaving
me a fortune.
I would bring about a two-fold good; first I would advance those
who are unjustly deprived of the rights of mankind to a state which
would be a proper gradation between abject slavery and perfect
liberty, and besides I would reinforce the defenders of liberty
with a number of gallant soldiers. Men, who have the habit of
subordination almost indelibly impressed on them, would have one
very essential qualification of soldiers. I am persuaded that if I
could obtain authority for the purpose, I would have a corps of
such men trained, uniformly clad, equip’d and ready in every
respect to act at the opening of the next campaign. The ridicule
that may be thrown on the color, I despise, because I am sure of
rendering essential service to my country.
I am tired of the languor with which so sacred a war as this is
carried on. My circumstances prevent me from writing so long a
letter as I expected and wish’d to have done on a subject which I
have much at heart. I entreat you to give a favorable answer to
Your most affectionate
JOHN LAURENS.
The Honble Henry Laurens Esq.
President of Congress.
HEAD QUARTERS, 2nd Feb., 1778.
My Dear Father:
The more I reflect upon the difficulties and delays which are
likely to attend the completing our Continental regiments, the more
anxiously is my mind bent upon the scheme, which I lately
communicated to you. The obstacles to the execution of it had
presented themselves to me, but by no means appeared
insurmountable. I was aware of having that monstrous popular
prejudice, open-mouthed against me, of undertaking to transform
beings almost irrational, into well disciplined soldiers, of being
obliged to combat the arguments, and perhaps the intrigues, of
interested persons. But zeal for the public service, and an ardent
desire to assert the rights of humanity, determined me to engage in
this arduous business, with the sanction of your consent. My own
perseverance, aided by the countenance of a few virtuous men, will,
I hope, enable me to accomplish it.
You seem to think, my dear father, that men reconciled by long
habit to the miseries of their condition, would prefer their
ignominious bonds to the untasted sweets of liberty, especially
when offer’d upon the terms which I propose.
I confess, indeed, that the minds of this unhappy species must be
debased by a servitude, from which they can hope for no relief but
death, and that every motive to action but fear, must be nearly
extinguished in them. But do you think they are so perfectly
moulded to their state as to be insensible that a better exists?
Will the galling comparison between themselves and their masters
leave them unenlightened in this respect? Can their self love be
so totally annihilated as not frequently to induce ardent wishes
for a change?
You will accuse me, perhaps, my dearest friend, of consulting my
own feelings too much; but I am tempted to believe that this
trampled people have so much human left in them, as to be capable
of aspiring to the rights of men by noble exertions, if some friend
to mankind would point the road, and give them a prospect of
success. If I am mistaken in this, I would avail myself, even of
their weakness, and, conquering one fear by another, produce equal
good to the public. You will ask in this view, how do you consult
the benefit of the slaves? I answer, that like other men, they are
creatures of habit. Their cowardly ideas will be gradually
effaced, and they will be modified anew. Their being rescued from
a state of perpetual humiliation, and being advanced as it were, in
the scale of being, will compensate the dangers incident to their
new state.
The hope that will spring in each man’s mind, respecting his own
escape, will prevent his being miserable. Those who fall in battle
will not lose much; those who survive will obtain their reward.
Habits of subordination, patience under fatigues, sufferings and
privations of every kind, are soldierly qualifications, which these
men possess in an eminent degree.
Upon the whole, my dearest friend and father, I hope that my plan
for serving my country and the oppressed negro race will not appear
to you the chimera of a young mind, deceived by a false appearance
of moral beauty, but a laudable sacrifice of private interest, to
justice and the public good.
You say, that my resources would be small, on account of the
proportion of women and children. I do not know whether I am
right, for I speak from impulse, and have not reasoned upon the
matter. I say, altho’ my plan is at once to give freedom to the
negroes, and gain soldiers to the states; in case of concurrence, I
should sacrifice the former interest, and therefore we change the
women and children for able-bodied men. The more of these I could
obtain, the better; but forty might be a good foundation to begin
upon.
It is a pity that some such plan as I propose could not be more
extensively executed by public authority. A well-chosen body of
5,000 black men, properly officer’d, to act as light troops, in
addition to our present establishment, might give us decisive
success in the next campaign.
I have long deplored the wretched state of these men, and
considered in their history, the bloody wars excited in Africa, to
furnish America with slaves–the groans of despairing multitudes,
toiling for the luxuries of merciless tyrants.
I have had the pleasure of conversing with you, sometimes, upon the
means of restoring them to their rights. When can it be better
done, than when their enfranchisement may be made conducive to the
public good, and be modified, as not to overpower their weak minds?
You ask, what is the general’s opinion, upon this subject? He is
convinced, that the numerous tribes of blacks in the southern parts
of the continent, offer a resource to us that should not be
neglected. With respect to my particular plan, he only objects to
it, with the arguments of pity for a man who would be less rich
than he might be.
I am obliged, my dearest friend and father, to take my leave for
the present; you will excuse whatever exceptionable may have
escaped in the course of my letter, and accept the assurance of
filial love, and respect of
Your
JOHN LAURENS]
If, however, it be objected that the arming of Negroes by the Rebels was
exceptional and local, and, that otherwise, the Rebels always used their
volunteer or impressed Negro forces in work upon fortifications and
other unarmed Military Works, and never proposed using them in the clash
of arms, as armed soldiers against armed White men, the contrary is
easily proven.
In a message to the Rebel Congress, November 7, 1864, Jefferson Davis
himself, while dissenting at that time from the policy, advanced by
many, of “a general levy and arming of the Slaves, for the duty of
soldiers,” none the less declared that “should the alternative ever be
presented of subjugation, or of the employment of the Slave as a
soldier, there seems no reason to doubt what should then be our
decision.”
In the meantime, however, he recommended the employment of forty
thousand Slaves as pioneer and engineer laborers, on the ground that
“even this limited number, by their preparatory training in intermediate
duties Would form a more valuable reserve force in case of urgency, than
threefold their number suddenly called from field labor; while a fresh
levy could, to a certain extent, supply their places in the special
service” of pioneer and engineer work; and he undertook to justify the
inconsistency between his present recommendation, and his past attitude,
by declaring that “A broad, moral distinction exists between the use of
Slaves as soldiers in defense of their homes, and the incitement of the
same persons to insurrection against their masters, for,” said he, “the
one is justifiable, if necessary; the other is iniquitous and unworthy
of a civilized people.”
So also, while a Bill for the arming of Slaves was pending before the
Rebel Congress early in 1865, General Robert E. Lee wrote, February
18th, from the Headquarters of the Rebel Armies, to Hon. E. Barksdale,
of the Rebel House of Representatives, a communication, in which, after
acknowledging the receipt of a letter from him of February 12th, “with
reference to the employment of Negroes as soldiers,” he said: “I think
the Measure not only expedient but necessary * * * in my opinion, the
Negroes, under proper circumstances, will make efficient soldiers. * *
* I think those who are employed, should be freed. It would be neither
just nor wise, in my opinion, to require them to remain as Slaves”–
thus, not only approving the employment of Black Slaves as soldiers, to
fight White Union men, but justifying their Emancipation as a reward for
Military service. And, a few days afterward, that Rebel Congress passed
a Bill authorizing Jefferson Davis to take into the Rebel Army as many
Negro Slaves “as he may deem expedient, for and during the War, to
perform Military service in whatever capacity he may direct,” and at the
same time authorizing General Lee to organize them as other “troops” are
organized.
611-612, passed both Houses, and was in these words:
A Bill to increase the Military Forces of the Confederate States.
“The Congress of the Confederate States of America do Enact, That
in order to provide additional forces to repel invasion, maintain
the rightful possession of the Confederate States, secure their
Independence and preserve their Institutions, the President be and
he is hereby authorized to ask for and accept from the owners of
Slaves the services of such number of able-bodied Negro men as he
may deem expedient for and during the War, to perform Military
service in whatever capacity he may direct.
“SEC. 2.–That the General-in-Chief be authorized to organize the
said Slaves into companies, battalions, regiments, and brigades,
under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of War may
prescribe, and to be commanded by such officers as the President
may appoint.
“SEC. 3.–That, while employed in the Service, the said troops
shall receive the same rations, clothing, and compensation as are
allowed to other troops in the same branch of the Service.
“SEC. 4.–That if, under the previous sections of this Act, the
President shall not be able to raise a sufficient number of troops
to prosecute the War successfully and maintain the Sovereignty of
the States, and the Independence of the Confederate States, then he
is hereby authorized to call on each State, whenever he thinks it
expedient, for her quota of 300,000 troops, in addition to those
subject to Military service, under existing laws, or so many
thereof as the President may deem necessary, to be raised from such
classes of the population, irrespective of color, in each State, as
the proper authorities thereof may determine: Provided, that not
more than 25 per cent. of the male Slaves, between the ages of 18
and 45, in any State, shall be called for under the provisions of
this Act.
“SEC. 5.–That nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize
a change in the relation of said Slaves.”]
CHAPTER XXII.
FREEDOM’S SUN STILL RISING.
After President Lincoln had issued his Proclamation of Emancipation, the
friends of Freedom clearly perceived–and none of them more clearly than
himselfthat until the incorporation of that great Act into the
Constitution of the United States itself, there could be no real
assurance of safety to the liberties of the emancipated; that unless
this were done there would be left, even after the suppression of the
Rebellion, a living spark of dissension which might at any time again be
fanned into the flames of Civil War.
Hence, at all proper times, Mr. Lincoln favored and even
urged Congressional action upon the subject. It was not, however, until
the following year that definite action may be said to have commenced in
Congress toward that end; and, as Congress was slow, he found it
necessary to say in his third Annual Message: “while I remain in my
present position I shall not attempt to retract or modify the
Emancipation Proclamation; nor shall I return to Slavery any person who
is Free by the terms of that Proclamation, or by any of the Acts of
Congress,”
Meantime, however, occurred the series of glorious
Union victories in the West, ending with the surrender to Grant’s
triumphant Forces on the 4th of July, 1863, of Vicksburg–“the Gibraltar
of the West”–with its Garrison, Army, and enormous quantities of arms
and munitions of war; thus closing a brilliant and successful Campaign
with a blow which literally “broke the back” of the Rebellion; while,
almost simultaneously, July 1-3, the Union Forces of the East, under
Meade, gained the great victory of Gettysburg, and, driving the hosts of
Lee from Pennsylvania, put a second and final end to Rebel invasion of
Northern soil; gaining it, on ground dedicated by President Lincoln,
before that year had closed–as a place of sepulture for the Patriot-
soldiers who there had fallenin a brief, touching and immortal Address,
which every American child should learn by heart, and every American
adult ponder deeply, as embodying the very essence of true
Republicanism.
Gettysburg, Pa., was dedicated Nov. 19, 1863, was in these
memorable words:
“Fourscore and seven years ago, our Fathers brought forth upon this
continent a new Nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the
proposition that all men are created equal.
“Now we are engaged in a great Civil War, testing whether that
Nation, or any Nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long
endure.
“We are met on a great battlefield of that War. We have come here
to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for
those who here gave their lives that that Nation might live.
“It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
“But in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate,
we can not hallow, this ground. The brave men, living and dead,
who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our power to add
or detract.
“The World will little note, nor long remember, what we say here;
but it can never forget what they did here.
“It is for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to the
unfinished work which they who fought here have, thus far, so nobly
advanced.
“It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task
remaining before us; that from these honored dead we take increased
devotion to that Cause for which they gave the last full measure of
devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not
have died in vain; that this Nation, under God, shall have a new
birth of Freedom; and that Government of the People, by the People,
and for the People, shall not perish front the Earth.”]
That season of victory for the Union arms, coming, as it did, upon a
season of depression and doubtfulness, was doubly grateful to the loyal
heart of the Nation. Daylight seemed to be breaking at last.
Gettysburg had hurled back the Southern invader from our soil; and
Vicksburg, with the immediately resulting surrender of Port Hudson, had
opened the Mississippi river from Cairo to the Gulf, and split the
Confederacy in twain.
But it happened just about this time that, the enrollment of the whole
Militia of the United States (under the Act of March, 1863), having been
completed, and a Draft for 300,000 men ordered to be made and executed,
if by a subsequent time the quotas of the various States should not be
filled by volunteering, certain malcontents and Copperheads, inspired by
agents and other friends of the Southern Conspirators, started and
fomented, in the city of New York, a spirit of unreasoning opposition
both to voluntary enlistment, and conscription under the Draft, that
finally culminated, July 13th, in a terrible Riot, lasting several days,
during which that great metropolis was in the hands, and completely at
the mercy, of a brutal mob of Secession sympathizers, who made day and
night hideous with their drunken bellowings, terrorized everybody even
suspected of love for the Union, plundered and burned dwellings,
including a Colored Orphan Asylum, and added to the crime of arson, that
of murdering the mob-chased, terror-stricken Negroes, by hanging them to
the lamp-posts.
These Riots constituted a part of that “Fire in the Rear” with which the
Rebels and their Northern Democratic sympathizers had so frequently
menaced the Armies of the Union.
Alluding to them, the N. Y. Tribune on July 15th, while its office was
invested and threatened with attack and demolition, bravely said: “They
are, in purpose and in essence, a Diversion in favor of Jefferson Davis
and Lee. Listen to the yells of the mob and the harangues of its
favorite orators, and you will find them surcharged with ‘Nigger,’
‘Abolition,’ ‘Black Republican,’ denunciation of prominent Republicans,
The Tribune, etc. etc.–all very wide of the Draft and the exemption.
Had the Abolitionists, instead of the Slaveholders, revolted, and
undertaken to upset the Government and dissolve the Union, nine-tenths
of these rioters would have eagerly voluntered to put them down. It is
the fear, stimulated by the recent and glorious triumphs of the Union
Arms, that Slavery and the Rebellion must suffer, which is at the bottom
of all this arson, devastation, robbery, and murder.”
The Democratic Governor, Seymour, by promising to “have this Draft
suspended and stopped,” did something toward quieting the Riots, but it
was not until the Army of the Potomac, now following Lee’s retreat, was
weakened by the sending of several regiments to New York that the Draft-
rioting spirit, in that city, and to a less extent in other cities, was
thoroughly cowed.
the Draft Law, in order to test its Constitutionality, Mr. Lincoln,
on the 7th of August, said he could not consent to lose the time
that would be involved in obtaining a decision from the U. S.
Supreme Court on that point, and proceeded: “We are contending with
an Enemy who, as I understand, drives every able-bodied man he can
reach into his ranks, very much as a butcher drives bullocks into a
slaughter-pen. No time is wasted, no argument is used.
“This system produces an Army which will soon turn upon our now
victorious soldiers already in the field, if they shall not be
sustained by recruits as they should be.
It produces an Army with a rapidity not to be matched on our side,
if we first waste time to re-experiment with the Volunteer system,
already deemed by Congress, and palpably, in fact, so far exhausted
as to be inadequate; and then more time to obtain a Court decision
as to whether a law is Constitutional which requires a part of
those not now in the Service to go to those who are already in it,
and still more time to determine with absolute certainty that we
get those who are to go, in the precisely legal proportion to those
who are not to go.
“My purpose is to be in my action Just and Constitutional, and yet
Practical, in performing the important duty with which I am
charged, of maintaining the Unity and the Free principles of our
common Country.”]
Worried and weakened by this Democratic opposition to the Draft, and the
threatened consequent delays and dangers to the success of the Union
Cause, and depressed moreover by the defeat of the National forces under
Rosecrans at Chickamauga; yet, the favorable determination of the Fall
elections on the side of Union and Freedom, and the immense majorities
upholding those issues, together with Grant’s great victory (November,
1863) of Chattanooga–where the three days of fighting in the
Chattanooga Valley and up among the clouds of Lookout Mountain and
Mission Ridge, not only effaced the memory of Rosecrans’s previous
disaster, but brought fresh and imperishable laurels to the Union Arms–
stiffened the President’s backbone, and that of Union men everywhere.
Not that Mr. Lincoln had shown any signs of weakness or wavering, or any
loss of hope in the ultimate result of this War for the preservation of
the Union–which now also involved Freedom to all beneath its banner.
On the contrary, a letter of his written late in August shows
conclusively enough that he even then began to see clearly the coming
final triumph–not perhaps as “speedy,” as he would like, in its coming,
but none the less sure to come in God’s “own good time,” and furthermore
not appearing “to be so distant as it did” before Gettysburg, and
especially Vicksburg, was won; for, said he: “The signs look better.
The Father of Waters again goes unvexed to the Sea”.
was in these words
EXECUTIVE MANSION,
WASHINGTON, August 26. 1863.
HON. JAMES C. CONKLING
MY DEAR SIR; Your letter inviting me to attend a Mass Meeting of
unconditional Union men to be held at the Capital of Illinois, on
the 3rd day of September, has been received. It would be very
agreeable for me thus to meet my old friends at my own home; but I
cannot just now be absent from here so long a time as a visit there
would require.
The meeting is to be of all those who maintain unconditional
devotion to the Union; and I am sure that my old political friends
will thank me for tendering, as I do, the Nation’s gratitude to
those other noble men whom no partisan malice or partisan hope can
make false to the Nation’s life.
There are those who are dissatisfied with me. To such I would say:
you desire Peace, and you blame me that we do not have it. But how
can we attain it? There are but three conceivable ways: First, to
suppress the Rebellion by force of Arms. This I am trying to do.
Are you for it? If you are, so far we are agreed. If you are not
for it, a second way is to give up the Union. I am against this.
Are you for it? If you are, you should say so plainly. If you are
not for Force, nor yet for Dissolution, there only remains some
imaginable Compromise.
I do not believe that any Compromise embracing the maintenance of
the Union is now possible. All that I learn leads to a directly
opposite belief. The strength of the Rebellion is its Military,
its Army. That Army dominates all the Country, and all the people,
within its range. Any offer of terms made by any man or men within
that range, in opposition to that Army, is simply nothing for the
present: because such man or men have no power whatever to enforce
their side of a Compromise, if one were made with them.
To illustrate: Suppose refugees from the South, and Peace men of
the North, get together in Convention, and frame and proclaim a
Compromise embracing a restoration of the Union. In what way can
that Compromise be used to keep Lee’s Army out of Pennsylvania?
Meade’s Army can keep Lee’s Army out of Pennsylvania, and, I think,
can ultimately drive it out of existence. But no paper Compromise
to which the controllers of Lee’s Army are not agreed, can at all
affect that Army. In an effort at such Compromise we would waste
time, which the Enemy would improve to our disadvantage; and that
would be all.
A Compromise, to be effective, must be made either with those who
control the Rebel Army, or with the people, first liberated from
the domination of that Army, by the success of our own Army. Now,
allow me to assure you that no word or intimation from that Rebel
Army, or from any of the men controlling it, in relation to any
Peace Compromise, has ever come to my knowledge or belief. All
charges and insinuations to the contrary are deceptive and
groundless. And I promise you that if any such proposition shall
hereafter come, it shall not be rejected and kept a secret from
you. I freely acknowledge myself to be the servant of the People,
according to the bond of service, the United States Constitution;
and that, as such, I am responsible to them.
But, to be plain. You are dissatisfied with me about the Negro.
Quite likely there is a difference of opinion between you and
myself upon that subject. I certainly wish that all men could be
Free, while you, I suppose, do not. Yet I have neither adopted nor
proposed any measure which is not consistent with even your view,
provided that you are for the Union. I suggested compensated
Emancipation; to which you replied you wished not to be taxed to
buy Negroes. But I had not asked you to be taxed to buy Negroes,
except in such a way as to save you from greater taxation to save
the Union, exclusively by other means.
You dislike the Emancipation Proclamation, and perhaps would have
it retracted. You say it is Unconstitutional. I think
differently. I think the Constitution invests the Commander-in-
Chief with the Law of War in Time of War. The most that can be
said, if so much, is, that Slaves are property. Is there, has
there ever been, any question that, by the Law of War, property,
both of enemies and friends, may be taken when needed? And is it
not needed whenever it helps us and hurts the Enemy? Armies, the
World over, destroy enemies’ property when they cannot use it; and
even destroy their own to keep it from the Enemy. Civilized
belligerents do all in their power to help themselves or hurt the
Enemy, except a few things regarded as barbarous or cruel. Among
the exceptions are the massacre of vanquished foes and non-
combatants, male and female.
But the Proclamation, as law, either is valid or is not valid. If
it is not valid, it needs no retraction. If it is valid it cannot
be retracted, any more than the dead can be brought to life. Some
of you profess to think its retraction would operate favorably for
the Union. Why better after the retraction than before the issue?
There was more than a year and a half of trial to suppress the
Rebellion before the Proclamation was issued, the last one hundred
days of which passed under an explicit notice that it was coming,
unless averted by those in revolt returning to their allegiance.
The War has certainly progressed as favorably for us since the
issue of the Proclamation as before.
I know as fully as one can know the opinions of others that some of
the Commanders of our Armies in the field, who have given us our
most important victories, believe the Emancipation policy and the
use of Colored troops constitute the heaviest blows yet dealt to
the Rebellion, and that at least one of those important successes
could not have been achieved when it was, but for the aid of Black
soldiers.
Among the Commanders who hold these views are some who have never
had an affinity with what is called “Abolitionism,” or with
“Republican party politics,” but who hold them purely as Military
opinions. I submit their opinions as entitled to some weight
against the objections often urged that Emancipation and arming the
Blacks are unwise as Military measures, and were not adopted as
such, in good faith.
You say that you will not fight to Free Negroes. Some of them seem
willing to fight for you; but no matter. Fight you, then,
exclusively to save the Union. I issued the Proclamation on
purpose to aid you in saving the Union. Whenever you shall have
conquered all resistance to the Union, if I shall urge you to
continue fighting, it will be an apt time then for you to declare
you will not fight to Free Negroes. I thought that in your
struggle for the Union, to whatever extent the Negroes should cease
helping the Enemy, to that extent it weakened the Enemy in his
resistance to you. Do you think differently? I thought whatever
Negroes can be got to do as soldiers, leaves just so much less for
White soldiers to do in saving the Union. Does it appear otherwise
to you? But Negroes, like other people, act upon motives. Why
should they do anything for us if we will do nothing for them? If
they stake their lives for us they must be prompted by the
strongest motives, even the promise of Freedom. And the promise,
being made, must be kept.
The signs look better. The Father of Waters again goes unvexed to
the Sea. Thanks to the great Northwest for it; nor yet wholly to
them. Three hundred miles up, they met New England, Empire,
Keystone, and Jersey, hewing their way right and left. The Sunny
South, too, in more colors than one, also lent a helping hand. On
the spot, their part of the history was jotted down in Black and
White. The job was a great National one, and let none be slighted
who bore an honorable part in it. And while those who have cleared
the Great River may well be proud, even that is not all. It is
hard to say that anything has been more bravely and well done than
at Antietam, Murfreesboro, Gettysburg, and on many fields of less
note. Nor must Uncle Sam’s web-feet be forgotten. At all the
watery margins they have been present, not only on the deep Sea,
the broad Bay, and the rapid River, but also up the narrow, muddy
Bayou, and wherever the ground was a little damp they had been, and
made their tracks. Thanks to all. For the Great Republic–for the
principle it lives by, and keeps alive–for Man’s vast future–
thanks to all.
Peace does not appear so distant as it did. I hope it will come
soon, and come to stay; and so come as to be worth the keeping in
all future time. It will then have been proved that among Freemen
there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet,
and that they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case and
pay the cost. And there will be some Black men who can remember
that, with silent tongue, and clinched teeth, and steady eye, and
well poised bayonet, they have helped mankind on to this great
consummation, while I fear there will be some White ones unable to
forget that with malignant heart and deceitful speech they have
striven to hinder it.
Still, let us not be over sanguine of a speedy, final triumph. Let
us be quite sober. Let us diligently apply the means, never
doubting that a just God, in his own good time, will give us the
rightful result.
Yours very truly,
A. LINCOLN.]
But Chattanooga, and the grand majorities in all the Fall State-
elections, save that of New Jersey,–and especially the manner in which
loyal Ohio sat down upon the chief Copperhead-Democrat and Treason-
breeder of the North, Vallandigham–came most auspiciously to strengthen
the President’s hands.
candidate for Governor of Ohio]
And now he saw, more clearly still, the approach of that time when the
solemn promise and declaration of Emancipation might be recorded upon
the sacred roll of the Constitution, and thus be made safe for all time.
In his Annual Message of December, 1863, therefore, President Lincoln,
after adverting to the fact that “a year ago the War had already lasted
nearly twenty months,” without much ground for hopefulness, proceeded to
say:
“The preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, issued in September, was
running its assigned period to the beginning of the New Year. A month
later the final Proclamation came, including the announcement that
Colored men of suitable condition would be received into the War
service. The policy of Emancipation, and of employing Black soldiers,
gave to the future a new aspect, about which hope, and fear, and doubt,
contended in uncertain conflict.
“According to our political system, as a matter of Civil Administration,
the General Government had no lawful power to effect Emancipation in any
State, and for a long time it had been hoped that the Rebellion could be
suppressed without resorting to it as a Military measure. It was all
the while deemed possible that the necessity for it might come, and that
if it should, the crisis of the contest would then be presented. It
came, and, as was anticipated, it was followed by dark and doubtful
days.
“Eleven months having now passed, we are permitted to take another view
* * * Of those who were Slaves at the beginning of the Rebellion, full
one hundred thousand are now in the United States Military service,
about one half of which number actually bear arms in the ranks; thus
giving the double advantage of taking so much labor from the Insurgent
cause, and supplying the places which otherwise must be filled with so
many White men. So far as tested, it is difficult to say they are not
as good soldiers as any.
“No servile insurrection, or tendency to violence or cruelty, has marked
the measures of Emancipation and arming the Blacks. These measures have
been much discussed in Foreign Countries, and contemporary with such
discussion the tone of public sentiment there is much improved. At
home, the same measures have been fully discussed, supported,
criticised, and denounced, and the annual elections following are highly
encouraging to those whose official duty it is to bear the Country
through this great trial. Thus we have the new reckoning. The crisis
which threatened to divide the friends of the Union is past.”
After alluding to his Proclamation of Amnesty, issued simultaneously
with this Message, to all repentant Rebels who would take an oath
therein prescribed, and contending that such an oath should be (as he
had drawn it) to uphold not alone the Constitution and the Union, but
the Laws and Proclamations touching Slavery as well, President Lincoln
continued:
“In my judgment they have aided and will further aid, the Cause for
which they were intended. To now abandon them, would be not only to
relinquish a lever of power, but would also be a cruel and an astounding
breach of faith.” And, toward the close of the Message, he added:
“The movements by State action, for Emancipation, in several of the
States not included in the Emancipation Proclamation, are matters of
profound gratulation. And while I do not repeat in detail what I have
heretofore so earnestly urged upon the subject, my general views remain
unchanged; and I trust that Congress will omit no fair opportunity of
AIDING THESE IMPORTANT STEPS TO A GREAT CONSUMMATION.”
Mr. Lincoln’s patient but persistent solicitude, his earnest and
unintermitted efforts–exercised publicly through his Messages and
speeches, and privately upon Members of Congress who called upon, or
whose presence was requested by him at the White House–in behalf of
incorporating Emancipation in the Constitution, were now to give
promise, at least, of bearing good fruit.
Measures looking to this end were submitted in both Houses of Congress
soon after its meeting, and were referred to the respective Judiciary
Committees of the same, and on the 10th of February, 1864, Mr. Trumbull
reported to the Senate, from the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which he
was Chairman, a substitute Joint Resolution providing for the submission
to the States of an Amendment to the United States Constitution in the
following words:
“ART. XIII., SEC. I. Neither Slavery nor Involuntary Servitude, except
as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly
convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to
their jurisdiction.
“SEC. II. Congress shall have power to enforce this Article by
appropriate legislation.”
This proposed Amendment came up for consideration in the Senate, on the
28th of March, and a notable debate ensued.
On the same day, in the House of Representatives, Thaddeus Stevens–with
the object perhaps of ascertaining the strength, in that Body, of the
friends of out-and-out Emancipation–offered a Resolution proposing to
the States the following Amendments to the United States Constitution:
“ART. I. Slavery and Involuntary Servitude, except for the punishment
of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, is forever
prohibited in the United States and all its Territories.
“ART. II. So much of Article four, Section two, as refers to the
delivery up of Persons held to Service or Labor, escaping into another
State, is annulled.”
The test was made upon a motion to table the Resolution, which motion
was defeated by 38 yeas to 69 nays, and showed the necessity for
converting three members from the Opposition. Subsequently, at the
instance of Mr. Stevens himself, the second Article of the Resolution
was struck out by 72 yeas to 26 nays.
The proceedings in both Houses of Congress upon these propositions to
engraft upon the National Constitution a provision guaranteeing Freedom
to all men upon our soil, were now interrupted by the death of one who
would almost have been willing to die twice over, if, by doing so, he
could have hastened their adoption.
Owen Lovejoy, the life-long apostle of Abolitionism, the fervid
gospeller of Emancipation, was dead; and it seemed almost the irony of
Fate that, at such a time, when Emancipation most needed all its friends
to make it secure, its doughtiest champion should fall.
But perhaps the eloquent tributes paid to his memory, in the Halls of
Congress, helped the Cause no less. They at least brought back to the
public mind the old and abhorrent tyrannies of the Southern Slave power;
how it had sought not not only to destroy freedom of Action, but freedom
of Speech, and hesitated not to destroy human Life with these; reminded
the Loyal People of the Union of much that was hateful, from which they
had escaped; and strengthened the purpose of Patriots to fix in the
chief corner-stone of the Constitution, imperishable muniments of human
Liberty.
Lovejoy’s brother had been murdered at Alton, Illinois, while
vindicating freedom of Speech and of the Press; and the blood of that
martyr truly became “the seed of the Church.” Arnold–recalling a
speech of Owen Lovejoy’s at Chicago, and a passage in it, descriptive of
the martyrdom,–said to the House, on this sad occasion: “I remember
that, after describing the scene of that death, in words–which stirred
every heart, he said he went a pilgrim to his brother’s grave, and,
kneeling upon the sod beneath which sleeps that brother, he swore, by
the everlasting God, eternal hostility to African Slavery.” And,
continued Arnold, “Well and nobly has he kept that oath.”
Washburne, too, reminded the House of the memorable episode in that very
Hall when, (April 5, 1860), the adherents of Slavery crowding around
Lovejoy with fierce imprecations and threats, seeking then and there to
prevent Free Speech, “he displayed that undaunted courage and matchless
bearing which extorted the admiration of even his most deadly foes.”
“His”–continued the same speaker–“was the eloquence of Mirabeau, which
in the Tiers Etat and in the National Assembly made to totter the throne
of France; it was the eloquence of Danton, who made all France to
tremble from his tempestuous utterances in the National Convention.
Like those apostles of the French Revolution, his eloquence could stir
from the lowest depths all the passions of Man; but unlike them, he was
as good and as pure as he was eloquent and brave, a noble minded
Christian man, a lover of the whole human Race, and of universal Liberty
regulated by Law.”
Grinnell, in his turn, told also with real pathos, of his having
recently seen Lovejoy in the chamber of sickness. “When,” said
Grinnell, “I expressed fears for his recovery, I saw the tears course
down his manly cheek, as he said ‘Ah! God’s will be done, but I have
been laboring, voting, and praying for twenty years that I might see the
great day of Freedom which is so near and which I hope God will let me
live to rejoice in. I want a vote on my Bill for the destruction of
Slavery, root and branch.'”
[Sumner, afterward speaking of Lovejoy and this Measure, said: “On
the 14th of December, 1863, he introduced a Bill, whose title
discloses its character: ‘A Bill to give effect to the Declaration
of Independence, and also to certain Provisions of the Constitution
of the United States.’ It proceeds to recite that All Men were
Created Equal, and were Endowed by the Creator with the Inalienable
Right to Life, Liberty and the Fruits of honest Toil; that the
Government of the United States was Instituted to Secure those
Rights; that the Constitution declares that No Person shall be
Deprived of Liberty without due Process of Law, and also provides–
article five, clause two–that this Constitution, and the Laws of
the United States made in pursuance thereof, shall be the Supreme
Law of the Land, and the Judges in each State shall be bound
thereby, anything in the Constitution and Laws of any State to the
contrary notwithstanding; that it is now demonstrated by the
Rebellion that Slavery is absolutely incompatible with the Union,
Peace, and General Welfare for which Congress is to Provide; and it
therefore Enacts that All Persons heretofore held in Slavery in any
of the States or Territories of the United States are declared
Freedmen, and are Forever Released from Slavery or Involuntary
Servitude except as Punishment for Crime on due conviction. On the
same day he introduced another Bill to Protect Freedmen and to
Punish any one for Enslaving them. These were among his last
Public acts,”–Cong. Globe, 1st S., 38th C., Pt. 2, p. 1334]
And staunch old Thaddeus Stevens said: “The change to him, is great
gain. The only regret we can feel is that he did not live to see the
salvation of his Country; to see Peace and Union restored, and universal
Emancipation given to his native land. But such are the ways of
Providence. Moses was not permitted to enter the Promised Land with
those he had led out of Bondage; he beheld it from afar off, and slept
with his fathers.” “The deceased,” he impressively added, “needs no
perishable monuments of brass or marble to perpetuate his name. So long
as the English language shall be spoken or deciphered, so long as
Liberty shall have a worshipper, his name will be known!”
What influence the death of Owen Lovejoy may have had on the subsequent
proceedings touching Emancipation interrupted as we have seen by his
demise–cannot be known; but among all the eloquent tributes to his
memory called forth by the mournful incident, perhaps none, could he
have heard it, would have better pleased him than those two opening
sentences of Charles Summer’s oration in the Senate–where he said of
Owen Lovejoy: “Could his wishes prevail, he would prefer much that
Senators should continue in their seats and help to enact into Law some
one of the several Measures now pending to secure the obliteration of
Slavery. Such an Act would be more acceptable to him than any personal
tribute,–” unless it might be these other words, which followed from
the same lips: “How his enfranchised Soul would be elevated even in
those Abodes to which he has been removed, to know that his voice was
still heard on Earth encouraging, exhorting, insisting that there should
be no hesitation anywhere in striking at Slavery; that this unpardonable
wrong, from which alone the Rebellion draws its wicked life, must be
blasted by Presidential proclamation, blasted by Act of Congress,
blasted by Constitutional prohibition, blasted in every possible way, by
every available agency, and at every occurring opportunity, so that no
trace of the outrage may continue in the institutions of the Land, and
especially that its accursed foot-prints may no longer defile the
National Statute-book. Sir, it will be in vain that you pass
Resolutions in tribute to him, if you neglect that Cause for which he
lived, and do not hearken to his voice!”
CHAPTER XXIII.
“THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT” IN THE SENATE.
During the great debate, which now opened in the Senate, upon the
Judiciary Committee’s substitute resolution for the Amendment of the
Constitution, so as forever to prohibit Slavery within the United
States, and to empower Congress to pass such laws as would make that
prohibition effective–participated in by Messrs. Trumbull, Wilson,
Saulsbury, Davis, Harlan, Powell, Sherman, Clark, Hale, Hendricks,
Henderson, Sumner, McDougall and others–the whole history of Slavery
was enquired into and laid bare.
Trumbull insisted that Slavery was at the bottom of all the internal
troubles with which the Nation had from its birth been afflicted, down
to this wicked Rebellion, with all the resulting “distress, desolation,
and death;” and that by 1860, it had grown to such power and arrogance
that “its advocates demanded the control of the Nation in
its interests, failing in which, they attempted its overthrow.” He
reviewed, at some length, what had been done by our Government with
regard to Slavery, since the breaking out of hostilities against us in
that mad attempt against the National life; how, “in the earlier stages
of the War, there was an indisposition on the part of the Executive
Authority to interfere with Slavery at all;” how, for a long time,
Slaves, escaping to our lines, were driven back to their Rebel masters;
how the Act of Congress of July, 1861, which gave Freedom to all Slaves
allowed by their Rebel masters to assist in the erection of Rebel works
and fortifications, had “not been executed,” and, said Mr. Trumbull, “so
far as I am advised, not a single Slave has been set at liberty under
it;” how, “it was more than a year after its enactment before any
considerable number of Persons of African descent were organized and
armed” under the subsequent law of December, 1861, which not only gave
Freedom to all Slaves entering our Military lines, or who, belonging to
Rebel masters, were deserted by them, or were found in regions once
occupied by Rebel forces and later by those of the Union, but also
empowered the President to organize and arm them to aid in the
suppression of the Rebellion; how, it was not until this law had been
enacted that Union officers ceased to expel Slaves coming within our
lines–and then only when dismissal from the public service was made the
penalty for such expulsion; how, by his Proclamations of Emancipation,
of September, 1862, and January, 1863, the President undertook to
supplement Congressional action–which had, theretofore, been confined
to freeing the Slaves of Rebels, and of such of these only as had come
within the lines of our Military power-by also declaring, Free, the
Slaves “who were in regions of country from which the authority of the
United States was expelled;” and how, the “force and effect” of these
Proclamations were variously understood by the enemies and friends of
those measures–it being insisted on the one side that Emancipation as a
War-stroke was within the Constitutional War-power of the President as
Commander-in-Chief, and that, by virtue of those Proclamations, “all
Slaves within the localities designated become ipso facto Free,” and on
the other, that the Proclamations were “issued without competent
authority,” and had not effected and could not effect, “the Emancipation
of a single Slave,” nor indeed could at any time, without additional
legislation, go farther than to liberate Slaves coming within the Union
Army lines.
After demonstrating that “any and all these laws and Proclamations,
giving to each the largest effect claimed by its friends, are
ineffectual to the destruction of Slavery,” and protesting that some
more effectual method of getting rid of that Institution must be
adopted, he declared, as his judgment, that “the only effectual way of
ridding the Country of Slavery, so that it cannot be resuscitated, is by
an Amendment of the Constitution forever prohibiting it within the
jurisdiction of the United States.”
He then canvassed the chances of adoption of such an Amendment by an
affirmative vote of two thirds in each House of Congress, and of its
subsequent ratification by three-fourths of the States of the Union, and
declared that “it is reasonable to suppose that if this proposed
Amendment passes Congress, it will, within a year, receive the
ratification of the requisite number of States to make it a part of the
Constitution.” His prediction proved correct–but only after a
protracted struggle.
Henry Wilson also made a strong speech, but on different grounds. He
held that the Emancipation Proclamations formed, together, a “complete,
absolute, and final decree of Emancipation in Rebel States,” and, being
“born of Military necessity” and “proclaimed by the Commander-in-Chief
of the Army and Navy, is the settled and irrepealable Law of the
Republic, to be observed, obeyed, and enforced, by Army and Navy, and is
the irreversible voice of the Nation.”
He also reviewed what had been done since the outbreak of the Rebellion,
by Congress and the President, by Laws and Proclamations; and, while
standing by the Emancipation Proclamations, declared that “the crowning
Act, in this series of Acts, for the restriction and extinction of
Slavery in America, is this proposed Amendment to the Constitution
prohibiting the existence of Slavery in the Republic of the United
States.”
The Emancipation Proclamation, according to his view, only needed
enforcement, to give “Peace and Order, Freedom and Unity, to a now
distracted Country;” but the “crowning act” of incorporating this
Amendment into the Constitution would do even more than all this, in
that it would “obliterate the last lingering vestiges of the Slave
System; its chattelizing, degrading, and bloody codes; its malignant,
barbarizing spirit; all it was, and is; everything connected with it or
pertaining to it, from the face of the Nation it has scarred with moral
desolation, from the bosom of the Country it has reddened with the blood
and strewn with the graves of patriotism.”
While the debate proceeded, President Lincoln watched it with careful
interest. Other matters, however, had, since the Battle of Chattanooga,
largely engrossed his attention.
The right man had at last been found–it was believed–to control as
well as to lead our Armies. That man was Ulysses S. Grant. The grade
of Lieutenant General of the Army of the United States–in desuetude
since the days of Washington, except by brevet, in the case of Winfield
Scott,–having been especially revived by Congress for and filled by the
appointment and confirmation of Grant, March 2, 1864, that great soldier
immediately came on to Washington, received his commission at the hands
of President Lincoln, in the cabinet chamber of the White House, on the
9th, paid a flying visit to the Army of the Potomac, on the 10th, and at
once returned to Nashville to plan future movements.
On the 12th, a General Order of the War Department (No. 98) was issued,
relieving Major-General Halleck, “at his own request,” from duty as
“General-in-Chief” of the Army, and assigning Lieutenant-General U. S.
Grant to “the command of the Armies of the United States,” “the
Headquarters of the Army” to be in Washington, and also with Lieutenant-
General Grant in the Field, Halleck being assigned to “duty, in
Washington, as Chief-of-staff of the Army, under the direction of the
Secretary of War and the Lieutenant-General commanding.”
By the same order, Sherman was assigned to the command of the “Military
Division of the Mississippi,” composed of the Departments of the Ohio,
the Cumberland, the Tennessee, and the Arkansas; and McPherson to that
of the Department and Army of the Tennessee.
On the 23rd of March, Grant was back again at Washington, and at once
proceeded to Culpepper Court-house, Virginia, where his Headquarters in
the field were, for a time, to be.
Here he completed his plans, and reorganized his Forces, for the coming
conflicts, in the South-west and South-east, which were to result in a
full triumph to the Union Arms, and Peace to a preserved Union.
It is evident, from the utterances of Mr. Lincoln when Vicksburg fell,
that he had then become pretty well satisfied that Grant was “the coming
man,” to whom it would be safe to confide the management and chief
leadership of our Armies. Chattanooga merely confirmed that belief–as
indeed it did that of Union men generally. But the concurrent judgment
of Congress and the President had now, as we have seen, placed Grant in
that chief command; and the consequent relief to Mr. Lincoln, in thus
having the heavy responsibility of Army-control, long unwillingly
exercised by him, taken from his own shoulders and placed upon those of
the one great soldier in whom he had learned to have implicit faith,–a
faith earned by steady and unvaryingly successful achievements in the
Field–must have been most grateful.
Other responsibilities would still press heavily enough upon the
President’s time and attention. Questions touching the Military and
Civil government of regions of the Enemy’s country, conquered by the
Union arms; of the rehabilitation or reconstruction of the Rebel States;
of a thousand and one other matters, of greater or lesser perplexity,
growing out of these and other questions; besides the ever pressing and
gigantic problems involved in the raising of enormous levies of troops,
and prodigious sums of money, needed in securing, moving, and supplying
them, and defraying the extraordinary expenses growing out of the
necessary blockade of thousands of miles of Southern Coast, and other
Naval movements; not to speak of those expenditures belonging to the
more ordinary business transactions of the Government.
But chief of all things claiming his especial solicitude, as we have
seen, was this question of Emancipation by Constitutional enactment, the
debate upon which was now proceeding in the Senate. That solicitude was
necessarily increased by the bitter opposition to it of Northern
Copperheads, and by the attitude of the Border-State men, upon whose
final action, the triumph or defeat of this great measure must
ultimately depend.
Many of the latter, were, as has already been shown in these pages,
loyal men; but the loyalty of some of these to their Country, was still
so questionably and so thoroughly tainted with their worshipful devotion
to Slavery–although they must have been blind indeed not to have
discovered, long ere this, that it was a “slowly-dying cause”–that they
were ever on the alert to delay, hamper, and defeat, any action, whether
Executive or Legislative, and however necessary for the preservation of
the Union and the overthrow of its mortal enemies, which, never so
lightly, impinged upon their “sacred Institution.”
This fact was well set forth, in this very debate, by a Senator from New
England–[Wilson of Massachusetts]–when, after adjuring the anti-
Slavery men of the age, not to forget the long list of Slavery’s crimes,
he eloquently proceeded:
“Let them remember, too, that hundreds of thousands of our countrymen in
Loyal States–since Slavery raised the banners of Insurrection, and sent
death, wounds, sickness, and sorrow, into the homes of the People–have
resisted, and still continue to resist, any measure for the defense of
the Nation, if that measure tended to impair the vital and animating
powers of Slavery. They resisted the Act making Free the Slaves used by
Rebels for Military purposes; the Confiscation of Rebel property and the
Freedom of the Slaves of Rebel masters; the Abolition of Slavery in the
Capital of the Nation, and the consecration of the Territories to Free
Labor and Free laboring men; the Proclamation of Emancipation; the
enlistment of Colored men to fight the battles of the Country; the
Freedom of the Black soldier, who is fighting, bleeding, dying for the
Country; and the Freedom of his wife and children. And now, when War
has for nearly three years menaced the life of the Nation, bathed the
Land in blood, and filled two hundred thousand graves with our slain
sons, these men of the Loyal States still cling to the falling fortunes
of the relentless and unappeasable Enemy of their Country and its
democratic institutions; they mourn, and will not be comforted, over the
expiring System, in the Border Slave-States; and, in tones of
indignation or of anguish, they utter lamentations over the Proclamation
of Emancipation, and the policy that is bringing Rebel States back again
radiant with Freedom.”
Among these “loyal” Democratic opponents of Emancipation, in any shape,
or any where, were not wanting men–whether from Loyal Northern or
Border States–who still openly avowed that Slavery was right; that
Rebellion, to preserve its continuance, was justifiable; and that there
was no Constitutional method of uprooting it.
Saulsbury of Delaware, was representative and spokesman of this class,
and he took occasion during this very debate–[In the Senate, March 31,
1864.]–to defend Slavery as a Divine Institution, which had the
sanction both of the Mosaic and Christian Dispensations!
first period of recorded history. It dates back even beyond the
period of Abraham, the Father of the Faithful, in whose seed all
the Nations of the Earth were to be blessed. We find that,
immediately after the Flood, the Almighty, for purposes inscrutable
to us, condemned a whole race to Servitude: ‘Vayomer Orur Knoan
Efet Afoatim Yeahio Le-echot:’ ‘And he said, Cursed be Canaan;
Slave of Slaves he shall be to his brethren.’ It continued among
all people until the advent of the Christian era. It was
recognized in that New Dispensation, which was to supersede the
Old. It has the sanction of God’s own Apostle; for when Paul sent
back Onesimus to Philemon, whom did he send? A Freeman? No, Sir.
He sent his (doulos,) a Slave, born as such, not even his
andrapodon, who was such by captivity in War. Among all people,
and in all ages, has this Institution, if such it is to be called,
existed, and had the countenance of wise and good men, and even of
the Christian Church itself, until these modern times, up at least
to the Nineteenth Century. It exists in this Country, and has
existed from the beginning.”
Mr. Harlan’s reply to the position of Mr. Saulsbury that Slavery is
right, is a Divine Institution, etc., was very able and
interesting. He piled up authority after authority, English as
well as American, to show that there is no support of Slavery–and
especially of the title to services of the adult offspring of a
Slave–at Common Law; and, after also proving, by the mouth of a
favorite son of Virginia, that it has no legal existence by virtue
of any Municipal or Statutory Law, he declared that the only
remaining Law that can be cited for its support is the Levitical
Code”–as follows:
“‘Both thy Bondmen, and thy Bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall
be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy
Bondmen and Bondmaids.
“‘Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among
you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you,
which they begat in your land; and they shall be your possession.
“‘And ye shall take them as an Inheritance for your children after
you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your Bondmen
forever.”‘
“I remark,” said he, “in this connection, that the Levitical Code,
or the Hebrew Law, contains a provision for the Naturalization of
Foreigners, whether captives of War, or voluntary emigrants. By
compliance with the requirements of this law they became citizens,
entitled to all the rights and privileges and immunities of native
Hebrews. The Hebrew Slave Code, applicable to Enslaved Hebrews, is
in these words:
“‘And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold
unto thee, and serve thee six years, then in the seventh year thou
shalt let him go Free from thee.’
“Here I request the attention of those who claim compensation for
Emancipated Slaves to the text:
“‘And when thou sendest him out Free from thee, thou shalt not let
him go away empty:
“‘Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy floor’–
“Which means granaries–
“‘and out of thy wine-press: of that wherewith the Lord thy God
hath blessed thee, thou shalt give unto him.’
“‘It shall not seem hard unto thee, when thou sendest him away Free
from thee, for he hath been worth a double-hired servant to thee,
in serving thee six years.’
“These Hebrew Statutes provide that the heathen might be purchased
and held as Slaves, and their posterity after them; that under
their Naturalization Laws all strangers and sojourners, Bond and
Free, have the privilege of acquiring the rights of citizenship;
that all Hebrews, natives or naturalized, might assert and maintain
their right to Freedom.
“At the end of six years a Hebrew Slave thus demanding his Liberty,
was not to be sent away empty; the owner, so far from claiming
compensation from his neighbors or from the Public Treasury for
setting him Free, was bound to divide with the Freedman, of his own
possessions: to give him of his flocks, of his herds, of his
granary, and of his winepress, of everything with which the Lord
Almighty had blessed the master during the years of his Servitude;
and then the owner was admonished that he was not to regard it as a
hardship to be required to Liberate the Slave, and to divide with
him of his substance.
“The Almighty places the Liberated Slave’s claim to a division of
his former master’s property on the eternal principles of Justice,
the duty to render an equivalent for an equivalent. The Slave
having served six years must be paid for his Service, must be paid
liberally because he had been worth even more than a hired servant
during the period of his enslavement.
“If, then,” continued Mr. Harlan, “the justice of this claim cannot
be found either in Reason, Natural Justice, or the principles of
the Common Law, or in any positive Municipal or Statute regulation
of any State, or in the Hebrew Code written by the Finger of God
protruded from the flame of fire on the summit of Sinai, I ask
whence the origin of the title to the services of the adult
offspring of the Slave mother? or is it not manifest that there is
no just title? Is it not a mere usurpation without any known mode
of justification, under any existing Code of Laws, human or
Divine?”]
He also undertook to justify Secession on the singular ground that “we
are sprung from a Race of Secessionists,” the proof of which he held to
be in the fact that, while the preamble to, as well as the body of the
Convention of Ratification of, the old Articles of Confederation between
the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and
Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennslyvania,
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia, declared that Confederation to be a “Perpetual Union,” yet,
within nine years thereafter, all the other States Seceded from New
York, Virginia, North Carolina, and Rhode Island by ratifying the new
Constitution for “a more perfect Union.”
He also endeavored to maintain the extraordinary proposition that “if
the Senate of the United States were to adopt this Joint-resolution, and
were to submit it to all the States of this Union, and if three-fourths
of the States should ratify the Amendment, it would not be binding on
any State whose interest was affected by it, if that State protested
against it!” And beyond all this, he re-echoed the old, old cry of the
Border-state men, that “the time is unpropitious for such a measure as
this.”
Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, however, by his great speech, of April
5th, in the Senate, did much to clear the tangle in the minds of some
faltering Union statesmen on this important subject.
He reviewed the question of human Slavery from the time when the
Constitutional Convention was held; showed that at that period, as well
as at the time of the Declaration of our Independence “there was but one
sentiment upon the subject among enlightened Southern statesmen”–and
that was, that Slavery “is a great affliction to any Country where it
prevails;” and declared that “a prosperous and permanent Peace can never
be secured if the Institution is permitted to survive.”
He then traversed the various methods by which statesmen were seeking to
prevent that survival of Slavery, addressing himself by turns to the
arguments of those who, with John Sherman, “seemed,” said he, “to
consider it as within the power of Congress by virtue of its Legislative
authority;” to those of the “many well-judging men, with the President
at their head, who,” to again use his own words, “seem to suppose that
it is within the reach of the Executive;” and lastly, to those “who
express the opinion that it is not within the scope of either Executive
or Legislative authority, or of Constitutional Amendment;” and after
demolishing the arguments of those who held the two former of these
positions, he proceeded to rebut the assumption that Slavery could not
be abolished at all because it was not originally abolished by the
Constitution.
Continuing, he said: “Remember, now, the question is, can that
Institution, which deals with Humanity as Property, which claims to
shackle the mind, the soul, and the body, which brings to the level of
the brute a portion of the race of Man, cease to be within the reach of
the political power of the People of the United States, not because it
was not at one time within their power, but because at that time they
did not exert the power?
“What says the Preamble to the Constitution? How pregnant with a
conclusive answer is the Preamble, to the proposition that Slavery
cannot be abolished! What does that Preamble state to have been the
chief objects that the great and wise and good men had at heart, in
recommending the Constitution, with that Preamble, to the adoption of
the American People? That Justice might be established; that
Tranquillity might be preserved; that the common Defense and general
Welfare might be maintained; and, last and chief of all, that Liberty
might be secured.
“Is there no Justice in putting an end to human Slavery? Is there no
danger to the Tranquillity of the Country in its existence? May it not
interfere with the common Defense and general Welfare? And, above all,
is it consistent with any notion, which the mind of man can conceive, of
human Liberty?”
He held that the very Amendatory clause of the Constitution under which
it was proposed to make this Amendment, was probably inserted there from
a conviction of that coming time “when Justice would call so loudly for
the extinction of the Institution that her call could not be disobeyed,”
and, when “the Peace and Tranquillity of the Land would demand, in
thunder tones,” its destruction, “as inconsistent with such Peace and
Tranquillity.”
To the atrocious pretence that “there was a right to make a Slave of any
human being”–which he said would have shocked every one of the framers
of the Constitution had they heard it; and, what he termed, the nauseous
declaration that “Slavery of the Black race is of Divine origin,” and
was intended to be perpetual; he said:
“The Saviour of Mankind did not put an end to it by physical power, or
by the declaration of any existing illegality, in word. His mission
upon Earth was not to propagate His doctrines by force. He came to
save, not to conquer. His purpose was not to march armed legions
throughout the habitable Globe, securing the allegiance of those for
whose safety He was striving. He warred by other influences. He aimed
at the heart, principally. He inculcated his doctrines, more ennobling
than any that the World, enlightened as it was before His advent upon
Earth, had been able to discover. He taught to Man the obligation of
brotherhood. He announced that the true duty of Man was to do to others
as he would have others do to him–to all men, the World over; and
unless some convert to the modern doctrine that Slavery itself finds not
only a guarantee for its existence, but for its legal existence, in the
Scripture, excepts from the operation of the influences which His
morality brought to bear on the mind of the Christian world, the Black
man, and shows that it was not intended to apply to Black men, then it
is not true, it cannot be true, that He designed His doctrine not to be
equally applicable to the Black and to the White, to the Race of Man as
he then existed, or as he might exist in all after-time.”
To the assumption that the African Slaves were too utterly deficient and
degraded, mentally and morally, to appreciate the blessings of Freedom,
he opposed the eloquent fact that “wherever the flag of the United
States, the symbol of human Liberty, now goes; under it, from their
hereditary bondage, are to be found men and women and children
assembling and craving its protection ‘fleeing from’ the iron of
oppression that had pierced their souls, to the protection of that flag
where they are ‘gladdened by the light of Liberty.'”
“It is idle to deny,” said he–“we feel it in our own persons–how, with
reference to that sentiment, all men are brethren. Look to the
illustrations which the times now afford, how, in the illustration of
that sentiment, do we differ from the Black man? He is willing to incur
every personal danger which promises to result in throwing down his
shackles, and making him tread the Earth, which God has created for all,
as a man, and not as a Slave.”
Said he: “It is an instinct of the Soul. Tyranny may oppress it for
ages and centuries; the pall of despotism may hang over it; but the
sentiment is ever there; it kindles into a flame in the very furnace of
affliction, and it avails itself of the first opportunity that offers,
promising the least chance of escape, and wades through blood and
slaughter to achieve it, and, whether it succeeds or fails,
demonstrates, vindicates in the very effort, the inextinguishable right
to Liberty.”
He thought that mischiefs might result from this measure, owing to the
uneducated condition of the Slave, but they would be but temporary. At
all events to “suffer those Africans,” said he, “whom we are calling
around our standard, and asking to aid us in restoring the Constitution
and the power of the Government to its rightful authority, to be reduced
to bondage again,” would be “a disgrace to the Nation.” The
“Institution” must be terminated.
“Terminate it,” continued he, “and the wit of man will, as I think, be
unable to devise any other topic upon which we can be involved in a
fratricidal strife. God and nature, judging by the history of the past,
intend us to be one. Our unity is written in the mountains and the
rivers, in which we all have an interest. The very differences of
climate render each important to the other, and alike important.
“That mighty horde which, from time to time, have gone from the
Atlantic, imbued with all the principles of human Freedom which animated
their fathers in running the perils of the mighty Deep and seeking
Liberty here, are now there; and as they have said, they will continue
to say, until time shall be no more: ‘We mean that the Government in
future shall be, as it has been in the past–Once an exemplar of human
Freedom, for the light and example of the World; illustrating in the
blessings and the happiness it confers, the truth of the principles
incorporated into the Declaration of Independence, that Life and Liberty
are Man’s inalienable right.”
Fortunately the Democratic opposition, in the Senate, to
this measure, was too small in numbers to beat the proposed Amendment,
but by offering amendments to it, its enemies succeeded in delaying its
adoption.
However, on the 5th of April, an amendment, offered by Garrett Davis,
was acted upon. It was to strike out all after the preamble of the
XIIIth Article of Amendment to the Constitution, proposed by the
Judiciary Committee, and insert the words:
“No Negro, or Person whose mother or grandmother is or was a Negro,
shall be a citizen of the United States and be eligible to any Civil or
Military office, or to any place of trust or profit under the United
States.”
Mr. Davis’s amendment was rejected by a vote of 5 yeas to 32 nays; when
he immediately moved to amend, by adding precisely the same words at the
end of Section 1 of the proposed Article. It was again rejected. He
then moved to amend by adding to the said Section these words:
“But no Slave shall be entitled to his or her Freedom under this
Amendment if resident at the time it takes effect in any State, the laws
of which forbid Free Negroes to reside therein, until removed from such
State by the Government of the United States.”
This also was rejected. Whereupon Mr. Powell moved to add, at the end
of the first Section, the words:
“No Slave shall be Emancipated by this Article unless the owner thereof
shall be first paid the value of the Slave or Slaves so Emancipated.”
This likewise was rejected, on a yea and nay vote, by 2 yeas (Davis and
Powell) to 34 nays; when Mr. Davis moved another amendment, viz.: to add
at the end of Section 2 of the proposed Article, the following:
“And when this Amendment of the Constitution shall have taken effect by
Freeing the Slaves, Congress shall provide for the distribution and
settlement of all the population of African descent in the United States
among the several States and Territories thereof, in proportion to the
White population of each State and Territory to the aggregate population
of those of African descent.”
This met a like fate; whereupon the Senate adjourned, but, on the
following day, the matter came up again for consideration:
Hale, of New Hampshire, jubilantly declared that “this is a day that I
and many others have long wished for, long hoped for, long striven for.
* * * A day when the Nation is to commence its real life; or, if it is
not the day, it is the dawning of the day; the day is near at hand * * *
when the American People are to wake up to the meaning of the sublime
truths which their fathers uttered years ago, and which have slumbered,
dead-letters, upon the pages of our Constitution, of our Declaration of
Independence, and of our history.”
McDougall, of California, on the other hand,–utterly regardless of the
grandly patriotic resolutions of the Legislature of his State, which had
just been presented to the Senate by his colleague–lugubriously
declared:
“In my judgment, it may well be said of us:
‘Let the Heavens be hung in black
And let the Earth put mourning on,’
for in the history of no Free People, since the time the Persians came
down upon Athens, have I known as melancholy a period as this day and
year of Our Lord in our history; and if we can, by the blessing of God
and by His favor, rise above it, it will be by His special providence,
and by no act of ours.”
The obstructive tactics were now resumed, Mr. Powell leading off by a
motion to amend, by adding to the Judiciary Committee’s proposed
Thirteenth Article of the Constitution, the following:
“ART. 14.–The President and Vice-President shall hold their Offices for
the term of four–[Which he subsequently modified to: ‘six years’]–
years. The person who has filled the Office of President shall not be
reeligible.”
This amendment was rejected by 12 yeas to 32 nays; whereupon Mr. Powell
moved to add to the Committee’s Proposition another new Article, as
follows:
“ART. 14.–The principal Officer in each of the Executive Departments,
and all persons connected with the Diplomatic Service, may be removed
from office at the pleasure of the President. All other officers of the
Executive Departments may be removed at any time by the President or
other appointing power when their services are unnecessary, or for
dishonesty, incapacity, inefficiency, misconduct, or neglect of duty,
and when so removed, the removal shall be reported to the Senate,
together with the reasons therefor.”
This amendment also being rejected, Mr. Powell offered another, which
was to add a separate Article as follows:
“ART. 14.–Every law, or Resolution having the force of law, shall
relate to but one subject, and that shall be expressed in its title.”
This also being rejected–the negative vote being, as in other cases,
without reference to the merits of the proposition–and Mr. Powell
having now apparently exhausted his obstructive amendatory talents, Mr.
Davis came to the aid of his Kentucky colleague by moving an amendment,
to come in as an additional Article, being a new plan of Presidential
election designed to do away with the quadrennial Presidential campaign
before the People by giving to each State the right to nominate one
candidate, and leaving it to a Convention of both Houses of Congress–
and, in case of disagreement, to the Supreme Court of the United States
–to elect a President and a Vice-President.
The rejection of this proposition apparently exhausted the stock of
possible amendments possessed by the Democratic opposition, and the
Joint Resolution, precisely as it came from the Judiciary Committee,
having been agreed to by that body, “as in Committee of the Whole,” was
now, April 6th, reported to the Senate for its concurrence.
On the following day, Mr. Hendricks uttered a lengthy jeremiad on the
War, and its lamentable results; intimated that along the Mississippi,
the Negroes, freed by the advance of our invading Armies and Navies,
instead of being happy and industrious, were without protection or
provision and almost without clothing, while at least 200,000 of them
had prematurely perished, and that such was the fate reserved for the
4,000,000 Negroes if liberated; and declared he would not vote for the
Resolution, “because,” said he, “the times are not auspicious.”
Very different indeed was the attitude of Mr. Henderson, of Missouri,
Border-State man though he was. In the course of a speech, of much
power, which he opened with an allusion to the 115,000 Slaves owned in
his State in 1860–as showing how deeply interested Missouri “must be in
the pending proposition”–the Senator announced that: “Our great
interest, as lovers of the Union, is in the preservation and
perpetuation of the Union.” He declared himself a Slaveholder, yet none
the less desired the adoption of this Thirteenth Article of Amendment,
for, said he: “We cannot save the Institution if we would. We ought not
if we could. * * * If it were a blessing, I, for one, would be
defending it to the last. It is a curse, and not a blessing. Therefore
let it go. * * * Let the iniquity be cast away!”
It was about this time that a remarkable letter written by Mr. Lincoln
to a Kentuckian, on the subject of Emancipation, appeared in print. It
is interesting as being not alone the President’s own statement of his
views, from the beginning, as to Slavery, and how he came to be “driven”
to issue the Proclamation of Emancipation, and as showing how the Union
Cause had gained by its issue, but also in disclosing, indirectly, how
incessantly the subject was revolved in his own mind, and urged by him
upon the minds of others. The publication of the letter, moreover, was
not without its effect on the ultimate action of the Congress and the
States in adopting the Thirteenth Amendment. It ran thus:
“EXECUTIVE MANSION.
“WASHINGTON, April 4, 1864.
“A. G. HODGES, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.
“MY DEAR SIR: You ask me to put in writing the substance of–what I
verbally said the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
“I am naturally anti-Slavery. If Slavery is not wrong, nothing is
wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel, and yet I
have never understood that the ‘Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling.
“It was in the oath I took, that I would to the best of my ability
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. I
could not take the Office without taking the oath. Nor was it my view
that I might take an oath to get power, and break the oath in using the
power.
“I understood, too, that in ordinary and Civil Administration this oath
even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment on
the moral question of Slavery. I had publicly declared this many times,
and in many ways.
“And I aver that, to this day, I have done no Official act in mere
deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on Slavery.
“I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the Constitution to
the best of my ability, imposed upon me the duty of preserving by every
indispensable means, that Government–that Nation, of which that
Constitution was the Organic Law.
“Was it possible to lose the Nation and yet preserve the Constitution?
“By General Law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a limb must
be amputated to save a life; but a life is never wisely given to save a
limb. I felt that measures, otherwise Unconstitutional, might become
lawful, by becoming Indispensable to the Constitution through the
preservation of the Nation.
“Right or wrong, I assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not
feel that, to the best of my ability, I have even tried to preserve the
Constitution, if, to save Slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit
the wreck of Government, Country, and Constitution, altogether.
“When, early in the War, General Fremont attempted Military
Emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
Indispensable Necessity.
“When, a little later, General Cameron, then Secretary of War, suggested
the Arming of the Blacks, I objected, because I did not yet think it an
Indispensable Necessity.
“When, still later, General Hunter attempted Military Emancipation, I
again forbade it, because I did not yet think the Indispensable
Necessity had come.
“When in March, and May, and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive
appeals to the Border-States to favor compensated Emancipation, I
believed the Indispensable Necessity for Military Emancipation and
arming the Blacks would come, unless averted by that measure.
“They declined the proposition, and I was, in my best judgment, driven
to the alternative of either surrendering the Union, and with it, the
Constitution, or of laying strong hand upon the Colored element. I
chose the latter. In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss,
but of this I was not entirely confident.
“More than a year of trial now shows no loss by it in our Foreign
Relations, none in our home popular sentiment, none in our white
Military force, no loss by it anyhow, or anywhere. On the contrary, it
shows a gain of quite a hundred and thirty thousand soldiers, seamen,
and laborers.
“These are palpable facts, about which, as facts, there can be no
cavilling. We have the men; and we could not have had them without the
measure.
“And now let any Union man who complains of this measure, test himself
by writing down in one line, that he is for subduing the Rebellion by
force of arms; and in the next, that he is for taking one hundred and
thirty thousand men from the Union side, and placing them where they
would be best for the measure he condemns. If he cannot face his case
so stated, it is only because he cannot face the truth.
“I add a word which was not in the verbal conversation. In telling this
tale, I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have
controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me.
Now at the end of three years’ struggle, the Nation’s condition is not
what either Party, or any man, devised or expected. God alone can claim
it.
“Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a
great wrong, and wills also that we of the North, as well as you of the
South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial
history will find therein new causes to attest and revere the Justice
and goodness of God.
“Yours truly,
“A. LINCOLN.”
The 8th of April (1864) turned out to be the decisive field-day in the
Senate. Sumner endeavored to close the debate on that day in a speech
remarkable no less for its power and eloquence of statement, its
strength of Constitutional exposition, and its abounding evidences of
extensive historical research and varied learning, than for its
patriotic fervor and devotion to human Freedom.
Toward the end of that great speech, however, he somewhat weakened its
force by suggesting a change in the phraseology of the proposed
Thirteenth Amendment, so that, instead of almost precisely following the
language of the Jeffersonian Ordinance of 1787, as recommended by the
Judiciary Committee of the Senate, it should read thus:
“All Persons are Equal before the Law, so that no person can hold
another as a Slave; and the Congress may make all laws necessary and
proper to carry this Article into effect everywhere within the United
States and the jurisdiction thereof.”
Mr. Sumner’s idea in antagonizing the Judiciary Committee’s proposition
with this, was to introduce into our Organic Act, distinctive words
asserting the “Equality before the Law” of all persons, as expressed in
the Constitutional Charters of Belgium, Italy and Greece, as well as in
the various Constitutions of France–beginning with that of September,
1791, which declared (Art. 1) that “Men are born and continue Free and
Equal in Rights;” continuing in that of June, 1793, which declares that
“All Men are Equal by Nature and before the Law:” in that of June, 1814,
which declares that “Frenchmen are Equal before the Law, whatever may be
otherwise their title and ranks;” and in the Constitutional Charter of
August, 1830 in similar terms to the last.
“But,” said he, “while desirous of seeing the great rule of Freedom
which we are about to ordain, embodied in a text which shall be like the
precious casket to the more precious treasure, yet * * * I am consoled
by the thought that the most homely text containing such a rule will be
more beautiful far than any words of poetry or eloquence, and that it
will endure to be read with gratitude when the rising dome of this
Capitol, with the Statue of Liberty which surmounts it, has crumbled to
dust.”
Mr. Sumner’s great speech, however, by no means ended the debate. It
brought Mr. Powell to his feet with a long and elaborate contention
against the general proposition, in the course of which he took occasion
to sneer at Sumner’s “most remarkable effort,” as one of his “long
illogical rhapsodies on Slavery, like:
‘–a Tale
Told by an Idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.'”
He professed that he wanted “the Union to be restored with the
Constitution as it is;” that he verily believed the passage of this
Amendment would be “the most effective Disunion measure that could be
passed by Congress”–and, said he, “As a lover of the Union I oppose
it.”
“The Union as it was, and the Constitution as it is,” afterward
became the Shibboleth under which the Democratic Party in the
Presidential Campaign of 1864, marched to defeat.]
He endeavored to impute the blame for the War, to the northern
Abolitionists, for, said he: “Had there been no Abolitionists, North,
there never would have been a Fire-eater, South,”–apparently ignoring
the palpable fact that had there been no Slavery in the South, there
could have been no “Abolitionists, North.”
He heatedly denounced the “fanatical gentlemen” who desired the passage
of this measure; declared they intended by its passage “to destroy the
Institution of Slavery or to destroy the Union,” and exclaimed: “Pass
this Amendment and you make an impassable chasm, as if you were to put a
lake of burning fire, between the adhering States and those who are out.
You will then have to make it a War of conquest and extermination before
you can ever bring them back under the flag of the Government. There is
no doubt about that proposition.”
Mr. Sumner, at this point, withdrew his proposed amendment, at the
suggestion of Mr. Howard, who expressed a preference “to dismiss all
reference to French Constitutions and French Codes, and go back to the
good old Anglo-Saxon language employed by our Fathers, in the Ordinance
of 1787, (in) an expression adjudicated upon repeatedly, which is
perfectly well understood both by the public and by Judicial Tribunals–
a phrase, which is peculiarly near and dear to the people of the
Northwestern Territory, from whose soil Slavery was excluded by it.”
referred to:
“ART. 6.–There shall be neither Slavery nor Involuntary Servitude
in the said Territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes,
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted: * * *.”]
Mr. Davis thereupon made another opposition speech and, at its
conclusion, Mr. Saulsbury offered, as a substitute, an Article,
comprising no less than twenty sections–that, he said, “embodied in
them some things” which “did not meet his personal approbation,” but he
had consented to offer them to the Senate as “a Compromise”–as “a Peace
offering.”
The Saulsbury substitute being voted down, the debate closed with a
speech by Mr. McDougall–an eloquent protest from his standpoint, in
which, after endorsing the wild statement of Mr. Hendricks that 250,000
of the people of African descent had been prematurely destroyed on the
Mississippi, he continued.
“This policy will ingulf them. It is as simple a truth as has ever been
taught by any history. The Slaves of ancient time were not the Slaves
of a different Race. The Romans compelled the Gaul and the Celt,
brought them to their own Country, and some of them became great poets,
and some eloquent orators, and some accomplished wits, and they became
citizens of the Republic of Greece, and of the Republic of Rome, and of
the Empire.
“This is not the condition of these persons with whom we are now
associated, and about whose affairs we undertake to establish
administration. They can never commingle with us. It may not be within
the reading of some learned Senators, and yet it belongs to demonstrated
Science, that the African race and the European are different; and I
here now say it as a fact established by science, that the eighth
generation of the Mixed race formed by the union of the African and
European, cannot continue their species. Quadroons have few children;
with Octoroons reproduction is impossible.
“It establishes as a law of nature that the African has no proper
relation to the European, Caucasian, blood. I would have them kindly
treated. * * * Against all such policy and all such conduct I shall
protest as a man, in the name of humanity, and of law, and of truth, and
of religion.”
The amendment made, as in Committee of the Whole, having been concurred
in, etc., the Joint Resolution, as originally reported by the Judiciary
Committee, was at last passed, (April 8th)–by a vote of 38 yeas to 6
nays–Messrs. Hendricks and McDougall having the uneviable distinction
of being the only two Senators, (mis-)representing Free States, who
voted against this definitive Charter of American Liberty.
YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Brown, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Conness,
Cowan, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale,
Harding, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Lane of
Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill, Nesmith, Pomeroy, Ramsey,
Sherman, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Wade,
Wilkinson, Willey, and Wilson–38.
NAYs–Messrs. Davis, Hendricks, McDougall, Powell, Riddle, and
Saulsbury.]
CHAPTER XXIV.
TREASON IN THE NORTHERN CAMPS.
The immortal Charter of Freedom had, as we have seen, with comparative
ease, after a ten days’ debate, by the power of numbers, run the
gauntlet of the Senate; but now it was to be subjected to the much more
trying and doubtful ordeal of the House. What would be its fate there?
This was a question which gave to Mr. Lincoln, and the other friends of
Liberty and Union, great concern.
It is true that various votes had recently been taken in that body, upon
propositions which had an indirect bearing upon the subject of
Emancipation, as, for instance, that of the 1st of February, 1864, when,
by a vote of 80 yeas to 46 nays, it had adopted a Resolution declaring
“That a more vigorous policy to enlist, at an early day, and in larger
numbers, in our Army, persons of African descent, would meet the
approbation of the House;” and that vote, although indirect, being so
very nearly a two-thirds vote, was most encouraging. But, on the other
hand, a subsequent Resolution, squarely testing the sense of the House
upon the subject, had been carried by much less than a two-thirds vote.
This latter Resolution, offered by Mr. Arnold, after conference with Mr.
Lincoln, with the very purpose of making a test, was in these direct
terms:
“Resolved, That the Constitution shall be so amended as to Abolish
Slavery in the United States wherever it now exists, and to prohibit its
existence in every part thereof forever.”
The vote, adopting it, was but 78 yeas to 62 nays. * This vote,
therefore, upon the Arnold Resolution, being nowhere near the two-thirds
affirmative vote necessary to secure the passage through the House of
the Senate Joint Resolution on this subject amendatory of the
Constitution, was most discouraging.
It was definite enough, however, to show the necessity of a change from
the negative to the affirmative side of at least fifteen votes. While
therefore the outlook was discouraging it was far from hopeless. The
debate in the Senate had already had its effect upon the public mind.
That, and the utterances of Mr. Lincoln–and further discussion in the
House, it was thought, might produce such a pressure from the loyal
constituencies both in the Free and Border Slave-States as to compel
success.
But from the very beginning of the year 1864, as if instinctively aware
that their Rebel friends were approaching the crisis of their fate, and
needed now all the help that their allies of the North could give them,
the Anti-War Democrats, in Congress, and out, had been stirring
themselves with unusual activity.
In both Houses of Congress, upon all possible occasions, they had been
striving, as they still strove, with the venom of their widely-
circulated speeches, to poison the loyal Northern and Border-State mind,
in the hope that the renomination of Mr. Lincoln might be defeated, the
chance for Democratic success at the coming Presidential election be
thereby increased, and, if nothing else came of it, the Union Cause be
weakened and the Rebel Cause correspondingly strengthened.
At the same time, evidently under secret instructions from their
friends, the Conspirators in arms, they endeavored to create heart-
burnings and jealousies and ill-feeling between the Eastern (especially
the New England) States and the Western States, and unceasingly attacked
the Protective-Tariff, Internal Revenue, the Greenback, the Draft, and
every other measure or thing upon which the life of the Union depended.
Most of these Northern-Democratic agitators, “Stealing the livery of
Heaven to serve the Devil in,” endeavored to conceal their treacherous
designs under a veneer of gushing lip-loyalty, but that disguise was
“too thin” to deceive either their contemporaries or those who come
after them. Some of their language too, as well as their blustering
manner, strangely brought back to recollection the old days of Slavery
when the plantation-whip was cracked in the House, and the air was blue
with execration of New England.
Said Voorhees, of Indiana, (January 11, 1864) when the House was
considering a Bill “to increase the Internal Revenue and for other
purposes:”
“I want to know whether the West has any friends upon the floor of this
House? We pay every dollar that is to be levied by this Tax Bill. * *
* The Manufacturing Interest pays not a dollar into the public Treasury
that stays there. And yet airs of patriotism are put on here by men
representing that interest. I visited New England last Summer, * * *
when I heard the swelling hum of her Manufactories, and saw those who
only a short time ago worked but a few hands, now working their
thousands, and rolling up their countless wealth, I felt that it was an
unhealthy prosperity. To my mind it presented a wealth wrung from the
labor, the sinews, the bone and muscle of the men who till the soil,
taxed to an illegitimate extent to foster and support that great System
of local wealth. * * * I do not intend to stand idly by and see one
portion of the Country robbed and oppressed for the benefit of another.”
And the same day, replying to Mr. Morrill of Vermont, he exclaimed: “Let
him show me that the plethoric, bloated Manufacturers of New England are
paying anything to support the Government, and I will recognize it.”
Washburne, of Illinois got back at this part of Mr. Voorhees’s speech
rather neatly, by defending the North-west as being “not only willing to
stand taxation” which had been “already imposed, but * * * any
additional taxation which,” said he, “may be necessary to crush out this
Rebellion, and to hang the Rebels in the South, and the Rebel
sympathizers in the North.” And, he pointedly added: “Complaint has
been made against New England. I know that kind of talk. I have heard
too often that kind of slang about New England. I heard it here for ten
years, when your Barksdales, and your Keitts’s, and your other Traitors,
now in arms against the Government, filled these Halls with their
pestilential assaults not only upon New England, but on the Free North
generally.”
Kelley of Pennsylvania, however, more fitly characterized the speech of
Voorhees, when he termed it “a pretty, indeed a somewhat striking,
paraphrase of the argument of Mr. Lamar, the Rebel Agent,–[in 1886,
Secretary of the Interior]–to his confreres in Treason, as we find it
in the recently published correspondence: ‘Drive gold coin out of the
Country, and induce undue Importation of Foreign products so as to
strike down the Financial System. You can have no further hope for
Foreign recognition. It is evident the weight of arms is against us;
and it is clear that we can only succeed by striking down the Financial
System of the Country.’ It was an admirable paraphrase of the
Instructions of Mr. Lamar to the Rebel Agents in the North.”
The impression was at this time abroad, and there were not wanting
elements of proof, that certain members of Congress were trusted
Lieutenants of the Arch-copperhead and Outlaw, Vallandigham. Certain it
is, that many of these leaders, six months before, attended and
addressed the great gathering from various parts of the Country, of
nearly one hundred thousand Vallandigham-Anti-War Peace-Democrats, at
Springfield, Illinois–the very home of Abraham Lincoln–which adopted,
during a lull, when they were not yelling themselves hoarse for
Vallandigham, a resolution declaring against “the further offensive
prosecution of the War” as being subversive of the Constitution and
Government, and proposing a National Peace Convention, and, as a
consequence, Peace, “the Union as it was,” and, substantially such
Constitutional guarantees as the Rebels might choose to demand! And
this too, at a time (June 13, 1863), when Grant, after many recent
glorious victories, had been laying siege to Vicksburg, and its Rebel
Army of 37,000 men, for nearly a month, with every reason to hope for
its speedy fall.
No wonder that under such circumstances, the news of such a gathering of
the Northern Democratic sympathizers with Treason, and of their adoption
of such treasonable Resolutions, should encourage the Rebels in the same
degree that Union men were disheartened! No wonder that Lee, elated by
this and other evidences of Northern sympathy with Rebellion, at once
determined to commence a second grand invasion of the North, and on the
very next day (June 14th,) moved Northward with all his Rebel hosts to
be welcomed, he fondly hoped, by his Northern friends of Maryland and
elsewhere! As we have seen, it took the bloody Battle of Gettysburg to
undeceive him as to the character of that welcome.
Further than this, Mr. Cox had stumped Ohio, in the succeeding election,
in a desperate effort to make the banished Traitor, Vallandigham–the
Chief Northern commander of the “Knights of the Golden Circle”
(otherwise known as the “Order of the Sons of Liberty,” and “O. A. K.”
or “Order of American Knights”)–Governor of that great State.
commander of this many-named treasonable organization, which in the
North alone numbered over 500,000 men.
August, 1864.–See Report of Judge Advocate Holt on certain “Secret
Associations,” in Appendix,]
And it only lacked a few months of the time when quantities of copies of
the treasonable Ritual of the “Order of American Knights”–as well as
correspondence touching the purchase of thousands of Garibaldi rifles
for transportation to the West–were found in the offices of leading
Democrats then in Congress.
When, therefore, it is said, and repeated, that there were not wanting
elements of proof, outside of Congressional utterances and actions, that
leading Democrats in Congress were trusted Lieutenants of the Supreme
Commander of over half a million of Northern Rebel-sympathizers bound
together, and to secrecy, by oaths, which were declared to be paramount
to all other oaths, the violation of which subjected the offender to a
shameful death somewhat like that, of being “hung, drawn, and
quartered,” which was inflicted in the middle ages for the crime of
Treason to the Crown–it will be seen that the statement is supported by
circumstantial, if not by positive and direct, evidence.
Whether the Coxes, the Garret Davises, the Saulsburys, the Fernando
Woods, the Alexander Longs, the Allens, the Holmans, and many other
prominent Congressmen of that sort,–were merely in close communion with
these banded “Knights,” or were actual members of their secret
organizations, may be an open question. But it is very certain that if
they all were not oath-bound members, they generally pursued the precise
methods of those who were; and that, as a rule, while they often loudly
proclaimed loyalty and love for the Union, they were always ready to act
as if their loyalty and love were for the so-called Confederacy.
Indeed, it was one of these other “loyal” Democrats, who even preceded
Voorhees, in raising the Sectional cry of: The West, against New
England. It was on this same Internal Revenue Bill, that Holman of
Indiana had, the day before Voorhees’s attack, said:
“If the Manufacture of the Northwest is to be taxed so heavily, a
corresponding rate of increase must be imposed on the Manufactures of
New England and Pennsylvania, or, will gentlemen tax us without limit
for the benefit of their own Section? * * * I protest against what I
believe is intended to be a discrimination against one Section of the
Country, by increasing the tax three-fold, without a corresponding
increase upon the burdens of other Sections.”
But these dreadfully “loyal” Democrats–who did the bidding of
traitorous masters in their Treason to the Union, and thus, while
posturing as “Patriots,” “fired upon the rear” of our hard-pressed
Armies–were super-sensitive on this point. And, when they could get
hold of a quiet sort of a man, inclined to peaceful methods of
discussion, how they would, terrier-like, pounce upon him, and extract
from him, if they could, some sort of negative satisfaction!
Thus, for instance, on the 22nd of January, when one of these quiet men
–Morris of New York–was in the midst of an inoffensive speech, Mr. Cox
“bristled up,” and blusteringly asked whether he meant to say that he
(Cox) had “ever been the apologist or the defender of a Traitor?”
And Morris not having said so, mildly replied that he did “not so
charge”–all of which little bit of by-play hugely pleased the touchy
Mr. Cox, and his clansmen.
But on the day following, their smiles vanished under the words of
Spalding or Ohio, who, after referring to the crocodile-tears shed by
Democratic Congressmen over the Confiscation Resolution–on the pretense
that it would hunt down “innocent women and children” of the Rebels,
when they had never a word of sympathy for the widows and children of
the two hundred thousand dead soldiers of the Union-continued:
“They can see our poor soldiers return, minus an arm, minus a leg, as
they pass through these lobbies, but their only care is to protect the
property of Rebels. And we are asked by one of my colleagues, (Mr. Cox)
does the gentleman from New York intend to call us Traitors? My friend,
Mr. Morris, modestly answered no! If he had asked that question of me,
he knows what my answer would have been! I have seen Rebel officers at
Johnson’s Island, and I have taken them by the hand because they have
fought us fairly in the field and did not seek to break down the
Government while living under its protection. Yes, Sir, that gentleman
knows that I would have said to him that I have more respect for an open
and avowed Traitor in the field, than for a sympathizer in this Hall.
Four months have scarcely gone by since that gentleman and his political
friends were advocating the election of a man for the Gubernatorial
office in my State, who was an open and avowed advocate of Secession–AN
OUTLAW AT THAT!”
And old Thaddeus Stevens–the clear-sighted and courageous “Old
Commoner”–followed up Spalding, and struck very close to the root and
animus of the Democratic opposition, when he exclaimed:
“All this struggle by calm and dignified and moderate ‘Patriots;’ all
this clamor against ‘Radicals;’ all this cry of ‘the Union as it Was,
and the Constitution as it Is;’ is but a persistent effort to
reestablish Slavery, and to rivet anew and forever the chains of Bondage
on the limbs of Immortal beings. May the God of Justice thwart their
designs and paralyze their wicked efforts!”
CHAPTER XXV.
“THE FIRE IN THE REAR.”
The treacherous purposes of professedly-loyal Copperheads being seen
through, and promptly and emphatically denounced to the Country by Union
statesmen, the Copperheads aforesaid concluded that the profuse
circulation of their own Treason-breeding speeches–through the medium
of the treasonable organizations before referred to, permeating the
Northern States,–would more than counteract all that Union men could
say or do. Besides, the fiat had gone forth, from their Rebel masters
at Richmond, to Agitate the North.
Hence, day after day, Democrat after Democrat, in the one House or the
other, continued to air his disloyal opinions, and to utter more or less
virulent denunciations of the Government which guarded and protected
him.
Thus, Brooks, of New York, on the 25th of January (1864), sneeringly
exclaimed: “Why, what absurdity it is to talk at this Capitol of
prosecuting the War by the liberation of Slaves, when from the dome of
this building there can be heard at this hour the booming of cannon in
the distance!”
Thus, also, on the day following, Fernando Wood–the same man who, while
Mayor of New York at the outbreak of the Rebellion, had, under Rebel-
guidance, proposed the Secession from the Union, and the Independence,
of that great Metropolis,–declared to the House that: “No Government
has pursued a foe with such unrelenting, vindictive malignity as we are
now pursuing those who came into the Union with us, whose blood has been
freely shed on every battle-field of the Country until now, with our
own; who fought by our side in the American Revolution, and in the War
of 1812 with Great Britain; who bore our banners bravest and highest in
our victorious march from Vera Cruz to the City of Mexico, and who but
yesterday sat in these Halls contributing toward the maintenance of our
glorious institutions.”
Then he went on, in the spirit of prophecy, to declare that: “No purely
agricultural people, fighting for the protection of their own Domestic
Institutions upon their own soil, have ever yet been conquered. I say
further, that no revolted people have ever been subdued after they have
been able to maintain an Independent government for three years.” And
then, warming up to an imperative mood, he made this explicit
announcement: “We are at War. * * * Whether it be a Civil War,
Rebellion, Revolution, or Foreign War, it matters little. IT MUST
CEASE; and I want this Administration to tell the American People WHEN
it will cease!” Again, only two days afterward, he took occasion to
characterize a Bill, amendatory of the enrollment Act, as “this
infamous, Unconstitutional conscription Act!”
C. A. White, of Ohio, was another of the malcontents who undertook, with
others of the same Copperhead faith, to “maintain, that,” as he
expressed it, “the War in which we are at present engaged is wrong in
itself; that the policy adopted by the Party in power for its
prosecution is wrong; that the Union cannot be restored, or, if
restored, maintained, by the exercise of the coercive power of the
Government, by War; that the War is opposed to the restoration of the
Union, destructive of the rights of the States and the liberties of the
People. It ought, therefore, to be brought to a speedy and immediate
close.”
It was about this time also that, emboldened by immunity from punishment
for these utterances in the interest of armed Rebels, Edgerton of
Indiana, was put forward to offer resolutions “for Peace, upon the basis
of a restoration of the Federal Union under the Constitution as it is,”
etc.
Thereafter, in both Senate and House, such speeches by Rebel-
sympathizers, the aiders and abettors of Treason, grew more frequent and
more virulent than ever. As was well said to the House, by one of the
Union members from Ohio (Mr. Eckley):
“A stranger, if he listened to the debates here, would think himself in
the Confederate Congress. I do not believe that if these Halls were
occupied to-day by Davis, Toombs, Wigfall, Rhett, and Pryor, they could
add anything to the violence of assault, the falsity of accusation, or
the malignity of attack, with which the Government has been assailed,
and the able, patriotic, and devoted men who are charged with its
Administration have been maligned, in both ends of the Capitol. The
closing scenes of the Thirty-Sixth Congress, the treasonable
declarations there made, contain nothing that we cannot hear, in the
freedom of debate, without going to Richmond or to the camps of Treason,
where most of the actors in those scenes are now in arms against us.”
With such a condition of things in Congress, it is not surprising that
the Richmond Enquirer announced that the North was “distracted,
exhausted, and impoverished,” and would, “through the agency of a strong
conservative element in the Free States,” soon treat with the Rebels “on
acceptable terms.”
Things indeed had reached such a pass, in the House of Representatives
especially, that it was felt they could not much longer go on in this
manner; that an example must be made of some one or other of these
Copperheads. But the very knowledge of the existence of such a feeling
of just and patriotic irritation against the continued free utterance of
such sentiments in the Halls of Congress, seemed only to make some of
them still more defiant. And, when the 8th of April dawned, it was
known among all the Democrats in Congress, that Alexander Long proposed
that day to make a speech which would “go a bow-shot beyond them all” in
uttered Treason. He would speak right out, what the other Conspirators
thought and meant, but dared not utter, before the World.
A crowded floor, and packed galleries, were on hand to listen to the
written, deliberate Treason, as it fell from his lips in the House. His
speech began with an arraignment of the Government for treachery,
incompetence, failure, tyranny, and all sorts of barbarous actions and
harsh intentions, toward the Rebels–which led him to the indignant
exclamation:
“Will they throw down their arms and submit to the terms? Who shall
believe that the free, proud American blood, which courses with as quick
pulsation through their veins as our own, will not be spilled to the
last drop in resistance?”
Warming up, he proceeded to say: “Can the Union be restored by War? I
answer most unhesitatingly and deliberately, No, never; ‘War is final,
eternal separation.'”
He claimed that the War was “wrong;” that it was waged “in violation of
the Constitution,” and would “if continued, result speedily in the
destruction of the Government and the loss of Civil Liberty, and ought
therefore, to immediately cease.”
He held also “that the Confederate States are out of the Union,
occupying the position of an Independent Power de facto; have been
acknowledged as a belligerent both by Foreign Nations and our own
Government; maintained their Declaration of Independence, for three
years, by force of arms; and the War has cut asunder all the obligations
that bound them under the Constitution.”
“Much better,” said he, “would it have been for us in the beginning,
much better would it be for us now, to consent to a division of our
magnificent Empire, and cultivate amicable relations with our estranged
brethren, than to seek to hold them to us by the power of the sword. *
* * I am reluctantly and despondingly forced to the conclusion that the
Union is lost, never to be restored. * * * I see neither North nor
South, any sentiment on which it is possible to build a Union. * * * in
attempting to preserve our Jurisdiction over the Southern States we have
lost our Constitutional Form of Government over the Northern. * * * The
very idea upon which this War is founded, coercion of States, leads to
despotism. * * * I now believe that there are but two alternatives, and
they are either an acknowledgment of the Independence of the South as an
independent Nation, or their complete subjugation and extermination as a
People; and of these alternatives I prefer the former.”
As Long took his seat, amid the congratulations of his Democratic
friends, Garfield arose, and, to compliments upon the former’s peculiar
candor and honesty, added denunciation for his Treason. After drawing
an effective parallel between Lord Fairfax and Robert E. Lee, both of
whom had cast their lots unwillingly with the enemies of this Land, when
the Wars of the Revolution and of the Rebellion respectively opened,
Garfield proceeded:
“But now, when hundreds of thousands of brave souls have gone up to God
under the shadow of the Flag, and when thousands more, maimed and
shattered in the Contest, are sadly awaiting the deliverance of death;
now, when three years of terrific warfare have raged over us, when our
Armies have pushed the Rebellion back over mountains and rivers and
crowded it back into narrow limits, until a wall of fire girds it; now,
when the uplifted hand of a majestic People is about to let fall the
lightning of its conquering power upon the Rebellion; now, in the quiet
of this Hall, hatched in the lowest depths of a similar dark Treason,
there rises a Benedict Arnold and proposes to surrender us all up, body
and spirit, the Nation and the Flag, its genius and its honor, now and
forever, to the accursed Traitors to our Country. And that proposition
comes–God forgive and pity my beloved State!–it comes from a citizen
of the honored and loyal Commonwealth of Ohio! I implore you, brethren
in this House, not to believe that many such births ever gave pangs to
my mother-State such as she suffered when that Traitor was born!”
As he uttered these sturdy words, the House and galleries were agitated
with that peculiar rustling movement and low murmuring sound known as a
“sensation,” while the Republican side with difficulty restrained the
applause they felt like giving, until he sadly proceeded:
“I beg you not to believe that on the soil of that State another such
growth has ever deformed the face of Nature and darkened the light of
God’s day.”
The hush that followed was broken by the suggestive whisper:
“Vallandigham!”
“But, ah,” continued the Speaker–as his voice grew sadder still–“I am
reminded that there are other such. My zeal and love for Ohio have
carried me too far. I retract. I remember that only a few days since,
a political Convention met at the Capital of my State, and almost
decided, to select from just such material, a representative for the
Democratic Party in the coming contest; and today, what claims to be a
majority of the Democracy of that State say that they have been cheated
or they would have made that choice!”
York.]
After referring to the “insidious work” of the “Knights of the Golden
Circle” in seeking “to corrupt the Army and destroy its efficiency;” the
“riots and murders which,” said he, “their agents are committing
throughout the Loyal North, under the lead and guidance of the Party
whose Representatives sit yonder across the aisle;” he continued: “and
now, just as the time is coming on when we are to select a President for
the next four years, one rises among them and fires the Beacon, throws
up the blue-light–which will be seen, and rejoiced over, at the Rebel
Capital in Richmond–as the signal that the Traitors in our camp are
organized and ready for their hellish work! I believe the utterance of
to-day is the uplifted banner of revolt. I ask you to mark the signal
that blazes here, and see if there will not soon appear the answering
signals of Traitors all over the Land. * * * If these men do mean to
light the torch of War in all our homes; if they have resolved to begin
the fearful work which will redden our streets, and this Capitol, with
blood, the American People should know it at once, and prepare to meet
it.”
At the close of Mr. Garfield’s patriotic and eloquent remarks, Mr. Long
again got the floor, declared that what he had said, he believed to be
right, and he would “stand by it,” though he had to “stand solitary and
alone,” and “even if it were necessary to brave bayonets, and prisons,
and all the tyranny which may be imposed by the whole power and force of
the Administration.”
Said he: “I have deliberately uttered my sentiments in that speech, and
I will not retract one syllable of it.” And, to “rub it in” a little
stronger, he exclaimed, as he took his seat, just before adjournment:
“Give me Liberty, even if confined to an Island of Greece, or a Canton
of Switzerland, rather than an Empire and a Despotism as we have here
to-day!”
This treasonable speech naturally created much excitement throughout the
Country.
On the following day (Saturday, April 9, 1864), immediately after
prayer, the reading of the Journal being dispensed with, the Speaker of
the House (Colfax) came down from the Speaker’s Chair, and, from the
floor, offered a Preamble and Resolution, which ended thus:
“Resolved, That Alexander Long, a Representative from the second
district of Ohio, having, on the 8th day of April, 1864, declared
himself in favor of recognizing the Independence and Nationality of the
so-called Confederacy now in arms against the Union, and thereby ‘given
aid, Countenance and encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility
to the United States,’ is hereby expelled.”
The debate which ensued consumed nearly a week, and every member of
prominence, on both the Republican and Democratic sides, took part in
it–the Democrats almost invariably being careful to protest their own
loyalty, and yet attempting to justify the braver and more candid
utterances of the accused member.
Mr. Cox led off, April 9th, in the defense, by counterattack. He quoted
remarks made to the House (March 18, 1864) by Mr. Julian, of Indiana, to
the effect that “Our Country, united and Free, must be saved, at
whatever hazard or cost; and nothing, not even the Constitution, must be
allowed to hold back the uplifted arm of the Government in blasting the
power of the Rebels forever;”–and upon this, adopting the language of
another–[Judge Thomas, of Massachusetts.]–Mr. Cox declared that “to
make this a War, with the sword in one hand to defend the Constitution,
and a hammer in the other to break it to pieces, is no less treasonable
than Secession itself; and that, outside the pale of the Constitution,
the whole struggle is revolutionary.”
He thought, for such words as he had just quoted, Julian ought to have
been expelled, if those of Long justified expulsion!
Finally, being pressed by Julian to define his own position, as between
the Life of the Nation, and the Infraction of the United States
Constitution, Mr. Cox said: “I will say this, that UNDER NO
CIRCUMSTANCES CONCEIVABLE BY THE HUMAN MIND WOULD I EVER VIOLATE THAT
CONSTITUTION FOR ANY PURPOSE!”
This sentiment was loudly applauded, and received with cries of “THAT IS
IT!” “THAT’S IT!” by the Democratic side of the House, apparently in
utter contempt for the express and emphatic declaration of Jefferson
that: “A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the
highest duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws
of Necessity, of Self-preservation, of SAVING OUR COUNTRY WHEN IN
DANGER, are of higher obligation. To LOSE OUR COUNTRY by a scrupulous
adherence to written law WOULD BE TO LOSE THE LAW ITSELF, with Life,
Liberty, Property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus
absolutely SACRIFICING THE END TO THE MEANS.”
for their information, and which may be found at page 542 of vol.
v., of Jefferson’s Works.]
Indeed these extreme sticklers for the letter of the Constitution, who
would have sacrificed Country, kindred, friends, honesty, truth, and all
ambitions on Earth and hopes for Heaven, rather than violate it–for
that is what Mr. Cox’s announcement and the Democratic endorsement of it
meant, if they meant anything–were of the same stripe as those
querulous Ancients, for the benefit of whom the Apostle wrote: “For THE
LETTER KILLETH, but the Spirit giveth life.”
And now, inspired apparently by the reckless utterances
of Long, if not by the more cautious diatribe of Cox, Harris of
Maryland, determining if possible to outdo them all, not only declared
that he was willing to go with his friend Long wherever the House chose
to send him, but added: “I am a peace man, a radical peace man; and I am
for Peace by the recognition of the South, for the recognition of the
Southern Confederacy; and I am for acquiescence in the doctrine of
Secession.” And, said he, in the midst of the laughter which followed
the sensation his treasonable words occasioned, “Laugh as you may, you
have got to come to it!” And then, with that singular obfuscation of
ideas engendered, in the heads of their followers, by the astute Rebel-
sympathizing leaders, he went on:
“I am for Peace, and I am for Union too. I am as good a Union man as
any of you. [Laughter.] I am a better Union man than any of you!
[Great Laughter.] * * * I look upon War as Disunion.”
After declaring that, if the principle of the expulsion Resolution was
to be carried out, his “friend,” Mr. Long, “would be a martyr in a
glorious cause”–he proceeded to announce his own candidacy for
expulsion, in the following terms:
“Mr. Speaker, in the early part of this Secession movement, there was a
Resolution offered, pledging men and money to carry on the War. My
principles were then, and are now, against the War. I stood, solitary
and alone, in voting against that Resolution, and whenever a similar
proposition is brought here it will meet with my opposition. Not one
dollar, nor one man, I swear, by the Eternal, will I vote for this
infernal, this stupendous folly, more stupendous than ever disgraced any
civilized People on the face of God’s Earth. If that be Treason, make
the most of it!
“The South asked you to let them go in peace. But no, you said you
would bring them into subjugation. That is not done yet, and God
Almighty grant that it never may be. I hope that you will never
subjugate the South. If she is to be ever again in the Union, I hope it
will be with her own consent; and I hope that that consent will be
obtained by some other mode than by the sword. ‘If this be Treason,
make the most of it!'”
An extraordinary scene at once occurred–Mr. Tracy desiring “to know
whether, in these Halls, the gentleman from Maryland invoked Almighty
God that the American Arms should not prevail?” “Whether such language
is not Treason?” and “whether it is in order to talk Treason in this
Hall?”–his patriotic queries being almost drowned in the incessant
cries of “Order!” “Order!” and great disorder, and confusion, on the
Democratic side of the House.
Finally the treasonable language was taken down by the Clerk, and, while
a Resolution for the expulsion of Mr. Harris was being written out, Mr.
Fernando Wood–coming, as he said, from a bed of “severe sickness,”
quoted the language used by Mr. Long, to wit:
“I now believe there are but two alternatives, and they are either the
acknowledgment of the Independence of the South as an independent
Nation, or their complete subjugation and extermination as a People; and
of these alternatives I prefer the former”–and declared that “if he is
to be expelled for the utterance of that sentiment, you may include me
in it, because I concur fully in that sentiment.”
opinions.]
Every effort was unavailingly made by the Democrats, under the lead of
Messrs. Cox–[In 1886 American Minister at Constantinople.]–and
Pendleton,–[In 1886 American Minister at Berlin.]–to prevent action
upon the new Resolution of expulsion, which was in these words:
“Whereas, Hon. Benjamin G. Harris, a member of the House of
Representatives of the United States from the State of Maryland, has on
this day used the following language, to wit: ‘The South asked you to
let them go in peace. But no; you said you would bring them into
subjection. That is not done yet, and God Almighty grant that it never
may be. I hope that you will never subjugate the South.’ And whereas,
such language is treasonable, and is a gross disrespect of this House:
Therefore, “Be it Resolved, That the said Benjamin G. Harris be expelled
from this House.”
Upon reaching a vote, however, the Resolution was lost, there being only
81 yeas, to 58 (Democratic) nays–two-thirds not having voted
affirmatively. Subsequently, despite Democratic efforts to obstruct, a
Resolution, declaring Harris to be “an unworthy Member” of the House,
and “severely” censuring him, was adopted.
The debate upon the Long-expulsion Resolution now proceeded, and its
mover, in view of the hopelessness of securing a two-thirds affirmative
vote, having accepted an amendment comprising other two Resolutions and
a Preamble, the question upon adopting these was submitted on the 14th
of April. They were in the words following:
“Whereas, ALEXANDER LONG, a Representative from the second district of
Ohio, by his open declarations in the National Capitol, and publications
in the City of New York, has shown himself to be in favor of a
recognition of the so-called Confederacy now trying to establish itself
upon the ruins of our Country, thereby giving aid and comfort to the
Enemy in that destructive purpose–aid to avowed Traitors, in creating
an illegal Government within our borders, comfort to them by assurances
of their success and affirmations of the justice of their Cause; and
whereas, such conduct is at the same time evidence of disloyalty, and
inconsistent with his oath of office, and his duty as a Member of this
Body: Therefore,
“Resolved, That the said Alexander Long, a Representative from the
second district of Ohio, be, and he is hereby declared to be an unworthy
Member of the House of Representatives.
“Resolved, That the Speaker shall read these Resolutions to the said
Alexander Long during the session of the House.”
The first of these Resolutions was adopted, by 80 yeas to 69 nays; the
second was tabled, by 71 yeas to 69 nays; and the Preamble was agreed
to, by 78 yeas to 63 nays.
And, among the 63 Democrats, who were not only unwilling to declare
Alexander Long “an unworthy Member,” or to have the Speaker read such a
declaration to him in a session of the House, but also refused by their
votes even to intimate that his conduct evidenced disloyalty, or gave
aid and comfort to the Enemy, were the names of such democrats as Cox,
Eldridge, Holman, Kernan, Morrisson, Pendleton, Samuel J. Randall,
Voorhees, and Fernando Wood.
Hence Mr. Long not only escaped expulsion for his treasonable
utterances, but did not even receive the “severe censure” which, in
addition to being declared (like himself) “an unworthy Member,” had been
voted to Mr. Harris for recklessly rushing into the breach to help him!
Anti-War (or Peace) Democrats, commonly called “Copperheads,” who
sympathized with the Rebellion, and opposed the War for the Union;
and the War (or Union) Democrats, who favored a vigorous
prosecution of the War for the preservation of the Union.] CHAPTER XXVI.
“THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT” DEFEATED IN THE HOUSE.
The debate in the House of Representatives, upon the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution–interrupted by the treasonable episode
referred to in the last Chapter–was subsequently resumed.
Meanwhile, however, Fort Pillow had been stormed, and its garrison of
Whites and Blacks, massacred.
And now commenced the beginning of the end-so far as the Military aspect
of the Rebellion was concerned. Early in May, Sherman’s Atlanta
Campaign commenced, and, simultaneously, General Grant began his
movement toward Richmond. In quick succession came the news of the
bloody battles of the Wilderness, and those around Spottsylvania, Va.;
at Buzzard Roost Gap, Snake Creek Gap, and Dalton, Ga.; Drury’s Bluff,
Va.; Resaca, Ga.; the battles of the North Anna, Va.; those around
Dallas, and New Hope church, Ga; the crossing of Grant’s forces to the
South side of the James and the assault on Petersburg. While the Union
Armies were thus valiantly attacking and beating those of the Rebels, on
many a sanguinary field the loyal men of the North, both in and out of
Congress, pressed for favorable action upon the Thirteenth Amendment.
“Friends of the wounded in Fredericksburg from the Battle of the
Wilderness”–exclaimed Horace Greeley in the New York Tribune, of May
31st,–“friends and relatives of the soldiers of Grant’s Army beyond the
Wilderness, let us all join hands and swear upon our Country’s altar
that we will never cease this War until African Slavery in the United
States is dead forever, and forever buried!”
Peace Democrats, however, were deaf to all such entreaties. On the very
same day, Mr. Holman, in the House, objected even to the second reading
of the Joint Resolution Amendatory of the Constitution, and there were
so many “Peace Democrats” to back him, that the vote was: 55 yeas to 76
nays, on the question “shall the Joint Resolution be rejected!”
The old cry, that had been repeated by Hendricks and others, in the
Senate and House, time and again, was still used–threadbare though it
was–“this is not the right time for it!” On this very day, for
instance, Mr. Herrick said: “I ask if this is the proper time for our
People to consider so grave a measure as the Amendment of the
Constitution in so vital a point? * * * this is no fitting time for
such work.”
Very different was the attitude of Kellogg, of New York, and well did he
show up the depths to which the Democracy–the Peace Democracy–had now
fallen. “We are told,” said he, “of a War Democracy, and such there
are–their name is legion–good men and true; they are found in the
Union ranks bearing arms in support of the Government and the
Administration that wields it. At the ballot-box, whether at home or in
the camp, they are Union men, and vote as they fight, and hold little in
common with the political leaders of the Democratic Party in or out of
this Hall–the Seymours, the Woods, the Vallandighams, the Woodwards,
and their indorsers, who hold and control the Democratic Party here, and
taint it with Treason, till it is a stench in the nostrils of all
patriotic men.”
After referring to the fact that the leaders of the Rebellion had from
the start relied confidently upon assistance from the Northern
Democracy, he proceeded:
“The Peace Democracy, and mere Party-hacks in the North, are fulfilling
their masters’ expectations industriously, unceasingly, and as far as in
them lies. Not even the shouts for victory, in these Halls, can divert
their Southern allies here. A sullen gloom at the defeat and
discomfiture of their Southern brethren settles down on their disastrous
countenances, from which no ray of joy can be reflected. * * * They
even vote solid against a law to punish guerrillas.
“Sir,” continued he, “in my judgment, many of those who withhold from
their Country the support they would otherwise give, find allegiance to
Party too strong for their patriotism. * * * Rejecting the example and
counsels of Stanton and Dickinson and Butler and Douglas and Dix and
Holt and Andrew Johnson and Logan and Rosecrans and Grant and a host of
others, all Democrats of the straightest sect, to forget all other ties,
and cleave only to their Country for their Country’s sake, and rejecting
the overtures and example of the Republican Party to drop and forget
their Party name, that all might unite and band together for their
Country’s salvation as Union men, they turn a deaf ear and cold
shoulder, and sullenly pass by on the other side, thanking God they are
not as other men are, and lend, if at all, a calculating, qualified, and
conditional and halting support, under protest, to their Country’s
cause; thus justifying the only hope of the Rebellion to-day, that Party
spirit at the North will distract its counsels, divide and discourage
and palsy its efforts, and ultimately make way for the Traitor and the
parricide to do their worst.”
Besides the set speeches made against the proposed
Constitutional amendment in the House, Peace-Democrats of the Senate
continued to keep up a running fire at it in that Chamber, on every
possible occasion. Garrett Davis was especially garrulous on the
subject, and also launched the thunders of his wrath at the President
quite frequently and even vindictively. For instance, speaking in the
Senate–[May 31,1864,]–of the right of Property in Slaves; said he:
“This new-born heresy ‘Military Necessity,’ as President Lincoln claims,
and exercises it, is the sum of all political and Military villanies * *
* and it is no less absurd than it is villanous. * * * The man has
never spoken or lived who can prove by any provision of the
Constitution, or by any principle, or by any argument to be deduced
logically and fairly from it, that he has any such power as this vast,
gigantic, all-conquering and all-crushing power of Military Necessity
which he has the audacity to claim.
“This modern Emperor, this Tiberius, a sort of a Tiberius, and his
Sejanus, a sort of a Sejanus, the head of the War Department, are
organizing daily their Military Courts to try civilians. * * *
“Sir, I want one labor of love before I die. I want the President of
the United States, I want his Secretary of War, I want some of his high
officers in Military command to bring a civilian to a Military
execution, and me to have the proud privilege of prosecuting them for
murder. * * * I want the law and its just retribution to be visited
upon these great delinquents.
“I would sooner, if I had the power, bring about such an atonement as
that, than I would even put down the Rebellion. It would be a greater
victory in favor of Freedom and Constitutional Liberty, a thousand-fold,
of all the People of America besides, than the subjugation of the Rebel
States could possibly be.”
But there seemed to be no end to the’ attacks upon the Administration,
made, in both Houses, by these peculiar Peace-Democrats. Union blood
might flow in torrents on the fields of the rebellious South, atrocities
innumerable might be committed by the Rebels, cold-blooded massacres of
Blacks and Whites, as at Fort Pillow, might occur without rebuke from
them; but let the Administration even dare to sneeze, and–woe to the
Administration.
It was not the Thirteenth Amendment only, that they assailed, but
everything else which the Administration thought might help it in its
effort to put down the Rebellion. Nor was it so much their malignant
activity in opposition to any one measure intended to strengthen the
hands of the Union, but to all such measures; and superadded to this was
the incessant bringing forward, in both Houses of Congress, by these
restless Rebel-sympathizers, of Peace-Resolutions, the mere presentation
of which would be, and were, construed by the Rebel authorities at
Richmond, as evidences of a weakening.
Even some of the best of the Peace-Democrats, like S. S. Cox, for
instance, not only assailed the Tariff–under which the Union Republican
Party sought to protect and build up American Industry, as well as to
raise as much revenue as possible to help meet the enormous current
expenditures of the Government–but also denounced our great paper-money
system, which alone enabled us to secure means to meet all deficiencies
in the revenues otherwise obtained, and thus to ultimately conquer the
hosts of Rebellion.
He declared (June 2, 1864) that “The People are the victims of the
joint-robbery of a system of bounties under the guise of duties, and of
an inconvertible and depreciated paper currency under the guise of
money,” and added: “No man is now so wise and gifted that he can save
this Nation from bankruptcy. * * * No borrowing system can save us.
The scheme of making greenbacks a legal tender, which enabled the debtor
to cheat his creditor, thereby playing the old game of kingcraft, to
debase the currency in order to aid the designs of despotism, may float
us for a while amidst the fluctuations and bubbles of the day; but as no
one possesses the power to repeal the Law of the Almighty, which decrees
(and as our Constitution has established) that gold and silver shall be
the standard of value in the World, so they will ever thus remain,
notwithstanding the legislation of Congress.”
Not satisfied with this sort of “fire in the rear,” it was attempted by
means of Democratic Free-Trade and antipaper-currency sophistries, to
arouse jealousies, heart-burnings and resentful feelings in the breasts
of those living in different parts of the Union–to implant bitter
Sectional antagonisms and implacable resentments between the Eastern
States, on the one hand, and the Western States, on the other–and thus,
by dividing, to weaken the Loyal Union States.
That this was the cold-blooded purpose of all who pursued this course,
would no doubt be warmly denied by some of them; but the fact remains no
less clear, that the effect of that course, whether so intended or not,
was to give aid and comfort to the Enemy at that critical time when the
Nation most needed all the men, money, and moral as well as material
support, it was possible to get, to put an end to the bloody Rebellion,
now–under the continuous poundings of Grant’s Army upon that of Lee in
Virginia, and the advance of Sherman’s Army upon that of Johnston in
Georgia–tottering to its overthrow. Thus this same speaker (S. S. Cox),
in his untimely speech, undertook to divide the Union-loving States
“into two great classes: the Protected States and the Unprotected
States;” and–having declared that “The Manufacturing States, mainly the
New England States and Pennsylvania, are the Protected States,” and “The
Agricultural States,” mainly the eleven Western States, which he named,
“are the Unprotected States”–proceeded to intemperately and violently
arraign New England, and especially Massachusetts, in the same way that
had years before been adopted by the old Conspirators of the South when
they sought–alas, too successfully!–to inflame the minds of Southern
citizens to a condition of unreasoning frenzy which made attempted
Nullification and subsequent armed Rebellion and Secession possible.
Well might the thoroughly loyal Grinnell, of Iowa–after exposing what
he termed the “sophistry of figures” by which Mr. Cox had seen fit “to
misrepresent and traduce” the Western States-exclaim: “Sir, I have no
words which I can use to execrate sufficiently such language, in
arraying the Sections in opposition during a time of War; as if we were
not one People, descended from one stock, having one interest, and bound
up in one destiny!”
The damage that might have been done to the Union Cause by such
malignant Democratic attacks upon the National unity and strength, may
be imagined when we reflect that at this very time the annual expenses
of our Government were over $600,000,000, and growing still larger; and
that $1.90 in legal tender notes of the United States was worth but
$1.00 in gold, with a downward tendency. Said stern old Thaddeus
Stevens, alluding on this occasion, to Statesmanship of the peculiar
stamp of the Coxes and Fernando Woods: “He who in this time will pursue
such a course of argument for the mere sake of party, can never hope to
be ranked among Statesmen; nay, Sir, he will not even rise to the
dignity of a respectable Demagogue!”
Within a week after this, (June 9, 1864), we find in the Senate also,
similarly insidious attacks upon the strength of the Government, made by
certain Northern Democrats, who never tired of undermining Loyalty, and
creating and spreading discontent among the People. The Bill then up,
for consideration, was one “to prohibit the discharge of persons from
liability to Military duty, by reason of the payment of money.”
In the terribly bloody Campaign that had now been entered upon by Grant
–in the West, under Sherman, and in the East, under his own personal
eye–it was essential to send to the front, every man possible. Hence
the necessity for a Bill of this sort, which moreover provided, in order
as far as possible to popularize conscription, that all calls for drafts
theretofore made under the Enrolling Act of March 3, 1863, should be for
not over one year’s service, etc.
This furnished the occasion for Mr. Hendricks, among other Peace
Democrats, to make opposing speeches. He, it seems, had all along been
opposed to drafting Union soldiers; and because, during the previous
Winter, the Senate had been unwilling to abolish the clause permitting a
drafted man to pay a commutation of $300 (with which money a substitute
could be procured) instead of himself going, at a time when men were not
quite so badly needed as now, therefore Mr. Hendricks pretended to think
it very strange and unjustifiable that now, when everything depended on
getting every possible man in the field, the Senate should think of
“abandoning that which it thought right last Winter!”
He opposed drafting; but if drafting must be resorted to, then he
thought that what he termed “the Horror of the Draft” should be felt by
as many of the Union people as possible!–or, in his own words: “the
Horror of the Draft ought to be divided among the People.” As if this
were not sufficient to conjure dreadful imaginings, he added: “if one
set of men are drafted this year to serve twelve months, and they have
to go because the power of the Government makes them go, whether they
can go well or not, then at the end of the year their neighbors should
be subjected to the same Horror, and let this dreadful demand upon the
service, upon the blood, and upon the life of the People be distributed
upon all.”
And, in order apparently to still further intensify public feeling
against all drafting, and sow the seeds of dissatisfaction in the hearts
of those drafted at this critical time, when the fate of the Union and
of Republican Government palpably depended upon conscription, he added:
“It is not so right to say to twenty men in a neighborhood: ‘You shall
go; you shall leave your families whether you can or not; you shall go
without the privilege of commutation whether you leave starving wives
and children behind you or not,’ and then say to every other man of the
neighborhood: ‘Because we have taken these twenty men for three years,
you shall remain with your wives and children safely and comfortably at
home for these three years.’ I like this feature of the amendment,
because it distributes the Horror of the Draft more equally and justly
over the whole People.”
Not satisfied with rolling the “Horror of the Draft” so often and
trippingly over his tongue, he also essayed the role of Prophet in the
interest of the tottering god of Slavery. “The People,” said he,
“expect great results from this Campaign; and when another year comes
rolling around, and it is found that this War is not closed, and that
there is no reasonable probability of its early close, my colleague
(Lane) and other Senators who agree with him will find that the People
will say that this effusion of blood must stop; that THERE MUST BE SOME
ADJUSTMENT. I PROPHESY THIS.”
And, as a further declaration likely to give aid and comfort to the
Rebel leaders, he said: “I do not believe many men are going to be
obtained by a draft; I do not believe a very good Army will be got by a
draft; I do not believe an Army will be put in the field, by a draft,
that will whip General Lee.”
But while all such statements were, no doubt, intended to help the foes
of the Union, and dishearten or dismay its friends, the really loyal
People, understanding their fell object, paid little heed to them. The
predictions of these Prophets of evil fell flat upon the ears of lovers
of their Country. Conspirators, however much they might masquerade in
the raiment of Loyalty, could not wholly conceal the ear-marks of
Treason. The hand might be the hand of Esau, but the voice was the
voice of Jacob.
On the 8th of June–after a month of terrific and bloody fighting
between the immediate forces of Grant and Lee–a dispatch from Sherman,
just received at Washington, was read to the House of Representatives,
which said: “The Enemy is not in our immediate front, but his signals
are seen at Lost Mountain, and Kenesaw.” So, at the same time, at the
National Capital, while the friends of the Union there, were not
immediately confronted with an armed Enemy, yet the signals of his
Allies could be seen, and their fire upon our rear could be heard, daily
and almost hourly, both in the Senate and the House of Representatives.
The fight in the House, upon the Thirteenth Amendment, now seemed
indeed, to be reaching a climax. During the whole of June 14th, until
midnight, speech after speech on the subject, followed each other in
rapid succession. Among the opposition speeches, perhaps those of
Fernando Wood and Holman were most notable for extravagant and
unreasoning denunciation of the Administration and Party in power–whose
every effort was put forth, and strained at this very time to the
utmost, to save the Union.
Holman, for instance, declared that, “Of all the measures of this
disastrous Administration, each in its turn producing new calamities,
this attempt to tamper with the Constitution threatens the most
permanent injury.” He enumerated the chief measures of the
Administration during its three and a half years of power-among them the
Emancipation Proclamation, the arming of the Blacks, and what he
sneeringly termed “their pet system of finance” which was to “sustain
the public credit for infinite years,” but which “even now,” said he,
“totters to its fall!” And then, having succeeded in convincing himself
of Republican failure, he exultingly exclaimed: “But why enumerate?
What measure of this Administration has failed to be fatal! Every step
in your progress has been a mistake. I use the mildest terms of
censure!”
Fernando Wood, in his turn also, “mildly” remarked upon Republican
policy as “the bloody and brutal policy of the Administration Party.”
He considered this “the crisis of the fate of the Union;” declared that
Slavery was “the best possible condition to insure the happiness of the
Negro race”–a position which, on the following day, he “reaffirmed”–
and characterized those members of the Democratic Party who saw Treason
in the ways and methods and expressions of Peace Democrats of his own
stamp, as a “pack of political jackals known as War Democrats.”
On the 15th of June, Farnsworth made a reply to Ross–who had claimed to
be friendly to the Union soldier–in which the former handled the
Democratic Party without gloves. “What,” said he, referring to Mr.
Ross, “has been the course of that gentleman and his Party on this floor
in regard to voting supplies to the Army? What has been their course in
regard to raising money to pay the Army? His vote will be found
recorded in almost every instance against the Appropriation Bills,
against ways and means for raising money to pay the Army. It is only a
week ago last Monday, that a Bill was introduced here to punish
guerrillas * * * and how did my colleague vote? Against the Bill.* * *
On the subject of arming Slaves, of putting Negroes into the Army, how
has my colleague and his Party voted? Universally against it. They
would strip from the backs of these Black soldiers, now in the service
of the Country, their uniforms, and would send them back to Slavery with
chains and manacles. And yet they are the friends of the soldier!”* * *
“On the vote to repeal the Fugitive Slave Law, how did that (Democratic)
side of the House vote? Does not the Fugitive Slave Law affect the
Black soldier in the Army who was a Slave? That side of the House are
in favor of continuing the Fugitive Slave Law, and of disbanding Colored
troops. How did that side of the House vote on the question of arming
Slaves and paying them as soldiers? They voted against it. They are in
favor of disbanding the Colored regiments, and, armed with the Fugitive
Slave Law, sending them back to their masters!”
He took occasion also to meet various Democratic arguments against the
Resolution,–among them, one, hinging on the alleged right of Property
in Slaves. This was a favorite idea with the Border-State men
especially, that Slaves were Property–mere chattels as it were,–and,
only the day before, a Northern man, Coffroth of Pennsylvania, had said:
“Sir, we should pause before proceeding any further in this
Unconstitutional and censurable legislation. The mere abolition of
Slavery is not my cause of complaint. I care not whether Slavery is
retained or abolished by the people of the States in which it exists–
the only rightful authority. The question to me is, has Congress a
right to take from the people of the South their Property; or, in other
words, having no pecuniary interest therein, are we justified in freeing
the Slave-property of others? Can we Abolish Slavery in the Loyal State
of Kentucky against her will? If this Resolution should pass, and be
ratified by three-fourths of the States–States already Free–and
Kentucky refuses to ratify it, upon what principle of right or law would
we be justified in taking this Slave-property of the people of Kentucky?
Would it be less than stealing?”
And Farnsworth met this idea–which had also been advanced by Messrs.
Ross, Fernando Wood, and Pruyn–by saying: “What constitutes property?
I know it is said by some gentlemen on the other side, that what the
statute makes property, is property. I deny it. What ‘vested right’
has any man or State in Property in Man? We of the North hold property,
not by virtue of statute law, not by virtue of enactments. Our property
consists in lands, in chattels, in things. Our property was made
property by Jehovah when He gave Man dominion over it. But nowhere did
He give dominion of Man over Man. Our title extends back to the
foundation of the World. That constitutes property. There is where we
get our title. There is where we get our ‘vested rights’ to property.”
Touching the ethics of Slavery, Mr. Arnold’s speech on the same occasion
was also able, and in parts eloquent, as where he said: ‘Slavery is to-
day an open enemy striking at the heart of the Republic. It is the soul
and body, the spirit and motive of the Rebellion. It is Slavery which
marshals yonder Rebel hosts, which confront the patriot Armies of Grant
and Sherman. It is the savage spirit of this barbarous Institution
which starves the Union prisoners at Richmond, which assassinates them
at Fort Pillow, which murders the wounded on the field of battle, and
which fills up the catalogue of wrong and outrage which mark the conduct
of the Rebels during all this War.
“In view of all the long catalogue of wrongs which Slavery has inflicted
upon the Country, I demand to-day, of the Congress of the United States,
the death of African Slavery. We can have no permanent Peace, while
Slavery lives. It now reels and staggers toward its last deathstruggle.
Let us strike the monster this last decisive blow.”
And, after appealing to both Border-State men, and Democrats of the Free
States, not to stay the passage of this Resolution which “will strike
the Rebellion at the heart,” he continued: “Gentlemen may flatter
themselves with a restoration of the Slave-power in this Country. ‘The
Union as it was!’ It is a dream, never again to be realized. The
America of the past, has gone forever. A new Nation is to be born from
the agony through which the People are now passing. This new Nation is
to be wholly Free. Liberty, Equality before the Law, is to be the great
Corner-stone.”
So, too, Mr. Ingersoll eloquently said–among many other good things:–
“It is well to eradicate an evil. That Slavery is an evil, no sane,
honest man will deny. It has been the great curse of this Country from
its infancy to the present hour, And now that the States in Rebellion
have given the Loyal States the opportunity to take off that curse, to
wipe away the foul stain, I say let it be done. We owe it to ourselves;
we owe it to posterity; we owe it to the Slaves themselves to
exterminate Slavery forever by the adoption of the proposed Amendment to
the Constitution. * * * I believe Slavery is the mother of this
Rebellion, that this Rebellion can be attributed to no other cause but
Slavery; from that it derived its life, and gathers its strength to-day.
Destroy the mother, and the child dies. Destroy the cause, and the
effect will disappear.
“Slavery has ever been the enemy of liberal principles. It has ever
been the friend of ignorance, prejudice, and all the unlawful, savage,
and detestable passions which proceed therefrom. It has ever been
domineering, arrogant, exacting, and overbearing. It has claimed to be
a polished aristocrat, when in reality it has only been a coarse,
swaggering, and brutal boor. It has ever claimed to be a gentleman,
when in reality it has ever been a villain. I think it is high time to
clip its overgrown pretensions, strip it of its mask, and expose it, in
all its hideous deformity, to the detestation of all honest and
patriotic men.”
After Mr. Samuel J. Randall had, at a somewhat later hour, pathetically
and poetically invoked the House, in its collective unity, as a
“Woodman,” to “spare that tree” of the Constitution, and to “touch not a
single bough,” because, among other reasons, “in youth it sheltered”
him; and furthermore, because “the time” was “most inopportune;” and,
after Mr. Rollins, of Missouri, had made a speech, which he afterward
suppressed; Mr. Pendleton closed the debate in an able effort, from his
point of view, in which he objected to the passage of the Joint
Resolution because “the time is not auspicious;” because, said he, “it
is impossible that the Amendment proposed, should be ratified without a
fraudulent use of the power to admit new States, or a fraudulent use of
the Military power of the Federal Government in the Seceded States,”–
and, said he, “if you should attempt to amend the Constitution by such
means, what binding obligation would it have?”
He objected, also, because “the States cannot, under the pretense of
amending the Constitution, subvert the structure, spirit, and theory of
this Government.” “But,” said he, “if this Amendment were within the
Constitutional power of amendment; if this were a proper time to
consider it; if three-fourths of the States were willing to ratify it;
and if it did not require the fraudulent use of power, either in this
House or in the Executive Department, to secure its adoption, I would
still resist the passage of this Resolution. It is another step toward
consolidation, and consolidation is Despotism; confederation is
Liberty.”
It was about 4 o’clock in the afternoon of June 15th, that the House
came to a vote, on the passage of the Joint Resolution. At first the
strain of anxiety on both sides was great, but, as the roll proceeded,
it soon became evident that the Resolution was doomed to defeat. And so
it transpired. The vote stood 93 yeas, to 65 nays–Mr. Ashley having
changed his vote, from the affirmative to the negative, for the purpose
of submitting, at the proper time, a motion to reconsider.
That same evening, Mr. Ashley made the motion to reconsider the vote by
which the proposed Constitutional Amendment was rejected; and the motion
was duly entered in the Journal, despite the persistent efforts of
Messrs. Cox, Holman, and others, to prevent it.
On the 28th of June, just prior to the Congressional Recess, Mr. Ashley
announced that he had been disappointed in the hope of securing enough
votes from the Democratic side of the House to carry the Amendment.
“Those,” said he, “who ought to have been the champions of this great
proposition are unfortunately its strongest opponents. They have
permitted the golden opportunity to pass. The record is made up, and we
must go to the Country on this issue thus presented.” And then he gave
notice that he would call the matter up, at the earliest possible moment
after the opening of the December Session of Congress.
CHAPTER XXVII.
SLAVERY DOOMED AT THE POLLS.
The record was indeed made up, and the issue thus made, between Slavery
and Freedom, would be the chief one before the People. Already the
Republican National Convention, which met at Baltimore, June 7, 1864,
had not only with “enthusiastic unanimity,” renominated Mr. Lincoln for
the Presidency, but amid “tremendous applause,” the delegates rising and
waving their hats–had adopted a platform which declared, in behalf of
that great Party: “That, as Slavery was the cause, and now constitutes
the strength, of this Rebellion, and as it must be, always and
everywhere, hostile to the principles of Republican government, Justice
and the National safety demand its utter and complete extirpation from
the soil of the Republic; and that while we uphold and maintain the Acts
and Proclamations by which the Government, in its own defense, has aimed
a death-blow at this gigantic evil, we are in favor, furthermore, of
such an Amendment to the Constitution, to be made by the People in
conformity with its provisions, as shall terminate and forever prohibit
the existence of Slavery within the limits or the jurisdiction of the
United States.”
So, too, with vociferous plaudits, had they received and adopted another
Resolution, wherein they declared “That we approve and applaud the
practical wisdom, the unselfish patriotism and the unswerving fidelity
to the Constitution and the principles of American Liberty, with which
Abraham Lincoln has discharged, under circumstances of unparalleled
difficulty, the great duties and responsibilities of the Presidential
Office; that we approve and endorse, as demanded by the emergency, and
essential to the preservation of the Nation, and as within the
provisions of the Constitution; the Measures and Acts which he has
adopted to defend the Nation against its open and secret foes; that we
approve, especially, the Proclamation of Emancipation, and the
employment, as Union soldiers, of men heretofore held in Slavery; and
that we have full confidence in his determination to carry these and all
other Constitutional Measures essential to the salvation of the Country,
into full and complete effect.”
Thus heartily, thoroughly and unreservedly, endorsed in all the great
acts of his Administration–and even more emphatically, if possible, in
his Emancipation policy–by the unanimous vote of his Party, Mr.
Lincoln, although necessarily “chagrined and disappointed” by the House-
vote which had defeated the Thirteenth Amendment, might well feel
undismayed. He always had implicit faith in the People; he felt sure
that they would sustain him; and this done, why could not the votes of a
dozen, out of the seventy Congressional Representatives opposing that
Amendment, be changed? Even failing in this, it must be but a question
of time. He thought he could afford to bide that time.
On the 29th of August, the Democratic National Convention met at
Chicago. Horatio Seymour was its permanent President; that same
Governor of New York whom the 4th of July, 1863, almost at the moment
when Vicksburg and Gettysburg had brought great encouragement to the
Union cause, and when public necessity demanded the enforcement of the
Draft in order to drive the Rebel invader from Northern soil and bring
the Rebellion speedily to an end–had threateningly said to the
Republicans, in the course of a public speech, during the Draft-riots at
New York City: “Remember this, that the bloody, and treasonable, and
revolutionary doctrine of public necessity can be proclaimed by a mob as
well as by a Government. * * * When men accept despotism, they may have
a choice as to who the despot shall be!”
In his speech to this Democratic-Copperhead National Convention,
therefore, it is not surprising that he should, at this time, declare
that “this Administration cannot now save this Union, if it would.”
That the body which elected such a presiding officer,–after the bloody
series of glorious Union victories about Atlanta, Ga., then fast leading
up to the fall of that great Rebel stronghold, (which event actually
occurred long before most of these Democratic delegates, on their
return, could even reach their homes)–should adopt a Resolution
declaring that the War was a “failure,” was not surprising either.
That Resolution–“the material resolution of the Chicago platform,” as
Vallandigham afterward characters it, was written and “carried through
both the Subcommittee and the General Committee” by that Arch-Copperhead
and Conspirator himself.–[See his letter of October 22, 1864, to the
editor of the New York News,]
It was in these words: “Resolved, That this Convention does explicitly
declare as the sense of the American People, that after four years of
failure to restore the Union by the experiment of War, during which,
under the pretense of a military necessity, or War-power higher than the
Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every
part, and public Liberty and private right alike trodden down and the
material prosperity of the Country essentially impaired–Justice,
Humanity, Liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts
be made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view to an ultimate
Convention of the States, or other peaceable means, to the end that at
the earliest practicable moment Peace may be restored on the basis of
the Federal Union of the States.”
With a Copperhead platform, this Democratic Convention thought it
politic to have a Union candidate for the Presidency. Hence, the
nomination of General McClellan; but to propitiate the out-and-out
Vallandigham Peace men, Mr. Pendleton was nominated to the second place
on the ticket.
This combination was almost as great a blunder as was the platform–than
which nothing could have been worse. Farragut’s Naval victory at
Mobile, and Sherman’s capture of Atlanta, followed so closely upon the
adjournment of the Convention as to make its platform and candidates the
laughing stock of the Nation; and all the efforts of Democratic orators,
and of McClellan himself, in his letter of acceptance, could not prevent
the rise of that great tidalwave of Unionism which was soon to engulf
the hosts of Copperhead-Democracy.
The Thanksgiving-services in the churches, and the thundering salutes of
100 guns from every Military and Naval post in the United States, which
–during the week succeeding that Convention’s sitting–betokened the
Nation’s especial joy and gratitude to the victorious Union Forces of
Sherman and Farragut for their fortuitously-timed demonstration that the
“experiment of War” for the restoration of the Union was anything but a
“Failure” all helped to add to the proportions of that rapidly-swelling
volume of loyal public feeling.
The withdrawal from the canvass, of General Fremont, nominated for the
Presidency by the “radical men of the Nation,” at Cleveland, also
contributed to it. In his letter of withdrawal, September 17th, he
said:
“The Presidential contest has, in effect, been entered upon in such a
way that the union of the Republican Party has become a paramount
necessity. The policy of the Democratic Party signifies either
separation, or reestablishment with Slavery. The Chicago platform is
simply separation. General McClellan’s letter of acceptance is
reestablishment, with Slavery. The Republican candidate is, on the
contrary, pledged to the reestablishment of the Union without Slavery;
and, however hesitating his policy may be, the pressure of his Party
will, we may hope, force him to it. Between these issues, I think no
man of the Liberal Party can remain in doubt.”
And now, following the fall of Atlanta before Sherman’s Forces, Grant
had stormed “Fort Hell,” in front of Petersburg; Sheridan had routed the
Rebels, under Early, at Winchester, and had again defeated Early at
Fisher’s Hill; Lee had been repulsed in his attack on Grant’s works at
Petersburg; and Allatoona had been made famous, by Corse and his 2,000
Union men gallantly repulsing the 5,000 men of Hood’s Rebel Army, who
had completely surrounded and attacked them in front, flank, and rear.
All these Military successes for the Union Cause helped the Union
political campaign considerably, and, when supplemented by the
remarkable results of the October elections in Pennsylvania, Indiana,
and Maryland, made the election of Lincoln and Johnson a foregone
conclusion.
The sudden death of Chief-Justice Taney, too, happening, by a strange
coincidence, simultaneously with the triumph of the Union Party of
Maryland in carrying the new Constitution of that State, which
prohibited Slavery within her borders, seemed to have a significance*
not without its effect upon the public mind, now fast settling down to
the belief that Slavery everywhere upon the soil of the United States
must die.
mark the transition from the Era of Slavery to that of Universal
Freedom.”]
Then came, October 19th, the Battle of Cedar Creek, Va. where the Rebel
General Early, during Sheridan’s absence, surprised and defeated the
latter’s forces, until Sheridan, riding down from Winchester, turned
defeat into victory for the Union Arms, and chased the armed Rebels out
of the Shenandoah Valley forever; and the fights of October 27th and
28th, to the left of Grant’s position, at Petersburg, by which the
railroad communications of Lee’s Army at Richmond were broken up.
At last, November 8, 1864, dawned the eventful day of election. By
midnight of that date it was generally believed, all over the Union,
that Lincoln and Johnson were overwhelmingly elected, and that the Life
as well as Freedom of the Nation had thus been saved by the People.
Late that very night, President Lincoln was serenaded by a Pennsylvania
political club, and, in responding to the compliment, modestly said:
“I earnestly believe that the consequences of this day’s work (if it be
as you assure, and as now seems probable) will be to the lasting
advantage, if not to the very salvation, of the Country. I cannot at
this hour say what has been the result of the election. But whatever it
may be, I have no desire to modify this opinion, that all who have
labored to-day in behalf of the Union organization have wrought for the
best interests of their Country and the World, not only for the present
but for all future ages.
“I am thankful to God,” continued he, “for this approval of the People;
but, while deeply gratified for this mark of their confidence in me, if
I know my heart, my gratitude is free from any taint of personal
triumph. I do not impugn the motives of any one opposed to me. It is
no pleasure to me to triumph over any one; but I give thanks to the
Almighty for this evidence of the People’s resolution to stand by Free
Government and the rights of Humanity.”
On the 10th of November, in response to another serenade given at the
White House, in the presence of an immense and jubilantly enthusiastic
gathering of Union men, by the Republican clubs of the District of
Columbia, Mr. Lincoln said:
“It has long been a grave question whether any Government, not too
strong for the Liberties of its People, can be strong enough to maintain
its existence in great emergencies. On this point the present
Rebellion. has brought our Republic to a severe test, and a
Presidential election, occurring in regular course during the Rebellion,
has added not a little to the strain. * * * But the election, along
with its incidental and undesired strife, has done good, too. It has
demonstrated that a People’s Government can sustain a National election
in the midst of a great Civil War, until now it has not been known to
the World that this was a possibility. It shows, also, how sound and
how strong we still are.
“But,” said he, “the Rebellion continues; and now that the election is
over, may not all having a common interest reunite in a common effort to
save our common Country?
“For my own part,” continued he–as the cheering, elicited by this
forcible appeal, ceased–“I have striven, and shall strive, to avoid
placing any obstacle in the way. So long as I have been here I have not
willingly planted a thorn in any man’s bosom. While I am deeply
sensible to the high compliment of a reelection, and duly grateful, as I
trust, to Almighty God for having directed my countrymen to a right
conclusion, as I think, for their own good, it adds nothing to my
satisfaction that any other man may be disappointed or pained by the
result.”
And, as the renewed cheering evoked by this kindly, Christian utterance
died away again, he impressively added: “May I ask those who have not
differed with me, to join with me in this same spirit, towards those who
have?”
So, too, on the 17th of November, in his response to the complimentary
address of a delegation of Union men from Maryland.
address, in which he said they rejoiced that the People, by such an
overwhelming and unprecedented majority, had again reelected Mr.
Lincoln to the Presidency and endorsed his course–elevating him to
the proudest and most honorable position on Earth. They felt under
deep obligation to him because he had appreciated their condition
as a Slave-State. It was not too much to say that by the exercise
of rare discretion on his part, Maryland to-day occupies her
position in favor of Freedom. Slavery has been abolished therefrom
by the Sovereign Decree of the People. With deep and lasting
gratitude they desired that his Administration, as it had been
approved in the past, might also be successful in the future, and
result in the Restoration of the Union, with Freedom as its
immutable basis. They trusted that, on retiring from his high and
honorable position, the universal verdict might be that he deserved
well of mankind, and that favoring Heaven might ‘Crown his days
with loving kindness and tender mercies.’]
The same kindly anxiety to soften and dispel the feeling of bitterness
that had been engendered in the malignant bosoms of the Copperhead-
Democracy by their defeat, was apparent when he said with emphasis and
feeling:
“I have said before, and now repeat, that I indulge in no feeling of
triumph over any man who has thought or acted differently from myself.
I have no such feeling toward any living man;” and again, after
complimenting Maryland for doing “more than double her share” in the
elections, in that she had not only carried the Republican ticket, but
also the Free Constitution, he added: “Those who have differed with us
and opposed us will yet see that the result of the Presidential election
is better for their own good than if they had been successful.”
The victory of the Union-Republican Party at this election was an
amazing one, and in the words of General Grant’s dispatch of
congratulation to the President, the fact of its “having passed off
quietly” was, in itself, “a victory worth more to the Country than a
battle won,”–for the Copperheads had left no stone unturned in their
efforts to create the utmost possible rancor, in the minds of their
partisans, against the Administration and its Party.
Of twenty-five States voting, Lincoln and Johnson had carried the
electoral votes of twenty-two of them, viz.: Maine, New Hampshire,
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Vermont, New York,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Michigan,
Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, California, Oregon, Kansas, West Virginia,
and Nevada; while McClellan and Pendleton had carried the twenty-one
electoral votes of the remaining three, viz.: New Jersey, Delaware, and
Kentucky–the popular vote reaching the enormous number of 2,216,067 for
Lincoln, to 1,808,725 for McClellan–making Lincoln’s popular majority
407,342, and his electoral majority 191!
But if the figures upon the Presidential candidacy were so gratifying
and surprising to all who held the cause of Union above all others, no
less gratifying and surprising were those of the Congressional
elections, which indicated an entire revulsion of popular feeling on the
subject of the Administration’s policy. For, while in the current
Congress (the 38th), there were only 106 Republican-Union to 77
Democratic Representatives, in that for which the elections had just
been held, (the 39th), there would be 143 Republican-Union to 41
Democratic Representatives.
It was at once seen, therefore, that, should the existing House of
Representatives fail to adopt the Thirteenth Amendment to the
Constitution, there would be much more than the requisite two-thirds
majority for such a Measure in both Houses of the succeeding Congress;
and moreover that in the event of its failure at the coming Session, it
was more than probable that President Lincoln would consider himself
justified in calling an Extra Session of the Thirty-ninth Congress for
the especial purpose of taking such action. So far then, as the
prospects of the Thirteenth Amendment were concerned, they looked
decidedly more encouraging.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
FREEDOM AT LAST ASSURED.
As to the Military situation, a few words are, at this time, necessary:
Hood had now marched Northward, with some 50,000 men, toward Nashville,
Tenn., while Sherman, leaving Thomas and some 35,000 men behind, to
thwart him, had abandoned his base, and was marching Southward from
Atlanta, through Georgia, toward the Sea.
On the 30th of November, 1864, General Schofield, in command of the 4th
and 23rd Corps of Thomas’s Army, decided to make a stand against Hood’s
Army, at Franklin, in the angle of the Harpeth river, in order to give
time for the Union supply-trains to cross the river. Here, with less
than 20,000 Union troops, behind some hastily constructed works, he had
received the impetuous and overwhelming assault of the Enemy–at first
so successful as to threaten a bloody and disastrous rout to the Union
troops–and, by a brilliant counter-charge, and subsequent obstinate
defensive-fighting, had repulsed the Rebel forces, with nearly three
times the Union losses, and withdrew the next day in safety to the
defenses of Nashville.
A few days later, Hood, with his diminished Rebel Army, sat down before
the lines of Thomas’s somewhat augmented Army, which stretched from bank
to bank of the bight of the Cumberland river upon which Nashville is
situated.
And now a season of intense cold set in, lasting a week or ten days.
During this period of apparent inaction on both sides–which aroused
public apprehension in the North, and greatly disturbed General Grant–I
was ordered to City Point, by the General-in-Chief, with a view to his
detailing me to Thomas’s Command, at Nashville.
On the way, I called on President Lincoln, at the White House. I found
him not very well, and with his feet considerably swollen. He was
sitting on a chair, with his feet resting on a table, while a barber was
shaving him. Shaking him by the hand, and asking after his health, he
answered, with a humorous twinkle of the eye, that he would illustrate
his condition by telling me a story. Said he: “Two of my neighbors, on
a certain occasion, swapped horses. One of these horses was large, but
quite thin. A few days after, on inquiry being made of the man who had
the big boney horse, how the animal was getting along?–whether
improving or not?–the owner said he was doing finely; that he had
fattened almost up to the knees already!”
Afterward–when, the process of shaving had been completed, we passed to
another room–our conversation naturally turned upon the War; and his
ideas upon all subjects connected with it were as clear as those of any
other person with whom I ever talked. He had an absolute conviction as
to the ultimate outcome of the War–the final triumph of the Union Arms;
and I well remember, with what an air of complete relief and perfect
satisfaction he said to me, referring to Grant–“We have now at the head
of the Armies, a man in whom all the People can have confidence.”
But to return to Military operations: On December 10th? Sherman reached
the sea-board and commenced the siege of Savannah, Georgia; on the 13th,
Fort McAllister was stormed and Sherman’s communications opened with the
Sea; on the 15th and 16th, the great Battle of Nashville was fought,
between the Armies of Thomas and Hood, and a glorious victory gained by
the Union Arms–Hood’s Rebel forces being routed, pursued for days, and
practically dispersed; and, before the year ended, Savannah surrendered,
and was presented to the Nation, as “a Christmas gift,” by Sherman.
And now the last Session of the Thirty-eighth Congress having commenced,
the Thirteenth Amendment might at any time come up again in the House.
In his fourth and last Annual Message, just sent in to that Body,
President Lincoln had said:
“At the last Session of Congress a proposed Amendment of the
Constitution abolishing Slavery throughout the United States, passed the
Senate, but failed for lack of the requisite two-thirds vote in the
House of Representatives. Although the present is the same Congress,
and nearly the same members, and without questioning the wisdom or
patriotism of those who stood in opposition, I venture to recommend the
reconsideration and passage of the measure at the present Session. Of
course the abstract question is not changed; but an intervening election
shows, almost certainly, that the next Congress will pass the measure if
this does not. Hence there is only a question of time as to when the
proposed Amendment will go to, the States for their action. And as it
is to so go, at all, events, may we not agree that the sooner the
better? It is not claimed that the election has imposed a duty on
members to change their views or their votes, any farther than, as an
additional element to be considered, their judgment may be affected by
it. It is the voice of the People now, for the first time, heard upon
the question. In a great National crisis like ours, unanimity of action
among those seeking a common end is very desirable–almost
indispensable. And yet no approach to such unanimity is attainable
unless some deference shall be paid to the will of the majority simply
because it is the will of the majority. In this case the common end is
the maintenance of the Union; and, among the means to secure that end,
such will, through the election, is most clearly declared in favor of
such Constitutional Amendment.”
After affirming that, on the subject of the preservation of the Union,
the recent elections had shown the existence of “no diversity among the
People;” that “we have more men now than we had when the War began;”
that “we are gaining strength” in all ways; and that, after the
evidences given by Jefferson Davis of his unchangeable opposition to
accept anything short of severance from the Union, “no attempt at
negotiation with the Insurgent leader could result in any good,” he
appealed to the other Insurgents to come back to the fold–the door of
amnesty and pardon, being still “open to all.” But, he continued:
“In presenting the abandonment of armed resistance to the National
Authority, on the part of the Insurgents, as the only indispensable
condition to ending the War, on the part of the Government, I retract
nothing heretofore said as to Slavery. I repeat the declaration made a
year ago, that ‘while I remain in my present position I shall not
attempt to retract or modify the Emancipation Proclamation, nor shall I
return to Slavery any Person who is Free by the terms of that
Proclamation, or by any of the Acts of Congress.’ If the People should,
by whatever mode or means, make it an Executive duty to Reenslave such
Persons, another, and not I, must be their instrument to perform it. In
stating a single condition of Peace I mean simply to say that the War
will cease on the part of the Government, whenever it shall have ceased
on the part of those who began it.”
On the 22d of December, 1864, in accordance with the terms of a
Concurrent Resolution that had passed both Houses, Congress adjourned
until January 5, 1865. During the Congressional Recess, however, Mr.
Lincoln, anxious for the fate of the Thirteenth Amendment, exerted
himself, as it afterward appeared, to some purpose, in its behalf, by
inviting private conferences with him, at the White House, of such of
the Border-State and other War-Democratic Representatives as had before
voted against the measure, but whose general character gave him ground
for hoping that they might not be altogether deaf to the voice of reason
and patriotism.
Missouri, who afterward gave the following interesting account of
the interview:
“The President had several times in my presence expressed his deep
anxiety in favor of the passage of this great measure. He and
others had repeatedly counted votes in order to ascertain, as far
as they could, the strength of the measure upon a second trial in
the House. He was doubtful about its passage, and some ten days or
two weeks before it came up for consideration in the House, I
received a note from him, written in pencil on a card, while
sitting at my desk in the House, stating that he wished to see me,
and asking that I call on him at the White House. I responded that
I would be there the next morning at nine o’clock.
“I was prompt in calling upon him and found him alone in his
office. He received me in the most cordial manner, and said in his
usual familiar way: ‘Rollins, I have been wanting to talk to you
for some time about the Thirteenth Amendment proposed to the
Constitution of the United States, which will have to be voted on
now, before a great while.’
“I said: ‘Well, I am here, and ready to talk upon that subject.
“He said: ‘You and I were old Whigs, both of us followers of that
great statesman, Henry Clay, and I tell you I never had an opinion
upon the subject of Slavery in my life that I did not get from him.
I am very anxious that the War should be brought to a close at the
earliest possible date, and I don’t believe this can be
accomplished as long as those fellows down South can rely upon the
Border-States to help them; but if the Members from the Border-
States would unite, at least enough of them to pass the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution, they would soon see that they could
not expect much help from that quarter, and be willing to give up
their opposition and quit their War upon the Government; that is my
chief hope and main reliance to bring the War to a speedy close,
and I have sent for you as an old Whig friend to come and see me,
that I might make an appeal to you to vote for this Amendment. It
is going to be very close; a few votes one way or the other will
decide it.’
“To this, I responded: ‘Mr. President, so far as I am concerned,
you need not have sent for me to ascertain my views on this
subject, for although I represent perhaps the strongest Slave-
district in Missouri, and have the misfortune to be one of the
largest Slave-owners in the country where I reside, I had already
determined to vote for the Amendment.
“He arose from his chair, and grasping me by the hand, gave it a
hearty shake, and said: ‘I am most delighted to hear that.’
“He asked me how many more of the Missouri delegates in the House
would vote for it.
“I said I could not tell; the Republicans of course would; General
Loan, Mr. Blow, Mr. Boyd, and Colonel McClurg.
“He said, ‘Won’t General Price vote for it? He is a good Union
man.’ I said I could not answer.
“‘Well, what about General King?’
“I told him I did not know.
“He then asked about Judges Hall and Norton.
“I said they would both vote against it, I thought.
“‘Well,’ he said, ‘are you on good terms with Price and King?’
“I responded in the affirmative, and that I was on easy terms with
the entire delegation.
“He then asked me if I would not talk with those who might be
persuaded to vote for the amendment, and report to him as soon as I
could find out what the prospect was.’
“I answered that I would do so with pleasure, and remarked at the
same time, that when I was a young man, in 1848, I was the Whig
competitor of King for Governor of Missouri, and, as he beat me
very badly, I thought now he should pay me back by voting as I
desired him on this important question.
“I promised the President I would talk to this gentleman upon the
subject.
“He said: ‘I would like you to talk to all the Border-State men
whom you can approach properly, and tell them of my anxiety to have
the measure pass; and let me know the prospect of the Border-State
vote,’ which I promised to do.
“He again said: ‘The passage of this Amendment will clinch the
whole subject; it will bring the War, I have no doubt, rapidly to a
close.'”–Arnold’s Life of Lincoln, pp. 358-359,]
On the 5th of January, 1865, the Christmas Recess having expired,
Congress re-assembled. The motion to reconsider the vote-by which the
Joint Resolution, to amend the Constitution by the abolition of Slavery,
had been defeated–was not called up, on that day, as its friends had
not all returned; but the time was mainly consumed in able speeches, by
Mr. Creswell of Maryland, and Stevens of Pennsylvania, in which the
former declared that “whether we would or not, we must establish Freedom
if we would exterminate Treason. Events have left us no choice. The
People have learned their duty and have instructed us accordingly.” And
Mr. Thaddeus Stevens solemnly said: “We are about to ascertain the
National will, by another vote to amend the Constitution. If gentlemen
opposite will yield to the voice of God and Humanity, and vote for it, I
verily believe the sword of the Destroying Angel will be stayed, and
this People be reunited. If we still harden our hearts, and blood must
still flow, may the ghosts of the slaughtered victims sit heavily upon
the souls of those who cause it!”
On the 6th of January, Mr. Ashley called up his motion to reconsider the
vote defeating the Thirteenth Amendment, and opened the debate with a
lengthy and able speech in favor of that measure, in concluding which he
said:
“The genius of history, with iron pen, is waiting to record our verdict
where it will remain forever for all the coming generations of men to
approve or condemn. God grant that this verdict may be one over which
the friends of Liberty, impartial and universal, in this Country and
Europe, and in every Land beneath the sun, may rejoice; a verdict which
shall declare that America is Free; a verdict which shall add another
day of jubilee, and the brightest of all, to our National calendar.”
The debate was participated in by nearly all the prominent men, on both
sides of the House–the speeches of Messrs. Cox, Brooks, Voorhees,
Mallory, Holman, Woods and Pendleton being the most notable, in
opposition to, and those of Scofield, Rollins, Garfield and Stevens, in
favor of, the Amendment. That of Scofield probably stirred up “the
adversary” more thoroughly than any other; that of Rollins was more
calculated to conciliate and capture the votes of hesitating, or Border-
State men; that of Garfield was perhaps the most scholarly and eloquent;
while that of Stevens was remarkable for its sledge-hammer pungency and
characteristic brevity.
Mr. Pendleton, toward the end of his speech, had said of Mr. Stevens:
“Let him be careful, lest when the passions of these times be passed
away, and the historian shall go back to discover where was the original
infraction of the Constitution, he may find that sin lies at the door of
others than the people now in arms.” And it was this that brought the
sterling old Patriot again to his feet, in vindication of the acts of
his liberty-inspired life, and in defense of the power to amend the
Constitution, which had been assailed.
The personal antithesis with which he concluded his remarks was in
itself most dramatically effective, Said he:
“So far as the appeals of the learned gentleman (Mr. Pendleton) are
concerned, in his pathetic winding up, I will be willing to take my
chance, when we all moulder in the dust. He may have his epitaph
written, if it be truly written, ‘Here rests the ablest and most
pertinacious defender of Slavery, and opponent of Liberty;’ and I will
be satisfied if my epitaph shall be written thus: ‘Here lies one who
never rose to any eminence, and who only courted the low ambition to
have it said that he had striven to ameliorate the condition of the
poor, the lowly, the downtrodden, of every race, and language, and
color.”
As he said these words, the crowded floors and galleries broke out into
involuntary applause for the grand “Old Commoner”–who only awaited its
cessation, to caustically add: “I shall be content, with such a eulogy
on his lofty tomb and such an inscription on my humble grave, to trust
our memories to the judgment of after ages.”
The debate, frequently interrupted by Appropriation Bills, and other
important and importunate measures, lasted until the 31st of January,
when Mr. Ashley called the previous question on his motion to
reconsider.
Mr. Stiles at once moved to table the motion to reconsider. Mr.
Stiles’s motion was lost by 57 yeas to 111 nays. This was in the nature
of a test-vote, and the result, when announced, was listened to, with
breathless attention, by the crowded House and galleries. It was too
close for either side to be satisfied; but it showed a gain to the
friends of the Amendment; that was something. How the final vote would
be, none could tell. Meanwhile it was known, from the announcements on
the floor, that Rogers was absent through his own illness and Voorhees
through illness in his family.
The previous question being seconded and the main question ordered, the
yeas and nays were called on the motion to reconsider–and the intense
silence succeeding the monotonous calling of the names was broken by the
voice of the Speaker declaring the motion to reconsider, carried, by 112
yeas to 57 nays.
This vote created a slight sensation. There was a gain of one,
(English), at any rate, from among those not voting on the previous
motion. Now, if there should be but the change of a single vote, from
the nays to the yeas, the Amendment would be carried!
The most intensely anxious solicitude was on nearly every face, as Mr.
Mallory, at this critical moment, made the point of order that “a vote
to reconsider the vote by which the subject now before the House was
disposed of, in June last, requires two-thirds of this Body,” and
emphatically added: “that two-thirds vote has not been obtained.”
A sigh of relief swept across the galleries, as the Speaker overruled
the point of order. Other attempted interruptions being resolutely met
and defeated by Mr. Ashley, in charge of the Resolution, the “previous
question” was demanded, seconded, and the main question ordered–which
was on the passage of the Resolution.
And now, amid the hush of a breathless and intent anxiety–so absolute
that the scratch of the recording pencil could be heard–the Clerk
commenced to call the roll!
So consuming was the solicitude, on all sides, for the fate of this
portentous measure, that fully one-half the Representatives kept tally
at their desks as the vote proceeded, while the heads of the gathered
thousands of both sexes, in the galleries, craned forward, as though
fearing to lose the startlingly clear responses, while the roll-call
progressed.
When it reached the name of English–Governor English, a Connecticut
Democrat, who had not voted on the first motion, to table the motion to
reconsider, but had voted “yea” on the motion to reconsider,–and he
responded with a clear-cut “aye” on the passage of the Resolution–it
looked as though light were coming at last, and applause involuntarily
broke forth from the Republican side of the floor, spreading instantly
to the galleries, despite the efforts of the Speaker to preserve order.
So, when Ganson of New York, and other Democrats, voted “aye,” the
applause was renewed again and again, and still louder again, when, with
smiling face–which corroborated the thrilling, fast-spreading, whisper,
that “the Amendment is safe!”–Speaker Colfax directed the Clerk to call
his name, as a member of the House, and, in response to that call, voted
“aye!”
Then came dead silence, as the Clerk passed the result to the Speaker-
during which a pin might have been heard to drop,–broken at last by the
Speaker’s ringing voice: “The Constitutional majority of two-thirds
having voted in the affirmative, the Joint Resolution is passed.”
President, Feb. 1, 1865,]
The words had scarcely left the Speaker’s lips, when House and galleries
sprang to their feet, clapping their hands, stamping their feet, waving
hats and handkerchiefs, and cheering so loudly and so long that it
seemed as if this great outburst of enthusiasm–indulged in, in defiance
of all parliamentary rules–would never cease!
In his efforts to control it, Speaker Colfax hammered the desk until he
nearly broke his mallet. Finally, by 4 o’clock, P.M., after several
minutes of useless effort–during which the pounding of the mallet was
utterly lost in the noisy enthusiasm and excitement, in which both the
Freedom-loving men and women of the Land, there present, participated–
the Speaker at last succeeded in securing a lull.
Advantage was instantly taken of it, by the successor of the dead Owen
Lovejoy, Mr. Ingersoll of Illinois, his young face flushing with the
glow of patriotism, as he cried: “Mr. Speaker! In honor of this
Immortal and Sublime Event I move that the House do now adjourn.” The
Speaker declared the motion carried, amid renewed demonstrations of
enthusiasm.
During all these uncontrollable ebullitions of popular feeling in behalf
of personal Liberty and National Freedom and strength, the Democratic
members of the House had sat, many of them moving uneasily in their
seats, with chagrin painted in deep lines upon their faces, while others
were bolt upright, as if riveted to their chairs, looking straight
before them at the Speaker, in a vain attempt, belied by the pallid
anger of their set countenances, to appear unconscious of the storm of
popular feeling breaking around them, which they now doggedly perceived
might be but a forecast of the joyful enthusiasm which on that day, and
on the morrow, would spread from one end of the Land to the other.
Harris, of Maryland, made a sort of “Last Ditch” protest against
adjournment, by demanding the “yeas and nays” on the motion to adjourn.
The motion was, however, carried, by 121 yeas to 24 nays; and, as the
members left their places in the Hall–many of them to hurry with their
hearty congratulations to President Lincoln at the White House–the
triumph, in the Halls of our National Congress, of Freedom and Justice
and Civilization, over Slavery and Tyranny and Barbarism, was already
being saluted by the booming of one hundred guns on Capitol Hill.
How large a share was Mr. Lincoln’s, in that triumph, these pages have
already sufficiently indicated. Sweet indeed must have been the joy
that thrilled his whole being, when, sitting in the White House, he
heard the bellowing artillery attest the success of his labors in behalf
of Emancipation. Proud indeed must he have felt when, the following
night, in response to the loud and jubilant cries of “Lincoln!”
“Lincoln!” “Abe Lincoln!” “Uncle Abe!” and other affectionate calls,
from a great concourse of people who, with music, had assembled outside
the White House to give him a grand serenade and popular ovation, he
appeared at an open window, bowed to the tumult of their acclamations,
and declared that “The great Job is ended!”–adding, among other things,
that the occasion was one fit for congratulation, and, said he, “I
cannot but congratulate all present–myself, the Country, and the whole
World–upon this great moral victory. * * * This ends the Job!”
Substantially the job was ended. There was little doubt, after such a
send off, by the President and by Congress, in view of the character of
the State Legislatures, as well as the temper of the People, that the
requisite number of States would be secured to ratify the Thirteenth
Amendment. Already, on the 1st of February, that is to say, on the very
day of this popular demonstration at the Executive Mansion, the
President’s own State, Illinois, had ratified it–and this circumstance
added to the satisfaction and happiness which beamed from, and almost
made beautiful, his homely face.
Other States quickly followed; Maryland, on February 1st and 3rd; Rhode
Island and Michigan, on February 2nd; New York, February 2nd and 3rd;
West Virginia, February 3rd; Maine and Kansas, February 7th;
Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, February 8th; Virginia, February 9th;
Ohio and Missouri, February 10th; Nevada and Indiana, February 16th;
Louisiana, February 17th; Minnesota, February 8th and 23rd; Wisconsin,
March 1st; Vermont, March 9th; Tennessee, April 5th and 7th; Arkansas,
April 20th; Connecticut, May 5th; New Hampshire, July 1st; South
Carolina, November 13th; Alabama, December 2nd; North Carolina, December
4th; Georgia, December 9th; Oregon, December 11th; California, December
20th; and Florida, December 28th;–all in 1865; with New Jersey, closely
following, on January 23rd; and Iowa, January 24th;–in 1866.
Long ere this last date, however, the Secretary of State (Mr. Seward)
had been able to, and did, announce (November 18, 1865) the ratification
of the Amendment by the requisite number of States, and certified that
the same had “become, to all intents and purposes, valid as a part of
the Constitution of the United States.”
Not until then, was “the job” absolutely ended; but, as has been already
mentioned, it was, at the time Mr. Lincoln spoke, as good as ended. It
was a foregone conclusion, that the great end for which he, and so many
other great and good men of the Republic had for so many years been
earnestly striving, would be an accomplished fact. They had not failed;
they had stood firm; the victory which he had predicted six years before
had come!
shall not fail; if we stand firm we shall not fail; wise counsels
may accelerate, or mistakes delay, but sooner or later the Victory
is sure to come.”] CHAPTER XXIX.
LINCOLN’S SECOND INAUGURATION.
While the death of Slavery in America was decreed, as we have seen; yet,
the sanguine anticipations of Mr. Lincoln, and other friends of Freedom,
that such a decree, imperishably grafted into the Constitution, must at
once end the Rebellion, and bring Peace with a restored Union, were not
realized. The War went on. Grant was still holding Lee, at Petersburg,
near Richmond, while Sherman’s victorious Army was about entering upon a
campaign from Savannah, up through the Carolinas.
During the previous Summer, efforts had been made, by Horace Greeley,
and certain parties supposed to represent the Rebel authorities, to lay
the ground-work for an early Peace and adjustment of the differences
between the Government of the United States and the Rebels, but they
miscarried. They led, however, to the publication of the following
important conciliatory Presidential announcement:
“EXECUTIVE MANSION,
“WASHINGTON, July 18, 1864.
“To whom it may concern:
“Any proposition which embraces the restoration of Peace, the integrity
of the whole Union, and the abandonment of Slavery, and which comes by
and with an authority that can control the Armies now at War against the
United States, will be received and considered by the Executive
Government of the United States, and will be met by liberal terms on
substantial and collateral points; and the bearer or bearers thereof
shall have safe conduct both ways.
“(Signed) ABRAHAM LINCOLN.”
About the same time, other efforts were being made, with a similar
object in view, but which came to naught. The visit of Messrs. Jacques
and Gilmore to the Rebel Capital on an informal Peace-errand was, at
least, valuable in this, that it secured from the head and front of the
armed Conspiracy, Jefferson Davis himself, the following definite
statement:
“I desire Peace as much as you do; I deplore bloodshed as much as you
do; but I feel that not one drop of the blood shed in this War is on my
hands. I can look up to my God and say this. I tried all in my power
to avert this War. I saw it coming, and for twelve years I worked night
and day to prevent it; but I could not. The North was mad and blind; it
would not let us govern ourselves; and so the War came: and now it must
go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his
children seize his musket and fight our battle, unless you acknowledge
our right to self-government. We are not fighting for Slavery. We are
fighting for INDEPENDENCE; and that, or EXTERMINATION, we WILL have.”
remarks, which may be pertinently quoted in support of this
authoritative statement that the South was “not fighting for
Slavery,” but for Independence–that is to say: for Power, and what
would flow from it.] [“The Charleston News and Courier a fortnight ago remarked that
‘not more than one Southern soldier in ten or fifteen was a
Slaveholder, or had any interest in Slave Property.’ The
Laurensville Herald disputed the statement, and declared that ‘the
Southern Army was really an Army of Slaveholders and the sons of
Slaveholders.’ The Charleston paper stands by its original
position, and cites figures which are conclusive. The Military
population of the eleven States which seceded, according to the
census of 1860, was 1,064,193. The entire number of Slaveholders
in the Country at the same time was 383,637, but of these 77,335
lived in the Border States, so that the number in the Seceding
States was only 306,302. Most of the small Slaveholders, however,
were not Slave-owners, but Slave hirers, and Mr. De Bow, the
statistician who supervised the census of 1850, estimated that but
little over half the holders were actually owners. The proportion
of owners diminished between 1850 and 1860, and the News and
Courier thinks that there were not more than 150,000 Slave-owners
in the Confederate States when the War broke out. This would be
one owner to every seven White males between eighteen and forty-
five; but as many of the owners were women, and many of the men
were relieved from Military service, the Charleston paper is
confirmed in its original opinion that there were ten men in the
Southern Army who were not Slave-owners for every soldier who had
Slaves of his own.”]
And when these self-constituted Peace-delegates had fulfilled the duty
which their zeal had impelled them to perform, and were taking their
leave of the Rebel chieftain, Jefferson Davis added:
“Say to Mr. Lincoln, from me, that I shall at any time be pleased to
receive proposals for PEACE on the basis of our INDEPENDENCE. It will
be useless to approach me with any other.”
Thus the lines had been definitely and distinctly drawn, on both sides.
The issue of Slavery became admittedly, as between the Government and
the Rebels, a dead one. The great cardinal issue was now clearly seen
and authoritatively admitted to be, “the integrity of the whole Union”
on the one side, and on the other, “Independence of a part of it.”
These precise declarations did great good to the Union Cause in the
North, and not only helped the triumphant re-election of Mr. Lincoln,
but also contributed to weaken the position of the Northern advocates of
Slavery, and to bring about, as we have seen, the extinction of that
inherited National curse, by Constitutional Amendment.
During January, of 1865, Francis P. Blair having been permitted to pass
both the Union and Rebel Army lines, showed to Mr. Lincoln a letter,
written to the former, by Jefferson Davis–and which the latter had
authorized him to read to the President–stating that he had always
been, and was still, ready to send or to receive Commissioners “to enter
into a Conference, with a view to secure Peace to the two Countries.”
On the 18th of that month, purposing to having it shown to Jefferson
Davis, Mr. Lincoln wrote to Mr. Blair a letter in which, after referring
to Mr. Davis, he said: “You may say to him that I have constantly been,
am now, and shall continue, ready to receive any agent whom he, or any
other influential person now resisting the National Authority, may
informally send to me, with the view of securing Peace to the People of
our common Country.” On the 21st of January, Mr. Blair was again in
Richmond; and Mr. Davis had read and retained Mr. Lincoln’s letter to
Blair, who specifically drew the Rebel chieftain’s attention to the fact
that “the part about ‘our common Country’ related to the part of Mr.
Davis’s letter about ‘the two Countries,’ to which Mr. Davis replied
that he so understood it.” Yet subsequently, he sent Messrs. Alexander
H. Stephens, R. M. T. Hunter, and John A. Campbell as Commissioners,
with instructions, (January 28, 1865,) which, after setting forth the
language of Mr. Lincoln’s letter, proceeded strangely enough to say: “In
conformity with the letter of Mr. Lincoln, of which the foregoing is a
copy, you are to proceed to Washington city for informal Conference with
him upon the issues involved in the existing War, and for the purpose of
securing Peace to the two Countries!” The Commissioners themselves
stated in writing that “The substantial object to be obtained by the
informal Conference is, to ascertain upon what terms the existing War
can be terminated honorably. * * * Our earnest desire is, that a just
and honorable Peace may be agreed upon, and we are prepared to receive
or to submit propositions which may, possibly, lead to the attainment of
that end.” In consequence of this peculiarly “mixed” overture, the
President sent Secretary Seward to Fortress Monroe, to informally confer
with the parties, specifically instructing him to “make known to them
that three things are indispensable, to wit:
“1. The restoration of the National Authority throughout all the
States.
“2. No receding, by the Executive of the United States, on the Slavery
question, from the position assumed thereon in the late Annual Message
to Congress, and in preceding documents.
“3. No cessation of hostilities short of an end of the War and the
disbanding of all forces hostile to the Government.”
Mr. Lincoln also instructed the Secretary to “inform them that all
propositions of theirs, not inconsistent with the above, will be
considered and passed upon in a spirit of sincere liberality;” to “hear
all they may choose to say, and report it” to him, and not to “assume to
definitely consummate anything.” Subsequently, the President, in
consequence of a dispatch from General Grant to Secretary Stanton,
decided to go himself to Fortress Monroe.
Following is the dispatch:
[In Cipher]OFFICE UNITED STATES MILITARY TELEGRAPH. WAR DEPARTMENT.
“The following telegram received at Washington, 4.35 A.M., February
2, 1865. From City Point, Va., February 1, 10.30 P.M., 1865
“Now that the interview between Major Eckert, under his written
instructions, and Mr. Stephens and party has ended, I will state
confidentially, but not officially, to become a matter of record,
that I am convinced, upon conversation with Messrs. Stephens and
Hunter, that their intentions are good and their desire sincere to
restore Peace and Union. I have not felt myself at liberty to
express, even, views of my own, or to account for my reticency.
This has placed me in an awkward position, which I could have
avoided by not seeing them in the first instance. I fear now their
going back without any expression from any one in authority will
have a bad influence. At the same time I recognize the
difficulties in the way of receiving these informal Commissioners
at this time, and do not know what to recommend. I am sorry,
however, that Mr. Lincoln cannot have an interview with the two
named in this dispatch, if not all three now within our lines.
Their letter to me was all that the President’s instructions
contemplated to secure their safe conduct, if they had used the
same language to Major Eckert.
“U. S. GRANT,
“Lieutenant General.
“Hon. EDWIN M. STANTON,
“Secretary of War.”
Mr. Stephens is stated by a Georgia paper to have repeated the
following characteristic anecdote of what occurred during the
interview. “The three Southern gentlemen met Mr. Lincoln and Mr.
Seward, and after some preliminary remarks, the subject of Peace
was opened. Mr. Stephens, well aware that one who asks much may
get more than he who confesses to humble wishes at the outset,
urged the claims of his Section with that skill and address for
which the Northern papers have given him credit. Mr. Lincoln,
holding the vantage ground of conscious power, was, however,
perfectly frank, and submitted his views almost in the form of an
argument. * * * Davis had, on this occasion, as on that of Mr.
Stephens’s visit to Washington, made it a condition that no
Conference should be had unless his rank as Commander or President
should first be recognized. Mr. Lincoln declared that the only
ground on which he could rest the justice of War–either with his
own people, or with foreign powers–was that it was not a War for
conquest, for that the States had never been separated from the
Union. Consequently, he could not recognize another Government
inside of the one of which he alone was President; nor admit the
separate Independence of States that were yet a part of the Union.
‘That’ said he ‘would be doing what you have so long asked Europe
to do in vain, and be resigning the only thing the Armies of the
Union have been fighting for.’ Mr. Hunter made a long reply to
this, insisting that the recognition of Davis’s power to make a
Treaty was the first and indispensable step to Peace, and referred
to the correspondence between King Charles I., and his Parliament,
as a trustworthy precedent of a Constitutional ruler treating with
Rebels. Mr. Lincoln’s face then wore that indescribable expression
which generally preceded his hardest hits, and he remarked: ‘Upon
questions of history I must refer you to Mr. Seward, for he is
posted in such things, and I don’t pretend to be bright. My only
distinct recollection of the matter is that Charles lost his head,’
That settled Mr. Hunter for a while.” Arnold’s Lincoln, p. 400.
On the night of February 2nd, Mr. Lincoln reached Hampton Roads, and
joined Secretary Seward on board a steamer anchored off the shore. The
next morning, from another steamer, similarly anchored, Messrs.
Stephens, Hunter, and Campbell were brought aboard the President’s
steamer and a Conference with the President and Secretary of several
hours’ duration was the result. Mr. Lincoln’s own statement of what
transpired was in these words:
“No question of preliminaries to the meeting was then and there made or
mentioned. No other person was present; no papers were exchanged or
produced; and it was, in advance, agreed that the conversation was to be
informal and verbal merely. On our part, the whole substance of the
instructions to the Secretary of State, hereinbefore recited, was stated
and insisted upon, and nothing was said inconsistent therewith; while,
by the other party, it was not said that in any event or on any
condition, they ever would consent to Re-union; and yet they equally
omitted to declare that they never would so consent. They seemed to
desire a postponement of that question, and the adoption of some other
course first, which, as some of them seemed to argue, might or might not
lead to Reunion; but which course, we thought, would amount to an
indefinite postponement. The Conference ended without result.”
In his communication to the Rebel Congress at Richmond, February 6.
1865, Jefferson Davis, after mentioning his appointment of Messrs.
Stephens, Hunter and Campbell, for the purpose stated, proceeded to say:
“I herewith transmit, for the information of Congress, the report of the
eminent citizens above named, showing that the Enemy refused to enter
into negotiations with the Confederate States, or any one of them
separately, or to give to our people any other terms or guarantees than
those which the conqueror may grant, or to permit us to have Peace on
any other basis than our unconditional submission to their rule, coupled
with the acceptance of their recent legislation on the subject of the
relations between the White and Black population of each State.”
On the 5th and 9th of February, public meetings were held at Richmond,
in connection with these Peace negotiations. At the first, Jefferson
Davis made a speech in which the Richmond Dispatch reported him as
emphatically asserting that no conditions of Peace “save the
Independence of the Confederacy could ever receive his sanction. He
doubted not that victory would yet crown our labors, * * * and sooner
than we should ever be united again he would be willing to yield up
everything he had on Earth, and if it were possible would sacrifice a
thousand lives before he would succumb.” Thereupon the meeting of
Rebels passed resolutions “spurning” Mr. Lincoln’s terms “with the
indignation due to so gross an insult;” declared that the circumstances
connected with his offer could only “add to the outrage and stamp it as
a designed and premeditated indignity” offered to them; and invoking
“the aid of Almighty God” to carry out their “resolve to maintain” their
“Liberties and Independence”–to which, said they, “we mutually pledge
our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.” So too, at the second
of these meetings, presided over by R. M. T. Hunter, and addressed by
the Rebel Secretary Judah P. Benjamin, resolutions were adopted amid
“wild and long continued cheering,” one of which stated that they would
“never lay down” their “arms until” their “Independence” had “been won,”
while another declared a full confidence in the sufficiency of their
resources to “conduct the War successfully and to that issue,” and
invoked “the People, in the name of the holiest of all causes, to spare
neither their blood nor their treasure in its maintenance and support.”
As during these Peace negotiations, General Grant, by express direction
of President Lincoln, had not changed, hindered, nor delayed, any of his
“Military movements or plans,” so, now that the negotiations had failed,
those Military movements were pressed more strenuously than ever.
to secure an immediate truce, or breathing spell, during which they
could get themselves in better condition for continuing the War.
Indeed a portion of Mr. Seward’s letter of Feb. 7, 1865, to Mr.
Adams, our Minister at the Court of St. James, giving him an
account of the Conference with the party of Insurgent
Commissioners, would not alone indicate this, but also that it was
proposed by that “Insurgent party,” that both sides, during the
time they would thus cease to fight one another, might profitably
combine their forces to drive the French invaders out of Mexico and
annex that valuable country. At least, the following passage in
that letter will bear that construction:
“What the Insurgent party seemed chiefly to favor was a
postponement of the question of separation, upon which the War is
waged, and a mutual direction of efforts of the Government, as well
as those of the Insurgents, to some extrinsic policy or scheme for
a season, during which passions might be expected to subside, and
the Armies be reduced, and trade and intercourse between the People
of both Sections resumed. It was suggested by them that through
such postponements we might now have immediate Peace, with some not
very certain prospect of an ultimate satisfactory adjustment of
political relations between this Government, and the States,
Section, or People, now engaged in conflict with it.”
For the whole of this letter see McPherson’s History of the
Rebellion, p. 570.]
Fort Fisher, North Carolina, had already been captured by a combined
Military and Naval attack of the Union forces under General Terry and
Admiral Porter; and Sherman’s Army was now victoriously advancing from
Savannah, Georgia, Northwardly through South Carolina. On the 17th of
February, Columbia, the capital of the latter State, surrendered, and,
the day following, Charleston was evacuated, and its defenses, including
historic Fort Sumter, were once more under that glorious old flag of the
Union which four years before had been driven away, by shot and shell
and flame, amid the frantic exultations of the temporarily successful
armed Conspirators of South Carolina. On the 22nd of February, General
Schofield, who had been sent by Grant with his 23rd Corps, by water, to
form a junction with Terry’s troops about Fort Fisher, and capture
Wilmington, North Carolina, had also accomplished his purpose
successfully.
The Rebel Cause now began to look pretty desperate, even to Rebel eyes.
[Hundreds of Rebels were now deserting from Lee’s Armies aboutRichmond, every night, owing partly to despondency. “These
desertions,” wrote Lee, on the 24th February, “have a very bad
effect upon the troops who remain, and give rise to painful
apprehensions.” Another cause was the lack of food and clothing.
Says Badeau (Military History of Ulysses S. Grant, vol. iii., p.
399): “On the 8th of January, Lee wrote to the Rebel Government
that the entire Right Wing of his Army had been in line for three
days and nights, in the most inclement weather of the season.
‘Under these circumstances,’ he said, ‘heightened by assaults and
fire of the Enemy, some of the men had been without meat for three
days, and all were suffering from reduced rations and scant
clothing. Colonel Cole, chief commissary, reports that he has not
a pound of meat at his disposal. If some change is not made, and
the commissary department reorganized, I apprehend dire results.
The physical strength of the men, if their courage survives, must
fail under this treatment. Our Cavalry has to be dispersed for
want of forage. Fitz Lee’s and Lomax’s Divisions are scattered
because supplies cannot be transported where their services are
required. I had to bring Fitz Lee’s Division sixty miles Sunday
night, to get them in position. Taking these facts in connection
with the paucity of our numbers, you must not be surprised if
calamity befalls us.'” Badeau’s (Grant, vol. iii., p. 401,)]
Toward the end of February, the Rebel General Longstreet having
requested an interview with General Ord “to arrange for the exchange of
citizen prisoners, and prisoners of war, improperly captured,” General
Grant authorized General Ord to hold such interview t and “to arrange
definitely for such as were confined in his department, arrangements for
all others to be submitted for approval.” In the course of that
interview “a general conversation ensued on the subject of the War,”
when it would seem that Longstreet suggested the idea of a composition
of the questions at issue, and Peace between the United States and the
Rebels, by means of a Military Convention. It is quite probable that
this idea originated with Jefferson Davis, as a /dernier ressort/; for
Longstreet appears to have communicated directly with Davis concerning
his interview or “interviews” with Ord. On the 28th of February, 1865
the Rebel Chief wrote to Lee, as follows:
“RICHMOND, VA., February 28.
“Gen. R. E. LEE, Commanding, etc.,
“GENERAL: You will learn by the letter of General Longstreet the result
of his second interview with General Ord. The points as to whether
yourself or General Grant should invite the other to a Conference is not
worth discussing. If you think the statements of General Ord render it
probably useful that the Conference suggested should be had, you will
proceed as you may prefer, and are clothed with all the supplemental
authority you may need in the consideration of any proposition for a
Military Convention, or the appointment of a Commissioner to enter into
such an arrangement as will cause at least temporary suspension of
hostilities.
“Very truly yours
“JEFFERSON DAVIS.”
Thereupon General Lee wrote, and sent to General Grant, the following
communication:
“HEADQUARTERS C. S. ARMIES, March 2, 1865.
“Lieut. Gen. U. S. GRANT,
“Commanding United States Armies:
“GENERAL: Lieut.-Gen. Longstreet has informed me that, in a recent
conversation between himself and Maj.-Gen. Ord, as to the possibility of
arriving at a satisfactory adjustment of the present unhappy
difficulties by means of a Military Convention, General Ord stated that
if I desired to have an interview with you on the subject, you would not
decline, provided I had authority to act. Sincerely desirous to leave
nothing untried which may put an end to the calamities of War, I propose
to meet you at such convenient time and place as you may designate, with
the hope that, upon an interchange of views, it may be found practicable
to submit the subjects of controversy between the belligerents to a
Convention of the kind mentioned.
“In such event, I am authorized to do whatever the result of the
proposed interview may render necessary or advisable. Should you accede
to this proposition, I would suggest that, if agreeable to you, we meet
at the place selected by Generals Ord and Longstreet, for the interview,
at 11 A.M., on Monday next.
“Very respectfully your obedient servant,
“R. E. LEE, General.”
Upon receipt of this letter, General Grant sent a telegraphic dispatch
to Secretary Stanton, informing him of Lee’s proposition. It reached
the Secretary of War just before midnight of March 3rd. He, and the
other members of the Cabinet were with the President, in the latter’s
room at the Capitol, whither they had gone on this, the last, night of
the last Session of the Thirty-Eighth Congress, the Cabinet to advise,
and the President to act, upon bills submitted to him for approval. The
Secretary, after reading the dispatch, handed it to Mr. Lincoln. The
latter read and thought over it briefly, and then himself wrote the
following reply:
“WASHINGTON, March, 3, 1865, 12 P.M.
“LIEUTENANT GENERAL GRANT: The President directs me to say to you that
he wishes you to have no Conference with General Lee, unless it be for
the capitulation of General Lee’s Army, or on some other minor and
purely Military matter. He instructs me to say to you that you are not
to decide, discuss, or confer upon any political question. Such
questions the President holds in his own hands, and will submit them to
no Military Conferences or Conventions. Meanwhile you are to press to
the utmost your Military advantages.
“EDWIN M. STANTON,
“Secretary of War.”
General Grant received this dispatch, on the day following, and at once
wrote and sent to General Lee a communication in which, after referring
to the subject of the exchange of prisoners, he said: “In regard to
meeting you on the 6th inst., I would state that–I have no authority to
accede to your proposition for a Conference on the subject proposed.
Such authority is vested in the President of the United States alone.
General Ord could only have meant that I would not refuse an interview
on any subject on which I have a right to act; which, of course, would
be such as are purely of a Military character, and on the subject of
exchange, which has been entrusted to me.”
Thus perished the last reasonable hope entertained by the Rebel
Chieftains to ward off the inevitable and mortal blow that was about to
smite their Cause.
The 4th of March, 1865, had come. The Thirty-Eighth Congress was no
more. Mr. Lincoln was about to be inaugurated, for a second term, as
President of the United States. The previous night had been vexed with
a stormy snow-fall. The morning had also been stormy and rainy. By
mid-day, however, as if to mark the event auspiciously, the skies
cleared and the sun shone gloriously upon the thousands and tens of
thousands who had come to Washington, to witness the second Inauguration
of him whom the people had now, long since, learned to affectionately
term “Father Abraham”–of him who had become the veritable Father of his
People. As the President left the White House, to join the grand
procession to the Capitol, a brilliant meteor shot athwart the heavens,
above his head. At the time, the superstitious thought it an Omen of
triumph–of coming Peace–but in the sad after-days when armed Rebellion
had ceased and Peace had come, it was remembered, with a shudder, as a
portent of ill. When, at last, Mr. Lincoln stood, with bared head, upon
the platform at the eastern portico of the Capitol, where four years
before, he had made his vows before the People, under such very
different circumstances and surroundings, the contrast between that time
and this–and all the terrible and eventful history of the interim–
could not fail to present itself to every mind of all those congregated,
whether upon the platform among the gorgeously costumed foreign
diplomats, the full-uniformed Military and Naval officers of the United
States, and the more soberly-clad statesmen and Civic and Judicial
functionaries of the Land, or in the vast and indiscriminate mass of the
enthusiastic people in front and on both sides of it. As Chief Justice
Chase administered the oath, and Abraham Lincoln, in view of all the
people, reverently bowed his head and kissed the open Bible, at a
passage in Isaiah (27th and 28th verses of the 5th Chapter) which it was
thought “admonished him to be on his guard, and not to relax at all, in
his efforts,” the people, whose first cheers of welcome had been stayed
by the President’s uplifted hand, broke forth in a tumult of cheering,
until again hushed by the clear, strong, even voice of the President, as
he delivered that second Inaugural Address, whose touching tenderness,
religious resignation, and Christian charity, were clad in these
imperishable words:
“FELLOW COUNTRYMEN: At this second appearing to take the Oath of the
Presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than
there was at the first. Then, a statement, somewhat in detail, of a
course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration
of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly
called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still
absorbs the attention and engrosses the energy of the Nation, little
that is new could be presented. The progress of our Arms, upon which
all else depends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it
is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high
hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.
“On the occasion corresponding to this, four years ago, all thoughts
were anxiously directed to an impending Civil War. All dreaded it–all
sought to avert it. While the Inaugural Address was being delivered
from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without War,
Insurgent agents were in the city, seeking to destroy it without War–
seeking to dissolve the Union, and divide the effects, by negotiation.
Both parties deprecated War; but one of them would make War rather than
let the Nation survive; and the other would accept War rather than let
it perish–and the War came.
“One-eighth of the whole population were colored Slaves, not distributed
generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it.
These Slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew
that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the War. To strengthen,
perpetuate and extend this interest was the object for which the
Insurgents would rend the Union, even by War; while the Government
claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement
of it. Neither Party expected for the War the magnitude or the duration
which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of
the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself
should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less
fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the
same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem
strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in
wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces; but let us
judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be
answered–that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His
own purposes. ‘Woe unto the World because of offences! for it must
needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence
cometh.’ If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those
offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which,
having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and
that He gives to both North and South this terrible War, as the woe due
to those by Whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any
departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living
God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope–fervently do we pray–
that this mighty scourge of War may speedily pass away. Yet, if God
wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondman’s two
hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until
every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn
with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must
be said, ‘The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.’
“With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the
right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the
work we are in; to bind up the Nation’s wounds, to care for him who
shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan–to do
all which may achieve and cherish a just and a lasting Peace among
ourselves, and with all Nations.”
With utterances so just and fair, so firm and hopeful, so penitent and
humble, so benignant and charitable, so mournfully tender and sweetly
solemn, so full of the fervor of true piety and the very pathos of
patriotism, small wonder is it that among those numberless thousands
who, on this memorable occasion, gazed upon the tall, gaunt form of
Abraham Lincoln, and heard his clear, sad voice, were some who almost
imagined they saw the form and heard the voice of one of the great
prophets and leaders of Israel; while others were more reminded of one
of the Holy Apostles of the later Dispensation who preached the glorious
Gospel “On Earth, Peace, good will toward Men,” and received in the end
the crown of Christian martyrdom. But not one soul of those present–
unless his own felt such presentiment–dreamed for a moment that, all
too soon, the light of those brave and kindly eyes was fated to go out
in darkness, that sad voice to be hushed forever, that form to lie
bleeding and dead, a martyred sacrifice indeed, upon the altar of his
Country!
CHAPTER XXX.
COLLAPSE OF THE ARMED CONSPIRACY.
Meantime, Sherman’s Armies were pressing along upward, toward Raleigh,
from Columbia, marching through swamps and over quicksands and across
swollen streams–cold, wet, hungry, tired–often up to their armpits in
water, yet keeping their powder dry, and silencing opposing batteries or
driving the Enemy, who doggedly retired before them, through the
drenching rains which poured down unceasingly for days, and even weeks,
at a time. On the 16th of March, 1865, a part of Sherman’s Forces met
the Enemy, under General Joe Johnston, at Averysboro, N. C., and forced
him to retire. On the 19th and 20th of March, occurred the series of
engagements, about Mill Creek and the Bentonville and Smithfield cross-
roads, which culminated in the attack upon the Enemy, of the 21st of
March, and his evacuation, that night, of his entire line of works, and
retreat upon Smithfield. This was known as the Battle of Bentonville,
and was the last battle fought between the rival Forces under Sherman
and Johnston. The Armies of Sherman, now swollen by having formed a
junction with the troops under Schofield and Terry, which had come from
Newbern and Wilmington, went into camp at Goldsboro, North Carolina, to
await the rebuilding of the railroads from those two points on the
coast, and the arrival of badly needed clothing, provision, and other
supplies, after which the march would be resumed to Burksville,
Virginia. By the 25th of March, the railroad from Newbern was in
running order, and General Sherman, leaving General Schofield in command
of his eighty thousand troops, went to Newbern and Morehead City, and
thence by steamer to City Point, for a personal interview with General
Grant. On the same day, Lee made a desperate but useless assault, with
twenty thousand (of his seventy thousand) men upon Fort Stedman–a
portion of Grant’s works in front of Petersburg. On the 27th, President
Lincoln reached City Point, on the James River, in the steamer “Ocean
Queen.” Sherman reached City Point the same day, and, after meeting the
General-in-Chief, Grant took him on board the “Ocean Queen” to see the
President. Together they explained to Mr. Lincoln the Military
situation, during the “hour or more” they were with him. Of this
interview with Mr. Lincoln, General Sherman afterwards wrote: “General
Grant and I explained to him that my next move from Goldsboro would
bring my Army, increased to eighty thousand men by Schofield’s and
Terry’s reinforcements, in close communication with General Grant’s
Army, then investing Lee in Richmond, and that unless Lee could effect
his escape, and make junction with Johnston in North Carolina, he would
soon be shut up in Richmond with no possibility of supplies, and would
have to surrender. Mr. Lincoln was extremely interested in this view of
the case, and when we explained that Lee’s only chance was to escape,
join Johnston, and, being then between me in North Carolina, and Grant
in Virginia, could choose which to fight. Mr. Lincoln seemed unusually
impressed with this; but General Grant explained that, at the very
moment of our conversation, General Sheridan was passing his Cavalry
across James River, from the North to the South; that he would, with
this Cavalry, so extend his left below Petersburg as to meet the South
Shore Road; and that if Lee should ‘let go’ his fortified lines, he
(Grant) would follow him so close that he could not possibly fall on me
alone in North Carolina. I, in like manner, expressed the fullest
confidence that my Army in North Carolina was willing to cope with Lee
and Johnston combined, till Grant could come up. But we both agreed
that one more bloody battle was likely to occur before the close of the
War. Mr. Lincoln * * * more than once exclaimed: ‘Must more blood be
shed? Cannot this last bloody battle be avoided?’ We explained that we
had to presume that General Lee was a real general; that he must see
that Johnston alone was no barrier to my progress; and that if my Army
of eighty thousand veterans should reach Burksville, he was lost in
Richmond; and that we were forced to believe he would not await that
inevitable conclusion, but make one more desperate effort.”
President Lincoln’s intense anxiety caused him to remain at City Point,
from this time forth, almost until the end–receiving from General
Grant, when absent, at the immediate front, frequent dispatches, which,
as fast as received and read, he transmitted to the Secretary of War, at
Washington. Grant had already given general instructions to Major-
Generals Meade, Ord, and Sheridan, for the closing movements of his
immediate Forces, against Lee and his lines of supply and possible
retreat. He saw that the time had come for which he had so long waited,
and he now felt “like ending the matter.” On the morning of the 29th of
March–preliminary dispositions having been executed–the movements
began. That night, Grant wrote to Sheridan, who was at Dinwiddie Court
House, with his ten thousand Cavalry: “Our line is now unbroken from the
Appomattox to Dinwiddie. * * * I feel now like ending the matter, if
it is possible to do so, before going back. * * * In the morning, push
around the Enemy, if you can, and get on his right rear. * * * We will
all act together as one Army, until it is seen what can be done with the
Enemy.” The rain fell all that night in torrents. The face of the
country, where forests, swamps, and quicksands alternated in presenting
apparently insuperable obstacles to immediate advance, was very
discouraging next morning, but Sheridan’s heart was gladdened by orders
to seize Five Forks.
On the 31st, the Battle of Dinwiddie Court House occurred–the Enemy
attacking Sheridan and Warren with a largely superior force. During the
night, Sheridan was reinforced with the Fifth Corps, and other troops.
On April 1st, Sheridan fought, and won, the glorious Battle of Five
Forks, against this detached Rebel force, and, besides capturing 6,000
prisoners and six pieces of artillery, dispersed the rest to the North
and West, away from the balance of Lee’s Army. That night, after Grant
received the news of this victory, he went into his tent, wrote a
dispatch, sent it by an orderly, and returning to the fire outside his
tent, calmly said: “I have ordered an immediate assault along the
lines.” This was afterward modified to an attack at three points, on
the Petersburg works, at 4 o’clock in the morning–a terrific
bombardment, however, to be kept up all night. Grant also sent more
reinforcements to Sheridan. On the morning of April 2nd, the assault
was made, and the Enemy’s works were gallantly carried, while Sheridan
was coming up to the West of Petersburg.
The Rebel Chieftain Lee, when his works were stormed and carried, is
said to have exclaimed: “It has happened as I thought; the lines have
been stretched until they broke.” At 10.30 A. M. he telegraphed to
Jefferson Davis: “My lines are broken in three places. Richmond must be
evacuated this evening.” This dispatch of Parke, Ord on Wright’s left,
Humphreys on Ord’s left and Warren on Humphrey’s left-Sheridan being to
the rear and left of Warren, reached Davis, while at church. All
present felt, as he retired, that the end of the Rebellion had come. At
10.40 A. M. Lee reported further: “I see no prospect of doing more than
holding our position here till night. I am not certain that I can do
that. If I can, I shall withdraw tonight, North of the Appomattox, and
if possible, it will be better to withdraw the whole line to-night from
James river. * * * Our only chance of concentrating our Forces is to
do so near Danville railroad, which I shall endeavor to do at once. I
advise that all preparations be made for leaving Richmond to-night. I
will advise you later, according to circumstances. “At 7 o’clock P. M.
Lee again communicated to the Rebel Secretary of War this information:
“It is absolutely necessary that we should abandon our position to-
night, or run the risk of being cut off in the morning. I have given
all the orders to officers on both sides of the river, and have taken
every precaution that I can to make the movement successful. It will be
a difficult operation, but I hope not impracticable. Please give all
orders that you find necessary, in and about Richmond. The troops will
all be directed to Amelia Court House.” This was the last dispatch sent
by Lee to the Rebel Government.
On the 3rd of April, Petersburg and Richmond were evacuated, and again
under the Union flag, while Grant’s immediate Forces were pressing
forward to cut off the retreat of Lee, upon Amelia Court House and
Danville, in an effort to form a junction with Johnston. On the 6th,
the important Battle of Sailor’s Creek, Va., was fought and won by
Sheridan. On the evening of the 7th, at the Farmville hotel, where Lee
had slept the night before, Grant, after sending dispatches to Sheridan
at Prospect Station, Ord at Prince Edward’s Court House, and Mead at
Rice Station, wrote the following letter to Lee:
“FARMVILLE, April 7th, 1865.
“GENERAL: The results of the last week must convince you of the
hopelessness of further resistance, on the part of the Army of Northern
Virginia, in this struggle. I feel that it is so, and regard it as my
duty to shift from myself the responsibility of any further effusion of
blood, by asking of you the surrender of that portion of the Confederate
States’ army known as the Army of Northern Virginia.
“U. S. GRANT,
“Lieutenant-General.”
Lee, however, in replying to this demand, and in subsequent
correspondence, seemed to be unable to see “the hopelessness of further
resistance.” He thought “the emergency had not yet come.” Hence, Grant
decided to so press and harass him, as to bring the emergency along
quickly. Accordingly, by the night of the 8th of April, Sheridan with
his Cavalry had completely headed Lee off, at Appomattox Court House.
By morning, Ord’s forces had reached Sheridan, and were in line behind
him. Two Corps of the Army of the Potomac, under Meade, were also, by
this time, close on the Enemy’s rear. And now the harassed Enemy,
conscious that his rear was threatened, and seeing only Cavalry in his
front, through which to fight his way, advanced to the attack. The
dismounted Cavalry of Sheridan contested the advance, in order to give
Ord and Griffin as much time as possible to form, then, mounting and
moving rapidly aside, they suddenly uncovered, to the charging Rebels,
Ord’s impenetrable barrier of Infantry, advancing upon them at a double-
quick! At the same time that this appalling sight staggered them, and
rolled them back in despair, they became aware that Sheridan’s impetuous
Cavalry, now mounted, were hovering on their left flank, evidently about
to charge!
Lee at once concluded that the emergency “had now come,” and sent, both
to Sheridan and Meade, a flag of truce, asking that hostilities cease,
pending negotiations for a surrender–having also requested of Grant an
audience with a view to such surrender. That afternoon the two great
rival Military Chieftains met by appointment in the plain little farm-
house of one McLean–Lee dressed in his best full-dress uniform and
sword, Grant in a uniform soiled and dusty, and without any sword–and,
after a few preliminary words, as to the terms proposed by Grant, the
latter sat down to the table, and wrote the following:
“APPOMATTOX COURT HOUSE,
“VIRGINIA, April 9, 1865.
“GENERAL: In accordance with the substance of my letter to you of the
8th instant, I propose to receive the surrender of the Army of Northern
Virginia on the following terms, to wit: Rolls of all the officers and
men to be made in duplicate, one copy to be given to an officer to be
designated by me, the other to be retained by such officer or officers
as you may designate. The officers to give their individual paroles not
to take up arms against the Government of the United States, until
properly exchanged; and each company or regimental commander to sign a
like parole for the men of their commands. The arms, artillery, and
public property to be parked and stacked, and turned over to the
officers appointed by me to receive them. This will not embrace the
side-arms of the officers nor their private horses or baggage. This
done, each officer and man will be allowed to return to his home, not to
be disturbed by United States authority so long as they observe their
paroles and the laws in force where they may reside.
“U. S. GRANT,
“Lieutenant-General.
“General R. E. LEE.”
After some further conversation, in which Grant intimated that his
officers receiving paroles would be instructed to “allow the Cavalry and
Artillery men to retain their horses, and take them home to work their
little farms”–a kindness which Lee said, would “have the best possible
effect,” the latter wrote his surrender in the following words:
“HEAD-QUARTERS, ARMY OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA,
April 9, 1865.
“GENERAL: I received your letter of this date containing the terms of
the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia, as proposed by you. As
they are substantially the same as those expressed in your letter of the
8th instant, they are accepted. I will proceed to designate the proper
officers to carry the stipulations into effect.
“R. E. LEE, General.
“Lieutenant-General U. S. GRANT.”
Before parting, Lee told Grant that his men were starving; and Grant at
once ordered 25,000 rations to be issued to the surrendered Rebels–and
then the Rebel Chieftain, shaking hands with the Victor, rode away to
his conquered legions. It was 4.30 P.M. when Grant, on his way to his
own headquarters, now with Sheridan’s command, dismounted from his
horse, and sitting on a stone by the roadside, wrote the following
dispatch:
“Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War, Washington.
“General Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia this afternoon on
terms proposed by myself. The accompanying additional correspondence
will show the conditions fully.
“U. S. GRANT, Lieutenant General.”
Meanwhile on the 5th of April, Grant, who had kept Sherman, as well as
Sheridan, advised of his main movements, had also ordered the former to
press Johnston’s Army as he was pressing Lee, so as, between them, they
might “push on, and finish the job.” In accordance with this order,
Sherman’s Forces advanced toward Smithfield, and, Johnston having
rapidly retreated before them, entered Raleigh, North Carolina, on the
13th. The 14th of April, brought the news of the surrender of Lee to
Grant, and the same day a correspondence was opened between Sherman and
Johnston, looking to the surrender of the latter’s Army–terms for which
were actually agreed upon, subject, however, to approval of Sherman’s
superiors. Those terms, however, being considered unsatisfactory, were
promptly disapproved, and similar terms to those allowed to Lee’s Army,
were substituted, and agreed to, the actual surrender taking place April
26th, near Durham, North Carolina. On the 21st, Macon, Georgia, with
12,000 Rebel Militia, and sixty guns, was surrendered to Wilson’s
Cavalry-command, by General Howell Cobb. On the 4th of May, General
Richard Taylor surrendered all the armed Rebel troops, East of the
Mississippi river; and on the 26th of May, General Kirby Smith
surrendered all of them, West of that river.
On that day, organized, armed Rebellion against the United States
ceased, and became a thing of the past. It had been conquered, stamped
out, and extinguished, while its civic head, Jefferson Davis, captured
May 11th, at Irwinsville, Georgia, while attempting to escape, was, with
other leading Rebels, a prisoner in a Union fort. Four years of armed
Rebellion had been enough for them. They were absolutely sick of it.
And the magnanimity of the terms given them by Grant, completed their
subjugation. “The wisdom of his course,” says Badeau, “was proved by
the haste which the Rebels made to yield everything they had fought for.
They were ready not only to give up their arms, but literally to implore
forgiveness of the Government. They acquiesced in the abolition of
Slavery. They abandoned the heresy of Secession, and waited to learn
what else their conquerors would dictate. They dreamed not of political
power. They only asked to be let live quietly under the flag they had
outraged, and attempt in some degree to rebuild their shattered
fortunes. The greatest General of the Rebellion asked for pardon.”
CHAPTER XXXI.
ASSASSINATION!
But while some of the great Military events alluded to in the preceding
Chapter, had been transpiring at the theatre of War, something else had
happened at the National Capital, so momentous, so atrocious, so
execrable, that it was with difficulty the victorious soldiers of the
Union, when they first heard the news, could be restrained from turning
upon the then remaining armed Rebels, and annihilating them in their
righteous fury.
Let us go back, for a moment, to President Lincoln, whom we left on
board the Ocean Queen, at City Point, toward the end of March and the
beginning of April, receiving dispatches from Grant, who was
victoriously engaged at the front. On the very day that Richmond fell–
April 4th–President Lincoln, with his little son “Tad,” Admiral Porter,
and others, visited the burning city, and held a reception in the
parlors of the Mansion which had now, for so many years, been occupied
by the Chief Conspirator, Jefferson Davis, and which had been
precipitately abandoned when the flight of that Arch-Rebel and his
“Cabinet” commenced. On the 6th, the President, accompanied by his
wife, Vice-President Johnson, and others from Washington, again visited
Richmond, and received distinguished Virginians, to whom he addressed
words of wisdom and patriotism.
prominent citizens of Virginia, anxious to learn what the policy of
the Government towards them would be. Without committing himself
to specific details, he satisfied them that his policy would be
magnanimous, forgiving, and generous. He told these Virginians
they must learn loyalty and devotion to the Nation. They need not
love Virginia less, but they must love the Republic more.”]
On the 9th of April, he returned to Washington, and the same day–his
last Sunday on Earth–came the grand and glorious news of Lee’s
surrender.
On the Wednesday evening following, he made a lengthy speech, at the
White House, to the great crowd that had assembled about it, to
congratulate him, and the Nation, upon the downfall of Rebellion. His
first thought in that speech, was of gratitude to God. His second, to
put himself in the background, and to give all the credit of Union
Military success, to those who, under God, had achieved it. Said he:
“We meet this evening, not in sorrow, but in gladness of heart. The
evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond, and the surrender of the
principal Insurgent Army, give hope of a righteous and speedy Peace,
whose joyous expression cannot be restrained. In the midst of this,
however, He from whom all blessings flow, must not be forgotten. A Call
for a National Thanksgiving is being prepared, and will be duly
promulgated. Nor must those whose harder part gives us the cause of
rejoicing, be overlooked. Their honors must not be parcelled out with
others. I myself was near the front, and had the high pleasure of
transmitting much of the good news to you; but no part of the honor, for
plan or execution, is mine. To General Grant, his skilful officers and
brave men, all belongs.”
This speech was almost entirely devoted to the subject of reconstruction
of the States lately in Rebellion, and to an argument in favor of the
Reconstruction policy, under which a new and loyal government had been
formed for the State of Louisiana. “Some twelve thousand voters in the
heretofore Slave State of Louisiana,” said he, “have sworn allegiance to
the Union, assumed to be the rightful political power of the State, held
elections, organized a State government, adopted a Free State
Constitution, giving the benefit of public schools equally to Black and
White, and empowering the Legislature to confer the elective franchise
upon the colored man. Their Legislature has already voted to ratify the
Constitutional Amendment recently passed by Congress, abolishing Slavery
throughout the Nation. These twelve thousand persons are thus fully
committed to the Union, and to perpetual Freedom in the State; committed
to the very things, and nearly all the things, the Nation wants; and
they ask the Nation’s recognition and its assistance to make good that
committal. Now, if we reject and spurn them, we do our utmost to
disorganize and disperse them. We, in effect, say to the White men,
‘You are worthless, or worse; we will neither help you, nor be helped by
you.’ To the Blacks we say, ‘This cup of Liberty which these, your old
masters, hold to your lips, we will dash from you and leave you to the
chances of gathering the spilled and scattered contents in some vague
and undefined when, where, and how.’ If this course, discouraging and
paralyzing both White and Black, has any tendency to bring Louisiana
into proper practical relations with the Union, I have, so far, been
unable to perceive it. If, on the contrary, we recognize and sustain
the new government of Louisiana, the converse of all this is made true.”
While, however, Mr. Lincoln thus upheld and defended this Louisiana plan
of reconstruction, yet he conceded that in applying it to other States,
with their varying conditions, “no exclusive and inflexible plan can
safely be prescribed as to details and collaterals.” The entire speech
shows the greatest solicitude to make no mistake necessitating backward
steps, and consequent delay in reconstructing the Rebel States into
Loyal ones; and especially anxious was he, in this, his last public
utterance, touching the outcome of his great life-work, Emancipation.
“If,” said he, “we reject Louisiana, we also reject one vote in favor of
the proposed Amendment to the National Constitution. To meet this
proposition it has been argued that no more than threefourths of those
States which have not attempted Secession are necessary to validly
ratify the Amendment. I do not commit myself against this further than
to say that such a ratification would be questionable, and sure to be
persistently questioned; whilst a ratification by three-fourths of all
the States would be unquestioned and unquestionable.”
On Thursday, by the President’s direction, a War Department Order was
drawn up and issued, putting an end to drafting and recruiting, and the
purchase of Military supplies, and removing all restrictions which
Military necessity had imposed upon the trade and commerce and
intercourse of any one part of the Union with the other. On Friday, the
14th of April, there was a meeting of the Cabinet at noon, to receive a
report from General Grant, in person–he having just arrived from the
scene of Lee’s surrender. Later, the President rode out with Mrs.
Lincoln, and talked of the hard time they had had since coming to
Washington; “but,” continued he, “the War is over, and, with God’s
blessing, we may hope for four years of Peace and happiness, and then we
will go back to Illinois, and pass the rest of our lives in quiet.” At
Ford’s Theatre, that evening, was played “The American Cousin,” and it
had been announced that both the President and General Grant would be
present. Grant, however, was prevented from attending. President
Lincoln attended with reluctance–possibly because of a presentiment
which he had that day had, that “something serious is going to happen,”
of which he made mention at the Cabinet meeting aforesaid.
It was about 9 o-clock P.M., that the President, with Mrs. Lincoln,
Major Rathbone, and Miss Harris, entered the Theatre, and, after
acknowledging with a bow the patriotic acclamations with which the
audience saluted him, entered the door of the private box, reserved for
his party, which was draped with the folds of the American flag. At
half past 10 o’clock, while all were absorbed in the play, a pistol-shot
was heard, and a man, brandishing a bloody dagger, was seen to leap to
the stage from the President’s box, crying “Sic Semper Tyrannis!” His
spuired boot, catching in the bunting, tripped him, so that he half fell
and injured one leg, but instantly recovered himself, and, shouting “The
South is avenged!” rushed across the stage, and disappeared. It was an
actor, John Wilkes Booth by name, who–inspired with all the mad,
unreasoning, malignant hatred of everything representing Freedom and
Union, which was purposely instilled into the minds and hearts of their
followers and sympathizers by the Rebel leaders and their chief
accomplices in the North–had basely skulked into the box, behind Mr.
Lincoln, mortally wounded him with a pistol-bullet, and escaped–after
stabbing Major Rathbone for vainly striving to arrest the vile
assassin’s flight.
Thus this great and good Ruler of our reunited People was foully
stricken down in the very moment of his triumph; when the Union troops
were everywhere victorious; when Lee had surrendered the chief Army of
the downfallen Confederacy; when Johnston was on the point of
surrendering the only remaining Rebel force which could be termed an
Army; on the self-same day too, which saw the identical flag of the
Union, that four years before had been sadly hauled down from the
flagstaff of Fort Sumter, triumphantly raised again over that historic
fort; when, the War being at an end, everything in the future looked
hopeful; at the very time when his merciful and kindly mind was
doubtless far away from the mimic scenes upon which he looked, revolving
beneficent plans for reconstructing and rebuilding the waste and
desolate places in the South which War had made; at this time, of all
times, when his clear and just perceptions and firm patriotism were most
needed,
present ‘situation,’ as the phrase goes, it may be my duty to make
some new announcement to the people of the South. I am
CONSIDERING, and shall not fail to act when satisfied that action
will be proper.”]
alike by conquerors and conquered, to guide and aid the Nation in the
difficult task of reconstruction, and of the new departure, looming up
before it, with newer and broader and better political issues upon which
all Patriot might safely divide, while all the old issues of States-
rights, Secession, Free-Trade, and Slavery, and all the mental and moral
leprosy growing out of them, should lie buried far out of sight as dead-
and-gone relics of the cruel and devastating War which they alone had
brought on! Abraham Lincoln never spoke again. The early beams of the
tomorrow’s sun touched, but failed to warm, the lifeless remain of the
great War-President and Liberator, as they were borne, in mournful
silence, back to the White House, mute and ghastly witness of the sheer
desperation of those who, although armed Rebellion, in the open field,
by the fair and legitimate modes of Military warfare, had ceased, were
determined still to keep up that cowardly “fire in the rear” which had
been promised to the Rebel leaders by their Northern henchmen and
sympathizers.
The assassination of President Lincoln was but a part of the plot of
Booth and his murderous Rebel-sympathizing fellow conspirators. It was
their purpose also to kill Grant, and Seward, and other prominent
members of the Cabinet, simultaneously, in the wild hope that anarchy
might follow, and Treason find its opportunity. In this they almost
miraculously failed, although Seward was badly wounded by one of the
assassins.
That the Rebel authorities were cognizant of, and encouraged, this
dastardly plot, cannot be distinctly proven. But, while they naturally
would be likely, especially in the face of the storm of public
exasperation which it raised throughout the Union, to disavow all
knowledge of, or complicity in, the vengeful murder of President
Lincoln, and to destroy all evidences possible of any such guilty
knowledge or complicity, yet there will ever be a strong suspicion that
they were not innocent. From the time when it was first known that Mr.
Lincoln had been elected President, the air was full of threats that he
should not live to be inaugurated.
That the assassination, consummated in April, 1865, would
have taken place in February of 1861, had it not been for the timely
efforts of Lieutenant-General Scott, Brigadier-General Stone, Hon.
William H. Seward, Frederick W. Seward, Esq., and David S. Bookstaver of
the Metropolitan Police of New York–is abundantly shown by
Superintendent John A. Kennedy, in a letter of August 13, 1866, to be
found in vol. ii., of Lossing’s “Civil War in America,” pages 147-149,
containing also an extract from a letter of General Stone, in which the
latter–after mentioning that General Scott and himself considered it
“almost a certainty that Mr. Lincoln could not pass Baltimore alive by
the train on the day fixed”–proceeds to say: “I recommended that Mr.
Lincoln should be officially warned; and suggested that it would be
altogether best that he should take the train of that evening from
Philadelphia, and so reach Washington early the next day.” * * *
General Scott, after asking me how the details could be arranged in so
short a time, and receiving my suggestion that Mr. Lincoln should be
advised quietly to take the evening train, and that it would do him no
harm to have the telegraph wires cut for a few hours, he directed me to
seek Mr. W. H. Seward, to whom he wrote a few lines, which he handed to
me. It was already ten o’clock, and when I reached Mr. Seward’s house
he had left; I followed him to the Capitol, but did not succeed in
finding him until after 12 M. I handed him the General’s note; he
listened attentively to what I said, and asked me to write down my
information and suggestions, and then, taking the paper I had written,
he hastily left. The note I wrote was what Mr. Frederick Seward carried
to Mr. Lincoln in Philadelphia. Mr. Lincoln has stated that it was this
note which induced him to change his journey as he did. The stories of
disguise are all nonsense; Mr. Lincoln merely took the sleeping-car in
the night train.
Equally certain also, is it, that the Rebel authorities were utterly
indifferent to the means that might be availed of to secure success to
Rebellion. Riots and arson, were among the mildest methods proposed to
be used in the Northern cities, to make the War for the Union a
“failure”–as their Northern Democratic allies termed it–while, among
other more devilish projects, was that of introducing cholera and yellow
fever into the North, by importing infected rags! Another much-talked-
of scheme throughout the War, was that of kidnapping President Lincoln,
and other high officials of the Union Government. There is also
evidence, that the Rebel chiefs not only received, but considered, the
plans of deperadoes and cut-throats looking to the success of the
Rebellion by means of assassination. Thus, in a footnote to page 448,
vol. ii., of his “Civil War in America,” Lossing does not hesitate to
characterize Jefferson Davis as “the crafty and malignant Chief
Conspirator, who seems to have been ready at all times to entertain
propositions to assassinate, by the hand of secret murder, the officers
of the Government at Washington;” and, after fortifying that statement
by a reference to page 523 of the first volume of his work, proceeds to
say: “About the time (July, 1862) we are now considering, a Georgian,
named Burnham, wrote to Jefferson Davis, proposing to organize a corps
of five hundred assassins, to be distributed over the North, and sworn
to murder President Lincoln, members of his Cabinet, and leading
Republican Senators, and other supporters of the Government. This
proposition was made in writing, and was regularly filed in the
‘Confederate War Department,’ indorsed ‘Respectfully referred to the
Secretary of War, by order of the President,’ and signed ‘J. C Ives.’
Other communications of similar tenor, ‘respectfully referred’ by
Jefferson Davis, were placed on file in that ‘War Department.'” All the
denials, therefore, of the Rebel chieftains, as to their complicity in
the various attempts to assassinate Abraham Lincoln, ending with his
dastardly murder in April, 1865, will not clear their skirts of the
odium of that unparalleled infamy. It will cling to them, living or
dead, until that great Day of Judgment when the exact truth shall be
made known, and “their sin shall find them out.”
ESCAPE OF LINCOLN,” quotes an interesting “Omaha Letter, to the St.
Paul Pioneer Press,” as follows:
“That more than one attempt was made to assassinate Abraham Lincoln
is a fact known to John W. Nichols, ex-president of the Omaha Fire
Department. Mr. Nichols was one of the body-guard of President
Lincoln from the Summer of 1862 until 1865. The following
narrative, related to your correspondent by Mr. Nichols, is
strictly true, and the incident is not generally known:
One night about the middle of August, 1864, I was
doing sentinel duty at the large gate through which entrance was
had to the grounds of the Soldiers’ Home. The grounds are situated
about a quarter of a mile off the Bladensburg road, and are reached
by devious driveways. About 11 o’clock I heard a rifle shot in the
direction of the city, and shortly afterwards I heard approaching
hoof-beats. In two or three minutes a horse came dashing-up, and I
recognized the belated President. The horse was very spirited, and
belonged to Mr. Lamon, marshal of the District of Columbia. This
horse was Mr. Lincoln’s favorite, and when he was in the White
House stables he always chose him. As horse and rider approached
the gate, I noticed that the President was bareheaded. After
assisting him in checking his steed, the President said to me: ‘He
came pretty near getting away with me, didn’t he? He got the bit
in his teeth before I could draw the rein.’ I then asked him where
his hat was, and he replied that somebody had fired a gun off down
at the foot of the hill, and that his horse had become scared and
jerked his hat off. I led the animal to the Executive Cottage, and
the President dismounted and entered. Thinking the affair rather
strange, a corporal and myself started in the direction of the
place from where the sound of the rifle report had proceeded, to
investigate the occurrence. When we reached the spot where the
driveway intersects with the main road we found the President’s
hat–a plain silk hat-and upon examining it we discovered a bullet
hole through the crown. The shot had been fired upwards, and it
was evident that the person who fired the shot had secreted himself
close to the roadside. We listened and searched the locality
thoroughly, but to no avail. The next day I gave Mr. Lincoln his
hat and called his attention to the bullet hole. He rather
unconcernedly remarked that it was put there by some foolish
gunner, and was not intended for him. He said, however, that he
wanted the matter kept quiet, and admonished us to say nothing
about it. We all felt confident that it was an attempt to kill
him, and a well-nigh successful one, too. The affair was kept
quiet, in accordance with his request. After that, the President
never rode alone.”‘]
That this dark and wicked and bloody Rebellion, waged by the upholders
and advocates of Slavery, Free Trade, and Secession, had descended so
low as to culminate in murder–deliberate, cold-blooded, cowardly
murder–at a time when the Southern Conspirators would apparently be the
least benefitted by it, was regarded at first as evidencing their mad
fatuity; and the public mind was dreadfully incensed.
The successor of the murdered President-Andrew Johnson-lost little time
in offering (May the 2d) rewards, ranging from $25,000 to $100,000, for
the arrest of Jefferson Davis, Jacob Thompson,
Interior, ordered the National flag of the Union–which he had
swindled, betrayed, fought, spit upon, and conspired against–to be
lowered at halfmast over the Interior Departmental Building, at
Washington, D. C.]
Clement C. Clay, Beverly Tucker, George N. Sanders, and W. C. Cleary,
in a Proclamation which directly charged that they, “and other Rebels
and Traitors against the Government of the United States, harbored in
Canada,” had “incited, concerted, and procured” the perpetration of the
appalling crime.
On the 10th of May, one of them, Jacob Thompson, from his place of
security, in Canada, published a letter claiming to be innocent;
characterized himself as “a persecuted man;” arrayed certain suspicious
facts in support of an intimation that Johnson himself was the only one
man in the Republic who would be benefited by President Lincoln’s death;
and, as he was found “asleep” at the “unusual hour” of nine o’clock
P.M., of the 14th of April, and had made haste to take the oath of
office as President of the United States as soon as the breath had left
the body of his predecessor, insinuated that he (Johnson) might with
more reason be suspected of “complicity” in “the foul work” than the
“Rebels and Traitors” charged with it, in his Proclamation; so charged,
for the very purpose–Thompson insinuated–of shielding himself from
discovery, and conviction!
But while, for a moment, perhaps, there flitted across the public mind a
half suspicion of the possibility of what this Rebel intimated as true,
yet another moment saw it dissipated. For the People remembered that
between “Andrew Johnson,” one of the “poor white trash” of Tennessee,
and the “aristocratic Slave-owners” of the South, who headed the
Rebellion, there could be neither sympathy nor cooperation–nothing, but
hatred; and that this same Andrew Johnson, who, by power of an
indomitable will, self-education, and natural ability, had, despite the
efforts of that “aristocracy,” forced himself upward, step by step, from
the tailor’s bench, to the successful honors of alderman and Mayor, and
then still upward through both branches of his State Legislature, into
the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States–and,
in the latter Body, had so gallantly met, and worsted in debate, the
chosen representatives of that class upon whose treasonable heads he
poured forth in invective, the gathered hatred of a life-time–would
probably be the very last man whom these same “aristocratic”
Conspirators, “Rebels, and Traitors,” would prefer as arbiter of their
fate.
The popular feeling responded heartily, at this time, to the
denunciations which, in his righteous indignation, he had, in the
Senate, and since, heaped upon Rebellion, and especially his declaration
that “Treason must be made odious!”–utterances now substantially
reiterated by him more vehemently than ever, and multiplied in posters
and transparencies and newspapers all over the Land. Thus the public
mind rapidly grew to believe it impossible that the Rebel leaders could
gain, by the substitution, in the Executive chair, of this harsh,
determined, despotic nature, for the mild, kindly, merciful, even-
tempered, Abraham Lincoln. With Andrew Johnson for President, the
People felt that justice would fall upon the heads of the guilty, and
that the Country was safe. And so it happened that, while the mere
instruments of the assassination conspiracy were hurried to an
ignominious death, in the lull that followed, Jefferson Davis and others
of the Rebel chiefs, who had been captured and imprisoned, were allowed
to go “Scott-free, without even the semblance of a trial for their
Treason!”
It is not the purpose of this work to deal with the history of the
Reconstruction or rehabilitation of the Rebel States; to look too
closely into the devious ways and subtle methods through and by which
the Rebel leaders succeeded in flattering the vanity, and worming
themselves into the confidence and control, of Andrew Johnson–by
pretending to believe that his occupation of the Presidential Office had
now, at last, brought him to their “aristocratic” altitude, and to a
hearty recognition by them of his “social equality;” or to follow,
either in or out of Congress, the great political conflict, between
their unsuspecting Presidential dupe and the Congress, which led to the
impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson, for high crimes and
misdemeanors in office, his narrow escape from conviction and
deposition, and to much consequent excitement and turmoil among the
People, which, but for wise counsels and prudent forethought of the
Republican leaders, in both Civil and Military life, might have
eventuated in the outbreak of serious civil commotions. Suffice it to
say, that in due time; long after the Thirteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution had been ratified by three-fourths of all the
States; after Johnson had vexed the White House, with his noisy
presence, for the nearly four years succeeding the death of the great
and good Lincoln; and after the People, with almost unexampled
unanimity, had called their great Military hero, Grant, to the helm of
State; the difficult and perplexing problems involved in the
Reconstruction of the Union were, at last, successfully solved by the
Republican Party, and every State that had been in armed Rebellion
against that Union, was not only back again, with a Loyal State
Constitution, but was represented in both branches of Congress, and in
other Departments of the National Government.
CHAPTER XXXII.
TURNING BACK THE HANDS!
And now, the War having ended in the defeat, conquest, and capture, of
those who, inspired by the false teachings of Southern leaders, had
arrayed themselves in arms beneath the standard of Rebellion, and fought
for Sectional Independence against National Union, for Slavery against
Freedom, and for Free Trade against a benignant Tariff protective alike
to manufacturer, mechanic, and laborer, it might naturally be supposed
that, with the collapse of this Rebellion, all the issues which made up
“the Cause”–the “Lost Cause,” as those leaders well termed it–would be
lost with it, and disappear from political sight; that we would never
again hear of a Section of the Nation, and last of all the Southern
Section, organized, banded together, solidified in the line of its own
Sectional ideas as against the National ideas prevailing elsewhere
through the Union; that Free Trade, conscious of the ruin and desolation
which it had often wrought, and of the awful sacrifices, in blood and
treasure, that had been made in its behalf by the conquered South, would
slink from sight and hide its famine-breeding front forever; and that
Slavery, in all its various disguises, was banished, never more to
obtrude its hateful form upon our Liberty-loving Land. That was indeed
the supposition and belief which everywhere pervaded the Nation, when
Rebellion was conquered by the legions of the Union–and which
especially pervaded the South. Never were Rebels more thoroughly
exhausted and sick of Rebellion and of everything that led to it, than
these. As Badeau said, they made haste “to yield everything they had
fought for,” and “dreamed not of political power.” They had been
brought to their knees, suing for forgiveness, and thankful that their
forfeit lives were spared.
For awhile, with chastened spirit, the reconstructed South seemed to
reconcile itself in good faith to the legitimate results of the War, and
all went well. But Time and Peace soon obliterate the lessons and the
memories of War. And it was not very long after the Rebellion had
ceased, and the old issues upon which it was fought had disappeared from
the arena of National politics, when its old leaders and their
successors began slowly, carefully, and systematically, to relay the
tumbled-down, ruined foundations and walls of the Lost Cause–a work in
which, unfortunately, they were too well aided by the mistaken clemency
and magnanimity of the Republican Party, in hastily removing the
political disabilities of those leaders.
Before proceeding farther, it is necessary to remark here, that, after
the suppression of the Rebellion and adoption of the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which prohibits
Slavery and Involuntary Servitude within the United States, it soon
became apparent that it was necessary to the protection of the Freedmen,
in the civil and political rights and privileges which it was considered
desirable to secure to them, as well as to the creation and fostering of
a wholesome loyal sentiment in, and real reconstruction of, the States
then lately insurgent, and for certain other reasons, that other
safeguards, in the shape of further Amendments to the Constitution,
should be adopted.
Accordingly the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were, on the 16th of
June, 1866, and 27th of February, 1869, respectively, proposed by
Congress to the Legislatures of the several States, and were declared
duly ratified, and a part of the Constitution, respectively on the 28th
of July, 1868, and March 30, 1870. Those Amendments were in these
words:
“ARTICLE XIV.
“SECTION 1.–All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce
any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of
the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
“SECTION 2.–Representatives shall be apportioned among the several
States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number
of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the
right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President
and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress,
the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the
Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such
State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States,
or in any way abridged, except for participation in Rebellion, or other
crime, the basis of Representation therein shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the
whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
“SECTION 3.–No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress,
or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or
military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having
previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of
the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an
executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution
of the United States, shall have engaged in Insurrection or Rebellion
against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But
Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such
disability.
“SECTION 4.–The validity of the public debt of the United States,
authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and
bounties for services in suppressing Insurrection or Rebellion, shall
not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall
assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of Insurrection or
Rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or
Emancipation of any Slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims
shall be held illegal and void.
“SECTION 5.–The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate
legislation, the provisions of this article.”
“ARTICLE XV.
“SECTION 1.–The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall
not be denied or abridged by, the United States or by any State on
account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
“SECTION 2.–The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by
appropriate legislation.”
It would seem, then, from the provisions of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth,
and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution, and the Congressional
legislation subsequently enacted for the purpose of enforcing them, that
not only the absolute personal Freedom of every man, woman, and child in
the United States was thus irrevocably decreed; that United States
citizenship was clearly defined; that the life, liberty, property,
privileges and immunities of all were secured by throwing around them
the “equal protection of the laws;” that the right of the United States
citizen to vote, was placed beyond denial or abridgment, on “account of
race, color, or previous condition of servitude;” but, to make this more
certain, the basis of Congressional Representative-apportionment was
changed from its former mixed relation, comprehending both persons and
“property,” so-called, to one of personal numbers–the Black man now
counting quite as much as the White man, instead of only three-fifths as
much; and it was decreed, that, except for crime, any denial to United
States citizens, whether Black or White, of the right to vote at any
election of Presidential electors, Congressional Representatives, State
Governors, Judges, or Legislative members, “shall” work a reduction,
proportioned to the extent of such denial, in the Congressional
Representation of the State, or States, guilty of it. As a further
safeguard, in the process of reconstruction, none of the insurgent
States were rehabilitated in the Union except upon acceptance of those
three Amendments as an integral part of the United States Constitution,
to be binding upon it; and it was this Constitution as it is, and not
the Constitution as it was, that all the Representatives, in both Houses
of Congress, from those insurgent States–as well as all their State
officers–swore to obey as the supreme law of the Land, when taking
their respective oaths of office.
Biding their time, and pretending to act in good faith, as the years
rolled by, the distrust and suspicion with which the old Rebel-
conspirators had naturally been regarded, gradually lessened in the
public mind. With a glad heart, the Congress, year after year, removed
the political disabilities from class after class of those who had
incurred them, until at last all, so desiring, had been reinstated in
the full privileges of citizenship, save the very few unrepentant
instigators and leaders of the Rebellion, who, in the depths of that
oblivion to which they seemingly had been consigned, continued to nurse
the bitterness of their downfall into an implacable hatred of that
Republic which had paralyzed the bloody hands of Rebellion, and
shattered all their ambitious dreams of Oligarchic rule, if not of
Empire.
But, while the chieftains of the great Conspiracy–and of the armed
Rebellion itself–remained at their homes unpunished, through the
clemency of the American People; the active and malignant minds of some
of them were plotting a future triumph for the “Lost Cause,” in the
overthrow, in consecutive detail, of the Loyal governments of the
Southern States, by any and all means which might be by them considered
most desirable, judicious, expedient, and effectual; the solidifying of
these Southern States into a new Confederation, or league, in fact–with
an unwritten but well understood Constitution of its own–to be known
under the apparently harmless title of the “Solid South,” whose mission
it would be to build up, and strengthen, and populate, and enrich itself
within the Union, for a time, greater or less, according to
circumstances, and in the meanwhile to work up, with untiring devotion
and energy, not only to this practical autonomy and Sectional
Independence within the Union, but also to a practical re-enslavement of
the Blacks, and to the vigorous reassertion and triumph, by the aid of
British gold, of those pernicious doctrines of Free-Trade which, while
beneficial to the Cotton-lords of the South, would again check and drag
down the robust expansion of manufactures and commerce in all other
parts of the Land, and destroy the glorious prosperity of farmers,
mechanics, and laborers, while at the same time crippling Capital, in
the North and West.
In order to accomplish these results–after whatever of suspicion and
distrust that might have still remained in Northern minds had been
removed by the public declaration in 1874, by one of the ablest and most
persuasively eloquent of Southern statesmen, that “The South–prostrate,
exhausted, drained of her life-blood as well as of her material
resources, yet still honorable and true–accepts the bitter award of the
bloody arbitrament without reservation, resolutely determined to abide
the result with chivalrous fidelity”–these old Rebel leaders commenced
in good earnest to carry out their well organized programme, which they
had already experimentally tested, to their own satisfaction, in certain
localities.
The plan was this: By the use of shot-guns and rifles, and cavalcades of
armed white Democrats, in red shirts, riding around the country at dead
of night, whipping prominent Republican Whites and Negroes to death, or
shooting or hanging them if thought advisable, such terror would fall
upon the colored Republican voters that they would keep away from the
polls, and consequently the white Democrats, undeterred by such
influences, and on the contrary, eager to take advantage of them, would
poll not only a full vote, but a majority vote, on all questions,
whether involving the mere election of Democratic officials, or
otherwise; and where intimidation of this, or any other kind, should
fail, then a resort to be had to whatever devices might be found
necessary to make a fraudulent count and return, and thus secure
Democratic triumph; and furthermore, when evidences of these
intimidations and frauds should be presented to those people of the
Union who believe in every citizen of this free Republic having one free
vote, and that vote fairly counted, then to laugh the complainants out
of Court with the cry that such stories are not true; are “campaign
lies” devised solely for political effect; and are merely the product of
Republican “outrage mills,” ground out, to order.
This plan was first thoroughly tried in Mississippi, and has hence been
called the “Mississippi plan.” So magically effectual was it, that,
with variations adapted to locality and circumstances, this “Mississippi
plan” soon enveloped the entire South in its mesh-work of fraud,
barbarity, and blood. The massacres, and other outrages, while
methodical, were remittent, wave-like, sometimes in one Southern State,
sometimes another, and occurring only in years of hot political
conflict, until one after another of those States had, by these crimes,
been again brought under the absolute control of the old Rebel leaders.
By 1876, they had almost succeeded in their entire programme. They had
captured all, save three, of the Southern States, and strained every
nerve and every resource of unprincipled ingenuity, of bribery and
perjury, after the Presidential election of that year had taken place,
in the effort to defeat the will of the People and “count in,” the
Presidential candidate of the Democratic Party.
Dispatches” is too fresh in the public mind to be entirely
forgotten,]
Failing in this effort, the very failure became a grievance. On the
principle of a fleeing thief diverting pursuit by shouting “Stop thief,”
the cry of “fraud” was raised by the Democratic leaders, North and
South, against the Republican Party, and was iterated and reiterated so
long and loudly, that soon they actually began, themselves, to believe,
that President Hayes had been “counted in,” by improper methods! At all
events, under cover of the hue and cry thus raised, the Southern leaders
hurried up their work of Southern solidification, by multiplied outrages
on the “Mississippi plan,” so that, by 1880, they were ready to dictate,
and did dictate, the Democratic Presidential nominations.
congratulations to General Hancock, and added: “General Buell tells
me that Murat Halsted says Hancock’s nomination by the Confederate
Brigadiers sets the old Rebel yell to the music of the Union.” In
the Convention which nominated Hancock, Wade Hampton made a speech,
saying; “On behalf of the ‘Solid South,’ that South which once was
arrayed against the great soldier of Pennsylvania, I stand here to
pledge you its solid vote. [cheers] * * * There is no name which
is held in higher respect among the people of the South, than that
of the man you have given to us as our standard-bearer.” And
afterward, in a speech at Staunton, Virginia, the same Southern
leader, in referring to the action of the Democratic Convention at
Cincinnati, said: “There was but one feeling among the Southern
delegates. That feeling was expressed when we said to our Northern
Democratic brethren ‘Give us an available man.’ They gave us that
man.”]
While these old Rebel leaders of the South had insisted upon, and had
succeeded in, nominating a man whose record as a Union soldier would
make him popular in the North and West, and while their knowledge of his
availability for Southern purposes would help them in their work of
absolutely solidifying the South, they took very good care also to press
forward their pet Free-Trade issue–that principle so dear to the hearts
of the Rebel Cotton-lords that, as has already been hinted, they
incorporated it into their Constitution of Confederation in these words:
“SEC. 8.–Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties,
imposts and excises for revenue necessary to pay the debts, provide for
the common defense, and carry on the Government of the Confederate
States; but no bounty shall be granted from the Treasury, nor shall any
duty or tax on importation from Foreign Nations be laid to promote or
foster any branch of industry.”
It may also be remarked that, under the inspiration of those Southern
leaders who afterward rebelled, it had been laid down as Democratic
doctrine, in the National Democratic platform of 1856–and “reaffirmed”
as such, in 1860–that “The time has come for the People of the United
States to declare themselves in favor of * * * progressive Free-Trade.
* * * That justice and sound policy forbid the Federal Government to
foster one branch of industry to the detriment of another.” But, by
1864, the Republican Protective-Tariff of 1860, had so abundantly
demonstrated, to all our people engaged in industrial occupations, the
beneficence of the great principle of home industrial Protection, that
Tariff-agitation actually ceased, and the National Democratic platform
of that year had nothing to say in behalf of Free-Trade!
After the close of the War, however, at the very first National
Democratic Convention, in 1868, at which there were delegations from the
lately rebellious States, the question was at once brought to the front,
and, under the inspiration of the old Rebel leaders aforesaid, the
Democratic platform again raised the banner of Free-Trade by declaring
for a Tariff for revenue. But the mass of the People, at that time
still freshly remembered the terrible commercial disasters and
industrial depressions which had befallen the Land, through the
practical operation of that baleful Democratic Free-Trade doctrine,
before the Rebellion broke out, and sharply contrasted the misery and
poverty and despair of those dark days of ruin and desolation, with the
comfort and prosperity and hopefulness which had since come to them
through the Republican Protective-Tariff Accordingly, the Republican
Presidential candidate, representing the great principle of Protection
to American Industries, was elected over the Democratic Free-Trade
candidate, by 214 to 71 electoral votes-or nearly three to one!
Taught, by this lesson, that the People were not yet sufficiently
prepared for a successful appeal in behalf of anything like Free-Trade,
the next National Democratic Convention, (that of 1872), under the same
Southern inspiration, more cautiously declared, in its platform, that
“Recognizing that there are in our midst, honest but irreconcilable
differences of opinion, with regard to the respective systems of
Protection and Free-Trade, we remit the discussion of the subject to the
People in their Congressional districts, and to the decision of the
Congress thereon, wholly free from Executive interference or dictation.”
The People, however, rebuked the moral cowardice thus exhibited by the
Democracy–in avoiding a direct issue on the doctrine which Democracy
itself had galvanized at least into simulated life,–by giving 286
electoral votes to the Republican candidate, to 63 for the Democratic,–
or in the proportion of nearly five to one.
Warned, by this overwhelming defeat, not to flinch from, or avoid, or
try to convert the great National question of Tariff, into a merely
local one, the National Democratic platform of 1876, at the instigation
of the old Rebel leaders of the now fast solidifying South, came out
flat-footedly again with the “demand that all Custom-house taxation
shall be only for revenue.” This time, the electoral vote stood almost
evenly divided, viz.: for the Republican candidate, 185; for the
Democratic candidate, 184;–a result so extremely close, as to lead to
the attempted perpetration of great frauds against the successful
candidate; the necessary settlement of the questions growing out of
them, by an Electoral commission–created by Congress at the instance of
the Democratic Party; great irritation, among the defeated Democracy,
over the just findings of that august Tribunal; and to the birth of the
alleged Democratic “grievance,” aforesaid.
The closeness of this vote–their almost triumph, in 1876,–encouraged
the Solid South to press upon the National Democratic Convention of
1880, the expediency of adopting a Free-Trade “plank” similar to that
with which, in 1876, they had so nearly succeeded. Hence the Democratic
platform of 1880, also declared decidedly for “A Tariff for revenue
only.”
The old Rebel leaders, at last in full control of the entire Democratic
Party, had now got things pretty much as they wanted them. They had
created that close corporation within the Union–that /imperium in
imperio/ that oligarchically–governed league of States (within the
Republic of the United States) which they termed the “Solid South,” and
which would vote as a unit, on all questions, as they directed; they had
dictated the nomination, by the Democratic Party, of a Presidential
candidate who would not dare to act counter to their wishes; and their
pet doctrine of Free-Trade was held up, to the whole Democratic front,
under the attractive disguise of a Tariff for revenue only.
South will see that ‘Hancock’ does the fair thing by them. In
other words, he will run the machine to suit them, or they will run
the thing themselves. They are not going to be played with any
longer.”]
In other words, they had already secured a “Solid South,” an “available”
candidate, and an “expedient” Free-Trade platform. All that remained
for them, at this stage, to do, was to elect the candidate, and enact
their Free-Trade doctrine into legislation. This was their current
work, so to speak–to be first attended to–but not all their work; for
one of the most brilliant and candid of their coadjutors had said, only
a few months before: “We do not intend to stop until we have stricken
the last vestige of your War measures from the Statute-book.”
Unfortunately, however, for their plans, an attempt made by them, under
the lead of Mr. Morrison of Illinois, in 1876, to meddle with the
Republican Protective-Tariff, had caused considerable public alarm, and
had been credited with having much to do with a succeeding monetary
panic, and industrial depression. Another and more determined effort,
made by them in 1878, under the lead of their old Copperhead ally,
Fernando Wood, to cut down the wise Protective duties imposed by the
Tariff Act, about 15 per cent.,–together with the cold-blooded Free-
Trade declaration of Mr. Wood, touching his ruinous Bill, that “Its
reductions are trifling as compared with what they should be. * * * If
I had the power to commence de novo, I should reduce the duties 50 per
cent., instead of less than 15 per cent., upon an average
as now proposed,”–an effort which was narrowly, and with great
difficulty, defeated by the Republicans, aided by a mere handful of
others,–had also occasioned great excitement throughout the Country,
the suspension and failure of thousands of business firms, the
destruction of confidence in the stability and profitableness of
American industries, and great consequent suffering, and enforced
idleness, to the working men and working women of the Land.
The sad recollection of these facts–made more poignant by the airy
declaration of the Democratic Presidential candidate, that the great
National question of the Tariff is a mere “local issue,”–was largely
instrumental, in connection with the insolent aggressiveness of the
Southern leaders, in Congress, in occasioning their defeat in the
Presidential contest of 1880, the Republican candidate receiving 214
electoral votes, while the Democratic candidate received but 155
electoral votes.
In 1882, the House of Representatives was under Republican control, and,
despite determined Democratic resistance, created a Tariff-commission,
whose duty it was “to take into consideration, and to thoroughly
investigate, all the various questions relating to the agricultural,
commercial, mercantile, manufacturing, mining, and (other) industrial
interests of the United States, so far as the same may be necessary to
the establishment of a judicious Tariff, or a revision of the existing
Tariff, upon a scale of justice to all interests.”
That same year, in the face of most protracted and persistent opposition
by the great bulk of Democratic members, both of the Senate and House of
Representatives, and an effort to substitute for it the utterly ruinous
Democratic Free-Trade Tariff of 1846, the Bill recommended by this
Republican Tariff-commission, was enacted; and, in 1883, a modified
Tariff-measure, comprehending a large annual reduction of import duties,
while also carefully preserving the great Republican American principle
of Protection, was placed by the Republicans on the Statute-book,
despite the renewed and bitter opposition of the Democrats, who, as
usual, fought it desperately in both branches of Congress. But
Republican efforts failed in 1884, in the interest of the wool-growers
of the country, to restore the Protective-duties on wool, which had been
sacrificed, in 1883, to an exigency created by Democratic opposition to
them.
Another Democratic effort, in the direction of Free-Trade, known as “the
Morrison Tariff-Bill of 1884,” was made in the latter year, which,
besides increasing the free-list, by adding to it salt, coal, timber,
and wood unmanufactured, as well as many manufactures thereof, decreased
the import duties “horizontally” on everything else to the extent of
twenty per cent. The Republicans, aided by a few Democrats, killed this
undigested and indigestible Democratic Bill, by striking out its
enacting clause.
By this time, however, by dint of the incessant special-pleading in
behalf of the obnoxious and un-American doctrine of Free-Trade,–or the
nearest possible approach to it, consistent with the absolutely
essential collection of revenues for the mere support of the Government
–indulged in (by some of the professors) in our colleges of learning;
through a portion of the press; upon the stump; and in Congress;
together with the liberal use of British gold in the wide distribution
of printed British arguments in its favor,–this pernicious but favorite
idea of the Solid South had taken such firm root in the minds of the
greater part of the Democratic Party in the North and West, as well as
the South, that a declaration in the National Democratic platform in its
favor was now looked for, as a matter of course. The “little leaven” of
this monstrous un-American heresy seemed likely to leaven “the whole
mass” of the Democracy.
But, as in spite of the tremendous advantage given to that Party by the
united vote of the Solid South, the Presidential contest of 1884 was
likely to be so close that, to give Democracy any chance to win, the few
Democrats opposed to Free-Trade must be quieted, the utterances of the
Democratic National Platform of that year, on the subject, were so
wonderfully pieced, and ludicrously intermixed, that they could be
construed to mean “all things to all men.”
At last, after an exciting campaign, the Presidential election of 1884
was held, and for the first time since 1856, the old Free-Trade
Democracy of the South could rejoice over the triumph of their
Presidential candidate.
Great was the joy of the Solid South! At last, its numberless crimes
against personal Freedom, and political Liberty, would reap a generous
harvest. At last, participation in Rebellion would no more be regarded
as a blot upon the political escutcheon. At last, commensurate rewards
for all the long years of disconsolate waiting, and of hard work in
night ridings, and house-burnings, and “nigger”-whippings, and “nigger”-
shootings, and “nigger”-hangings, and ballot-box stuffings, and all the
other dreadful doings to which these old leaders were impelled by a
sense of Solid-Southern patriotism, and pride of race, and lust for
power, would come, and come in profusion.
Grand places in the Cabinet, and foreign Missions, for the old Rebels of
distinction, now Chiefs of the “Solid-Southern” Conspiracy, and for
those other able Northern Democrats who had helped them, during or since
the Rebellion; fat consulates abroad, for others of less degree; post-
offices, without stint, for the lesser lights; all this, and more, must
now come. The long-hidden light of a glorious day was about to break.
The “restoration of the Governnnent to the principles and practices of
the earlier period,” predicted by the unreconstructed “Rebel chieftains”
those “same principles for which they fought for four years” the
principles of Southern Independence, Slavery, Free Trade and Oligarchic
rule–were now plainly in sight, and within reach!
The triumph of the Free-Trade Democracy, if continued to another
Presidential election, would make Free-Trade a certainty. The old forms
of Slavery, to be sure, were dead beyond reanimation–perhaps; but, in
their place, were other forms of Slavery, which attracted less attention
and reprobation from the World at large, and yet were quite as effectual
for all Southern purposes. The system of Peonage and contracted
convict-labor, growing out of the codes of Black laws, were all-
sufficient to keep the bulk of the Negro race in practical subjection
and bondage. The solidifying of the South had already made the South
not only practically independent within the Union, but the overshadowing
power, potential enough to make, and unmake, the rulers and policies of
the Democratic Party, and of that Union.
This, indeed, was a grand outcome for the tireless efforts of the once
defeated Conspirators! And as to Oligarchal rule–the rule of the few
(and those the Southern chiefs) over the many,–was not that already
accomplished? For these old Rebel leaders and oligarchs who had secured
the supreme rule over the Solid South, had also, through their ability
to wield the power of that Solid South within the Union, actually
secured the power of practically governing the entire Union!
That Union, then, which we have been wont to look upon as the grandest,
noblest, freest, greatest Republic upon Earth,–is it really such, in
all respects, at the present? Does the Free Republic of the United
States exist, in fact, to-day?
CHAPTER XXXIII.
WHAT NEXT?
And what next? Aye, what next? Do the patriotic, innocent-minded
lovers of a Republican form of Government imagine, for an instant, that
all danger to its continued existence and well-being has ceased to
threaten?–that all the crises perilous to that beneficent popular
governmental form have vanished?–that the climacteric came, and went,
with the breaking out, and suppression, of the Rebellion?–and that
there is nothing alarming in the outlook? Quite likely. The public
mind has not yet been aroused to a sense of the actual revolution
against Republican form of government that has already taken place in
many of the Southern States, much less as to the likelihood of things to
come. The people of any one of the Western, or Northern States,–take
New York, for example,–feel prosperous and happy under the beneficent
workings of the Republican Protective-Tariff system. Business, of all
sorts, recovering from the numerous attacks made upon that prime bulwark
of our American industries, if only let alone, will fairly hum, and look
bright, so far as “the Almighty dollar” is concerned. They know they
have their primaries and conventions, in their wards and counties
throughout their State, and their State Conventions, and their
elections. They know that the voice of the majority of their own
people, uttered through the sacred ballot-box, is practically the Vox
Dei–and that all bow to it. They know also, that this State government
of theirs, with all its ramifications–whether as to its Executive, its
Legislative, its Judicial, and other officials, either elective or
appointed–is a Republican form of government, in the American sense–in
the sense contemplated by the Fathers, when they incorporated into the
revered Constitution of our Country the vital words: “The United States
shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of
government.” But they do not realize the vastly different condition of
things in many States of the Solid South, nor how it affects themselves.
And what is this “republican” form of government, thus pledged? It is
true that there are not wanting respectable authorities whose
definitions of the words “republic,” and “republican,” are strongly
inharmonious with their true meaning, as correctly understood by the
great bulk of Americans. Thus, Brande asserts that “A republic may be
either a democracy or an aristocracy!”–and proceeds to say: “In the
former, the supreme power is vested in the whole body of the people, or
in representatives elected by the people; in the latter, it is vested in
a nobility, or a privileged class of comparatively a small number of
persons.” John Adams also wrote: “The customary meanings of the words
republic and commonwealth have been infinite. They have been applied to
every Government under heaven; that of Turkey and that of Spain, as well
as that of Athens and of Rome, of Geneva and San Marino.” But the true
meaning of the word “republican” as applied to a “form of government,”
and as commonly and almost invariably understood by those who, above all
others in the wide World, should best understand and appreciate its
blessings–to wit: the American People has none of the looseness and
indefiniteness which these authorities throw about it.
The prevailing and correct American idea is that “Republican” means: of,
or pertaining to, a Republic; that “Republic” means a thing, affair, or
matter, closely related to, and touching the “public;” and that the
“public” are the “people”–not a small proportion of them, but “the
people at large,” the whole community, the Nation, the commonalty, the
generality. Hence, “a Republican form of government” is, in their
opinion, plainly that form which is most closely identified with, and
representative of, the generality or majority of the people; or, in the
language of Dr. J. E. Worcester, it is “That form of government or of a
State, in which the supreme power is vested in the people, or in
representatives elected by the people.”
It is obvious that there can be no such thing as “a republic,” which is,
at the same time, “an aristocracy;” for the moment that which was “a
republic” becomes “an aristocracy,” that moment it ceases to be “a
republic.” So also can there be no such thing as “a republic” which is
“an oligarchy,” for, as “a republic” is a government of the many, or, as
President Lincoln well termed it, “a government of the people, by the
people, for the people”–so it must cease to be “a republic,” when the
supreme power is in the hands of the oligarchic few.
There can be but two kinds of republics proper–one a democratic
republic, which is impossible for a great and populous Nation like ours,
but which may have answered for some of the small republics of ancient
Greece; the other, a representative republic, such as is boasted by the
United States. And this is the kind palpably meant by the Fathers,
when, for the very purpose of nipping in the bud any anti-republican
Conspiracy likely to germinate from Slavery, they inserted in the Great
Charter of American Liberties the solemn and irrevocable mandate: “The
United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican
Form of Government.” That they meant this majority rule–this
government by the many, instead of the few–this rule of the People, as
against any possible minority rule, by, or through, oligarchs or
aristocrats, is susceptible of proof in other ways.
It is a safe guide, in attempting to correctly expound the Constitution
of the United States, to be careful that the construction insisted on,
is compatible and harmonious with the spirit of that great instrument;
so that–as was said by an eloquent and distinguished Massachusetts
statesman of twenty years ago, in discussing this very point–“the
guarantee of a Republican form of government must have a meaning
congenial with the purposes of the Constitution.” Those purposes, of
course, are expressed in its preamble, or in the body of the instrument,
or in both. The preamble itself, in this case, is sufficient to show
them. It commences with the significant words: “We THE PEOPLE of the
United States”–words, instinct with the very consciousness of the
possession of that supreme power by the People or public, which made
this not only a Nation, but a Republic; and, after stating the purposes
or objects sought by the People in thus instituting this Republic,
proceeds to use that supreme political power vested in them, by
ordaining and establishing “this CONSTITUTION for the United States of
America.” And, from the very first article, down to the last, of that
“Constitution,” or “structure,” or “frame,” or “form” of government,
already self-evidently and self-consciously and avowedly Republican,
that form is fashioned into a distinctively representative Republican
government.
The purposes themselves, as declared in the preamble, for which the
People of the United States thus spake this representative Republic into
being, are also full of light. Those purposes were “to form a more
perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide
for the common defense, promote the General Welfare, and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”
How is it possible, for instance, that “the Blessings
of Liberty” are to be secured to “ourselves and our Posterity,” if
citizens of the United States, despite the XVth Amendment of that
Constitution, find-through the machinations of political organizations–
their right to vote, both abridged and denied, in many of the States,
“on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude?” How,
if, in such States, “the right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures,” is habitually violated, despite the IVth Amendment of that
Constitution? How, if, in such States, persons are notoriously and
frequently “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process
of law,” in violation of the Vth Amendment of that Constitution? Yet
such is the state of affairs generally prevalent in many States of the
Solid South.
These provisions in the Constitution were, with others, placed there for
the very purpose of securing “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and
our Posterity,” of promoting the “General Welfare,” of establishing
“Justice,” of insuring “domestic Tranquillity” and making “a more
perfect Union”–and the violation of those provisions, or any one of
them, in any part of our Land, by any part of our People, in any one of
the States, is not only subversive of the Constitution, and
revolutionary, but constitutes a demand, in itself, upon the National
Government, to obey that imperative mandate of the Constitution (Sec. 4,
article IV.) comprehended in the words: “The United States SHALL
guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.”
Justice Bronson of New York (4 Hill’s Reports, 146) in these words:
“The meaning of the section then seems to be, that no member of the
State shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of his rights or
privileges unless the matter shall be adjudged against him upon
trial had according to the course of common law. The words ‘due
process of law’ cannot mean less than a prosecution or suit
instituted and conducted according to the prescribed forms and
solemnities for ascertaining guilt or determining the title to
property.”]
It is well that the truth should be spoken out, and known of all men.
The blame for this condition of things belongs partly to the Republican
Party. The question is sometimes asked: “If these outrages against
citizenship, against the purity of the ballot, against humanity, against
both the letter and spirit of the Constitution of our Republic, are
perpetrated, why is it that the Republican Party–so long in power
during their alleged perpetration–did not put a stop to them?” The
answer is: that while there are remedial measures, and measures of
prevention, fully warranted by the Constitution–while there are
Constitutional ways and means for the suppression of such outrages–yet,
out of exceeding tenderness of heart, which prompted the hope and belief
that the folly of continuing them must ere long come home to the
Southern mind and conscience, the Republican Party has been loath to put
them in force. The–best remedy of all, and the best manner of
administering it, lies with the people themselves, of those States where
these outrages are perpetrated. Let them stop it. The People of the
United States may be long-suffering, and slow to wrath; but they will
not permit such things to continue forever.
When the Rebellion was quelled, the evil spirit which brought it about
should have been utterly crushed out, and none of the questions involved
in it should have been permitted to be raised again. But the Republican
Party acted from its heart, instead of its head. It was merciful,
forgiving, and magnanimous. In the magnificent sweep of its generosity
to the erring son, it perhaps failed to insure the exact justice to the
other sons which was their right. For, as has already been shown in
these pages, Free-Trade, imbedded in the Rebel Constitution, as well as
Slavery, entered into and became a part, and an essential part, of the
Rebellion against the Union–to triumph with Slavery, if the Rebellion
succeeded–to fall with Slavery, if the Rebellion failed. And, while
Slavery and Free-Trade, were two leading ideas inspiring the Southern
Conspirators and leaders in their Rebellion; Freedom to Man, and
Protection to Labor, were the nobler ideas inspiring those who fought
for the Union.
The Morrill-Tariff of 1860, with modifications to it subsequently made
by its Republican friends, secured to the Nation, through the triumph of
the Union arms, great and manifold blessings and abundant prosperity
flowing from the American Protective policy; while the Emancipation
proclamations, together with the Constitutional amendments, and
Congressional legislation, through the same triumph, and the acceptance
of the legitimate results of the War, gave Freedom to all within the
Nation’s bound aries. This, at least, was the logical outcome of the
failure of the Rebellion. Such was the general understanding, on all
sides, at the conclusion of the War. Yet the Republican Party, in
failing to stigmatize the heresy of Free Trade–which had so large an
agency in bringing about the equally heretical doctrines of State
Sovereignty and the right of Secession, and Rebellion itself,–as an
issue or question settled by the War, as a part and parcel of the
Rebellion, was guilty of a grave fault of omission, some of the ill-
effects of which have already been felt, while others are yet to come.
For, quickly after the War of the Rebellion closed,–as has been already
mentioned–the defeated Rebel leaders, casting in their lot with their
Democratic friends and allies, openly and without special rebuke,
prevailed upon the National Democracy to adopt the Rebel Free-Trade
Shibboleth of “a Tariff for revenue;” and that same Democracy, obtaining
power and place, through violence and fraud and falsehood at the so-
called “elections” in the Solid Southern States, now threatens the
Country once more with iniquitous Free-Trade legislation, and all its
attendant train of commercial disasters and general industrial ruin.
Were Abraham Lincoln able bodily to revisit the United States to-day,
how his keen gray eyes would open in amazement, to find that many
legitimate fruits of our Union victories had been filched from us; that
–save the honorable few, who, accepting the legitimate results of the
War, were still honestly striving for the success of principles
harmonizing with such results, and inuring to the general welfare–they
who strove with all their might to wreck the Government,–were now,–
through the fraudulent and forcible restriction of voters in their right
to vote–at the helm of State; that these, who sought to ruin the
Nation, had thus wrongfully usurped its rule; that Free-Trade–after
“running-a-muck” of panic and disaster, from the birth of the Republic,
to the outbreak of the Rebellion, with whose failure it should naturally
have expired–was now reanimated, and stood, defiantly threatening all
the great industries of our Land; that all his own painstaking efforts,
and those of the band of devoted Patriots who stood by him to free the
Southern Slaves, had mainly resulted in hiding from sight the repulsive
chains of enforced servitude, under the outward garb of Freedom; that
the old Black codes had simply been replaced by enactments adapted to
the new conditions; that the old system of African Slavery had merely
been succeeded by the heartless and galling system of African Peonage;
that the sacrifices made by him–including that of his martyrdom–had,
to a certain extent, been made in vain; that all the sacrifices, the
sorrows, the sufferings, of this Nation, made in blood, in tears, and in
vast expenditures of time and treasure, had, in some degree, and in a
certain sense, been useless; that the Union, to be sure, was saved–but
saved to be measurably perverted from its grand purpose; that the power
which animated Rebellion and which was supposed to have expired in the
“last ditch” with the “Lost Cause” had, by political legerdemain and
jugglery and violence, been regained; that the time had actually come
for Patriots to take back seats, while unrepentant Rebels came to the
front; that the Republic still lived, but only by sufferance, with the
hands of Southern oligarchs about its palpitating throat–a Republic,
not such as he expected, where all men are equal before the law, and
protected in their rights, but where the rights of a certain class are
persistently trampled under foot; that the people of the Northern,
Middle, and Western States, observing nothing beyond their own vicinage,
so to speak, and finding that each of their own States is still
Republican in its form of government, persistently, and perversely, shut
their eyes to the election terrorism practiced in the Solid South by,
which the 16 solid, Southern States were, and are, solidified by these
conspiring oligarchs into one compact, and powerful, political mass,
ever ready to be hurled, in and out of Congress, against the best
interests of the Nation–16 States, not all “Republican” in form, but
many of them Despotisms, in substance,–16 States, misnamed
“Democratic,” many of them ruled not by a majority, but by an Oligarch-
ridden minority–16 States, leagued, banded, bound solidly together, as
one great controlling Oligarchy, to hold, in its merciless and selfish
hands, the balance of power within this Republican Union; and that these
confederated Southern States are now actually able to dictate to all the
other States of the Union, the particular man, or men, to whose rule the
Nation must submit, and the particular policy, or policies, which the
Nation must adopt and follow:
“What next?”–you ask–“What next?” Alas, it is not difficult to
predict! Power, lawlessly gained, is always mercilessly used. Power,
usurped, is never tamely surrendered. The old French proverb, that
“revolutions never go backward,” is as true to-day, as when it was
written. Already we see the signs of great preparations throughout the
Solid South. Already we hear the shout of partisan hosts marshalled
behind the leaders of the disarmed Rebellion, in order that the same old
political organization which brought distress upon this Land shall again
control the Government. Already the spirit of the former aggressiveness
is defiantly bestirring itself. The old chieftains intend to take no
more chances. They feel that their Great Conspiracy is now assured of
success, inside the Union. They hesitate not to declare that the power
once held by them, and temporarily lost, is regained. Like the Old Man
of the Sea, they are now on top, and they:
MEAN TO KEEP THERE–IF THEY CAN.
BIOGRAPHICAL ADDENDUM: As few readers 150 years later know of John Logan
it seemed appropriate to the eBook editor to append this short biography
taken from the Encyclopedia Britanica of 1911:
LOGAN, JOHN ALEXANDER (1826-1886),
American soldier and political leader, was born in what is now
Murphysborough, Jackson county, Illinois, on the 9th of February 1826.
He had no schooling until he was fourteen; he then studied for three
years in Shiloh College, served in the Mexican War as a lieutenant of
volunteers, studied law in the office of an uncle, graduated from the
Law Department of Louisville University in 1851, and practised law with
success. He entered politics as a Douglas Democrat, was elected county
clerk in 1849, served in the State House of Representatives in 1853-1854
and in 1857, and for a time, during the interval, was prosecuting
attorney of the Third Judicial District of Illinois. In 1858 and 1860
he was elected as a Democrat to the National House of Representatives.
Though unattached and unenlisted, he fought at Bull Run, and then
returned to Washington, resigned his seat, and entered the Union army as
colonel of the 31st Illinois Volunteers, which he organized. He was
regarded as one of the ablest officers who entered the army from civil
life. In Grant’s campaigns terminating in the capture of Vicksburg,
which city Logan’s division was the first to enter and of which he was
military governor, he rose to the rank of major-general of volunteers;
in November 1863 he succeeded Sherman in command of the XV. Army Corps;
and after the death of McPherson he was in command of the Army of the
Tennessee at the battle of Atlanta. When the war closed, Logan resumed
his political career as a Republican, and was a member of the National
House of Representatives from 1867 to 1871, and of the United States
Senate from 1871 until 1877 and again from 1879 until his death, which
took place at Washington, D.C., on the 26th of December 1886. In 1868
he was one of the managers in the impeachment of President Johnson. His
war record and his great personal following, especially in the Grand
Army of the Republic, contributed to his nomination for Vice-President
in 1884 on the ticket with James G. Blaine, but he was not elected. His
impetuous oratory was popular on the platform. He was commander-in-
chief of the Grand Army of the Republic from 1868 to 1871, and in this
position successfully urged the observance of Memorial or Decoration
Day, an idea which probably originated with him. He was the author of
The Great Conspiracy: Its Origin and History (1886), an account of the
Civil War, and of The Volunteer Soldier of America (1887). There is a
fine statue of him by St. Gaudens in Chicago.
The best biography is that by George F. Dawson, The Life and Services
of Gen. John A. Logan, as Soldier and Statesman (Chicago and New York,
1887).
**************
This etext was retrieved by ftp from ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg
It is also available from www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg
This eBook was produced by David Widger, widger@cecomet.net
Be the first to comment