Diary of 1st Lieutenant Luman Harris Tenney: Sunday, December 4, 1864

Wrote several letters and read. Heard a sermon at Brigade Hdqrs.

SOURCE: Frances Andrews Tenney, War Diary Of Luman Harris Tenney, p. 136

Diary of 1st Lieutenant Luman Harris Tenney: Monday, December 5, 1864

2nd Ohio went out to Fisher's Hill on a scout. Got back in evening. Enemy reported in front by 2nd N. Y. Big fires. Thought they heard bugles, etc. Co. C in advance. No enemy.

SOURCE: Frances Andrews Tenney, War Diary Of Luman Harris Tenney, p. 136-7

Diary of 1st Lieutenant Luman Harris Tenney: Tuesday, December 6, 1864

In camp. Bill Smith officer of the day.

SOURCE: Frances Andrews Tenney, War Diary Of Luman Harris Tenney, p. 137

Diary of 1st Lieutenant Luman Harris Tenney: Wednesday, December 7, 1864

On picket. Put up with Co. B. Charge of 3rd Batt. Pleasant time. Cold night. Excellent letters from Ella and Will. Heard reports of promotion.

SOURCE: Frances Andrews Tenney, War Diary Of Luman Harris Tenney, p. 137

Diary of 1st Lieutenant Luman Harris Tenney: Thursday, December 8, 1864

Relieved in good season.

SOURCE: Frances Andrews Tenney, War Diary Of Luman Harris Tenney, p. 137

Gerrit Smith to Stephen C. Phillips, October 13, 1846

Peterboro, October 23,1846.

Hon. Stephen C. Phillips, of Salem, Mass.:

Dear Sir — This day's mail brings me the speech which you delivered at the meeting recently assembled at Faneuil Hall to consider the outrage of kidnapping a man in the streets of Boston.

I am not insensible to the ability, eloquence, beauty, of this speech: — and yet it fails of pleasing me. The meeting, after I saw its proceedings, was no longer an object of my pleasant contemplations. Indeed, Massachusetts herself has ceased to be such an object. There was a time, when, among all commonwealths, she was my beau ideal. Her wisdom, integrity, bravery — in short, her whole history, from her bud in the Mayflower to the blossoms and fruits with which a ripe civilization has adorned and enriched her — made her the object of my warm and unmeasured admiration. But, a change has come over her. Alas, how great and sad a one! She has sunk her ancient worth and glory in her base devotion to Mammon and Party.

When, in the year 1835, one of her sons — that son to whom she, not to say this whole nation, owes more than to any other person, was, for his honest, just, and fearless assaults on slavery, driven by infuriate thousands through the streets of her metropolis with a halter round his neck, Massachusetts looked on, applauding. So far was she from disclaiming the mob that she boasted, that her “gentlemen of property and standing” composed it. Indeed, one of her first acts after the mob, was to choose for her governor the man who promptly rewarded her for this choice by his official recommendation to treat abolitionists as criminals.

Massachusetts was not, however, lost to shame. It was not in vain that the finger of scorn was pointed at her for this mob and for other demonstrations of her pro-slavery. For very decency's sake, she began to adjust her dress, and put on better appearances. Indeed, anti-slavery sentiment became the order of the day with her: and, from her chief statesman down to her lowest demagogue, all tried their skill in uttering big words against slavery. But, the hollowest sentiment and the merest prating constituted the whole warp and woof of this pretended and unsubstantial opposition to slavery. Massachusetts still remained the slave of Party and Mammon. She would still vote for slaveholders, rather than break up the national parties to which she was wedded. She would still make every concession to the slave power to induce it to spare her manufactures.

A fine occasion was afforded Massachusetts, a few years ago, to talk her anti-slavery words, and display her anti-slavery sentiment, and right well did she improve it. I refer to the casting of the fugitive slave George Latimer into one of her jails. Instantly did she show anti-slavery colors. She was anti-slavery all over, and to the very core also, as a stranger to her ways would have thought. But beneath all her manifestations of generous regard for the oppressed, she continued to be none the less bound up in avarice— none the less servile to the South. The first opportunity she had to do so, she again voted for slaveholders.

Then came the project to annex Texas. The slaveholders demanded more territory to soak with the sweat and tears and blood of the poor African. This was another occasion for Massachusetts to make another anti-slavery bluster. She made it: — and then voted for Clay — for the very man who had done unspeakably more than any other man to extend and perpetuate the dominion of American slavery. As a specimen of her heartlessness, in this instance of her anti-slavery parade, her present Whig Governor, who was among the foremost and loudest to condemn this scheme of annexation, is now calling, in the name of patriotism, on his fellow-citizens to consummate it by murdering the unoffending Mexicans.

Next came the expulsion of her commissioners from Charleston and New Orleans. Again she blustered for a moment. She denounced slavery and the South. She boasted of herself, as if she still were what she had been; as if “modern degeneracy had not reached” her. But, the sequel proved her hypocrisy and baseness. After a little time, she quietly pocketed the insult, and was as ready as ever to vote for slaveholders.

I will refer to but one more of the many opportunities which Massachusetts has had to prove herself worthy of her former history. It is that which called out your present speech. This was emphatically an opportunity for Massachusetts to show herself to be an anti-slavery State. But she had not a heart to improve it. Her own citizens in the very streets of her own gloried-in city, had chased down a man, and bound him, and plunged him into the pit of perpetual slavery. The voice of such a deed, sufficient to rend her rocks, and move her mountains, could not startle the dead soul of her people. They are the fast bound slaves of Mammon and Party. True, a very great meeting was gathered in Faneuil Hall. Eloquent speeches were made; and a committee of vigilance was appointed. But nothing was done to redeem herself from her degeneracy: nothing to recall to her loathsome carcass the great and glorious spirit which had departed from it; nothing was done for the slave. When the year 1848 shall come round, Massachusetts, if still impenitent, will be as ready to vote for the slaveholders whom the South shall then bid her vote for, as she was to do so in 1844.

Your great meeting was a farce; — and will you pardon me, if I cite your own speech to prove it? That speech, which denounces your fellow-citizen for stealing one man, was delivered by a gentleman, who (risum teneatis?) contends, that a person who steals hundreds of men is fit to be President of the United States! It is ludicrous, beyond all parallel, that he, who would crown with the highest honors the very prince of kidnappers, should, with a grave face, hold up to the public abhorrence the poor man, who has only just begun to try his hand at kidnapping. Then, your contemptuous bearing towards Captain Hannum and his employers! — how affected! If you shall not be utterly insensible to the claims of consistency, who, when you shall have Henry Clay to dine with you, will you allow to be better entitled than this same Captain Hannum and his employers to seats at your table? Cease, my dear sir, from your outrages on consistency. You glory in Mr. Clay. How can you then despise and reproach those who, with however much of the awkwardness of beginners, are, nevertheless, doing their best to step forward in the tracks of their “illustrious predecessor?”

It would be very absurd — would it not? — for you to denounce the stealing of a single sheep, at the same time that you are counting as worthy of all honor the man who steals a whole flock of sheep. But, I put it to your candor, whether it would be a whit more absurd than is your deep loathing and unutterable contempt of Captain Hannum and his employers for a crime, which, though incessantly repeated and infinitely aggravated in the case of Mr. Clay, does not disqualify him, in your esteem, to be the chief ruler of this nation— to be, what the civil ruler is required to be — “the minister of God.”

You intimate, that the State Prison is the proper place for Captain Hannum and his employers. And do you not think it the proper place for Henry Clay also? Out upon partiality, if, because he is your candidate for the presidency, you would not have this old and practical man-thief punished, as well as those who are but in their first lessons of his horrid piracy!

To be serious, Mr. Phillips — you are not the man to have to do with Captain Hannum and his employers, unless it is to set them an example of repentance. It becomes you not to look down upon them —but to take your seat by their side, and to bow your head as low as shame and sorrow should bow theirs. No—if Captain Hannum and his employers should steal a man every remaining day of their lives, they could not do as much to sanction and perpetuate the crime of man-stealing, as the honored and influential Stephen C. Phillips has done by laboring to elect to the highest civil office the very man stealer, who has contributed far more than any other living person to make man-stealing reputable, and to widen the theatre of its horrors.

Alas, what a pity to lose such an occasion for good as was afforded by this instance of kidnapping. That was the occasion for you and other distinguished voters for slaveholders to employ the power of your own repentance in bringing other pro-slavery voters to repentance. That was the occasion for your eyes to stream with contrite sorrow, and your lips to exclaim: “We have sinned: — we have sinned against God and the slave: — we have not sought to have Civil Government look after the poor, and weak, and oppressed, and crushed: — but we have perverted and degraded it from this high, and holy, and heaven-intended use, to the low purposes of money-making and to the furtherance of the selfish schemes of ambition: we have not chosen for rulers men who, in their civil office, as Josiah in his, “judged the cause of the poor and needy'—men who, in their civil office, could say, as did Job in his, ‘I was a father to the poor’ — ‘I brake the jaws of the wicked and plucked the spoil out of his teeth’ — but we have chosen our Clays and our Polks — pirates, who rob, and buy and sell, the poor — monsters, who, with their sharks' teeth devour the poor.” Deny, doubt, evade it, as you will — you may, nevertheless, my dear sir, depend upon it, that it is for your repentance and the repentance of all the voters for slaveholders, that God calls. He calls, also, for the repentance of the American ministry, that so wickedly and basely refuses to preach Bible politics, and to insist on the true and heaven-impressed character of Civil Government. Depend upon it, my dear sir, that your disease and theirs is one which can be cured by no medicine short of the medicine of repentance. I am not unaware that this is a most offensive and humbling medicine — especially to persons in the higher walks of life; — nevertheless, you and they must take it or remain uncured. No clamor against Captain Hannum and his employers — no attempt to make scape-goats of them — will avail to cure you.

Alas, what a pity that a mere farce should have taken the place of the great and solemn measure which was due from your meeting! Had your meeting felt, that the time for trifling on the subject of slavery is gone by; and had it passed, honestly and heartily, the Resolution: “No voting for slaveholders, nor for those who are in political fellowship with slaveholders,” it would have had the honor of giving the death-blow to American slavery. This resolution, passed by such a meeting, would have electrified the whole nation. Within all its limits every true heart would have responded to it, and every false one been filled with shame.

When the glorious Missionary, William Knibb, had seen the slaveholders tear down and burn a large share of the chapels in Jamaica, he set sail for Great Britain. Scarcely had he landed, ere he began the cry, “Slavery is incompatible with Christianity.” He went over his native land, uttering this cry. A mighty cry it was. The walls of British slavery felt its power as certainly as did the walls of Jericho the shout by which it was prostrated.

The power of the cry: “No voting for slaveholders, nor for those who are in political fellowship with slaveholders,” would, were it to proceed from the right lips, be as effective against the walls of American slavery, as was the cry of William Knibb against the walls of British slavery. You, and Charles Sumner, (I know and love him,) and Charles Francis Adams, and John G. Palfrey, are the men to utter this cry. Go, without delay, over the whole length and breadth of your State, pouring these talismanic words into the ears of the thousands and tens of thousands who shall flock to hear you; and Massachusetts will, even at the approaching election, reject all her pro-slavery candidates. Such is the power of truth, when proceeding from honored and welcome lips!

Be in earnest, ye Phillipses and Sumners and Adamses and Palfreys — be entirely in earnest, in your endeavors to overthrow slavery. You desire its overthrow, and are doing something to promote it. But you lack the deep and indispensable earnestness; and, therefore, do you shrink from employing the bold and revolutionary means which the case demands. No inferior means however, will accomplish the object. As well set your babies to catch Leviathans with pin-hooks, as attempt to overthrow American slavery by means which fall below the stern and steadfast purpose: “Not to vote for slaveholders, nor for those who are in political fellowship with slaveholders.” But, only press the hearts of your fellow-men with this, the solemn and immovable purpose of your own hearts—and fallen Massachusetts rises again — and American slavery dies—and your names are written in everduring letters among the names of the saviors of your country.

Very respectfully yours,

Gerrit Smith.

SOURCES: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 196-200

Amos A. Lawrence, July 1857

We look on the great question as now settled, and all political movements in Kansas as having chiefly a local interest. Some of us stood ready to have made a much greater sacrifice had it been necessary, somewhat commensurate with that made by yourself and others. For months I felt as though I held my property and even my life by an uncertain tenure; but with a numerous family of children and a loving wife, I did not intend to part with either until it was necessary to bring up the “forlorn hope.” But I have never had the least doubt about our carrying it ultimately. Please not show this to any one, for I never wrote it before, and never reflect upon it without devout gratitude to God for having spared me so great a sacrifice. Now we must be magnanimous to the South. Slavery cannot be extended. Whether it can ever be got rid of in this country is doubtful. It is a curse imposed by the sins of our ancestors, and we must bear it patiently.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 111-2

Thomas Wentworth Higginson, February 1857

February, 1857

. . . Health is the first object,” as the worthy Doctor used to say, so I take naps and gymnasium and read the fascinating Dr. Kane.

I do believe Robinson Crusoe will have to give place hereafter, and that boys will keep some small edition of Dr. Kane instead of Baron Trench in their school desks. I seldom read of anything which I do not fancy I could have done myself, such is the weakness of our common nature; but here I confess myself distanced, even in fancy.

On the other hand, what a dull and unprofitable book is the “Letters of Daniel Webster”; no genius or power in it, or charm of any kind except the letters to his farmers, which are quite delightful. Perhaps his letters about and to his children, especially to the star-eyed Julia, show more domestic feeling than I supposed; there is one quite beautiful burst of fatherly pride where he describes her to somebody as being “beautiful as Juno.” But he shows beyond all question that shallowness of knowledge which Theodore Parker attributed to him, and everything in the shape of thought is amazingly commonplace. . . .

Mary . . . has been reflecting to-day that there's no telling what might have been; for instance, she might have been the wife of Dr. Kane; and what would he have done with her in the Arctic regions? That's the present anxiety.

*          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *

I am giving Sunday evening lectures on the “Seven Deadly Sins,” or, as Mary irreverently terms them, “the Deadlies.” The congregations are crowded as much as ever, though half the original ones are gone West.

SOURCE: Mary Potter Thacher Higginson, Editor, Letters and Journals of Thomas Wentworth Higginson, 1846-1906, p. 90-1

Senator Charles Sumner to George L. Stearns, February 3, 1861

Washington, 3d Feb., '61.

My Dear Sir:

There are but few who stand rooted, like the oak, against a storm. This is the nature of man. Let us be patient.

My special trust is this. No possible compromise or concession will be of the least avail. Events are hastening which will supersede all such things. This will save us. But I hope to see Massachusetts in this breaking up of the Union ever true. God keep her from playing the part of Judas or — of Peter! You may all bend or cry pardon — I will not. Here I am and I mean to stand firm to the last. God bless you!

Ever yours,

Charles Sumner.

SOURCE: Preston Stearns, The Life and Public Services of George Luther Stearns, p. 241

Samuel Gridley Howe to Horace Mann, Friday, January 31, 1851

Friday, 31st Jan'y, 1851.

My Dear Mann:  — I have summoned some good men and true to hold a council of war. Alas! we are in an extremity, but so much the more it behooves us to fight. Can't you send something for our paper upon the crisis, and the responsibility resting upon those who, having the power to send guardian angels to Washington, send devils to destroy, or do-nothing squires to sing peace, peace when there is no peace? I'll take care you are not known.

Ever yours,

S. G. Howe.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 336

William T. Sherman to George Mason Graham, December 2, 1859

Seminary, Friday, Dec. 2 [1859].

Dear General: I was in town [Alexandria] yesterday at 8 a.m. and waited till ten to prove the paper which we left with Mr. Boyce. I then got the first page and corrected it. He had not prepared the paper and would have to strike off the whole number of sheets of the first matter before trying the second page. I therefore assured myself that it was in proper order, and left Boyce to correct the second page and came out with Captain Jarreau.

I think we have made fair progress now, and I have given Mr. James¹ written instructions with drawings of what remains to be done, and by my return from New Orleans I hope to see all the necessary tables, benches, desks, blackboards, stands, shelves, and hooks all done. I have one man cutting wood, and Jarreau promises another next Tuesday, so that I feel confident that we shall be more than ready by Christmas.

I think also that in New Orleans I will be satisfied to depend on Alexandria for blankets of which both Robertson and Henarie have a good supply at fair prices from $3.25 to $4.50 a pair. Same of brooms, glass tumblers, assorted hand soap and castile soap. I think also we may depend on the Trechur for wash-basins and dippers. All else on my list I will try and bring up. I feel a little embarrassed by Mr. Ford's offer to make twenty-five or thirty mattresses without naming price. It would be better to have mattresses made uniformly by one responsible person, but as in case of accident to Mr. Ford and there being no other mattresses to be had in Alexandria I may purchase more than otherwise might seem prudent.

In New Orleans, I will ascertain the price of everything needed by us in future, and then if persons in our neighborhood apply we can encourage the manufacture of about the quantity needed at standard prices. . .

I generally have strong opinions on a subject of importance, but experience has taught me the wisdom of forbearance, and as the Board will again attempt to meet on the tenth during my absence, I will only say now that I listened to your argument and that of the other members with great interest.

I have always believed that a Military Academy was only possible, when the state made present compensation, or held out future inducements, to compensate the cadet for the usual drills, guards, and restraints customary in such colleges, here and abroad. I doubt whether we could when cadets pay all expenses enforce that rigid obedience without which the system would become ridiculous. I am satisfied that we can make certain drills, guards, and military parades and exercise so manifestly advantageous to the cadets, that their own sense, judgment, and fancy will take the place of compulsion, and the course of studies being more practical, and useful, will be preferred by cadet and parent to the old routine of grammar and everlasting lexicon.

As to the encampment, I think in the regulations there is no mention made of an encampment, nor do I recall any expression that would lead to it. Therefore they will need no amendment on that point. The Board can pass over the point in silence. If you are not fortified in the legislature it might also be wise to allow a few years to slide along till we have four classes of well drilled cadets. Let them at first have the vacation allowed in Kentucky, elsewhere, and at all literary colleges. If our system of instruction be good, and if we take good pains to impress the cadets with our kindness, justness, fairness, and give them a manly bearing, good ideas of truth, honor, and courtesy, and withall teach them practical wisdom, by going home they will spread the good seed, and actually serve the cause of the institution in its infancy, better than they could in the mere routine duties of a camp. I do not think an encampment necessary to our course of instruction, nor does it seem to me prudent to prevent cadets from going home; if such be the custom, and if their parents desire it. I don't think Captain Jarreau² will object as his contract runs for only six months, and longer if we are all satisfied. My idea is to make all things conspire to the economy, cleanliness, good order, and proper instruction of those cadets, till we naturally pass into the system which is to last, for some system “must endure.”

Should the legislature of this state determine to put an arsenal here, the necessity of a guard is then patent and she would naturally offer to pay us, and make it to our interest to guard her property, afford a safe place for arms, rendezvous, and safety for this at present remote district of valuable country. We would then have a good necessity, a good reason for an encampment, which now would be a mere naked ceremony. Nevertheless my theory is that the Board must legislate, and I will try to execute their resolves and policy. . .

_______________

¹ The contractor. — Ed.

² The Seminary steward. — Ed.

SOURCES: The article is abstracted in Walter L. Fleming’s, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 70-2

John Brown to Reverend Luther Humphrey,* November 19, 1859

Charlestown, Jefferson County, Va., Nov. 19, 1859.

Rev. Luther Humphrey.

My Dear Friend, — Your kind letter of the 12th instant is now before me. So far as my knowledge goes as to our mutual kindred, I suppose I am the first since the landing of Peter Brown from the “Mayflower” that has either been sentenced to imprisonment or to the gallows. But, my dear old friend, let not that fact alone grieve you. You cannot have forgotten how and where our grandfather fell in 1776, and that he, too, might have perished on the scaffold had circumstances been but a very little different. The fact that a man dies under the hand of an executioner (or otherwise) has but little to do with his true character, as I suppose. John Rogers perished at the stake, a great and good man, as I suppose; but his doing so does not prove that any other man who has died in the same way was good or otherwise.

Whether I have any reason to “be of good cheer” or not in view of my end, I can assure you that I feel so; and I am totally blinded if I do not really experience that strengthening and consolation yon so faithfully implore in my behalf: the God of our fathers reward your fidelity! I neither feel mortified, degraded, nor in the least ashamed of my imprisonment, my chains, or near prospect of death by hanging. I feel assured “that not one hair shall fall from my head without the will of my Heavenly Father.” I also feel that I have long been endeavoring to hold exactly “such a fast as God has chosen.” (See the passage in Isaiah which you have qnoted.¹) No part of my life has been more happily spent than that I have spent here; and I humbly trust that no part has been spent to better purpose. I would not say this boastingly, but thanks be unto God, who giveth us the victory through infinite grace.

I should be sixty years old were I to live to May 9, 1860. I have enjoyed much of life as it is, and have been remarkably prosperous, having early learned to regard the welfare and prosperity of others as my own. I have never, since I can remember, required a great amount of sleep; so that I conclude that I have already enjoyed full an average number of working hours with those who reach their threescore years and ten. I have not yet been driven to the use of glasses, but can see to read and write quite comfortably. But more than that, I have generally enjoyed remarkably good health. I might go on to recount unnumbered and unmerited blessings, among which would be some very severe afflictions, and those the most needed blessings of all. And now, when I think how easily I might be left to spoil all I have done or suffered in the cause of freedom, I hardly dare wish another voyage, even if I had the opportunity.

It is a long time since we met; but we shall come together in our Father's house, I trust. Let us hold fast that we already have, remembering we shall reap in due time if we faint not. .Thanks be unto God, who giveth us the victory through Jesus Christ our Lord. And now, my old, warm-hearted friend, good-by.

Your affectionate cousin,

John Brown.

_______________

* A cousin of John Brown.

¹ The reference here is to the familiar text in the fifty-eighth chapter of the prophet, who may be said to have foretold Brown as clearly as he predicted any event in Hebrew history: “Is not this the fast that I have chosen, — to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him: and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh? . . . Then shalt thou call, and the Lord shall answer; thou shalt cry, and he shall say, Here I am. . . . Thou shalt raise up the foundations of many generations; and thou shalt be called the Repairer of the breach, the Restorer of paths to dwell in."

SOURCES: Franklin B. Sanborn, The Life and Letters of John Brown, p. 594-5

J. B. Smith to William Still, January 25, 1855

Tononto, January 25th, 1855.

DEAR FRIEND STILL: — George Walker, of Petersburg, Va., is now in my offce, and requests me to write a letter to you, and request you to write to his wife, after or according to the instructions he gave to his friend, John Brown, in your city, with whom he says you are acquainted. You will understand, of course, his reason for wanting the letter wrote and posted at Philadelphia. You will please attend to it and address a letter to him (Walker) in my care. He and Beverly Good, his comrade, tender much love to you. Send them on; we are prepared for them.

Yours in great haste,

J. B. SMITH.

P. S. — Be sure and follow the directions given to Brown.

SOURCE: William Still, The Underground Railroad: A Record of Facts, Authentic Narratives, Letters &c., p. 312

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, May 15, 1862

New York, May 1862.

Sir: You desired me to put in writing the statements made to you by me while in Washington. In compliance with that request I have the honor to submit the following. The printed portions were written by myself.

WESTERN TEXAS.

A very large portion of the population of Western Texas continue loyal. In Austin (the Capital) three-fourths of the residents are loyal, and dare express their sentiments openly. In most other places any expression of opinion favorable to the Government is not tolerated. The Germans can be relied on almost without exception.

It is important that Western Texas should be made a Free State, and it can be accomplished. It is important because, thereby, the Slave States will be surrounded by the Free, and the slave power be rendered incapable of extension. They now hope to acquire some portion of Mexico for slavery, and while they hold Western Texas, will not cease to strive for that end. Hence, from its geographical position, Western Texas, is more important (with respect to slavery) than any other portion of the United States. It is very healthy, adapted to white labor, and but few slaves are there. In most portions of that country slave labor is not profitable, and, among others, the Germans are well known to be opposed to it. Among the leading Union men areEx-Governor Pease, Judge Norton (editor of the Intelligencer) A. J. Hamilton (former member of Congress) and Judge Paschal — all of Austin. I cannot say whether they desire a Free State, but most Texas loyalists would do anything for the sake of the Union. Mr. Charles Anderson is perhaps the best man the Government could select for a high civil position. He is well known there, is popular, able, eloquent and fearless, and his recent persecution by the rebel authorities enlisted the sympathy of all Union men, and of some others.

Col. Bomford was made prisoner of war by Gen. Twigg's surrender. He has been exchanged and is assigned to the 16th regiment of Regular infantry — is a graduate of West Point — was distinguished in Mexico — has been stationed several years in Texas, and, I understand, has recently been highly recommended by Gen. Scott for an appointment of Brigadier. He is a fine officer, and thoroughly familiar with Western Texas, its resources, forts, road, etc., the character of the people and their method of fighting.

“Sibley’s Brigade” contained about Twenty seven Hundred men, and went to New Mexico. There were some respectable men in it, but most were ruffians and desperadoes, and all would fight well. Most of them were armed each with a double-barrel shot-gun and navy revolver, though some had minie muskets (stolen from U. S.) or common rifles, and four companies had nothing but unwieldy lances. For artillery they had nine mountain howitzers. These were all mounted men, and were joined in Arizona by Col. Baylor's regiment numbering seven hundred, and provided with other artillery (ordinary brass field pieces). I should think there were in February last, about 1,000 men at the various forts in the Indian country, some or all of whom, I understood were to be sent on to reinforce Sibley. The colonels of the regiments serving under Sibley are Riley (formerly of Ohio) Green (formerly of Tennessee), Steele (formerly Capt. U. S. Army), and Baylor. They were insufficiently supplied with provisions — nor did they have sufficient ammunition — for so long an expedition. I have frequently seen Sibley's Brigade, and what I say about it, is reliable.

In February last, there were about Seven Thousand men around and between Galveston and Houston. Fortifications (field works) were prepared near Galveston, and they had considerable artillery there, including a few siege guns said to have been brought from New Orleans. There had already been sent out of the State (as I was informed) Thirteen to Fifteen Thousand men besides Sibley's Brigade. I was told by a Rebel officer that Thirty Two Thousand men were then underarms in Texas, including troops at Galveston, Houston and Brownsville. I think his statement greatly exaggerated, though he included all the home-guards, organized militia, etc., most of whom are poorly armed.

There were at or near Brownsville eight or nine hundred men. Fort Brown is near the town and contains eighteen guns, as I am informed. They also have four or five mountain howitzers and at least one battery of field pieces. Matamoras is opposite Brownsville, and the Rebels have organized quite an extensive trade there. Vessels sail for Matamoras and land their cargoes at Brownsville. These two towns are twenty or twenty-five miles from the mouth of the Rio Grande. Large amounts of coffee have been imported from Mexico through Brownsville and sent to Eastern Texas and Louisiana. Many officers of the regular army have heretofore been stationed at Fort Brown and know all about it. It is said not to have been much strengthened by the rebels.

Mr. George Giddings of San Antonio was proprietor of the San Antonio and San Diego overland mail line. Early last winter he was appointed, by Jefferson Davis, agent to receive and collect all cotton contributed in the Southwest, for the Confederate government. It was said that he also received a large amount of Confederate money with which to buy cotton. It was said — and believed by all — that he was instructed to take all the cotton he could collect, through Brownsville to Matamoras or Tampico, and export it to Foreign countries, bringing back in exchange arms and munitions of war. I am unable to say whether the plan was relinquished subsequently to my leaving, but at that time he had a great number of Mexican carts in his employ, and almost all transportation there is done by these carts.

Corpus Christi is the healthiest place on the coast of Western Texas, and a majority of the inhabitants were for the Union. The harbor is not good, but troops can march from there to within thirty miles of San Antonio, and have good drinking water all the way — an important consideration in that dry country. Officers of the regular army, familiar with Texas, can tell where a landing should be made, much better than I can. It is important however, that an army once landed, should push forward rapidly so as to give protection to Union men who would otherwise be forced into the rebel army or massacred. Probably Twenty-five Thousand Federal troops could take and hold the whole State — certainly the Western portion. Col. Bomford thought fifteen Thousand could march even from Galveston to San Antonio, and garrison all important points on the road.

The Eastern part of the State, including Houston and Galveston, is Secession, though there are many Union men even there. I found Union men in all the states through which I passed, except Mississippi.

The want of arms is severely felt and this want is becoming[g] greater rapidly. I do not think they have received from abroad more than one tenth, certaintly not more than one-fifth, of the arms which are reported to have been received. I refer to reports prevalent in the South, all of which may not have been heard of in the North. I never saw but one foreign musket in the hands of a Southern soldier.

The Southern leaders do not hesitate to make any statement which will encourage their own people.

The gentleman from Memphis referred to in the printed column was a Mr. Randolph, an East Tennessee Union man, who had been to Memphis to attend the Legislature, of which he was a member. He passed through Corinth about the twentieth of March, or a little later. At that time there were between Forty and Forty-Five Thousand rebel troops there. Reinforcements came in as fast as they could be raised. The battle of Shiloh was fought about sixteen days afterward. They might have received reinforcements at the rate of 2,000 per day, but I should not think they received more than one thousand per day. According to this estimate the rebel force in that battle was not far from Sixty Thousand.

About the first of April, the number of troops in East Tennessee, as well as I could judge, was not far from ten thousand, of whom between three and four thousand were at Cumberland Gap, which is a position strong by nature and strongly fortified.

The gentleman referred to in the printed column is named McDowell, a nephew of Gen. Floyd and a relative of our Gen. McDowell. I knew him in Texas, and he is now an officer in the Rebel army. He said that immediately after Floyd ceased to be Secretary of War, a plantation with negroes in South Carolina, was purchased in Mrs. Floyd's name, and $700,000 in cash paid down for it.

The journey from N. Orleans to Richmond occupied seven days. I was told by members of the Rebel Congress in Richmond — (among others, Col. Wilcox, formerly U. S. Congressman from Mississippi) — that they now expected the war would continue six or seven years longer. I have also heard military men there say the same. Secretary Benjamin told me that the Federals arrested and put in prison every one who reached them from the South. In case their large armies are dispersed, their intention undoubtedly is, to adopt a general system of guerilla warfare, and thus wear out their enemies, and make the Government weary of the war.

In the Gulf States East of the Mississippi river, it seemed to me that nearly every able bodied man had been sent to the war. In the State of Mississippi, but few men were to be seen in any of the villages through which I passed. It is necessary, however, in estimating the number of troops they can raise, to note the following facts.

1st. In the beginning of the war thousands left the South and came North. I estimate the number at not less than fifty Thousand men, nor more than 100,000.

2nd. The mortality by sickness in the Southern army has been great. In the last part of October I learned (indirectly) from an officer of high position, that Thirty Thousand southern soldiers had already died from sickness alone. Assuming this to be true, their whole loss from sickness up to the present time cannot be less than Sixty Thousand.

3rd. Thousands have returned home invalids, and will be of no further use during the war. I cannot estimate the number well, but should think that (including those disabled by wounds) it is at least 30,000 and probably twice as many.

4th. Their loss in killed, deserters and prisoners has been large. You can estimate this number better than I can.

The above statements only approximate to the truth. Throughout the South it is impossible to obtain any accurate information. Facts are suppressed for fear of discouraging the people now in rebellion. It really seems to me that the rebels cannot raise many more men than they now have in the service. At any rate they would not be efficient, unless supplies of arms, etc. are received from abroad. It is the opinion of the Federal officers before-mentioned (Col. Bomford and others) that the United States needs more men in the field — at least 100,000 more.

The Yellow Fever generally prevails in New Orleans about one year out of three. It can be prevented by strict quarantine, though this fact is sometimes disputed. The epidemic generally commences in the last part of August (seldom before the 15th) and ends with the first frost, which usually occurs in the first week of November. The number of inhabitants remaining in the city during an epidemic is about Eighty Thousand, and the number of deaths is usually about four thousand or a little more. Sometimes (never except twice) the disease is very malignant and does not yield to former remedies, as in 1853, when it commenced in May and Thirteen Thousand died in the city during the epidemic. With proper sanitary and hospital arrangements I should estimate the number of the army who would escape the disease entirely, at ten per cent. of the whole, and the number who would die at not more than ten per cent. If there is no yellow fever, they would probably be as healthy as Southern soldiers. Probably ninety nine out of a hundred of the Southern army would suffer as much from Yellow fever as our own soldiers, and they will never undertake to occupy any place where the epidemic already prevails. This disease is prevalent along the whole Gulf coast from Key West to the Rio Grande, except the islands, the Texas Coast near Corpus Christi and a few other localities. It extends far inland where the country is slightly elevated above the sea, but never prevails in Western Texas except near the coast.

The Southern climate (near the Gulf) is far less healthy for armies than the Northern, but undoubtedly Federal armies will suffer from sickness no more and probably less, than Southern armies under the same circumstances. I am informed that this was true in the Mexican War. The second year is said to be more dangerous to Northern men than the first. They should be sent South in the Fall or Winter, and, during the hot season, sanitary precautions used, which all good physicians understand.

I think the South can be conquered without abolishing slavery in the Gulf States or elsewhere. To abolish it in the Gulf States would produce a unanimity among the people of those States which does not now exist. They all abhor the idea of the negroes being set free among them and (as they express it) made their equals. It is worth while to treat with conciliation and kindness those who are, or have been, Union men.

The original secessionists are a minority in every state except South Carolina, and perhaps Mississippi. Conciliation and kindness toward them is utterly thrown away. They expect and deserve the same treatment they have given Union men in their midst, and will fight to the last. But few of them will become good citizens again, and when subdued many of them will leave the country forever.

If Western Texas is to become a Free State, it must be before the close of this war. Eastern Texas is more populous and strongly pro-slavery, and will prevent any division of the state in time of peace.

With more time I could have made the foregoing statements more concise. I shall be gratified if they prove to be of any use.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 300-6

Gideon Welles to Gustavus V. Fox, May 8, 1861

Navy Department

8th May 1861 

G. V. Fox, Esqr

Dear Sir

You are appointed Chief Clerk of the Navy Department, and I shall be glad to have you enter upon the duties as soon as you conveniently can.

Yours truly

Gideon Welles

SOURCE: Robert Means Thompson & Richard Wainwright, Editors, Publications of the Naval Historical Society, Volume 9: Confidential Correspondence of Gustavus Vasa Fox, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, 1861-1865, Volume 1, p. 45

Gideon Welles to Gustavus V. Fox, May 9, 1861

Navy Department

May 9, 1861.  

Sir,

You are hereby appointed Chief Clerk of the Navy Department. Enclosed herewith you will find a blank oath of office, which having taken and subscribed to, you will return to the Department with your letter of acceptance.

I am respectfully

Your Obdt Srvt          

Gideon Welles

G. V. Fox, Esq.

Washington D. C.

SOURCE: Robert Means Thompson & Richard Wainwright, Editors, Publications of the Naval Historical Society, Volume 9: Confidential Correspondence of Gustavus Vasa Fox, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, 1861-1865, Volume 1, p. 45-6

Gideon Welles to Gustavus V. Fox, May 30, 1861

Navy Department

May 30, 1861 

Sir:

On and after Monday next the office hours will be from 9 A.M. to 4 P.M. No absences are to be permitted from the office of the Secretary of the Navy, except by authority of the Chief Clerk, and no person, unless on public service, will be allowed in the rooms. Any clerk whose work is behindhand will be required to labor in the evening, or after office hours, until it is up.

You will cause these rules to be enforced so far as the office of the Secretary of the Navy is concerned.

I am, respectfully,

Yr. obt. Svt.   

Gideon Welles

Mr. G. V. Fox,

Chf Clerk

Navy Dept.

SOURCE: Robert Means Thompson & Richard Wainwright, Editors, Publications of the Naval Historical Society, Volume 9: Confidential Correspondence of Gustavus Vasa Fox, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, 1861-1865, Volume 1, p. 46

Diary of Gideon Welles: Wednesday, March 9, 1864

Went last evening to the Presidential reception. Quite a gathering; very many that are not usually seen at receptions were attracted thither, I presume, from the fact that General Grant was expected to be there. He came about half-past nine. I was near the centre of the reception room, when a stir and buzz attracted attention, and it was whispered that General Grant had arrived. The room was not full, the crowd having passed through to the East Room. I saw some men in uniform standing at the entrance, and one of them, a short, brown, dark-haired man, was talking with the President. There was hesitation, a degree of awkwardness in the General, and embarrassment in that part of the room, and a check or suspension of the moving column. Soon word was passed around for “Mr. Seward.” “General Grant is here,” and Seward, who was just behind me, hurried and took the General by the hand and led him to Mrs. Lincoln, near whom I was standing. The crowd gathered around the circle rapidly, and, it being intimated that it would be necessary the throng should pass on, Seward took the General's arm and went with him to the East Room. There was clapping of hands in the next room as he passed through, and all in the East Room joined in it as he entered. A cheer or two followed. All of which seemed rowdy and unseemly. An hour later the General and Mr. Seward and Stanton returned. Seward beckoned me and introduced me and my two nieces.

To-day I received a note from the Secretary of State to be at the Executive Mansion quarter before 1 P.M. The Cabinet was all there, and General Grant and his staff with the Secretary of War and General Halleck entered. The President met him and presented to the General his commission¹ with remarks, to which the latter responded. Both read their remarks. General Grant was somewhat embarrassed.

A conversation of half an hour followed on various subjects, but chiefly the war and the operations of Sherman.

_______________

¹ As Lieutenant-General of the United States Army.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 538-9

Colonel Rutherford B. Hayes to Lucy Webb Hayes, August 24, 1863

Camp White, August 24,1863.

Dearest: — I write you again so soon to speak of a man we lost on Saturday. Joseph Kramer was drowned while sailing on the river. The sailboat (that pretty one of Captain Warren's) was swamped by a severe gale and poor Kramer sank after swimming several rods. You will remember him as a good-natured sailor who rowed boat with Archie at Camp Reynolds. He got a furlough to see his family near Columbus. He was a good soldier; leaves a wife and three or four children. They live near Georgesville on the farm of the Harpers, a few miles southwest of Columbus. Lieutenant Abbott was nearly lost with him. He sank near shore and was senseless for a time.

Kramer is buried on the beautiful hill above the White monument. He was so good a man that I hope his family will not be forgotten by those who are interesting themselves at Columbus in the welfare of soldiers' families. His widow will need the aid of a lawyer or claim agent to get her allowances from [the] Government. Platt can perhaps name the right person and otherwise assist her. — No news. — Love to all.

Affectionately,

R.

Mrs. Hayes.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 2, p. 429-30

In The Review Queue: War Stuff

War Stuff: The Struggle for Human

and Environmental Resources in

the American Civil War

by Joan E. Cashin

In this path-breaking work on the American Civil War, Joan E. Cashin explores the struggle between armies and civilians over the human and material resources necessary to wage war. This war 'stuff' included the skills of white Southern civilians, as well as such material resources as food, timber, and housing. At first, civilians were willing to help Confederate or Union forces, but the war took such a toll that all civilians, regardless of politics, began focusing on their own survival. Both armies took whatever they needed from human beings and the material world, which eventually destroyed the region's ability to wage war. In this fierce contest between civilians and armies, the civilian population lost. Cashin draws on a wide range of documents, as well as the perspectives of environmental history and material culture studies. This book provides an entirely new perspective on the war era.

About the Author

Joan E. Cashin is a Professor of History at Ohio State University. An award-winning scholar of nineteenth-century American history, she is the author or editor of five books, including First Lady of the Confederacy: Varina Davis's Civil War (2009).

ISBN 978-1108413183, Cambridge University Press, © 2018, Papberback, 270 pages, End Notes, Works Cited & Index. $24.99.  To purchase this book click HERE.