Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, April 24, 1866

Admiral Farragut and Mrs. F. are staying with us, and I find little time to write. Have had several interviews with the President and Mr. Seward in relation to the cruise of the Chattanooga and passage of Colonel Robert Johnson, under an appointment of the State Department. The President evidently feels embarrassed, yet anxious on his son's account. He is aware of the importance to himself and the country that he should be relieved from the care of this unfortunate young man, but is unwilling that anything personal to himself should be done.

I called last Thursday with Captain McKinstry and introduced him first to the President and then to Messrs. Stover and Robert Johnson. Subsequently I saw Mr. Seward, who arranged the subject-matter of the mission. I addressed him a letter, stating the cruise of the Chattanooga and the principal points at which she would stop. By request of Mr. S. an alteration was made, avoiding Australia and going to China and Japan instead of running directly on the west coast of South America.

At the Cabinet-meeting I submitted Admiral Godon's dispatch of the 23d of January, stating the demands and difficulties of Mr. Washburn,¹ our Minister to Paraguay, who had been absent from his post more than a year and has been wintering since last September with his family in Buenos Ayres. In the mean time the allies have blockaded the river and object to his passing through the lines, and he has made a demand for the Wasp or some other naval vessel to convey him and his family.

Mr. Seward, without knowing all the facts, at once requested that Mr. Washburn should have public conveyance. I showed him Godon's dispatch, who states that no foreign power has attempted to pass the blockade, that he cannot do it without obtaining from the Buenos Ayres authorities coal, and that to return the courtesy by setting them at defiance would be ungracious; that no foreign government has a representative in Paraguay; that we have no interests there, and that if Mr. Washburn gets there he will be almost the only American in the territory and will require a naval force to protect him.

Although taken a little aback by the statements of Godon, Seward had committed himself too strongly to back down. He said the Minister must go through the blockade, whether it cost $3000 or $30,000; that he must get the coal of the Buenos Ayres authorities and disoblige them by violating the blockade, if Mr. Washburn could not go without; and he (Seward) wanted to take Godon's dispatch and read.

_______________

¹ Charles Ames Washburn, brother of Elihu B. Washburne.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 490-2

Governor Rutherford B. Hayes to Sardis Birchard, March 7, 1869

COLUMBUS, March 7, 1869.

DEAR UNCLE:—We are all well. Political talk is just now all the talk. Grant's inaugural strikes me as capital. His Cabinet looks like a revolution, an experiment. If it succeeds, as I hope it will, all will applaud him for his courage and wisdom. Otherwise, otherwise. It is a Cabinet for work, for honesty, and for economy. It contains three radicals, Washburne, Creswell, and Howe; three conservative Republicans, Cox, Stewart, and Borie. It is outside of political circles— no man of political strength in the list, and is therefore untrammelled, owes nobody anything. It contains no Presidential aspirants, and may therefore be regarded as organized for harmony. No man being conspicuous, Grant's leadership and rule is beyond question. It seems to mean business and not political scheming. It is an attempt to put fitness and qualifications before what is called "claims" and "political services." If anybody could overthrow the spoils doctrine and practice, Grant is the man. It has been thought impossible hitherto, but I hope with some confidence that he will win.

Sincerely,

R. B. HAYES.

S. BIRCHARD.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 59

General William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, August 28, 1874

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES,        

WASHINGTON, D.C., Aug. 28, 1874.

Dear Brother: . . . Don't ever give any person the least encouragement to think I can be used for political ends. I have seen it poison so many otherwise good characters, that I am really more obstinate than ever. I think Grant will be made miserable to the end of his life by his eight years' experience. Let those who are trained to it keep the office, and keep the Army and Navy as free from politics as possible, for emergencies that may arise at any time.

Think of the reputations wrecked in politics since 1865.

Yours affectionately,

W. T. SHERMAN.

[A few days later he continued:]

*          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *

No matter what the temptation, I will never allow my name to be used by any party; but I don't think it would be prudent to allow the old Democrats to get possession of the Government; and hope the Republicans will choose some new man, as like Mr. Lincoln as you can find. Or else let us unite on Blaine, or even Washburne. . . .

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 340

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, March 16, 1865

Mr. Blair wishes a young friend paroled, and requests me to see the President. I am disinclined to press these individual cases on the President. Mrs. Tatnall, wife of the Rebel commodore, desires to come North to her friends in Connecticut. Mrs. Welles, wife of Albert Welles, wants a permit to go to Mobile to join her husband. Miss Laura Jones, an old family acquaintance, wishes to go to Richmond to meet and marry her betrothed. These are specimen cases.

Blair believes the President has offered the French mission to Bennett. Says it is the President and not Seward, and gives the reasons which lead him to that conclusion. He says he met Bartlett, the (runner) of Bennett, here last August or September; that Bartlett sought him, said they had abused him, B., in the Herald but thought much of him, considered him the man of most power in the Cabinet, but were dissatisfied because he had not controlled the Navy Department early in the Administration and brought it into their (the Herald's) interest. Blair replied that the Herald folks had never yet learned or understood the Secretary of the Navy; that he was a hardheaded and very decided man in his opinions. He says Bartlett then went on to tell him that he was here watching movements and that they did not mean this time to be cheated. It was, Blair says, the darkest hour of the administration, and when the President himself considered his prospect of a reelection almost hopeless.  Soon after the Herald went for the re election and he has little doubt that the President made some promise or assurance at that time.  At a later day, Bartlett alluded again to the matter, and he told him if he had got the President’s word he might rely upon it implicitly.  This has some plausibility and there may have been something to encourage the Herald folks, but I cannot believe the President promised, or will give him the French Mission.

I am sorry to hear Blair speak approvingly of the appointment of Bennett. A vagabond editor without character for such an appointment, whose whims are often wickedly and atrociously leveled against the best men and the best causes, regardless of honor or right. As for Bartlett, he is a mercenary rascal who sought to use the Navy Department and have himself made the agent to purchase the vessels for the Navy. Because I would not prostitute my office and favor his brokerage, he threatened me with unceasing hostility and assaults, not only from the Herald but from nearly every press in New York. He said he could control them all. I was incredulous as to his influence over other journals, and at all events shook him off, determined to have nothing to do with him. In a very short time I found the papers slashing and attacking me, editorially and through correspondents. Washburne, Van Wyck, Dawes, J. P. Hale, and others coöperated with them, perhaps intentionally; most certainly they were, intentionally or otherwise, the instruments of the combination of correspondents led on by this Bartlett, who boasted of his work and taunted me through others.

But the New York press was unable to form a public sentiment hostile to the administration of the Navy Department. There were a few, very few, journals in other parts of the country that were led astray by them, and some of the frivolous and surface scum of idle loungers echoed the senseless and generally witless efforts to depreciate my labors, but the people and a large portion of the papers proved friendly. The New York Tribune was, while professing friendship, the most malicious and mean; the Times and the Herald were about alike; the Evening Post gave me a halting support; the Express was, as usual, balderdash; the Journal of Commerce in more manly opposition; the Commercial Advertiser alone was at that time fair and honestly friendly. Most of the weeklies were vehicles of blackguardism against me by the combined writers. Although somewhat annoyed by these concerted proceedings in New York and Washington, formed for mischief, I was too much occupied to give much heed to the villainous and wicked course pursued against me.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 258-60; William E. Gienapp & Erica L. Gienapp, Editors, The Civil War Diary of Gideon Welles, Lincolns Secretary of the Navy, p. 603-5

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, September 5, 1864

Mr. Blair returned this morning from Concord. He had, I have little doubt, been sent for, partly to see and influence me. I am not sufficiently ductile for Mr. Raymond, Chairman of the National Executive Committee, who desires to make each navy yard a party machine. The party politicians of King's County wish to make the Brooklyn Navy Yard control their county and State elections, and this not by argument, persuasion, conviction, personal effort on their part, but by the arbitrary and despotic exercise of power on the part of the Secretary of the Navy. I told Blair I could not be instrumental in any such abuse, and read to him Admiral Paulding's letter. I should have read it to Raymond, had he possessed the manliness to call on me. But he says I am unapproachable, a wall that he cannot penetrate or get over. E. B. Washburne is in this business; so are Usher and others. They want me to do a mean thing, and think it would benefit the party, — a most egregious error, were I so weak as to listen to them. The wrong which they would perpetrate would never make a single convert, control a single vote, but it would create enmities, intensify hatred, increase opposition. They would remove any man who is not openly with us and of our party organization, would employ no doubtful or lukewarm men in the yard, whatever may be their qualifications or ability in their trade. But removing them would not get us their vote, and instead of being lukewarm or doubtful they would be active electioneers against us, exciting sympathy for themselves and hatred towards the Administration for its persecution of mechanics and laborers for independent opinions.

Blair like a man of sense, has a right appreciation of things, as Paulding's letter satisfied him. Whether it will Raymond and Washburne is another question, about which I care not two straws; only for their importuning the President, would not give the old Whig Party a moment's attention. His good sense and sagacity are against such exercise or abuse of power and patronage, as I heard him once remark. It is an extreme of partyism such as is practiced in New York.

Blair informed me that Simeon Draper is appointed Collector of New York, and the evening papers confirm the fact. I also learn from Blair that Chase opposed the appointment of Preston King, saying he was not possessed of sufficient ability for the place. Gracious heaven! A man who, if in a legal point of view not the equal, is the superior of Chase in administrative ability, better qualified in some respects to fill any administrative position in the government than Mr. Chase! And in saying this I do not mean to deny intellectual talents and attainments to the Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. Fessenden also excepted to King, but not for the reasons assigned by Mr. Chase. It is because Mr. King is too obstinate! He is, indeed, immovable in maintaining what he believes to be right, but open always to argument and conviction. If the opposition of Fessenden is not dictated by Chase, he has fallen greatly in my estimation, and I am in any event prepared to see the Treasury Department fall away under such management. The selection of Sim Draper with his vicious party antecedents is abominable. I am told, however, that prominent merchants advised it. This shows how little attention should be paid in such matters to those who traffic. I have no confidence in Draper. I look upon him as corrupt, and his appointment will beget distrust in the Administration. I so expressed myself to Mr. Blair, although he had acquiesced in the selection, — not from choice, but to prevent the place from being conferred upon another.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 136-8

Lieutenant-General Ulysses S. Grant to Congressman Elihu B. Washburne, August 12, 1864

HEADQ'Rs ARMIEs of THE UNITED STATEs,

CITY Point, Va., August 16, 1864.

Hon. E. B. WASHBURNE.

DEAR SIR: I state to all citizens who visit me that all we want now to insure an early restoration of the Union, is a determined unity of sentiment North.

The rebels have now in their ranks their last man. The little boys and old men are guarding prisons, guarding, railroad bridges, and forming a good part of their garrisons for entrenched positions. A man lost by them cannot be replaced. They have robbed alike the cradle and the grave to get their present force. Besides what they lose in frequent skirmishes and battles, they are now losing, from desertions and other causes at least one regiment per day. With this drain upon them the end is not far distant if we will only be true to ourselves. Their only hope now is ina divided North. This might give them reinforcements from Tennessee, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri, while it would weaken us. With the draft quietly enforced, the enemy would become despondent and would make but little resistance.

I have no doubt but the enemy are exceedingly anxious to hold out until after the Presidential election. They have many hopes from its effects. They hope a counter revolution; they hope the election of a peace candidate; in fact, like Micawber, they hope for something to turn up. Our peace friends, if they expect peace from separation, are much mistaken. be but the beginning of war, with thousands of northern men joining the South, because of our disgrace in o To have “peace on any terms,” the South would demand the restoration of their slaves already freed. They would demand indemnity for losses sustained, and they would demand a treaty which would make the North slave-hunters for the South. They would demand pay or the restoration of over. escaping to the North.

Yours, truly,

U. S. GRANT.

SOURCE: Phineas Camp Headley, The Life and Campaigns of General U. S. Grant, p. 518-9

Henry J. Raymond to Abraham Lincoln, August 22, 1864

ROOMS OF THE NATIONAL UNION

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

Astor House, New York, Aug 22 1864.

My dear Sir:—

I feel compelled to drop you a line concerning the political condition of the Country as it strikes me. I am in active correspondence with your staunchest friends in every State and from them all I hear but one report. The tide is strongly against us. Hon. E. B. Washburne writes that “were an election to be held now in Illinois we should be beaten”. Mr. Cameron writes that Pennsylvania is against us. Gov. Morton writes that nothing but the most strenous efforts can carry Indiana. This State, according to the best information I can get, would go 50.000 against us to-morrow. And so of the rest.

Nothing but the most resolute and decided action, on the part of the Government and its friends, can save the country from falling into hostile hands.

Two special causes are assigned for this great reaction in public sentiment, — the want of military successes, and the impression in some minds, the fear and suspicion in others, that we are not to have peace in any event under this Administration until Slavery is abandoned. In some way or other the suspicion is widely diffused that we can have peace with Union if we would. It is idle to reason with this belief — still more idle to denounce it. It can only be expelled by some authoritative act, at once bold enough to fix attention and distinct enough to defy incredulity & challenge respect.

Why would it not be wise, under these circumstances, to appoint a Commission, in due form, to make distinct proffers of peace to Davis, as the head of the rebel armies, on the sole condition of acknowledging the supremacy of the Constitution, — all other questions to be settled in convention of the people of all the States? The making of such an offer would require no armistice, no suspension of active war, no abandonment of positions, no sacrifice of consistency.

If the proffer were accepted (which I presume it would not be,) the country would never consent to place the practical execution of its details in any but loyal hands, and in those we should be safe.

If it should be rejected, (as it would be,) it would plant seeds of disaffection in the South, dispel all the peace delusions about peace that previal in the North, silence the clamorous & damaging falsehoods of the opposition, take the wind completely out of the sails of the Chicago craft, reconcile public sentiment to the War, the draft, & the tax as inevitable necessities, and unite the North as nothing since firing on Fort Sumter has hitherto done.

I cannot conceive of any answer which Davis could give to such a proposition which would not strengthen you & the Union cause everywhere. Even your radical friends could not fail to applaud it when they should see the practical strength it would bring to the Union common cause.

I beg you to excuse the earnestness with which I have pressed this matter upon your attention. It seems to me calculated to do good — & incapable of doing harm. It will turn the tide of public sentiment & avert impending evils of the gravest character. It will raise & concentrate the loyalty of the country &, unless I am greatly mistaken, give us an early & a fruitful victory.

Permit me to add that if done at all I think this should be done at once, — as your own spontaneous act. In advance of the Chicago Convention it might render the action of that body, of very little consequence.

I have canvassed this subject very fully with Mr. Swett of Illinois who first suggested it to me & who will seek an opportunity to converse with you upon it.

I am, very respectfully,

Your ob't Serv't

Henry J. Raymond

SOURCE: Abraham Lincoln Papers in the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.: Lincoln, Abraham. Abraham Lincoln papers: Series 1. General Correspondence. 1833 to 1916: Henry J. Raymond to Abraham Lincoln, Monday,Political affairs. 1864. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mal3547800/.

Captain John A. Rawlins to Congressman Elihu B. Washburne, December 30, 1861

Headquarters, District of Cairo,        

December 30, 1861.

DEAR WASHBURNE:

Yours of the 21st is at hand. I was no less astounded at the contents of your note than you must have been at the information reported to you.

I thank you for the confidence manifested by you in the frank manner of your inquiry. I feel that you of all other men had the right, as you would feel it your duty, to investigate the charge. I know how much you have done for General Grant and how jealous you are of his good name, and assure you it is appreciated not only by General Grant but by all his friends.

I will answer your inquiry fully and frankly, but first I would say unequivocally and emphatically that the statement that General Grant is drinking very hard is utterly untrue and could have originated only in malice.

When I came to Cairo, General Grant was as he is to-day, a strictly total abstinence man, and I have been informed by those who knew him well, that such has been his habit for the last five or six years.

A few days after I came here a gentleman made him a present of a box of champagne. On one or two occasions he drank a glass of this with his friends, but on neither occasion did he drink enough to in any manner affect him. About this time General Grant was somewhat dyspeptic and his physician advised him to drink two glasses of ale or beer a day. He followed this prescription for about one or two weeks (never exceeding the two glasses per day) and then being satisfied it did him no good, he resumed his total abstinence habits, until some three or four weeks after the Battle of Belmont, while he was rooming at the St. Charles Hotel, Colonel Taylor of Chicago, Mr. Dubois, Auditor of State, and other friends, were visiting Cairo, and he was induced out of compliment to them to drink with them on several occasions but in no instance did he drink enough to manifest it to any one who did not see him drink. About this time Mr. Osborne, President of the Illinois Central Railroad Company, our mutual friend J. M. Douglas, and several of their friends made a visit to Cairo, and gave a dinner (or lunch) on the cars, to which the General and I were invited with others; champagne was part of the fare. Sitting near the General I noticed that he did not drink more than half a glass. The fact of his drinking at all was remarked simply because of his usual total abstinence.

But no man can say that at any time since I have been with him has he drunk liquor enough to in the slightest unfit him for business, or make it manifest in his words or actions. At the time I have referred to, continuing probably a week or ten days, he may have taken an occasional drink with those gentlemen and others visiting Cairo at that time, but never in a single instance to excess, and at the end of that period he voluntarily stated he should not during the continuance of the war again taste liquor of any kind, and for the past three or four weeks, though to my knowledge frequently importuned on visits of friends, he has not tasted any kind of liquor. Ever since I have been with General Grant he has sent his reports in his own handwriting to Saint Louis, daily when there was matter to report, and never less than three times a week, and during the period above referred to he did not at all relax this habit.

If there is any man in the service who has discharged his duties faithfully and fearlessly, who has ever been at his post and guarded the interest confided to him with the utmost vigilance, General Grant has done it. Not only his reports, but all his orders of an important character are written by himself, and I venture here the statement there is not an officer in the Army who discharges the duties of his command so nearly without the intervention of aides, or assistants, as does General Grant.

Some ten or twelve days ago an article was published in the Chicago Tribune, charging frauds on the Quartermaster's Department here, in the purchase of lumber at Chicago. General Grant immediately sent Captain W. S. Hillyer, a member of his staff, to Chicago, with instructions to thoroughly investigate and report the facts. That report and a large mass of testimony substantiating the charge had been forwarded to St. Louis when orders came from Washington to investigate the charge. The investigation had already been made. Thus time and again has he been able to send back the same answer when orders were received from St. Louis in reference to the affairs of this District.

I am satisfied from the confidence and consideration you have manifested in me that my statement is sufficient for you, but should the subject be mooted by other parties, you can refer them to Colonel J. D. Webster, of the 1st Illinois Artillery, General Grant's Chief of Staff, who is well known in Chicago as a man of unquestionable habits. He has been counsellor of the General through this campaign, was with him at and all through the Battle of Belmont, has seen him daily and has had every opportunity to know his habits. I would further refer them to General Van Renssalaer, who was specially sent to inspect the troops and investigate the condition of the District by Major General McClellan, and Generals Sturgiss and Sweeny, who were sent here by Major General Halleck for the same purpose. These gentlemen after a full and thorough investigation returned to St. Louis some two weeks ago. I know not what report they made; but this I do know, that a few days after their return an order arrived from St. Louis creating the District of Cairo, a District including Southeast Missouri, Southern Illinois, and all of Kentucky west of the Cumberland, a District nearly twice as large as General Grant's former command. I would refer them to Flag Officer A. H. Foote of the U. S. Mississippi Naval Fleet, a man whose actions and judgments are regulated by the strictest New England standard, a strict and faithful member of the Congregational Church who for months has had personal as well as official intercourse with the General.

If you could look into General Grant's countenance at this moment you would want no other assurance of his sobriety. He is in perfect health, and his eye and intellect are as clear and active as can be.

That General Grant has enemies no one could doubt, who knows how much effort he has made to guard against and ferret out frauds in his district, but I do not believe there is a single colonel or brigadier general in his command who does not desire his promotion, or at least to see him the commanding general of a large division of the army, in its advance down the Mississippi when that movement is made.

Some weeks ago one of those irresponsible rumors was set afloat, that General Grant was to be removed from the command of the District, and there was a universal protest expressed against it by both officers and men.

I have one thing more to say, and I have done, this already long letter.

None can feel a greater interest in General Grant than I do; I regard his interest as my interest, all that concerns his reputation concerns me; I love him as a father; I respect him because I have studied him well, and the more I know him the more I respect and love him.

Knowing the truth I am willing to trust my hopes of the future upon his bravery and temperate habits. Have no fears; General Grant by bad habits or conduct will never disgrace himself or you, whom he knows and feels to be his best and warmest friend (whose unexpected kindness toward him he will never forget and hopes some time to be able to repay). But I say to you frankly, and I pledge you my word for it, that should General Grant at any time become an intemperate man or an habitual drunkard, I will notify you immediately, will ask to be removed from duty on his staff (kind as he has been to me), or resign my commission. For while there are times when I would gladly throw the mantle of charity over the faults of friends, at this time and from a man in his position I would rather tear the mantle off and expose the deformity.

Having made a full statement of all the facts within my knowledge, and being in a position to know them all and I trust done justice to the character of him whom you and I are equally interested in,

I remain, your friend,

John A. Rawlins.

SOURCE: James Harrison Wilson, The Life of John A. Rawlins, p. 68-71

William Bross* to Simon Cameron, December 30, 1861

Tribune Office,

Chicago, Ill., Dec. 30, 1861

Hon. SIMON CAMERON

Sec. of War

Dear Sir

Evidence entirely satisfactory to myself and Associate Editors of the Tribune has become so convincing that Gen U. S. Grant commanding at Cairo is an inebriate, that I deem it my duty to call your attention to the matter. The inclosed anonymous letter would not deserve a moment's attention, were not facts abundant from other sources that what the writer says is true. His treatment to myself refered to in the first paragraph I care nothing about, but I was satisfied that he would not have acted as he did, had he been sober. The names on the second page of the letter may assist you to get at the facts. We think it best to call your attention to this painful matter, rather than to attack Gen. Grant in the Tribune. As you may not know me personally I refer to Dr Chas V. Dyer & His Excellency President Lincoln

Your Obt. Servt.

WM. BROSS

Respectfully referred to the President.

SIMON CAMERON.

War Dept.
January 4, 1861.

_______________

On Jan. 4, 1862, Cameron forwarded the letter to President Abraham Lincoln. The anonymous letter is no longer available, but was once the subject of a newspaper article which quoted excerpts. “Your Mr. Bross who was so badly treated here by General Grant and by Captain Lagow ought not to influence you against others of General Grant's staff officers.” The writer went on to accuse Grant of frequently being too drunk to fill his station and of “being perfectly inebriate under a flag of truce with rebels.” The letter continued: “All these things are facts which the world ought to know. Until we can secure pure men in habits and men without secesh wives with their own little slaves to wait upon them, which is a fact here in this camp with Mrs. Grant, our country is lost.” — Robert Anderson, "A New Lincoln Letter," Chicago Sunday Tribune Magazine, Jan. 14, 1962, p. 45.

On Jan. 4, Lincoln endorsed the anonymous letter. “Bross would not knowingly misrepresent. Gen. Grant was appointed chiefly on the recommendation of Hon. E. B. Washburne—Perhaps we should consult him”

On Jan. 6, Cameron added his endorsement. “Respectfully referred to Hon. E. B. Washburne, with the request that he will return these papers to the Dept.”

_______________

* Of the Chicago Tribune.

SOURCES: John Y. Simon, Editor, The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant: Volume 4: January 8-March 31, 1862, p. 118-9; Washburne, E. B. E. B. Washburne Papers: Bound volumes, letters received; ; Dec. 6-31, undated. 1861. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mss44651.020/. Image #'s 296, 297, 298.

Joseph Medill to Congressman Elihu B. Washburn, May 24, 1862

Tribune Office,          

Chicago, Ill., May 24, 1862

Elihu B.

There is no whistling wind.  The army are fornenst you in relation to Grant.  It was a most apprehensible surprise followed by an awful slaughter. Our cause was put in terrible peril.  Want of foresight, circumspection, prudence and generalship are all charged upon the wretched in man.  But we need not dispute about it.  I admire your pertinacity and steadfastness in behalf of your friend, but I fear he is played out.  The soldiers are down on him.

Yours Truly

J M

SOURCE: Washburne, E. B. E. B. Washburne Papers: Bound volumes, letters received; ; May 22-June 19. 1862. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mss44651.025/ (image 22).

Diary of 2nd Lieutenant Luman Harris Tenney: April 8-19, 1864

Generally went to town once during the day on business and to see Dan. The boy has seen trouble and I fear that it will be too much for him. He had been intimate with and for some time engaged to a young lady of wealthy family. The father opposed the intimacy and engagement and ordered all attentions discontinued. Burned Dan's letters and her letters, taking them from the office privily. She remained true, but her father compelled her to marry another, she all the time protesting. I know how to sympathize with Dan, poor boy.

Twenty-six officers and non-commissioned officers ordered into Penn. to buy horses for the regt. to be gone five days or thereabouts. Gen. Burnside came to see us one day. Another day, Burnside, Grant and Washburn reviewed us. Have read “Sutherland,” author unknown, not much liked because it has a pro-slavery tendency. “Red Tape and Pigeon Hole Generals.” Telling criticisms on Fitz-John Porter, Butterfield, McClellan and Regulars generally. Written in a spicy and entertaining style and withal quite interesting and I guess, truthful.

Reported that Burnside's expedition will leave on the 24th. Fear that we will be left in the lurch. Dread to be. Have played chess somewhat with A. B. N. Ma has moved to Minnie's, Minnie very sick. Written home twice and heard twice.

SOURCE: Frances Andrews Tenney, War Diary Of Luman Harris Tenney, p. 113

Diary of Gideon Welles: December 1863

It has been some weeks since I have opened this book. Such time as I could spare from exacting and oppressing current duties at the Department has been devoted to gathering and arranging materials for, and in writing, my Annual Report. Most of this latter labor has been done in the evening, when I was fatigued and exhausted, yet extending often to midnight. Likely the document itself will in style and manner show something of the condition of the author's mind. In examining, analyzing, and weighing matters, I have sometimes felt discouraged and doubted my ability to do equal and exact justice to all, injustice to none. Every statement and sentence will be scrutinized, criticized, and scanned; politicians, naval men, legislators, statesmen at home and abroad will in this period of war and controversy study what may be said, with a zeal and purpose beyond what is usual. My wish is to do wrong to no one, to present the facts correctly and to serve my country honestly. The two or three friends to whom I have submitted the paper speak encouragingly of it. Mr. Faxon has been most useful to me and assisted me most. Mr. Fox and Mr. Lenthall have made sensible suggestions. I have found Mr. Eames a good critic, and he twice went over the whole with me. When finally printed and I sent off my last proof, I felt relieved and better satisfied with the document than I feared I should be. There is a responsibility and accountability in this class of papers, when faithfully done, vastly greater and more trying than in ordinary authorship. I believe I can substantiate everything I have said to any tribunal, and have omitted nothing which the Congress or the country ought to know. I do not expect, however, to silence the captious, or those who choose to occupy an attitude of hostility. If what I have said shall lead the government to better action or conclusions in any respect, I shall be more than satisfied.

The President requested that each head of Department would prepare a few paragraphs relating to his Department which might, with such modifications as he chose to make, be incorporated into the message. Blair and myself submitted ours first, each about three weeks since; the others were later.

I was invited and strongly urged by the President to attend the ceremonials at Gettysburg, but was compelled to decline, for I could not spare the time. The President returned ill and in a few days it was ascertained he had the varioloid. We were in Cabinet-meeting when he informed us that the physicians had the preceding evening ascertained and pronounced the nature of his complaint. It was in a light form, but yet held on longer than was expected. He would have avoided an interview, but wished to submit and have our views of the message. All were satisfied, and that portion which is his own displays sagacity and wisdom.

The Russian government has thought proper to send its fleets into American waters for the winter. A number of their vessels arrived on the Atlantic seaboard some weeks since, and others in the Pacific have reached San Francisco. It is a politic movement for both Russians and Americans, and somewhat annoying to France and England. I have directed our naval officers to show them all proper courtesy, and the municipal authorities in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia have exhibited the right spirit. Several of the Russian ships arrived and ascended the Potomac about the 1st instant.

On Saturday, the 5th instant, the Admiral and his staff made me an official visit, and on Monday, the 7th, the Secretary of State and myself with Mr. Usher returned the visit. Taking a steamboat at the navy yard, we proceeded down to the anchorage near Alexandria, where we were received with salutes and dined with the officers. On Monday dined with Baron Stoeckel and the Russian officers at Seward's. Tuesday we were entertained at Stoeckel's. On Wednesday, the 9th, received and entertained fifty Russian officers, the Cabinet, foreign ministers, and the officers of our own Navy who were in Washington, and all professed to be, and I think were, gratified. It was a question whether some of the legations would attend, but I believe all were present at our party.

Mr. Colfax was elected Speaker, and the House was organized without difficulty. There was an attempt to elect some one else, but it was an abortion. Washburne of Illinois wanted the place, but found few supporters and finally gave up the effort. Blair, to my surprise, went for Washburne, who, though the oldest, is confessedly the meanest man in Congress. Colfax is exceedingly sore over the course of Blair, who, he says, advised him not to compete with Grow, and now, when the field is open and fairly his, goes for W., whom he (C.) knows B. does not like. I not only preferred Colfax, but did not conceal my contempt for Washburne, whose honesty and veracity I know to be worse than indifferent. Blair tells me his opinion of W. is pretty much the same as mine and that he suggested and spoke of him at the instigation of the President, who, while he has not a very high opinion of Washburne, wants confidence in Colfax, whom he considers a little intriguer, — plausible, aspiring beyond his capacity, and not trustworthy.

In the appointment of committees, Colfax avows a desire to do justice to the Departments, which Grow did not in all cases, but placed some men on the Department committees that were positively bad. In no instance did he consult me. There is a practice by some Secretaries, I understand, to call upon the Speaker and influence his selections. The practice is, I think, wrong, yet courtesy and propriety would lead a fair-minded Speaker to appoint fair committees and consult the Departments and not put upon committees any of the class mentioned, objectionable characters who would embarrass the Secretary or be indifferent to their own duties. The conduct of Colfax is, so far as I am concerned, in pleasant contrast with Grow. Not that I do not appreciate Grow, nor that I am not on friendly terms with him. But C. has called and consulted with me, which G. never did. I neither then nor now undertook to select or name individual members, as I know has been done by others. Colfax named or showed me a list of names from which he proposed to make up the Naval Committee. He says Schenck intimates he would like to be chairman, — that when, in Congress twenty years ago, he was on the Naval Committee, the duties were pleasant and familiar to him. There are, however, family rather than public reasons which now influence him. If on the Naval Committee he would expect to legislate and procure favor for his brother. The Schenck family is grasping and pugnacious. I objected to him, and also to H. Winter Davis, who is Du Pont's adviser, and who is disappointed because he was not made Secretary of the Navy.

In the Senate there is a singular state of things, I hear. Their proceedings are secret, but I am informed the Senators are unanimously opposed to placing John P. Hale on the Naval Committee, where he has been Chairman, but persistently hostile to the Department. The sentiments of Senators, I am told, confounded Hale, who alternately blusters and begs. Some, very likely a majority, want the moral courage to maintain and carry out their honest convictions, for there is not a Senator of any party who does not know he is a nuisance and discredit to the Naval Committee, and that he studies to thwart and embarrass the Department and never tries to aid it. This movement against Hale is spontaneous in the Senate. It certainly has not been prompted by me, for though he is the organ of communication between the Department and the Senate, I have ceased to regard him with respect, and have been silent respecting him.

. . . The Senators have failed to pay attention to him, and do well in getting rid of him, if they succeed in resisting his importunities, which, I hear, are very persistent. . . . The Senators have, in their secret meetings, let [Hale] know their opinion of him, — that their confidence in him has gone. Should they continue him as Chairman of the Naval Committee, he will have no influence, and his fall, which must eventually take place, will be greater. . . .

The interference of Members of Congress in the organization of the navy yards and the employment of workmen is annoying beyond conception. In scarcely a single instance is the public good consulted in their interference, but a demoralized, debauched system of personal and party favoritism has grown up which is pernicious. No person representing a district in which there is a navy yard, ought ever to be placed on the Naval Committee, nor should a Member of Congress meddle with appointments unless requested by the Executive. It is a terrible and increasing evil.

A strange sale of refuse copper took place in September at the Washington Navy Yard. I have had the subject investigated, but the board which I appointed was not thorough in its labors, and did not pursue the subject closely. But the exhibit was such that I have dismissed the Commandant of the Yard, the Naval Storekeeper, and two of the masters, who are implicated, yet I am by no means certain I have reached all, or the worst.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 479-83

Diary of William Howard Russell: June 21, 1861

Verily I would be sooner in the Coptic Cairo, narrow streeted, dark bazaared, many flied, much vexed by donkeys and by overland route passengers, than the horrid tongue of land which licks the muddy margin of the Ohio and the Mississippi. The thermometer at 100° in the shade before noon indicates nowhere else such an amount of heat and suffering, and yet prostrate as I was, it was my fate to argue that England was justified in conceding belligerent, rights to the South, and that the attitude of neutrality we had assumed in this terrible quarrel is not in effect an aggression on the United States; and here is a difference to be perceived between the North and the South.

The people of the seceding States, aware in their consciences that they have been most active in their hostility to Great Britain, and whilst they were in power were mainly responsible for the defiant, irritating, and insulting tone commonly used to us by American statesmen, are anxious at the present moment when so much depends on the action of foreign countries, to remove all unfavorable impressions from our minds by declarations of good will, respect, and admiration, not quite compatible with the language of their leaders in times not long gone by. The North, as yet unconscious of the loss of power, and reared in a school of menace and violent assertion of their rights, regarding themselves as the whole of the United States, and animated by their own feeling of commercial and political opposition to Great Britain, maintain the high tone of a people who have never known let or hindrance in their passions, and consider it an outrage that

the whole world does not join in active sympathy for a government which in its brief career has contrived to affront every nation in Europe with which it had any dealings.

If the United States have astonished France by their ingratitude, they have certainly accustomed England to their petulance, and one can fancy the satisfaction with which the Austrian Statesmen who remember Mr. Webster's despatch to Mr. Hulsemann, contemplate the present condition of the United States in the face of an insurrection of these sovereign and independent States which the Cabinet at Washington stigmatizes as an outbreak of rebels and traitors to the royalty of the Union.

During my short sojourn in this country I have never yet met any person who could show me where the sovereignty of the Union resides. General Prentiss, however, and his Illinois volunteers, are quite ready to fight for it.

In the afternoon the General drove me round the camps in company with Mr. Washburne, Member of Congress, from Illinois, his staff and a party of officers, among whom was Mr. Oglesby, colonel of a regiment of State Volunteers, who struck me by his shrewdness, simple honesty, and zeal,* He told me that he had begun life in the utmost obscurity, but that somehow or other he got into a lawyer's office and there, by hard drudgery, by mother wit, and industry, notwithstanding a defective education, he had raised himself not only to independence, but to such a position that 1000 men had gathered at his call and selected one who had never led a company in his life to be their colonel; in fact, he is an excellent orator of the western school, and made good homely, telling speeches to his men.

“I'm not as good as your Frenchmen of the schools of Paris, nor am I equal to the Russian colonels I met at St. Petersburg, who sketched me out how they had beaten you Britishers at Sebastopol,” said he; “but I know I can do good straight fighting with my boys when I get a chance. There is a good deal in training, to be sure, but nature tells too. Why I believe I would make a good artillery officer if I was put to it. General, you heard how I laid one of them guns the other day and touched her off with my own hand and sent the ball right into a tree half-a-mile away.” The Colonel evidently thought he had by that feat proved his fitness for the command of a field battery. One of the German officers who was listening to the lively old man's talk, whispered to me, “Dere is a good many of tese colonels in dis camp.”

At each station the officers came out of their tents, shook hands all round, and gave an unfailing invitation to get down and take a drink, and the guns on the General's approach fired salutes, as though it was a time of profoundest peace. Powder was certainly more plentiful than in the Confederate camps, where salutes are not permitted unless by special order on great occasions.

The General remained for some time in the camp of the Chicago light artillery, which was commanded by a fine young Scotchman of the Saxon genus Smith, who told me that the privates of his company represented a million and a half of dollars in property. Their guns, horses, carriages, and accoutrements were all in the most creditable order, and there was an air about the men and about their camp which showed they did not belong to the same class as the better disciplined Hungarians of Milotzky close at hand.

Whilst we were seated in Captain Smith's tent, a number of the privates came forward, and sang the “Star-spangled banner,” and a patriotic song, to the air of “God save the Queen!” and the rest of the artillery-men, and a number of stragglers from the other camps, assembled and then formed line behind the singers. When the chorus was over there arose a great shout for Washburne, and the honorable congressman was fain to come forward and make a speech, in which he assured his hearers of a very speedy victory and the advent of liberty all over the land. Then “General Prentiss” was called for; and as citizen soldiers command their Generals on such occasions, he too was obliged to speak, and to tell his audience "the world had never seen any men more devoted, gallant, or patriotic than themselves.” “Oglesby” was next summoned, and the tall, portly, good-humored old man stepped to the front, and with excellent tact and good sense, dished up in the Buncombe style, told them the time for making speeches had passed, indeed it had lasted too long; and although it was said there was very little fighting when there was much talking, he believed too much talking was likely to lead to a great deal more fighting than any one desired to see between citizens of the United States of America, except their enemies, who, no doubt, were much better pleased to see Americans fighting each other than to find them engaged in any other employment. Great as the mischief of too much talking had been, too much writing had far more of the mischief to answer for. The pen was keener than the tongue, hit harder, and left a more incurable wound; but the pen was better than the tongue, because it was able to cure the mischief it had inflicted,” And so by a series of sentences the Colonel got round to me, and to my consternation, remembering how I had fared with my speech at the little private dinner on St. Patrick's Day in New York, I was called upon by stentorian lungs, and hustled to the stump by a friendly circle, till I escaped by uttering a few sentences as to “mighty struggle,” “Europe gazing,” “the world anxious,” “the virtues of discipline,” “the admirable lessons of a soldier's life,” and the “aspiration that in a quarrel wherein a British subject was ordered, by an authority he was bound to respect, to remain neutral, God might preserve the right.”

Colonel, General, and all addressed the soldiers as “gentlemen,” and their auditory did not on their part refrain from expressing their sentiments in the most unmistakable manner. “Bully for you, General!” “Bravo, Washburne!” “That's so, Colonel!” and the like, interrupted the harangues; and when the oratorical exercises were over the men crowded round the staff, cheered and hurrahed, and tossed up their caps in the greatest delight.

With the exception of the foreign officers, and some of the Staff, there are very few of the colonels, majors, captains, or lieutenants who know anything of their business. The men do not care for them, and never think of saluting them. A regiment of Germans was sent across from Bird's Point this evening for plundering and robbing the houses in the district in which they were quartered.

It may be readily imagined that the scoundrels who had to fly from every city in Europe before the face of the police will not stay their hands when they find themselves masters of the situation in the so-called country of an enemy. In such matters the officers have little or no control, and discipline is exceedingly lax, and punishments but sparingly inflicted, the use of the lash being forbidden altogether. Fine as the men are, incomparably better armed, clad — and doubtless better fed — than the Southern troops, they will scarcely meet them man to man in the field with any chance of success. Among the officers are bar-room keepers, persons little above the position of potmen in England, grocers' apprentices, and such like — often inferior socially, and in every other respect, to the men whom they are supposed to command. General Prentiss has seen service, I believe, in Mexico; but he appears to me to be rather an ardent politician, embittered against slaveholders and the South, than a judicious or skilful military leader.

The principles on which these isolated commanders carry on the war are eminently defective. They apply their whole minds to petty expeditions, which go out from the camps, attack some Secessionist gathering, and then return, plundering, as they go and come, exasperating enemies, converting neutrals into opponents, disgusting friends, and leaving it to the Secessionists to boast that they have repulsed them. Instead of encouraging the men and improving their discipline these ill-conducted expeditions have an opposite result.

_______________

* Since died of wounds received in action.

SOURCE: William Howard Russell, My Diary North and South, Vol. 1, p. 337-41

Diary of John Hay: Tuesday, December 24, 1863

I dined to-day with S. S. Cox. He spoke of Greeley’s foolish  Chase explosion the other night at Wendell Phillip’s Cooper Institute meeting, and said Chase was working night and day. He has gotten nearly the whole strength of the New England States. If there is any effort made in Ohio he can be beaten there.  He has little strength in his own State.

I asked him whom his party would nominate.

C. “Gen'l McClellan! We will run McClellan. He is our best ticket. He lost some prestige by his Woodward letter. But it was necessary. He never would have gotten the nomination without it.”

“You don't agree with the Herald on Grant?”

C. “Grant belongs to the Republicans. We can't take him after his letter to Washburne. But for that, we might have taken him. The Republicans won't take him either. They have got his influence, and have no further use for him.”

“If I were a soldier I should much prefer commanding the U. S. Army for life, to four years in the Executive Mansion. I think Grant would.”

“So would McClellan, I know."

I met him again to-night in the Theatre. He says he is getting tired of Washington. He wants to spend a few years in Europe. He will go, if McClellan is next President; — thinks he will anyhow. Says it is delightful to be in the minority; you are not bored by your people for office. — “Glad you like it!” quoth I. “We will try to keep you so.”

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 143-4; for the entire diary entry see Tyler Dennett, Editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and Letter of John Hay, p. 143-4

Diary of John Hay: December 13, 1863

The President, speaking to-day about Missouri matters, said he had heard some things of Schofield which had very much displeased him: — That while Washburne was in Missouri, he saw or thought he saw that Schofield was working rather energetically in the politics of the State, and that he approached Schofield and proposed that he should use his influence to harmonize the conflicting elements so as to elect one of each wing, Gratz Brown and Henderson. Schofield’s reply was that he would not consent to the election of Gratz Brown.

Again when Gratz Brown was about coming to Washington, he sent a friend to Schofiled to say that he would not oppose his confirmation, if he (S.) would, so far as his influence extended, agree to a Convention of Missouri to make necessary alterations in her State Constitution. Schofield’s reply, as reported by Brown to the President was that he would not consent to a State Convention. These things, the President says, are obviously transcendent of his instructions and must not be permitted. He has sent for Schofiled to come to Washington and explain these grave matters.

The President is inclined to put Rosecrans in Schofield’s place, and to give to Gen. Curtis the Department of Kansas. But Halleck and Stanton stand in his way, and he has to use the strong hand so often with those impractical gentlemen that he avoids it when he can.

To-night Hackett arrived and spent the evening with the President. The conversation at first took a professional turn, the President showing a very intimate knowledge of those plays of Shakespeare where Falstaff figures. He was particularly anxious to know why one of the best scenes in the play — that where Falstaff and Prince Hal alternately assume the character of the king — is omitted in the representation. Hackett says it is admirable to read, but ineffective on stage; — that there is generally nothing sufficiently distinctive about the actor who plays Henry to make an imitation striking.

Hackett plays with stuffing of india-rubber; — says Shakespeare refers to it when he says: “How now! blown Jack!” Hackett is a very amusing and garrulous talker. He had some good reminiscences of Houston, Crockett (the former he admires, the latter he thinks a dull man), McCarty and Prentiss. . . .

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 139-40; For the whole diary entry see Tyler Dennett, Editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and letters of John Hay, p. 137-9.

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, February 10, 1863

Presented Colonel Hawley's name to the President for Brigadier-General with expressions of my regard. Was kindly received but no assurance given. Informed the President I should put Preble's case in his hands to be disposed of. The nomination of Mark Howard for Collector of the Hartford District has been suspended in the Senate. Howard is a very faithful, competent, and excellent man for the office, but he and Senator Dixon, neighbors and formerly intimate friends, have latterly had some differences. Dixon takes advantage of his position as Senator to stab Howard in secret session, where H. can have no opportunity for selfdefense. Senator Sumner, whom I met this evening, says Dixon came to him and asked, if a personal enemy, who abused, slandered, and defied him were before the Senate, would he vote for him. Sumner replied, No. Senator Doolittle admits he was in like manner approached; says it was embarrassing, for there is an implied understanding — a courtesy among Senators — that they will yield to the personal appeals of a Senator in appointments to office in his own town. I asked if it was possible that the Senate prostituted itself to gratify private animosities, — made itself a party to the personal quarrels of one of its members and gave him the means to wreak his vengeance on a worthy person without cause or justification? Doolittle attempted no defense; evidently did not like the attitude in which he was placed. Thurlow Weed is in town. He has been sent for, but my informant knows not for what purpose. It is, I learn, to consult in regard to a scheme of Seward to influence the New Hampshire and Connecticut elections. Some days since, Seward handed me a dispatch as I entered the President's office on Cabinet day, from Mr. Dayton at Paris, stating the French Government was pressing friendly mediation. I handed it back after reading, with the remark that it was wholly inadmissible. Seward made no reply, but handed the dispatch to others to read as they came in. There was, I think, a response similar to mine from each. When I heard that Seward's factotum, Weed, had been called here I thought at once of Dayton's dispatch and schemes of adjustment. Nous verrons. [In the lower House of Congress] after a violent attack by Calvert, Washburne, and a few others [on the subject of appointment of midshipmen], I was sustained by a vote of two to one, to the great chagrin of the clique, who, I am told, did not conceal their vexation.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 235-6

Lieutenant-Colonel Theodore Lyman to Elizabeth Russell Lyman, March 11, 1865

From Grant we got a despatch that he would come up, with some ladies and gentlemen, to see our left and to review a few troops. The General rode down to the terminus of the railroad (which is not very far from Hatcher's Run), and soon after came the train, with Grant and his party. Among them was our old friend Daddy Washburn, the same who came to the Rapid Ann, last May, to behold Grant swallow Lee at a mouthful, and — didn't see it! Two divisions of the 2d Corps were turned out under the eye of the redoubtable Humphreys. They made a fine appearance, marching past; but I could have cried to see the Massachusetts 20th with only a hundred muskets or so, and commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Curtis, whom I used to see at Culpeper with a lieutenant's shoulder-straps. How changed from last spring, when they passed in review with full ranks, and led by Abbot! . . .

That evening we were invited to City Point, to see a medal given to General Grant. This medal had been voted by Congress in honor of him and his soldiers, after the battle and capture of Vicksburg. And you now see the rationale of the Hon. Washburn's presence. He was to present it. The Corps commanders with a few aides, and some division commanders, were all the General took with him in the special train. We arrived about 8.30 P.M. and at 9 the ceremony began, in the upper saloon of the steamer Martyn, lying at the wharf. The solemnities were these: General Grant stood on one side of a small table, with an expression as if about to courageously have a large tooth out. On the other stood Washburn, with what seemed an ornamental cigar-box. Whereupon W., with few words, remarked that the Congress of the United States of Amerikay had resolved to present him a medal, and a copy of their resolutions engrossed on parchment. “General” (unrolling a scroll), “this is the copy of the resolutions, and I now hand it to you.” (Grant looked at the parchment, as much as to say, “That seems all right,” rolled it up, in a practical manner, and put it on the table.) “This, General” (opening the ornamental cigar-box, taking out a wooden bonbonnière and opening that), “is the medal, which I also hand to you, together with an autograph letter from President Lincoln.” The “all-right” expression repeated itself on Grant's face, as he put down the bonbonnière beside the scroll. Then he looked very fixedly at Mr. Washburn and slowly drew a sheet of paper from his pocket. Everyone was hushed, and there then burst forth the following florid eloquence: “Sir! I accept the medal. I shall take an early opportunity of writing a proper reply to the President. I shall publish an order, containing these resolutions, to the troops that were under my command before Vicksburg.” As he stopped, Major Pell drew a long breath and said: “I thought we were sure of a speech this time, but now we never shall get one out of him.” The medal was of gold, three pounds in weight; on one side a bad likeness of Grant; on the reverse a goddess, in an impossible position, who, as General Meade remarked, “seemed to keep a general furnishing shop of guns and sabres.” “What is the meaning of the allegory?” he enquired of the Lieutenant-General. “I don't know,” replied Grant, with entire simplicity, “I don't know, but I am going to learn, so as to be able to explain it to people!” Then the distinguished militaries crowded round to gaze. Major-General Ord, who can't get over his Irish blood, said: “I believe, sir, you are the first man who medalled with his battalion.” To which Grant, not taking the point in the faintest degree, replied gravely: “I don't know but I was.” There was a heavy crowd of Hectors, I can tell you. Generals Meade, Warren, Wright, Parke, Humphreys, Ord, Gibbon, Ayres, Griffin, Rawlins, Ingalls, etc., etc. Very few ladies. After this a moderate collation, and so home to bed.

SOURCE: George R. Agassiz, Editor, Meade’s Headquarters, 1863-1865: Letters of Colonel Theodore Lyman from the Wilderness to Appomattox, p. 318-20

Brigadier-General John A. Rawlins to Congressman Elihu B. Washburne, January 30, 1864 (Extract)

On my return from the North, I was pleased to find your very welcome and interesting letter of the 30th ult., and I hasten to assure you, your friendship for the General, your devotion to our common country and heroic manifestation of interest in the welfare and success of our army here, through evil as well as good report, in the dark of the Nation's despondency as well as in the light of its victories are truly and honestly appreciated, and to you, more than to any one in congress, the great heart of this army warms with gratitude as the true representative and bold and uncompromising defender. ... So give yourself no concern in the matter of the Cavalry regiment you speak of, for the general fully understands your motives, and knows them to be prompted solely by a desire for the public service and in friendship to him.

. . . I see by the papers the bill creating a lieutenant-generalcy is still undisposed of. As far as Gen. Grant may be regarded in connection with it, I only say that if the conferring of the distinguished honor on him would be the taking him out of the field or with a view to the superseding of Gen. Halleck, he would not desire it, for he feels that if he can be of service to the government in any place it is in command of the army in the field, and there is where he would remain if made a lieutenant-general; besides he has great confidence in and friendship for the general-in-chief and would, without regard to rank, be willing at all times to receive orders through him.

The advocacy of the New York Herald and other papers of the general for the presidency, gives him little concern; he is unambitious for the honor and will voluntarily put himself in no position nor permit himself to be placed in one he can prevent that will in the slightest manner embarrass the friends of the government in their present grand effort to enforce its rightful authority and restore the Union of the states. Of his views in this matter I suppose he has fully acquainted you.

The presence of Longstreet in East Tennessee is much to be regretted. Had Gen. Grant's orders been energetically, and with a broader judgment, executed by Gen. Burnside, Longstreet would have been forced to continue his retreat from Knoxville to beyond the Tennessee line. The General's official report will show the facts and orders and will be satisfactory, I have no doubt, to the government. Our forces in the Holston Valley, east of Knoxville, have been compelled by Longstreet to fall back toward Knoxville. Whether he intends to again undertake the capture of that place, or simply to extend his forage ground, is not as yet known. In either design, he must be foiled. Gen. Grant, Gen. W. F. Smith, and myself go forward to-morrow to Chattanooga that the General may be enabled to give his personal attention to affairs in the direction of Knoxville.

SOURCE: James H. Wilson, The Life of John A. Rawlins, p. 433-4

Brigadier-General John A. Rawlins to Mary Emeline Hurlburt Rawlins, April 14, 1864

Culpepper C. H., April 14, 1864.

. . . Spring seems really to be here, but it has brought with it no ploughman to “turn the glebe afield.” All is barrenness and desolation. The houses of the happy people who once enjoyed their possessions here, stand solitary and alone. No fences surround them to turn aside the horseman from his path of pleasure or of war. How blessed are the people of the North compared to these. Of this you have had personal experience. Would to God that the lessons war teaches a people whom it visits could be truly appreciated by those who have not seen its footprints on their own farms. They could then better understand what we are fighting for, and would with greater alacrity rally to the support and maintenance of the Government left them by Washington and his compeers.

Be assured, I am not one of earth's gloomy children, looking ever to the dark clouds. I am among the most hopeful. When a boy none pictured life more fair and full of pleasure, none looked forward to hope for happiness, with more eagerness or boyish glee, than I. In all this I have not changed. The pleasures of home and the happiness to be found in the bosom of my family alone I estimate above all earthly goods. . . .

Enclosed I send you the telegraphic despatch from the Honorable E. B. Washburne, informing me of my confirmation by the Senate. It is just received, and I have no doubt will make your heart glad. I assure you it pleases me, for while I never sought the rank, yet after having had it conferred upon me by appointment, I should have felt badly if I had been rejected by the Senate, especially when I have striven with whatever ability I possess to serve my country. You can see in all this Mr. Washburne's warm friendship for me. Enclosed also I hand you two letters from him to me, one dated December 21st, 1861, in reference to General Grant, and one written January 6th, 1862, in reply to mine answering his of December 21st.s My letter was a detailed statement on the subject to which his alludes. These letters you will not fail to preserve.  . . . I confide in you everything. The General is still in Washington, but telegraphs he will be here to-morrow. I am much better than for two or three days past, but not yet well. My appetite is returning, and when it is good I am generally in fair health. . . .

SOURCE: James H. Wilson, The Life of John A. Rawlins, p. 416-7

Brigadier-General John A. Rawlins to Mary Emeline Hurlburt Rawlins, April 9, 1864

Culpepper C. H., Va., April 9, 1864.

. . . Rain. The ride of yesterday was too much for me and has excited my cough.

Read the Sermon on the Mount — “the Lord's prayer lifted the gloom from my soul.”

To-day's information is that Lee has but thirty-five thousand infantry in our front, with 15,000 more at Lynchburg under Longstreet, or 50,000 in all, exclusive of cavalry and artillery. The rebel conscription has brought but few men to their ranks.

I am of the opinion that Lee's force is much larger than is stated above, but this statement does not vary much from the estimate made by Generals Meade and Butler.

Enclosed I send you what I had written Enos Ripley in December, 1862, from Oxford, Miss. It is hurriedly written but gives my impression of affairs at the time. It was never finished or sent, but please preserve it, for it may some time be of benefit to me¹  . . . I send you also a general order issued by General McPherson. You will see the point of interest in it; also the order from the adjutant general's office announcing General Grant's staff, in which you will not fail to see my name. I sent you the other day for preservation, without note or comment, a copy of a letter written by me to Hon. E. B. Washburne from the rear of Vicksburg, also General Grant's original order to his troops after the battle of Port Gibson.

_______________

¹ Not found.

SOURCE: James H. Wilson, The Life of John A. Rawlins, p. 414