Edward Bates to the Whig Committee of New York, February 24, 1859

St. Louis, Feb. 24, 1859.

To Messrs. J. PHILIPS PHOENIX, WILLIS BLACKSTONE, H. M. BININGER, DAVID J. LILET AND H. R. SMITH, Committee, New York.

Sirs: A short time ago I was favored with your note of the 7th inst., covering a resolution of the Committee, to the effect that it is inexpedient at this time further to discuss or agitate the Negro question, but rather to turn the attention of the people to other topics — "topics of general importance, such as our Foreign Relations, including the Extension of Territory; the building of Railroads for National purposes; the improvement of our Harbors, the navigation of our Rivers to facilitate Internal Commerce; the subject of Currency, and a Tariff of Duties, and other means of developing our own internal resources, our home wealth, and binding together by ties of national and fraternal feelings, the various parts and sections of our widely extended Republic."

Your letter, gentlemen, opens a very wide field, in asking for my "opinion upon the subject, and my views as to the signs of the times." Books have been written upon these matters, and speeches delivered by the thousand ; and yet the argument seems as far from being exhausted as it was at the beginning ; and I take it for certain that you do not expect or desire me to discuss at large, all or any of these interminable quarrels. That I have opinions upon all or most of them, is true — not the opinions of this or that party, ready to be abandoned or modified to suit this or that platform, but my own opinions — perhaps the more fixed and harder to be changed because deliberately formed in the retirement of private life, free from the exigencies of official responsibility and from the perturbations of party policy. They are my own opinions, right or wrong.

As to the Negro question — I have always thought, and often declared in speech and in print, that it is a pestilent question, the agitation of which has never done good to any party, section or class, and never can do good, unless it be accounted good to stir up the angry passions of men, and exasperate the unreasoning jealousy of sections, and by those bad means foist some unfit men into office, and keep some fit men out. It is a sensitive question into whose dangerous vortex it is quite possible for good men to be drawn unawares. But when I see a man, at the South or the North, of mature age and some experience, persist in urging the question, after the sorrowful experience of the last few years, I can attribute his conduct to no higher motive than personal ambition or sectional prejudice.

As to the power of the General Government to protect the persons and properties, and advance the interests of the people, by laying taxes, raising armies and navies, building forts and arsenals, light houses, moles, and breakwaters, surveying the coasts and adjacent seas, improving rivers, lakes, and harbors, and making roads — I should be very sorry to doubt the existence of the power, or the duty to exercise it, whenever the constituted authorities have the means in their hands, and are convinced that its exercise is necessary to protect the country and advance the prosperity of the people.

In my own opinion, a government that has no power to protect the harbors of its country against winds and waves and human enemies, nor its rivers against snags, sands and rocks, nor to build roads for the transportation of its armies and its mails and the commerce of its people, is a poor, impotent government, and not at all such a government as our fathers thought they had made when they produced the Constitution which was greeted by intelligent men everywhere with admiration and gratitude as a government free enough for all the ends of legal liberty and strong enough for all the purposes of national and individual protection. A free people, if it be wise, will make a good constitution; but a constitution, however good in itself, did never make a free people. The people do not derive their rights from the government, but the government derives its powers from the people; and those powers are granted for the main, if not the only, purpose of protecting the rights of the people. Protection, then, if not the sole, is the chief end of government.

And it is for the governing power to judge, in every instance, what kind and what degree of protection is needful — whether a Navy to guard our commerce all around the world, or an Army to defend the country against armed invasion from without, or domestic insurrection from within; or a Tariff, to protect our home industry against the dangerous obtrusion of foreign labor and capital.

Of the existence of the power and duty of the Government to protect the People in their persons, their property, their industry and their locomotion, I have no doubt; but the time, the mode and the measure of protection, being always questions of policy and prudence, must of necessity be left to the wisdom and patriotism of those whose duty it is to make laws for the good government of the country. And with them I freely leave it, as the safest, and indeed the only, constitutional depository of the power.

As to our Foreign Policy generally, I have but little to say. I am not much of a progressive, and am content to leave it where Washington [Jefferson] placed it, upon that wise, virtuous, safe maxim — "Peace [. . .] with all nations; entangling alliance[s] with none." The greedy and indiscriminate appetite for foreign acquisition, which makes us covet our neighbor's lands, and devise cunning schemes to get them, has little of my sympathy. I view it as a sort of political gluttony, as dangerous to our body politic as gluttony is to the natural man — producing disease certainly, hastening death, probably. Those of our politicians who are afflicted with this morbid appetite are wont to cite the purchase of Louisiana and Florida, as giving countenance to their inordinate desires. But the cases are wholly unlike in almost every particular. Louisiana was indispensable to our full and safe enjoyment of an immense region which was already owned, and its acquisition gave us the unquestioned control of that noble system of Mississippi waters, which nature seems to have made to be one and indivisible, and rounded off the map of the nation into one uniform and compacted whole. Nothing remained to mar and disfigure our national plat, but Florida, and that was desirable, less for its intrinsic value, than because it would form a dangerous means of annoyance, in case of war with a Maritime Power, surrounded as it is, on three sides by the ocean, and touching three of our present States, with no barrier between. The population of Louisiana and Florida, when acquired, was very small compared with the largeness of the territory; and, lying in contact with the States, was easily and quickly absorbed into and assimilated with the mass of our people. Those countries were acquired, moreover, in the most peaceful and friendly manner, and for a satisfactory consideration.

Now, without any right or any necessity, it is hard to tell what we do not claim in all the continent south of us, and the adjacent islands. Cuba is to be the first fruit of our grasping enterprise, and that is to be gotten at all hazards, by peaceful purchase if we can, by war and conquest if we must.² But Cuba is only an outpost to the Empire of Islands and continental countries that are to follow. A leading Senator³ has lately declared (in debate on the Thirty Million bill⁴) that we must not only have Cuba, but all the islands from Cape Florida to the Spanish Main, so as to surround the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, and make them our "mare clausum" like the Mediterranean, in old times, when the Roman Emperor ruled both its shores, from the pillars of Hercules to the Hellespont.⁵ This claim of mare nostrum implies, of course, that we must own the continent that bounds our sea on the west, as well as the string of islands that inclose it on the east — that is, Mexico, Central America, and all South America, so far south at least as the Orinoco.⁶ In that wide compass of sea and land there are a good many native governments, and provinces belonging to the strongest maritime powers, and a narrow continental isthmus which we ourselves, as well as England and France, are wont to call the highway of nations. To fulfill the grand conception, and perfect our tropical empire, we must buy or conquer all these torrid countries, and their mongrel populations. As to buying them, it strikes me that we had better waite [sic] awhile, at least until the Government has ceased to borrow money to pay its current expenses. And as to conquering them, perhaps it would be prudent to pause and make some estimate of costs and contingencies, before we rush into war with all maritime Europe and half America.

I am not one of those who believe that the United States is not an independent and safe nation, because Cuba is not a part of it. On the contrary, I believe that we are quite capable of self-defense, even if the "Queen of the Antilles" were a province of England, France or Russia; and surely, while it remains an appendage of a comparatively feeble nation, Cuba has much more cause to fear us than we have to fear Cuba. In fact, gentlemen, I cannot help doubting the honesty of the cowardly argument by which we are urged to rob poor old Spain of this last remnant of her Western empire, for fear that she might use it to rob us.

But suppose we could get, honestly and peaceably, the whole of the country — continental and insular — from the Rio Grande to the Orinoco, and from Trinidad to Cuba, and thus establish our mare clausum, and shut the gate of the world across the Isthmus, can we govern them wisely and well? For the last few years, in the attempt to govern our home Territories of Kansas and Utah, we have not very well maintained the dignity and justice of the nation, nor secured the peace and prosperity of the subject people.⁷ Can we hope to do better with the various mixed races of Mexico, Central and South America, and the West India Islands? Some of those countries have been trying for fifty years to establish republican governments on our model, but in every instance have miserably failed; and yet, there was no obstacle to complete success but their own inaptitude.

For my part, I should be grieved to see my country become, like Rome, a conquering and dominant nation; for I think there are few or no examples in history, of Governments whose chief objects were glory and power, which did ever secure the happiness and prosperity of their own people. Such Governments may grow great and famous, and advance a few of their citizens to wealth and nobility; but the price of their grandeur is the personal independence and individual freedom of their people. Still less am I inclined to see absorbed into our system, "on an equal footing with the original States," the various and mixed races (amounting to I know not how many millions) which inhabit the continent and islands south of our present border. I am not willing to inoculate our body politic with the virus of their diseases, political and social — diseases which, with them, are chronic and hereditary, and with us could hardly fail to produce corruption in the head and weakness in the members.

Our own country, as it is, in position, form and size, is a wonder which proclaims a wisdom above the wit of man. Large enough for our posterity, for centuries to come: All in the temperate zone, and therefore capable of a homogeneous population, yet so diversified in climates and soils, as to produce everything that is necessary to the comfort and wealth of a great people: Bounded east and west by great oceans, and bisected in the middle by a mighty river, which drains and fructifies the continent, and binds together the most southern and northern portions of our land by a bond stronger than iron. Beside all this, it is new and growing — the strongest on the continent, with no neighbor whose power it fears, or of whose ambition it has cause to be jealous. Surely such a country is great enough and good enough for all the ends of honest ambition and virtuous power.

It seems to me that an efficient home-loving Government, moderate and economical in its administration, peaceful in its objects, and just to all nations, need have no fear of invasion at home, or serious aggression abroad. The nations of Europe have to stand continually in defense of their existence; but the conquest of our county by a foreign power is simply impossible, and no nation is so absurd as to entertain the thought. We may conquer ourselves by local strifes and sectional animosities; and when, by our folly and wickedness, we have accomplished that great calamity, there will be none to pity us for the consequences of so great a crime.

If our Government would devote all its energies to the promotion of peace and friendship with all foreign countries, the advancement of Commerce, the increase of Agriculture, the growth and stability of Manufactures, and the cheapening, quickening and securing the internal trade and travel of our country ; in short, if it would devote itself in earnest to the establishment of a wise and steady policy of internal government, I think we should witness a growth and consolidation of wealth and comfort and power for good, which cannot be reasonably hoped for from a fluctuating policy, always watching for the turns of good fortune, or from a grasping ambition to seize new territories, which are hard to get and harder to govern.

The present position of the Administration is a sorrowful commentary upon the broad democracy of its professions. In theory, the people have the right and ability to do anything; in practice, we are verging rapidly to the One-Man power.

The President, the ostensible head of the National Democrats, is eagerly striving to concentrate power in his own hands, and thus to set aside both the People and their Representatives in the actual affairs of government. Having emptied the Treasury, which he found full, and living precariously upon borrowed money, he now demands of Congress to entrust to his unchecked discretion the War power, the Purse and the Sword. First, he asks Congress to authorize him, by statute, to use the Army to take military possession of the Northern Mexico, and hold it under his protectorate, and as a security for debts due to our citizens⁸ — civil possession would not answer, for that might expose him, as in the case of Kansas, to be annoyed by a factious Congress and a rebellious Territorial Legislature.

Secondly: Not content with this, he demands the discretionary power to use the Army and Navy in the South, also in blockading the coast and marching his troops into the interior of Mexico and New Granada, to protect our citizens against all evil-doers along the transit routes of Tehuantepec and Panama.⁹ And he and his supporters in Congress claim this enormous power upon the ground that, in this particular at least, he ought to be the equal of the greatest monarch of Europe. They forget that our fathers limited the power of the President by design, and for the reason that they had found out by sad experience that the monarchs of Europe were too strong for freedom.

Third: In strict pursuance of this doctrine, first publicly announced from Ostend,¹⁰ he demands of Congress to hand over to him thirty millions of dollars to be used at his discretion, to facilitate his acquisition of Cuba.¹¹ Facilitate how ? Perhaps it might be imprudent to tell.

Add to all this, the fact (as yet unexplained) that one of the largest naval armaments which ever sailed from our coast is now operating in South America, ostensibly against a poor little republic far up the Plate River,¹² to settle some little quarrel between the two Presidents.¹³ If Congress had been polite enough to grant the President's demand of the sword and the purse against Mexico, Central America and Cuba, this navy, its duty done at the south, might be made, on its way home, to arrive in the Gulf very opportunely, to aid the " Commander-in-Chief " in the acquisition of some very valuable territory.

I allude to these facts with no malice against Mr. Buchanan, but as evidences of the dangerous change which is now obviously sought to be made in the practical working of the Government — the concentration of power in the hands of the President, and the dangerous policy, now almost established, of looking abroad for temporary glory and aggrandizement, instead of looking at home, for all the purposes of good government — peaceable, moderate, economical, protecting all interests alike, and by a fixed policy, calling into safe exercise all the talents and industry of our people, and thus steadily advancing our country in everything which can make a nation great, happy, and permanent.

The rapid increase of the Public Expenditures (and that, too, under the management of statesmen professing to be peculiarly economical) is an alarming sign of corruption and decay.

That increase bears no fair proportion to the growth and expansion of the country, but looks rather like wanton waste or criminal negligence. The ordinary objects of great expense are not materially augmented — the Army and Navy remain on a low peace establishment— the military defenses are little, if at all, enlarged — the improvement of Harbors, Lakes and Rivers is abandoned, and the Pacific Railroad is not only not begun but its very location is scrambled for by angry sections, which succeed in nothing but mutual defeat. In short, the money to an enormous amount (I am told at the rate of $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 a year) is gone, and we have little or nothing to show for it. In profound peace with foreign nations, and surrounded with the proofs of National growth and individual prosperity, the Treasury, by less than two years of mismanagement, is made bankrupt, and the Government itself is living from hand to mouth, on bills of credit and borrowed money!

This humiliating state of things could hardly happen if men in power were both honest and wise. The Democratic economists in Congress confess that they have recklessly wasted the Public Revenue; they confess it by refusing to raise the Tariff to meet the present exigency, and by insisting that they can replenish the exhausted Treasury and support the Government, in credit and efficiency, by simply striking off their former extravagances.

An illustrious predecessor of the President is reported to have declared "that those who live on borrowed money ought to break." I do not concur in that harsh saying; yet I am clearly of opinion that the Government, in common prudence (to say nothing of pride and dignity), ought to reserve its credit for great transactions and unforeseen emergencies. In common times of peace, it ought always to have an established revenue, equal, at least, to its current expenses. And that revenue ought to be so levied as to foster and protect the Industry of the country employed in our most necessary and important manufactures.

Gentlemen, I cannot touch upon all the topics alluded to in your letter and resolution. I ought rather to beg your pardon for the prolixity of this answer. I speak for no party, because the only party I ever belonged to has ceased to exist as an organized and militant body.

And I speak for no man but myself.

I am fully aware that my opinions and views of public policy are of no importance to anybody but me, and there is good reason to fear that some of them are so antiquated and out of fashion as to make it very improbable that they will ever again be put to the test of actual practice.

Most respectfully,

EDWARD BATES.

_______________

² This was the substance of the Ostend Manifesto which Buchanan as Minister to Great Britain had joined Ministers John Y. Mason and Pierre Soulé in promulgating. As Secretary of State under President Polk, Buchanan had tried to buy Cuba. In his second, third, and fourth annual messages he urged Congress to cooperate with him in securing it by negotiation.

³ Robert Toombs of Georgia: Whig state legislator, 1837-1840, 1841-1844; states' rights Democratic congressman, 1845-1853; U. S. senator, 1853-1861. He was later a leader in the Georgia Secession Convention, and congressman, brigadier-general, and secretary of State under the Confederacy.

⁴ January, 1859, Senate Reports, 35 Cong., 2 Sess., ser. no. 994, doc. no. 351. The bill purposed to appropriate $30,000,000 "to facilitate the acquisition of Cuba by negotiation." Senator Slidell (infra, Nov. 24, 1859, note 89) introduced it on January 10. 1859 (Cong. Globe, 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 277) ; it was reported favorably by the Committee on Foreign Relations of which he was chairman, on January 24, 1859 (ibid., 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 538) ; it was debated at great length on January 24, February 9-10, February 15—17, February 21, and February 25 (ibid., 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 538-544, 904-909, 934-940, 960968, 1038, Appendix [155-169], 1058-1063, 1079-1087, 1179-1192, 1326-1363) ; but because of opposition, it was withdrawn on February 26 (ibid., 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 13S51387). At the next session, on December 8, 1859, Senator Slidell reintroduced this bill (ibid., 36 Cong., 1 Sess., 53), had it referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations on December 21 (ibid., 36 Cong., 1 Sess., 199), reported it out favorably to the Senate on May 30, 1860, but because of opposition did not push it (ibid., 36 Cong., 1 Sess., 2456). He promised to call it up again at the next session, but when that time arrived was too busy seceding to bother about Cuba.

⁵ On January 24, Toombs had said, "Cuba has fine ports, and with her acquisition, we can make first the Gulf of Mexico, and then the Caribbean Sea, a mare clausum. Probably younger men than you or I will live to see the day when no flag shall float there except by permission of the United States of America . . . that development, that progress throughout the tropics [is] the true, fixed unalterable policy of the nation." Ibid., 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 543.

⁶ I. e., as far as Venezuela.

⁷ Bitterness over the slavery question had reached the point of armed conflict, raids, and murder in Kansas in 1855-1856, and Utah was at this time subject to frequent Indian raids. It was in 1859, too, that the Republicans tried to prohibit polygamy in Utah and the Democrats succeeded, probably with slavery in other territories in mind, in preventing Congressional legislation on the subject.

⁸ Dec. 6, 1858, James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, V, 514. See infra, Feb. 15, 1860.

⁹ J. D. Richardson, op. cit., V, 516-517.

¹⁰ Supra, April 20, 1859, note 2.

¹¹ J. D. Richardson, op. cit., V, 508-511.

¹² Rio de La Plata in South America.

¹³ An expedition of some 19 ships, 200 guns, and 2.500 men which was sent against Paraguay because a vessel of that nation had fired upon the United States steamer Water Witch. A mere show of force sufficed to secure both an apology and an indemnity on February 10, 1859. The President of Argentina was so interested and so pleased that he presented the commander with a sword.

SOURCE: Howard K. Beale, Editor, Annual Report of The American Historical Association For The Year 1930, Vol. 4, The Diary Of Edward Bates, pp. 1-9

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, May 21, 1866

Captain S. P. Lee called on me to-day respecting his orders to Mare Island. The President on Saturday showed me an application which Lee had made to him to be relieved from the orders and placed on leave for one year. Mr. Blair had left with me a similar paper, unsigned, however. The President inquired what he should do with the paper. I answered that it was an extraordinary application even if made to the Department, but more extraordinary in passing over the Department and applying to the President to rid himself of orders.

The President said he would refer the paper to me to dispose of. It reached me this A.M., and Lee followed it within half an hour. He showed a consciousness of manner in opening the subject, and made a half-turn apology for having gone to the President by saying, if he had not called on me, his father-in-law, Mr. Blair, had. I did not conceal from him my surprise at the unusual course he had pursued, the more so as his age, experience, and long attendance at Washington precluded any idea that it was the result of ignorance.

I told him that he had been favored and fortunate in some respects beyond any officer of his grade, perhaps beyond any officer in the service; that he could not expect to remain off duty while all others were on duty; that he had been eight months on waiting orders, and that no officer had asked a year's leave; that he assigned no reason, nor could I conceive of any that would justify such leave.

He said his case was peculiar and he wished to remain in Washington to attend to his promotion.

Then, said I, any officer would be entitled to the same privilege, and the service would soon be in a demoralized state; that I did not desire for his own reputation to see him seated at the threshold of the Executive Mansion, or at the door of the Senate, beseeching for undue favors; that he would do well to leave his case in the hands of the Department, as did other officers. He certainly would fare as well if away as if here.

The interview was long and unpleasant. Again this evening he has called at my house to repeat the same plea.

The President, I find, is by no means pleased with the steps that have been taken in regard to Fox's going to Russia. He thinks that injustice is designed towards me by Seward, certain Radicals, and by Fox himself. His surmises are probably correct, except as regards Fox, who does not wish to do me wrong, though, perhaps, not sufficiently considerate in his efforts for this mission; and on other occasions the same fault may appear.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 511-2

A New Lesson on Dying in the Last Ditch, September 15, 1864

Why didn’t Denmark die in the last ditch? Plucky as she has been she happens to be made of flesh and blood, and this sort of dying is not a thing for flesh and blood to do.  It may be talked about; all mankind has a weakness that way; but it never has happened, and never will.  Of course we refer to people collectively, and not to individuals.  A person here and there, seized with some sublime phrenzy may take death sooner than yield.  A people never dies thus, not even the bravest.  A man my commit suicide; a people cannot.  “Give me liberty, or give me death,” is a very fine sentiment, and ought, we suppose, to be universally adopted, and either lived, or died, up to.  But it isn’t done.  Men in general, somehow can’t overcome the instinct of self-preservation.  They’ll take any measure of wrong sooner than death.  “Better a living dog than a dead lion,” is a maxim that, we are afraid, commends itself to our pour nature now as much as ever.  Are there braver men on earth than Hungarians, or the Poles, or the Cireassians?  And yet have we not lately seen them all, as we now see the brave Danes, bow themselves to their conqueror, sooner than to fight to extermination?  They did this not in any want of courage.  They had courage enough.  It was precisely that no courage could help them that they stopped fighting.  Courage is of no avail without strength; and when their strength had been broken up by their enemies, submission came. Cowards yield because they won’t help themselves.  Brave men yield because they can’t help themselves.  That is just the difference between them.

The Danes never protested so loudly that they would fight to the death, as for a week or two before they gave in.  Nothing is more common than this.  We saw it in the late Crimean war.  When the reverses and discomfitures of two campaigns culminated in the overthrow of Sebastopol itself, Russia had nothing to answer but an order for a new levy of 100,000 men.  From the Czar to the lowest serf, there was an outburst of continued defiance, so imposing that even the cool Richard Cobden who had once declared in Parliament that “Russia might be crumbled up like a sheet of brown paper,” issued a pamphlet maintaining that Russia was unconquerable, and that peace must be made with her own terms.  Yet a month did not collapse before the Czar made known his readiness to accept terms which not only conceded all the points originally in dispute, but others of a yet more humiliating character.  Just so did the Mexicans.  One of their last acts before submission was to create a Dictator, with absolute power for everything except submission; and a proclamation to the provinces, declaring resistance to the death.  This access of new defiance just before succumbing is perfectly natural.  The pride of the worsted party is always the last quality to yield.  It rallies when the strength no longer can.  It is the return of the spirit upon itself when the arm droops—a self-assertion, or self-protest of the soul, Necessarily incident, perhaps to its superiority over the flesh, but for all that, perfectly useless.  We don’t call such exhibitions mere bravado.  They are not.  On the contrary, they are the most apt to be seen in those who are most truly brave.  The higher in the spirit, the sharper the recoil.  At no time have our rebels protested stronger that they will never submit than they are now doing.  Jeff. Davis said the other day with unusual emphasis that “We will have extermination or independence.”  He felt so, undoubtedly; but the truth is, he neither.  His people will not take the one, and we have no intentions to give the other.  Precisely as Tennessee and Louisiana, and Arkansas have neither extermination of independence, so will it be with all the remaining eight States of the so-called Confederacy.  The twenty five millions of loyal states have the ability to overcome the remaining strength of this rebellion.  They mean to do it.  When it is done these people will do precisely what every other people at war have done when their strength was gone—they will submit.  They will yield when exhausted—will stop fighting when they can fight no longer.  All this talk about “extermination” is natural enough, and, after a fashion, credible, but it amounts to nothing.  It will not give these rebels on breath the more or less.  “The thing which hath been, it is that which shall be, and there is no new thing under the sun”—not even under this remarkable southern sun of ours.  We attempt no prediction when this submission will come through it sometimes seems to us that it cannot be far at farthest.  If it is certain that the rebellion has been greatly weakened in fighting material, and that the disparity between its available force and our own is daily becoming greater.  There are those who believe that even now it is sustained only by the hope the last draft ordered by President Lincoln will not be sustained by the Northern people and that he himself will be repudiated at the election in November.  It is expected by some who call themselves close observers, that the rebels will give up the fight next Winter, if this hope of theirs is not realized.  The submission my occur than, and it may not.  It is impossible to tell.  But the particular time is of no essential consequence.  It is enough to know that it must come sooner or later: and just as soon as the warning strength of the rebels comes to the point of exhaustion.  It would appear that we ought to expect an earlier submission than in the other wars we have averted to, because that submission involves no hard terms—nothing but a resumption of equal rights under the same broad Constitution.  But perhaps this rational inducement may have no such effect.  We do not calculate upon it.  We simply affirm that these rebels will succumb sooner than be exterminated, and that this yielding will be preceded by strong talk, and be sudden when it comes.  N. Y. Times.

SOURCES: “A New Lesson on Dying in the Last Ditch,” Janesville Daily Gazette, Janesville, Wisconsin, Thursday, September 15, 1864, p. 2; “A New Lesson on Dying in the Last Ditch,” The Tiffin Tribune, Tiffin, Ohio, Thursday, September 22, 1864, p. 1, “Highly Pertinent,” Detroit Free Press, Detroit, Michigan, Saturday, August 27, 1864, p. 2.

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: November 25, 1863

We have an unintelligible dispatch from Gen. Bragg, saying he had, yesterday, a prolonged contest with the enemy for the possession of Lookout Mountain, during which one of his divisions suffered severely, and that the manoeuvring of the hostile army was for position. This was the purport, and the language, as well as I remember. There is no indication of the probable result—no intimation whether the position was gained. But the belief is general that Bragg will retreat, and that the enemy may, if he will, penetrate the heart of the South! To us it seems as if Bragg has been in a fog ever since the battle of the 20th of September. He refused to permit ——— to move on the enemy's left for nearly two months, and finally consented to it when the enemy had been reinforced by 20,000 from Meade, and by Sherman's army from Memphis, of 20,000, just when he could not spare a large detachment! In other words, lying inert before a defeated army, when concentrated; and dispersing his forces when the enemy was reinforced and concentrated! If disaster ensues, the government will suffer the terrible consequences, for it assumed the responsibility of retaining him in command when the whole country (as the press says) demanded his removal.

From letters received the last few days at the department, I perceive that the agents of the government are impressing everywhere—horses, wagons, hogs, cattle, grain, potatoes, etc. etc.—leaving the farmers only enough for their own subsistence. This will insure subsistence for the army, and I hope it will be a death-blow to speculation, as government pays less than one-fourth the prices demanded in market. Let the government next sell to non-producers, and every man of fighting age will repair to the field, and perhaps the invader may be driven back.

We have the speech of the French Emperor, which gives us no encouragement, but foreshadows war with Russia, and perhaps a general war in Europe.

We have rain again. This may drive the armies in Virginia into winter quarters, as the roads will be impracticable for artillery.

The next battle will be terrific; not many men on either side will be easily taken prisoners, as exchanges have ceased.

Dr. Powell brought us a bushel of meal to-day, and some persimmons.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 104-5

John L. Motley to Anna Lothrop Motley, November 17, 1863

November 17, 1863.

My Dearest Mother: . . . I shall say nothing of our home affairs save that I am overjoyed at the results of the elections in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York, without being at all surprised. As to Massachusetts, of course I should as soon have thought of the sun's forgetting to rise as of her joining the pro-slavery Copperheads. The result of the elections in Missouri and Maryland has not yet reached me, but I entertain a strong hope that the latter State has elected an emancipation legislature, and that before next summer the accursed institution will be wiped out of "my Maryland."

The elections I consider of far more consequence than the battles, or rather the success of the antislavery party and its steadily increasing strength make it a mathematical certainty that, however the tide of battle may ebb and flow with varying results, the progress of the war is steadily in one direction. The peculiar institution will be washed away, and with it the only possible dissolvent of the Union.

We are in a great mess in Europe. The Emperor of the French, whom the littleness of his contemporaries has converted into a species of great man, which will much amuse posterity, is proceeding in his self-appointed capacity of European dictator. His last dodge is to call a Congress of Sovereigns, without telling them what they are to do when they have obeyed his summons. All sorts of tremendous things are anticipated, for when you have a professional conspirator on the most important throne in Christendom, there is no dark intrigue that doesn't seem possible. Our poor people in Vienna are in an awful fidget, and the telegraph-wires between London, St. Petersburg, and Paris are quivering hourly with the distracted messages which are speeding to and fro, and people go about telling each other the most insane stories. If Austria doesn't go to the Congress out of deference to England, then France, Russia, Prussia, and Italy are to meet together and make a new map of Europe. France is to take the provinces of the Rhine from Prussia, and give her in exchange the kingdom of Hanover, the duchy of Brunswick, and other little bits of property to round off her estate. Austria is to be deprived of Venice, which is to be given to Victor Emmanuel. Russia is to set up Poland as a kind of kingdom in leading-strings, when she has finished her Warsaw massacres, and is to take possession of the Danubian Principalities in exchange. These schemes are absolutely broached and believed in. Meantime the Schleswig-Holstein question, which has been whisking its long tail about through the European system, and shaking war from its horrid hair till the guns were ready to fire, has suddenly taken a new turn. Day before yesterday the King of Denmark, in the most melodramatic manner, died unexpectedly, just as he was about to sign the new constitution, which made war with the Germanic Confederation certain. Then everybody breathed again. The new king would wait, would turn out all the old ministers, would repudiate the new constitution, would shake hands with the German Bund, and be at peace, when, lo! just as the innocent bigwigs were making sure of this consummation so devoutly wished, comes a telegram that his new Majesty has sworn to the new constitution and kept in the old ministers.

Our weather has become gray, sullen, and wintry, but not cold. There has hardly been a frost yet, but the days are short and fires indispensable. The festivities will begin before long. Thus far I have been able to work steadily and get on pretty well.

Ever your most affectionate son,

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 348-50

John L. Motley to Ann Lothrop Motley, May 12, 1863

Vienna, May 12, 1863.

My Dearest Mother: Since Easter brought an end to the Lenten entertainments which succeeded the carnival, there has been absolutely nothing going on in the social world. To-morrow there is a ceremony at the chapel of the imperial palace, the presentation of the cardinal's hat by the emperor to our colleague here, the internuncio, who has just been cardinalized by the Pope. I wish it had taken place yesterday, for then I might have a topic for my letter, besides having got through the bore of witnessing it.

There is much talk about war in Europe, but I can hardly believe it will come to blows. I don't exactly see how France or England is to get any benefit from the war. The Crimean War was different. Without it, it is probable that Russia would have got Constantinople, which England, of course, can never stand. France would like to fight Prussia and get the Rhine provinces, but England couldn't stand that, nor Austria either, much as she hates Prussia. So it would seem difficult to get up a war. As for Austria's going into such a shindy, the idea is ridiculous. To go to war to gain a province is conceivable; to do so expressly to lose one is not the disinterested fashion of European potentates. As for the Poles, nothing will satisfy them but complete independence, and in this object I don't believe that France or England means to aid them. So there will be guerrilla fighting all summer. Blood will flow in Poland, and ink in all the European cabinets very profusely, and the result will be that Russia will end by reducing the Poles to submission. At least this is the way things look now; but “on the other hand,” as Editor Clapp used to say, there is such a thing as drift, and kings and politicians don't govern the world, but move with the current, so that the war may really come before the summer is over, for the political question (to use the diplomatic jargon) is quite insoluble, as the diplomatic correspondence has already proved. There, I have given you politics enough for this little letter, and now I have only to say how much love we all send to you and the governor. I hope this summer will bring warmth and comfort and health to you. Give my love to my little Mary. Our news from America is to April 29, and things look bright on the Mississippi. I hope to hear good accounts from Hooker, but Virginia seems a fatal place for us.

Good-by, my dearest mother.

Ever your affectionate son,

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 330-2

John L. Motley to Ann Lothrop Motley, March 3, 1863

Legation of the United States,

March 3, 1863.           

My Dearest Mother: As I have now made up my mind that our war is to be protracted indefinitely, I am trying to withdraw my attention from it, and to plunge into the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries again. While I am occupying myself with the events of a civil war which lasted eighty years and engaged and exhausted the energies of all the leading powers of Europe, perhaps I may grow less impatient with military operations extended over a much larger and less populated area, and which have not yet continued for two years. Attention in Europe, I am happy to say, is somewhat diverted from our affairs by the events which are taking place in Poland.

Meetings are held day by day all over England, in which the strongest sympathy is expressed for the United States government, and detestation for the slaveholders and their cause, by people belonging to the working and humbler classes, who, however, make up the mass of the nation, and whose sentiments no English ministry (Whig or Tory) dares to oppose. As for Poland, I suppose the insurrection will be crushed, although it will last for months. I don't believe in any intervention on the part of the Western powers. There will only be a great deal of remonstrating, and a great talk about liberty and free institutions on the part of that apostle of liberty and civilization, Louis Napoleon.

I feel very much grieved that our only well-wisher in Europe, the Russian government, and one which has just carried out at great risks the noblest measure of the age, the emancipation of 25,000,000 slaves, should now be contending in arms with its own subjects, and that it is impossible for us to sympathize with our only friends. The government here keeps very quiet.

Ever your most affectionate son,

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 317-8

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, December 26, 1851

Boston, Dec. 26, 1851.

Dear Sumner: — . . . I told you I should give you my views touching that part of your beautiful speech from which I dissent entirely.

You are quite right in saying Kossuth is demanding more than is reasonable, if by reasonable you mean practical and feasible. If however you plant yourself upon the ground of human brotherhood, and demand of your brother man, or brother nation, all that the sacred tie of brotherhood warrants, and suppose others will do their duty — then you have a right to demand nearly, if not all, that he does.

I am not at all moved by what you (and still more others) say about a war costing us five hundred millions — of course we must first settle if it be right, and then meet the cost as we best may.

Depend upon it, Sumner, God has not yet finished his work with his instrument of combativeness and destructiveness; and though wars are as bad as you have ever depicted them; though the ordeal, the fight, is absurd and all that, still, — still, — when the lower propensities are so active in the race they must occasionally be knocked down with clubbed muskets.

It is not at all probable, still it is possible that, taking advantage of reaction, and of Louis Napoleon's treason,¹ and of the intense desire of the bourgeois class all over Europe for peaceful pursuit of business, let who may govern, and despairing of anything better, the Russians and the Prussians and the Austrians may combine to establish despotism and avert all progress in western Europe; and it is possible that England may be forced to engage single-handed with them: if so shall we be neutral? Shall we merely send a “God speed!” — and not back it up by hearty blows at the enemies of the race?

I say no! a thousand times no! and be it five hundred or five thousand millions that it will cost, let us go into the fight.

Kossuth is doing a great and glorious work; and though like all enthusiasts he overdoes his task, — and attempts more than it is possible to perform — still he will do much for us. God keep him and give him a chance to work for five years more, when he will have a chance to try a struggle with Russia.

What does George² write you? I take it Louis Nap. will have it all his own way for some time to come; not long as Nature views things, but long for us impatient mortals.

Ever thine,

s. G. H.

_______________

¹ The Coup d’Etat.

² George Sumner.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 353-5

Samuel Gridley Howe to Charles Sumner, August 20, 1850

Paris, Aug. 20, '50.

My Dear Sumner: — I am always cheered by the sight of your “hand-o'-write” and that of your last letter was more than usually welcome. Notwithstanding your sad errand you seemed to be in an elastic and healthy tone of mind, and I know too well by experience of the opposite condition what a blessing that is: may my friend never fall from the one into the other! You will be surprised at the date of this, and exclaim, “Why are you not en route for Frankfort?” I'll tell you. I had concluded or been persuaded by your letter and other considerations to go and attend the Peace Congress. I left Paris for that purpose on Friday evening last so as to be in Frankfort on the 20th, but I had hardly got an hundred miles when I began to feel the sure premonitions of an attack of cholera morbus. I remained all night in a miserable inn, hoping to be able to go on by the early train; but it was too certain that the grip of disease was upon me; I therefore turned back with all speed to get properly attended here. I was quite ill Saturday and Sunday; yesterday better but unable to travel, and to-day not fit for a fatiguing journey. I must therefore give up the Congress. All I should have done would have been to move for an adjournment en masse to the seat of war in Holstein, and discuss war between the two hostile armies. I am sick of this preaching to Israel in Israel; the Gentile ought to hear. Peace men should go to Russia, and Abolitionists to the Slave States. Besides, this calling upon France and Germany to disarm while Russia has the open blade in hand is what I cannot do. Our combativeness and destructiveness are the weapons God gives us to use as long as they are necessary, in order to keep others less advanced than we are in quiet by the only motives they will heed, selfishness and fear; you may as well appeal to conscience and benevolence in babes and idiots as in Russians and Tartars, I mean en masse. Conscience and benevolence they have, ay! and so have babes and idiots, but they are (not) yet called into life and action.

You tell me to go about sightseeing and to enjoy the rare opportunity before me. I go to see nothing — I care little for shows. I want to be back in the only place in the world which is fit for me or has charm for me; in my own office with the harness on my back. I wish you had my opportunity and I had yours. So goes the world. . . .

Kind words to Longfellow, Hillard, Felton, &c. Tell Briggs my conscience has been continually smiting me about my neglect of that Frenchman in prison. I hope he is out.

Ever, dear Sumner, most affectionately thine,

S. G. H.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 322-3

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, December 12, 1863

To-day the Members of Congress very generally visited the Russian fleet. I did not go down, but detailed two steamers which were at the yard to convey the members. Our Russian friends are rendering us a great service.

Senator Sumner called, and we had half an hour's interesting conversation on the topics of the day and times. He compliments my Report. Senator Morgan also called. Says the nominating committee will, he thinks, nominate Hale Chairman of the Naval Committee, though reluctantly; no one wants him. Says Hale tendered him the appointment, but he knew not Hale's power to bestow it. That wretched Senator knows not the estimation in which he is held by his associates, and I can perceive by this attempted manœuvre with Morgan that he supposes Morgan and myself have been conspiring against him, whereas the truth is we have never exchanged a word concerning him, nor have I attempted to influence a single Senator.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 484

Diary of Gideon Welles: December 1863

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Simon Cameron to Abraham Lincoln, June 26, 1862

St Petersburg

June 26, 1862.

My dear Sir,

I must begin this my first letter from Russia, by thanking you for your message to Congress, in relation to the N. York agencies. It was a good act, bravely done. Right, in itself, as it was, very many men, in your situation, would have permitted an innocent man to suffer rather than incur responsibility. I am glad to see that the leading presses of Europe speak of it, in high terms, as an act of “nobleness”; and if I can believe what I hear from home, you will lose nothing there. At all events, I can assure you, that I will never cease to be grateful for it.

Yesterday, I had the honor of being introduced to the Emperor, of which I shall send an official account to-day to the State Dept. The interview was a long one, and his majesty was more than cordial. He asked me many questions shewing his interest in our affairs, and when I thanked him, in your name, for his prompt sympathy in our cause, the expression of his eyes, and his subsequent remarks, shewed me very clearly that he was particularly well pleased for he soon after turned the conversation to England.

The whole Court is at present out of the city, and all the high officials will remain absent, for some months. The Emperor came to town only to receive me. There is never much to be done here by an American Minister, and now there is really nothing for me to do. I more than ever regret that Mr Seward did not give me authority to travel, as you said I might have.

Feeling sure that no harm can come to the Government, by the absence of its minister at this time, I am induced now to ask you for a forlough to go home, as was given I think to Mr. Schurze, to look after my private affairs I make this request with more confidence in the assurance that the Legation will be well conducted, during my absence by Mr Taylor. I certainly would not have left home when the attack was made on me in the House of Reps strengthened as I was by your repeated assurances that I might take my own time for leaving, only that all my arrangements had been made for sailing, my passage taken and paid for, to which I had been urged by the belief that wrong was being done to Mr Clay by my delay, = but when I came here I found he was entirely content, and would have been satisfied if my arrival had been still later.

I should like to leave here by the middle of September, as then the lease of the house which I took from Mr. Clay to relieve him, will expire. The rent is a heavy item in the expenditures of a Minister, being over $3000 & more than one fourth of his yearly pay. Going at that time too, will enable me to reach home in time before the Pennsa. election to be of some service to my country, for I think your troubles will soon be removed from the Army to Congress. I shall make this application to the State Department officially – but I ask it now, from your friendship

I have been gratified all over Europe to find the high reputation you are making, and from home, too, there are indications of a growing belief that you will have to be your own successor. While it is, in my judgment, the last place to find happiness, I think you will have to make up your mind to endure it.

This is a great city and Russia is a mighty nation, and I have many things to say of them, which will be deferred till we meet. The climate I regret to say does not suit the health of my family, and they wish to leave it.

Please give to Mrs. Lincoln, the kindest regards of my wife, and believe me

Your friend Truly

Simon Cameron

Hon. A. Lincoln

Your prompt reply to my request, will especially oblige me.

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

John G. Nicolay to Therena Bates, January 14, 1862

[Washington, 14 January 1862]

. . . The President made an item of news yesterday for the country by appointing Edwin M. Stanton of Pa Secretary of war in place of Simon Cameron whom he sends as Minister to Russia.  Cassius M. Clay of Kentucky, now holding that place will come home and take a generalship in the army.  Quite a little shuffle all round.

So far as the Secretaryship of War is concerned I think the change a very important and much needed one.  I don’t know Mr. Stanton personally but he is represented as being an able and efficient man, and I shall certainly look for very great reforms in the war department.  So far the Department has substantially taken care of itself. . . .

SOURCE: Michael Burlingame, Editor, With Lincoln in the White House: Letters, Memoranda, and Other Writings of John G. Nicolay, 1860-1865, p. 66

Diary of Edward Bates: January 13, 1862

To night, I was taken by surprise in hearing that Mr. Cameron sec. of War, has resigned, and goes to Russia, in lieu of Cash: M. Clay ²⁶ — and that Edwin M. Stanton ²⁷ is to take his place. This was a street rumor in the afternoon. At night, I was told by Senator Harris,²⁸ that the nominations had been actually made. Strange — not a hint of all this was heard last friday, at C.[abinet] C.[ouncil] and stranger still, I have not been sent for by the Prest. nor spoken to by any member. The thing, I learn, was much considered saturday and sunday — Hay²⁹ told the ladies at Eames’³⁰ jocosely, that the Cabinet had been sitting en permanence — and Mr. E[ames] himself informed me that Mr. Seward had been with the Prest: the whole of Sunday forenoon.

[Marginal Note.] Upon reflection, it is not strange — When the question is of the retaining or dismissing a member of the cabinet, the Prest. could not well lay the matter before the cabinet — he must do that himself.

There is a rumor in town, that Burnside³¹ has landed to attack Norfolk (proven afterwards, as I expected at the time, false)[.]

_______________

²⁶ Cassius M. Clay, Kentucky abolitionist, editor, politician, had supported Lincoln In 1860 and expected to become secretary of War, but was appointed minister to Russia instead, 1861-1862, 1S63-1869. He was now returning -with a brigadier-generalship to make room for Cameron to be eased out of the Cabinet, but, when he got here, he refused to fight until the Government abolished slavery in the seceded states, and so the next year when Cameron tired of the post, he returned to Russia.

²⁷ Able Pittsburgh lawyer who practiced frequently before the U. S. Supreme Court; anti-slavery Democrat who believed in protection of slavery in the South where It legally existed; Free-Soiler in 1848; attorney-general in Buchanan's Cabinet, 1S60-1861, where he vigorously opposed the plan to abandon Fort Sumter ; bitter critic of Lincoln in 1860-1861; secretary of War, 1862-1868; professed supporter of Lincoln; treacherous enemy of Johnson. Bates shares Welles's distrust of Stanton even under Lincoln.

²⁸ Supra, Jan. 4, 1862, note 11.

²⁹ John M. Hay: poet; journalist; private secretary to the President; later, ambassador to Great Britain, 1897-1898; secretary of State, 1898-1905; historian of Lincoln.

³⁰ Charles Eames: international lawyer; commissioner to Hawaii, 1849; editor of the Nashville Union, in 1850, and the Washington Union, 1850-1854 ; minister resident to Venezuela, 1854-1857; at this time (1861-1867) counsel for the Navy Department and the captors in prize cases and for the Treasury Department in cotton cases.

³¹ Supra, Nov. 29, 1861, note 97.

SOURCE: Howard K. Beale, Editor, The Diary of Edward Bates, 1859-1866, p. 226-7

Diary of Salmon P. Chase: January 12, 1862

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

_______________

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

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

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, September 25, 1863

The President was not with us to-day at the Cabinet-meeting, being at the War Department with Stanton. All were present but them. Little known of army movements, but anxiety on the part of each. The English Government has interposed to prevent the armored rams built by the Lairds from coming out. Seward announced the fact, and also that he had placed me under injunctions of secrecy. This was the reason why no explanation had been given for my non-action, for which I have been much blamed.

Things look a little threatening from France, but Louis Napoleon may not persist when he learns that England has changed her policy. Should we meet with defeat at Chattanooga, it is by no means certain England will not again assume unfriendly airs, and refer the question of the departure of the armored ships to the “law officers of the Crown.” Our own ironclads and the fear of privateers which would ruin her commerce are, however, the best law, and our best safeguards.

The Russian fleet has come out of the Baltic and are now in New York, or a large number of the vessels have arrived. They are not to be confined in the Baltic by a northern winter. In sending them to this country at this time there is something significant. What will be its effect on France and the French policy we shall learn in due time. It may moderate; it may exasperate. God bless the Russians.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 443

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: February 16, 1863

Another gun-boat has got past Vicksburg. But three British steamers have run into Charleston with valuable cargoes.

Gen. Lee is now sending troops to Charleston, and this strengthens the report that Hooker's army is leaving the Rappahannock. They are probably crumbling to pieces, under the influence of the peace party growing up in the North. Some of them, however, it is said, are sent to Fortress Monroe.

Our Bureau of Conscription ought to be called the Bureau of Exemption. It is turning out a vast number of exempts. The Southern Express Company bring sugar, partridges, turkeys, etc. to the potential functionaries, and their employees are exempted during the time they may remain in the employment of the company. It is too bad!

I have just been reperusing Frederick's great campaigns, and find much encouragement. Prussia was not so strong as the Confederate States, and yet was environed and assailed by France, Austria, Russia, and several smaller powers simultaneously. And yet Frederick maintained the contest for seven years, and finally triumphed over his enemies. The preponderance of numbers against him in the field was greater than that of the United States against us; and Lee is as able a general as Frederick. Hence we should never despair.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 1, p. 260

Diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut: September 2, 1864

The battle has been raging at Atlanta,¹ and our fate hanging in the balance. Atlanta, indeed, is gone. Well, that agony is over. Like David, when the child was dead, I will get up from my knees, will wash my face and comb my hair. No hope; we will try to have no fear.

At the Prestons' I found them drawn up in line of battle every moment looking for the Doctor on his way to Richmond. Now, to drown thought, for our day is done, read Dumas's Maîtres d'Armes. Russia ought to sympathize with us. We are not as barbarous as this, even if Mrs. Stowe's word be taken. Brutal men with unlimited power are the same all over the world. See Russell's India — Bull Run Russell's. They say General Morgan has been killed. We are hard as stones; we sit unmoved and hear any bad news chance may bring. Are we stupefied?

_______________

¹ After the battle, Atlanta was taken possession of and partly burned by the Federals.

SOURCE: Mary Boykin Chesnut, Edited by Isabella D. Martin and Myrta Lockett Avary, A Diary From Dixie, p. 326

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