John Tyler to James Buchanan, Saturday Evening, February 9, 1861

Saturday evening, February 9, 1861.

MY DEAR SIR: I communicated to Governor Pickens what passed between us as to Mr. Holt's letter, and I am happy to say that the reply, received a moment ago, leaves me no ground to fear any early disturbance. The whole subject is referred to the convention at Montgomery, as I plainly infer. The conclusion is in these words: "Everything which can be done consistently with the honor and safety of this State, to avoid collision and bloodshed, has been and will be the purpose of the authorities here."

Thus, my dear sir, the inquietude you expressed may be dismissed.

Very truly and faithfully yours,

JOHN TYLER.

SOURCES: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 612; John Bassett Moore, Editor, The Works of James Buchanan: Comprising His Speeches, State Papers and Private Correspondence, Vol. 11: 1860-1868, p. 142

Diary of Gideon Welles: February 1, 1866

Colonel Bolles and Eames have prepared an order for the President to sign for a mixed commission to try Semmes. I took it to the President this P.M. He expressed himself strongly against a military trial or military control. Wished the Navy to keep the case in its own hands. Said he wished to put no more in Holt's control than was absolutely necessary; that Holt was cruel and remorseless, made so perhaps by his employment and investigations; that his tendencies and conclusions were very bloody. The President said he had a large number of Holt's decisions now—pointing to the desk—which he disliked to take up; that all which came from that quarter partook of the traits of Nero and Draco. I have never heard him express himself so decidedly in regard to Holt, but have on one or two previous occasions perceived that his confidence in the Judge Advocate-General was shaken.

I long since was aware that Holt was severe and unrelenting, and am further compelled to think that, with a good deal of mental vigor and strength as a writer, he has strange weaknesses. He is credulous and often the dupe of his own imaginings. Believes men guilty on shadowy suspicions, and is ready to condemn them without trial.

Stanton has sometimes brought forward singular papers relating to conspiracies, and dark and murderous designs in which he had evident faith, and Holt has assured him in his suspicions.

I am glad that the President does not consider him infallible, and that he is guarded against the worst traits; the others will develop themselves, if they have not already.

I stated to the President that I would not advise a military, naval, or mixed commission to try Semmes for treason or piracy, for the civil tribunals had cognizance of those offenses. But if he had violated the laws of war for which he could not be arraigned in court, there was perhaps a necessity that we should act through a commission. He realized the distinction and the propriety of acting and wished me to bring the subject before the full Cabinet.

One of my troubles in the matter of the charges and specifications has been to limit our action to violations of the law of war. The lawyers who have it in charge, especially Colonel Bolles, are for embracing a wider range. He wishes to figure in the case.

Senator Dixon gave me to-day a slip from the New Haven Courier, written by Babcock, the Collector, taking issue with Deming in his late speech. Babcock sustains the policy of the President, and his article is very creditable. Dixon wished me to write him and says McCulloch will do so. I wish some of our more reliable friends would have the sagacity and determination to do this subject justice.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 423-4

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, December 12, 1865

Not a very long session of the Cabinet. Some conversation in regard to the Rebel leaders led me to inquire whether it might not be best to parole Mallory, who has written me personally. He offers to make disclosures and assist in reëstablishing Union feeling. Stanton objected; says Judge Holt advises his trial, etc.

Senator Nye called and had a long talk with me, chiefly in regard to the Rebels. Is pretty strongly touched with the Sumner notions, but seems disposed to recant and consider suggestions. To him and others I have stated my objections to the Stevens resolution. Most of the Members have said their principal object was to have the two houses in perfect accord and of one mind. I have declared this an indirect attempt to defeat or evade the Constitution, which intended separate action. Hence the two branches. This proposed committee, I maintain, is revolutionary and calculated to promote, if not designed to create, alienation and sectional parties. Nye says the resolution will be disemboweled and of little moment, but Nye himself is unreliable.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 395-6

Diary of George Mifflin Dallas, January 16, 1861

I have been kept for a week, and am still, in a state of great anxiety about the dangerous political excitements at home. The President has taken an attitude less friendly to the secessionists. This has been owing, it would seem, to the occupation of Fort Moultrie and the seizure of a revenue cutter, in the harbour of Charleston, by the South Carolina authorities. General Floyd, as Secretary of War, had pledged his honour to Governor Pickens that there should be no change in the status of the fortifications in the harbour.

Major Anderson, in command, with prudent strategy, shifted his little garrison of twenty men from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter. The South Carolina Commissioners at Washington protested, alleging breach of faith. Floyd demanded orders to Anderson to go back. The President declined. Governor Pickens sent militia into Fort Moultrie and seized a United States cutter. Floyd resigned on 29th of December, and his resignation was quietly accepted on the 31st by the President, who appointed Postmaster-General Holt to conduct the department until a successor was named. The President has addressed Congress, announced his determination to protect the property and collect the revenue of the United States with all the power at his disposal, and is said to have directed the frigate Brooklyn to be held in readiness at Norfolk, while two revenue cutters are proceeding to Charleston harbour, on board which a new Collector, McIntyre, of Pennsylvania, will exact the duties on imports. In the interim reinforcements are being sent to Southern garrisons, as a determination to seize them has shown itself in Georgia, Alabama, and North Carolina. These facts, if well founded, place the country in imminent risk of civil war; and if, at the bottom of the whole, there exist, as Mr. Daniel, our Minister to Turin, vehemently assured me on Monday last was the case, an immense majority in the South who desire disunion and have been preparing to accomplish it for twenty years, it would seem that a sanguinary convulsion is unavoidable. Perhaps a large movement of militia, similar to the one made by Washington in 1794 against our Whiskey Insurrection, would overawe the disaffected and restore tranquillity. Certainly, South Carolina has taken, by capturing forts and cutters, a more decisively insurrectionary character than could be attributed to the disorderly riots of Pennsylvania.

My old friend "Betsey Bonaparte" and her son have enlisted Berryer and Legrand in a trial to come off on the 25th inst., before the Court of First Instance in Paris, asserting the validity of the marriage of Jerome in Baltimore in 1803, and claiming to share in the property he has left. If the marriage be sustained, the necessary result would be the illegitimacy of Prince Napoleon and Princess Mathilde. Here is fine garbage for Imperial scandal! and "Betsey" is not one, though she can't lack much of eighty, to shrink in the pursuit of money or to be scared by a crown.

SOURCE: George Mifflin Dallas, Diary of George Mifflin Dallas, While United States Minister to Russia 1837 to 1839, and to England 1856 to 1861, Volume 3, p. 428-30

Diary of Gideon Welles: Wednesday, August 30, 1865

At my special request the President made an order restoring General Hawley to duty, who had been mustered out of service. Had some conversation with General Hawley, who was an original and earnest Abolitionist, on political subjects. I perceive that the negro is pretty strong on his brain. Advised him to keep within constitutional limitations and not permit humanitarian impulses to silence reason or break our governmental restraints. Suggested that he should also caution Warner not to commit his paper too strongly and inconsiderately to Radical impulses.

There is an apparent determination among those who are ingrained Abolitionists to compel the government to impose conditions on the Rebel States that are wholly unwarranted. Prominent men are striving to establish a party on the basis of equality of races in the Rebel States, for which the people are not prepared, perhaps they never will be, for these very leaders do not believe in social equality, nor will they practice it. Mr. Sumner, who is an unmarried man, has striven to overcome what seems a natural repugnance. A negro lawyer has been presented by him to practice in the Supreme Court, and extra demonstrations of that kind have been made by him and Chief Justice Chase. Sumner, I think, has become a devotee in this matter; it is his specialty, and, not being a Constitutionalist in politics, he is sincere, I have no doubt, in his schemes. I cannot say quite as much in favor of the Chief Justice. His work is connected more closely with political party aspirations. Sumner is not divested of them. General Hawley is of that school. Wants to do for the negro. His old associates are on that idea. Many of them — most of them would assume, and have the government assume, arbitrary power, regardless of the Constitution, to carry into effect their opinions and wishes. General H. is too intelligent for this, yet it is evident he would strain a point for the negro.

Judge Blair has been making a speech at Clarksville in Maryland which appears to me to be in some respects injudicious just at this time. Yet it is a demonstration deliberately made and for a purpose. He anticipates a new formation of parties and is preparing for it in advance, all of which may be well, provided he does not go too fast and too far. I think his speech is too intensely personal to be effective. This is not the time to make assaults on Seward, perhaps not on Stanton, unless confident not only that he is right but that he will be sustained. He will not be supported by the press of either party. I am not certain that he wishes to be at present; but whether, if he loses the general confidence, he can regain it when he exhibits so much acrimony, is doubtful.

I think better of Blair than most persons will on reading his speech. He is not a malignant or revengeful man; is generous, frank, truthful, honest; scorns a mean thing, detests duplicity, and abhors a liar. He has good political and general intelligence, understands men generally very well, but I think is sometimes imposed upon. In his friendships and hates he occupies no middle ground, and sometimes, I think, judges severely and harshly. I see no reason for the onslaught on Seward at this time.

Holt is also assailed, as if Seward and Stanton were not enough. It is painful to have a man like Holt denounced. He is a stern, stubborn, relentless man, has his faults, but I believe is a patriot and a statesman of ability. I have esteemed him to be the ablest man in Buchanan's cabinet, and beyond any other one the principal mind to sustain the national integrity in that combination during the winter preceding the advent of President Lincoln, and I regretted that he was not preferred to Stanton as the successor of Cameron if one of that cabinet were taken. Why Blair should attack Holt, I do not understand, unless because of his identification with Stanton, which is certainly not to his credit. Blair brings out a singular and unfortunate letter of Holt's to some one in Pittsburg, which had escaped my memory, and which can hardly be excused in these days. But the changes and vicissitudes which have occurred during the last few eventful years have taught me to have forbearance for men's utterances and actions. My own language was sometimes mild and gentle when it should have been strong to resist the coming storm which I vainly hoped might be averted; at other times it was rash and almost violent when mildness and conciliation were necessary. Human foresight is short and insufficient, and indulgence is due to men in positions of responsibility who were compelled to act, and who in view of the calamities that overhung the country strove to extricate the government and country.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 369-71

Diary of Gideon Welles: September 28, 1865

I have been absent during most of the month of September in my native State and among the scenes of my childhood and youth. Change is there. Of the companions who fifty years ago it was my pleasure to love, and who I truly believe loved me, few, only few, remain, while of those who were in middle life or more advanced age, men who encouraged and stood by me, who voluntarily elected me to the Legislature when I was but twenty-four, scarcely one remains. Their children and grandchildren to some extent occupy their places, but a different class of persons have come into the old town and much altered its character.

Little of importance has transpired during the month. The rebellious States are reorganizing their governments and institutions, — submitting to results they could not arrest or avert. In the Free States, political conventions have been held and movements made to revivify old parties, and, on the part of the extremists, or Radicals, an exhibition of intense hate towards the Rebels which bodes mischief has manifested itself.

In New York an extraordinary step, a coup d'état, was taken by the Democratic organization, which indorsed President Johnson and nominated Union men to some of the most important places on the ticket. A counter move was made by the Union party, which nominated an entire new ticket, and passed resolutions not remarkable in any respect.

The Massachusetts Republican convention did not like to take ground antagonistic to the Administration, although the leaders, particularly Sumner and his friends, cannot suppress their hostile feelings. Their resolutions, adopted at Worcester, are very labored, and abound more in words than distinct ideas, reminding one of the old woman who wished to scream but dared not.

In Connecticut the question of amending the State Constitution so as to erase the word "white" is pending. Some feeling among the old Abolitionists and leading politicians was exhibited, and they may, and probably will, work up some feeling in its favor; but generally the people are indifferent or opposed to it. But for the national questions before the country, the amendment would be defeated; the probabilities appeared to me in its favor. I avoided interfering in the question or expressing an opinion on the subject, but the partisans are determined to draw me out. It is asserted in the Times that I am opposed to negro suffrage. Two of the editors deny this and have so written me. I replied in a hasty note that no one was authorized to say I had expressed opposition to it. Since then I have had a telegram from the editor of the Press, Warner, asking if I am in favor of negro suffrage. Disliking to be catechized in this way and not disposed to give a categorical answer, I replied that I was in favor of intelligence, not of color for qualification for suffrage. The truth is I have little or no feeling on the subject, and as we require that the electors shall read, and have few negroes in Connecticut, I acquiesce in, rather than advocate, the amendment. I would not enslave the negro, but his enfranchisement is another question, and until he is better informed, it is not desirable that he should vote. The great zeal of Sumner and the Abolitionists in behalf of the negro voting has no responsive sympathy with me. It is a species of fanaticism, zeal without discretion. Whenever the time arrives that he should vote, the negro will probably be permitted. I am no advocate for social equality, nor do I labor for political or civil equality with the negro. I do not want him at my table, nor do I care to have him in the jury-box, or in the legislative hall, or on the bench. The negro does not vote in Connecticut, nor is he taxed. There are but a few hundreds of them. Of these perhaps not half can read and consequently cannot vote, while, if the restriction is removed, all will be taxed.

Judge Blair came to see me the day after I came back. He is preparing a reply to Judge Holt. During my absence the papers have published a statement made by Mr. Fox in relation to the Sumter expedition, which was sent to the Senate as an appendix to my reply to a call of the Senate, but that body declined to receive F.'s statement. It comes in now, aptly, with Blair's speech, and will doubtless be considered a part of the scheme. General Meigs hastened too fast to reply in order to assure Mr. Seward.

There are serious mistakes or blunders in Meigs's letter, which, however, will doubtless be corrected. Blair wished to get the armistice signed by Holt, Toucey, and Mallory, and asked if I remembered it. I told him I did, and that we had it on our files. But on sending for the volume I find it is only a copy. Yet my convictions were as positive as Blair's that the original was in the Navy Department. I thought I remembered the paper distinctly, its color and general appearance, but the copy does not correspond with my recollection, yet I cannot doubt it is the paper which I saw. From this difference I am admonished of the uncertainty and fallibility of human testimony.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 372-4

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, July 21, 1865

A very warm day. Thermometer 90 and upward. Chief subject at the Cabinet was the offense and the disposition of J. Davis. The President, it was evident, was for procuring a decision or having the views of the Cabinet. Seward thought the question might as well be disposed of now as at any time. He was satisfied there could be no conviction of such a man, for any offense, before any civil tribunal, and was therefore for arraigning him for treason, murder, and other offenses before a military commission. Dennison, who sat next him, immediately followed, and thought if the proof was clear and beyond question that Davis was a party to the assassination, then he would have him by all means brought before a military tribunal, but unless the proof was clear, beyond a peradventure, he would have him tried for high treason before the highest civil court. When asked what other court there was than the circuit court, he said he did not wish him tried before the court of this District. And when further asked to be more explicit on the subject of the question of murder or assassination, he said he would trust that matter to Judge Holt and the War Department, and, he then added, the Attorney-General. McCulloch would prefer, if there is to be a trial, that it should be in the courts, but was decidedly against any trial at present, would postpone the whole subject. Stanton was for a trial by the courts for treason, the highest of crimes, and, by the Constitution, only the courts could try him for that offense. Otherwise he would say a military commission. For all other offenses he would arraign him before the military commission. Subsequently, after examining the Constitution, he retracted the remark that the Constitution made it imperative that the trial for treason should be in the civil courts, yet he did not withdraw the preference he had expressed. I was emphatically for the civil court and an arraignment for treason; for an early institution of proceedings; and was willing the trial should take place in Virginia. If our laws or system were defective, it was well to bring them to a test. I had no doubt he was guilty of treason and believed he would be convicted, wherever tried. Harlan would not try him before a civil court unless satisfied there would be conviction. If there was a doubt, he wanted a military commission. He thought it would be much better to pardon Davis at once than to have him tried and not convicted. Such a result, he believed, would be most calamitous. He would, therefore, rather than run that risk prefer a military court. Speed was for a tribunal and for a trial for treason; but until the Rebellion was entirely suppressed he doubted if there could be a trial for treason. Davis is now a prisoner of war and was entitled to all the rights of belligerent, etc., etc. I inquired if Davis was not arrested and a reward offered for him and paid by our government as for other criminals.

The question of counsel and the institution of proceedings was discussed. In order to get the sense of each of the members, the President thought it would be well to have the matter presented in a distinct form. Seward promptly proposed that Jefferson Davis should be tried for treason, assassination, murder, conspiring to burn cities, etc., by a military commission. The question was so put, Seward and Harlan voting for it, the others against, with the exception of myself. The President asked my opinion. I told him I did not like the form in which the question was put. I would have him tried for military offenses by a military court, but for civil offenses I wanted the civil courts. I thought he should be tried for treason, and it seemed to me that the question before us should first be the crime and then the court. The others assented and the question put was, Shall J. D. be tried for treason? There was a unanimous response in the affirmative. Then the question as to the court. Dennison moved a civil court. All but Seward and Harlan were in the affirmative; they were in the negative.

Stanton read a letter from Fortress Monroe, saying Davis' health had been failing for the last fortnight; that the execution of the assassins had visibly affected him. Davis remarked that President Johnson was “quick on the trigger.”

I this day took possession of the rooms in the new wing which had been prepared and furnished for the Secretary of the Navy.

The solicitor, Mr. Bolles, arrived to-day and entered upon his duties so far as to take possession of his rooms. He was not anxious, I perceived, to enter upon his new duties on Friday, although he did not assign that as the reason for delay.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 337-40

Diary of Gideon Welles: May 2, 1865

A very protracted session of the Cabinet. The chief subject was the Treasury regulations. There was unanimity, except McCulloch, who clings to the schemes of Chase and Fessenden. The latter can, however, hardly be said to have schemes of his own. But the policy of Chase and his tools, which F. adopted, is adhered to by McCulloch, who is new in place and fears to strike out a policy of his own. He fears to pursue any other course than the one which has been prescribed.

McCulloch is a correct man in business routine but is not an experienced politician or educated statesman. He wants experience in those respects, and needs grasp and power to extricate himself from among a rotten and corrupt swarm of leeches who have been planted in the Treasury. Some legal points being raised, the subject was referred to Attorney-General Speed to examine and report.

Stanton produced a paper from Judge-Advocate-General Holt, to the effect that Jeff Davis, Jacob Thompson, Sanders,¹ and others were implicated in the conspiracy to assassinate President Lincoln and others. A proclamation duly prepared was submitted by Stanton with this paper of Holt, which he fully indorses, offering rewards for their apprehension. McCulloch and Hunter, whose opinions were asked, went with Stanton without a question. I, on being asked, remarked if there was proof of the complicity of those men, as stated there was, they certainly ought to be arrested, and that reward was proper, but I had no facts.

_______________

¹ George N. Sanders, a Confederate agent in Canada.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 299-300

Diary of Gideon Welles: May 11, 1865

The papers, and especially those of New York, are complaining of the court which is to try the assassins, and their assault is the more severe because it is alleged that the session is to be secret. This subject is pretty much given over to the management of the War Department, since Attorney-General Speed and Judge-Advocate-General Holt affirm that to be legal, and a military court the only real method of eliciting the whole truth. It would be impolitic, and, I think, unwise and injudicious, to shut off all spectators and make a “Council of Ten" of this Commission. The press will greatly aggravate the objections, and do already.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 305

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, April 3, 1865

Intelligence of the evacuation of Petersburg and the capture of Richmond was received this A.M., and the city has been in an uproar through the day.

Most of the clerks and others left the Departments, and there were immense gatherings in the streets. Joy and gladness lightened every countenance. Secessionists and their sympathizers must have retired, and yet it seemed as if the entire population, the male portion of it, was abroad in the streets. Flags were flying from every house and store that had them. Many of the stores were closed, and Washington appeared patriotic beyond anything ever before witnessed. The absence of the Assistant, Chief Clerk, and Solicitor compelled my attendance until after 3 P.M. close of mail.

Attorney-General Speed and myself met by agreement at Stanton's room last night at nine, to learn the condition of affairs with the armies. We had previously been two or three times there during the day. It was about eleven before a dispatch was received and deciphered. The conversation between us three was free, and, turning on events connected with the Rebellion, our thoughts and talk naturally traveled back to the early days of the insurrection and the incipient treason in Buchanan's cabinet. Stanton became quite communicative. He was invited, as I have previously understood, through the influence of Black. Says Buchanan was a miserable coward, so alarmed and enfeebled by the gathering storm as to be mentally and physically prostrated, and he was apprehensive the President would not survive until the fourth of March. The discussion in regard to the course to be pursued towards Anderson and the little garrison at Sumter, became excited and violent in December, 1860. On the 27th or 29th of that month there were three sessions of the Cabinet in council. Sitting late at night, Buchanan, wrapped in an old dressing-gown or cloak, crouched in a corner near the fire, trembled like an aspen leaf. He asked what he should do. Declared that Stanton said he ought to be hung and that others of the Cabinet concurred with him. This, Stanton said, grew out of his remarks that if they yielded up Sumter to the conspirators it was treason, and no more to be defended than Arnold's. In the discussion Holt was very emphatic and decided in his loyalty, Toucey the most abject and mean. When called upon by the President for his opinion, Toucey said he was for ordering Anderson to return immediately to Fort Moultrie. He was asked if he was aware that Moultrie was dismantled, and replied that would make no difference, Anderson had gone to Sumter without orders, and against orders of Floyd, and he would order him back forthwith. Stanton says he inquired of Toucey if he ever expected to go back to Connecticut after taking that position, and Toucey said he did, but asked Stanton why he put the question. Stanton replied that he had inquired in good faith, that he might know the character of the people in Connecticut or Toucey's estimate of them, for were he, S., to take that position and it were known to the people of Pennsylvania, he should expect they would stone him the moment he set foot in the State, stone him through the State, and tie a stone around his neck and throw him in the river when he reached Pittsburg. Stanton gives Toucey the most despicable character in the Buchanan cabinet, not excepting Floyd or Thompson.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 272-4

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, October 13, 1864

The President is greatly importuned and pressed by cunning intrigues just at this time. Thurlow Weed and Raymond are abusing his confidence and good nature badly. Hay says they are annoying the President sadly. This he tells Mr. Fox, who informs me. They want, Hay says, to control the Navy Yard but dislike to come to me, for I give them no favorable response. They claim that every mechanic or laborer who does not support the Administration should be turned out of employment. Hay's representations alarmed Fox, who made it a point to call on the President. F. reports that the President was feeling very well over the election returns, and, on the subject of the Navy Yard votes, expressed his intention of not further interfering but will turn the whole matter over to me whenever the politicians call upon him. I have no doubt he thinks so, but when Weed and Raymond, backed by Seward, insist that action must be taken, he will hardly know how to act. His convictions and good sense will place him with me, but they will alarm him with forebodings of disaster if he is not vindictive. Among other things an appeal has been made to him in behalf of Scofield, a convicted fraudulent contractor, who is now in prison to serve out his sentence. Without consulting me, the President has referred the subject to Judge-Advocate-General Holt, to review and report to him. Holt knows nothing of the case, and, with his other duties, cannot examine this matter thoroughly. Why should the President require him, an officer of another Department, wholly unacquainted with the subject, to report upon it? There are probably two thousand pages of manuscript. The New York party jobbers are in this thing. They will . . . try to procure [Scofield's] release and pardon for a consideration.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 175-6

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, October 15, 1864

The speeches of Jeff Davis betoken the close of the War. The rebellion is becoming exhausted, and I hope ere many months will be entirely suppressed. Not that there may not be lingering banditti to rob and murder for a while longer, the offspring of a demoralized state of society, but the organized rebellion cannot long endure.

One of the assistants from the office of Judge-Advocate Holt came from that office to make some inquiries as to the views of the Department in Scofield's case. He says that Thurlow Weed and Raymond are very urgent in the matter, and that some one named Williamson is active and pressing. I have no doubt a heavy fee lies behind a pardon in this case, which is pressed upon the President as if it were all-essential that it should be granted before the election. It pains me that the President should listen to such fellows in such a matter, or allow himself to be tampered with at all. The very fact that he avoids communicating with me on the subject is complimentary to me; at the same time it is evident that he has some conception of the unworthy purpose of the intriguers I mention.

General Banks called on me yesterday formally before leaving Washington. I have not previously seen him since he returned, though I hear he has called on part of the Cabinet. We had some conversation respecting his command and administration in Louisiana. The new constitution, the climate, etc., were discussed. Before leaving, he alluded to the accusations that had been made against him, and desired to know if there was anything specific. I told him there had been complaints about cotton and errors committed; that these were always numerous when there were reverses. That, he said, was very true, but he had been informed Admiral Porter had gone beyond that, and was his accuser. I remarked that several naval officers had expressed themselves dissatisfied, — some of them stronger than Admiral Porter, — that others besides naval officers had also complained.

The Republican of this evening has an article evidently originating with General Banks, containing some unworthy flings at both Lee and Porter. Banks did not write the paragraph nor perhaps request it to be written, but the writer is his willing tool and was imbued with General Banks's feelings. He is doubtless Hanscom, a fellow without conscience when his interest is concerned, an intimate and, I believe, a relative, of Banks.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 177-8

Statement of Messrs. Miles And Keitt, of what Transpired Between the President and the South Carolina Delegation, between January 1 & 14, 1861

In compliance with the request of the Convention, we beg leave to make the following statement:

On Saturday, the 8th of December, several of the South Carolina delegation, including ourselves, waited upon the President. At this time, there was a growing belief that reinforcements were on the eve of being sent to the forts in Charleston harbor. It was known that the subject was frequently and earnestly discussed in the Cabinet. It was rumored that General Cass and Mr. Holt were urgent that reinforcements should be sent. Upon our being announced, the President, who was then in Cabinet Council, came out to us in the ante-room. We at once entered into a conversation upon the topic, which was so closely occupying his thoughts as well as ours. The President seemed much disturbed and moved. He told us that he had had a painful interview with the wife of Major Anderson, who had come on from New York to see him. She had manifested great anxiety and distress at the situation of her husband, whom she seemed to consider in momentary danger of an attack from an excited and lawless mob. The President professed to feel a deep responsibility resting upon him to protect the lives of Major Anderson and his command. We told him that the news that reinforcements were on their way to Charleston, would be the surest means of provoking what Mrs. Anderson apprehended, and what he so much deprecated. We said, further, that we did not believe that Major Anderson was in any danger of such an attack; that the general sentiment of the State was against any such proceeding. That, prior to the action of the State Convention, then only ten days off, we felt satisfied that there would be no attempt to molest the forts in any way. That, after the Convention met, — while we could not possibly undertake to say what that body would see fit to do, — we yet hoped and believed that nothing would be done until we had first endeavored, by duly accredited Commissioners, to negotiate for a peaceful settlement of all matters, including the delivery of the forts, between South Carolina and the Federal Government. At the same time, we again reiterated our solemn belief that any change in the then existing condition of things in Charleston harbor, would, in the excited state of feeling at home, inevitably precipitate a collision. The impression made upon us was, that the President was wavering, and had not decided what course he would pursue. He said he was glad to have had this conversation with us, but would prefer that we should give him a written memorandum of the substance of what we had said. This we did on Monday, the 10th. It was in these words:

Commissioners of the State of South Carolina to James Buchanan, December 9, 1860

The President did not like the word “provided,” because it looked as if we were binding him while avowing that we had no authority to commit the Convention. We told him that we did not so understand it. We were expressing our convictions and belief, predicated upon the maintenance of a certain condition of things, which maintenance was absolutely, and entirely in his power. If he maintained such condition, then we believed that collision would be avoided until the attempt at a peaceable negotiation had failed. If he did not, then we solemnly assured him that we believed collision must inevitably, and at once, be precipitated. He seemed satisfied, and said it was not his intention to send reinforcements, or make any change. We explained to him what we meant by the words '”relative military status,” as applied to the forts; mentioned the difference between Major Anderson's occupying his then position at Fort Moultrie, and throwing himself into Fort Sumter. We stated that the latter step would be equivalent to reinforcing the garrison, and would just as certainly as the sending of fresh troops, lead to the result which we both desired to avoid. When we rose to go, the President said in substance, “After all, this is a matter of honor among gentlemen. I do not know that any paper or writing is necessary. We understand each other.” One of the delegation, just before leaving the room, remarked, “Mr. President, you have determined to let things remain as they are, and not to send reinforcements; but, suppose that you were hereafter to change jour policy for any reason, what then? That would put us, who are willing to use our personal influence to prevent any attack upon the forts before Commissioners are sent on to Washington, in rather an embarrassing position.” “Then,” said the President, “I would first return you this paper.” We do not pretend to give the exact words on either side, but we are sure we give the sense of both.

The above is a full and exact account of what passed between the President and the delegation. The President, in his letter to our Commissioners, tries to give the impression that our “understanding” or “agreement” was not a “pledge.” We confess, we are not sufficiently versed in the wiles of diplomacy to feel the force of this “distinction without a difference.” Nor can we understand how, in “a matter of honor among gentlemen,” in which “no paper or writing is necessary,” the very party who was willing to put it on that high footing can honorably descend to mere verbal criticism, to purge himself of what all gentlemen and men of honour must consider a breach of faith. The very fact that we (the representatives from South Carolina) were not authorized to commit or “pledge” the State, were not treating with the President as accredited ministers with full powers, but as gentlemen assuming, to a certain extent, the delicate task of' undertaking to foreshadow the course and policy of the State, should have made the President the more ready to strengthen our hands to bring about and carry out that course and policy which he professed to have as much at heart as we had. While we were not authorized to say that the Convention would not order the occupation of the forts immediately after secession, and prior to the sending on of Commissioners, the President, as Commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, could most positively say, that so long as South Carolina abstained from attacking and seizing the forts, he would not send reinforcements to them, or allow their relative military status to be changed. We were acting in the capacity of gentlemen holding certain prominent positions, and anxious to exert such influence as we might possess, to effect a peaceful solution of pending political difficulties, and prevent, if possible, the horrors of war. The President was acting in a double capacity; not only as a gentleman, whose influence in carrying out his share of the understanding, or agreement, was potential, but as the head of the army, and, therefore, having the absolute control of the whole matter of reinforcing or transferring the garrison at Charleston. But we have dwelt long enough upon this point. Suffice it to say, that considering the President as bound in honor, if not by treaty stipulation, not to make any change in the forts, or to send reinforcements to them, unless they were attacked, we of the delegation who were elected to the Convention, felt equally bound in honor to do everything on our part to prevent any premature collision. This Convention can bear us witness as to whether or not we endeavored honorably to carry out our share of the agreement.

The published debates at the very commencement of the session, contain the evidence of our good faith. We trusted the President. We believed his wishes concurred with his policy, and that both were directed to avoiding any inauguration of hostilities. We were confirmed in our confidence, and reassured in our belief by a significant event which took place subsequent to our interview. He allowed his premier Cabinet officer, an old and tried friend to resign, rather than yield to his solicitations for the reinforcement of the garrison at Charleston. We urged this as a convincing proof of his firmness and sincerity. But how have we been deceived! The news of Major Anderson's coup produced a sudden and unexpected change in the President's policy. While declaring that his withdrawal from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter was “without orders, and contrary to orders,” he yet refused, for twelve hours, to take any action in the matter. For twelve hours, therefore, without any excuse, he refused to redeem his plighted word. No subsequent acts on the part of our State — no after reasons — can wipe away the stain which he suffered to rest upon his “honor as a gentleman,” while those hours, big with portentous events, rolled slowly by. His Secretary of War, impatient of a delay, every moment of which he felt touched his own honor, resigned. He did so solely on the ground that the faith of the government — solemly pledged — was broken, if it failed promptly to undo what had been done contrary to its wishes — against its settled policy — and in violation of its distinct agreement. The President accepted his resignation without comment. He did not attempt to disabuse the mind of his Secretary as to what was the true position of the Government. What a spectacle does the President's vacillating and disingenuous course present! He allows one Secretary to resign rather than abandon a policy which he has agreed upon. Scarcely have a few short weeks elapsed, and he accepts the resignation of another, rather than adhere to that very policy. He makes an agreement with gentlemen which, while he admits that they have faithfully kept it on their part, he himself evades and repudiates. And this he does rather than redress a wrong — correct an error — what he himself considers an error — committed by a subordinate, without his orders, and contrary to his wishes! It was at least due to Mr. Floyd, who, as one of his Cabinet, had officially and personally stood by his administration from its very commencement — through good report, and through evil report — to have explained to him that he was, in the President's opinion, laboring under a misapprehension. At least, to have said to him, “you are mistaken about this matter — do not leave me on a false issue.” But no; he coldly, ungraciously, yet promptly, receives the resignation without a syllable of remonstrance, and thus tacitly, but unequivocally, accepts without shame the issue presented. He does not deny that the faith of his government is pledged, but he deliberately refuses to redeem it.

WM. PORCHER MILES.

LAURENCE M. KEITT.

SOURCE: The Correspondence Between the Commissioners of the State of So. Ca. to the Government at Washington and the President of the United States, p. 21-6, Published in The Richmond Daily Dispatch, Richmond, Virginia, January 14, 1861, p. 1

Gustavus V. Fox to Virginia Woodbury Fox, February 7, 1861

7th Feb., 1861

Dr. V.

I have determined to remain here a day or two longer at the earnest instigation of Aunt Minna — and as Charles will probably return with me.

I think there is a hope that S. Carolina will not attack Sumpter and that reinforcements therefore are unnecessary. I would not trust them but old Buck may know better. My plan will be adopted if it becomes certain that reinforcements must be sent. I had several interviews with the Gen^l, Secy of War and the officer from Sumpter.

Do not expect me until Sunday morning at the farthest.

All send love and your ma is certainly expected — no will not be taken.

Aff

Gus

The Union looks better—

SOURCE: Robert Means Thompson & Richard Wainwright, Editors, Publications of the Naval Historical Society, Volume 9: Confidential Correspondence of Gustavus Vasa Fox, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, 1861-1865, Volume 1, p. 6-7

Diary of Salmon P. Chase: January 12, 1862

At church in the morning.  Good, plain sermon. Wished much to join in communion, but felt myself to subject to temptation to sin. After church went to see Cameron by appointment, but being obliged to meet the President, etc., at one, could only excuse myself. At President's, found Generals McDowell, Franklin, and Meigs, and Seward and Blair. Meigs decided against dividing forces; in favor of battles in front. President said McClellan's health was much improved; and thought it best to adjourn until to-morrow; and have all then present, attend, with McC. at three. Home, and talk, and reading. Dinner. Cameron came in. Advised loan in Holland, and recommended Brooks, Lewis, and another whom I have forgotten. Then turned to department matters; and we talked of his going to Russia, and Stanton as successor; and he proposed I should again see the President. I first proposed seeing Seward, to which he assented. He declared himself determined to maintain himself at the head of his department, if he remained; and to resist, hereafter, all interferences. I told him I would, in that event, stand by him faithfully. He and I drove to Willard's, where I left him, and went myself to Seward's. I told him, at once, what was in my mind — that I thought the President and Cameron were both willing that C. should go to Russia. He seemed to receive the matter as new; except so far as suggested by me last night. Wanted to know who would succeed Cameron. I said Holt and Stanton had been named; that I feared Holt might embarrass us, on the slavery question, and might not prove quite equal to the emergency; that Stanton was a good lawyer and full of energy; but I could not, of course, judge him as an executive officer as well as he (S.) could, for he knew him when he was in Buchanan's Cabinet. Seward replied that he saw much of him then; that he was of great force; full of expedients, and thoroughly loyal. Finally, he agreed to the whole thing; and promised to go with me, to talk with the President about it, to-morrow. Just at this point, Cameron came in, with a letter from the President, proposing his nomination to Russia, in the morning. He was quite offended; supposing the letter intended as a dismissal; and, therefore, discourteous. We both assured him it could not be so. Finally, he concluded to retain the letter till morning; and then go and see the President. Seward was expecting General Butler; and Cameron said he ought to be sent off immediately. I said, “Well, let's leave Seward to order him off at once.” C. laughed; and we went off together, I taking him to his house. Before parting, I told him what had passed between me and Seward concerning Stanton, with which he was gratified. I advised him to go to the President in the morning, express his thanks for the consideration with which his wishes, made known through me, as well as by himself orally, had been treated, and tell him frankly, how desirable it was to him that his successor should be a Pennsylvanian, and should be Stanton. I said I thought that his wish, supported as it would be by Seward and myself, would certainly be gratified, and told him that the President had already mentioned Stanton, in a way which indicated that no objection on his part would be made. I said, also, that, if he wished, I would see Seward, and would go to the President, after he had left him, and urge the point. He asked, why not come in when we should be there; and I assented to this. We parted, and I came home. A day which may have — and, seemingly, must have — great bearing on affairs. I fear Mr. Seward may think Cameron's coming into his house pre-arranged, and that I was not dealing frankly. I feel satisfied, however, that I have acted right, and with just deference to all concerned, and have in no respect deviated from the truth.*

_______________

* Warden’s “Private Life and Public Services of Salmon P. Chase.”

SOURCES: Frederick W. Seward, Seward at Washington as Senator and Secretary of State, p. 44-5; John Niven, Editor, The Salmon P. Chase Papers, Volume 1: Journals, 1828-1872, p. 324-6

Major-General Henry W. Halleck to Elizabeth Hamilton Halleck, January 15, 1862

ST. Louis, Jan. 15, 1862.

MY DEAR * * * *

I am very sorry to hear that Mr. Stanton succeeds Mr. Cameron as Sect'y of War. I was in hopes that Mr. Holt would be appointed. Mr. Stanton does not like me, and of course will take the first opportunity he can to injure me. I shall take my precautions accordingly so as not to give him a chance. * * *

H. W. H.

SOURCE: The Collector, New York, New York, Volume 21, No. 3, January 1908, p. 29

Joseph Holt to Abraham Lincoln, January 15, 1862

St Louis Jan 15th 1862

Dear Sir.

I cannot repress the desire that I feel as an American citizen to thank you — which I do from my heart — for the appointment of the present Secretary of War. In him you will find a friend true as steel, & a support, which no pressure from within or from without, will ever shake. It was my fortune to know him during the darkest days of the late administration & I think I know him well. With his great talents, he is the soul of honor, of courage, & of loyalty. In the progress of the terrible events inseperable from the struggle for the life of our country, in which you are heroically engaged, you can assign to Edwin M. Stanton no duty however stern, or solemn or self-sacrificing, which he will not nobly & efficiently perform.

Very Sincerely

Yours

J Holt.

SOURCE: The Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.

Diary of John Hay: October 2, 1864

To-day I received a letter from Wm. N. Grover saying certain of his friends had agreed to press his name for Judge of the District Court, Western Missouri, in place of Judge Welles. He adds, however, that, in case Judge Bates, Attorney-General, should desire the appointment, he would not stand in his way, believing that Bate’s appointment would be very advantageous and satisfactory to the Union people of the State. He requested me to make this known both to Mr. Bates and the President. I read his letter to the President, and, at the same time referred to the recent indiscreet announcement made by Cameron, that in the event of a reelection the President would call around him fresh and earnest men. He said: “They need not be especially savage about a change. There are now only three left of the original Cabinet with the Government.” He added that he rather thought he would appoint Mr. Bates to the vacant judgeship if he desired it. He said he would be troubled to fill his place in the Cabinet from Missouri, especially from among the radicals. I thought it would not be necessary to confine himself to Missouri; that he might do better farther South by taking Mr. Holt from Kentucky.

He did not seem to have thought of that before. But said at once: “That would do very well; that would be an excellent appointment. I question if I could do better than that. . . . I had always thought, though I had never mentioned it to anyone, that if a vacancy should occur in the Supreme Bench in any Southern District, I would appoint him, . . . but giving him a place in the Cabinet would not hinder that.”

I told him I should show Grover’s letter to Judge Bates, to which he assented.

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 230-2; Michael Burlingame and John R. Turner Ettlinger, Editors, Inside Lincoln’s White House: The Complete Civil War Diary of John Hay, p. 234-5.

Joseph Holt & Isaac Toucey to James Glynn et al, January 29, 1861

WASHINGTON, January 29, 1861.

To JAMES GLYNN, commanding the Macedonian; Capt. W. S. WALKER, commanding the Brooklyn, and other naval officers in command; and Lieut. ADAM J. SLEMMER, First Regiment Artillery, U. S. Army, commanding Fort Pickens, Pensacola, Fla.:

In consequence of the assurances received from Mr. Mallory in a telegram of yesterday to Messrs. Slidell, Hunter, and Bigler, with a request it should be laid before the President, that Fort Pickens would not be assaulted, and an offer of such an assurance to the same effect from Colonel Chase, for the purpose of avoiding a hostile collision, upon receiving satisfactory assurances from Mr. Mallory and Colonel Chase that Fort Pickens will not be attacked, you are instructed not to land the company on board the Brooklyn unless said fort shall be attacked or preparations shall be made for its attack. The provisions necessary for the supply of the fort you will land. The Brooklyn and other vessels of war on the station will remain, and you will exercise the utmost vigilance and be prepared at a moment's warning to land the company at Fort Pickens, and you and they will instantly repel an attack on the fort. The President yesterday sent a special message to Congress commending the Virginia resolutions of compromise. The commissioners of different States are to meet here on Monday, the 4th February, and it is important that during their session a collision of arms should be avoided, unless an attack should be made or there should be preparation for such an attack. In either event the Brooklyn and the other vessels will act promptly.

Your right, and that of the other officers in command at Pensacola, freely to communicate with the Government by special messenger, and its right in the same manner to communicate with yourself and them, will remain intact as the basis on which the present instruction is given.

 J. HOLT,

Secretary of War.

ISAAC TOUCEY,

Secretary of the Navy.

SOURCES: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 1 (Serial No. 1), p. 355-6; Samuel Wylie Crawford, The Genesis of the Civil War: The Story of Sumter, 1860-1861, p. 401-2

Diary of John Hay: July 18, 1863

To-day we spent six hours deciding on Court Martials, the President, Judge Holt and I. I was amused at the eagerness with which the President caught at any fact which would justify him in saving the life of a condemned soldier. He was only merciless in cases where meanness or cruelty were shown.

Cases of cowardice he was specially averse to punishing with death. He said it would frighten the poor devils too terribly to shoot them. On the case of a soldier who had once deserted and reenlisted, he endorsed: — “Let him fight instead of shooting him!”

One fellow who had deserted, and escaped after conviction, into Mexico, he sentenced, saying: — “We will condemn him as they used to sell hogs in Indiana, as they run.”

He told one good story about U. F. Linder getting a fellow off who had stolen a hog, by advising him to go and get a drink, suggesting that the water was better in Tennessee.

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 88-9; Tyler Dennett, Editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and letters of John Hay, p. 68-9; Michael Burlingame, Editor, Inside Lincoln's White House: The Complete Civil War Diary of John Hay, p. 64;