Thursday, September 24, 2026

Diary of Governor Rutherford B. Hayes, March 6, 1870

I have borrowed of Uncle, and on his name, of John G. Deshler eight thousand dollars and invested it in one hundred and sixty acres of land one and one-fourth miles from the dock at Duluth, Minnesota. I expect Duluth to grow rapidly and that this property will increase in value about one hundred per cent for the next three or five years. The cash and deeds pass this week. General George B. Sargent, care J. Cooke and Co., New York, is my correspondent's address.

I have been digging into Savage and other books on genealogy during the last week. I trace my lineage up almost to the Mayflower but not yet into it. I have only run back on the line of my father's side of the house, and the important family of the Smiths is left out!! Almost one-half of the stock! To be exact, it leaves out exactly one-fourth of the stock, as I find nearly one-half of the Smiths. Now, the new idea I get by this study is, how futile it is to trace one's descent from a distinguished name in the past. Two hundred and thirty or forty years ago my ancestors were from thirty to a hundred different persons. The Hayes or the Rutherford of 1625 was only one out of forty or more who are equally my ancestors. What does it signify that John Russell was able and pious in 1640? I am but one part in forty to sixty of his blood. We attach more importance to the deeds of ancestors of our own names. But this is a mere figment of the imagination. I am just as much a Trowbridge, referring now to the Thomas Trowbridge who founded the family in New Haven in 1640, as any of those now living there who bear his name. The blood, the physical, mental, or moral qualities which distinguished an early "father," do not follow the name; do not accompany it.

I have always thought of myself as Scotch, but of the fathers of my family who came to America about thirty were English and two only, Hayes and Rutherford, were of Scotch descent. This, on my father's side. On my mother's side, the whole thirty-two were probably all of other peoples beside the Scotch. Again, I have been proud of my descent (not very of course, only a trifle so,) from the famous Rutherfords; but it is plain that the brains, energy, and character possessed by my grandfather's children and grandchildren — by the children and grandchildren of Rutherford Hayes — are mainly derived from our plain ancestor, whom [who] Uncle Sardis says was the homeliest woman he ever saw(!), Grandmother Chloe Smith.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, pp. 91-2

Governor Rutherford B. Hayes to Birchard Hayes, March 11, 1870

COLUMBUS, OHIO, March 11, 1870.

MY DEAR BOY:— You ask me about the college at Hudson [Western Reserve]. It has a good history — has turned out many able and successful men. I hope it will grow into a great institution. I have no doubt you can get there all that is essential which any college can give. You will hear no objection from me if it is finally thought best by you and Uncle to go to that college. But I prefer you would not finally decide about it until I have a talk with both of you. You can, if you wish, go on and study as if that would be your college. In a few weeks I will see you and Uncle and consider all sides. The main thing is the student—his industry, his habits, character, and talents. The college affords him merely the tools.

Affectionately,
R. B. HAYES.
BIRCHARD HAYES.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 92

Governor Rutherford B. Hayes to General Henry B. Carrington, March 12, 1870

COLUMBUS, March 12, 1870.

MY DEAR SIR:— My wife is a granddaughter of Isaac Cook, son of Colonel Isaac Cook of Wallingford, Connecticut. I have just learned that James Carrington married a sister of Colonel Cook, and that he (Carrington) compiled a pedigree of the Cooks which passed into the hands of his son, James Carrington, formerly of Astoria, Long Island. I write to ascertain if you have any information of that pedigree, or of the names or residences of the earlier Cooks. I will be particularly obliged if you can set me on the right track.

Sincerely,
R. B. HAYES.
GENERAL H. B. CARRINGTON.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 92

Governor Rutherford B. Hayes to General Manning F. Force, March 17, 1870

COLUMBUS, March 17, 1870.

MY DEAR GENERAL:— I enclose you a letter and newspaper slip just received from Rogers which will enlighten you on Duluth prospects. Please return them. I am particularly anxious to have Rogers interested in this property, as he is the discoverer. Can you give him a third interest in your lots, he to pay his share and interest at next payment? I propose to get a joint interest with him on some such terms. He can be very useful in protecting us from loss by sales, etc., etc., at proper times.

Sincerely,
R. B. HAYES.
GENERAL M. F. FORCE,
        Cincinnati, Ohio.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, pp. 92-3

Governor Rutherford B. Hayes to Sardis Birchard, March 20, 1870

COLUMBUS, OHIO, March 20, 1870.

DEAR UNCLE:— I am rather busy now. The appointment of Agricultural College Trustees excites some interest. I think I shall get a good board. In your district I must appoint a Democrat, and have pretty much determined to appoint Warren P. Nobles, of Seneca. I have offered Pendleton a place, and if he accepts will give the other to A. P. Perry.

I am rather gratified by the turn things are taking. I regard the Orphans' Bill as safe in some form.

Sincerely,
R. B. HAYES.
S. BIRCHARD.
        Private and Confidential.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 93

Governor Rutherford B. Hayes to George B. Hollister, March 29, 1870

COLUMBUS, March 29, 1870.

DEAR HOLLISTER:— I am in receipt of yours of the 28th. I like General B——— ever so much and have expected, and still, expect, to reappoint him. But why does he not act — investigate — publish the result, etc., etc.? All sorts of ill rumors are afloat — intemperance, etc., etc. The trustees are bound to do or say something. Silence longer is confession. What does B——— think and say? What will he do?

Sincerely,
R. B. HAYES.
P. S. - Return this letter to me with your reply. - H.

HONORABLE GEORGE B. HOLLISTER.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 93

Wednesday, September 23, 2026

Review: Three Roads to Gettysburg

Three Roads to Gettysburg: Meade, Lee, Lincoln, and theBattle That Changed the War, the Speech That Changed the Nation

By Tim McGrath

It is estimated that between 60,000 and 100,000 books related to the American Civil War have been published since 1865, with approximately 30,000 devoted to the Gettysburg Campaign and Battle of Gettysburg. Depending on which estimates one accepts, that means that somewhere between 30 and 50 percent of the enormous literature of the Civil War has focused, at least in part, on Gettysburg. With numbers like these, one might reasonably ask: Is there really a need for another book about Gettysburg?

Tim McGrath’s Three Roads to Gettysburg provides a compelling answer to that question—not by uncovering some previously unknown story of the battle, but by finding a different way to tell a familiar one.

Many people, justly or unjustly, point to Gettysburg as the turning point of the Civil War. But how did the war arrive at that pivotal moment? The events of July 1–3, 1863, did not occur in isolation. They were the product of years of political, military, and personal developments involving thousands of individuals. A comprehensive accounting of all the events and personalities that laid the foundation for Gettysburg would be virtually impossible in a single volume. McGrath simplifies that daunting task by selecting three men whose lives and decisions became intimately connected with the battle and its aftermath: Union Major General George Gordon Meade, Confederate General Robert E. Lee, and President Abraham Lincoln.

These three "roads" form the structure of McGrath’s narrative. He follows Meade, Lee, and Lincoln from their early lives through the events that ultimately brought two of them together on the Gettysburg battlefield and placed the third in the position of interpreting the battle's meaning for a divided nation. Along the way, McGrath demonstrates how seemingly separate lives can gradually converge at a single moment in history.

For Meade and Lee, McGrath begins with their early years and education at West Point, follows their military assignments and service during the Mexican-American War, and then traces their careers through the turbulent 1850s and the outbreak of the Civil War. Their military careers unfold against the growing sectional crisis and, eventually, the war itself. The two men ultimately find themselves commanding opposing armies on the fields around Gettysburg.

Lincoln’s road is different, but equally important. McGrath follows him from his humble beginnings near Hodgenville, Kentucky, and his formative years in Indiana, through his experiences in New Orleans and New Salem, Illinois, and into Illinois politics and the United States Congress. From these modest beginnings, Lincoln eventually reaches the presidency at the moment when the nation is torn apart by civil war. His road to Gettysburg culminates not as a battlefield commander but as the nation's chief executive and, ultimately, as the author of the Gettysburg Address.

McGrath’s narrative is essentially linear, alternating among his three principal subjects and giving each his turn as their lives move through the twists and turns of history. This approach allows the reader to watch the three roads gradually converge on the small Pennsylvania town of Gettysburg. The contrast between the scale of the events and the size of the town is striking. Approximately 160,000 soldiers would eventually participate in the battle, while Gettysburg itself was home to only about 2,400 people.

Once the armies arrive at Gettysburg, however, the limitations of a three-man biography become apparent. The lives of Meade and Lee alone cannot provide everything necessary to explain the complicated events of July 1–3, 1863. McGrath therefore expands his narrative, introducing the experiences and perspectives of numerous other participants. This allows him to move beyond the three principal biographies and provide the reader with a broader understanding of the battle itself.

The approach works particularly well for readers who may know the broad outlines of Gettysburg but lack a detailed understanding of how the battle unfolded. Rather than becoming overwhelmed by the enormous cast of characters associated with Gettysburg, the reader is given three central figures through whom the larger story can be understood.

The book does not end with the Confederate retreat from Gettysburg. Its final chapters turn to Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and then provide a broad overview of the remaining two years of the war, from Gettysburg through Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House. McGrath follows Lee into the postwar years and his presidency of what became Washington and Lee University, examines Lincoln’s assassination, revisits the postwar relationship between Meade and Major General Daniel E. Sickles, and concludes with the deaths of Lee and Meade.

This structure reinforces one of the book's central themes: Gettysburg was not an isolated event but a moment in the lives of three men whose stories continued long after the guns fell silent. The battle itself occupies only a few days, but the roads that brought Meade, Lee, and Lincoln there—and the consequences of what happened there—extend across decades.

So, to return to the original question: Is there really a need for another book about Gettysburg?

This is not a book written for scholars of the American Civil War or specialists in the Gettysburg Campaign. Nor does it attempt to replace the numerous detailed studies that have examined the battle from virtually every conceivable angle. It was not designed to do so. McGrath’s intended audience is the general reader of history with an interest in the Civil War, particularly those with limited knowledge of the war and Gettysburg, as well as readers looking for an accessible refresher on one of the most studied battles in American history.

For that audience, Three Roads to Gettysburg offers a distinctive approach. It is a well-researched and accessible narrative presented as a single-volume triple biography. Rather than asking the reader to absorb the enormous cast of characters and events surrounding Gettysburg all at once, McGrath uses the lives of Meade, Lee, and Lincoln as three guideposts through the complicated history that led to the battle and its aftermath.

There will almost certainly always be new books about Gettysburg. Some will be massive, highly detailed studies devoted to the minutiae of the campaign, the battlefield, individual units, commanders, soldiers, civilians, or particular moments of the fighting. Others, like Three Roads to Gettysburg, will provide broader narratives for readers who are new to the subject or simply want to revisit the story without wading through hundreds of pages of specialized scholarship.

And perhaps that is the best answer to the question of whether another Gettysburg book is necessary. There is always room for another telling of an important story when it finds a new audience or presents that story in an accessible way. Gettysburg has been studied for more than 160 years, yet each generation produces new readers encountering the Civil War for the first time. For those readers, the story still needs to be told—and McGrath has chosen three remarkable roads by which to tell it.

ISBN 978-0593184394, Dutton, © 2025, Hardcover, 528 Pages, Maps, End Notes, Bibliography & Index. $38.00.  To Purchase the book click HERE.


Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 1, 1863

Coal [sic] and raney in the morning and in the eavning it was clear and very windy

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 30

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 2, 1863

a beautyfull Spring day.

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 30

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 3, 1863

a beautyfull one and our Regiment left the old camp clost to Port Royal and marched back clost to Fredericksburg and taken camp again clos to the one we left

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 30

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 16, 1863

cloudy and coal And Mr. Stons in Co. F. 57 N. C. Regiment was shot to death to day with musketry.

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, pp. 30-1

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 17, 1863

the Yanks crossed the Raphanock River at Keleys foad and our calvry whipt them back.

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 31

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 20, 1863

cloudy in the morning and snowed a littel in the eavning and Mr. I. H. Compton arived at our camp today on a visit

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 31

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 21, 1863

Snowed untell it was about 3 inches deep on the ground

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 31

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 22, 1863

the snow all melted off And Mr. Compton and Johnston left camp today for home.

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 31

Diary of 4th Corporal Bartlett Yancey Malone, March 31, 1863

The last day of March the Snow was about 3 inches deep on the ground.

SOURCE: Bartlett Yancey Malone, The Diary of Bartlett Yancey Malone, p. 31

Diary of Henry Greville, Sunday, March 9, 1862

A tremendous hurricane has been blowing all day, after two beautiful spring days. Algy Egerton came from London yesterday, and spoke in high terms of a speech made by William Gregory on Friday, in favour of our breaking the American blockade. It lasted two hours, and was listened to with deep attention, but the facts on which it was founded were upset by the Solicitor-General, Roundell Palmer, and the motion was withdrawn. Gregory is clever, and should be put into office.

In the French Chambers, the new Bill which is substituted for the one granting a dotation to Palikao is a bit of thimbleriggery. It is proposed that a sum of money shall be voted which is to be put at the disposal of the Emperor, with which he may reward the services of the army, from a marshal to a private, with or without reversibility, according to his pleasure. So that His Majesty gets even more than he originally asked for. In the meantime it is said Fould and Persigny cannot agree, and if Fould gets the upper hand Walewski will go to the wall, and it is suspected the Emperor has a new card to play, in Drouin de l'Huys. It was known that if the dotation of Palikao had been persisted in, Jules Favre and others of the Republican party had intended bringing up a lawsuit in which Montauban had played a very disgraceful part. Palikao, in Chinese, means 'cochon pourri.'

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1861-1872, pp. 27-8

Diary of Henry Greville, Thursday, March 13, 1862

On Monday night there was a debate in the House of Lords on the American blockade, when Lord John Russell declined to give the papers moved for, and said that 'the policy pursued by our Government had been dictated not by expediency, but by justice, and that both sides at some future period would acknowledge this fact, and he trusted that within three months, if not sooner, we might see the end of the war, and he hoped that it might terminate in a manner consistent with the welfare and happiness of both parties, and a renewal of the old good feeling between North and South, and that they would consent to a peaceful separation into two States which might be powerful and prosperous.' I don't think this prophecy on the part of John Russell was judicious, however likely it may be of accomplishment, and I see no probability of it. It is, however, remarkable that by the advices from New York the same expectation exists of the approaching end of the war, and Mr. Seward gives exactly the same opinion of its duration as John Russell did (ninety days), though by no means with the same result. Edward Ellice, whom I met at Flahault's on Monday, said he was convinced that whether the war went on or not, the Federal Union was doomed. Mr. Adams, the American Minister, told Flahault that the war would be over by the month of June, but with what result he did not specify.

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1861-1872, pp. 28-9

Diary of Henry Greville, Saturday, March 15, 1862

News of fresh reverses sustained by the Confederates, and the occupation of Nashville by the Federals, and the crossing of the Potomac, reached London this morning, as also a message from President Davis to his Congress admitting the reverses to be serious and humiliating, but expressing unabated confidence in the determination of the South to resist to the last.

Dined yesterday at the Palmerstons' to meet Princess Camporeale (née Acton), who sang charmingly after dinner. Palmerston was detained in the House of Commons. Lady Palmerston told me, except on Saturdays and Sundays, he hardly ever dined with her, but did so at three, went to the House of Commons at four, and except some tea at the House he took nothing more until he came home to bed, seldom earlier than one o'clock. What a life for a man in his seventy-seventh year! I sat next to Lady Jocelyn at dinner, who said the Queen was on the whole better, occupied all day with one thing or other, and had given orders that whenever her people had anything to ask of or to say to her, they should address themselves straight to her. Lady Augusta Bruce is the only lady of her household who approaches her unannounced.

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1861-1872, pp. 29-30

Diary of Henry Greville, Monday, March 17, 1862

The Queen laid the first stone of the Mausoleum in Frogmore Gardens on Saturday. In this receptacle Prince Albert's remains and her own are ultimately to be deposited. The whole Household in Waiting attended the ceremony, and all those who had been in any way connected with the Prince, such as the bailiffs of Osborne and Balmoral, were summoned. Sydney tells me this Mausoleum had been determined upon before the Prince's death. I think these German fancies are much to be regretted, as keeping up a morbid and artificial sort of grief which in the case of the Queen will be of considerable inconvenience. She has visited the tomb and strewn flowers over the coffin, with which also the bed in which the Prince died is decked, and which she and the Royal children constantly renew, and his rooms are left exactly in the state they were in at the moment of his death.

A letter from Fanny Kemble, begun at Philadelphia and finished at Washington, received this morning, says: “The war seems to be approaching a crisis. The Northern troops are gradually surrounding the Southern forces, and there have been some very important advantages gained by the Federal Army, which indicate, I think, a termination, by no means remote, of the contest. A very important entrenched camp called Fort Donnelson, in Tennessee, which commands the entrance into the heart of the Southern country, and the approach to Nashville (a place of great importance), have just been taken by the Northern troops. They have also invested the city of Savannah, and the news of its surrender is hourly expected. In short, I think the clouds are bursting, and very decided daylight approaching. The end of the Civil War will leave the Government burthened with questions of infinite difficulty to deal with, but it will have been worth two good results to the American Nation. The theory of State Rights and the practice of slavery have both, I think, received their death-blow, and the efforts and sacrifices which the Northern States have made with such extraordinary energy and devotion will enhance for many a long year the value of the Union in the hearts and minds of the people. I arrived here yesterday (Washington); the whole road from Philadelphia to this place is a string of camps and military stations, sometimes only a small cluster of tents peering from the banks on the railroad track. The weather has been frightful, and the melting of the snow and the coming up of the frost out of the ground have left the surface of it one mud-bed, and the poor soldiers looked forlorn enough in their plank houses, which seemed but sorry shelter for such a season. They had huge wood fires blazing at all their posts, however, which, as evening came on, looked very picturesque. Wherever the train stopped, eager requests were made by the soldiers who crowded round it for newspapers, which the passengers gave them.

I bestowed a ‘Times’ on them. I did not think the American news would edify them much, but thought they might be the better for reading the history of the Hartley Colliery catastrophe. You cannot imagine how strange all this sudden apparition of warlike life is here, where till within the last year such a thing as a real soldier was never seen! President Lincoln has made a suggestion that pecuniary compensation should be offered to any State which will abolish slavery. This has made a great sensation in America, but is here considered quite impracticable and as a bait to the Border States to return to their allegiance to the Union.”

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1861-1872, pp. 30-2