Yes, here is another post based on information from the Covington Journal from February 16, 1861. I do not intend to have this blog become CovingtonJournal.com, but as long as I see interesting articles in it, I'll take advantage of this resource. I especially am interested in watching it in the weeks before war broke out. Some of its articles are long and often hard to read online, but still provide an interesting Southern-supporting perspective from a city located along the Ohio River, just a short trip from "the North."
There was no title to this particular piece, but please note that even this brief manifesto on government cannot resist mentioning the topic of slavery.
A Republican says that if we have a Government, he would like to see its strength tried. Better not try it just now; for its weakness might be more apparent than its strength. Our fathers did not intend to make a strong Government. A power able to execute law with exactness at all times is convenient for the governors but not so comfortable to the governed. Such a power is too strong for the liberties of the people. The British Government was strong enough to hold Ireland in chains for centuries. Austria is still strong enough to hold Hungary. The first-named was strong enough to force the emancipation of slaves in Jamaica, and to extort from the toil and sweat of the laboring white men of England one hundred thousand pounds, to liberate the worthless negro. Every page of history is full of the crimes of strong governments. It is true, the weakness of our government is manifest now; but must it be strong enough to coerce these States? Could we afford to have so strong a Government? The troubles we pay now are but the penalties we pay for freedom. We apprehend that a strong government, and a free one, no human ingenuity will ever invent.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
2 different accounts of Lincoln's inaugural journey
The Covington Journal, this time from February 16, 2011, published this pair of very different reports from a couple of Cincinnati newspapers that covered President-elect Lincoln's trip to Washington D.C.
Not the Man for the Times
The Columbus correspondent of the Cincinnati Enquirer , speaking of Lincoln's reception at that place says:
Mr. Kirk, President of the Senate, welcomed him in a short but pretty speech, though the delivery was a little too much on class-meeting order. The reply of Mr. Lincoln was an exceedingly commonplace concern. Many Lincoln men muttered, "We are sold; he is not the man for the times."
The other article was untitled.
The following from the Cincinnati Gazette, the leading Republican organ of the West, is suggestive:
"THE NATIONAL OVATION - The progress of Mr. Lincoln from Springfield to this point has been a continued ovation. The demonstrations of the people have been enthusiastic beyond description. The concourse of the masses, wherever he goes, has been altogether unparalleled. Words and numbers avail little in the way of describing such scenes. Tens of thousands came out to greet him at Indianapolis, and it is hardly an exaggeration to say that hundreds of thousands have thronged about him. If it were ever doubtful that the hopes of the country repose upon him - that he is looked to with confidence as the chosen instrument for resuscitating the Government, and saving the Union, no many can any longer doubt the fact. The people believe that the man who is to be a second "savior of his country" is now on his way to the national capitol. It is a time of general jubilation and rejoicing, such as was never before witnessed."
--
I read a few sports message boards and sometimes see posters complaining about "biased" media coverage; this often leads to someone making comments like "What has happened to journalism, when real reporters just reported the facts and did not add their opinions to it?"
Whenever I see that, I have to chuckle and wonder what they would think of journalism of 150 years ago. With the two very different reports from Lincoln's journey (though, of course, both could be true - masses could be happy while a few men may have made disparaging remarks), it appears that maybe the "good old days" of press coverage were not always so good.
Not the Man for the Times
The Columbus correspondent of the Cincinnati Enquirer , speaking of Lincoln's reception at that place says:
Mr. Kirk, President of the Senate, welcomed him in a short but pretty speech, though the delivery was a little too much on class-meeting order. The reply of Mr. Lincoln was an exceedingly commonplace concern. Many Lincoln men muttered, "We are sold; he is not the man for the times."
The other article was untitled.
The following from the Cincinnati Gazette, the leading Republican organ of the West, is suggestive:
"THE NATIONAL OVATION - The progress of Mr. Lincoln from Springfield to this point has been a continued ovation. The demonstrations of the people have been enthusiastic beyond description. The concourse of the masses, wherever he goes, has been altogether unparalleled. Words and numbers avail little in the way of describing such scenes. Tens of thousands came out to greet him at Indianapolis, and it is hardly an exaggeration to say that hundreds of thousands have thronged about him. If it were ever doubtful that the hopes of the country repose upon him - that he is looked to with confidence as the chosen instrument for resuscitating the Government, and saving the Union, no many can any longer doubt the fact. The people believe that the man who is to be a second "savior of his country" is now on his way to the national capitol. It is a time of general jubilation and rejoicing, such as was never before witnessed."
--
I read a few sports message boards and sometimes see posters complaining about "biased" media coverage; this often leads to someone making comments like "What has happened to journalism, when real reporters just reported the facts and did not add their opinions to it?"
Whenever I see that, I have to chuckle and wonder what they would think of journalism of 150 years ago. With the two very different reports from Lincoln's journey (though, of course, both could be true - masses could be happy while a few men may have made disparaging remarks), it appears that maybe the "good old days" of press coverage were not always so good.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Book Review: My Old Confederate Home
Rusty Williams
copyright 2010
The University Press of Kentucky
After having read Anne Marshall's Creating a Confederate Kentucky (see my review here), I thought perhaps that Rusty William's book would make for a nice follow-up. That intuition proved to be correct, as I really enjoyed My Old Confederate Home.
In this book, Williams employs a very readable, free-flowing style to tell the tale of a property in Pewee Valley, Kentucky that served as a home for former Confederate veterans for over 30 years.
William picks a pair of "characters" to build each chapter around, discussing how those two individuals knew each other or what other similarity they held. This is an effective tool and provides consistency throughout the book.
This book is easy to read, full of enjoyable writing and with a good flow.
Williams shows how the seeds for such a house were planted in post-Civil War Confederate groups that sprung up throughout the south and in Kentucky.
Williams shows how the seeds for such a house were planted in post-Civil War Confederate groups that sprung up throughout the south and in Kentucky.
He also discusses many of the people who played major roles in the establishment of this home, the maintenance and administration of it, as well as how state-wide Confederate groups such as the United Confederate Veterans and United Daughters of the Confederacy contributed and/or tried to contribute to the house.
The role women played - and tried to play - is a very interesting "story within a story" as women as individuals and as members of groups showed a keen interest in the upkeep of this institution.
Williams describes the changing roles of Kentucky state politics in the house, from its beginning to its end as the number of residents inevitably declined. The final chapter, with mentions of the numbers of inmates at the house at various time frames does a great job of serving almost as a "countdown" to the home's final days.
The book does concentrate specifically on the Confederate Home and events surrounding it, but the nature of this story does describe some of the same aspects of Civil War memory in Kentucky as does Marshall's book. Williams' piece adds to the study of just how far the image of Kentucky as a Confederate state spread in the late 1800s and early 1900s and the influence former Confederates and Confederate supporters had throughout the state. Marshall spends more time explaining how this happened, but this books provides a good specific example of the effects of that image. Reading these books back-to-back proved to be a terrific idea and one I certainly suggest other readers to consider.
My Old Confederate Home is a very fine book dealing specifically with the Confederate Veteran's Home in Pewee Valley, Kentucky and is a nice addition to the study of Kentucky's image as a Confederate state.
I gladly recommend this book
The role women played - and tried to play - is a very interesting "story within a story" as women as individuals and as members of groups showed a keen interest in the upkeep of this institution.
Williams describes the changing roles of Kentucky state politics in the house, from its beginning to its end as the number of residents inevitably declined. The final chapter, with mentions of the numbers of inmates at the house at various time frames does a great job of serving almost as a "countdown" to the home's final days.
The book does concentrate specifically on the Confederate Home and events surrounding it, but the nature of this story does describe some of the same aspects of Civil War memory in Kentucky as does Marshall's book. Williams' piece adds to the study of just how far the image of Kentucky as a Confederate state spread in the late 1800s and early 1900s and the influence former Confederates and Confederate supporters had throughout the state. Marshall spends more time explaining how this happened, but this books provides a good specific example of the effects of that image. Reading these books back-to-back proved to be a terrific idea and one I certainly suggest other readers to consider.
My Old Confederate Home is a very fine book dealing specifically with the Confederate Veteran's Home in Pewee Valley, Kentucky and is a nice addition to the study of Kentucky's image as a Confederate state.
I gladly recommend this book
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
The True Difference Between Northerners and Southerners (humor)
Slavery? Tariffs? Centralized governmental powers?
Forget it all. The Covington Journal in early 1861 gives us the true difference between the two regions.
A wag was once heard to say that the difference between the Southern and Northern people is, those in the South never sell anything they can eat, while those in the North never eat anything they can sell.
Forget it all. The Covington Journal in early 1861 gives us the true difference between the two regions.
A wag was once heard to say that the difference between the Southern and Northern people is, those in the South never sell anything they can eat, while those in the North never eat anything they can sell.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
Free Soil Press in Slave States
While this article is obviously pre-Civil War, coming in the October 29, 1859 edition of the Covington Journal, I found it to be fascinating. It is a reprint from the New Orleans Crescent.
Clearly, the assumption of who the next President would be was wrong, but I find it remarkable that a newspaper was complaining that free speech and free press would be protected. I guess when those freedoms brought an anti-slavery message, they did not seem so important.
Also note that none of the examples listed in the article came from the deep south. Virginia and Missouri certainly had more than their share.
Freesoil Press in Slave States
No phase of the growth of Black Republicanism is more alarmingly significant than the establishment of newspapers advocating freesoil principles in slave commonwealths. A few years since, such attempts would have been regarded as dangerous and incendiary. Now, in many of the border slave States, freesoil publications are not only tolerated, but looked on with an eye of favor by many of the population, all of which is ample evidence of the decrease of the strength of the institution of the institution in those States, truly foreshadowing early ultimate abolition there.
There are, proudly remarks a Northern freesoil contemporary, now ten Black Republican journals printed in English, and eight in German, making eighteen in all, published in slave States, distributed as following:
The Missouri Democrat, St. Louis, Missouri; The Free Democrat, St. Joseph, MO; The Sentinel, Kansas City, MO; The Free South, Newport, Ky.; The Wheeling Intelligencer, Wheeling Va.; The Wellsburg Herald, Wellsburg, Va.; The Ceredo Crescent, Ceredo, Va.; The National Era, The Republic, Washington D.C.; The News and Advertiser, Milford, Del.
German - Der Anzeiger des Westens, Die Westliche Post, St. Louis, Mo.; Der St. Charles Demokrat, St. Charles, Mo.; Die Deutsche Zeitung, St. Joseph, Mo.; Die Missouri Post, Kansas City, Mo.; Der Louisville Anzeiger, Louisville, Ky.; Der Baltimore Wecker, Baltimore, Md.
We are of opinion that several more ought to be added to the above list, but "sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." We shouldn't be surprised if moderate freesoil journals were published in this city in three years. With Seward as President the "freedom of speech and the press" would probably be protected. At all events Seward would make the attempts and with the officeholders and power and patronage of the Federal Government to back him, he might be successful.
--
Of course, the presence of such newspapers in the border states was not as easy and accepted as this article makes it seem. Here is a link to a report on the Free South of Newport, Ky, and some of the challenges it faced to stay in existence.
The article transcribed above also fails to mention previous attempts at such newspapers in the region such as Cassius Clays The True American, published in Lexington, Ky and the opposition it aroused, as well as Elijay Lovejoy's murder that happened because of his continued attempts to publish abolition information in Missouri and southern Illinois.
Other papers, both mentioned and neglected above likely faced opposition in the slave states. Despite that, however, this article as reprinted in the Covington Journal does provide an interesting view of how at least one part of the deep south viewed the border states and how slavery was faring in those locales.
Clearly, the assumption of who the next President would be was wrong, but I find it remarkable that a newspaper was complaining that free speech and free press would be protected. I guess when those freedoms brought an anti-slavery message, they did not seem so important.
Also note that none of the examples listed in the article came from the deep south. Virginia and Missouri certainly had more than their share.
Freesoil Press in Slave States
No phase of the growth of Black Republicanism is more alarmingly significant than the establishment of newspapers advocating freesoil principles in slave commonwealths. A few years since, such attempts would have been regarded as dangerous and incendiary. Now, in many of the border slave States, freesoil publications are not only tolerated, but looked on with an eye of favor by many of the population, all of which is ample evidence of the decrease of the strength of the institution of the institution in those States, truly foreshadowing early ultimate abolition there.
There are, proudly remarks a Northern freesoil contemporary, now ten Black Republican journals printed in English, and eight in German, making eighteen in all, published in slave States, distributed as following:
The Missouri Democrat, St. Louis, Missouri; The Free Democrat, St. Joseph, MO; The Sentinel, Kansas City, MO; The Free South, Newport, Ky.; The Wheeling Intelligencer, Wheeling Va.; The Wellsburg Herald, Wellsburg, Va.; The Ceredo Crescent, Ceredo, Va.; The National Era, The Republic, Washington D.C.; The News and Advertiser, Milford, Del.
German - Der Anzeiger des Westens, Die Westliche Post, St. Louis, Mo.; Der St. Charles Demokrat, St. Charles, Mo.; Die Deutsche Zeitung, St. Joseph, Mo.; Die Missouri Post, Kansas City, Mo.; Der Louisville Anzeiger, Louisville, Ky.; Der Baltimore Wecker, Baltimore, Md.
We are of opinion that several more ought to be added to the above list, but "sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." We shouldn't be surprised if moderate freesoil journals were published in this city in three years. With Seward as President the "freedom of speech and the press" would probably be protected. At all events Seward would make the attempts and with the officeholders and power and patronage of the Federal Government to back him, he might be successful.
--
Of course, the presence of such newspapers in the border states was not as easy and accepted as this article makes it seem. Here is a link to a report on the Free South of Newport, Ky, and some of the challenges it faced to stay in existence.
The article transcribed above also fails to mention previous attempts at such newspapers in the region such as Cassius Clays The True American, published in Lexington, Ky and the opposition it aroused, as well as Elijay Lovejoy's murder that happened because of his continued attempts to publish abolition information in Missouri and southern Illinois.
Other papers, both mentioned and neglected above likely faced opposition in the slave states. Despite that, however, this article as reprinted in the Covington Journal does provide an interesting view of how at least one part of the deep south viewed the border states and how slavery was faring in those locales.
Monday, February 14, 2011
2 KY Senators discuss the state resolutions, part 2
Regarding the state resolutions I posted about previously right here and one state Senator's thoughts on it, here are the comments of Benjamin P. Cissel, a Democrat from (ironically) Union County.
He clearly was not happy with the legislature's decision.
Mr. Speaker - I rise to make an explanation. I am sorry that the dominant majority here have seen proper by moving and carrying the previous question to put the gag upon the mouths of the Representatives of a free people. The motion and action by the majority is unjustifiable, illiberal and altogether out of the ordinary laws of parlimentary usage and courtesy. But as it is, the gag has been placed upon our mouths, and all that is left me, is a mere explanation of my vote. The 3d resolution is nothing but one offered by myself; the Senator from Logan and the Senator from Bourbon, at an early day in the session, so weakened as to mean nothing; its vitality has been extracted from it. Yet, being unable to do better - if I had to vote on it as a single proposition, I would vote for it. But when I am compelled to indorse the statements in the whole, I cannot do it. I had hoped that Kentucky would have placed herself in a bold and proud position; but these resolutions, if hoped to destroy her character for manliness and independence and place her, through this General Assembly, in opposition which will not be seconded by her gallant and daring sons. Therefore, as a whole, I cannot indorse them, and must vote against them, and from party caucuses and party cliques, I for one intend to appeal to the liberality and magnanimity of a free and enlightened people.
He clearly was not happy with the legislature's decision.
Mr. Speaker - I rise to make an explanation. I am sorry that the dominant majority here have seen proper by moving and carrying the previous question to put the gag upon the mouths of the Representatives of a free people. The motion and action by the majority is unjustifiable, illiberal and altogether out of the ordinary laws of parlimentary usage and courtesy. But as it is, the gag has been placed upon our mouths, and all that is left me, is a mere explanation of my vote. The 3d resolution is nothing but one offered by myself; the Senator from Logan and the Senator from Bourbon, at an early day in the session, so weakened as to mean nothing; its vitality has been extracted from it. Yet, being unable to do better - if I had to vote on it as a single proposition, I would vote for it. But when I am compelled to indorse the statements in the whole, I cannot do it. I had hoped that Kentucky would have placed herself in a bold and proud position; but these resolutions, if hoped to destroy her character for manliness and independence and place her, through this General Assembly, in opposition which will not be seconded by her gallant and daring sons. Therefore, as a whole, I cannot indorse them, and must vote against them, and from party caucuses and party cliques, I for one intend to appeal to the liberality and magnanimity of a free and enlightened people.
2 KY Senators discuss the state resolutions, part 1
Following my previous entry on a set of resolutions announced by the legislature of Kentucky and printed in the February 9, 1861 edition of the Covington Journal, I will now post two speeches given by Kentucky state Senators during the vote on those resolutions, one (reluctantly) in favor of the legislature's decision and one opposed to it. Due to their length, I will create a separate entry for each.
The paper credited these first comments to "Mr. Rhea, Union (of Logan)." I believe this refers to Albert G. Rhea, member of a prominent Logan County family. "Union" may refer to the Union party.
I desire for us to proclaim in language that cannot be misunderstood, that when all effort shall fail in restoring peace and tranquility to the country, and securing constitutional guarantees for the protection of the rights and interests of the slave States of the Union, that our sympathies are with the South, and we will with them make a common cause. When our overtures are all disregarded and our propositions for adjustment are all rejected, what other course can we take in honor and justice to ourselves.
In my judgment, Mr. Speaker, if Kentucky would at once assume this position - for it is her true position, and he who has not yet learned it knows but little of the feeling of the great mass of her citizens - it would do more to arrest the besom of destruction which is now sweeping over all beloved land, than all else we have done besides. Our brethren of the South would no longer doubt our sympathy for them, and they would harken unto our voice when we entreat them to stay the desolating hand of disunion until all efforts shall fail to secure our rights under the Constitution. It would open the eyes of the North to the folly of their course and they would feel and see that we are in earnest- This they do not now believe. They think Kentucky will submit to any and all grievances a fanatical majority may see proper to inflict. This is not true, and the sooner the fact is impressed on the free States the better it will be for all concerned. If Kentucky would take this position, I believe a satisfactory adjustment would be speedily made.
But, Mr. Speaker, I am denied making an effort to engraft such a sentiment in the resolutions. I know full well from the indications manifested that these resolutions are the best the Senate is now willing to adopt, and whilst I cannot get all I desire embodied in them, yet approving much that they contain, and protesting against the indecent haste with which they are being passed through,as well as the gag which has been applied with reference to their discussion, I will cast my vote in the affirmative.
The paper credited these first comments to "Mr. Rhea, Union (of Logan)." I believe this refers to Albert G. Rhea, member of a prominent Logan County family. "Union" may refer to the Union party.
I desire for us to proclaim in language that cannot be misunderstood, that when all effort shall fail in restoring peace and tranquility to the country, and securing constitutional guarantees for the protection of the rights and interests of the slave States of the Union, that our sympathies are with the South, and we will with them make a common cause. When our overtures are all disregarded and our propositions for adjustment are all rejected, what other course can we take in honor and justice to ourselves.
In my judgment, Mr. Speaker, if Kentucky would at once assume this position - for it is her true position, and he who has not yet learned it knows but little of the feeling of the great mass of her citizens - it would do more to arrest the besom of destruction which is now sweeping over all beloved land, than all else we have done besides. Our brethren of the South would no longer doubt our sympathy for them, and they would harken unto our voice when we entreat them to stay the desolating hand of disunion until all efforts shall fail to secure our rights under the Constitution. It would open the eyes of the North to the folly of their course and they would feel and see that we are in earnest- This they do not now believe. They think Kentucky will submit to any and all grievances a fanatical majority may see proper to inflict. This is not true, and the sooner the fact is impressed on the free States the better it will be for all concerned. If Kentucky would take this position, I believe a satisfactory adjustment would be speedily made.
But, Mr. Speaker, I am denied making an effort to engraft such a sentiment in the resolutions. I know full well from the indications manifested that these resolutions are the best the Senate is now willing to adopt, and whilst I cannot get all I desire embodied in them, yet approving much that they contain, and protesting against the indecent haste with which they are being passed through,as well as the gag which has been applied with reference to their discussion, I will cast my vote in the affirmative.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
150th Anniversary of Lincoln Inaugural Journey
I was lucky enough to attend the Cincinnati stop of this event and found it to be very enjoyable. It was crowded and a bit warm inside the ampitheater, but the event was well organized and enjoyable.
Lincoln presenter Fritz Klein did a fantastic job of portraying Lincoln and the speech he gave in Cincinnati, and the recreations of local events of the time - a welcome from the mayor, songs from a local German group and a brief speech by a local leader of German ancestry - added to the festivities. It was very enjoyable and an interactive event, with the crowd offering cheers and applause as often happened in speeches at the time.
Anyone near one of the stops remaining on this tour (see the link above for more information) should try to attend. I do not know all the details of the local events, but I arrived at this one 30 minutes before it started and was lucky to get a seat, so if it is as popular in other cities as it was here (2 shows with the 300 seat ampitheater packed full), you may want to arrive early.
Below are a couple pictures I took tonight. Most of the pictures I took turned out blurry, but these two were pretty good.
Lincoln presenter Fritz Klein did a fantastic job of portraying Lincoln and the speech he gave in Cincinnati, and the recreations of local events of the time - a welcome from the mayor, songs from a local German group and a brief speech by a local leader of German ancestry - added to the festivities. It was very enjoyable and an interactive event, with the crowd offering cheers and applause as often happened in speeches at the time.
Anyone near one of the stops remaining on this tour (see the link above for more information) should try to attend. I do not know all the details of the local events, but I arrived at this one 30 minutes before it started and was lucky to get a seat, so if it is as popular in other cities as it was here (2 shows with the 300 seat ampitheater packed full), you may want to arrive early.
Below are a couple pictures I took tonight. Most of the pictures I took turned out blurry, but these two were pretty good.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Kentucky Legislature Resolutions, February 1861
After seeing an interesting post at Robert Moore's Cenantua's Blog describing some articles he found in newspapers, I thought his idea sounded really interesting, so I will be trying to add some coverage from the Northern Kentucky and Cincinnati newspapers in early 1861 before the war came.
One newspaper, the Covington Journal is available online through the Kenton County Public Library's website, so I will certainly be taking advantage of it quite frequently. I hope also to make some return visits to the library to do some microfilm searches of the Cincinnati Daily Enquirer and Cincinnati Daily Commercial, though I realize that time constraints may not let me do that as frequently as I would like.
Still, I think it will be interesting to see what the newspapers thought was worthy of printing and commentary in the early part of 1861, when peace still prevailed in the midst of so much uncertainty, with talk of secession and the changing of hands of the US Presidency. Will any of these newspapers show a preference for any side of these issues? Will the paper printed in Kentucky be significantly different than the ones across the river?
__
I start today with information from the Covington Journal of February 9, 1861. It was a weekly newspaper, so each edition contained many articles. This particular edition has a couple interesting stories in it, including one very long commentary of the situation regarding slavery, but the article I will discuss today is a "report of the Select Committee on Federal Relations" from the state legislature.
Reading this report, it's almost like a "close the barn door after the horse is out" situation. Much of that is based on hindsight available now, of course, but this same issue carries an article declaring Texas's decision to secede (awaiting a vote of the people for confirmation), along with plans from Arkansas to vote on whether or not to have a secession convention. This all, of course, is after several states had already declared their departure from the Union.
This report asks both the southern states and the Federal Government to back off their plans or potential plans and try to come up with a compromise to preserve the Union. It does read like a document from a state that wanted to try to please both sides.
Here is the text of this report.
Resolved, by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, That the people of Kentucky view with the most lively apprehension the dangers that now environ the Union and threaten its perpetuity.
Resolved, That we appeal to our Southern brethren to stay the work of revolution; to return and make one mighty effort to perpetuate the noble work of our forefathers, hallowed by the recollections of a thousand noble deeds.
Resolved, That we protest against the use of force or coercion by the General Government against the seceding States, as unwise and inexpedient, and tending to the destruction of our common country.
Resolved, That as this General Assembly has made an application to Congress to call a National Convention to amend the Constitution of the United States, and requested the Legislatures of all other States to make similar applications, and has appointed commissioners to meet those which have been appointed by the State of Virginia, and such as may be appointed by other States, at a designated time and place to consider and, if practicable, agree upon some suitable adjustment of the present unhappy controversies, it is unnecessary and inexpedient for this Legislature to take any further action on this subject at the present time. And as evidence of the sincerity and good faith of our propositions for an adjustment, and an expression of devotion to the Union and desire for its preservation, Kentucky awaits with deep solicitude the response from her sister States.
The final resolution then schedules its next meeting and lists the members of this committee, one of whom was L. H. Rousseau, a future Union general. Another member was Thornton F Marshall, a Democrat whose vote was the deciding one in Kentucky's decision to declare neutrality at the beginning of the Civil War. (See also page 580 of the Encyclopedia of Northern Kentucky)
This newspaper followed up this report with comments from a pair of Kentucky Senators. I will review those comments in a future entry.
One newspaper, the Covington Journal is available online through the Kenton County Public Library's website, so I will certainly be taking advantage of it quite frequently. I hope also to make some return visits to the library to do some microfilm searches of the Cincinnati Daily Enquirer and Cincinnati Daily Commercial, though I realize that time constraints may not let me do that as frequently as I would like.
Still, I think it will be interesting to see what the newspapers thought was worthy of printing and commentary in the early part of 1861, when peace still prevailed in the midst of so much uncertainty, with talk of secession and the changing of hands of the US Presidency. Will any of these newspapers show a preference for any side of these issues? Will the paper printed in Kentucky be significantly different than the ones across the river?
__
I start today with information from the Covington Journal of February 9, 1861. It was a weekly newspaper, so each edition contained many articles. This particular edition has a couple interesting stories in it, including one very long commentary of the situation regarding slavery, but the article I will discuss today is a "report of the Select Committee on Federal Relations" from the state legislature.
Reading this report, it's almost like a "close the barn door after the horse is out" situation. Much of that is based on hindsight available now, of course, but this same issue carries an article declaring Texas's decision to secede (awaiting a vote of the people for confirmation), along with plans from Arkansas to vote on whether or not to have a secession convention. This all, of course, is after several states had already declared their departure from the Union.
This report asks both the southern states and the Federal Government to back off their plans or potential plans and try to come up with a compromise to preserve the Union. It does read like a document from a state that wanted to try to please both sides.
Here is the text of this report.
Resolved, by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, That the people of Kentucky view with the most lively apprehension the dangers that now environ the Union and threaten its perpetuity.
Resolved, That we appeal to our Southern brethren to stay the work of revolution; to return and make one mighty effort to perpetuate the noble work of our forefathers, hallowed by the recollections of a thousand noble deeds.
Resolved, That we protest against the use of force or coercion by the General Government against the seceding States, as unwise and inexpedient, and tending to the destruction of our common country.
Resolved, That as this General Assembly has made an application to Congress to call a National Convention to amend the Constitution of the United States, and requested the Legislatures of all other States to make similar applications, and has appointed commissioners to meet those which have been appointed by the State of Virginia, and such as may be appointed by other States, at a designated time and place to consider and, if practicable, agree upon some suitable adjustment of the present unhappy controversies, it is unnecessary and inexpedient for this Legislature to take any further action on this subject at the present time. And as evidence of the sincerity and good faith of our propositions for an adjustment, and an expression of devotion to the Union and desire for its preservation, Kentucky awaits with deep solicitude the response from her sister States.
The final resolution then schedules its next meeting and lists the members of this committee, one of whom was L. H. Rousseau, a future Union general. Another member was Thornton F Marshall, a Democrat whose vote was the deciding one in Kentucky's decision to declare neutrality at the beginning of the Civil War. (See also page 580 of the Encyclopedia of Northern Kentucky)
This newspaper followed up this report with comments from a pair of Kentucky Senators. I will review those comments in a future entry.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
The Position of Kentucky, Early 1861: Two Contemporary Views
The American Interest's The Long Recall blog blog has an entry regarding The Position of Kentucky, or at least what the Louisville Democrat believed that position to be on February 8 of 1861. It's a good read, including some comments about the importance of slavery to the state.
This was not the only newspaper that opined on Kentucky and how this state felt about then-current events. The Covington Journal, from the northernmost section of Kentucky, and also in a city bordering the Ohio River like its Louisville counterpart, had some longer thoughts on this topic in its January 19 edition.
It is interesting that both start out by avowing Kentucky's interest in the Union, but then quickly turn towards the states loyalties to slavery or to "Southern States." The Journal is quite a bit more emphatic in showing which side of the controversy it supports.
The Position of Kentucky
The unwavering devotion of the people of Kentucky to the Union is this day signally attested by their unwillingness to believe that any thing has occurred or can occur to force them into a new position or change their Federal obligations. This state of things cannot last long. We must sooner or later recognize established facts and accept the weighty responsibilities they create. We may iterate and reiterate Jackson's patriotic declaration - "The Union must and shall be preserved;" we may resolve and re-resolve that we will stick to the Union "at all hazards and under all circumstances," and yet the stubborn facts are not changed - the march of startling events is not arrested.
The North* shows no signs of compromise or concession, but instead is arming its people manifestly for the purpose of coercing the South. For Southern States, in vindication of what they conceive their honor and their rights, have gone out of the Union; other Southern States are making preparations to go out. The Union formed by our Fathers no longer exists. Deplorable as we may regard these movements they cannot be ignored nor ought their importance to be underrated.
We repeat, it is our duty to look the facts in the face. We of Kentucky are not responsible for them. We may deplore their existence. Nevertheless, they are facts, and every consideration demands of us that we should deal with them as such.
In this condition of affairs, with the pillars of the temple falling around her and events affecting her dearest interests crowding upon her, Kentucky cannot long remain indifferent or inactive. She will speedily be compelled to take a position and make her voice heard. Her Legislature is now in session, and may to some extent speak for her people. Kentucky is for the enforcement of the laws; she would promptly give her aid in crushing out Insurrection or Rebellion. But we hold that it is insane folly to treat the Southern movement as a Rebellion. Already beyond the control of the Federal Government, every day is adding to its importance, its magnitude, its invincibility. It is REVOLUTION, and must be regarded and treated as such.
Entertaining these views, we think the Legislature of Kentucky ought to do four things:
1. Propose, as the ultimatum of the State, a national convention for amending the Constitution on the basis of Mr. Crittenden's plan.
2. Enter a form protest against the force by the Federal authorities, as not only impracticable but as cutting off all hopes of a reconstruction of the Union.
3. Prohibit Northern troops from crossing our borders to subjugate a Southern State.
4. Call a Convention of the people to determine all questions that lie beyond the foregoing, and especially to determine what course the State will take in the event that all efforts to adjust the controversy with the North upon just and honorable terms shall fail.
----
*We mean, of course, the dominant party of the North, and its representative men.
This was not the only newspaper that opined on Kentucky and how this state felt about then-current events. The Covington Journal, from the northernmost section of Kentucky, and also in a city bordering the Ohio River like its Louisville counterpart, had some longer thoughts on this topic in its January 19 edition.
It is interesting that both start out by avowing Kentucky's interest in the Union, but then quickly turn towards the states loyalties to slavery or to "Southern States." The Journal is quite a bit more emphatic in showing which side of the controversy it supports.
The Position of Kentucky
The unwavering devotion of the people of Kentucky to the Union is this day signally attested by their unwillingness to believe that any thing has occurred or can occur to force them into a new position or change their Federal obligations. This state of things cannot last long. We must sooner or later recognize established facts and accept the weighty responsibilities they create. We may iterate and reiterate Jackson's patriotic declaration - "The Union must and shall be preserved;" we may resolve and re-resolve that we will stick to the Union "at all hazards and under all circumstances," and yet the stubborn facts are not changed - the march of startling events is not arrested.
The North* shows no signs of compromise or concession, but instead is arming its people manifestly for the purpose of coercing the South. For Southern States, in vindication of what they conceive their honor and their rights, have gone out of the Union; other Southern States are making preparations to go out. The Union formed by our Fathers no longer exists. Deplorable as we may regard these movements they cannot be ignored nor ought their importance to be underrated.
We repeat, it is our duty to look the facts in the face. We of Kentucky are not responsible for them. We may deplore their existence. Nevertheless, they are facts, and every consideration demands of us that we should deal with them as such.
In this condition of affairs, with the pillars of the temple falling around her and events affecting her dearest interests crowding upon her, Kentucky cannot long remain indifferent or inactive. She will speedily be compelled to take a position and make her voice heard. Her Legislature is now in session, and may to some extent speak for her people. Kentucky is for the enforcement of the laws; she would promptly give her aid in crushing out Insurrection or Rebellion. But we hold that it is insane folly to treat the Southern movement as a Rebellion. Already beyond the control of the Federal Government, every day is adding to its importance, its magnitude, its invincibility. It is REVOLUTION, and must be regarded and treated as such.
Entertaining these views, we think the Legislature of Kentucky ought to do four things:
1. Propose, as the ultimatum of the State, a national convention for amending the Constitution on the basis of Mr. Crittenden's plan.
2. Enter a form protest against the force by the Federal authorities, as not only impracticable but as cutting off all hopes of a reconstruction of the Union.
3. Prohibit Northern troops from crossing our borders to subjugate a Southern State.
4. Call a Convention of the people to determine all questions that lie beyond the foregoing, and especially to determine what course the State will take in the event that all efforts to adjust the controversy with the North upon just and honorable terms shall fail.
----
*We mean, of course, the dominant party of the North, and its representative men.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Manhood: How Lost, How Restored, 1861 advertisement
I'm sure my friend Jim Schmidt has seen ads like this when researching his Civil War Medicine columns and blog entries, but it's the first I've seen like this. It is a bit strange to see something like this printed publicly during the Victorian age (though it apparently is just a lecture, not an actual medicine. I guess it's not quite the Viagra of it's time.)
It is from the Covington Journal of February 9, 1861. (And it is interesting that the doctor admitted to learning this from "his own experience.")
Manhood,
How Lost, How Restored
Just published in a sealed envelope
On the NATURE, TREATMENT and radical cure of SPERMATORRHEA, or Seminal Weakness, Sexual Debility, Nervousness and Involuntary Emissions, inducing Impotency, and Mental and Physical Incapacity,
by ROB. J. CULVERWELL, M.D.
author of the Green Book,&c.
The world-renowned author, in this admirable Lecture, clearly proves from his own experience that the awful consequences of Self-abuse may be effectually removed without medicine and without dangerous surgical operations, bougies, instruments, rings or cordials, pointing out a mode of cure at once certain and effectual, by which every sufferer, no matter what his condition may be, may cure himself cheaply, privately and radically. This lecture will prove a boon to thousands and thousands.
Sent under seal to any address, post paid, on the receipt of two postage stamps, by addressing DR. CH J.C. KLINE, 127 Bowroy, New York, Post Box 4,586
(Here's a definition of a "bougie" - use your imagination what use it would have had for these conditions.)
Here is an image of the ad. Sorry it's a bit blurry, but it was difficult to convert it from .pdf format and I'm still new with manipulating images, so this will have to do.
It is from the Covington Journal of February 9, 1861. (And it is interesting that the doctor admitted to learning this from "his own experience.")
Manhood,
How Lost, How Restored
Just published in a sealed envelope
On the NATURE, TREATMENT and radical cure of SPERMATORRHEA, or Seminal Weakness, Sexual Debility, Nervousness and Involuntary Emissions, inducing Impotency, and Mental and Physical Incapacity,
by ROB. J. CULVERWELL, M.D.
author of the Green Book,&c.
The world-renowned author, in this admirable Lecture, clearly proves from his own experience that the awful consequences of Self-abuse may be effectually removed without medicine and without dangerous surgical operations, bougies, instruments, rings or cordials, pointing out a mode of cure at once certain and effectual, by which every sufferer, no matter what his condition may be, may cure himself cheaply, privately and radically. This lecture will prove a boon to thousands and thousands.
Sent under seal to any address, post paid, on the receipt of two postage stamps, by addressing DR. CH J.C. KLINE, 127 Bowroy, New York, Post Box 4,586
(Here's a definition of a "bougie" - use your imagination what use it would have had for these conditions.)
Here is an image of the ad. Sorry it's a bit blurry, but it was difficult to convert it from .pdf format and I'm still new with manipulating images, so this will have to do.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
The Youth's Companion: A Deserter Shot
Here is another story from the Youth's Companion magazine, this one dated April 14, 1864. It gives some good details on how an execution was carried out during the Civil War.
I have not yet confirmed that a Joseph Stroble was a member of the 55th Pennsylvania Regiment, but the National Park Service's Soldiers and Sailors System does confirm that this regiment was stationed in or near Beaufort, S.C., from late 1862 until 1864. It is possible that this young man's name does not appear on the list of regiment members because of his crime and execution.
Another link I found shows only a James Murphy having been executed from the 55th Pennsylvania before this article was published. Did the author of the article get the wrong name or just the wrong regiment? Even without this detail, the description of the process is still worth reading, but having that type of detail would just add a bit of "human touch" to the story.
A Deserter Shot
Death is the penalty for desertion from the army. It is a severe punishment, but as the efficiency and oftentimes the existence of an army depends upon the prevention of desertion, the most effectual means must be taken to secure it, and the fear of death exerts upon most minds the greatest power of restraint. A clergyman at Beaufort, S. S., describes the shooting of a deserter at that post, of which he was a witness:
Joseph Stroble, a member of the 55th Pennsylvania Regiment, was tried by court martial for "desertion and attempting to enter the rebel lines," convicted and sentenced to be sot, at Beaufort, S.C., at three o'clock P.M. At two o'clock all the military of this post were drawn up in order, formed in two lines on three sides of a hollow square. Through these lines, about twenty feet apart, the condemned man rode beside the chaplain, in a cart. Four soldiers bore his coffin in front of him, and his executioners marched behind him, with laded muskets, while the ban, with muffled drums, played a solemn dirge. After the condemned man had passed through the lines, in plain view of every soldier, he halted at the fatal spot designated for his execution. The coffin was borne forward ten paces in front and placed upon the ground. The chaplain and young Stroble advanced together and knelt beside the coffin. A prayer was offered in his behalf. They arose, and the prisoner read, in a clear, strong voice, a paper confessing his guilt and the justice of his sentence, and that he had lived a thoughtless and wicked life, regardless of God or his soul, and in the name of Christ implored pardon. The chaplain read the colloquy between Christ and the two thieves, and they both knelt again beside the coffin, and both offered vocal prayer.
He arose, shook hands with the provost marshal and his spiritual adviser, calmly took off his blue overcoat and laid it on his coffin. He was not pinioned for hoodwinked, at his own request, but stood erect in a soldier's position, at the head of his coffin, and ten feet in front of seven soldiers detailed as his executioners. He put his hand to his left breast and said, "Aim there." The word of command was given, and six minie balls passed through his body, and his soul was launched into the presence of his God.
Each regiment then marched in rank and file past the body of the deserter, while the band was playing a solemn dirge with muffled drums. It was truly a sad and heart-aching sight to see a young man thus violently hurried into eternity, but no malice or revenge could have dictated his death. H attempted desertion to the rebel lines under the most aggravating circumstances; and had he succeeded in his plot, the streets of Beaufort might have been drenched in blood by a rebel raid.
Awful as this extreme penalty of military law may seem, yet is, I am convinced, a necessity, as a terror and warning to those who contemplate desertion.
The following illustration was in the December 28, 1861 Harper's Weekly, courtesy of www.sonofthesouth.net
I have not yet confirmed that a Joseph Stroble was a member of the 55th Pennsylvania Regiment, but the National Park Service's Soldiers and Sailors System does confirm that this regiment was stationed in or near Beaufort, S.C., from late 1862 until 1864. It is possible that this young man's name does not appear on the list of regiment members because of his crime and execution.
Another link I found shows only a James Murphy having been executed from the 55th Pennsylvania before this article was published. Did the author of the article get the wrong name or just the wrong regiment? Even without this detail, the description of the process is still worth reading, but having that type of detail would just add a bit of "human touch" to the story.
A Deserter Shot
Death is the penalty for desertion from the army. It is a severe punishment, but as the efficiency and oftentimes the existence of an army depends upon the prevention of desertion, the most effectual means must be taken to secure it, and the fear of death exerts upon most minds the greatest power of restraint. A clergyman at Beaufort, S. S., describes the shooting of a deserter at that post, of which he was a witness:
Joseph Stroble, a member of the 55th Pennsylvania Regiment, was tried by court martial for "desertion and attempting to enter the rebel lines," convicted and sentenced to be sot, at Beaufort, S.C., at three o'clock P.M. At two o'clock all the military of this post were drawn up in order, formed in two lines on three sides of a hollow square. Through these lines, about twenty feet apart, the condemned man rode beside the chaplain, in a cart. Four soldiers bore his coffin in front of him, and his executioners marched behind him, with laded muskets, while the ban, with muffled drums, played a solemn dirge. After the condemned man had passed through the lines, in plain view of every soldier, he halted at the fatal spot designated for his execution. The coffin was borne forward ten paces in front and placed upon the ground. The chaplain and young Stroble advanced together and knelt beside the coffin. A prayer was offered in his behalf. They arose, and the prisoner read, in a clear, strong voice, a paper confessing his guilt and the justice of his sentence, and that he had lived a thoughtless and wicked life, regardless of God or his soul, and in the name of Christ implored pardon. The chaplain read the colloquy between Christ and the two thieves, and they both knelt again beside the coffin, and both offered vocal prayer.
He arose, shook hands with the provost marshal and his spiritual adviser, calmly took off his blue overcoat and laid it on his coffin. He was not pinioned for hoodwinked, at his own request, but stood erect in a soldier's position, at the head of his coffin, and ten feet in front of seven soldiers detailed as his executioners. He put his hand to his left breast and said, "Aim there." The word of command was given, and six minie balls passed through his body, and his soul was launched into the presence of his God.
Each regiment then marched in rank and file past the body of the deserter, while the band was playing a solemn dirge with muffled drums. It was truly a sad and heart-aching sight to see a young man thus violently hurried into eternity, but no malice or revenge could have dictated his death. H attempted desertion to the rebel lines under the most aggravating circumstances; and had he succeeded in his plot, the streets of Beaufort might have been drenched in blood by a rebel raid.
Awful as this extreme penalty of military law may seem, yet is, I am convinced, a necessity, as a terror and warning to those who contemplate desertion.
The following illustration was in the December 28, 1861 Harper's Weekly, courtesy of www.sonofthesouth.net
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Book Review: Creating a Confederate Kentucky, by Anne Marshall
author: Anne Marshall
copyright 2010
University of North Carolina Press
This may be one of the tougher book reviews I have ever attempted, simply because I do not want it to come across as hagiography, yet I enjoyed it and learned so much from it, I am afraid that is what this review may appear to be. With that out of the way, here I go.
"Image is everything" became a popular marketing slogan in the early 1990's and has remained popular. It is often used to ridicule people or products that seem to rely on looks or packaging rather than talent or production, and is generally not intended to be complimentary, but for this review I use it to mean exactly what it says, with no disrespect intended.
In Anne Marshall's book, Creating a Confederate Kentucky: The Lost Cause and Civil War Memory in a Border State, "image is everything" aptly describes Kentucky's ties to the Confederacy in the post-war years. Marshall shows how Kentucky's identity as a "Confederate" state blossomed, starting soon after the end of the Civil War (being planted during the war itself) and persisted for decades after the war ended.
She begins by stating in the introduction: "it is important to understand that Kentucky was, before, during and after the Civil War, a southern state." (page 4). I have seen other views on that subject, usually regarding modern-day Kentucky, but that is the position she takes for this book and it is difficult to argue against her claim, given the evidence that follows throughout the book.
In the first chapter, she discusses the debate in the state about how to proceed once the war started, and shows that emancipation - followed by the enlistment of African-Americans into the Union army - left many Kentuckians feeling upset, even betrayed. They had supported the Union to keep the country whole, and expected the government to protect them and their property in return.
Additionally, this chapter points out that some Union policies were very harsh, and Marshall even used the term "police state" to describe it; this type of environment clearly did not endear people to the government.
A third intriguing point from this chapter is that the people who supported the Union cause often belonged to the older generation, while the younger citizens often supported the Confederates. This concept is very logical regarding the long-term implications of Kentucky's image, as the older generation would naturally start losing positions of influence and passing away and the next generation would assumed these leadership roles. I wish there were statistics or a demographic study to show how true this thought really was.
The second chapter looks into Kentucky politics in the years immediately after the war, showing how the conservative Democratic party quickly gained control. Much of the control of this party fell into the hands of former Confederates, but many Union men, upset by emancipation and the arming of African-Americans, also joined this party. Keeping white control of the state was an important element of this political atmosphere, appealing to both former Confederates and former Union men.The lack of Reconstruction policies being forced upon the state benefited this conservative element also.
Chapter three contains a terrific discussion of the lawlessness that was common throughout Kentucky in the postwar years. Much of the violence was against African-Americans, including lynchings, as well as against those who tried to hire the former slaves and other free African-Americans or who otherwise publicly supported Republican positions. Like the political situation, this appeared to outsiders to be very similar to life in the deep south in prewar years, adding another block in the creation of a Confederate image for Kentucky.
In chapter four, Marshall discusses "memorial activity" in the state from the end of the war through 1895. This chapter shows how Confederate supporters and groups were more active, aggressive and successful in portraying and sharing their memories of the war than were their Union counterparts. She also describes the valuable role women and woman's groups played in shaping post-war memory and perception, another fascinating point.
African-Americans attempted to participate in such memorial experiences also. In 1883, a large convention of African-Americans met in Louisville, with Frederick Douglass serving as chairman and making an impassioned plea on behalf of his people. Reaction was quite mixed, with some moderates trying to show the conference in positive terms, while a more conservative element was not so kind.
Chapter 5 explores the Appalachian region of Kentucky and the images that developed around it. The chapter describes the concept of "two Kentuckies" - Appalachia and everywhere else - that formed during the postwar years and how popular literature and public speakers contributed to the mountainous region's image of being a stronghold of Union support.This image was not totally true, and Marshall also demonstrates that people in the rest of Kentucky used the violence present in the mountains to take attention away from the lawlessness in the rest of the state.
The next chapter is entitled "Literature, Confederate Identity and Kentucky's Reputation, 1890-1915" and shows how many popular writers used Kentucky as the location of their stories. Authors like Annie Fellows Johnston and others authored popular books with Confederate themes and Kentucky settings. This chapter may be where the "image is everything" theme is most obvious, as these literary works, despite being fictional, still affected how people around the country viewed Kentucky and its people.
The final chapter of the book, chapter 7, returns to a discussion of the issues of monuments and physical representations of the memories of the war, this time focusing on the period form 1895 to 1935. By this time a spirit of reconciliation had become much more widespread than immediately after the war, yet it was still the Confederate supporters who took the lead in erecting monuments honoring their perceptions and memories, sometimes with the support of Union veterans. The 1895 GAR encampment, held not far from a large Confederate monument, and with former Confederates being present throughout the city, serves as one example.
Still, race was a huge concern, and pages 170 and 171 introduce the "Uncle Tom's Cabin Law" which the state legislature passed to stop the showing of a version of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, when members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy protested it as being a mistreatment of Kentucky's past, and, especially, of their memories of slavery.
That was just one way in which Kentucky state government contributed to the development of the Southern or Confederate image of the state. Marshall then offers other examples of such support, including ways the state helped finance some Confederate memorials.
The Afterword section shows that much of this Confederate identity started to weaken as time passed and that as the twenty-first century began different voices about the Civil War started to be more widespread and noticeable. The celebration over the bicentennial of Abraham Lincoln's birth and other new trails, signs and markers are signs that Kentucky's Unionist heritage may be gaining more attention than in the past.
I cannot recommend this book enough. For anyone interested in Kentucky's history or reputation, or of the study and remembrance of the Civil War, it simply is a must read. I do not know how else to describe it.
It is also informative and enjoyable enough to benefit anyone interested in the Civil War. It is well-written, readable, includes end-notes and a long bibliography, and is full of information and perspectives about its subject. Anne Marshall clearly researched this material and analyzed her findings in a very in-depth fashion.
Creating a Confederate Kentucky is easily among the best books I have ever read and is nothing short of being absolutely remarkable.
In the first chapter, she discusses the debate in the state about how to proceed once the war started, and shows that emancipation - followed by the enlistment of African-Americans into the Union army - left many Kentuckians feeling upset, even betrayed. They had supported the Union to keep the country whole, and expected the government to protect them and their property in return.
Additionally, this chapter points out that some Union policies were very harsh, and Marshall even used the term "police state" to describe it; this type of environment clearly did not endear people to the government.
A third intriguing point from this chapter is that the people who supported the Union cause often belonged to the older generation, while the younger citizens often supported the Confederates. This concept is very logical regarding the long-term implications of Kentucky's image, as the older generation would naturally start losing positions of influence and passing away and the next generation would assumed these leadership roles. I wish there were statistics or a demographic study to show how true this thought really was.
The second chapter looks into Kentucky politics in the years immediately after the war, showing how the conservative Democratic party quickly gained control. Much of the control of this party fell into the hands of former Confederates, but many Union men, upset by emancipation and the arming of African-Americans, also joined this party. Keeping white control of the state was an important element of this political atmosphere, appealing to both former Confederates and former Union men.The lack of Reconstruction policies being forced upon the state benefited this conservative element also.
Chapter three contains a terrific discussion of the lawlessness that was common throughout Kentucky in the postwar years. Much of the violence was against African-Americans, including lynchings, as well as against those who tried to hire the former slaves and other free African-Americans or who otherwise publicly supported Republican positions. Like the political situation, this appeared to outsiders to be very similar to life in the deep south in prewar years, adding another block in the creation of a Confederate image for Kentucky.
In chapter four, Marshall discusses "memorial activity" in the state from the end of the war through 1895. This chapter shows how Confederate supporters and groups were more active, aggressive and successful in portraying and sharing their memories of the war than were their Union counterparts. She also describes the valuable role women and woman's groups played in shaping post-war memory and perception, another fascinating point.
African-Americans attempted to participate in such memorial experiences also. In 1883, a large convention of African-Americans met in Louisville, with Frederick Douglass serving as chairman and making an impassioned plea on behalf of his people. Reaction was quite mixed, with some moderates trying to show the conference in positive terms, while a more conservative element was not so kind.
Chapter 5 explores the Appalachian region of Kentucky and the images that developed around it. The chapter describes the concept of "two Kentuckies" - Appalachia and everywhere else - that formed during the postwar years and how popular literature and public speakers contributed to the mountainous region's image of being a stronghold of Union support.This image was not totally true, and Marshall also demonstrates that people in the rest of Kentucky used the violence present in the mountains to take attention away from the lawlessness in the rest of the state.
The next chapter is entitled "Literature, Confederate Identity and Kentucky's Reputation, 1890-1915" and shows how many popular writers used Kentucky as the location of their stories. Authors like Annie Fellows Johnston and others authored popular books with Confederate themes and Kentucky settings. This chapter may be where the "image is everything" theme is most obvious, as these literary works, despite being fictional, still affected how people around the country viewed Kentucky and its people.
The final chapter of the book, chapter 7, returns to a discussion of the issues of monuments and physical representations of the memories of the war, this time focusing on the period form 1895 to 1935. By this time a spirit of reconciliation had become much more widespread than immediately after the war, yet it was still the Confederate supporters who took the lead in erecting monuments honoring their perceptions and memories, sometimes with the support of Union veterans. The 1895 GAR encampment, held not far from a large Confederate monument, and with former Confederates being present throughout the city, serves as one example.
Still, race was a huge concern, and pages 170 and 171 introduce the "Uncle Tom's Cabin Law" which the state legislature passed to stop the showing of a version of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, when members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy protested it as being a mistreatment of Kentucky's past, and, especially, of their memories of slavery.
That was just one way in which Kentucky state government contributed to the development of the Southern or Confederate image of the state. Marshall then offers other examples of such support, including ways the state helped finance some Confederate memorials.
The Afterword section shows that much of this Confederate identity started to weaken as time passed and that as the twenty-first century began different voices about the Civil War started to be more widespread and noticeable. The celebration over the bicentennial of Abraham Lincoln's birth and other new trails, signs and markers are signs that Kentucky's Unionist heritage may be gaining more attention than in the past.
I cannot recommend this book enough. For anyone interested in Kentucky's history or reputation, or of the study and remembrance of the Civil War, it simply is a must read. I do not know how else to describe it.
It is also informative and enjoyable enough to benefit anyone interested in the Civil War. It is well-written, readable, includes end-notes and a long bibliography, and is full of information and perspectives about its subject. Anne Marshall clearly researched this material and analyzed her findings in a very in-depth fashion.
Creating a Confederate Kentucky is easily among the best books I have ever read and is nothing short of being absolutely remarkable.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)