Wednesday, January 8, 2025

In The Review Queue: Building A House Divided

Building A HouseDivided: Slavery, Westward Expansion and the Roots of the Civil War

By Stephen G. Hyslop

By the time Abraham Lincoln asserted in 1858 that the nation could not “endure permanently half slave and half free,” the rift that would split the country in civil war was well defined. The origins and evolution of the coming conflict between North and South can in fact be traced back to the early years of the American Republic, as Stephen G. Hyslop demonstrates in Building a House Divided, an exploration of how the incipient fissure between the Union’s initial slave states and free states—or those where slaves were gradually being emancipated—lengthened and deepened as the nation advanced westward.

Hyslop focuses on four prominent slaveholding expansionists who were intent on preserving the Union but nonetheless helped build what Lincoln called a house divided: Presidents Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and James K. Polk and Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, who managed a plantation in Mississippi bequeathed by his father-in-law. Hyslop examines what these men did, collectively and individually, to further what Jefferson called an “empire of liberty,” though it kept millions of Black people in bondage. Along with these major figures, in all their conflicts and contradictions, he considers other American expansionists who engaged in and helped extend slavery—among them William Clark, Stephen Austin, and President John Tyler—as well as examples of principled opposition to the extension of slavery by northerners such as John Quincy Adams and southerners like Henry Clay and Thomas Hart Benton, who held slaves but placed preserving the Union above extending slavery across the continent.

The long view of the path to the Civil War, as charted through the Jeffersonian and Jacksonian eras in this book, reveals the critical fault in the nation’s foundation, exacerbated by slaveholding expansionists like Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, and Douglas, until the house they built upon it could no longer stand for two opposite ideas at once.

About The Author

Stephen G. Hyslop writes about American history, the American West, and American and international conflicts, including the Mexican War, the Civil War, and World War II. His books are vivid documentary narratives, drawing on numerous accounts from those who made history and witnessed it to portray events as they unfolded. Formerly a staff writer and text editor at Time-Life Books, he has collaborated as author with picture editors and designers to produce several illustrated books, including eyewitness histories and historical atlases published by National Geographic. His special interest in the trails that traders, settlers, and soldiers followed to the Southwest inspired two books on New Mexico and California up through the Mexican War, including Bound for Santa Fe (University of Oklahoma Press), a finalist in 2003 for the Western Writers of America Spur Award, Best Western Nonfiction. His articles have appeared in American History, Kansas History, California History, World War II, and the History Channel Magazine.

ISBN 978-0806192734, University of Oklahoma Press, © 2023, Hardcover, 328 Pages, Photographs, Illustrations, Maps, End Notes, Bibliography & Index. $32.95.  To Purchase the book click HERE.

Tuesday, January 7, 2025

In The Review Queue: Hell by the Acre

Hellby the Acre: A Narrative History of the Stones River Campaign, November1862-January 1863

By Daniel A. Masters

The waning days of 1862 marked a nadir in the fortunes of the United States. After major defeats at Fredericksburg in Virginia and Chickasaw Bayou in Mississippi, it fell to Maj. Gen. William S. Rosecrans and his Army of the Cumberland to secure a victory that would give military teeth to the Emancipation Proclamation set to take effect on January 1, 1863.

On the day after Christmas, Rosecrans moved his army southeast out of Nashville to Murfreesboro, met Gen. Braxton Bragg’s Army of Tennessee, and fought one of the largest and bloodiest battles of the war. The full campaign, with extensive new source material and coverage, is the subject of Daniel Masters’ new Hell by the Acre: A Narrative History of the Stones River Campaign, November 1862–January 1863.

The opposing armies—44,000 men under Rosecrans and 37,000 under Bragg—locked bayonets on December 31, 1862, in some of the hardest fighting of the war. Bragg’s initial attack drove the Federals back nearly three miles, captured 29 cannons, and thousands of prisoners. Somehow the Union lines held firm during the critical fighting along the Nashville Pike that afternoon against repeated determined attacks that left both armies bloodied and exhausted. The decisive moment came two days later when, in the fading afternoon of January 2, 1863, Bragg launched an assault on an isolated Union division on the east bank of Stones River. The Confederates once again enjoyed initial success only to be repulsed by 58 Union guns combined with a daring counterattack. This repulse broke Bragg’s hold on Murfreesboro. He retreated the following night, leaving Rosecrans and his Cumberland army victors of the field.

Prior Stones River books, each excellent in its own way, focused on strategy, tactics, and high-level command decisions. Masters ably examines all these issues in a study carefully constructed to also present the view from the soldiers who fought the battle. His masterful use of hundreds of archival and firsthand accounts, many of which have never been published, sheds significant new light on the experiences of the front-line troops. Hell by the Acre is an unparalleled view of Civil War combat and tactical command from the men who pulled the triggers.

Stones River marked a turning point for Federal fortunes in the Western Theater, and this fresh and original study sets forth the hefty cost of securing that victory.

About the Author

Daniel A. Masters is a graduate of the University of Toledo with a BA in Communications. Perhaps best known for his popular blog Dan Masters’ Civil War Chronicles, his work focuses on the war in the Western Theater from the perspective of the men in the ranks. He is the author of many articles in various journals and magazines and ten books on the Civil War. His 2017 Sherman’s Praetorian Guard won a local history publication award from Bowling Green State University; his most recent work, a collaboration with Larry M. Strayer entitled Echoes of Battle: Annals of Ohio’s Soldiers in the Civil War, was released in 2022. Dan is a supply chain manager for a metals manufacturing company. He, his wife Amy, and five of his six children live and work in Perrysburg, Ohio.

ISBN 978-1611217124, Savas Beatie, © 2024, Hardcover, 672 Pages, Photographs, Maps, Footnotes, Order of Battle, Bibliography & Index. $39.95.  To Purchase the book click HERE.

Saturday, December 28, 2024

Francis Mallory to Senator Robert M. T. Hunter, May 11, 1856

NORFOLK, [VA.], May 11, 1856.

DEAR HUNTER: I have just returned from a visit to my old (Hampton) county and hope things will end there as we desire. Booker is warm in your favor and out against Buch[ana]n talking publickly of his Tariff vote in '42 and Missouri Compromise opinions. I shall attend the convention there on next Thursday and so told Booker who seemed much pleased at my promise. I shall be an outsider but will try my best. Drop B[ooker] a Line the moment you get this. It will encourage him much. Your letter to him had a fine effect.

He is fond of you but has been much courted by Wise. High minded honorable and brave as he is these little attentions are always agreeable especially to a country gentleman living a secluded life. He still praises W[ise] but thinks him out of the question this time. I want you to ask him to go and say you will leave him to act according to his own judgment content with any action he may take &c. Wednesday the convention for the Norfolk district comes off. But for the Wise men who still look to W[ise] as residuary Legatee of B[uchanan] we should have no difficulty. No one is opposed to you but the idea is afloat that B[uchanan] is the strong candidate and as office here controls every thing they profess preference for him because he is as they think the strong man. Simkins has softened down very much and so has Blow. If either of them go from the lower end I have a strong hope of getting him right. If they get in their men I will work day and night to operate on them and if I can wield a little influence in Washington I may succeed. I have just had a conversation with Simkins the Leader of the Wise party here as to the proceedings in Portsmouth and he asked me to draw up the resolutions (this of course confidential) and state his positions: 1st Compliment Pierce and endorse his admin [istratio]n, 2d support nominee of Cin[cinnat]i Convention, 3d Express no preference, 4th Leave delegates free to act according to circumstances. We shall carry a true man I think from the upper counties and will at least divide the district.

I told Banks to get old Frank Rives (who he says is all right) to work on Boykin of Isle of Wight and Atkinson and he writes me that it has been done. Boykin wants office and is slippery. He is weak in intellect and his attachments by no means stable. He wants to go as a Delegate. I cant advocate him but I know, I think, how and who can manage him. He is more tractable than Blow or Smith. The son I can do nothing with. He wanted the Collectorship here and is sound against Pierce. He will make a hard fight for Delegate but we have quietly operated against him on the ground, that the Elector comes from Portsmouth, Smith's place of residence and that she is not entitled to [a] Delegate and none of the Norfolk City Delegation will support him. Pierce's office holders give us no aid whatever. They are afraid to take position. When I was Navy Ag[en]t I ruled my party in the District and so could Loyall have done, but he is effete, selfish and timid. Sawyer has no power, even with his subordinates. Will the above positions (I mean the resolutions) suit you or would it answer to make an issue for Pierce direct. The result would be doubtful in as much as the floating vote in Conventions generally sides with the moderate party whether they be so in fact or in fraud. Drop me a line the moment you get this and draft me a resolution or two. You need not be afraid of my indiscretion. You fellows in Congress did not know me half as well as I did you. If I talk at random sometimes, so also can I be silent and prudent when there is necessity. If I had position in the Line or on the staff I could win the victory here. If I can do any good I will speak at both Conventions. I care not who gets the nomination for Delegates I mean to commence operations on him and if it be any but Smith (who hates me) I hope to succeed. I am far from giving up the fight for these ten districts for none will be pledged or committed.

Send me the names of your friends in Gloucester that will be in Hampton that I may know who to approach. My Brother Chas. K. Mallory, a lawyer, residing in Hampton is a warm and active friend. It will be hard if him and Booker acting together can not carry things to suit us.

Tell Muscoe our inspection law has so far put a stop to slave stealing in lower Virginia. It works beautifully tho' the Senate did it much damage by its amendments. I have got things quite snug for him in the lower end of his district in view of Bayly's departure.

My son has just returned. Many thanks for your kindness, and please thank Pierce for me.

If you wish me to hear from you before the Conventions meet, write the moment you get this, which is nearly as hard to decipher as your own. The Baltimore Boats leave in the afternoon and arrive here next morning. This you will get Tuesday morning. If the positions in the resolutions suit you, telegraph me in the words "All right," if not "make an issue direct for P[ierce] or H[unter]" as the case may be and sign it. T. M. provided you cant mail your letter by the 1 P. M. [boat] for Baltimore or 1½ P. M. or that which carries the mail through to Norfolk which can be known by enquiring at the City p[ost] office. If the vote of V[irgini]a depends on these two districts I dont think you have much to fear let things take what shape they may just now. It is easier to vanquish men in detail than attacking numbers. I shall act as we Doctors say "pro re natu."

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 189-91

Francis Mallory to Senator Robert M. T. Hunter, May 15, 1856

HAMPTON, VA., May 15th, 1856.

MY DEAR SIR: According to promises I proceed to give you an acc[oun]t of the proceedings of the District Convention which met here to-day and have just adjourned. Every County in the district was represented and the Convention was respectable both in numbers and talent. At 12 O'clock the convention was called to order in the spacious ball saloon of Dr. Banks' delightfully located Hotel which he had kindly tendered to its use.

As the proceedings will soon be published in the leading public journal of the State, I must content myself with giving a mere synopsis of what passed without going into particulars.

Jno. W. Catlett Esq. of Gloucester with Eleven Vice presidents, and Mr. Hope and Mallory of Hampton, as Secretaries, was chosen as the permanent officers of the Convention. During the absence of the Committee on Organization, our Elector Wm. B. Taliaferro Esq. entertained the Convention in a very pretty speech of half an hours duration. It is the intention of Major Taliaferro to canvass the district after the nominations at Cincinnati, and as you will of course have an opportunity of hearing him and judging of his oratorical abilities for yourself, I will only say that he is a good looking man and of pleasant address. Conl R. C. Claybrook the talented delegate from Northumberland in the last legislature also spoke, and made a very happy effort indeed. He is a fine popular orator, and as he is quite a young man I should not be at all surprised if before a great while, he is called on to play a prominent part in the politics of this district.

Mr. Catlett on taking the Chair returned his thanks for the honor conferred on him in a neat and appropriate address which I hope will be given to the public by the accomplished Secretary exactly as it fell from his lips, for it was full of sound Southern sentiment patriotically expressed.

The rules of the house of Delegates were adopted for the Gov[ernmen]t of the Convention and also a resolution "that whenever a sealed vote should be called for, each delegate should give his proportion of the aggregate Dem[ocratic] vote cast by his County in the last Election for Governor." It was generally understood that the Convention would not attempt to express a preference for any one of the distinguished gentleman whose names have been so prominently spoken of for the Cincinnati nominations; then, judge of our surprise when a gentleman from Williamsburg, Mr. Causnan offered the following resolution, which caused no little stir and a perfect war of words: "that while this convention do not intend to instruct their delegates to the Cincinnati Convention, yet the nomination by that body of their distinguished fellow citizen H. A. Wise Esq. for the first office in the gift of the American people, will be highly gratifying and meet with the cordial approbation of the people of this district." I believe I give you the very words of the resolution; I am certain you have its pith and marrow. Mr. Causnan accompanied his resolution with a short speech, citing the action of the late convention in the Essex District which expressed a preference for Senator Hunter, as a reason very cogent to his mind, why this district should pronounce for Gov. Wise. A gentleman from Gloucester I think, moved to lay the resolution on the table, while another moved its indefinite postponement. A long debate ensued in which a good many silly and common place things were said. Mr. Seawell of Gloucester however, made a very sensible speech; he said "that Mr. Wise might be, probably he was, the choice of a majority of the District, yet he had no hesitation in saying that he would receive fewer votes and a less cordial support than any other man the Cin[cinna]ti Convention might nominate; that such a resolution ought not to pass unless as the unanimous sense of this Convention, which could not be; that the strong opposition to it would rob it of even the semblance of a compliment and destroy that moral effect which it was intended to convey."

It is a great pity that the overzealous friends of the Governour did not heed these words of wisdom. A Sealed Vote was called for. The friends of the resolution were taken all aback, and no little feeling manifested in certain quarters, by the vote of Accomack, two of her delegates voting for postponement and two against. The fate of the resolution was doubtful, but when the Secretary announced that 1002 had voted against and 1227 for indefinite postponement, the sensation throughout the convention was most profound. Chagrin and mortification were depicted on many countenances. Noses, to use a vulgar phrase, had been counted in the morning outside of the Convention and it was thought the resolution could be carried and certain Wise workers intended to do it against all opposition. A member immediately arose and offered the same resolution, substituting the name of Senator Hunter for that of Gov. Wise. Amid the noise and confusion around me I could not hear the remarks he made, as he spoke in a low voice. At this point there was a struggle for the floor. Mr. Custis of Accomack however gained it, and moved the indefinite postponement and took occasion in strong and nervous language to define his position, "he had voted to postpone the first resolution because he regarded it as an apple of discord calculated to mar the harmony of the Convention and the Convention had acted wisely in disposing of it as they did-he was unwilling to express a preference for any man although he had a decided choice. The delegates to Cin[cinna]ti should be left free and untrammelled. He was willing to trust to their discretion and good judgments. Virginia could not decide between her distinguished sons and present that unity of sentiment and action in which consisted her great moral power. To attempt such a thing would produce discord at once, and realise the fable of the Kilkenny Cats; if either Mr. Wise or Mr. Hunter should receive the nomination at Cin[cinna]ti the first move in favor of either must come from some other State, and when that was made, their good old mother would be prepared to follow."

These sentiments met with general favour. The resolution was then unanimously postponed.

At this stage of the proceedings a general anxiety to go into the election of Delegates to Cin[cinna]ti was manifested, but Mr. Cary of Hampton insisted on explaining the reasons that influenced the Convention in their late votes, and offered a resolution to this effect, "that the Convention was opposed to the expression of a preference for any one, feeling perfectly satisfied that the Cin[cinna]ti Convention would give us no other than a good and true man, whom we could all most cheerfully and enthusiastically support." This is the substance though not the language of the resolution. Now after a session of nearly four hours, the real business for which the Convention met, commenced, viz-the Selection and appointment of Delegates to the National Convention. Geo. Booker Esq of Elizabeth City, who has served on former occasions in 1848 and 1852 at Baltimore, and who seems to be a general favorite, was elected on the first ballot by a nearly unanimous vote. On the 3rd or 4th ballot M. W. Fisher Esq. of Northampton, was chosen as the other delegate. And Conl. R. C. Claybrook of Northumberland and Jno. Seawell Esq. of Gloucester were appointed alternates.

Here the scene became very interesting; each one of the Eleven Vice Presidents were in turn, called out and delivered themselves of short, pithy speeches, abounding in humour and happy hits. The Convention adjourned after returning thanks to the Democracy of Elizabeth] City for their kindness and hospitality. A most sumptuous repast was spread in the basement of the Hotel for the Convention, abounding in all the good things of this life. Champagne poped toasts were drunk, and speeches made, it was literally a "feast of reason and a flow of soul."

At night the good people of Hampton and vicinity met at their Court House, and were highly delighted by speeches from T. Cropper Esq. of Norfolk, Mr. Weaver of Accomack, and Jno. Seawell Esq. of Gloucester. Mr. S[eawell] is generally regarded as one of the ablest lawyers in the district, and is a fine speaker. He is very much like our friend L. The best feeling and spirit pervades the Democracy. They are confident every where of a splendid victory, eclipsing all past victories in November next. Hoping to meet you soon, when we will talk all these things over and many more.

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 191-4

Thursday, December 26, 2024

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 10, 1862

Left Manchester camp and arrived at Tullahoma the same day, and encamped for the night, making a march of 12 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 18

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 11, 1862

Left Tullahoma camp and arrived at Nashville the same day, and encamped for the night, making a march of 70 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 18

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 12, 1862

Left Nashville camp and moved four miles out of town to camp, and was rallied the same day and slept all night on our arms, with sixty rounds of cartridges, in the town of Nashville, Tenn., making a march of four miles and four back again, making 8 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 18

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 13, 1862

Left camp again and slept all night on our arms in Nashville, and encamped or changed camp the same day on College Hill, 1½ miles out of town, making a march of 2½ miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 18

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 16, 1862

Left Camp College Hill, or was rallied and sent to Gallatin, Summer county, Tenn, and slept on our arms all night, and the next morning our company was sent out to ascertain where company K, of the 79th Pa. Inf was, as they were put on out-post picket in the night and could not be found in the morning. We found them on the Gallatin road, one mile from town; in the mean time orders came to right-about and march to camp again. On arriving there, orders had come to the regiment to right-about and march to College Hill again, leaving Co. D behind. So we lay over until the next day, and a train of cars came for us and we returned again to camp, making a march of 23 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 18

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 17, 1862

Returned to camp, making a march of 13 miles, remaining in this camp four days.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 21, 1862

Left Camp College Hill on a rally from Nashville to the junction of the L. R. & Gr. rail road and returned to Nashville the same day, and was ordered right back the same night, making a march of 30 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 22, 1862

Left as an escort for General Nelson to Franklin, Tenn., from camp at the junction of the L.R. & G. rail road, and encamped at Tire Spring for the night, making a march of 12 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 23, 1862

Left Tire Spring camp and arrived at Drake's mill, Franklin, the same day, and encamped for the night, having fulfilled our escort, making a march of 22 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 24, 1862

Left Drake's mill camp and arrived the same day in Franklin, and encamped for the night, making a march of 2 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 25, 1862

Left Franklin camp and arrived at the tunnel of the Louisville & Nashville R. R. the same day, and encamped for the night, making a march of 22 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 26, 1862

Left the Tunnel camp and arrived at Grallatin on the same day, driving General Morgan and his forces out of the above named town, killing one of the rebel pickets because he would not halt when ordered by one of our number, and took possession of the town for the night, making a march of 7 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 27, 1862

Left Gallatin and returned to our old camp on College Hill, Nashville, making another grand circle the same day, a march of 26 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 19

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 28, 1862

Left Camp College Hill on the night of the 27th on a rally of double-quick for Columbia. Lay there all night and the 28th in battle line, making a march of 45 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 20

Diary of Private Adam S. Johnston, August 29, 1862

Left Columbia camp, the half of our regiment coming from Pulaski, 35 miles of a march, and returned to camp the same day, and encamped for the night, making another march this same day of 45 miles.

SOURCE: Adam S. Johnston, The Soldier Boy's Diary Book, p. 20

Wednesday, December 25, 2024

Daniel Webster to George G. Smith and Others, April 15, 1851

Marshfield, April 15, 1851.

GENTLEMEN,—I duly received your letter of the 11th of this month, and had fully made up my mind to comply with your invitation; for, although I have entertained no purpose of discussing further, at present, the political questions which have so much agitated the country, yet I could not deny myself the pleasure of meeting you and your fellow-citizens, for mutual congratulation upon our escape, so far, from dangers which, a year ago, seemed most seriously to threaten the very existence of our national institutions; and upon the prospect of an early return, in all parts of the country, of feelings of good-will and reciprocal regard.

But the newspapers of this afternoon inform me that the Board of Aldermen have refused your request for the use of Faneuil Hall. I care nothing for this, personally, except that it deprives me of the gratification of seeing you; although, if I supposed that the general voice of the people of Boston approved of this proceeding, it would, I confess, cause me the deepest regret. The resolution, denying you the Hall, has been adopted, if I mistake not, by the same Board which has practically refused to join with the other branch of the city government, in offering the hospitalities of the city to President Fillmore.

Gentlemen, for nearly thirty years I have been in the service of the country, by the choice of the people of Boston, and the appointment of the legislature of Massachusetts. My public conduct, through the whole of that long period, is not unknown, and I cheerfully leave it to the judgment of the country, now and hereafter.

Since the commencement of March of last year, I have done something, and hazarded much, to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and to maintain interests of the most vital importance to the citizens of Boston. And I shall do more and hazard more, whenever in my judgment it becomes necessary that more be done or more be hazarded. I shall perform with unflinching perseverance, and to the end, my duty to my whole country; nor do I in the slightest degree fear the result. Folly and fanaticism may have their hour. They may not only affect the minds of individuals, but they may also seize on public bodies, of greater or less dignity. But their reign is without doubt destined to be short, even where, for the moment, it seems most triumphant. We, of Massachusetts, are not doomed to a course of political conduct, such as would reproach our ancestors, destroy our own prosperity, and expose us to the derision of the civilized world. No such future is before us.

Far otherwise. Patriotism, the union of good men, fidelity to the Constitution in all its provisions, and that intelligence which has hitherto enabled the people of this State to discern and appreciate their own political blessings, as well as what is due to their own history and character, will bring them back to their accustomed feelings of love of country, and of respect and veneration for its institutions.

I am, gentlemen, with the most sincere regards, your obliged friend, and very obedient servant,

DANIEL WEBSTER.

To Messrs. GEORGE G. SMITH, CALEB EDDY, ASA SWALLOW, URIEL CROCKER, and others.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 429-31

Saturday, December 21, 2024

Documents, Letters & Speeches: July 1 - December 31, 1862

The Founding Documents | Ordinances of Secession
The Antebellum Period
1860 | 1861
January 1 – June 30, 1862
July 1 – December 31, 1862

January 1 - June 30, 1863
July 1 - December 31, 1863
January 1 - June 30, 1864
July 1 - December 31, 1864
January 1 - to December 31, 1865
Reconstruction & Post War