Showing posts with label Republicanism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicanism. Show all posts

Thursday, March 26, 2020

Major-General Patrick R. Cleburne et al. to General Joseph E. Johnston and the Division, Brigade and Regimental Commanders of the Army of Tennessee, January 2, 1864

[JANUARY 2, 1864.]

COMMANDING GENERAL, THE CORPS, DIVISION, BRIGADE, AND REGIMENTAL COMMANDERS OF THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE:

GENERAL: Moved by the exigency in which our country is now placed, we take the liberty of laying before you, unofficially, our views on the present state of affairs. The subject is so grave, and our views so new, we feel it a duty both to you and the cause that before going further we should submit them for your judgment and receive your suggestions in regard to them. We therefore respectfully ask you to give us an expression of your views in the premises. We have now been fighting for nearly three years, have spilled much of our best blood, and lost, consumed, or thrown to the flames an amount of property equal in value to the specie currency of the world. Through some lack in our system the fruits of our struggles and sacrifices have invariably slipped away from us and left us nothing but long lists of dead and mangled. Instead of standing defiantly on the borders of our territory or harassing those of the enemy, we are hemmed in today into less than two-thirds of it, and still the enemy menacingly confronts us at every point with superior forces. Our soldiers can see no end to this state of affairs except in our own exhaustion; hence, instead of rising to the occasion, they are sinking into a fatal apathy, growing weary of hardships and slaughters which promise no results. In this state of things it is easy to understand why there is a growing belief that some black catastrophe is not far ahead of us, and that unless some extraordinary change is soon made in our condition we must overtake it. The consequences of this condition are showing themselves more plainly every day; restlessness of morals spreading everywhere, manifesting itself in the army in a growing disregard for private rights; desertion spreading to a class of soldiers it never dared to tamper with before; military commissions sinking in the estimation of the soldier; our supplies failing; our firesides in ruins. If this state continues much longer we must be subjugated. Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late. We can give but a faint idea when we say it means the loss of all we now hold most sacred—slaves and all other personal property, lands, homesteads, liberty, justice, safety, pride, manhood. It means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by all the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, our maimed veterans as fit objects for derision. It means the crushing of Southern manhood, the hatred of our former slaves, who will, on a spy system, be our secret police. The conqueror's policy is to divide the conquered into factions and stir up animosity among them, and in training an army of negroes the North no doubt holds this thought in perspective. We can see three great causes operating to destroy us: First, the inferiority of our armies to those of the enemy in point of numbers; second, the poverty of our single source of supply in comparison with his several sources; third, the fact that slavery, from being one of our chief sources of strength at the commencement of the war, has now become, in a military point of view, one of our chief sources of weakness.

The enemy already opposes us at every point with superior numbers, and is endeavoring to make the preponderance irresistible. President Davis, in his recent message, says the enemy “has recently ordered a large conscription and made a subsequent call for volunteers, to be followed, if ineffectual, by a still further draft.” In addition, the President of the United States announces that “he has already in training an army of 100,000 negroes as good as any troops,” and every fresh raid he makes and new slice of territory he wrests from us will add to this force. Every soldier in our army already knows and feels our numerical inferiority to the enemy. Want of men in the field has prevented him from reaping the fruits of his victories, and has prevented him from having the furlough he expected after the last reorganization, and when he turns from the wasting armies in the field to look at the source of supply, he finds nothing in the prospect to encourage him. Our single source of supply is that portion of our white men fit for duty and not now in the ranks. The enemy has three sources of supply: First, his own motley population; secondly, our slaves; and thirdly, Europeans whose hearts are fired into a crusade against us by fictitious pictures of the atrocities of slavery, and who meet no hindrance from their Governments in such enterprise, because these Governments are equally antagonistic to the institution. In touching the third cause, the fact that slavery has become a military weakness, we may rouse prejudice and passion, but the time has come when it would be madness not to look at our danger from every point of view, and to probe it to the bottom. Apart from the assistance that home and foreign prejudice against slavery has given to the North, slavery is a source of great strength to the enemy in a purely military point of view, by supplying him with an army from our granaries; but it is our most vulnerable point, a continued embarrassment, and in some respects an insidious weakness. Wherever slavery is once seriously disturbed, whether by the actual presence or the approach of the enemy, or even by a cavalry raid, the whites can no longer with safety to their property openly sympathize with our cause. The fear of their slaves is continually haunting them, and from silence and apprehension many of these soon learn to wish the war stopped on any terms. The next stage is to take the oath to save property, and they become dead to us, if not open enemies. To prevent raids we are forced to scatter our forces, and are not free to move and strike like the enemy; his vulnerable points are carefully selected and fortified depots. Ours are found in every point where there is a slave to set free. All along the lines slavery is comparatively valueless to us for labor, but of great and increasing worth to the enemy for information. It is an omnipresent spy system, pointing out our valuable men to the enemy, revealing our positions, purposes, and resources, and yet acting so safely and secretly that there is no means to guard against it. Even in the heart of our country, where our hold upon this secret espionage is firmest, it waits but the opening fire of the enemy's battle line to wake it, like a torpid serpent, into venomous activity.

In view of the state of affairs what does our country propose to do? In the words of President Davis “no effort must be spared to add largely to our effective force as promptly as possible. The sources of supply are to be found in restoring to the army all who are improperly absent, putting an end to substitution, modifying the exemption law, restricting details, and placing in the ranks such of the able-bodied men now employed as wagoners, nurses, cooks, and other employés, as are doing service for which the negroes may be found competent.” Most of the men improperly absent, together with many of the exempts and men having substitutes, are now without the Confederate lines and cannot be calculated on. If all the exempts capable of bearing arms were enrolled, it will give us the boys below eighteen, the men above forty-five, and those persons who are left at home to meet the wants of the country and the army, but this modification of the exemption law will remove from the fields and manufactories most of the skill that directed agricultural and mechanical labor, and, as stated by the President, “details will have to be made to meet the wants of the country,” thus sending many of the men to be derived from this source back to their homes again. Independently of this, experience proves that striplings and men above conscript age break down and swell the sick lists more than they do the ranks. The portion now in our lines of the class who have substitutes is not on the whole a hopeful element, for the motives that created it must have been stronger than patriotism, and these motives added to what many of them will call breach of faith, will cause some to be not forthcoming, and others to be unwilling and discontented soldiers. The remaining sources mentioned by the President have been so closely pruned in the Army of Tennessee that they will be found not to yield largely. The supply from all these sources, together with what we now have in the field, will exhaust the white race, and though it should greatly exceed expectations and put us on an equality with the enemy, or even give us temporary advantages, still we have no reserve to meet unexpected disaster or to supply a protracted struggle. Like past years, 1864 will diminish our ranks by the casualties of war, and what source of repair is there left us? We therefore see in the recommendations of the President only a temporary expedient, which at the best will leave us twelve months hence in the same predicament we are in now. The President attempts to meet only one of the depressing causes mentioned; for the other two he has proposed no remedy. They remain to generate lack of confidence in our final success, and to keep us moving down hill as heretofore. Adequately to meet the causes which are now threatening ruin to our country, we propose, in addition to a modification of the President's plans, that we retain in service for the war all troops now in service, and that we immediately commence training a large reserve of the most courageous of our slaves, and further that we guarantee freedom within a reasonable time to every slave in the South who shall remain true to the Confederacy in this war. As between the loss of independence and the loss of slavery, we assume that every patriot will freely give up the latter—give up the negro slave rather than be a slave himself. If we are correct in this assumption it only remains to show how this great national sacrifice is, in all human probabilities, to change the current of success and sweep the invader from our country.

Our country has already some friends in England and France, and there are strong motives to induce these nations to recognize and assist us, but they cannot assist us without helping slavery, and to do this would be in conflict with their policy for the last quarter of a century. England has paid hundreds of millions to emancipate her West India slaves and break up the slave trade. Could she now consistently spend her treasure to reinstate slavery in this country? But this barrier once removed, the sympathy and the interests of these and other nations will accord with our own, and we may expect from them both moral support and material aid. One thing is certain, as soon as the great sacrifice to independence is made and known in foreign countries there will be a complete change of front in our favor of the sympathies of the world. This measure will deprive the North of the moral and material aid which it now derives from the bitter prejudices with which foreigners view the institution, and its war, if continued, will henceforth be so despicable in their eyes that the source of recruiting will be dried up. It will leave the enemy's negro army no motive to fight for, and will exhaust the source from which it has been recruited. The idea that it is their special mission to war against slavery has held growing sway over the Northern people for many years, and has at length ripened into an armed and bloody crusade against it. This baleful superstition has so far supplied them with a courage and constancy not their own. It is the most powerful and honestly entertained plank in their war platform. Knock this away and what is left? A bloody ambition for more territory, a pretended veneration for the Union, which one of their own most distinguished orators (Doctor Beecher in his Liverpool speech) openly avowed was only used as a stimulus to stir up the anti-slavery crusade, and lastly the poisonous and selfish interests which are the fungus growth of the war itself. Mankind may fancy it a great duty to destroy slavery, but what interest can mankind have in upholding this remainder of the Northern war platform? Their interests and feelings will be diametrically opposed to it. The measure we propose will strike dead all John Brown fanaticism, and will compel the enemy to draw off altogether or in the eyes of the world to swallow the Declaration of Independence without the sauce and disguise of philanthropy. This delusion of fanaticism at an end, thousands of Northern people will have leisure to look at home and to see the gulf of despotism into which they themselves are rushing.

The measure will at one blow strip the enemy of foreign sympathy and assistance, and transfer them to the South; it will dry up two of his three sources of recruiting; it will take from his negro army the only motive it could have to fight against the South, and will probably cause much of it to desert over to us; it will deprive his cause of the powerful stimulus of fanaticism, and will enable him to see the rock on which his so called friends are now piloting him. The immediate effect of the emancipation and enrollment of negroes on the military strength of the South would be: To enable us to have armies numerically superior to those of the North, and a reserve of any size we might think necessary; to enable us to take the offensive, move forward, and forage on the enemy. It would open to us in prospective another and almost untouched source of supply, and furnish us with the means of preventing temporary disaster, and carrying on a protracted struggle. It would instantly remove all the vulnerability, embarrassment, and inherent weakness which result from slavery. The approach of the enemy would no longer find every household surrounded by spies; the fear that sealed the master's lips and the avarice that has, in so many cases, tempted him practically to desert us would alike be removed. There would be no recruits awaiting the enemy with open arms, no complete history of every neighborhood with ready guides, no fear of insurrection in the rear, or anxieties for the fate of loved ones when our armies moved forward. The chronic irritation of hope deferred would be joyfully ended with the negro, and the sympathies of his whole race would be due to his native South. It would restore confidence in an early termination of the war with all its inspiring consequences, and even if contrary to all expectations the enemy should succeed in overrunning the South, instead of finding a cheap, ready-made means of holding it down, he would find a common hatred and thirst for vengeance, which would break into acts at every favorable opportunity, would prevent him from settling on our lands, and render the South a very unprofitable conquest. It would remove forever all selfish taint from our cause and place independence above every question of property. The very magnitude of the sacrifice itself, such as no nation has ever voluntarily made before, would appal our enemies, destroy his spirit and his finances, and fill our hearts with a pride and singleness of purpose which would clothe us with new strength in battle. Apart from all other aspects of the question, the necessity for more fighting men is upon us. We can only get a sufficiency by making the negro share the danger and hardships of the war. If we arm and train him and make him fight for the country in her hour of dire distress, every consideration of principle and policy demand that we should set him and his whole race who side with us free. It is a first principle with mankind that he who offers his life in defense of the State should receive from her in return his freedom and his happiness, and we believe in acknowledgment of this principle. The Constitution of the Southern States has reserved to their respective governments the power to free slaves for meritorious services to the State. It is politic besides. For many years, ever since the agitation of the subject of slavery commenced, the negro has been dreaming of freedom, and his vivid imagination has surrounded that condition with so many gratifications that it has become the paradise of his hopes. To attain it he will tempt dangers and difficulties not exceeded by the bravest soldier in the field. The hope of freedom is perhaps the only moral incentive that can be applied to him in his present condition. It would be preposterous then to expect him to fight against it with any degree of enthusiasm, therefore we must bind him to our cause by no doubtful bonds; we must leave no possible loophole for treachery to creep in. The slaves are dangerous now, but armed, trained, and collected in an army they would be a thousand fold more dangerous: therefore when we make soldiers of them we must make free men of them beyond all question, and thus enlist their sympathies also. We can do this more effectually than the North can now do, for we can give the negro not only his own freedom, but that of his wife and child, and can secure it to him in his old home. To do this, we must immediately make his marriage and parental relations sacred in the eyes of the law and forbid their sale. The past legislation of the South concedes that large free middle class of negro blood, between the master and slave, must sooner or later destroy the institution. If, then, we touch the institution at all, we would do best to make the most of it, and by emancipating the whole race upon reasonable terms, and within such reasonable time as will prepare both races for the change, secure to ourselves all the advantages, and to our enemies all the disadvantages that can arise, both at home and abroad, from such a sacrifice. Satisfy the negro that if he faithfully adheres to our standard during the war he shall receive his freedom and that of his race. Give him as an earnest of our intentions such immediate immunities as will impress him with our sincerity and be in keeping with his new condition, enroll a portion of his class as soldiers of the Confederacy, and we change the race from a dreaded weakness to a position of strength.

Will the slaves fight? The helots of Sparta stood their masters good stead in battle. In the great sea fight of Lepanto where the Christians checked forever the spread of Mohammedanism over Europe, the galley slaves of portions of the fleet were promised freedom, and called on to fight at a critical moment of the battle. They fought well, and civilization owes much to those brave galley slaves. The negro slaves of Saint Domingo, fighting for freedom, defeated their white masters and the French troops sent against them. The negro slaves of Jamaica revolted, and under the name of Maroons held the mountains against their masters for 150 years; and the experience of this war has been so far that half-trained negroes have fought as bravely as many other half-trained Yankees. If, contrary to the training of a lifetime, they can be made to face and fight bravely against their former masters, how much more probable is it that with the allurement of a higher reward, and led by those masters, they would submit to discipline and face dangers.

We will briefly notice a few arguments against this course. It is said Republicanism cannot exist without the institution. Even were this true, we prefer any form of government of which the Southern people may have the molding, to one forced upon us by a conqueror. It is said the white man cannot perform agricultural labor in the South. The experience of this army during the heat of summer from Bowling Green, Ky., to Tupelo, Miss., is that the white man is healthier when doing reasonable work in the open field than at any other time. It is said an army of negroes cannot be spared from the fields. A sufficient number of slaves is now administering to luxury alone to supply the place of all we need, and we believe it would be better to take half the able bodied men off a plantation than to take the one master mind that economically regulated its operations. Leave some of the skill at home and take some of the muscle to fight with. It is said slaves will not work after they are freed. We think necessity and a wise legislation will compel them to labor for a living. It is said it will cause terrible excitement and some disaffection from our cause. Excitement is far preferable to the apathy which now exists, and disaffection will not be among the fighting men. It is said slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties. We have now briefly proposed a plan which we believe will save our country. It may be imperfect, but in all human probability it would give us our independence. No objection ought to outweigh it which is not weightier than independence. If it is worthy of being put in practice it ought to be mooted quickly before the people, and urged earnestly by every man who believes in its efficacy. Negroes will require much training; training will require time, and there is danger that this concession to common sense may come too late.

P. R. Cleburne, major-general, commanding division; D. C. Govan, brigadier-general; John E. Murray, colonel Fifth Arkansas; G. F. Baucum, colonel Eighth Arkansas; Peter Snyder, lieutenant-colonel, commanding Sixth and Seventh Arkansas; E. Warfield, lieutenant-colonel, Second Arkansas; M. P. Lowrey, brigadier-general; A. B. Hardcastle, colonel Thirty-second and Forty-fifth Mississippi; F. A. Ashford, major Sixteenth Alabama; John W. Colquitt, colonel First Arkansas; Rich. J. Person, major Third and Fifth Confederate; G. S. Deakins, major Thirty-fifth and Eighth Tennessee; J. H. Collett, captain, commanding Seventh Texas; J. H. Kelly, brigadier-general, commanding Cavalry Division.

[32.]

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 52 (Serial No. 110), p. 586-92

Wednesday, June 27, 2018

Governor Salmon P. Chase to Senator Charles Sumner, February 14, 1860

Columbus, Feb. 14, I860.

Dear Sumner, Your congratulations, if not among the first, were by no means the least welcome; for I know the sincere & noble heart from which they came.

But I feel no pleasure in the thought of returning to the Senate. If circumstances warrant me in so doing I shall prefer to resign without taking my seat. These are days of too much concession to suit me.

We all remember you with love and admiration. Your picture hangs alone in my library over a framed autograph of Charles Carroll. It hangs with others, all of earnest men, in my dining room. I put them all up when I first opened my house, as a defiance to the proslavery men who would resist or debase republicanism — as symbols of my faith and my purposes.

Why should Seward retire from the Senate? Is he certain of the nomination at Chicago? I do not so read the signs exactly; but I shall not be disappointed, if such shall be the event. I look upon him as a great man, faithful to the cause of freedom & humanity, & worthy of any honor which can be conferred upon him. We don't agree in some views, but I should be ashamed of myself, if I could be moved to undervalue or decry him. On the contrary I heartily honor, & cheerfully praise &, if the Republicans choose him as their standard bearer, shall zealously support him.

Cordially your friend,
[SALMON P. CHASE.]

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. ChaseAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 285-6

Saturday, March 25, 2017

Diary of 1st Lieutenant Lemuel A. Abbott: Tuesday, September 6, 1864

O, such a terrible day! Rain, wind, sleet and everything to make it gloomy. The Vermont troops have voted to-day as directed by the Governor. My Company (E) cast seven votes for the Republican candidate. The other men didn't know who the Democratic candidate was and so didn't vote. Nothing has disgusted me so since I left Vermont. I'm sadly disappointed politically, in my Company, but the men are good fighters and I like them. They seem devoted to me. It is disappointing, though, to have to send such a report to Vermont! It's mortifying! But I mustn't let the men know how I feel for it can't be helped now. It makes me feel queer, though, for my Republicanism is as staunch as the granite hill (the Bar re granite quarries) on which I was born. I am dazed at the result of the vote in Company E! I guess I'm in the wrong pew politically; very few democrats in Barre.

SOURCE: Lemuel Abijah Abbott, Personal Recollections and Civil War Diary, 1864, p. 144

Friday, July 25, 2014

John G. Fee to Cassius M. Clay, December 12, 1859

Pittsburg, Pa., December 12, 1859.
Mr. C. M. Clay

Dear Friend: — I am still in the free States, being detained longer than I expected. My health is better than when I left home. We shall raise money enough to pay for our land, and open the way for other more extended interests.

I find Republicanism rising. The Republicans in Philadelphia have separated from the “mere peoples’ party.” They are going into the work in good earnest. I stopped with some true friends of yours, Wm. B. Thomas and Professor Cleveland. Many inquired for you. I told them you were still in the field, and the true friend of freedom. I believe this, and I am pained when I hear Republicans talk of such men as Bates, Blair, etc., and omit your name.

I have repeatedly spoken of you in public and private. I think the spirit is rising in the Republican ranks, and will yet demand a representative man. If you or Chase or Seward are on the ticket, or tried men, I shall expect to work with the Republicans. I shall continue to do all I can to urge a higher standard. Wm. B. Thomas of Philadelphia says he will thus work and expend money to induce a higher standard; but, if the party “flattens down” below what it was last time, he is off. Hundreds of others will do the same — yes, thousands; and that class of men the party can not well do without.

Dr. Hart of New York proposed that I address a letter to you, calling you out. I thought it not best to do so until I should see you personally, or write to you, and have an arrangement. I am having encouraging audiences — staying longer than I had intended — perhaps ’tis all well. I learn there is some feeling against me in Kentucky in consequence of an article in the Louisville Courier, representing me as approving John Brown's course, etc. Such is a direct perversion of my uniform and invariable teaching. I have been careful here, and always said I disapproved his manner of action — attempts to abduct, or incite insurrection; but that I thought God is speaking to the world through John Brown, in his spirit of consecration. I suppose I can not help the gullibility of the people, unless I attempt to correct by publishing. Is this best? Write to me at Cincinnati, care of Geo. L. Weed. I shall start for Lewis in a day or two; from thence to Cincinnati, and home.

John. G. Fee.

SOURCE: Cassius Marcellus Clay, The life of Cassius Marcellus Clay, Volume 1, p. 575-6

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Republican Landmarks

The attempt now making to revive the Republican party on an extra-constitutional platform which contemplates the erasure of a large number of stars from the National flag, makes this a fitting time for considering how far such an attempt is justified by the antecedents of the Republican party or the principles on which it was brought into power.  We will not measure the new creed by the standard of the Convention which nominated Mr. Lincoln, at Chicago.  The Chicago platform was a compromise, in which “advanced” Republicans, like Mr. Greeley, were willing to soften their more radical views in order to conciliate conservative voters.  A truer exposition of the aims of the Republican party is found in the speeches of the recognized leaders who furnished it with ideas, gave impulse and vitality to its movements, and infused into it the courage by which after ten years’ effort, it won its great national triumph.

Among these leaders Mr. Seward held the foremost rank, both in fact and in estimation of the party.  There was no Republican statesman with half his brains and accomplishments that had hodld of his political intrepidity.  During the long struggle of the party for existence and power, Seward boldly led where but few had the courage to follow.  Nobody can have forgotten the storm of obloquy that was raised by his famous “higher law” speech in the Senate.  The offensive doctrines of that speech were almost the sole stock in trade of the opponents of the Republican party, until they were again startled and shocked by the celebrated “irrepressible conflict” speech, delivered on the stump at Rochester in the autumn of 1858.  We may safely take these memorable speeches, which have made such a great figure in the political history of the last decade, as the most advanced landmarks of the most daring and aggressive Republicanism.

If it has been deemed expedient, during the progress of this war to sink even the Chicago platform out of sight, what shall be said of an attempt to revive the Republican party on principles beside which the “higher law” speech and the “irrepressible conflict” speech “pale their ineffectual fires?”

These were both emancipation speeches; but they were both fundamentally wrong, or else emancipation is possible without any such extra-constitutional resorts as Mr. Sumner and his coadjutors now propose.  Both of those noted speeches, though accepted with applause by radical anti-slavery men, were fundamentally wrong, or else emancipation is not even desirable by the sudden, violent, destructive methods which a few men are now found to advocate. – In the “higher law” speech, Mr. Seward in language of which time is already vindicating the wisdom, and will more fully vindicate it with the progress of events, said:

“It seems to me that all our difficulties, embarrassments, and dangers, arise, not out of perversions of the question of slavery, as some suppose, but from the want of moral courage to meet THIS QUESTION OF EMANCIPATION as we ought.  Consequently, we hear on one side demands – absurd, indeed, but yet unceasing – for an immediate and unconditional abolition of slavery; as if any power except the people of the Slave States could abolish it, and as if they could be moved to abolish it  BY MERELY SOUNDING THE TRUMPET LOUDLY, AND PROCLAMIMING EMANCIPATION, WHILE THE INSTITUTION IS INTERWOVEN WITH ALL THEIR SOCIAL AND POLITICAL INTERESTS, CONSTITUTIONS, AND CUSTOMS.”

On the other hand Mr. Seward declared that he equally disapproved of the views of our statesmen who say that slavery has always existed, and only GOD can indicate the way to remove it:

“Here, then,” he said, “is my point of separation from both these parties.  I feel assured that slavery will give way, and must give way TO SALUTARY INSTRUCTIONS OF ECONOMY AND TO THE RIPENING INFLUENCES OF HUMANITY; THAT EMANCIPATION IS INEVITABLE AND THAT IT IS NEAR; that it may be hastened or hindered; and that whether it shall be peaceful or violent depends upon the question whether it be hastened or hindered; that all measures which fortify slavery or extend it, tend to the consummation of violence; all that check its extension or abate its strength tend to its peaceful extirpation.  But I will adopt none but lawful, constitutional, and peaceful measures to accomplish even that end; and none such can I or will I forgo.  Nor do I know any important or responsible political body that proposes to do more than this.  No free state claims to extend its legislation into a slave state.  None claims that Congress shall USURP power to abolish slavery in the slave states.  None claims that any violent, unconstitutional, or unlawful measure shall be embraced.  And, on the other hand, if we offer no scheme or plan for the adoption of the slave states, with the assent and co-operation of Congress, it is only because the slave states are unwilling, as yet, to receive such suggestions, or even to entertain the question of emancipation in any form.”

Mr. Seward’s repudiation of all sudden, violent, or unconstitutional means for effecting emancipation is again asserted in the closing paragraph of this very able and celebrated speech:

“While we leave slavery to the care of the states where it exists, let us inflexibly direct the policy of the government to circumscribe its limits and favor ITS ULTIMATE EXTINGUISHMENT.  Let those who have this misfortune entailed upon them, instead of contriving how to maintain an equilibrium that never had existence, consider carefully how at some time – it may be ten, or twenty, or even fifty years hence – by some means, by all means of their own and WITH OUR AID, WITHOUT SUDDEN CHANGE OR VIOLENT ACTION they may bring about the emancipation of labor, and its restoration to its just dignity and power in the state.

More than eight years elapsed after the delivery of this speech before Mr. Seward mad his well-abused exposition of the “irrepressible conflict.”  His mind, meanwhile, had undergone no change, except to acquire increased confidence in the universal triumph of freedom throughout our national borders.  A single quotation will sufficiently illustrate his views of the methods by which this triumph will be achieved:

“It remains to say on this point only one word to guard against misapprehension.  If these states are to again become universally slaveholding, I do not pretend to say with what violations of the Constitution that end shall be accomplished.  On the other hand, while I do confidently believe and hope that my country will yet become a land of universal freedom, I DO NOT EXPECT THAT IT WILL BE MADE SO OTHERWISE THAN THROUGH THE ACTION OF THE SEVERAL STATES, CO-OPERATING WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND ALL ACTING IN STRICT CONFORMITY WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE CONSTITUTIONS.”

We submit that we have clearly established to position which we undertook to maintain, namely, that the new scheme for breaking down the state governments of the South for the purpose of bringing slavery within the control of Congress is not Republicanism.  Whatever may be its merits or its disadvantages, it flies in the teeth, not only of the Chicago platform, but of the most advanced views which have ever been accepted by the most radical wing of the Republican party. – {New York World.

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

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Reconstruction of the Democratic Party

On the 12th of this month, one year ago, the “dogs of war” were unloosed, the cannon was unlimbered and belched forth the parricidal shot that proclaimed from the hot-bed of treason, that the civil war was fairly inaugurated; that peace which for nearly a half century had dwelt in our fair country, had blown, and the desolation of an internecine struggle had commenced.  Previous to that time the political principles of the nation had assumed a strange aspect. – All of the old questions that divided the people into parties had sunk away and been forgotten.  The national bank, sub-treasury system, tariff, internal improvements, all had been harmonized, and the country was at peace on these great political questions.  The Whig party, which had given life to these issues, and died, and with its dissolution, the Democratic party had almost sunk into desuetude.  A new political organization had been formed, growing out of the rapid strides that slavery had made.  It was started by no political demagogues with the expectation of rallying around them a powerful party and hoisting into power some political favorites.  But men of principle, who saw the rapid encroachments of a stupendous evil and the fearful result if it were permitted to overspread our country, determined to stay its progress, and for that purpose rallied around them some of the best talent of the country and laid down a platform of principles, as a basis for a new political organization, the chief plank of which was hostility to the advance of slavery.  They were not abolitionists, feebly fighting against the evil in its strongholds, but patriots, bent upon staying its progress.  By aiming at too much they might have lost all.  The public mind was ripe for confining slavery to the limits of the States in which it then existed, while it would have rebelled against any attempt to destroy it there.

The new platform of principles not only enlisted the best talent of the country, but it called for the co-operation of the moral men of the nation, until it soon became apparent that it embraced the great majority of the people of the North, and was making inroad among the better informed classes of those States where the chains of slavery pressed less gallingly. – Toward this new organization the old Democratic party, which in name still kept the field, although shorn of many of its best men and all of its old principles, showed a hostile front.  It had always been a negative organization, and it was strictly in accordance with its antecedents to oppose any measure assumed by any other party.  The first gun fired upon Fort Sumter destroyed all organized pro-slavery feeling at the North, it disrupted the Democratic party and scattered it like chaff before the wind.  As a political organization it was emphatically dead, as it could not  maintain its opposition to Republicanism and at the same time be loyal to the North.  That which destroyed the Democratic organization gave life and vigor to the Republican party, it intensified its principles; no longer seeking to stay slavery within its already overgrown limits, it sought to curtail its existing dimensions.  With the progress of the war, slavery fell so into disrepute that even its friends began to forsake it, justly regarding it as the cause of all our troubles.  Gathering boldness, Republicanism now sought to provide a way for its final extinction, and, in the language of Wendell Phillips, “for the first time in the history of the anti-slavery North, the Government has spoken; the President who first spoke an anti-slavery word after he got into the chair is our present one,” and to show the advance of anti-slavery principles, the press that had formerly represented the Democratic party, was the loudest in encoring the sentiments enunciated by the President.

In this condition of affairs, as we attempted to show in our Monday morning’s issue, a few of the old bell-weathers of the defunct democratic party, who still hankered after the loaves and fishes and whose sympathies were with the South, have attempted its re-construction on the basis of opposition to Republican principles as matured by the war; or in other words, an advocacy of the system of human chattelism, the maintenance of that institution which has been the cause of all the heart agonies, bloodshed and misery, that have overspread our once happy country during the last twelvemonth.  In its issue of Saturday the Democrat of this city handed in its allegiance to this faction, and taking heart from this demonstration of the debris of the old Democratic party to kick itself into existence, calls upon the “Democrats of the State, county, town and district to stand ready to fall into line.”  “Let there be no wavering in the ranks,” it says, “for the day of battle is dawning, and the enemy is already in sight.”  And who is that enemy?  The anti-slavery men of the North.  Unless we are grievously mistaken in the intelligence of our countrymen, both native and adopted, a party founded upon such basis can never possess vitality in the free States of the North.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Wednesday Morning, April 2, 1862, p. 2