Jefferson Davis to Senator William Allen, March 25, 1844

Hurricane Mi., 25th March 1844

Hon. Sen. Allen of Ohio,

Dr. Sir,

“The sick man knows the Physician's step,” but I assure you that if breaking a long silence to ask a favor of you should expose me to the suspicion of remembering you only because of my trouble, the fact is nevertheless quite otherwise. I am one of the Presidential "electors" for the State of Mississippi and though I do not doubt the democratic character of our people I fear false statements and false issues in the approaching canvass and expect the Whigs to make great exertions.

I wish you to aid me with any statements which can be made available against the charge of defalcation and extravagance under Mr. Van Buren's administration, against the present Tariff as productive of revenue, against the U. S. Bank, against the charge of improper removals of officers and if there be such statement the removals in the first year of Harrison & Tyler's administration. Further I should be glad to have the evidence of Mr. Clay's refusal to divide the resolution of censure upon President Jackson for the removal of the deposits and the rule of the senate in relation to the division of questions, Secretary Taney's report on the removal of the deposits from the U. S. Bank, Secretary Poinset's annual report recommending reorganization of the militia and answer to call of the house on the same subject. Was not President V. Buren one of the first to point out the unconstitutionality of the military districts as projected in that answer? I had but cannot now find a speech of yours showing that the U. S. Bank loaned at a time which indicated the purpose, more money to members of Congress than the amount of their pay. Can you send me a copy of that speech?

I have mingled but little in politics and as you perceive by this letter have an arsenal poorly supplied for a campaign. Labor is expected of me and I am willing to render it. I believe much depends on this presidential election, and that every man who loves the union and the constitution as it is should be active.

You will understand what I want or should want better than myself, so far as you can conveniently send such you will greatly oblige me, and any suggestions you may find leisure to make to me will be highly appreciated.

Vy. Respectfully and truly yours

JEFFN. DAVIS

Wm. Allen
        Washington
                D. C.

        P. S.

                Address to Warrenton,
                        Warren County,
                                Missi.

SOURCE: Dunbar Rowland, Editor, Jefferson Davis, Constitutionalist: His Letters, Papers and Speeches, Volume 1, p. 9-10

George Mason Graham to William T. Sherman, January 4, 1861

TYRONE, Friday Night, Jan. 4, 1861.

DEAR COLONEL: Your Christmas letter came duly to hand, and I beg to make you my acknowledgements for it, although it added fuel to the flame of the sad thoughts and feelings with which I am now constantly oppressed.

First of all, I thought of your little circle at Lancaster and felt provoked that instead of being absorbed in the enjoyment of their society you should have no better occupation on that day than in writing to me.

Then the already almost realized certainty that we shall lose you, for I feel as confident as I possibly can of any event not yet transpired, than an ordinance of secession will be rushed through the convention with breathless haste. The tone of the Louisiana Democrat ever since the presidential election has satisfied me of that — its last issue confirms it. Less than four weeks ago I proclaimed from the steps of the post-office, to an unusually large crowd awaiting the opening of the mail, that “I stood by the Union, that secession was treason, and no man in the crowd opened his mouth affirmatively or negatively, although I saw men there — lifelong Democrats, too — who, I knew, felt and thought as I did about it. A few days afterward a man who was in that crowd, and whose breath smells of whatever Governor Moore chews, told me that he was opposed to sending men of extreme views either way to the convention on Dec. 26. The same man said in my presence in Alexandria that he would not vote for any man for the convention who would not pledge himself beforehand to put the state out of the Union before the 4th of March.

And what men are we to vote for to that convention! So far as the talent and ability requisite for the occasion are concerned I look upon both tickets as sphinxs, having a common head. I shall vote for the courthouse sphinx, because that was made publicly in open day, by the people, where everybody had a chance to take a part whilst the dark lantern sphinx was made nobody knows by whom, nobody knows where, but popped on to the Democratic stage by Locofoco jugglery.

The course you have marked out for yourself I had anticipated. There is none other left for you. In the event of the convention passing an ordinance of abrupt secession, I do not see that there will be the slightest obligation on (you), or propriety in your allowing time for a successor. Where is he to come from at this time except temporarily out of the present Academic Board? Some of our friends will be apt to think that they have accomplished more than they ever contemplated, and may come, possibly, to the conclusion that there are more things between heaven and earth than were ever dreamt of in their philosophy.

Having no papers or letters by yesterday's mail, I am very much in a mist in regard to Bob Anderson's situation (in Fort Sumter). I have heard that Mr. Floyd has resigned because he was not allowed to reinforce him. Am looking with intense anxiety for the mail of to-morrow night. I really think that Mr. Van Buren would have made longer strides after Gen. Jackson than poor old Buck.

I have been greatly engrossed during the Holy Days (?). The overseer for "Forked-Deer"¹ has only now arrived, having been to Mississippi for his wife, and I have no overseer at Tyrone yet, though almost hourly pestered with applications — so that I have the cares and troubles of both plantations on my hands, for it will take several days yet to get rid of "Forked-deer.” Onze Heurs, et mes yeux beaucoup fatigues.

To-morrow I must work to get all the votes I can for the courthouse sphinx. . .

_______________

¹ One of General Graham's plantations. – ED

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 326-8

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, October 14, 1864

Seward was quite exultant over the elections; feels strong and self-gratified. Says this Administration is wise, energetic, faithful, and able beyond any of its predecessors; that it has gone through trials which none of them has ever known, and carried on, under extraordinary circumstances and against combinations such as the world has never known, a war unparalleled in the annals of the world. The death of Judge Taney was alluded to. His funeral takes place to-morrow. The body will pass from his residence at 7 A.M. to the depot; and be carried to Frederick, Maryland. Seward thought it his duty to attend the funeral in this city but not farther, and advised that the President should also. The Attorney-General deemed it his duty and a proper courtesy to go with the remains to F. The President inquired my views. I thought the suggestions in regard to himself and Messrs. Seward and Bates very well, and it would be best not to take official action but to let each member of the Cabinet act his pleasure. For my own part, I felt little inclined to participate. I have never called upon him living, and while his position and office were to be respected, I had no honors for the deceased beyond those that were public. That he had many good qualities and possessed ability, I do not doubt; that he rendered service in Jackson's administration is true, and during most of his judicial life he was upright and just. But the course pursued in the Dred Scott case and all the attending circumstances forfeited respect for him as a man or a judge.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 176-7

Flag Officer Samuel F. Dupont to Gustavus V. Fox, July 7, 1862

Private

Wabash, Port Royal, S.C.     

7, July, 62 

My Dear Friend

I enclose a slip from Charleston Mercury of 25. ulto —that you may see how our correspondents give aid and comfort to the rebels. They were alarmed in so high a degree as not to be able to understand some extraordinary proceedings—they will now be reassured by what I am made to say.

I enclose also a Charleston Courier with a violent attack on Drayton, that he may be credited accordingly at the Department. The denunciation omitted one item in the Drayton family, that the Commander's father General Jackson's friend, was driven from South Carolina for his Union sentiments, lived in exile from his State, and died in the North. Do not however let the article in question be republished, but keep the paper.

Please do not let that gang of Thugs the Associated Press have my reports or the reports of my officers to me—they always mutilate, never know the point involved of anything professional, and generally leave out what is best.

The Dept have been very kind in publishing the reports of my commanding officers, and it has had a very happy effect in the squadron. I wish you could have seen a letter received the other day from Stevens by Rodgers—it would have gratified you as it certainly did me and touched on this very point—that the officers here had always been brought forward. I mention all this because I think you made too light of our occupation of Georgetown waters, not for us but for the Depmt itself. I think you should have published Ammen's and my letter about Sproston's death. You published the one about Budd and Mather and it brought me more letters than you can imagine, and I think the relatives in Balto are all union people. Truxtun's letter too was deeply interesting.

Other letters from me to-day will tell you of my sending this ship home. You will see Rodgers—it is important you should.

Yours most faithfully 

S. F. DUPONT 

Mr. Fox, Washington.

SOURCE: Robert Means Thompson & Richard Wainwright, Editors, Publications of the Naval Historical Society, Volume 9: Confidential Correspondence of Gustavus Vasa Fox, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, 1861-1865, Volume 1, p. 129-30

Jonathan Worth to the People of Randolph County, North Carolina, May 1861

 RALEigh, May, 1861.

You know how earnestly I have labored to preserve the Union. I still regard it as the “paladium of our liberty.” I have no hope that so good a government will be built upon its ruins. I advised you last February to vote against a Convention, regarding it as a contrivance to overthrow the Government. There was then a majority in North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, Arkansas in favor of preserving the Union. I felt sure if a reconsideration could not be effected, war must ensue—and if war was commenced by either party, it would engender hatred between the sections and greatly widen the breach. I have always believed and still believe that the doctrine of secession, as a peaceful and constitutional mode of withdrawing a State from the Union, an absurdity; and that it was the right and the duty of the Federal Government, to execute the laws and protect the public property by military force in such seceding States; but after seven States had been allowed without molestation, to assert this doctrine of secession and set up and put in operation a new government—after all the Federal officers within their limits had resigned and they had possessed themselves without resistance of all the forts, excepting Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens, on the mainland in seven States, I deemed it highly inexpedient for the Government to attempt coercion by military force: because,

First—it would result in a bloody civil war—and could not end in a restoration of friendly union.

Secondly—because I thought Congress had indicated, by refusing to pass a force bill, that it was inexpedient at that time, to use military power to retain or regain the public property, through the agency of a Sectional President, which indication I supposed the President, as the power appointed to execute the Legislative will, would observe.

Thirdly—I supposed that President, though he had obtained power by the advocacy of Sectional doctrines, tending to dissolve the Union, still desired to preserve the Union; and any man of ordinary common sense knew that any attempt on the part of a president elected by one section, to compel by force of arms, the other section which had been allowed quietly to accomplish revolution and establish a government, would be resisted—and all the men in the same States, still adhering to the Union, would be rendered impotent to resist the current of Revolution.

The President must have known that all of us in the Slave States, who in spite of the unfriendly action of the North, had barely become able to stand up for the Union would be crushed by the first gun he fired against the South. I believed he still desired to protect our rights and preserve the Union, and that he had some sympathy with those of us who had breasted the current of Disunion, and that he would not voluntarily drive us out of the Union—though the President had been elected as a partisan, upon one Sectional idea, I hoped and believed, when he and his party had attained control of the government, that he was enough of a statesman and a patriot to exert his powers to protect our rights and preserve the Union. Clay and Jackson and all the statesmen of the land, when South Carolina first asserted the Doctrine of Nullification and Secession, held that extraordinary Legislation was necessary to enable the executive to suppress the rebellion. The last Congress had refused the extraordinary legislation—the legislative will was therefore clearly expressed, that there should be no attempt at military coercion, and for some weeks after the inauguration of Lincoln, his administration allowed it to be understood that they intended to act in conformity to the will of Congress and evacuate Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens—and thus allowing excited passions to subside, leave to the next Congress to determine what was to be done. But suddenly and without explanation, a fleet is fitted by the President and notice given to the Southern Confederacy that Fort Sumter would be provided for peaceably or forcibly. Men of war were sent to Charleston Harbor—then Fort Sumter was attacked and taken. The first guns were fired by the Southern army, but this was after they had notice from the President that he intended to retain possession of the Fort by force.

[The remainder is missing, but the substance of it was an appeal to the people to unite in defense of the South.]

SOURCE: J. G. de Roulhac Hamilton, Editor, The Correspondence of Jonathan Worth, Volume 1, p. 135-7

Jonathan Worth to Joseph John Jackson, December 17, 1860

RALEigh, Dec. 17, ‘60.

I can not find time to write you as often as I ought to.

To-day the Senate voted 27 to 15 to suspend the rules in order to pass through its 2d and 3d readings a bill offered this morning by Erwin, who is a manly disunionist, not a disunionist under the disguise of secession, authorizing the Gov. to expend $300,000 in buying arms. The reason given for this remarkable precipitancy is that there are reasons to fear that a considerable insurrection is on foot, and secondly, that just now a gun factory offers him the guns at cash prices and payment to be made in State bonds at par. I need not say that such pretext is equally silly. The bill is made the order of the day for 12 to-morrow. It will probably pass its second and third readings. Its real object is to enable the Governor to arm volunteers to aid S. C. The State will soon be involved in war unless, to the great disappointment and mortification of the leaders in this General Assembly, the committee of 33 should make a pacification.

Cass has resigned because B. would not reinforce Ft. Moultrie. This is the report here, fully credited. Cass is too much of a Statesman to connive at the refusal of the President to execute the laws. Lincoln would not be permitted to execute them.

So So. Ca. will become another Paradise—By her cotton will rule the world—Get plenty of cheap negroes from Africa, and we may possibly be allowed to attach ourselves to her as an humble dependency.

Slavery, as Gen. Jackson well predicted, is only a “pretext.” Slavery is doomed if the South sets up a Southern Confederacy. With Canada in effect for her Northern border from the Atlantic to the Pacific—all hating us, it is madness to think of anything else only to cut the throats of the negroes or have our own throats cut.

I am truly sorry that I am a member of this Assembly which I think contains less of patriotism than any like number of men ever assembled in this State since the close of the Revolution.

Nearly half of the Democratic members desire to preserve the Union, but they are the rank and file and will all ultimately follow their leaders—at least, vote for the measures of Avery and Co.—all of which, openly or in disguise, look to a dissolution.

SOURCE: J. G. de Roulhac Hamilton, Editor, The Correspondence of Jonathan Worth, Volume 1, p. 126-7

Brigadier-General Thomas Benton Smith.

General Thomas Benton Smith, who was the youngest general in the Confederate army and enjoys the further distinction of being the only one now living, has reached the venerable age of eighty-five years. His birth occurred in Rutherford county, Tennessee, on the 24th of February, 1838, his parents being James M. and Martha (Page) Smith, the former a native of Dinwiddie county, Virginia. He comes of English ancestry in the paternal line and of Welsh descent on the maternal side, and his mother's people lived in North and South Carolina before coming to Tennessee. General Smith still has in his possession a silver piece that his maternal ancestors brought from Wales and which was given to him by his mother. His maternal grandparents, John and Martha Page, lived ten miles from Franklin and five miles from Triune. James M. Smith, the father of General Smith, was a carpenter of Mechanicsville, Rutherford county, this state, who made and sold gins, while his wife made cloth to provide wearing apparel for her children and the ten negro slaves owned by the family. Their home was a log house of two rooms and a side porch. James M. Smith was a soldier of the War of 1812, participating in the battle of New Orleans under Andrew Jackson. When the Civil war was inaugurated he and his wife owned one hundred and five acres of land and other property to the value of about ten thousand dollars.

In the acquirement of an education Thomas Benton Smith walked two miles to attend common school and later became a student in a military academy at Nashville, Tennessee, from which he was graduated. Andrew Johnson gave him a lieutenant's commission and he then went to West Point, New York, attending school for sixteen years altogether. The opening of the Civil war found him busily engaged in the cultivation of a farm of one hundred and five acres which he owned in the vicinity of Triune and he left the plow handles to enlist in the Zollicoffer Guards of the Twentieth Tennessee Regiment, being sworn in at Triune on the 17th of May, 1861. Both he and his brother, John M. Smith, joined the Confederate forces, leaving their mother and the negroes at home. Thomas B. Smith was sent with his company to Camp Zollicoffer and in January, 1862, took part in the battle of Fishing Creek, while subsequently he fought at Shiloh, Murfreesboro, Chickamauga, Baton Rouge, Franklin and Nashville. His horse was shot from under him at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and again at the battle of Atlanta. After he had surrendered he was struck on the head with a sword by a Yankee colonel named W. S. McMillen, the blow splitting the bone of his head and exposing his brain, and he was placed in the Tennessee state prison, which was being used as a hospital. Following his discharge at Fort Warren, Massachusetts, he was given transportation and came direct to Nashville. Vernon K, Stevenson, the first president of the Nashville & Chattanooga Railroad, who was his close personal friend, offered him a position in recognition of the fact that General Smith had made his son, Vernon K. Stevenson, Jr., a member of his staff in 1864. General Smith engaged in railroad work first as a brakeman, then as freight conductor and later won promotion to the position of passenger conductor on the Nashville & Chattanooga, being identified with railroad interests altogether for ten years, during a part of which period he was in the service of the Nashville & Decatur. After leaving the railroad he became a candidate for congress in the counties of Williamson, Wilson and Rutherford and following the election of E. I. Gollady of Lebanon, Tennessee, returned home, where he remained until the death of his mother. He was then sent to the Central State Hospital of Nashville, where he has been a patient for about forty-seven years, or since 1876, when the institution was under Dr. Callender's administration. He has always been accorded the best and kindest treatment and has numerous friends whose regard he prizes. His closest kin are nephews and nieces. He enjoyed the personal friendship of many distinguished men of an earlier day, including Andrew Johnson, General Felix K. Zollicoffer, General John C. Brown, General William B. Bate, General Bragg, who handed him his commission as brigadier general, General W. J. Hardee, General Frank Cheatham, Colonel E. W. Cole, John W. Thomas and W. L. Danley. Lieutenant James L. Cooper of Nashville and Dr. D. B. Cliff, Sr., of Franklin, Tennessee, were members of his staff while he held the rank of brigadier general in 1864. He attends the annual reunion of the Twentieth Tennessee Regiment of Confederate Veterans at Centennial Park, also goes to Mount Olivet once a year to decorate the graves of Confederate soldiers and occasionally takes other trips to Nashville. He declares that he is as happy as anyone could be under the circumstances and he is spending the evening of life in quiet content.

(Since this biographical sketch was written, General Smith has passed to his reward. In honor of his distinguished character and services his body was placed in state in the hall of the house of representatives in the capitol of Tennessee, where the funeral services were held under the auspices of the United Confederate Veterans.)

SOURCE: Tennessee: The Volunteer State, 1769-1923, Volume 2, p. 144-7

John J. Crittenden to Henry Clay, September 3, 1827

Frankfort, September 3, 1827.

My Dear Sir,—I have received your letter of the 23d of July last, and cannot hesitate to give you the statement you have requested. Some time in the fall of 1824, conversing upon the subject of the then pending presidential election, and speaking in reference to your exclusion from the contest, and to your being called upon to decide and vote between the other candidates who might be returned to the House of Representatives, you declared that you could not, or that it was impossible, for you to vote for General Jackson in any event. This contains the substance of what you said. My impression is, that this conversation took place not long before you went on to Congress, and your declaration was elicited by some intimation that fell from me of my preference for General Jackson over all other candidates except yourself. I will only add, sir, that I have casually learned from my friend Colonel James Davidson, our State treasurer, that you conversed with him about the same time on the same subject, and made in substance the same declaration. Notwithstanding the reluctance I feel at having my humble name dragged before the public, I could not in justice refuse you this statement of facts, with permission to use it as you may think proper for the purpose of your own vindication.

I have the honor to be, yours, etc.,

J. J. Crittenden.

Hon. Henry Clay,

Secretary of State.

SOURCES: Mrs. Chapman Coleman, The Life of John J. Crittenden, Volume 1, p. 66

Henry Clay to John J. Crittenden, March 10, 1826

Washington, March 10, 1826.

Dear Crittenden, — Robert Scott informs me that there are several cases of the estate of Colonel Morrison on the docket of the new Court of Appeals. I should be glad if they were anywhere else; but, being there, I must beg that you will not allow the estate to suffer for the want of counsel. If you do not practice in the new court and believe that counsel may be nevertheless necessary there, be pleased to engage for me some one who does. I have absolutely not had time or health to keep up my private and friendly correspondence during the past winter with any regularity. With respect to politics, from others and from the public prints, you have no doubt received most of the information which I should have been able to communicate. In the House of Representatives members and talents are largely on the side of the administration. In the Senate matters do not stand so well. There are about sixteen or seventeen senators resolved on opposition at all events, seven or eight more are secretly so disposed, and indulge in that spirit, as far as they can, prudently. When these two sections unite, they make together a small majority. Near three months ago a nomination was made of ministers to Panama. That subject has been selected for opposition, and by numerous contrivances, the measure has been delayed to this time, and may be for some days to come. On all collateral questions, these senators who are secretly disposed to opposition, vote with the Macedonian phalanx, and thus making a majority procrastinate the decision. Nevertheless, that decision is not believed by either party to be doubtful. The measure will be finally sanctioned by a small majority. The Vice-President (your particular friend) is up to the hub with the opposition, although he will stoutly deny it when proof cannot be adduced. One of the main inducements with him and those whom he can influence is, that they suppose, if they can defeat, or by delay cripple the measure, it will affect me. I am sorry to tell you that our senator (Mr. Rowan) is among the bitterest of the opponents to the administration. He appears as if he had been gathering a head of malignity for some years back, which he is now letting off upon poor Mr. Adams and his administration; he is, however, almost impotent. As for the Colonel, he is very much disposed to oblige all parties, and is greatly distressed that neither of them is willing to take him by moieties. If the Relief party should decline (as Jackson's cause seems to be giving way), the Colonel will be a real, as he is now a nominal, supporter of the administration. The President wishes not to appoint a judge in place of our inestimable friend, poor Todd, until the Senate disposes of the bill to extend the judiciary, though he may, by the delay to which that body seems now prone, be finally compelled to make the appointment without waiting for its passage or rejection. It is owing principally to Mr. Rowan that an amendment has been made in the Senate, throwing Kentucky and Ohio into the same circuit, and his object was to prevent any judge from being appointed in Kentucky. He told me himself that he wished the field of election enlarged for a judge in our circuit. Give my respects to Blair, and tell him I mean to write to him soon,—not, however, on Kentucky politics. Say to him that I should be very glad to gratify him if I could, by expressing an opinion in favor of the ——— or a compromise, but I would rather oblige him in any other matter. I mean to abjure Kentucky politics, not because I have not the deepest interest in all that concerns her character and prosperity, but—it is not worth while to trouble you with the reasons.

I am faithfully your friend,

H. Clay.

Hon. J. J. Crittenden.

SOURCE: Mrs. Chapman Coleman, The Life of John J. Crittenden, Volume 1, p. 63-5

Ezekiel Webster to Congressman Daniel Webster, April 3, 1823

April 3, 1823.

Dear Daniel,—I received yours this morning. Of all the candidates named for the Presidency, the people of New Hampshire would undoubtedly prefer Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams being out of the question, I think Mr. Calhoun would be their choice. I think neither Jackson, Crawford, nor Clay could ever obtain the votes of this State. They would prefer to have a Northern man for the President, and I think would vote for Mr. Clinton, if there should be any prospect of his being chosen. It seems to me there is among us a pretty strong local feeling, something like a very general wish that the next President should be from the North. There is a kind of presentiment that, after this election, we may give up all further expectation.

Of all the persons named I reply Calhoun. Yet, if a prominent man from New England, New York, or Pennsylvania should /be put in nomination against him, I think he would obtain the electoral vote.

Consulting my own feelings and wishes at this time, I should put the candidates in this order, Adams, Calhoun, Clinton. I am, however, very incompetent to judge correctly of their qualifications.

For the time we had to labor we did something. Every department of the government will be what is called here anti-Hill. Some good will result from the change, not immediately perhaps, but in time.

The result of the election was one of the most unexpected, and yet one of the most natural events that could be imagined. Here is a paradox, I give no more.

I intend to be in Boston the 3d day of May, as I have some engagements after the 10th that will require me to be at home.

Yours affectionately,

Ezekiel Webster.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Volume 1, p. 323-4

George M. Bibb to John J. Crittenden, March 8, 1824

Washington, March 8, 1824.

DEAR JOHN,—That there are men who will ascribe my actions to any motive but a reasonable one, I know, but that any should suppose that I have come to Washington for the purpose of electioneering against Mr. Clay is an extravagance that I did not anticipate would have been charged against me. My great motive in coming here was to get a hearing and decision in my suit for the land at Falmouth; in this I have succeeded. The opinion is delivered, and is in my favor. I endeavored to lay a contribution on other suitors in the court to help pay expenses of the trip, but the people of Kentucky are not drilled to paying fees to the lawyers. They pay in promises. As to Mr. Clay, he has broken the cords of friendship which bound me to him; they can never again be tied. I have no desire to interfere with your friendship for him, nor to trouble you with complaints of his conduct to me. Beware of such sunshine friends! As to electioneering upon the subject of President, I am as far removed from it as Washington is from Kentucky. I have heard a great deal; said little. I am not a member of Congress, and have, therefore, no right to go to caucus or vote in caucus, nor have I a vote when the question shall come before the House of Representatives. A listener, who hears all parties, is perhaps better able to form his opinions than those who are heated, busy, bustling managers. The grand Harrisburg Convention has decided, with but a single dissenting voice, for Jackson. Roberts was the only man who did not, upon the first vote, declare for Jackson. This has given a new impetus to him. The anticipation that Pennsylvania would declare for him gave him great advantages. The undivided voice of the Convention at Harrisburg has surprised the friends of all the other candidates, — save those of Calhoun, — they looked for it after the meeting in the county of Philadelphia, for the purpose of choosing a delegate to the Convention at Harrisburg. It seems that the people of North Carolina are taking up Jackson, as Pennsylvania did, against their politicians and of their own mere will. So it is in New York. The majority of the Senate are disposed to keep the appointment of electors in the legislature, — that is their calculation for Crawford; but a large majority of the House of Representatives of that State are decidedly opposed to Crawford. Adams is the most potent there. With the people, Jackson is next to Adams, and should the election go to the people Jackson may prevail in that State. The indications in Maryland are for Jackson. Tennessee and Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Missouri, for Jackson. All New England for Adams. As for Indiana and Ohio, it is difficult now to say for whom their vote will be. The most knowing say that the substantial controversy is now between Adams and Jackson, and by a union of the slaveholding States with Pennsylvania Jackson may be elected. Unless Clay gets the votes of New York he cannot be one of the three from whom the House of Representatives is to choose. What revolutions in the electoral votes may take place before the time of choosing the Electoral College, should the friends of Crawford find out what everybody else seems to have found out (that he cannot be elected either by the people or the House of Representatives), cannot be foreseen. Jackson's ticket is every day acquiring new friends. Since the Convention at Harrisburg his pretensions are placed before the people by means of newspapers that were devoted before to other candidates. So much for politics. The great case, between Jersey and New York as it is called, upon the constitutionality of the law of New York, giving to Fulton the exclusive right to navigate the waters of New York by steamboats, is decided against New York. In this cause, I heard from Wirt the greatest display that I have ever heard at the bar since the days of Patrick Henry. His legal argument was very strong; his peroration was beautiful and grand. I did not hear Webster, nor Oakley, nor Emmett in this case, but all are said to have exhibited great talents. I have heard Webster, Sergeant, and White, of Tennessee. Wirt, Webster, White, and Ogden are the ablest lawyers, and Walter Jones should also be ranked among the first. Emmett I have not heard, but his reputation is high. After all, I have not been convinced that the bar of Kentucky does not contain as much talent and force as any other bar in the Union.

SOURCE: Mrs. Chapman Coleman, The Life of John J. Crittenden, Volume 1, p. 60-1

George M. Bibb to John J. Crittenden, March 17, 1824

March17th. I have heard Wirt in another great case, opposed by Clay and Harper. Wirt rises with the occasion and the opposing force. The bill for putting the choice of the electors of New York to the people has been rejected by the Senate, so that it cannot now be foreseen how New York will be. The majority of the Senate for Crawford, the majority of the House of Representatives against him. Mr. Clay's prospects there, feeble as they were, are gone. We may now begin to settle down between Jackson and Adams. I can have no hesitation; my voice is for Jackson.

Monroe is here, our Tom, and is charged with a speech. I have no mission in view; I expect to be a pleader of causes as long as I am able to follow the profession. I had not, in coming here, any other motive or prospect. This day week I expect to be off to Kentucky.

Yours, as ever,

George M. Bibb.

SOURCE: Mrs. Chapman Coleman, The Life of John J. Crittenden, Volume 1, p. 61-2

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: Dr. Francis Wayland, October 20, 1838

We wonder if this learned divine has ever undertaken to convince men that their “responsibilities were limited” in regard to the removal of any other nuisance than slavery. We have not seen any portion of his "limitations," except that relating to slavery. Whether he has treated on them as to any other sin, we do not know. But what possessed him to think men needed reminding of the limitations of their obligations? Are they prone to works of supererogation? Are they apt to be rampant in the exercise of that “charity,” which “seeketh not her own,” to transcend the bounds of their duty? Is it necessary, in order to a proper husbanding of their sympathies, that they be warned and admonished against their too prodigal lavishment upon their fellow-men? Is it to be predicated of fallen, depraved men, that they will be likely to overrun their obligations? Need they be guarded against an extravagance like this? Need ministers of the gospel tax their ingenuity in a behalf like this? Generally this class of men have been engaged, on what they call in court “the other side;” in enforcing human obligations, and in setting forth and urging on men's consciences their terrible responsibilities—to remove from their minds and hearts erroneous notions of their limitation?. and of their own freedom from obligation.

We take it nothing can be clearer and more reasonable than the universal obligation to do to others as we would that they should do to us — and to do likewise for others. If we were slaves, does any doctor doubt we should desire our neighbors, if we had any, to try to rescue us? If our house was a-fire, should not we want our neighbors to help put the fire out? If we were in the water, going to the bottom, could we bear it that neighbors should go indifferently by, and let us sink — that they should merely pity us — in the abstract? The slavery case is exceedingly plain. Slavery is the creature of tolerance — of public sufferance. Southern slavery exists in northern sufferance. The North is the seat of American sufferance. It is the theatre of moral influence for this nation. There is no such influence in the South — that is, no reforming influence except by negative operation. What is the moral influence of New Orleans on the nation? What of Charleston, or Mobile, or St. Louis, or Richmond, or any of the states or people of which these are the capitals? What religious or moral enterprise ever originated, or advanced in any of these places or people? They no more influence the country, than gamblers, drunkards, thieves, religiously influence the church. The church influences them for good or for evil, according to her faithfulness or unfaithfulness in her Master's service. The North influences the South in the matter of slavery. Yea, the North acts with the South in slaveholding. They directly and professedly uphold the system wherever they have occasion. They tolerate it in the District of Columbia. They directly sustain it in the territories. They allow the slave trade between the states. They conspired with the South in the constitution, that the foreign trade in slaves should not be interrupted by Congress for twenty years. They voted that Arkansas should come into the Union, with a constitution guarding slavery with a two-edged sword, giving the slaveholder a veto upon an emancipating legislature, and the legislature a check upon the repentant slaveholder. They have voted to admit a system that forbids and discourages repentance of the sin of slaveholding, and makes it desperate. All this has been done solemnly and with deliberation, and in legislative form — and the whole nation has tacitly allowed those of its people who chose, to hold slaves. It has never been disreputable, but highly the contrary, to hold slaves in this country. Is not a nation answerable for the vices and crimes which are reputable and popular within its borders? If a nation has any moral influence, any moral standard, is it not responsible for what that standard does not condemn? Has not this nation cast all its presidential votes for two men, guilty at the very moment of the election and all their days before and since, of the crime of slaveholding — Andrew Jackson, a slaveholder and a slave driver, and voted for twice by a majority of the electoral suffrage of this nation, north and south — and Henry Clay, a slaveholder and a notorious compromiser in the service of the infernal system, voted for by the rest of the nation. Jackson chosen by northern men against Adams a northern man. And then a northern man abandoned by northern men, one and the same party, in favor of Clay, a southern slaveholder[.]

We have nothing to do with abolishing slavery, says the Doctor Wayland, either as citizens of the United States, or as men. Our responsibilities for its removal are all limited away. On the very face of our case, it is palpable and grossly evident, we say, that the northern people have at least as much to do with its abolition as the people of the south. They have at least as much to do with its continuation. They are as directly engaged in it. They have the control of it in the national councils wherever it exists within congressional jurisdiction. It is the North, and not the South, that prevents a legislative abolition of it in the District of Columbia. Slavery in the national district is a northern institution, and not a southern. It is the “peculiar institution” there of the North, and not of the South. Is it not so? We declare then, that, as citizens and as men, we at the North have something to do with the abolition of American slavery — ay, that we have every thing to do with it. We can abolish it, and we alone can. We ought to abolish it, and we alone ought to do it, as appears at first impartial glance.

“I think it evident,” says Dr. Wayland, “that as citizens of the United States, we have no power whatever either to abolish slavery in the southern states, or to do any thing of which the direct intention is to abolish it.” We do not perceive the propriety of the Doctor's language when he talks of a thing having an intention. Slaves have intentions, and the Doctor and his friends call them things—but how a thing to be done can have an intention — a “direct intention,” as the Doctcr says, is beyond our slight learning. Perhaps the Doctor meant tendency by intention — and meant to say that we could not do any thing the direct tendency of which is the abolition of southern slavery. That is to say, we, as citizens of the United States, may not vote in Congress against slaveholding in the District of Columbia, or in the territories, or against the slave trade between the states. We may not receive petitions in behalf of those objects — we may not petition Congress — we may not talk against slaveholding — or write against it — or pray against it — or sympathize with our fellow-men in slavery; because each and every one of these acts has a direct tendency to abolish slavery in the southern states. Slavery in the land is a system, a whole system, a custom, a crime, and but one crime wherever committed. It is not warrantable in one place, and not in another. It is not lawful in one state, and not in another. It is one entire, individual, undivided matter of fact every where in the land, as much as murder is —  and if it is denounced and condemned in the District of Columbia by Congress, it is as fatal to it, in the whole country, as if denounced in South Carolina by Congress, or any where else — more fatal to it. A blow struck against it, as existing in that district, would be a blow at the head of it, and it would be mortal, — not one having a direct tendency to kill the system — or a direct intention, as the Doctor hath it, — but a blow destructive in itself. It would fix the brand of infamy on every slaveholder's front throughout the nation. It would render him infamous even in the eyes of Americans. Dr. Wayland could set no limits to his infamy. It would seal him a criminal with the broad seal of the nation, the E pluribus unum. Who would vote for him for President then — who would send him ambassador to London — who put him in Speaker of the House — President of the Senate — Chief Justice of the United States? Who would shake hands with him at the capitol? Now he is first in office, first in honor. Slaveholding is passport to every distinction. We ask Dr. Wayland and his aid-de-camp Major Mordecai Noachus, if a vote by Congress on our petitions, abolishing slavery in the district, and making it capital to enslave a man there, as they would do if they made it penal at all, would not give the system the death blow in the South, even if abolitionists had done nothing to kill it elsewhere. Would not that single enactment do it? Self-evidently it would. Have we not a right, as citizens of the United States, to do this? The Doctor says no. We say, ay.

But not to follow this self-immolated man any farther now, we will say that we need not get a vote from Congress against slavery in order to its abolition there and every where. Congress! what is it? The mere dregs and precipitations, the settlings and sediments of the nation. It is as soulless as a corporation. It has no soul, no mind, no principle, no opinion. It is an echo, and that not always a true one. It is a mere catastrophe—an upshot. It will only mutter the word abolition, after it has become an old story through the country. We have struck slavery its death blow already. We need not contend with the Doctor about the power. “One thing you have done,” said an eminent judge to us, “you have driven the South to come out and declare directly in favor of slavery. Heretofore they have pretended to lament it, as an evil. Now they declare it is a blessing, and a righteous institution.” Have we not, said we, driven them to join the issue, before the world, in favor of slaveholding? “You have,” said the judge. Must they not maintain it before the world, said we, to save the institution from going down? “They must,” he replied. Can they maintain it? said we. “No,” said he, — and yet the judge is not an abolitionist.

We need not contend with this Wayland and wayward President for the power, as citizens or as men, to beat down southern slaveholding. We have exercised the power already, and the South knows it. We have waked the nation to discuss the demerits of the system and the question of the negro man's humanity; and they are discussing it, and amid the flash and fervor of the agitation the foul system dies. It can no more endure it, than owls can noon, or bats sunshine, or ghosts day-break. While Wayland is groping about in his metaphysics to get hold of some puzzle to embarrass us about the power, we will have exercised it to the full, and cleared the land of slavery. Then where will the Doctor find a market for his “limitations?” Slavery is a dead man already, unless Orator Rhett, and Professor Dew, and Colonel McDuffie, and General Hamilton, and doctor this, that and the other one, can maintain the precious creature in the argument, and get the verdict of an enlightened and purged christianity in its favor. To this conclusion it has already come. The question is stated — the issue joined — the pleadings closed — all demurring and abating and delaying past by. And now for the trial. Now, Slavery, hold thine own. The Doctor's question of our having the power comes too late.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 39-44 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of October 20, 1838.

Diary of Corporal David L. Day: Milford, Mass., Sept. 6, 1861.

THE BEGINNING.

Pursuant to a call from President Lincoln for more troops in suppression of the great rebellion, a regiment is now being recruited in the city of Worcester for that service, and a company is being recruited here for that regiment. Believing that it is too soon to divide the estate, and that too many different administrations running at the same time might run amuck, and believing I should never feel quite satisfied with myself if I do not go, and believing with President Jackson, that the Union must and shall be preserved, I have this day enlisted in the company now being raised here. It would be useless for me to claim that I have enlisted from purely patriotic motives, as no one would believe it; and surely none would believe that I would enlist for the plain thirteen dollars a month. So I may as well call it that I have enlisted partly from a love of adventure; for the other part, people are at liberty to draw their own inferences.

The formation of this company was suggested by Mr. George Draper, a patriotic and public spirited citizen of the town, who has given liberally of his means for its success; his son also enlisting in the company. It has also received the aid and patronage of several other patriotic citizens of the town.

SOURCE: David L. Day, My Diary of Rambles with the 25th Mass. Volunteer Infantry, p. 5

George Poindexter to John F. H. Claiborne, December 25, 1829

Ashwood Place, Wilkinson Co., Dec. 25th, 1829.

My Dear Sir, — I had written you, before I received yours of the 22d, on the subject to which it relates. I differ with you entirely as to the effect of a visit to Jackson. It would be degrading to both parties. On my part, it would manifest a mean solicitude for office which, thank God, I do not feel; and, on the part of the electors, it would imply that they might be led from one man to another, with perfect ease, if one would only take the proper pains. Show yourself in person, flatter their vanity, and convince them by actual inspection of your physical powers, and you will find them the most docile creatures on earth. If I had no public character to rest my claims on, if I had rendered no service to the state, if I were entirely unknown as a politician and a jurist, I would eagerly substitute for merit personal attentions, urgent solicitations, and disgusting professions and protestations. The line of conduct which I have marked out for myself is founded on moral virtue, and supports the dignity of the senatorial character. The other course is sycophantic and demoralizing in all its tendencies. You will find that no gentleman who intended to vote for me will decline doing so because I do not choose to approach him with personal importunities. Those who do not mean to vote for me may make my remaining at home a convenient excuse. There can be no mistake about the state of my health. If I am worthy of the high trust of senator in Congress, I certainly may be trusted to tell the truth as to the state of my health. On former occasions I have rejected important offices, because my health would not justify my accepting them. This very office of senator was offered to mo in 1825, but I could not fulfill the duties, and it was declined. But if other evidence is wanted concerning my health, my friends and neighbors, who will be at Jackson, and my physicians will testify to it. If I had the strength of my overseer (a very stout man) I would not make my personal appearance at Jackson until after the vote is taken. I should then take great pleasure in paying my respects to the members. Candidates without merit, who are willing to rely on management, will honor the members with their company and conversation on all occasions, and will be “all things to all men,” that they may gain favor with a few. If, then, my friends think that my presence is a sine qua non, they may drop my name as a candidate. You seem to doubt whether the senator from —— will vote against me. I can assure you I should as soon expect to see a white crow as to obtain the vote of any man in this state of the name of ——. Huston and others are laboring in their vocation. They expect to get a share of Mr. Adams's practice — all pure patriotism and love of country! A Clay man supporting a Jackson man, and the Jackson men of Adams County electing a Clay man to the Legislature. “Heads I win, tails you lose.” The good people of Mississippi have been duped and ridden for many years past, and I suppose they are not yet sufficiently gulled.

Your friend, most truly,

Geo. Poindexter.

Hon. J. F. H. Claiborne, Jackson.

SOURCE: John F. H. Quitman, Life and Correspondence of John A. Quitman, Volume 1, p. 98-100

Last Will and Testament of Andrew Jackson, June 7, 1843

Hermitage, June 7th, 1843.

In The Name Of God, Amen: — I, Andrew Jackson, Sen’r., being of sound mind, memory, and understanding, and impressed with the great uncertainty of life and the certainty of death, and being desirous to dispose of my temporal affairs so that after my death no contention may arise relative to the same — And whereas, since executing my will of the 30th of September, 1833, my estate has become greatly involved by my liabilities for the debts of my well beloved and adopted son Andrew Jackson, Jun., which makes it necessary to alter the same: Therefore I, Andrew Jackson, Sen’r., of the county of Davidson, and state of Tennessee, do make, ordain, publish, and declare this my last will and testament, revoking all other wills by me heretofore made.

First, I bequeath my body to the dust whence it comes, and my soul to God who gave it, hoping for a happy immortality through the atoning merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. My desire is, that my body be buried by the side of my dear departed wife, in the garden at the Hermitage, in the vault prepared in the garden, and all expenses paid by my executor hereafter named.

Secondly, That all my just debts to be paid out of my personal and real estate by my executor; for which purpose to meet the debt my good friends Gen’l J. B. Planchin & Co. of New Orleans, for the sum of six thousand dollars, with the interest accruing thereon loaned to me to meet the debt due by A. Jackson, Jun., for the purchase of the plantation from Hiram G. Runnels, lying on the east bank of the river Mississippi, in the state of Mississippi. Also, a debt due by me of ten thousand dollars. borrowed of my friends Blair and Rives, of the city of Washington and District of Columbia, with the interest accruing thereon; being applied to the payment of the lands bought of Hiram G. Runnels as aforesaid, and for the faithful payment of the aforesaid recited debts, I hereby bequeath all my real and personal estate. After these debts are fully paid—

Thirdly, I give and bequeath to my adopted son, Andrew Jackson, Junior, the tract of land whereon I now live, known by the Hermitage tract, with its butts and boundaries, with all its appendages of the three lots of land bought of Samuel Donelson, Thomas J. Donelson, and Alexander Donelson, sons and heirs of Sovern Donelson, deceased, all adjoining the Hermitage tract, agreeable to their butts and boundaries, with all the appurtenances thereto belonging or in any wise appertaining, with all my negroes that I may die possessed of, with the exception hereafter named, with all their increase after the before recited debts are fully paid, with all the household furniture, farming tools, stock of all kind, both on the Hermitage tract farms, as well as those on the Mississippi plantation, to him and his heirs for ever.—The true intent and meaning of this my last will and testament is, that all my estate, real, personal, and mixed, is hereby first pledged for the payment of the above recited debts and interest; and when they are fully paid, the residue of all my estate, real, personal and mixed, is hereby bequeathed to my adopted son A. Jackson, Jun., with the exceptions hereafter named, to him and his heirs for ever.

Fourth, Whereas I have heretofore by conveyance, deposited with my beloved daughter Sarah Jackson, wife of my adopted son A. Jackson, Jun., given to my beloved granddaughter, Rachel Jackson, daughter of A. Jackson, Jun. and Sarah his wife, several negroes therein described, which I hereby confirm. — I give and bequeath to my beloved grandson Andrew Jackson, son of A. Jackson, Jun. and Sarah his wife, a negro boy named Ned, son of Blacksmith Aaron and Hannah his wife, to him and his heirs for ever.

Fifth, I give and bequeath to my beloved little grandson. Samuel Jackson, son of A. Jackson, Jun. and his much beloved wife Sarah, one negro boy named Davy or George, son of Squire and his wife Giney, to him and his heirs for ever.

Sixth, To my beloved and affectionate daughter, Sarah Jackson, wife of my adopted and well beloved son, A. Jackson, Jun., I hereby recognise, by this bequest, the gift I made her on her marriage, of the negro girl Gracy, which I bought for her, and gave her to my daughter Sarah as her maid and seamstress, with her increase, with my house-servant Hannah and her two daughters, namely, Charlotte and Mary, to her and her heirs for ever. This gift and bequest is made for my great affection for her — as a memento of her uniform attention to me and kindness on all occasions, and particularly when worn down with sickness, pain, and debility — she has been more than a daughter to me, and I hope she never will be disturbed in the enjoyment of this gift and bequest by any one.

Seventh, I bequeath to my well beloved nephew, Andrew J. Donelson, son of Samuel Donelson, deceased, the elegant sword presented to me by the state of Tennessee, with this injunction, that he fail not to use it when necessary in support and protection of our glorious union, and for the protection of the constitutional rights of our beloved country, should they be assailed by foreign enemies or domestic traitors. This, from the great change in my worldly affairs of late, is, with my blessing, all 1 can bequeath him, doing justice to those creditors to whom I am responsible. This bequest is made as a memento of my high regard, affection, and esteem I bear for him as a high-minded, honest, and honorable man.

Eighth, To my grand-nephew Andrew Jackson Coffee, I bequeath the elegant sword presented to me by the Rifle Company of New Orleans, commanded by Capt. Beal, as a memento of my regard, and to bring to his recollection the gallant services of his deceased father Gen’l John Coffee, in the late Indian and British war, under my command, and his gallant conduct in defence of New Orleans in 1814 and 1815; with this injunction, that he wield it in the protection of the rights secured to the American citizen under our glorious constitution, against all invaders, whether foreign foes, or intestine traitors.

I bequeath to my beloved grandson Andrew Jackson, son of A. Jackson, Jun. and Sarah his wife, the sword presented to me by the citizens of Philadelphia, with this injunction, that he will always use it in defence of the constitution and our glorious union, and the perpetuation of our republican system: remembering the motto — “Draw me not without occasion, nor sheath me without honour.”

The pistols of Gen'l Lafayette, which were presented by him to Gen’l George Washington, and by Col. Wm Robertson presented to me, I bequeath to George Washington Lafayette, as a memento of the illustrious personages through whose hands they have passed — his father, and the father of his country.

The gold box presented to me by the corporation of the City of New York, the large silver vase presented to me by the ladies of Charleston, South Carolina, my native state, with the large picture representing the unfurling of the American banner, presented to me by the citizens of South Carolina when it was refused to be accepted by the United States Senate, I leave in trust to my son A. Jackson, Jun., with directions that should our happy country not be blessed with peace, an event not always to be expected, he will at the close of the war or end of the conflict, present each of said articles of inestimable value, to that patriot residing in the city or state from which they were preented, who shall be adjudged by his countrymen or the ladies to have been the most valiant in defence of his country and our country's rights.

The pocket spyglass which was used by Gen’l Washington during the revolutionary war, and presented to me by Mr. Custis, having been burned with my dwellinghouse, the Hermitage, with many other invaluable relics, 1 can make no dispositon of them. As a memento of my high regard for Gen'l Robert Armstrong as a gentleman, patriot and soldier, as well as for his meritorious military services under my command during the late British and Indian war, and remembering the gallant bearing of him and his gallant little band at Enotochopco creek, when, falling desperately wounded, he called out — “My brave fellows, some may fall, but save the cannon” — as a memento of all these things, I give and bequeath to him my case of pistols and sword worn by me throughout my military career, well satisfied that in his hands they will never be disgraced — that they will never be used or drawn without occasion, nor sheathed but with honour.

Lastly, I leave to my beloved son all my walking-canes and other relics, to be distributed amongst my young re'atives—namesakes—first, to my much esteemed name.t.ike, Andrew J. Donelson, son of my esteemed nephew A. J. Donelson, his first choice, and then to be distributed as A. Jackson, Jun. may think proper.

Lastly, I appoint my adopted son Andrew Jackson, Jun., my whole and sole executor to this my last will and testament, and direct that no security be required of him for the faithful execution and discharge of the trusts hereby reposed in him.

In testimony whereof I have this 7th day of June, one thousand eight hundred and forty-three, hereunto set my hand, and affixed my seal, hereby revoking all wills heretofore made by me, and in the presence of

Marion Adams,	}
Elizabeth D. Love,	}
Thos. J. Donelson,	}	ANDREW JACKSON. (Seal.)
Richard Smith,	}
R Armstrong.	}

SOURCE: John Stilwell Jenkins, Life and Public Services of Genl. Andrew Jackson, p. 375-9 

John H. Lumpkin* to Howell Cobb, November 13, 1846

Rome [ga.], 13th Nov., 1846.

Dear Cobb, Your letter of the 10th inst. was received by last night's mail. I agree with you that the Southern democracy have not redeemed their pledges to their Northern allies; that while we have contended for and obtained the whole of Texas, we have sacrificed and given up one half of our claim to Oregon — and this of itself is enough to account for the defeats that our friends have met with in Pa., N. Y., and other Northern and Northwestern States. But is this the cause of our disasters? I think not entirely. Indeed I incline to the opinion that our Northern allies are not prepared to support some of the cardinal measures of the Democratic party. With the Southern' portion of our party a tariff for revenue only is a cardinal principle, and we cannot consent to compromise this principle, even for success itself. But in Pennsylvania and in New York and some other states North and East this doctrine is repudiated by those who claim to be associated with us in principles. I need not inform you that such Democrats received no encouragement or countenance in the legislation of the last session of Congress. I am not surprised therefore that these men have been repudiated at home. In fact I rejoice that Whigs have superseded such Democrats as Dr. Leib, Yost, Black etc. etc., and for my part I had rather be in the minority than to be in the majority controlled by such men. The bill making appropriations for rivers and harbours caused a similar division among our own friends in different sections of the Union, and has likely contributed in some degree to these disastrous results. But shall we give up our opposition to protective tariff and to these extravagant appropriations on this account? By no means. Let us commence the contest anew and have nothing to do with any man or set of men who combine for our destruction; and if we have not the power to accomplish positive good, we may have power to prevent harm and prevent our destruction. Some of our warm and influential Democrats in this section of the State are disposed to censure the President and his Cabinet and attribute these results to the want of management in our Executive. I disagree with all such. I do not believe that Genl. Washington, or Genl. Jackson in his prime, could have directed the ship of state with more ability. Indeed, no man living or dead could have produced harmony and ensured success with such conflicting and discordant materials. I am amazed when I see what was accomplished at the last session, and can never censure the President for any of these disastrous results. I differ with the President in one point only, and that is purely a question of policies, and that is in regard to appointing men to office who do not agree with him in principle. I do not mean such as are politically opposed to him alone, but such as do not sustain the great, leading measures of his administration that are nominally identified with the Democratic party. More of this when we meet. I shall be with you in Augusta on the first. Mrs. L. unites with me in regards to Mrs. Cobb.

_______________     

*A leading Democrat of northwestern Georgia, Member of Congress, 1843-1849 and 1855-1857; judge of the superior court of Georgia (Cherokee circuit), 1849-1850; a close friend and voluminous correspondent of Howell Cobb.

SOURCE: Ulrich Bonnell Phillips, Editor, The Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1911, Volume 2: The Correspondence of Robert Toombs, Alexander H. Stephens, and Howell Cobb, p. 86-7

Thomas Hart Benton to Colonel James Patton Preston, December 16, 1821

Washington City, Dec. 16th, 1821.

dear Sir:

We left Missouri 13th Oct. We were all very well there during the summer, Elizabeth better than she had been for several years. We staid two weeks in Kentucky, and left all our friends well there. Mr. and Mrs. McDowell travelled with us from that place. In the Cumberland mountains we were stopped five days by some alarming symptoms in Elizabeth and afterwards travelled slowly to Abingdon, where I left her to proceed leisurely with her father and mother, and I came on in the stage. She has wrote to me several times since, the last from Mrs. Madison's, on the 7th, having left your house the day before. Your mother, wife and family were well, but suffering an excessive solicitude on your account, not having heard from you for a great while. Mrs. Preston expected you might be here, but I have written to her to the contrary.

I expect to be at Col. McDowell's at Christmas, and again about the first of February. My dear Elizabeth expects to be a mother at that time.

Nothing essential going on here. The Captain General of all the Floridas* has resigned. A letter from Nashville states he is now bestowing his inconsiderate and intemperate abuse upon his old friend the President.

Pray write to us, and let us know how you are and when we are to see you.

Your sincere friend,

Thomas H. Benton.

Col. Preston, Athens, Georgia.

SOURCE: William Montgomery Meigs, The Life of Thomas Hart Benton, p. 130

Address of the Union State Central Committee

To the People of Pennsylvania:

In the midst of a fierce conflict for the national life – responding to calls for large reinforcements to enable our armies to successfully combat with traitors – cheerfully meeting the payment of extraordinary taxation to supply the Government with money to conduct the war, the submitting to an immense increase in the prices of living, the people of Pennsylvania have nevertheless been able for three years to maintain a prosperity, and secure a healthy operation in all the branches of their trade, unprecedented in the annals of any country while engaged in the prosecution of a war.  In the trials of this bloody war, with the struggle just reaching its climax, the people of Pennsylvania suddenly find themselves involved in a political contest invested with the highest importance, because fraught with the most momentous issues.  Ordinarily, heretofore, political contests meant only a choice of policy as to the manner of administering the Government.  The struggle of parties was for the possession of the powers of Government, and merely to control their operation.  How, however, our political contests have resolved themselves into a direct and a positive issue for the safety and the permanence of the Government; because, politically as well as sectionally, the contest at the ballot-box and in the battle-field must decide whether the Union shall exist or perish with the triumph or defeat of one or the other of the contending parties.  Hence the unwonted importance with which our political campaigns are now invested. — Parties are now divided on issued which vitally concern the Government.  They are composed of friends and enemies of that government.  To choose between these parties equally interests the cause of loyalty and that of treason.  No man can stand neutral between the two, and all that are not fairly for the Government will be justly recognized as its enemy. — Admitting that such is the new importance assumed by our political contests, we have an excuse as well as a justification for entering on the contest fast approaching, for the amendments to the Constitution, with all the zeal in our nature, and all the devotion that should characterize the patriot and the lover of his country in his effort to serve it.

It was seem that on an amendment to the Constitution granting the soldier a right to vote there should be no division.  Among a free people particularly, who are admitted always to be the most intelligent, such a right should be so well grounded in common and statute law as to need no action, at this late day, for its exercise and vindication.  The soldier, in all lands, alike among civilized and barbaric nations, has ever been admitted to the highest honors conferred by the governments beneath whose banners he fought.  His valor, his sacrifices, and his devotion, have ever been regarded as themes for the poet, subjects for the painter, and material for the historian; and thus the calling of arms became one of honor – one which elicited the noble rivalries of compatriots, and, where civilization refined for the instincts and elevated the character of men, war has been so conducted as to force combatants to respect and honor each other’s qualities – the victor still to treat the vanquished as a MAN.  The Constitution and laws expressly declare that no man shall be deprived of his citizenship, except for high crimes of which he shall be chard and proven guilty.  He must be summoned to meet such a charge of criminality in the presence of judges whose oaths bind them to do him entire justice.  He must be insured a trial by a jury sworn impartially to consider his case.  If found guilty, the sentence of his judges may result in his disfranchisement – but disfranchisement is not aimed at as a result of his punishment.  Disfranchisement as a direct punishment is only made to follow the highest crime known against the State.  Yet in the face of these facts, and in opposition to all equity, there are those in the State who insist that disfranchisement should follow the highest service which a man can perform for his Government.  There is a strong party to-day in Pennsylvania, regularly organized, controlled by able leaders and sustained by astute and learned advocates, insisting that the service of a citizen as a soldier – the periling of life and limb in the support of the Government, the giving up of domestic endearments, the sacrifice of business interests, and the yielding  of all personal comforts, forfeit for those thus engaged all political right, every franchise of a free-born or constitutionally adopted American citizen.  The monstrous iniquity of such a claim is at once apparent, however it has been maintained by our highest judicial tribunals.  Its injustice can only be sustained by sophistries founded in the worst political prejudices, so that the sooner the Constitution and laws are made plain and rendered explicit on this subject, and posted where every man can read and understand them, just so soon do we secure the strength and majesty of the Government in the confidence and respect of the governed – just so soon do we make our good old State worthy of the past valor of her sons, and glorious in the future.  American citizenship has its virtues and these their merits.  Each virtue can only be exalted by serving the Government under which they flourish; but if that service is made a badge of degradation, will it not be more natural for men of honor and spirit and true courage to resist its rendition than voluntarily to accept its duties?  The citizen-soldier feels when he takes up arms it is to defend, not destroy, his political rights.  The man who sacrifices his business interests, and for a stipulated time surrenders his personal liberty, cannot understand why he should be deprived of his political rights.  The service of arms does not blunt the judgment or blur the ability of a citizen to exercise the elective franchise.  It rather gives him a new title to the enjoyment of such a right, and fits him for the highest privileges of a free Government.  Unlike the masses of Europe, the great body of the American people are intelligent, possessed of educations affording the heights knowledge.  While war for a time may change the habits of such people, it cannot affect their sense of justice, their appreciation of power, and their love of Government.  It cannot lessen their ability for self-government.  If it could, the war in which we are now engaged for the defence of the Government and the safety of the public weal had better be stopped immediately.

The Democratic leaders now oppose the enfranchisement of the soldier.  In the olden time of the Democratic leaders, such as Jefferson, Jackson, Snyder and Shultze insisted that the elective franchise followed the flag under which a soldier fought.  If that flag was potent, on the sea and the land, to protect a man in war, why should it not possess the other virtues of continuing his political franchises?  If it made the deck of a vessel above which it waved the soil of the country represented by it, regardless of the sea or clime in which it floated, so also does it carry with it for the soldier who fights beneath its folds any political rights which these heroes enjoyed before they were mustered into the service; and on this soundly democratic argument the soldiers who fought in Mexico were able to exercise a freeman’s right in the wilds of the chapparel, the heats of the seashore, the din of conflict, and in the shadow of battlemented castles, the same as if they had been at home in their respective wards and precincts.  If men fighting thousands of miles from home – cut off from all communication – scarcely informed at the time on the issues of the political campaign, were able and entitled to exercise the right of the franchise, is it not fair to suppose that citizens of a like intelligence, engaged in the same service of the Government within the limits of its authority, distant only a few miles from home, conversant with all the issues involved in the political contest, in daily communication with their friends, and in perusal also of journals discussing the questions at stake – is it not fair to suppose that such men are entitled to the exercise of all their political rights?  Only those who act from perverted policy on this subject, will seek to evade the responsibility of such a question.  This is proven by the judicial history already attached to this question.  When it was deemed expedient, as it was undoubtedly considered by the democratic leaders then, the elective franchise was extended to the absent soldiers in Mexico; but in the midst of a war waged by the upholders of an institution from which the Democratic leaders thrive all their strength, George W. Woodward, a Justice of the Supreme Court, and lately the candidate of the Democratic party for Governor, judicially denied the soldiers the exercise of the elective franchise; denied our brave defenders the right almost in the same breath in which he declared the right of the States of the South to rebel and secede from the Union!  Fair men can see no difference in an American soldier voting in Mexico, while fighting beneath the flag of his country, and the same soldier citizen under the same circumstances voting in a rebellious State.  Time nor place, within the limits of a free government, or in the service thereof, cannot influence, should not be permitted to affect the rights of a freeman.  The government which is not able to insure him these inherent rights is unworthy his support.  The authority of a free government, which seeks to degrade a freeman while periling his life in its defence, is a despotism more fearful than that which denies all right to the governed.  It is not possible that such a government can last.  At some period in its history, if the rights of its defenders be disregarded as the Democratic leaders now deny the right of the franchise to the soldiers, it will need arms to protect it both from foreign and domestic foes, and perish eventually, an object to mean for defence.

In advocating the soldier’s right to vote, the loyal men of Pennsylvania are sustained by a faith in the fact that his service is such as to secure him not merely all the rights he enjoyed before he entered the army, but increased dignity and power at the hands of the Republic.  The enemies of this great principle oppose it only for reasons of expediency.  There was a time when the Democratic leaders claimed that the army was largely and even almost wholly composed of their partisan followers.  When they were most clamorous in insisting upon the recognition of such a claim, the supporters of the principle, opposed politically to these leaders were most earnest and even persistent in its advocacy.  To them it was a principle of justice too sacred to be disregarded – too noble to be rejected – too important in its relations to the very genius and vitality of the Republic to be denied to all the people thereof, alike shoes who risk the perils of battle in its defence and those who run no danger of life, limb or property in the service of Government, and who still claim its highest immunities and most sacred privileges.  On the second day of August ensuing this question will come practically before the People of Pennsylvania.  We do not doubt the result of the election as to the acceptance of rejection of the soldier’s right to vote.  But we would be false to the party which we represent, and recreant to the creed which we adore, if we failed to avow in advance our approval of granting this great right to our brave defenders.  Pennsylvania has many thousands of her citizens now in the army. – They have all gone forth inspired by a sublime faith in the strength of a free Government to crush a wicked conspiracy, and does it become us, while enjoying the halcyon blessings of peace at home, while the limbs of our soldiers are wet with their own blood, and their weapons are dripping with the gore of traitors, to say to them, “You have forfeited your citizenship; you are no longer worthy of participating in the control of a free Government; your positions must be with the slaves of the South among the disgraced and degraded of God’s children?”  We cannot believe that the people of Pennsylvania are prepared to send such a message to their fellow-citizens in the armies of the republic.  We cannot believe that so foul a disgrace awaits our war-warn but still intrepid heroes.  The hearts of the great majority of the people at home are too full of gratitude for a return of great service by galling neglect.  Our faith in the justice of the people renders us confident in the establishment and vindication of the political rights of the soldier.  But that fault must be accompanied by works.  Hence it becomes the duty of the State Central Committee to urge on the friends of the soldier actively to labor for the triumph of this effort in his behalf.  Let it be said of our fellow-citizens now absent as soldiers, that as our victorious armies planted their banners in the capital of treason, it was beneath their folds in Richmond each hero of the Keystone State exercised the freeman’s right of the elective franchise for a president to administer the Government to a reunited Union, to States once more loyal, to a people again at peach and blessed with prosperity.

SIMON CAMERON, Chairman.

A. W. BENEDICT,

WIEN FORNEY,

Secretaries.

— Published in The Jeffersonian, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania,Thursday, July 14, 1864, p. 2