Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, May 16, 1864

I yesterday took a steamer with a small company, consisting among others of Postmaster-General Blair, Senators Doolittle and Grimes, Messrs. Rice and Griswold of the Naval Committee, Count Rosen of the Swedish Navy, Mr. Hale (the newly selected Consul-General to Egypt), G. W. Blunt and Assistant Secretary Fox, Commander Wise, Dr. Horwitz, and two or three others, and went down the Potomac to Belle Plain. The day was pleasant and the sail charming. We reached Belle Plain about two P.M. and left a little past five. Is a rough place with no dwelling, — an extemporized plank-way from the shore some twenty or thirty rods in the rear. Some forty or fifty steamers and barges, most of them crowded with persons, were there. Recruits going forward to reinforce Grant's army, or the wounded and maimed returning from battle. Rows of stretchers, on each of which was a maimed or wounded Union soldier, were wending towards the steamers which were to bear them to Washington, while from the newly arrived boats were emerging the fresh soldiers going forward to the field. Working our way along the new and rough-made road, through teams of mules and horses, we arrived at the base of a hill some two or three hundred feet in height, and went up a narrow broken footpath to the summit, on which were the headquarters of General Abercrombie and staff. The ascent was steep and laborious. We had expected to find the prisoners here, but were told they were beyond, about one and a half miles. The majority were disposed to proceed thither, and, though tired and reluctant, I acquiesced. The prisoners, said to be about 7000 in number, were encamped in a valley surrounded by steep hills, the circumference of the basin being some two or three miles. Returning, we passed through the centre of this valley or basin. The prisoners were rough, sturdy-looking men, good and effective soldiers, I should judge. Most of them were quiet and well-behaved, but some few of them were boisterous and inclined to be insolent.

One of the prisoners, a young man of some twenty-five, joined me and inquired if I resided in the neighborhood. I told him at a little distance. He wished to exchange some money, Rebel for greenbacks. When I told him that his was worthless, he claimed it was better than greenbacks though not current here. I asked him if they had not enough of fighting, opposing the Union and lawful authority. He said no, there was much more fighting yet to be done. Claimed that Lee would be in Fredericksburg before the Union army could get to Richmond. Would not believe that J. E. B. Stuart was killed, news of which I received just as I came on board the boat this morning. He was earnest, though uninformed, and said he was from western North Carolina. Returning, we reached Washington at 9 P.M.

To-day I have been busy in preparing two or three letters and matters for Congress.

Governor Morgan called on me relative to abuses in cotton speculations, and malconduct of Treasury agents and others. Some of the malpractices which are demoralizing the army and the officials and disgusting the whole people in the lower Mississippi are becoming known, and will, I trust, lead to legislative correction. As Morgan introduced the subject and thought proper to consult me, I freely gave him facts and my views, which conflict with Chase and the Treasury management. A bill which Morgan showed me is crudely drawn but introduces, or makes, an entire change. It is not, in some of its features, what I should have proposed, but it will improve on the present system.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 31-3

Horace Greeley to Charles A. Dana, December 1, 1855

WASHINGTON, D. C., Dec. 1, 1855.

FRIEND DANA: I think ——— worth $150 per month. He has facilities at the west end which I have not and never can have, and living here is horribly dear for those who have to see people. By and by he may perfect his opportunities with Marcy & Co., and then you can stop him. For the present better pay $200 a month than lose him. I see him and confer with him several times a day; but it is best that the business should all go through one channel. So I wish you would write him accepting his terms. If you can easily repeat the hint I have given him, that we value facts more than opinions, it will be well. Everybody we employ to gather information seems to think he has the paper to edit, and I expect soon to have a notice from Dennis that, if we don’t change our course on some public question, he will be obliged to relieve himself of all responsibility in the premises by dissolving his connection with the Tribune.

I thank you for your reply to Dr. Bailey. He is eaten up with the idea of making Chase President.

I am doing what I can for Banks; but he won't be Speaker. His support of the Republicans against the K. N. ticket this fall renders it impossible. If we elect anybody it will be Pennington or Fuller. I fear the latter. Pennington is pretty fair, considering. He will try to twist himself into the proper shape, but I would greatly prefer one who had the natural crook.

Phelps to-night announced in Democratic caucus that two of the Missouri Whigs would vote their side. Glad of it.

The news from Kansas is helping us.

You ought to see the loving glances I get from Whitfield. We know each other first-rate, but are not introduced.  I think the House will organize on Monday; if not, Tuesday will fetch it.

I hate this hole, but am glad I have come. It does me good to see how those who hate the Tribune much, fear it yet more. There are a dozen here who will do better for my eye being on them. Schouler is particularly cordial.

As to old McRea, I think, we may as well let him have his $10 a week for a few weeks yet, though I can't use him. I wouldn’t mind his being a genius, if he was not a fool. He has no idea of keeping his mouth shut, but tells everybody he is connected with the Tribune, but doesn’t go its isms, etc. He annoys me to the amount of $10 per week at least; but let him wait a little.

Yours,

H. G.

C. A. DANA, Esq.

SOURCE: Horace Greeley, Greeley on Lincoln: With Mr. Greeley's Letters to Charles A. Dana and a Lady Friend, p. 87-9

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, February 7, 1863

(Private)

New Orleans, February 7th, 1863.

Dear Sir: I wrote you by the last steamer expressing a wish to receive the office of “Commissioner of Internal Revenue” which you so kindly offerred. I now repeat the wish, and am ready to commence operations whenever you direct.

The great military movement up the West side of the Mississippi has commenced to-day or will commence in a day or two. The bayous leading from the Teche and near there, lead right through to Red River, so that light draft boats can go through them above Port Hudson. About 9,000 men will advance in one column.

A rumor prevails here among the secessionists that we have been whipped off Mobile and that Ship Island is captured. The story is without foundation, though you may see it in N. Y. papers. A very strong feeling is arising among the planters against Gen. Banks. The reason is that he is not sufficiently pro-slavery to suit them. I think statements have been sent to Washington that he has commenced speculating. I am confident such charges are entirely false. 1 do not think Gen. Banks a great commander, but believe him to be completely honest.

Admiral Farragut has gone out to sea in his flagship, the "Hartford"—probably for the purpose of visiting the various blockading vessels along the coast.

In my next I shall have occasion to say something more about Dr. Zachary.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 356-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, May 12, 1864

Late last night, Mr. Byington, a newspaper correspondent, called at my house. He left General Grant's headquarters at 8 A.M. yesterday. Reports hard fighting on Tuesday, but represents our troops to have had the best of it. General Robinson, severely wounded, arrived in Washington.

Secretary Chase sends me a letter that the Treasury is unwilling to pay bills drawn abroad in coin, and wishes the Department to buy coin and pay the bills independent of the Treasury. In other words, the Treasury Department declines to meet government obligations as heretofore. It is incapable of discharging its fiscal duties, is no longer to be a fiscal but a brokerage establishment for borrowing money and issuing a baseless, fictitious paper currency. These are the inglorious results of the schemes and speculations of our financier, and the end is not yet. There will be a general breakdown under this management.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 29

George L. Stearns, writing from Nashville, Tennessee, September 10, 1863

I opened a letter from you this morning and lo, it was dated 30th August. Probably it had strayed to Rosecrans at Chattanooga and back here. It breathed the old tale of suffering sadness. Such is our life. One day I am successful, and consequently happy. Then, something adverse casts me down, and I have to nerve myself up to the work.

Governor Johnson is afraid of me (or rather was) and opposed my work, and I have been laboring to bring him over to the faith, and think I have succeeded, but can't tell yet. If I do it will be a great gain, for then we will try to settle the slavery question at Washington before Congress meets.

The Governor showed me recent letters from Lincoln and Chase that were very encouraging, Lincoln looking to Tennessee for the key-note of his policy for bringing back the slave states; and I should not be surprised if I was to shape that policy, and the whole affair be settled before it was thought of at the North.

SOURCE: Preston Stearns, The Life and Public Services of George Luther Stearns, p. 309-10

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, February 5, 1863

(Private)

New Orleans, February 5th, 1863.

Dear Sir: The steamer did not leave yesterday as was expected, and now I can reply to your letter with less hesitation.

I choose the office of “Commissioner of Internal Revenue” as it is termed in your letter, and will assume the duties thereof whenever you direct. I suppose it to be an office requiring my constant presence here, and whatever its duties may be, I can discharge them to your satisfaction. Full instructions and all printed information will, of course, be supplied to me.

I sent to you Gen. Banks' order respecting trade as soon as it was issued, and regret you did not receive it. You are mistaken in supposing it contemplates trade with the enemy—of any kind or degree. Gen. Banks is utterly opposed to any such proceeding. The General's English is not always good and his orders not always clear.

Do not think from my letter about Dr. Zachary, that I intended to cast suspicion on Gen. Banks, who is not only a kind and pleasant gentleman, but also, I am satisfied, a thoroughly honest man. Dr Zachary applied to me an hour ago, for another of his Israelite friends to take a large stock of goods to Donaldsonville. The reason given is the same as before—that the Dr. wants his friends' cooperation, which would be imperfect unless said friend pretends to be selling goods. I don't believe a word of it. The Doctor pretends to be my best friend, but I think him a humbug.

I sent him to the General for an order and he has not yet returned.

Notwithstanding my personal regard for Gen. Banks, I repeat the conviction so often expressed before, that he is not the man for this important place. Gen. Butler is the only man who is equal to the situation, and he ought to come back.

I kept you well informed about Gen. Butler while he was here, and you know whatever wrong things were done by him. Four fifths of the accusations against him are false.

I shall do everything in my power to help Mr. Bullitt when he assumes the duties of the office.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 355-6

Murat Halstead to Salmon P. Chase, April 1, 1863

Copy.

Cincinnati, Apl. 1st., 1863.

Gov. Chase

You do once in a while, don't you, say a word to the President, or Stanton, or Halleck, about the

conduct of the War?

Well, now, for God's sake say that Genl. Grant, entrusted with our greatest army, is a jackass in the original package. He is a poor drunken imbecile. He is a poor stick sober, and he is most of the time more than half drunk, and much of the time idiotically drunk.

About two weeks ago, he was so miserably drunk for twenty-four hours, that his Staff kept him shut up in a state-room on the steamer where he makes his headquarters — because he was hopelessly foolish.

I know precisely what I am writing about and the meaning of the language I use.

Now are our Western heroes to be sacrificed by the ten thousand by this poor devil?

Grant will fail miserably, hopelessly, eternally. You may look for and calculate upon his failure in every position in which he may be placed, as a perfect certainty.

Don't say I am grumbling. Alas! I know too well I am but faintly outlining the truth.

Grant is shamefully jealous of Rosecrans, just as such an imbecile would naturally be of his superior; and he and his staff would chuckle to see Rosecrans cut to pieces.

Anybody would be an improvement on Grant!

If nothing else can be done, now while the Cumberland River is up send all Grant's army at once,

except a division or two, to join Rosecrans and he can instantly penetrate to Georgia.

Or let me suggest a plan. Have Grant's Army withdrawn from below Memphis, and suddenly, without warning, send the force amounting to at least 50.000 men up the Tennessee River as far as it is navigable. This would throw them in the rear of Bragg.

Anything to get the army of the Mississippi out of the control of the horrible fool, Grant!

There is another plan of operations. Here is Burnside's  corps in Kentucky. The rebel invasion of Kentucky is “played out”— Now then order Burnside to secure with his troops just arrived all the places in Ky., and the Louisville & Nashville R. R: and order a division of Grant's wasting and useless  army instantly up the Cumberland to garrison Nashville. Then Rosecrans can have concentrated in a mass all the old troops of his and Wright's command now in Ky., and at Gallatin, Tenn., and Nashville. He will thus have 120.000 men; and give Rosecrans that many men, and he will with absolute certainty, break the enemy's center. He will destroy Bragg's Army utterly, this side the Tennessee River.

Rosecrans is the man to strike the blow. For Christ's and the country's sake, put the weapon in his

hands.

With any sort of handling of the troops we have in the West under Grant, Rosecrans & Burnside, and our enormous steamboat transportation, not ten men of Bragg's Army of 65.000 should escape beyond the Tennessee River. All that is wanted is concerted action — that can only be had through an impulse from headquarters, which shall subordinate the proceedings of Grant & Burnside to those of Rosecrans who is in the center, at the post of danger; is the fighting man; and has the absolute and enthusiastic confidence of his troops

Can you not do something to put the spear in his hands? That is our only hope. If Burnside is allowed to fool away 50.000 men in Ky., and Grant to bury 100.000 in the Mississippi swamps, we are gone up.

M. H.

SOURCE: Library of Congress, Washington D.C.: Lincoln, Abraham. Abraham Lincoln papers: Series 1. General Correspondence. 1833 to 1916: Murat Halstead to Salmon P. Chase, Wednesday, Drunkenness of General Grant. April 1, 1863. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mal2276900/.

Gerrit Smith: Destroy Not Man's Faith In Man!, June 12, 1862

DESTROY NOT MAN'S FAITH IN MAN!

ACCEPT THE RIGHT MAN, WHICHEVER PARTY NOMINATES HIM!

A people are demoralized by being trained to the ready entertainment of charges of corruption against those, whom they select to be their rulers, teachers and exemplars. For, when they can easily suspect such ones of baseness and crime, their faith in man is destroyed. It scarcely need be added that, when they have no longer faith in man, they will be quick to acquiesce in the application of a very low standard of morality to their leaders, and a still lower one to themselves. I say a still lower one, inasmuch as they will, naturally, expect a less degree of moral worth in the masses than in the individual, who is, here and there, selected from the masses on account of his superior wisdom and virtue. How much better it would be to persuade the people that it is their duty to hold sacred the reputation of those, whom they elevate to posts of honor! For how much more like would they, then, be to elevate those only, whose reputation is worthy to be held sacred! Moreover, what could be more elevating to themselves than such carefulness in selecting their guides and representatives!

I have been led to make these remarks by seeing the recent calumnious and contemptuous treatment of the Chief Justice and such Senators as Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Trumbull. The flood-gates of defamation were opened upon Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Trumbull, because they voted for the acquittal of the President. I wish they had voted for his conviction. For, although I had not, previously, taken much interest in the proposition to impeach him, nevertheless, after reading those parts of his last Annual Message in which he traduces the colored citizens of our country, I was quite willing to have him removed from office. Were Victoria to take such an outrageous liberty with the Irish or Scotch or Welsh, she would quickly be relieved of her crown. I do not forget that insulting the negro is an American usage. But not with impunity should the President of the whole American people insult, in his official capacity, any of the races, which make up that people — least of all the race, which is, already, the most deeply wronged of them all. This gross violation of the perfect impartiality, which should ever mark the administration of the President's high Office — this ineffable meanness of assailing the persecuted and weak, whom he might rather have consoled and cheered, should not have been overlooked, but should have been promptly and sternly rebuked. How petty the President's affair with Mr. Stanton, compared with his unrelenting wicked war upon these black millions, to whose magnanimous forgiveness of our measureless wrongs against them, and to whose brave help of our Cause we were so largely indebted for its success!

I said that I wish Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Trumbull had voted for the conviction of the President. Nevertheless, in the light of their life-long uprightness, I have not the least reason to doubt that they voted honestly. Nay, in the light of their eminent wisdom, I am bound to pause and inquire of my candid judgment whether they did not vote wisely as well as honestly.

This clamor against the Chief Justice was not, as is pretended, occasioned by his conduct in the Impeachment Trial. That this conduct was wise and impartial, scarcely one intelligent man can doubt. This clamor proceeded from the purpose of preventing his nomination to the Presidency. It is said that he desires to be President. But a desire for this high Office is not, necessarily, culpable. Instead of being prompted in all instances by selfishness, it may in some instances be born of a high patriotism and a disinterested philanthropy. For one, I should rejoice to see the Chief Justice in the Presidency; — and I say this, after a-many-years intimate acquaintance with him — after much personal observation of the workings of his head and heart. I, however, expect to vote for Grant and Colfax. I like them both; and, in the main, I like the platform on which they stand. Nevertheless, if contrary to my expectations, the Democrats shall have the wisdom to nominate the Chief Justice, and along with him a gentleman of similar views and spirit — a gentleman honest both toward the Nation's creditors and toward the negro — I shall prefer to vote for the Democratic Candidates. And why, in the case of such nomination by the Democrats, should not every Republican be willing, nay glad, to sustain the nomination? If the Democrats, at last sick and ashamed, as I have no doubt tens of thousands of them are, of ministering to the mean spirit of caste — prating for “a white man's government,” and defying the sentiment of the civilized world — shall give up their nonsense and wickedness, and nominate for office such men as Republicans have been eager to honor — how wanting in magnanimity and in devotion to truth, and how enslaved to Party, would Republicans show themselves to be, were they not to welcome this overture, and generously respond to these concessions!

By all means should the Republicans let, ay and help, the Democratic Party succeed at the coming Election, provided only that its candidates be the representatives of a real and righteous, instead of a cutaneous and spurious, Democracy. That success would bring to an end this too-long-continued War between Republicans and Democrats. That success would turn us all into Republicans and all into Democrats. The old and absorbing issues about Slavery and its incidents would, then, have passed away. The “everlasting negro,” having gained his rights, would then have sunk out of sight. Doubtless, new Parties would, ere long, be formed. But they would be formed with reference to new questions or, more generally, to old ones, which, by reason of the engrossing interest in the Slavery Battle, have been compelled to wait very long, and with very great detriment to the public weal, for their due share of the public attention.

And, then too, when the quarrel between the Republican and Democratic Parties had ended, Peace between the North and the South would speedily come. Hitherto, the Republican Party has been so anxious to keep a bad Party out of power, that it has not been in a mood to use or study all the means for producing Peace between the North and South. It should, immediately on the surrender of the South, have inculcated on the North the duty of penitently confessing her share of the responsibility for the War—a share as great as the South's, since the responsibility of the North for Slavery, out of which the War grew, was as great as the South's. Quickly would the South have followed this example of penitent confession. And, then, the two would have rivalled each other in expressions of mutual forgiveness and mutual love. Amongst these expressions would have been the avowal of the North to charge no one with Treason, and to open wide the door for the return of every exile, who had not, by some mean or murderous violation of the laws of war, shut himself out of the pale of humanity. And amongst these expressions would have been the joyful consent of the North to let fifty or a hundred millions go from the National Treasury toward helping her War-impoverished sister rise up out of her desolations. The heart of the South would, now, have been won; and she would have manifested the fact by tendering to the North a carte blanche — feeling no fear that there would be any designed injustice in the terms of “Reconstruction,” which her forgiving and generous foe should write upon it. Yes, there would, then, have been Peace between the North and the South — a true and loving and enduring Peace. Ashamed of their past, they would unitedly and cordially have entered upon the work of making a future for our country as innocent and as happy as that past had been guilty and sorrowful. It is not, now, too late to have, by such means, such a Peace. We should, surely, have it, were there to be, at the coming Election, that oneness between Republicans and Democrats, which good sense and good feeling call for.

Is it said that the money, which in loans or (preferably) gifts to the South, I ask to have used in effecting this Peace would make the Peace cost too much? I answer that it would be returned tenfold. The improvement in our National credit, resulting from such a Peace, would, very soon, enable our Government to borrow at an interest of four per cent. Comparatively small, then, would be our taxes, and, by the way, comparatively small, then, would be the temptation to cheat the Nation's creditors.

Peterboro JUNE 12 1868.

G. S.

Bottom of Form

SOURCES: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 266-7; Smith, Gerrit. Destroy not man's faith in man! Accept the right man, whichever party nominates him! ... G. S. Peterboro. Peterboro, 1868. Pdf. https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.12703100/. 

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, February 4, 1863

(Private.)

New Orleans, February 4th, 1863.

Dear Sir: Your letter of the 19th. Jan. is just received. The steamer is about to leave and I have time to reply only partially and in haste. You wish me to be “Sp. Agt. and Acting Surveyor”, or “Commissioner of Internal Revenue.” Please put me in the place where you want me most, and where I can be most useful to you. I shall write more fully by next mail.

I wish to call your attention to the importance of Special Agent in reference to Regulations of August 28th. If you make me Sp. Agt. and Acting Surveyor, I should think all that business had better be managed and controlled by me, as I am familiar with it, having devoted much attention to it — and as my system is the only one, whereby, without benefit to the enemy, the wants of the country can be supplied. I know nothing of the character of the second office mentioned by you, and shall defer speaking of it until the next mail. I cannot refrain from asking that no general change be made in the subordinate officers, to make places for the New Collector's friends. Those selected by me, and now holding the important positions, accepted office when it was not pleasant or very desirable — and are skilled, honest, efficient and of tried loyalty. Some of them relinquished good places in New York, and came here at your request. Mr. Gray the D'y. Collector, who is brother in law of Mr. Godwin of the Evening Post, is one of these.

I think it the duty of the Government to see that these men be not dismissed without cause.

By the next armed transport for New York, I shall forward what specie is in my hands.

Mr. Walton (New City Treasurer) of whom Mr. Flanders spoke to you, is an excellent man for any place.

To whatever place you assign me, I ought to have an opportunity for a few days or weeks of conferring with Mr. Bullitt, that he may be informed concerning the thousand details peculiar to this position, which otherwise he will be months in learning.

I thank you again and again for the kind expression of your approval. This alone repays any amount of labor and effort.

A great military movement commences shortly — in three or four days perhaps. An advance will be made up the Teche with a large force, and right through to Red River. I know no more of it than this. Port Hudson will not be troubled, as this movement is on the west side of the Mississippi. This comes direct from Gen. Banks.

As I have to settle up, please let me know what my compensation is that no mistake may occur. Twenty words will inform me, and I never yet knew.

Pardon the imperfect manner in which I am obliged to write.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 354-5

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, February 1, 1863

(Private)

New Orleans, February 1st, 1863.

Dear Sir: Everything is quiet on the Mississippi. There have been no military movements. Appearances indicate that something is to be attempted before long, but I do not know what it will be.

Gen. Banks has authorized the raising of the 4th. Reg’t. “Native Guards” (colored) and it is filling up rapidly. The Lieut. Colonel is Mr. Hill, correspondent of the New York Herald. More regiments will be raised, but I do not know how many. Gen. Banks’ policy in regard to the enlistment of negroes, seems to me timorous and hesitating. He might have 50,000 in the service in three months — yes, 100,000 by energetically adopting the proper means.

An army of negroes could be made most formidable. They could be inspired with a religious enthusiasm as terrible and persistent as that of the followers of Mahomet. Such blind impulses, directed by a controlling mind, have accomplished great things. But no prominent man is here shrewd enough to originate, or smart enough to execute such a project. I say again, what I have often said before, that the negroes will fight this war for us, and succeed, if we will use them, and here is the place to commence. Perhaps you are aware that, for various reasons, the negroes of Louisiana are much superior in all respects to those of Virginia and of the other Atlantic States. One hundred and fifty refugees have arrived from Matamoras. I wish to remind you again, of the growing importance of the trade across the Rio Grande. A Confederate agent named Swisher, left Matamoras last June to buy arms in Europe. He has just returned to Matamoras, and three cargoes of arms bought by him in Europe, are expected to arrive shortly in Matamoras — or rather at the mouth of the Rio Grande. How all this can be stopped I explained in my last letter.

There is a person here of the Jewish persuasion — an Israelite indeed — named Dr. Zachary, who is said lately to have been a healer of corns and bunions, in New York. His vest is of flowered velvet — his hair beautifully oiled — and his presence distills continual perfume sweeter than the winds that blow from Araby the blest. In season and out of season, he fails not to announce himself as the Confidential Agent, or Correspondent, of the President. A smart little lawyer, named Shaw, used to write for him his letters from here to the President, which Zachary copied and forwarded as his own. Shaw was on Gen. Hamilton's staff, but has returned to New York. His address is Charles P. Shaw, 111 Broadway. I don't know who writes Zachary's letters now — perhaps he does it himself. Jews take to trade, as ducks to water. Dr. Zachary could not fulfill his mission without the co-operation of one Simon. That co-operation would be imperfect without Simon took a stock of goods to Baton Rouge for sale, in order to conceal the object of Simon's stay at that place. Notwithstanding these representations, and at the risk of impairing the Doctor's efficiency as Government agent, I refused to let the goods go up the River without a written order from Gen. Banks. The result was, that the order was issued. Simon took up to Baton Rouge nearly $20,000 worth of goods (including quantities of spiritous liquors), and Dr. Zachary will probably have no reason to repent the venture.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 352-3

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, May 6, 1864

At the Cabinet-meeting each of the members read his opinion. There had, I think, been some concert between Seward and Stanton and probably Chase; that is, they had talked on the subject, although there was not coincidence of views on all respects. Although I was dissatisfied with my own, it was as well as most others.

Between Mr. Bates and Mr. Blair a suggestion came out that met my views better than anything that had previously been offered. It is that the President should by proclamation declare the officers who had command at the massacre outlaws, and require any of our officers who may capture them, to detain them in custody and not exchange them, but hold them to punishment. The thought was not very distinctly enunciated. In a conversation that followed the reading of our papers, I expressed myself favorable to this new suggestion, which relieved the subject of much of the difficulty. It avoids communication with the Rebel authorities. Takes the matter in our own hands. We get rid of the barbarity of retaliation.

Stanton fell in with my suggestion, so far as to propose that, should Forrest, or Chalmers, or any officer conspicuous in this butchery be captured, he should be turned over for trial for the murders at Fort Pillow. I sat beside Chase and mentioned to him some of the advantages of this course, and he said it made a favorable impression. I urged him to say so, for it appeared to me that the President and Seward did not appreciate it.

We get no tidings from the front. There is an impression that we are on the eve of a great battle and that it may already have commenced.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 24-5

George L. Stearns to Mary Hall Stearns, July 26, 1863

I am still perplexed as to the mode in which I can best carry out the work intrusted to me. It is so difficult to attach my mode of rapid working to the slow routine of the Department that I sometimes almost despair of the task and want to abandon it. Indeed, yesterday I went to Olmstead and asked his advice. He was so clearly of opinion that I must continue to work in the hope of better times, that I abandoned the idea, and came here to see Colonel Birney. Birney is a son of the old abolitionist, an able man and sound to the core. He is raising a regiment here with good success, and is just the man for the work. My next work will be here, and when I get through it I trust my future sailing will be plain and rapid.

I have had a short interview with Mr. Chase, who was very gracious; too short for me to form an opinion of him. He is much interested in my work, for it aids his plans, and will see me again.

Hugh McCulloch, to whom I wrote my letters on currency, is very much pleased with them. He made an objection which I am at his request to answer. It will probably lead to a correspondence on that subject.

SOURCE: Preston Stearns, The Life and Public Services of George Luther Stearns, p. 306-7

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, January 29, 1863

New Orleans, January 29th, 1863.

Dear Sir: I have to-day transmitted my bond as Special Agt. and Acting Collector. The sureties are men of abundant means, and were selected as being the most respectable and worthy representatives of the Union residents of this city. For good reasons, I was careful to choose such persons, rather than any of the numerous and wealthy speculators. Judge Peabody remarked that the justification of the sureties, etc., was before the highest and best authority here at any rate.

I have reason to believe that a speedy movement on the Teche country, is in preparation and will soon be carried into effect. This is the movement of which I have so frequently spoken.

In other respects military affairs are in the same condition as at the date of my last letter.

Two vessels, as I am informed, were captured by the Rebels at Sabine Pass, Texas, in the same manner as was the "Harriet Lane." One of the vessels was destroyed. They were sailing transports, I believe, and probably of not much consequence.

Enclosed is an order just issued, of Gen. Banks, “promulgating the Emancipation proclamation.”

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 351-52

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, January 26, 1863

(Private)

New Orleans, January 26th, 1863.

Dear Sir: The situation is the same as when I last wrote. There is no movement of troops, so far as I am informed, and there appears to be no probability of an advance in any direction.

The New York papers will state that the “Harriet Lane” has escaped from Galveston and gone to sea. This is not true. She is still in the harbor according to official advices just received here.

It is rumored here that the “Ovieto” has been captured. Admiral Farragut does not believe it. When she escaped from Mobile the “Cuyler” went in pursuit and neither vessel has yet been heard from.

Three days ago a steamer supposed to be the Alabama appeared at the mouth of the river, and then steered off in a southwest direction. The Admiral sent a vessel from here (The Mississippi) to follow her. As the “Alabama” is the faster vessel and had a start of 100 miles, and the Mississippi started from here 24 hours after the Rebel vessel was seen — it is not probable that anything will be effected.

It should not be forgotten that here is the place to make the proclamation effective. I am afraid Gen. Banks will never do it. He decides and moves too slowly and is too much afraid of responsibilities. He does not seem to regard with favor the three fine regiments already raised, and declines putting them in the field. I told you that they had sent him a petition to be put in the front rank at Port Hudson, that they might remove from their race the stigma of cowardice, etc. In all the regiments Gen. Banks brought with him, three cannot be selected so efficient as these three colored regiments, and in my opinion, they would be worth any five of the raw regiments Gen. Banks brought with him. I see Gen. Banks almost every day, but am perfectly ignorant of his plans and intentions. I do not wish to retract or qualify any statement in my late letters to you — nor in a letter to Mr. Flanders which I asked him to show you.

If my letters are uninteresting or too frequent, please inform me.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 350-1

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, April 29, 1864

Usher relates to me to-day some damaging stories concerning the Treasury. I cannot but think them exaggerations. I know, from some reliable and unmistakable sources, that there have been improprieties among the subordinates of a licentious character, and that Chase is cognizant of the facts. It has surprised me that, knowing the facts, he should have permitted the person most implicated to retain a position of great trust. Only great weakness, or implication in error would give a solution. I do not for a moment entertain the latter, and the former is not a trait in his character.

These matters cannot be suppressed. Blair says Chase will not assent to a committee. He cannot avoid it, and since Frank Blair has left, I think he will not attempt it. Colfax, the Speaker, will give him pretty much such a committee as he wishes. The majority will be friends of Chase, as they should be, and none probably will be unfair opponents.

The President to-day related to two or three of us the circumstances connected with his giving a pass to the half-sister of his wife, Mrs. White. He gave the details with frankness, and without disguise. I will not go into them all, though they do him credit on a subject of scandal and abuse. The papers have assailed him for giving a pass to Mrs. White to carry merchandise. Briefly, Mrs. W. called at the White House and sent in her card to Mrs. Lincoln, her sister, who declined to receive or see her. Mrs. W. two or three times repeated these applications to Mrs. L. and the President, with the same result. The President sent a pass, such as in some cases he has given, for her to proceed South. She sent it back with a request that she might take trunks without being examined. The President refused. She then showed her pass and talked “secesh” at the hotel, and made application through Mallory first and then Brutus Clay. The President refused the former and told Brutus that if Mrs. W. did not leave forthwith she might expect to find herself within twenty-four hours in the Old Capitol Prison.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 20-1

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, April 30, 1864

The Wilkes court martial found him guilty on all charges and sentenced him to three years’ suspension and a reprimand. It is a light punishment for the conviction.

Army movements indicate an early and great battle, but when and where to be fought is unknown in Washington.

Congress to-day has ordered a committee on the Treasury. It is made up as only Colfax could do it. Some able friends of Chase are on it, and Brooks who is a superficial demagogue is associated with them.

Thirty years ago I was accustomed to meet Brooks, then a resident of Portland, Maine. He was at that time a zealous Whig partisan, with no settled principles. Judging from the New York Express, his paper, I think he has changed very little, though now elected by, and acting with, those who call themselves Democrats and have a Democratic organization.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 21-2; William E. Gienapp & Erica L. Gienapp, Editors, The Civil War Diary of Gideon Wells, p. 399-400.

Gerrit Smith to Elizabeth Cady Stanton, June 6, 1864

PETERBORO, June 6, 1864.

MRs. E. CADY STANTON, New-York:

MY DEAR Cousin: I have your letter. It would be too great labor to answer all, who seek to know my choice amongst the presidential candidates. But I must answer you.

I have no choice. The first of September will be time enough for me and for every other person to have one. Intermediate events and changes will be indispensable lessons in our learning who should be the preferred candidate. To commit ourselves in time of war to a candidate one month before it is necessary, is worse than would be a whole year of such prematureness in time of peace. Then there is the absorbing, not to say frenzying, interest, which attends our important elections. That it is frenzying is manifest from the scornful reproach and wild invective, which the press is already heaping up on Lincoln and Fremont — both of them honest and able men, and both of them intent on saving the country. How unwise, nay how insane, to let this absorbing and frenzying interest come needlessly early into rivalry with our interest in the one great work of crushing the rebellion! For more than half a year have I frequently and faithfully, both with lips and pen, deprecated the premature agitation of the question who should be the chosen candidate. If, therefore, the Cleveland and Baltimore Conventions shall have the effect to divide the loyal voters so far as to let a pro-slavery and sham Democrat slip into the Presidency through their divisions, I, at least, shall not be responsible for the ruin that may come of it.

My concern whether it shall be Lincoln or Fremont or Chase or Butler or Grant who shall reach the presidential chair is comparatively very slight. But my concern to keep out of it a man, who would make any other terms with the rebels than their absolute submission is overwhelming. For any other terms would not only destroy our nation, but lessen the sacredness of nationality everywhere, and sadly damage the most precious interests of all mankind.

Since the Rebellion broke out, I have been nothing but an anti-rebellion man. So unconditionally have I gone for putting it down unconditionally, as to make no stipulations in behalf of m most cherished objects and dearest interests. And so shall I continue to go. I love the anti-slavery cause. Nevertheless, I would have the rebellion put down at whatever necessary expense to that cause. I love the Constitution; and deprecate the making of any even the slightest change in it. Nevertheless, I make infinitely less account of saving it than of destroying the rebellion. I love my country. But sooner than see her compromise with the rebels, I would see her exhaust herself and perish in her endeavors to defeat their crime — that greatest crime of all the ages and all the world. I do not forget that many of my old fellow abolitionists accuse me of having been unfaithful to the anti-slavery cause during the rebellion. My first answer to them is — that to help suppress the rebellion is the duty which stands nearest to me: and my second answer — that in no way so well as in suppressing it can the anti-slavery cause or any other good cause be promoted. There is not a good cause on the earth that has not an enemy in the unmixed and mighty wickedness of this rebellion.

You will rightly infer from what I have said, that my vote will be cast just where I shall judge it will be like to go farthest in keeping a disloyal man out of the Presidency. My definition of a disloyal man includes every one who would consent to obtain peace by concessions to the rebels – concessions however slight. Should the rebellion be disposed of before the election, I might possibly refuse to vote for any of the present candidates. When voting in time of war, and especially such a fearful war as the present, for a Governor or President, I vote for a leader in the war rather than for a civil ruler. Where circumstances leave me free to vote for a man with reference mainly to his qualifications as a civil ruler, I am, as my voting for thirty years proves, very particular how I vote. In 1856, Fremont was in nomination for the Chief Magistracy. I honored him — but I did not vote for him. In 1860, Lincoln was nominated for it. I had read his Debate with Senator Douglas, and I thought well of him. But neither for him did I vote. To-day, however, I could cheerfully vote for either to be the constitutional head of the army and navy. I go further, and say, that to save the Presidential office from going into the hands of one who would compromise with the rebels I, would vote for a candidate far more unsound on slavery than the severest abolition critic might judge either Lincoln or Fremont to be. But were there no such danger, I would sternly refuse to vote for any man who recognizes, either in or out of the Constitution, a law for slavery, or who would graduate any human rights, natural or political, by the color of the skin.

This disposition to meddle with things before their time is one that has manifested itself, and worked badly, all the way through the war. The wretched attempts at “Reconstruction” are an instance of it. “Reconstruction” should not so much as have been spoken of before the rebellion was subdued. I hope that by that time all loyal men, the various doctrines and crotchets to the contrary notwithstanding, will be able to see that the seceded States did, practically as well as theoretically, get themselves out of the Union and Nation — as effectually out as if they had never been in. Our war with Mexico ended in a treaty of peace with her. Doubtless our war with the South will end in like manner. If we are the conqueror, the treaty will, I assume, be based on the unconditional surrender of the South. And then the South, having again become a portion of our nation, Congress will be left as free to ordain the political divisions of her territory, as it was to ordain those of the territory we conquered from Mexico. Next in order, Congress will very soon, as I have little doubt, see it to be safe and wise to revive our old State lines. Nevertheless, I trust, that such revival would never be allowed until Congress should see it to be clearly safe and wise. We hear much of the remaining constitutional rights of the loyal men in the seceded States. But they, no more than their rebellious neighbors, have such rights. It is true that the rebellion is their misfortune instead of their crime. Nevertheless, it severed every political cord as well between the nation and themselves as between the nation and those rebellious neighbors. The seceded States embarked in a revolution, which swept away all the political relations of all their people, loyal as well as disloyal. Such is the hazard, which no man, however good, can escape from. If the major part or supreme power of his State carries it to destruction, he is carried along with it. A vigilant, informed, active, influential member of his body politic does it therefore behoove every good man to be. In his haste for “Reconstruction,” the President went forward in it — whereas he is entitled to not the least part in it, until Congress has first acted in it. In the setting up of military or provisional governments, as we proceed in our conquests, his is the controlling voice — for he is the military head of the nation. But in regard to the setting up of civil governments in the wake of those conquests, he is entitled to no voice at all until after Congress has spoken. Another instance of meddling with things before their time is this slapping of the face of France with the “Monroe Doctrine.” I was about to say that doing so serves but to provoke the enmity of France. There is, however, one thing more which it provokes and that is the ridicule of the world. For us, whilst the rebels are still at the throat of our nation, and may even be at her funeral, to be resolving that we will protect the whole Western Continent from the designs of the whole Eastern Continent, is as ludicrous a piece of impotent bravado as ever the world laughed at. And still another instance of our foolish prematureness is the big words in which we threaten to punish the leaders of the rebellion. It would be time enough for these big words when we had subdued the rebellion and captured the leaders. In the mean time there should be only big blows. Moreover, if we shall succeed in getting these leaders into our hands, it will be a question for the gravest consideration whether we should not beg their pardon instead of punishing them. What was it that stirred up the rebellion? The spirit of slavery. That alone is the spirit by means of which Southern treason can build up a fire in the Southern heart whose flames shall burst out in rebellion. Slavery gone from the South, and there will never more be rebellions there to disturb the peace and prosperity in which North and South will ever after dwell together. Who was the guiltier party in feeding and inflaming that spirit? The pro-slavery and preponderant North. The guiltier North it was, that had the more responsible part in moulding the leaders of the rebellion. Does it then become this guiltier North to be vengeful toward these her own creations—her own children ?—and, what is more, vengeful toward them for the bad spirit which she herself had so large a share in breathing into them? — for the Satanic character which she herself did so much to produce in them? But I shall be told that the North has repented of her in upholding slavery, and thereby furnishing the cause of the rebellion; and that the South should have followed her example. But if her repentance did not come until after the rebellion broke out, then surely it came too late to save her from responsibility for the rebellion. Has it, however, come even yet? I see no proof of it. I can see none so long as the American people continue to trample upon the black man. God can see none. Nor will he stay his desolating judgments so long as the American Congress, instead of wiping out penitently and indignantly all fugitive slave statutes, is infatuated enough to be still talking of “the rights of slaveholders,” and of this being “a nation for white men.” Assured let us be, that God will never cease from his controversy with this guilty nation until it shall have ceased from its base and blasphemous policy of proscribing, degrading, and outraging portions of his one family. The insult to him in the persons of his red and black children, of which Congress was guilty in its ordinance for the Territory of Montana, will yet be punished in blood, if it be not previously washed out in the tears of penitence. And this insult, too, whilst the nation is under God’s blows for like insults! What a silly as well as wicked Congress! And then that such a Congress should continue the policy of providing chaplains for the army! Perhaps, however, it might be regarded as particularly fit for such a Congress to do this. Chaplains to pray for our country's success whilst our country continues to perpetrate the most flagrant and diabolical forms of injustice! As if the doing of justice were not the indispensable way of praying to the God of justice! It is idle to imagine that God is on the side of this nation. He can not be with us. For whilst he is everywhere with justice, he is nowhere with injustice. I admit that he is not on the side of the rebellion. From nothing in all his universe can his soul be further removed than from this most abominable of all abominations. If we succeed in putting it down, our success, so far as God is concerned, will be only because he hates the rebellion even more than he hates our wickedness. To expect help from him in any other point of view than this, is absurd. Aside from this, our sole reliance must be, as was the elder Napoleon's, on having “the strongest battalions.” I believe we shall succeed — but that it will be only for the reasons I have mentioned — only because we are the stronger party and that God is even more against the rebels than he is against us. How needful, however, that we guard ourselves from confounding success against the rebellion with the salvation of the nation! Whether the nation shall be saved is another question than whether the rebellion shall be suppressed. In the providence of God, even a very wicked nation may be allowed to become a conqueror — may be used to punish another wicked nation before the coming of its own turn to be conquered and punished. But a nation, like an individual, can be saved only by penitence and justice.

SOURCES: Gerrit Smith, Speeches and Letters of Gerrit Smith (from January 1863, to January 1864), on the Rebellion, Volume 2, p. 14-8

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, January 16, 1863

(Private)

New Orleans, January 16th, 1863.

Dear Sir: I have just been informed by Gen. Banks that the expedition to the Teche under Weitzel, was completely successful and accomplished all he intended. The rebels had in the Bayou a large and powerful gunboat called the “Cotton,” which boat got aground below their fortifications. This boat we destroyed. They have no other boats in any of the bayous below Red River.

Gen. Banks can now take the Teche country whenever he pleases. Weitzel's force has returned, but, I judge, Gen. Banks intends occupying the country by flank movement according to suggestions made by me at first.

I hear much complaint of Gen. Banks that he has not accomplished, or prepared to accomplish, anything — that his time is occupied in listening to complaints of secessionists — that four weeks of fine weather have been lost without military operations—that no step has been taken to open the river — and other similar complaints.

Gen. Banks told me this morning, he cannot yet undertake the opening of the river, because he has no cavalry — no transportation — no medicines, &c. He says everything has been done that ought to have been — and that he shall operate up the River at the earliest day possible. I will say one thing strongly in his favor — that he conceals his plans (whatever they may be) perfectly — and I hardly think even the members of his staff know his intentions.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 350

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, April 28, 1864

The opinion in regard to General Banks is very unanimous. None speak favorably of him as a military man, and his civil administration is much censured. Whether the President will continue to sustain him is to be seen.

General Frank Blair has resigned his seat in the House, and the President has revoked the acceptance of his military resignation. This is a stretch of power and construction that I do not like. Much censure will fall on the President for this act, and it will have additional edge from the violent and injudicious speech of General Blair denouncing in unmeasured terms Mr. Chase. He also assails the appointees of Chase, and his general policy touching agent's permits in the valley of the Mississippi as vicious and corrupt. I have an unfavorable opinion of the Treasury management there and on the coast, and there are some things in the conduct of Chase himself that I disapprove.

The Blairs are pugnacious, but their general views, especially those of Montgomery Blair, have seemed to me sound and judicious in the main. A forged requisition of General Blair has been much used against him. A committee of Congress has pronounced the document a forgery, having been altered so as to cover instead of $150 worth of stores some $8000 or $10,000. He charges the wrong on the Treasury agents, and Chase’s friends, who certainly have actively used it. Whether Chase has given encouragement to the scandal is much to be doubted. I do not believe he would be implicated in it, though he has probably not discouraged, or discountenanced it. Chase is deficient in magnanimity and generosity. The Blairs have both, but they have strong resentments. Warfare with them is open, bold, and unsparing. With Chase it is silent, persistent, but regulated with discretion. Blairs make no false professions. Chase avows no enmities.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 19-20

Gerrit Smith’s Speech on the Fort Pillow and Plymouth Massacres: Peterboro, Massachusetts, April 26, 1864.

The whole civilized world will be startled and horrified by this slaughter of probably not less than five or six hundred persons. The excuse in the case of a part of the slaughtered is, that they were traitorous citizens of the Confederacy: in the case of another part, that they were whites fighting by the side of blacks: in the case of the remainder, including women and even children, that they were blacks. That these were blacks, was cause enough why, though numbering three or four hundred, they should be murdered — murdered in utter contempt of all the sacred rights of prisoners of war. It is of the crime against these, I would now speak.

Who are to be held amenable for this crime? The rebels. Yes, but not the rebels only. The authorship of this crime, so matchless in its worst features, is very comprehensive. The responsibility for it is wider than our nation. England shares in the authorship and responsibility, because it was she who planted slavery in America, and because it is slavery out of which this crime has come. Our own nation, however, is the far guiltier one. The guilt of this crime is upon all her people who have contributed to that public sentiment, which releases white men from respecting the rights of black men. Our highest Court says that this satanic sentiment prevailed in the early existence of our nation. Certain it is, that it has prevailed in all the later periods of that existence. Who are they who have contributed to generate it? All who have held that blacks are unfit to sit by the side of whites in the church, the school, the car and at the table. All who have been in favor of making his complexion shut out a black man from the ballot-box. All who have been for making a man's title to any of the rights of manhood turn on the color of the skin in which his Maker has chosen to wrap him. All, in short, who have hated or despised the black man.

Even President Lincoln, whom God now blesses and will yet more bless for the much he has done for his black brethren, is not entirely innnocent of the Fort Pillow and Plymouth massacres. Had his plan of “Reconstruction” recognized the right of the black men to vote, it would thereby have contributed to lift them up above outrage, instead of contributing, as it now does, to invite outrage upon them. By the way, it is a pity that he undertook “Reconstruction.” It was entirely beyond his civil capacity to do so: and it was entirely beyond his military capacity to have a part in setting up any other than a military or provisional government. Moreover, this is the only kind of government which it is proper to set up in the midst of war. The leisure and advantages of peace are necessary in the great and difficult work of establishing a permanent government. In this connection let me advert for a moment to the doctrine, “Once a State always a State” — a doctrine so frequently wielded against “Reconstruction” on any terms. Where is the authority for this doctrine? In the Constitution, it is said. But nowhere does the Constitution say that a State may plunge into war, secure at all hazards from some of the penalties of war. But amongst the penalties of war is whatever change the conqueror may choose to impose upon the conquered territory. I admit that it is very desirable to have all the revolting States reestablished — reinstated. But that there is any law by which this becomes inevitable is absurd. Nowhere does the Constitution say that a State is to be exempt from the operation of the law of war. Nowhere does it undertake to override the law of war. How clear is it, then, that by this paramount law these revolted States will, when conquered, lie at the will of the conqueror! And how clear is it, that it will then turn not at all upon the Constitution, but upon this will of the conqueror, backed by this paramount law of war, whether the old statehood of these States shall be revived, or whether they shall be remanded to a territorial condition, and put upon their good behavior!

There is another instance in which the President has contributed to that cruel public sentiment, which leaves the black race unprotected. I refer to his so strangely long delay in promising protection to the black soldier, and to the even longer and not yet ended delay in affording it. The President is a humane as well as an honest man; and the only explanation I can find for his delay to protect the black soldier and to put an end, so far as in him lies, to the various, innumerable, incessant outrages upon the freedmen is in the continuance of his childish and cowardly desire to conciliate his native Kentucky and the Democratic party.

I argued that even President Lincoln is responsible in some degree for that public sentiment, which invites outrage upon the black man and leaves him a prey to the wicked. Those Members of Congress, who are opposing the reasonable measure of letting the black man vote in the Territories, are also guilty of favoring that public sentiment which broke out in the crime at Fort Pillow and Plymouth. Similarly guilty are those members who would make the pay of a black soldier less than that of a white one. And so are those members who consent to leave a fugitive slave statute in existence. In a word, all should tax their consciences with the sin of this public sentiment and with the resulting crime at Fort Pillow and Plymouth, whose influence, by either word or deed, has been to keep up in this heathen land the caste-spirit—that preeminent characteristic of heathenism. I call this a heathen land. To the Christ-Religion — that simple religion of equal rights and of doing as you would be done by — there can be no greater insult than to call a nation in which, as in this, the most cruel and murderous caste-spirit prevails, a Christian nation.

Both on the right hand and on the left, I hear that our nation is to be saved. But my fears that it will not, often become very strong. That the Rebellion is to be crushed, I deeply believe. Often in the course of Providence a wicked people, which is itself to be afterward destroyed, is previously to be used in destroying another and generally more wicked people. There are striking illustrations of this in the Bible. The duty of abolitionists and anti-abolitionists, Democrats and Republicans, to work unitedly, incessantly, and unconditionally for the overthrow of the Rebellion I have not only never doubted, but ever urged. I hold it to be unpatriotic and even traitorous for the Abolitionists to make any conditions in behalf of their specialty, and to propose, as some of them do, to go against the Rebellion only so far as going against it will be going against slavery. So too are those Democrats unpatriotic and even traitorous who can favor the War, only under the stipulation that it be so conducted as to harm neither the Democratic party nor the Constitution. To put down the Rebellion is an object immeasurably higher than to save a party or to save the Constitution, or even to save the country. No man is right-minded, who would not have it put down, even though it be at the expense of the last man and the last dollar.

If anything makes me doubt that the Rebellion will be crushed it is the omission of Congress to abolish slavery, now when it is so clearly seen that the abolition of slavery is an indispensable means to the abolition of the Rebellion. The proposed Amendment to the Constitution I take no interest in. One reason why I do not, is, that it is not a proposition to abolish slavery now. Another is, that war is not the time to be tinkering at constitutions. I see it denied that Congress has the power, even as a war measure, to abolish slavery. Amazing delusion! There is in every nation an absolute power for carrying on war. The nation that disclaims it may as well give up being a nation. In our own, this power is vested in Congress. Congress is to declare war: and Congress is “to make all laws necessary and proper (itself of course the sole judge of the necessity and propriety) for carrying into execution” the declaration. Is it the institution of apprenticeship, which it finds to be in the way of the successful prosecution of the war — then is it to sweep it out of the way. Is it the abomination of slavery? — then is it to strike at that.

There is, however, one thing more which sometimes, though not often, raises a doubt in me whether the Rebellion will be crushed. It is the premature agitation of the Presidential question. When the Rebellion broke out, I assumed that it would be put down in a few months — for I assumed that this greatest crime against nationality and humanity would arouse and unite the whole North. How greatly was I mistaken Very soon the Democratic party was seen to prefer itself to the country. The Republican party stood by the country. But at the present time there is no little danger that the country may be sacrificed in a strife between the members of the Republican party. For, taking advantage of this strife, the Democratic party may succeed in getting the reins of Government into the hands of one of its pro-slavery peacemakers. But I may be asked — will not the rebels be conquered and the country saved before the next Election? I still hope so — and until the last few months I believed so. But is there not some reason to fear that the North will be wrought up to a greater interest in this year's Presidential than in this year's military campaign In other words, is there not some reason to fear that, for the coming six months, politics instead of patriotism will be in the ascendant?

I still say, as through the past winter I have frequently said, written, and printed — that the Presidential question should not have been talked of, no, nor so much as thought of, until midsummer. The first of September is quite early enough to make the nomination; and in the mean time, undistracted by this so distracting subject, we should be working as one man for the one object of ending the Rebellion — and of ending it before reaching the perils of a presidential election. And such working would best educate us to make the best choice of a candidate. Moreover, it is the condition the country will be in three or four months hence, rather than the condition it is now in, that should be allowed to indicate the choice. Great and rapidly successive are the changes in the circumstances of a country in time of war. To nominate a President in time of peace, six months earlier than is necessary, all would admit to be great folly. But greater folly would it be to nominate him in time of war even a single month earlier than is necessary. The Baltimore Convention is understood to be a movement for renominating President Lincoln, and the Cleveland Convention one for nominating General Fremont. Would that both Conventions were dropped Would indeed that the whole subject were dropped until July or August! — and would too that it were dropped with the understanding, that it should then be taken up, not by the politicians, but by the people!

The people would present a loyal and an able candidate: and whether it were Lincoln or Fremont, Chase or Butler, Dickinson or Dix, the country would be safe.

I recall at this moment the large and respectable meeting for consultation held in Albany last January. What a pity that the meeting took fright at the temperate and timely resolutions reported to it! What a pity that the meeting saw in them danger to the country, or perhaps, more properly speaking, to a party! One of these resolutions and its advocates urged the importance of postponing until the latest possible day the whole subject of a Presidential nomination: and, had it been adopted and published, it would not unlikely have exerted sufficient influence to bring about such postponement. Time has proved the wisdom of the other resolutions also. I wish I could, without seeming egotism, say that slavery, and slavery alone, having brought this war upon us, they, who have given but little thought to slavery, should be too modest to toss aside indignantly and sneeringly the suggestions of those who have made it their life-long study. Were these resolutions now published, almost every man who opposed them, would wonder that he had so little foresight as to oppose them.

And there is still another thing which should perhaps be allowed to suggest a doubt whether the rebellion will be crushed. It is, that we are so reluctant to pay the cost of crushing it. Our brave soldiers and sailors give their lives to this end. But we who stay at home shrink from the money tax which is, and which should be far more largely put upon us. Our nation is imperiled by the incessant outflow of a big stream of gold. Wise and patriotic as he is, our Secretary of the Treasury will nevertheless labor in vain to diminish this stream unless importations shall be taxed far more heavily. Deeply disgraceful are these importations when it is by all that is precious in the very life of our nation that they are forbidden. Surely it is no time now to be indulging in foreign luxuries: and as to necessaries, our own country can furnish them all. Luxuries, whether foreign or domestic, should all come now with great cost to the consumer. And only a small return for protecting their estates from the rebels would it be for the rich to pay over to Government one fourth, and the very rich one half of their incomes. Let me add in this connection that the State Banks should be so patriotic, as to rejoice in the national advantage of an exclusively National currency.

I expressed my belief that the rebellion will be crushed — but my doubt whether the nation will be saved. A guilty nation, like a guilty individual, can be saved through repentance only. But where are the proofs that this nation has so much as begun to repent of the great sin, which has brought the great calamity upon her? She has, it is true, dome much to prove that she regards slavery as a political and economical evil, and a source of great peril to the nation: but she has done exceedingly little toward proving that she has a penitent sense of her sin in fastening the yoke of slavery on ten to twenty millions of this and former generations. It is only here and there — at wide intervals both of time and space — that has been heard the penitent exclamation, “We are verily guilty concerning our brother;” — only at these wide intervals that has been seen any relaxation of the national hatred and scorn for the black man. “Abolitionist,” which, when the nation shall be saved, will be the most popular name in it, is still the most odious and contemptible name in it. That the fugitive slave statute is still suffered to exist, is ample proof that this nation has still a devil's heart toward the black man. How sad that even now, when because of the sin of slaveholding, God is making blood flow like water in this land, there should be found members of Congress, who claim this infernal statute to be one of the rights of slaveholding! As if slaveholding had rights! As if any thing else than punishment were due to it! — punishment adequate to its unmingled, unutterable, and blasphemous wrongs!

I shall, however, be told that slavery will soon be abolished by an Amendment of the Constitution. And what will such an Amendment say? Why, nothing more than that slavery ought not to be — must not be — when it shall no longer be constitutional. What, however, the American people need to say, is, that be it constitutional or unconstitutional, slavery shall not be. So they are always prepared to say regarding murder. But slavery is worse than murder. Every right-minded man had far rather his child were murdered than enslaved. Why, then, do they not affirm that, in no event, will they tolerate slavery any more than murder? The one answer is — because it is the black man, and the black man only, on whom slavery falls. Were white Americans to be enslaved in a Barbary State, or anywhere else, our nation would respect no pleadings of statutes or even of constitutions for their enslavement. In defiance of whatever pleas or whatever restraints, she would release them if she could. The most stupendous hypocrisy of which America has been guilty, is first professing that there is law for slavery — law for that which all law proclaims an outlaw — law for that in which there is not one element of law, but every element of which is an outrage upon law; and second, in professing it, not because she has a particle of belief in it — but simply because blacks instead of whites are the victims of her slavery. America declared that John Brown was “rightly hung.” How hypocritical was the declaration, may be inferred from the fact that had they been white instead of black slaves whom he flung away his life to rescue, she would have honored him as perhaps man has never been honored. And she would have made his honors none the less, but heaped them up all the more, if, in prosecuting his heroic and merciful work, he had tossed aside statutes and broken through sacred constitutions. Oh! if this nation shall ever be truly saved, it will no longer regard John Brown as worthy of the fate of a felon; but it will build the whitest monuments to his memory, and cherish it as the memory. of the sublimest and most Christ-like man the nation has ever produced! Some of the judgments of John Brown — especially such as led him to Harper's Ferry — were unsound and visionary. Nevertheless, even when committing his mistakes, he stood, by force of the disinterestedness and greatness of his soul, above all his countrymen.

Would Congress contribute most effectively to put down the rebellion, and to save the nation by the great salvations of penitence and justice — the only real salvations? Would it do this? — then let it pass, solemnly and unanimously, a resolution that there never was and never can be, either inside or outside of statutes or constitutions, law for slavery; and then another resolution that whoever shall attempt to put the yoke of slavery on however humble a neck, black or white, deserves to be put to death.

A word further in regard to the proposed Amendment. Were the impudent and monstrous claim of its being law set up for murder, no one would propose an amendment of the Constitution forbidding murder. The only step in that case would be to make the penalty for the crime more sure and if possible more severe. Such an amendment would be strenuously objected to, in that it would stain the Constitution with the implication that murder had been constitutional. And now, if we shall have a Constitutional Amendment, which, in terms, forbids slavery, (it is already forbidden by the spirit, principles, and even provisions of the Constitution,) shall we not be virtually admitting to the world and to posterity that this nation had been guilty of tolerating, if not indeed of positively authorizing, in its Constitution the highest crime of earth o God save us from an admission, which shall serve both to stamp us with infamy and to perpetuate the infamy!

PETERBoro, April 26, 1864.

SOURCES: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 260; Gerrit Smith, Speeches and Letters of Gerrit Smith (from January 1863, to January 1864), on the Rebellion,  Volume 2, p. 7-13