Major Wilder Dwight: January 10, 1862

cantonment Hicks, January 10, 1862,

Near Frederick, Maryland.

Napoleon said, “Marlborough, while he gained battles, ruled cabinets and guided statesmen.” I question much if our General, whatever may be the future record of him as a battle-victor, will ever excite the praise of ruling cabinets or statesmen. My impression, which I cannot shake off, is, that McClellan fails to be master of the whole position. . . . . His admirers all say, “Wait till he takes the field. He will whirl and sweep his enemies before him like a storm-king.” I hope so; but meanwhile, in the organizing and preparatory season, whose opportunity is now, his impulse is not as widely or as directly felt as I could wish. This seems a tangible and real defect, whose correction ought to be possible.

It is with such considerations as this that our minds naturally busy themselves at this time. In this seclusion one is apt to get under the influence of moods or rumors, and to exaggerate or create facts; but I seem, to myself, to notice a great want of tone and confidence in the people and in the army. This may not be so. Certainly, however, Congress is as utterly beneath the emergency as possible.

After all the flurry of last Sunday, we are again hopelessly quiet. This is exactly according to my faith, and I am sorry that you should have imagined an anxiety for me, as your last letter indicates. Don't mind the telegraph; you can really judge nothing by it.

You will see, by the date of my letter, that our camp is now changed to a cantonment, by orders from brigade headquarters. The huts and houses have so far outnumbered the tents that this nomenclatorial effort of the General is excusable. Still, we are a camp, in my view, and not a cantonment; though, of course, I date my letter according to the order.

SOURCE: Elizabeth Amelia Dwight, Editor, Life and Letters of Wilder Dwight: Lieut.-Col. Second Mass. Inf. Vols., p. 186-7

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: January 15, 1862

I forgot to mention the fact that some weeks , ago I received a work in manuscript from London, sent thither before the war, and brought by a bearer of dispatches from our Commissioner, Hon. Ambrose Dudley Mann, to whom I had written on the subject. I owe him a debt of gratitude for this kindness. When peace is restored, I shall have in readiness some contributions to the literature of the South, and my family, if I should not survive, may derive pecuniary benefit from them. I look for a long war, unless a Napoleon springs up among us, a thing not at all probable, for I believe there are those who are constantly on the watch for such dangerous characters, and they may possess the power to nip all embryo emperors in the bud.

Some of our functionaries are not justly entitled to the great positions they occupy. They attained them by a species of snap-judgment, from which there may be an appeal hereafter. It is very certain that many of our best men have no adequate positions, and revolutions are mutable things.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 1, p. 105

Francis Lieber to Major-General Henry W. Halleck, October 15, 1864

New YorK, October 15, 1864.

. . . I dare say you have already attended to the subject I am going to write about; still I feel prompted to say what follows. From the “New York Times” of this day I observe that much noise is made about the Rebels using our men, captured by them, for working in the fortifications, and that General Butler seems to fall into the error of considering it a grievous offence on the part of the enemy. We ought always to take care not to make ourselves ridiculous. Not to speak of 76 of General Orders No. 100, the employment of prisoners of war is universal: employment for domestic ends (such as when Russia distributed Frenchmen to the farmers, or Napoleon set Prussians to dig one of the chief canals of France) ; or for military purposes, such as working in army factories; or, lastly, for actual army purposes, such as working at fortifications, building roads, bridges near armies, &e. General Meigs asked my opinion on this very subject some months ago, and I wrote him a somewhat elaborate letter, which, were it necessary, might be referred to. That we have abstained from doing so until now, and have fed all along some fifty thousand idle prisoners, is another question. I believe it was done because we have a barbarous and reckless enemy, who threatened to use our men in pestiferous swamps if we should utilize the prisoners in our hands. That we tell them, “If you use our men, we shall use yours,” is all right; but let us not talk of unheard cruelty if they simply set the prisoners to work. We expose ourselves, especially when we do this in the face of our own general order and our own acknowledgment of the law of war. I, for one, am in favor of setting Rebel prisoners to work, — especially now, when the Rebels have used United States prisoners for fortifying Richmond, &c, although I think we must be prepared for insolent resistance and proportionate coercion on our part. . . .

SOURCE: Thomas Sergeant Perry, Editor, The Life and Letters of Francis Lieber, p. 351-2

Brigadier-General P. G. T. Beauregard to Louis T. Wigfall, July 8, 1861

manassas Junction, Va.,

July 8th, 1861.

My dear Col.,

I believe we are about to be attacked by the enemy, who has been increasing his forces rapidly in the last few days. He no doubt has at present on this side of the Potomac at least 30,000 men —  and probably as many in or about Washington; and I am informed on good authority, that he is crossing over reinforcements in large numbers every night; so that very shortly we probably will be attacked by about 40,000 men! What do you suppose is my effective force to resist this attack? About 15,000 effective men! How can it be expected that I should be able to maintain my ground, unless reinforced, and that immediately? I am determined to give the enemy battle no matter at what odds against us — but is it right and proper to sacrifice so many valuable lives (and perhaps our cause) without the least prospect of success?

I think not; but I hope that it will delay the forward movement of the enemy, and give our friends time to come to the rescue!

I have applied two or three times for the most essential things required here. To obtain anything with despatch, I have to send a special messenger to Richmond. Is that the way to direct and control the operations of an army in the field? Cannot that evil be remedied? I am sure it could, if properly represented to the President.

I am afraid General Johnston is no better off than I am — but his section of the country is, I believe, more easily defended, being wooded and mountainous.

My troops are in fine spirits and anxious for a fight. They seem to have the most unbounded confidence in me!

Oh! that I had the genius of a Napoleon to be more worthy of our cause and of their confidence! If I can only get the enemy to attack me — as I am trying to have done — I will stake my reputation on the handsomest victory that could be desired.

Yours very truly,

G. T. Beauregard.

col. L. T. Wigfall,

Member of C. S. Congress, Richmond, Va.

SOURCE: Louise Wigfall Wright, A Southern Girl in ’61, p. 71-2

Diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut: February 16, 1864

Saw in Mrs. Howell's room the little negro Mrs. Davis rescued yesterday from his brutal negro guardian. The child is an orphan. He was dressed up in little Joe's clothes and happy as a lord. He was very anxious to show me his wounds and bruises, but I fled. There are some things in life too sickening, and cruelty is one of them.

Somebody said: “People who knew General Hood before the war said there was nothing in him. As for losing his property by the war, some say he never had any, and that West Point is a pauper's school, after all. He has only military glory, and that he has gained since the war began.”

“Now,” said Burton Harrison, “only military glory! I like that! The glory and the fame he has gained during the war — that is Hood. What was Napoleon before Toulon? Hood has the impassive dignity of an Indian chief. He has always a little court around him of devoted friends. Wigfall, himself, has said he could not get within Hood's lines.'”

SOURCE: Mary Boykin Chesnut, Edited by Isabella D. Martin and Myrta Lockett Avary, A Diary From Dixie, p. 290

Extracts of Letters Written by Louise Wigfall: April – June 1861

Longwood, near Boston,

April and May and June, 1861.

. . . Isn't the news from Sumter delightful. When I read the account in a paper, I felt like crying for joy. No one sympathizes with me here, except Grandmama, and I feel like a stranger in a foreign land.

Everybody here is groaning, and deploring the taking of Sumter. Uncle B. says that Boston was the scene of great excitement to-day, all the military were getting ready and everyone is on the lookout for war in earnest. . . .

I went into Boston to-day and you never saw such confusion; the State House steps and grounds were crowded with men, some to see, and some to volunteer.

Grandmama had a letter from Mama, written in the midst of the firing of the guns at Sumter. One of Uncle B.'s last puns (you know how fond he is of making them) was the following. “What does the man who robs and catches the Governor of South Carolina get? Poor Pickings.” (Governor Pickens.) I have just returned from seeing a company of Zouaves drill, their manoeuvres were miserable (!) and if this is a specimen of Northern chivalry, I don't think we have much to fear. Everybody here knows who we are, and whenever I go out the people stare and gaze at us. This evening I found little Fanny surrounded by girls, who were questioning and teasing her. She seemed to be perfectly able to maintain her position, and she said, “she gave them as good as they sent;” they all seemed quite amused at her answers, and said they liked to hear her; she talked so “funny.” One of the girls soon after came up to where I stood and said she thought the girls “hadn't ought to tease Fanny.” This is one of their common expressions, and another is that they “admire” to take a walk, or play on the piano. Grandmama and I went into Boston the other day and to my joy I saw a photo of President Davis in one of the windows. I immediately purchased it. The Babcocks are coming to take tea with us this evening, and I anticipate a good deal of pleasure in seeing Emma. She is lovely as ever and I am sure you would like her. We are fast friends and I made her promise she would read Mr. Davis's message, and as a reward I shall give her a very small piece of the flag staff you sent me. She is a very sensible girl and in all our discussions we never get the least excited or vexed. “Abe Lincoln!” is her hero, and “Jeff Davis” is mine; but there is one thing she never can explain, namely, “Abe’s” flight through Baltimore! But we agree in almost everything else. She thinks Napoleon the greatest man that ever lived, and so do I, and that is a never failing source of conversation.

Mrs. Lincoln is now in Boston, and I suppose the Republicans are all flocking to see her, and she is asking them “How they flourish?” Boston is in a whirl of excitement; troops drilling and volunteering all the time — the stores and houses all decked with flags. . . . Dear Papa, won't you send us each a small flag of South Carolina, and the Confederate States? I am very anxious to see them. Yesterday evening Aunt F. got an invitation to attend a meeting of ladies to make shirts, and sew for the different regiments; she, of course, is not going. A poor set of creatures they must be if they can't furnish their own shirts!  . . . Uncle B. has just bought the Sun announcing the secession of Virginia. I feel as if I can't contain myself I am so glad. Poor Uncle B. looks as if he had taken a blue pill — he takes everything so to heart; it is deplorable to see him. Aunt F. is in hopes that all the States will now follow and that will be the means of securing peace.

SOURCE: Louise Wigfall Wright, A Southern Girl in ’61, p. 57-60

Francis Lieber to Major-General Henry W. Halleck, August 2, 1863

New York, August 2, 1863.

My Dear General, — Doubtless you agree with me that now, the Mississippi being cleared, we shall have prowling assassins along its banks, firing on passengers from behind the levees. You share, I know, my opinion, expressed in my Guerilla pamphlet, regarding these lawless prowlers. Will it not be well to state distinctly, in a general order, that they must be treated as outlaws? Or would a proclamation touching this point —and the selling or massacring of our colored soldiers, as well as the breaking of the parole — be better? I cannot judge of this from a distance, but it reads very oddly that a rebel officer who has broken his parole was among the prisoners that recently arrived at Washington, as all the newspapers had it. I hope it is not true; and if not true, Government should semi-officially contradict it. That Government has too much to do, would be no answer. Napoleon even wrote occasionally articles for the “Moniteur.”  . . . I have pointed out a most important military position, near my house, in case of repeated riot. It is the highly elevated crossing of Fourth Avenue and Thirty-fourth Street. It has been adopted. Did I tell you that I, too, patrolled for three nights during that infamous, fiendish, and rascally riot. To be sure, wholly unprotected as we were, our patrolling was hardly for any other purpose than to take away in time our wives and children. The one good feature in this riot was that no blank cartridges were fired. The handful of troops we had — invalids and full combatants, as well as the police — behaved well, I believe, and did what was possible. My son Hamilton was in the midst of it during the whole time with his invalids. . . .

SOURCE: Thomas Sergeant Perry, Editor, The Life and Letters of Francis Lieber, p. 335-6

Francis Lieber to Senator Charles Sumner, December 14, 1861

New York, December 14,1861.

As to that proposition to melt together the United States army and the volunteers, I wish to heaven I had the ear of some influential man in this matter. Nothing is more dangerous to modern civil liberty than a large democratic army; vide France. The traditional fear of standing armies, thoroughly founded in times past, when Louis XIV. and James II. were justly haunting the minds of upright men, must be changed into a fear of a large, thoroughly democratic army. In countries pervaded by an institutional spirit and system of self-government, — with a true, not nominal, representative national body, which keeps the army under its thumb as to size and appropriation, — the danger is not in the standing army, of itself. Look at England. Make our present large army a homogeneous, vast, democratic army; give it some suecesses; let some striking victory knit them well together, man to man, and to the general, — and every person versed in the analytical chemistry of history will tell you that a Bonaparte dictating after a Lodi is unavoidable. No congress, no parliament, can keep under an organized, vast, democratic army, especially when no sea intervenes. There is nothing so revolutionary as such an army. The sword is always arrogant. A soldier is writing this, — but a soldier who is a historian too, and a citizen, philosopher, and a man who is willing that this should be “hung out” after he is gone — as they used to hang out the proof-sheets in the early days of printing — for all that might choose to find errata. I stake my name to this. . . .

SOURCE: Thomas Sergeant Perry, Editor, The Life and Letters of Francis Lieber, p. 321

Diary of William Howard Russell: Monday, April 2, 1861

The following day I started early, and performed my pilgrimage to “the shrine of St. Washington,” at Mount Vernon, as a foreigner on board called the place. Mr. Bancroft has in his possession a letter of the General's mother, in which she expresses her gratification at his leaving the British army in a manner which implies that he had been either extravagant in his expenses or wild in his manner of living. But if he had any human frailties in after life, they neither offended the morality of his age, nor shocked the susceptibility of his countrymen; and from the time that the much maligned and unfortunate Braddock gave scope to his ability, down to his retirement into private life, after a career of singular trials and extraordinary successes, his character acquired each day greater altitude, strength, and lustre. Had his work failed, had the Republic broken up into small anarchical states, we should hear now little of Washington. But the principles of liberty founded in the original Constitution of the colonies themselves, and in no degree derived from or dependent on the Revolution, combined with the sufferings of the Old and the bounty of nature in the New World to carry to an unprecedented degree the material prosperity, which Americans have mistaken for good government, and the physical comforts which have made some States in the Union the nearest approach to Utopia. The Federal Government hitherto “let the people alone” and they went on their way singing and praising their Washington as the author of so much greatness and happiness. To doubt his superiority to any man of woman born, is to insult the American people. They are not content with his being great — or even greater than the great: he must be greatest of all; — “first in peace, and first in war.” The rest of the world cannot find fault with the assertion, that he is “first in the hearts of his countrymen.” But he was not possessed of the highest military qualities, if we are to judge from most of the regular actions, in which the British had the best of it; and the final blow, when Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, was struck by the arm of France, by Rochambeau and the French fleet, rather than by Washington and his Americans. He had all the qualities for the work for which he was designed, and is fairly entitled to the position his countrymen have given him as the immortal czar of the United States. His pictures are visible everywhere — in the humblest inn, in the Minister's bureau, in the millionnaire's gallery. There are far more engravings of Washington in America than there are of Napoleon in France, and that is saying a good deal.

What have we here? The steamer which has been paddling down the gentle current of the Potomac, here a mile and more in breadth, banked in by forest, through which can be seen homesteads and white farm-houses, in the midst of large clearings and corn-fields — has moved in towards a high bluff, covered with trees, on the summit of which is visible the trace of some sort of building — a ruined summer-house, rustic temple — whatever it may be; and the bell on deck begins to toll solemnly, and some of the pilgrims uncover their heads for a moment. The boat stops at a rotten, tumbledown little pier, which leads to a waste of mud, and a path rudely cut through the wilderness of briers on the hill-side. The pilgrims, of whom there are some thirty or forty, of both sexes, mostly belonging to the lower classes of citizens, and comprising a few foreigners like myself, proceed to climb this steep, which seemed in a state of nature covered with primeval forest, and tangled weeds and briers, till the plateau, on which stands the house of Washington and the domestic offices around it, is reached. It is an oblong wooden house, of two stories in height, with a colonnade towards the river face, and a small balcony on the top and on the level of the roof, over which rises a little paltry gazebo. There are two windows, a glass door at one end of the oblong, and a wooden alcove extending towards the slave quarters, which are very small sentry-box huts, that have been recently painted, and stand at right angles to the end of the house, with dog-houses and poultry-hutches attached to them. There is no attempt at neatness or order about the place; though the exterior of the house is undergoing repair, the grass is unkempt, the shrubs untrimmed, — neglect, squalor, and chicken feathers have marked the lawn for their own. The house is in keeping, and threatens to fall to ruin. I entered the door, and found myself in a small hall, stained with tobacco juice. An iron railing ran across the entrance to the stairs. Here stood a man at a gate, who presented a book to the visitors, and pointed out the notice therein, that “no person is permitted to inscribe his name in this book who does not contribute to the Washington Fund, and that any name put down without money would be erased.” Notwithstanding the warning, some patriots succeeded in recording their names without any pecuniary mulct, and others did so at a most reasonable rate. When I had contributed in a manner which must have represented an immense amount of Washingtoniolatry, estimated by the standard of the day, I was informed I could not go up-stairs as the rooms above were closed to the public, and thus the most interesting portion of the house was shut from the strangers. The lower rooms presented nothing worthy of notice —some lumbering, dusty, decayed furniture; a broken harpsichord, dust, cobwebs — no remnant of the man himself. But over the door of one room hung the key of the Bastille.*  The gardens, too, were tabooed; but through the gate I could see a wilderness of neglected trees and shrubs, not unmingled with a suspicion of a present kitchen-ground. Let us pass to the Tomb, which is some distance from the house, beneath the shade of some fine trees. It is a plain brick mausoleum, with a pointed arch, barred by an iron grating, through which the light penetrates a chamber or small room containing two sarcophagi of stone. Over the arch, on a slab let into the brick, are the words: “Within this enclosure rest the remains of Gen. George Washington.” The fallen leaves which had drifted into the chamber rested thickly on the floor, and were piled up on the sarcophagi, and it was difficult to determine which was the hero's grave without the aid of an expert, but there was neither guide nor guardian on the spot. Some four or five gravestones, of various members of the family, stand in the ground outside the little mausoleum. The place was most depressing. One felt angry with a people whose lip service was accompanied by so little of actual respect. The owner of this property, inherited from the “Pater Patriӕ,” has been abused in good set terms because he asked its value from the country which has been so very mindful of the services of his ancestor, and which is now erecting by slow stages the overgrown Cleopatra's needle that is to be a Washington Monument when it is finished. Mr. Everett has been lecturing, the Ladies' Mount Vernon Association has been working, and every one has been adjuring everybody else to give liberally; but the result so lately achieved is by no means worthy of the object. Perhaps the Americans think it is enough to say — “Si monumentum quӕris, circumspice" But, at all events, there is a St. Paul's round those words.

On the return of the steamer I visited Fort Washington, which is situated on the left bank of the Potomac. I found everything in a state of neglect — gun-carriages rotten, shot piles rusty, furnaces tumbling to pieces. The place might be made strong enough on the river front, but the rear is weak, though there is low marshy land at the back. A company of regulars were on duty. The sentries took no precautions against surprise. Twenty determined men, armed with revolvers, could have taken the whole work; and, for all the authorities knew, we might have had that number of Virginians and the famous Ben McCullough himself on board. Afterwards, when I ventured to make a remark to General Scott as to the carelessness of the garrison, he said: “A few weeks ago it might have been taken by a bottle of whiskey. The whole garrison consisted of an old Irish pensioner.” Now at this very moment Washington is full of rumors of desperate descents on the capital, and an attack on the President and his Cabinet. The long bridge across the Potomac into Virginia is guarded, and the militia and volunteers of the District of Columbia are to be called out to resist McCullough and his Richmond desperadoes.

_______________

* Since borrowed, it is supposed, by Mr. Seward, and handed over by him to Mr. Stanton. Lafayette gave it to Washington; he also gave his name to the Fort which has played so conspicuous a part in the war for liberty — “La liberté des deux mondes,” might well sigh if he could see his work, and what it has led to.

SOURCE: William Howard Russell, My Diary North and South, p. 55-9

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: June 17, 1861

To-day there was a rumor in the streets that Harper's Ferry had been evacuated by Gen. Joseph E. Johnston, and, for the first time, I heard murmurs against the government. So far, perhaps, no Executive had ever such cordial and unanimous support of the people as President Davis. I knew the motive of the evacuation, and prepared a short editorial for one of the papers, suggesting good reasons for the retrograde movement; and instancing the fact that when Napoleon's capital was surrounded and taken, he had nearly 200,000 men in garrison in the countries he had conquered, which would have been ample for the defense of France. This I carried to the Secretary at his lodgings, and he was so well pleased with it he wanted me to accompany him to the lodgings of the President, in the same hotel, and show it to him. This I declined, alleging it might be too late for the press. He laughed at my diffidence, and disinclination on such occasions to approach the President. I told him my desire was to serve the cause, and not myself. I suppose he was incredulous.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 1, p. 52-3

Diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut: August 25, 1861

Mr. Barnwell says democracies lead to untruthfulness. To be always electioneering is to be always false; so both we and the Yankees are unreliable as regards our own exploits. “How about empires? Were there ever more stupendous lies than the Emperor Napoleon's?” Mr. Barnwell went on: “People dare not tell the truth in a canvass; they must conciliate their constituents. Now everybody in a democracy always wants an office; at least, everybody in Richmond just now seems to want one.” Never heeding interruptions, he went on: “As a nation, the English are the most truthful in the world.” “And so are our country gentlemen: they own their constituents — at least, in some of the parishes, where there are few whites; only immense estates peopled by negroes.” Thackeray speaks of the lies that were told on both sides in the British wars with France; England kept quite alongside of her rival in that fine art. England lied then as fluently as Russell lies about us now.

Went to see Agnes De Leon, my Columbia school friend. She is fresh from Egypt, and I wished to hear of the Nile, the crocodiles, the mummies, the Sphinx, and the Pyramids. But her head ran upon Washington life, such as we knew it, and her soul was here. No theme was possible but a discussion of the latest war news.

Mr. Clayton, Assistant Secretary of State, says we spend two millions a week. Where is all that money to come from? They don't want us to plant cotton, but to make provisions. Now, cotton always means money, or did when there was an outlet for it and anybody to buy it. Where is money to come from now?

Mr. Barnwell's new joke, I dare say, is a Joe Miller, but Mr. Barnwell laughed in telling it till he cried. A man was fined for contempt of court and then, his case coming on, the Judge talked such arrant nonsense and was so warped in his mind against the poor man, that the “fined one” walked up and handed the august Judge a five-dollar bill, “Why? What is that for?” said the Judge. “Oh, I feel such a contempt of this court coming on again!”

I came up tired to death; took down my hair; had it hanging over me in a Crazy Jane fashion; and sat still, hands over my head (half undressed, but too lazy and sleepy to move). I was sitting in a rocking-chair by an open window taking my ease and the cool night air, when suddenly the door opened and Captain walked in.

He was in the middle of the room before he saw his mistake; he stared and was transfixed, as the novels say. I dare say I looked an ancient Gorgon. Then, with a more frantic glare, he turned and fled without a word. I got up and bolted the door after him, and then looked in the glass and laughed myself into hysterics. I shall never forget to lock the door again. But it does not matter in this case. I looked totally unlike the person bearing my name, who, covered with lace cap, etc., frequents the drawing-room. I doubt if he would know me again.

SOURCE: Mary Boykin Chesnut, Edited by Isabella D. Martin and Myrta Lockett Avary, A Diary From Dixie, p. 110-1

Senator James W. Grimes to J. H. Gear, W. F. Coolbaugh, A. W. Carpenter, Joshua Copp, J. G. Foote, and other Citizens of Burlington, August 17, 1861

Burlington, August 17, 1861.

I have received your favor of the 15th instant, in which you congratulate me upon my return to the State, and invite me to address the people of this city, at such time and place as I may designate, on the important questions now before the country, involving the existence of the Government.

I appreciate, as I ought, the kind feeling that prompted this invitation, and return you my sincere thanks for it. I would address you at any time and at any place, if I supposed I could communicate a particle of information not already in the possession or within the reach of every citizen of the State. I could only say in many words, what I now say in a few, that it seems to me that there is no safe alternative before us, but to give a firm and ardent support to the Government in its attempt to put down insurrection and rebellion. More than any State in this Confederacy, Iowa should resist the pretended right of a State to secede from it. Our position in the centre of the continent, without foreign commerce, dependent upon other States for our markets and for our means for transportation to reach them, would soon, if the right to destroy the Union by the secession of the States be conceded, place us in the character of a dependent and conquered province. We need, and must have, at whatever cost, a permanent government and unrestricted access to the Atlantic Ocean and to the Gulf of Mexico. There must be no foreign soil between us and our markets.

As one of the Representatives of Iowa in the Federal Congress, I have sought to give expression by my votes to what I believe to be the opinions of the people of the State, and have uniformly voted all the men, money, ships, and supplies, that were asked for. In doing so, I have not only expressed what I believed to be their wishes, but I have acted upon my own convictions of duty. I shall continue to do so until this unholy war shall be brought to a successful conclusion.

The public debt that this war will impose upon us will appall some and perhaps dampen the patriotism of some. Most erroneous impressions, however, seem to prevail as to the magnitude of our present indebtedness, and that which we are likely to create. The entire public indebtedness of this country on the 6th instant, the day Congress adjourned, was a hundred and eleven million dollars, most of which was inherited from the preceding Administration, and the estimated expenses of the next year, for military, naval, and civil purposes, were less than three hundred million dollars, less than the annual expenses of Great Britain in a time of profound peace. In connection with the aggregate of these two sums let us remember that England paid eight thousand five hundred million dollars to carry on her wars with the first Napoleon. She was contending for her commercial rights, and the result showed that her money was well expended: we are not only contending for our commercial rights, but we seek to uphold and perpetuate the best Government ever known among men.

Foreigners call us, with great truth, the most impatient people on the earth. This natural impatience is greatly increased by our present troubles. We all want peace restored and business revived, and most of us believe that a permanent peace can only be established by the victorious arms of our soldiers. Our anxieties in this regard are very liable to cause us to do great injustice to the Government and to ourselves also. We clamor for victories, forgetting that the most thorough preparation is necessary to achieve them. We forget the condition of the country four months ago, and ask that that shall be done in a week which requires months of arduous labor to perform. Very few fully appreciate the difficulties by which the President of the United States found himself surrounded, when he assumed power on the 4th of March last. Many of the Executive Departments had recently been under the control of traitors. The army had been dispersed and demoralized, and many of the most trusted and prominent officers were disloyal. Our vessels-of-war were scattered upon foreign and remote stations. The Departments were full of spies and traitors. The public armories had been plundered and their contents delivered to the rebels. The President was without an army, without a navy, without arms or munitions of war, and with enemies within and without. In this condition of things, and after an almost uninterrupted peace of fifty years, he was called upon to organize in a few weeks five armies, each of them larger than any that had ever been marshaled on this continent, and to improvise a navy with which to blockade a coast greater in extent than that which England was unable to blockade with more than four hundred vessels-of-war in 1812-’14. That there have been mistakes committed in the selection of agents and officers cannot be denied, but, that there has been any lack of energy or of devotion to the cause of the country, it seems to me that no fail man who examines the subject will assert. Few persons comprehend all the labor, the time, and the perplexities involved in furnishing clothing, arms, transportation, stores and pay for four hundred and fifty thousand men, and in purchasing or building, manning, arming, and equipping two hundred vessels-of-war by a Government whose credit was impaired, whose armories had been destroyed, and whose munitions of war had been stolen, and to do all this in the space of three months.

It becomes us to be hopeful and patient, bearing in mind that the authorities in Washington are resolved that their preparation for the conflict shall correspond with the magnitude of the conspiracy they are compelled to encounter.

You say, gentlemen, that you address me without distinction of party, and I find among the signatures appended to your letter the names of many to whom I have always been politically opposed. Permit me to say that the time has arrived when I am anxious to forget all party names, and party platforms, and party organizations, and to unite with anybody and everybody in an honest, ardent, and patriotic support of the Government — not as a party Government with a Republican at its head, but as the national Government, ordained by and for the benefit of the whole people of the country.

SOURCE: William Salter, The Life of James W. Grimes, p. 147-50

Francis Lieber to Charles Sumner, June 2, 1861

June 2,1861.

Since I wrote the enclosed I have perused the news brought by the “America.” It is humiliating for us, who wish to honor England, to see her lowering herself thus. England has somewhat recovered from her Crimean loss of prestige, and she ought more carefully to husband her honor now. How bitterly the cup she is brewing now may one day be pressed to her mouth by the Irish, that her lips will bleed and her teeth will ache. England's conduct toward us forms a disgusting contrast to her repeated fawning on Napoleon, — England petting the South in her godless rebellion, and while even Virginians come out in favor of reopening the slave-trade I . . . We now want more than ever a large, sharp, and telling victory. That would change the premises, not only of Southern, but also of English syllogisms. I believe the cotton interest, the unpleasant consciousness of having played the second fiddle for a long time, the silly doctrine of State-sovereignty which seems to be acknowledged by almost all English papers, the snobbish idea of the gentlemanliness of the South, and the irritation at our tariff — all combined — have produced the remarkable state of feeling exhibited in the House of Lords. I find that the English news produced here only greater earnestness — no doubt still more so with you. What I fear most is that the next Congress will talk. There are some very vile fellows in it, e. g. our Wood. If they could only be made to abstain from all discussion of principle and let every vote be an act I 1 send a copy of a pamphlet of mine. The Psalm of to-day, read in church, had this beginning: “Why dost Thou stand so far away, O Lord?”

SOURCE: Thomas Sergeant Perry, Editor, The Life and Letters of Francis Lieber, p. 319-20

Major General George G. Meade to Margaretta Sergeant Meade, January 28, 1863

CAMP NEAR FALMOUTH, VA., January 28, 1863.

Your anxiety lest I should be placed in command of the army causes me to smile. Still, I must confess when such men as Gibbon say it is talked about, it really does look serious and alarming; yet, when I look back on the good fortune which has thus far attended my career, I cannot believe so sudden a change for the worse can occur as would happen if I were placed in command. I think, therefore, we may for the present dismiss our fears on that score. General Hooker has been two days in Washington. I am looking anxiously for his return to hear what will be the result. Before he was placed in command he was open-mouthed and constant in his assertions that he did not want to command, and that he would not command unless he was perfectly untrammeled and allowed in every respect to do exactly as he pleased. Now, I am quite confident no such conditions will be acceded to in Washington. Hence, either "Fighting Joe" will have to back down or some one else will be sent to take the command. From my knowledge of friend Hooker, I am inclined to surmise the former will be the case. But even supposing they give him carte-blanche, his position is anything but enviable. This army is in a false position, both as regards the enemy and the public. With respect to the enemy, we can literally do nothing, and our numbers are inadequate to the accomplishment of any result even if we go to the James River. On the other hand, the wise public are under the delusion that we are omnipotent, and that it is only necessary to go ahead to achieve unheard-of success. Of course, under such circumstances, neither Csesar, Napoleon nor any other mighty genius could fail to meet with condemnation, never mind what he did, and Hooker, I fancy, will find in time his fate in the fate of his predecessors, namely, undue and exaggerated praise before he does anything, and a total absence of reason and intelligence in the discussion of his acts when he does attempt anything, and a denial of even ordinary military qualifications unless he achieves impossibilities. Such being the case, he certainly is not to be envied. I think when his head is cut off, the Administration will try a general of their own kidney, either Fremont, Hunter or some other. Of course, so long as Hooker is absent, I continue in command of the Centre Grand Division, but I am more and more inclined to believe that his visit to Washington will result in the abolition of the grand-division system altogether, and the return to corps alone. I hope I shall retain the Fifth Corps, as it is one of the best, including as it does the regulars.

Humphreys has gone to Washington. I believe I wrote you he behaved with distinguished gallantry at Fredericksburg. It appears that soon after the battle, Burnside told him both the President and Secretary assured him solemnly that Humphreys should be immediately promoted. He now finds a long list sent to the Senate, including such names as Butterfield, Sickles, Berry and others, who have really done nothing, while his name is omitted, and he cannot hear that there is any record in the Department going to show he has ever even been thought of. Under these circumstances he is naturally very indignant. This is all entre nous. Just as I had gotten thus far, I heard Hooker had returned, and notwithstanding it is storming and snowing violently, I rode three miles to his headquarters to see him, and have just returned. He seemed in excellent spirits, said they had treated him "en prince" in Washington, and told him he had only to ask and he should have what he wanted. He did not tell me his plans, but intimated that as soon as the weather and the roads permitted he was prepared to try something.

SOURCE: George Meade, The Life and Letters of George Gordon Meade, Vol. 1, p. 351-2

Abraham Lincoln to Major General Joseph Hooker, January 26, 1863

EXECUTIVE MANSION,

Washington, D. C., January 26, 1863.

Major-General HOOKER:

GENERAL: I have placed you at the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of course I have done this upon what appears to me to be sufficient reasons, and yet I think it best for you to know that there are some things in regard to which I am not quite satisfied with you. I believe you to be a brave and skillful soldier, which, of course, I like. I also believe you do not mix politics with your profession, in which you are right. You have confidence in yourself, which is a valuable, if not an indispensable, quality. You are ambitious, which, within reasonable bounds, does good rather than harm; but I think that during General Burnside's command of the army you have taken counsel of your ambition, and thwarted him as much as you could, in which you did a great wrong to the country and to a most meritorious and honorable brother officer. I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the Army and the Government needed a dictator. Of course, it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain successes can set up dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship. The Government will support you to the utmost of its ability, which is neither more nor less than it has done and will do for all commanders. I much fear that the spirit which you have aided to infuse into the army, of criticising their commander and withholding confidence from him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist you as far as I can to put it down. Neither you nor Napoleon, if he were alive again, could get any good out of an army while such a spirit prevails in it. And now beware of rashness. Beware of rashness, but with energy and sleepless vigilance go forward and give us victories.

Yours, very truly,

A. LINCOLN.

SOURCES: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 25, Part 1 (Serial No. 40), p. 4; Roy P. Basler, editor, Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume 6, p. 78-9; 

Brigadier General William T. Sherman to Ellen Ewing Sherman, August 13, 1861

[Undated: apparently August 13, 1861.]

The incessant wants of 5,000 men, all complaining, with sick wives and children and fathers at home, wanting to go to Georgetown and Washington and everywheres where they should not go, growling about clothing, shoes, beef, pork, and everything! Now in an army all these things are regulated by sergeants, captains and colonels. A brigadier only has to operate through them. An irregularity in a regiment is checked by a word to the colonel; but here every woman within five miles who has a peach stolen or roasting ear carried off comes to me to have a guard stationed to protect her tree, and our soldiers are the most destructive men I have ever known. It may be other volunteers are just as bad, indeed the complaint is universal, and I see no alternative but to let it take its course. When in Fairfax County we had a majority of friends. Now I suppose there is not a man, woman or child but would prefer Jeff Davis or the Czar of Russia to govern them rather than an American volunteer army. My only hope now is that a common sense of decency may be inspired into the minds of this soldiery to respect life and property. Officers hardly offer to remonstrate with their men, and all devolves on me. As usual I cannot lie down, go away, without fifty people moving after me. Had I some good regulars I could tie to them. As it is, all the new Brigadiers must manufacture their Brigades out of raw material. Napoleon allowed three years as a minimum, Washington one year. Here it is expected in nine days, and Bull Run is the consequence. I don't believe McClellan will be hurried, and the danger to our country is so imminent that all hands are now conscious that we must build up from the foundation. . . .

A good many little incidents, shooting of sentinels and pickets, all the cruel, useless attendants of war occur daily, but I no longer apprehend an attack by Beauregard's forces, though strange to say he receives news much more freely than we do. McClellan has notice of large forces coming up from Georgia, Alabama and the extreme South. . . .

SOURCES: M. A. DeWolfe Howe, Editor, Home Letters of General Sherman, p. 214-5.  A full copy of this letter can be found in the William T Sherman Family papers (SHR), University of Notre Dame Archives (UNDA), Notre Dame, IN 46556, Folder CSHR 1/139.

Major General William T. Sherman to Major R. M. Sawyer, January 31, 1864

HEADQUARTERS DEPT. OF THE TENN.,

VICKSBURG, Jan. 31,1864.

MAJOR R. M. SAWYER,

A. A. C. Army of the Tenn.,

Huntsville, Alabama.

Dear Sawyer: In my former letters I have answered all your questions save one, and that relates to the treatment of inhabitants known or suspected to be hostile or "Secesh." This is in truth the most difficult business of our army as it advances and occupies the Southern country. It is almost impossible to lay down rules, and I invariably leave the whole subject to the local commanders, but am willing to give them the benefit of my acquired knowledge and experience. In Europe, whence we derive our principles of war, wars are between kings or rulers through hired armies, and not between peoples. These remain, as it were, neutral, and sell their produce to whatever army is in possession.

Napoleon when at war with Prussia, Austria, and Russia bought forage and provisions of the inhabitants, and consequently had an interest to protect the farms and factories which ministered to his wants. In like manner the Allied Armies in France could buy of the French habitants whatever they needed, the produce of the soil or manufactures of the country. Therefore, the general rule was and is that war is confined to the armies engaged, and should not visit the houses of families or private interests. But in other examples a different rule obtained the sanction of historical authority. I will only instance one, where in the siege of William and Mary the English army occupied Ireland, then in a state of revolt. The inhabitants were actually driven into foreign lands, and were dispossessed of their property and a new population introduced.

To this day a large part of the north of Ireland is held by the descendants of the Scotch emigrants sent there by William's order and an act of Parliament. The war which now prevails in our land is essentially a war of races. The Southern people entered into a clear compact of government with us of the North, but still maintained through state organizations a species of separate existence, with separate interests, history, and prejudices. These latter became stronger and stronger, till at last they have led to war and have developed fruits of the bitterest kind. We of the North are beyond all question right in our cause, but we are not bound to ignore the fact that the people of the South have prejudices which form a part of their nature, and which they cannot throw off without an effort of reason or the slower process of natural change. The question then arises, Should we treat as absolute enemies all in the South who differ from us in opinion or prejudice, kill or banish them, or should we give them time to think and gradually change their conduct so as to conform to the new order of things which is slowly and gradually creeping into their country?

When men take up arms to resist a rightful authority, we are compelled to use like force, because all reason and argument cease when arms are resorted to. When the provisions, forage, horses, mules, wagons, etc., are used by our enemy, it is clearly our duty and right to take them also, because otherwise they might be used against us. In like manner all houses left vacant by an inimical people are clearly our right, and as such are needed as storehouses, hospitals, and quarters. But the question arises as to dwellings used by women, children, and non-combatants. So long as non-combatants remain in their houses and keep to their accustomed peaceful business, their opinions and prejudices can in no wise influence the war, and therefore should not be noticed; but if any one comes out into the public streets and creates disorder, he or she should be punished, restrained, or banished to the rear or front, as the officer in command adjudges. If the people, or any of them, keep up a correspondence with parties in hostility, they are spies, and can be punished according to law with death or minor punishment. These are well-established principles of war, and the people of the South having appealed to war, are barred from appealing for protection to our constitution, which they have practically and publicly defied. They have appealed to war, and must abide its rules and laws. . . .

It is all idle nonsense for these Southern planters to say that they made the South, that they own it, and can do as they please to break up our Government and shut up the natural avenues of trade, intercourse, and commerce. We know, and they know, if they are intelligent beings, that as compared with the whole world they are but as five millions to one thousand millions, that they did not create the land, that the only title to use and usufruct is the deed of the United States, and that if they appeal to war they hold their all by a very insecure tenure. For my part, I believe that this war is the result of false political doctrine, for which we are all as a people more or less responsible, and I would give all a chance to reflect, and, when in error, to recant. I know the slave-owners, finding themselves in possession of a species of property in opposition to the growing sentiment of the whole civilized world, conceived their property to be in danger and foolishly appealed to war, and that by skilful political handling they involved with themselves the whole South on this result of error and prejudice. I believe that some of the rich and slave-holding are prejudiced to an extent that nothing but death and ruin will ever extinguish, but I hope that as the poorer and industrious classes of the South realize their relative weakness and their dependence upon the fruits of the earth and good-will of their fellow-men they will not only discover the error of their ways and repent of their hasty action, but bless those who persistently have maintained a constitutional government strong enough to sustain itself, protect its citizens, and promise peaceful homes to millions yet unborn.

If the people of Huntsville think differently, let them persist in this war three years longer, and then they will not be consulted.

Three years ago, by a little reflection and patience, they could have had a hundred years of peace and prosperity, but they preferred war. Last year they could have saved their slaves, but now it is too late, — all the powers of earth cannot restore to them their slaves any more than their dead grandfathers. . . .

A people who will persevere in war beyond a certain limit ought to know the consequences. Many, many people, with less pertinacity than the South has already shown, have been wiped out of national existence.

My own belief is that even now the non-slave-holding classes of the South are alienating from their associates in war. Already I hear crimination and recrimination. Those who have property left should take warning in time.

Since I have come down here I have seen many Southern planters, who now hire their own negroes and acknowledge that they were mistaken and knew not the earthquake they were to make by appealing to secession. They thought that the politicians had prepared the way, and that they could part the States of this Union in peace. They now see that we are bound together as one nation by indissoluble ties, and that any interest, or any fraction of the people that set themselves up in antagonism to the nation, must perish.

Whilst I would not remit one jot or tittle of our nation's rights in peace or war, I do make allowances for past political errors and prejudices.

Our national Congress and the Supreme Court are the proper arenas on which to discuss conflicting opinions, and not the battle-field.

You may not hear from me again for some time, and if you think it will do any good, call some of the better people of Huntsville together and explain to them my views. You may even read to them this letter and let them use it, so as to prepare them for my coming. . . .

We are progressing well in this quarter, but I have not changed my opinion that although we may soon make certain the existence of the power of our national government, yet years must pass before ruffianism, murder, and robbery will cease to afflict this region of our country.

Your friend,

WM. T. SHERMAN,

Major Gen'l Comd.

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 228-33

Burning and Destroying

Some talk is had upon the street corners as to the policy best to be pursued in case the enemy advance upon the city and the country, and seem likely to capture the city.  The Federal forces are yet a great distance from us, and we hope and believe they will never be able to reach here.  Certainly they will not if the whole people arouse in their might and present a solid breast against the invaders.  The movement in progress here aims to stir up the people to this universal resistance, and it seems probably that it will be successful.

The talk upon the corners is not always remarkably sensible.  Men who spend their time in dilating their lungs at such places are very often not the most wise, calm and brave sort of characters.  They are apt to talk large and act small.  They often cloak over a craven heart under stout words.  Often, too, their counsels spring from panic stricken hearts, though they wear the color and take the shape of being the offspring of courage and patriotism.

Certainly we prefer to follow the advice or commands of our chosen and lawful leaders as to the best modes of conducting the war.  It is the business, and duty, and right of the military chiefs to plan and direct the proper measures in the exigency.  If they say fight, we say fight; if they say retreat, we acquiesce, however painful it may be, if they say tear up the railroads, so say we; if they say burn the bridges, burn them, if they order the country to be laid waist, execute the order; if they command the city to be laid to ashes, lay the city in ashes and plow up its foundations, and sow salt over them.  It is the right of the military chiefs to give such orders and cause them to be executed.  The law of the land, the civil law read out of books and administered by the courts, holds them blameless for such orders and acts.

But street corner orators, and groggery-alley haunters, and whisky-inflamed patriots, and panic-struck cravens are not intrusted with any such right or authority; nor are even the most sensible and excellent of private citizens.  If they venture to usurp or perpetrate any of these acts, the law has a name for them, and the statute book provides for their treatment.  Felons is the name, and the act is arson, a crime which is punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than five nor more than twenty-one years.  Arson is the willful burning of any house or out-house, in the country, or the setting fire to or burning of any house or building in any city or town.  Private persons are not allowed to do these acts, no matter how laudable they may think their purpose.  Nor can a man excuse himself from the consequences of the crime, even though he sets on fire his own buildings, if by so doing he jeopards the building of another.  And besides, the criminal offense such person makes himself liable in a civil action for the value of any building of another which he cause to be burned by the setting on fire his own house.

Obviously, it may be very wise and altogether right to burn a town upon which an enemy is advancing; but quite as plainly is it, that it will never do to allow any person who chooses to do these things.  It is not a power entrusted to any and everybody.  It is not certain that any and everybody is wise, and prudent, and patriotic.  Any and everybody may claim to be so; but any and everybody’s talk is not a very safe ground on which to trust a power of this kind.

Acts of this extreme character may become a military necessity.  Such was the case of Moscow, famed in the history of Napoleon.  Moscow is in the heart of the Russian Empire.  It stands on North latitude in the 56th parallel, the same as the central region of Labrador in North America.  Of course this is an extreme winter climate, though Moscow is not as cold as the same latitude on the eastern slope of this continent.  Besides, Moscow was some seven hundred miles from the western frontier of Russia, the nearest point to a country friendly to Napoleon.  In that day, the year 1812, there were no railroads or steamers, or in that region of Russia any rivers, for the easy or speedy transportation of any army.  So that Napoleon, to get from Moscow out of Russia to a friendly country, had a line of about 700 miles over which his army must march on feet, and an average of 18 or 20 miles per day, in case he was forced to retreat.  Over so long a line, and during mid-winter, and through a hostile country, such retreat would inevitably be fatal.  The Russian soldiers were inured to the climate. – The French army were of many nations, most of them of countries having mild climates, and were unable to bear the rigor of the Russian climate.  Hence, the policy of the Russians was to force Napoleon to retreat during the winter.  This could be done by depriving the French army of shelter and food.

To burn Moscow and desolate the country around, accomplished both – left the French without food and without shelter.  Count Rastopchin was the Governor of Moscow, and Kutusoff was the General-in-Chief of the Russian army.  The battle of Borodino was fought and lost by Kutusoff, seventy miles west of Moscow.  As he retreated before the French, he devastated the country for several miles on each side of the line of his march; and upon approaching the city moved several divisions of his army through it, and, at the point of the bayonet, drove the citizens out of the walls, and far off into the country.

Napoleon entered the city on the 16th of September.  The day after his entrance, the city was set on fire in several places by felons, that Rastopochin had turned out of prison for the purpose; and seven-eights of the houses laid in ashes.  Three hundred thousand Russians were driven from the city, of whom one hundred thousand perished in the fields, of starvation, freezing and disease – men, women, children – old and young, male and female.

About the middle of October, Napoleon took up the line of retreat.  He could find nothing to eat, nor any shelter for his soldiers.  Very soon the rigors of winter set in.  Of that grand army of 500,000 men which entered Russia on the first of July, a wretched fragment of 40,000 men crossed the frontier upon the retreat out, about the middle of December.

The Russian policy was wise and effective.  It was so because Napoleon was seven hundred miles distant from the nearest friendly point – because his army could not live in tents – because he could not procure food at that distance from the country friendly to him – and because the Russian army though inferior in regular warfare, was greatly superior in numbers and was able to surround him in Moscow, and to cut off all attempts of foraging parties into the country around.  Such were reasons and such the policy of burning Moscow. – {Memphis Avalanche.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 8, 1862, p. 1

Congress - Second Session

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6.

SENATE. – Mr. Carlisle presented a petition numerously signed by citizens of Boston asking Congress to leave the negro question alone and to attend to the business of the country.

The bill to define the pay and emolument of the officers of the army was taken up.

Mr. Sherman said the bill did not meet the difficulty.  A year ago we were physically weak with no public debt, now we are physically strong, but financially weak.  The total amount of the expenses for next year will probably not be less than $500,000,000.  This is a greater expense than ever was borne by any nation.  The highest expenditure of Great Britain was never $500,000,000 a year, not even in the war with Napoleon.

Mr. Sherman here quoted from the London Post, the Government organ, which said that we (the U. S. Government,) were approaching national bankruptcy.  In his judgment these propositions were needed: first, the prompt levy of a tax of not less than $150,000,000.  Second, a careful revision of the laws regulating salaries and compensations.  Third, rigid scrutiny into the disbursement of all public funds, and prompt punishment of every officer taking money or allowing others to take it for property in the service of which the Government does not receive benefit.

Mr. King presented several petitions asking 300,000 copies of the Agricultural Report be printed in the German language.

HOUSE. – Mr. Conway, of Kansas, asked leave to offer the following, to which Mr. Maynard objected, and a unanimous consent was required to introduce it:

            Resolved, That the President be requested to furnish the House, if not incompatible with public interests, with the names of all persons arrested under order of any executive officer without legal process and confined in any of the forts or other prisons of this country as prisoners of war, the names of forts or other prisons in which said persons have been and are confined respectively, the date of the several arrests, together with a full statement of the charges and evidence upon which they were arrested, also the names of all such persons who have since been discharged, the date of their several discharges and the reasons for the same.

The House then took up the Treasury Note Bill.

Mr. Thomas, of Mass., gave the reasons which would induce him to vote against the bill as it now stands.

– Published in The Dubuque Herald, Dubuque, Iowa, Friday Morning, February 7, 1862, p. 1

A Hard Hit

The Memphis Appeal’s Richmond correspondent, writing on the 27^th ult., says: “You recollect how the Moniteur spoke of the landing of Napoleon on his return from Elba, and how it greeted his arrival in the Capital. ‘The Corsican monster has escaped!’  ‘The usurper has landed in France!’  ‘General Bonaparte is at Grenoble!’  ‘Napoleon is at Lyons’  ‘The Emperor is at Paris.’  ‘Vive l’Empereur!’  Such would be the tone, I fear, of too many of the inhabitants of Richmond toward McClellan.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Thursday Morning, March 27, 1862, p. 2