Here's a brief but interesting anecdote of "role reversal" from the Covington Journal of June 29, 1861
One of the slaves, at Newport News, on being questioned as to whether he had run away from his master, replied, "No, golly, Massa run away from me! When he see de soldiers comin' he run like de debil. 'spec he's gone to Richmond!"
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Book Review: The Class of 1846 by John C. Waugh
The Class of 1846: From West Point to Appomattox: Stonewall Jackson, George McClellan and Their Brothers
John C.Waugh
copyright 1994
Warner Books
I finished this fine book a couple of weeks ago and though I regret I cannot do a full review of it, I do want to offer at least a small review of it.
It is a good book, but long. At over 500 pages, it did take me quite a while to read it (outside distractions kept me from reading it as quickly as I wished), but that is not a bad thing. It is well-written and easy to read, so the length is not a major issue.
This book serves almost as a mini-biography of several of the future soldiers, but especially McClellan and Jackson, for whom it describes their youth and their lives in between their time at West Point and the Civil War. They - the two most prominent members of the class - are certainly the two dominant figures in this book.
I enjoyed sketches of others as well though. I wish they had talked a bit more about A.P. Hill (though he was moved back to the class of 1847, he did start in the 1846 class), especially in the final days of his life. The same can be said about George Pickett.
At one point, the book had a nice discussion about Ambrose Burnside replacing McClellan late in 1862 and when the chapter ended, I was disappointed that the discussion about Burnside stopped too. Then I realized he was not part of this class, not even temporarily like Hill.
Waugh discusses their time at West Point, with the spartan lifestyle and he describe many of the teachers under whom the cadets studied. He mentions Benny Havens, of course, and the trouble associated with that tavern and related activities. He also describes the Mexican War, and the role many of these young men played in it.
Overall, I found this to be an enjoyable book, a pleasant read and an informative description of several future well-known Civil War generals.
I enjoyed sketches of others as well though. I wish they had talked a bit more about A.P. Hill (though he was moved back to the class of 1847, he did start in the 1846 class), especially in the final days of his life. The same can be said about George Pickett.
At one point, the book had a nice discussion about Ambrose Burnside replacing McClellan late in 1862 and when the chapter ended, I was disappointed that the discussion about Burnside stopped too. Then I realized he was not part of this class, not even temporarily like Hill.
Waugh discusses their time at West Point, with the spartan lifestyle and he describe many of the teachers under whom the cadets studied. He mentions Benny Havens, of course, and the trouble associated with that tavern and related activities. He also describes the Mexican War, and the role many of these young men played in it.
Overall, I found this to be an enjoyable book, a pleasant read and an informative description of several future well-known Civil War generals.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
The Terrors of Civil War
The Covington Journal of June 22, 1861 re-printed this piece.
The Lutheran Observer, a strong Union paper, says:
"Of all the awful judgments of a justly incensed God, WAR, and especially INTESTINE WAR, is the most terrific and destructive. When God determined to inflict condign punishment on His ancient people on account of their offenses, He submitted to David, their King, his choice of three fearful scourges, to wit: Famine, War, or Pestilence. David would rather fall into the hand of the Lord, "because His mercies are great," than of man, and chose pestilence as the least appalling.
The Lutheran Observer, a strong Union paper, says:
"Of all the awful judgments of a justly incensed God, WAR, and especially INTESTINE WAR, is the most terrific and destructive. When God determined to inflict condign punishment on His ancient people on account of their offenses, He submitted to David, their King, his choice of three fearful scourges, to wit: Famine, War, or Pestilence. David would rather fall into the hand of the Lord, "because His mercies are great," than of man, and chose pestilence as the least appalling.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
One brief view of the North's war goal
From the Covington Journal of June 22, 1861, comes this brief story which makes an interesting and thought-provoking point in the concluding paragraph (its response to the reprinted report above it.)
"The great mass of those who are supporting the war in the North, and fighting its battles, have not the most remote idea of giving it an emancipation character" - Cincinnati Enquirer
Have they not? Then the spectacle is presented to the world of a mass of men aiding in the accomplishment of an object they do not approve of.
This newspaper, a Southern-supporting periodical in a state that remained in the Union, clearly saw the Union war effort as having an abolitionist goal, even more than a year before the Emancipation Proclamation.
"The great mass of those who are supporting the war in the North, and fighting its battles, have not the most remote idea of giving it an emancipation character" - Cincinnati Enquirer
Have they not? Then the spectacle is presented to the world of a mass of men aiding in the accomplishment of an object they do not approve of.
This newspaper, a Southern-supporting periodical in a state that remained in the Union, clearly saw the Union war effort as having an abolitionist goal, even more than a year before the Emancipation Proclamation.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Youth's Companion: Camp Life of the Soldier
From the Youth's Companion of January 23, 1862
A correspondent of the Sunday School Gazette gives the following description of the camp life of our soldiers now stationed on the Potomac. Such a life is no boy's play:
The first thing done, when a regiment reaches camp ground, is to pitch the tents. These are arranged in lines as regular as the streets of a city, and sometimes camp streets receive names like the streets of a city. The tents are made of stout canvas, and are of different sizes, some being round, others square, and others oblong.
The largest tents are used to accommodate the soldiers, and will hold ten, fifteen, or twenty, who use this one place for parlor, bedroom, sitting and dining-room. The smaller tents belong to officers, three of whom sometimes chum together, sometimes two only, and again but one using the tent. Old-bachelor-like, I have a tent all to myself, with nothing to disturb my slumbers or interfere with my comfort, but noise outside.
The tents, inside, are furnished in various ways, according to the taste, means or rank of the occupant. Some have boarded floors with a carpet, table, comfortable chairs, pictures, books, and a soft, easy bed, while others have only the ground covered with straw or the branches of trees, and little or no furniture. In going to war, soldiers are allowed to have only what they can carry in knapsacks on their backs, but officers can take trunks, and supply themselves with quite a number of home comforts.
After the tents are pitched, and things all arranged, cooks, wagoners, commissaries, and other company-helpers are chosen from each company, the company consisting of one hundred men, and fireplaces or ovens are built in the ground, or of stone or brick, above ground; rude eating-booths, sheltered by boughs of trees, are put up, and the regiment is prepared to begin military life in earnest. The food supplied by government is wholesome and abundant, and the clothing amply sufficient for all reasonable wants; but, sometimes, owing to the rascality of contractors, or the carelessness of the men themselves, the food gets injured, the clothing does very poor service, and suffering follows.
A correspondent of the Sunday School Gazette gives the following description of the camp life of our soldiers now stationed on the Potomac. Such a life is no boy's play:
The first thing done, when a regiment reaches camp ground, is to pitch the tents. These are arranged in lines as regular as the streets of a city, and sometimes camp streets receive names like the streets of a city. The tents are made of stout canvas, and are of different sizes, some being round, others square, and others oblong.
The largest tents are used to accommodate the soldiers, and will hold ten, fifteen, or twenty, who use this one place for parlor, bedroom, sitting and dining-room. The smaller tents belong to officers, three of whom sometimes chum together, sometimes two only, and again but one using the tent. Old-bachelor-like, I have a tent all to myself, with nothing to disturb my slumbers or interfere with my comfort, but noise outside.
The tents, inside, are furnished in various ways, according to the taste, means or rank of the occupant. Some have boarded floors with a carpet, table, comfortable chairs, pictures, books, and a soft, easy bed, while others have only the ground covered with straw or the branches of trees, and little or no furniture. In going to war, soldiers are allowed to have only what they can carry in knapsacks on their backs, but officers can take trunks, and supply themselves with quite a number of home comforts.
After the tents are pitched, and things all arranged, cooks, wagoners, commissaries, and other company-helpers are chosen from each company, the company consisting of one hundred men, and fireplaces or ovens are built in the ground, or of stone or brick, above ground; rude eating-booths, sheltered by boughs of trees, are put up, and the regiment is prepared to begin military life in earnest. The food supplied by government is wholesome and abundant, and the clothing amply sufficient for all reasonable wants; but, sometimes, owing to the rascality of contractors, or the carelessness of the men themselves, the food gets injured, the clothing does very poor service, and suffering follows.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Military Oath
From the June 15th Covington Journal
By the provision of the last military bill adopted by the Legislature, all members of the State Guard are required to take the oath which the officers of the organization have heretofore taken, and if they refuse to take it within thirty days, the State arms held by them are to be returned to the proper authorities. Home Guards organized under that bill, receiving arms from the State, are required to take the same obligation. It is as follows;
"I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof; and I further swear that I will well and truly execute and obey the legal orders of all officers legally placed over me, when on duty. So help me God.
By the provision of the last military bill adopted by the Legislature, all members of the State Guard are required to take the oath which the officers of the organization have heretofore taken, and if they refuse to take it within thirty days, the State arms held by them are to be returned to the proper authorities. Home Guards organized under that bill, receiving arms from the State, are required to take the same obligation. It is as follows;
"I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof; and I further swear that I will well and truly execute and obey the legal orders of all officers legally placed over me, when on duty. So help me God.
Monday, June 13, 2011
National Geographic Civil War Centennial Coverage: Part 4
A few weeks ago, I received an email about National Geographic's online coverage of the Civil War Sesquicentennial
This reminded me that I owned some bound volumes of this magazine from the early 1960s and I decided to compare and contrast how this publication covered the current observance and the 100th anniversary of the war. Below are links to the three previous entries I made on this subject.
part 1
part 2
Part 3
For today's entry, presumable the final one on this topic, I turn to the National Geographic from April 1965, volume 127, number 4.
The coverage in this edition is very similar to its initial coverage, in "part 1" linked above. Once again, it features an article written by Ulysses S Grant 3rd, the grandson of the famous Union General and President.
The article discusses the last few days of the Civil War, as Union troops tried to trap the forces commanded by Robert E Lee and force them to surrender. The article includes photographs, from the war period and from the magazine's own era, as well as maps and illustrations of people, places and events during those chaotic few days.
Deciding to focus the coverage on that part of the war was a natural choice and one I can support, but what bothered me about this article was how frequently the author used it to praise his grandfather, either from his own thoughts and memories (though the general died when this grandson was only 4 years old) or from quotes by others. I do not dislike praise for the original U.S. Grant, and much, if not all, of it, was well-deserved, but I did find it difficult to take it as seriously, coming from his own descendant. It struck me almost as being hagiography at times, and certainly not as an objective discussion of the general and his performance. The author's using various terms like "my grandfather," "General Grant" and "the general" throughout the article did not help either.
The author's telling of a story told by his grandmother of a discussion with President Lincoln was quite interesting and something I had not seen before, but, again, I'm not sure an article commemorating the end of the war was the right place for a piece of family history.
I understand why Grant III wrote as he did, and think it's great he felt so proud of his ancestor, but it was not a good idea to have him write this article due to the obvious lack of objectivity.
Besides the frequent praise for General Grant, this article did at times fall back on the 1961's reliance on a theme of "reunification" and how the war brought "a Nation united for all time." This theme was not as constant as in the 1961 article, but did appear at times throughout it.
A large portion of this theme of reconciliation is in the ending pages of the article, where the author makes frequent mention of and reference to his ancestor's generosity in the terms offered to Lee, even including quotes from an essay by Robert Louis Stevenson and from a 1912 speech by Lee staff member Colonel Charles Marshall, showing how "magnanimous" and "gentlemanly" Grant the elder was
It is a good article and worth reading, but while I understand the magazine's decision to have the grandson of what many consider to be an American hero write for it, I wish they had let him do an article to serve as a brief biography of the general and had another author discuss the race to Appomattox.
This reminded me that I owned some bound volumes of this magazine from the early 1960s and I decided to compare and contrast how this publication covered the current observance and the 100th anniversary of the war. Below are links to the three previous entries I made on this subject.
part 1
part 2
Part 3
For today's entry, presumable the final one on this topic, I turn to the National Geographic from April 1965, volume 127, number 4.
The coverage in this edition is very similar to its initial coverage, in "part 1" linked above. Once again, it features an article written by Ulysses S Grant 3rd, the grandson of the famous Union General and President.
The article discusses the last few days of the Civil War, as Union troops tried to trap the forces commanded by Robert E Lee and force them to surrender. The article includes photographs, from the war period and from the magazine's own era, as well as maps and illustrations of people, places and events during those chaotic few days.
Deciding to focus the coverage on that part of the war was a natural choice and one I can support, but what bothered me about this article was how frequently the author used it to praise his grandfather, either from his own thoughts and memories (though the general died when this grandson was only 4 years old) or from quotes by others. I do not dislike praise for the original U.S. Grant, and much, if not all, of it, was well-deserved, but I did find it difficult to take it as seriously, coming from his own descendant. It struck me almost as being hagiography at times, and certainly not as an objective discussion of the general and his performance. The author's using various terms like "my grandfather," "General Grant" and "the general" throughout the article did not help either.
The author's telling of a story told by his grandmother of a discussion with President Lincoln was quite interesting and something I had not seen before, but, again, I'm not sure an article commemorating the end of the war was the right place for a piece of family history.
I understand why Grant III wrote as he did, and think it's great he felt so proud of his ancestor, but it was not a good idea to have him write this article due to the obvious lack of objectivity.
Besides the frequent praise for General Grant, this article did at times fall back on the 1961's reliance on a theme of "reunification" and how the war brought "a Nation united for all time." This theme was not as constant as in the 1961 article, but did appear at times throughout it.
A large portion of this theme of reconciliation is in the ending pages of the article, where the author makes frequent mention of and reference to his ancestor's generosity in the terms offered to Lee, even including quotes from an essay by Robert Louis Stevenson and from a 1912 speech by Lee staff member Colonel Charles Marshall, showing how "magnanimous" and "gentlemanly" Grant the elder was
It is a good article and worth reading, but while I understand the magazine's decision to have the grandson of what many consider to be an American hero write for it, I wish they had let him do an article to serve as a brief biography of the general and had another author discuss the race to Appomattox.
 | |
| Currier and Ives' image of the surrender, courtesy of Library of Congress |
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Camp Dennison Civil War Event June 25-26
Camp Dennison Reenactment
This is courtesy of the Ohio Civil War 150 blog, a very informative blog that I do recommend for people interested in the Civil War in and around the Buckeye State.
Here are a couple of links with some more information about Camp Dennison including Camp Dennison Civil War page
The Christian Waldschmidt homestead will host the event and I recommend visiting it, including the house which was built in the very early 1800s. It's a neat place and the Daughters of the American Revolution do a terrific job with it
This is courtesy of the Ohio Civil War 150 blog, a very informative blog that I do recommend for people interested in the Civil War in and around the Buckeye State.
Here are a couple of links with some more information about Camp Dennison including Camp Dennison Civil War page
The Christian Waldschmidt homestead will host the event and I recommend visiting it, including the house which was built in the very early 1800s. It's a neat place and the Daughters of the American Revolution do a terrific job with it
Friday, June 10, 2011
The Old School Presbyterian Church
Covington Journal June 8, 1861
The "irrepressible conflict" hast got into the Old School Presbyterian Church and has, we fear, forever destroyed its unity. The General Assembly, after an earnest and protracted discussion, adopted resolutions fully sustaining the Washington administration. The vote was ayes 154, nays 66. The Kentucky Commissioners voted in the negative. It must be regarded as a great public misfortune that this good old church, which has so long and so nobly resisted the inroads of fanaticism, has been forced from its conservative position. Well may Christians weep when they see a great church organization sacrificing its unity for the purpose of maintaining a party platform
The "irrepressible conflict" hast got into the Old School Presbyterian Church and has, we fear, forever destroyed its unity. The General Assembly, after an earnest and protracted discussion, adopted resolutions fully sustaining the Washington administration. The vote was ayes 154, nays 66. The Kentucky Commissioners voted in the negative. It must be regarded as a great public misfortune that this good old church, which has so long and so nobly resisted the inroads of fanaticism, has been forced from its conservative position. Well may Christians weep when they see a great church organization sacrificing its unity for the purpose of maintaining a party platform
Monday, June 6, 2011
One Northerner's Opinion about the Reason for the War
The Covington Journal of June 8, 1861 printed this story.
"An Albany, N.Y., newspaper says a clergyman of that place, while recently discussing our present national troubles, used the following language:
"I disapprove of the principles of the Revolutionary war. It was waged against lawful authority. I regard the war of 1812 as still worse. The Mexican War I opposed with all my heart; but the present war I approve.It is a holy war. It is a war for the extinction of slavery.
"An Albany, N.Y., newspaper says a clergyman of that place, while recently discussing our present national troubles, used the following language:
"I disapprove of the principles of the Revolutionary war. It was waged against lawful authority. I regard the war of 1812 as still worse. The Mexican War I opposed with all my heart; but the present war I approve.It is a holy war. It is a war for the extinction of slavery.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Subjugation
Here is another article from the June 1, 1861 Covington Journal.
Subjugation
No matter how pure may be the intentions of the Administration - no matter that Mr. Seward or President Lincoln may honestly desire simply and solely to sustain the Constitution and perpetuate the Union - such a Constitution and such a Union as our fathers framed -- will be utterly destroyed. The indications afforded even by the telegraphic dispatches show that a spirit has been aroused which so difficult it may be to lay it, may subvert those republican liberties which the Constitution was to guard -- A military character will be impressed on our people; and hereafter it is to be feared there will be constantly in our midst hundreds of thousands of men who will be content with no peaceful occupation. They will be the ready instruments of any man popular enough to reach eminent station, and daring enough to abuse that station to his personal advancement, regardless of the checks of laws and Constitutions.
We the other day commented with painful interest upon an article in the Springfield (Ill) Journal, which claimed dictatorial powers for the President. We were astonished at the appearance of so elaborate a defense of Despotism in any American paper. But it may soon be that such championship of autocracy will be found so profitable and so common as no longer to excite surprise. The danger to all the reserved rights of the States seems well nigh overwhelming, and equally so the incoming of a consolidated power, which is substantially the equivalent of an imperial despotism
The subjugation of certain of the States is familiar talk. But that subjugation may be universal. Not only the sufferer will be the State which is carried by fire and sword; but all will finally share a common doom.
To prevent a fate like this, what appeal can be made? The question is one of terrible moment, and how it will be answered we confess our inability now to see. Perhaps a reaction may set in and a sense of the perils in store for us as a people, will be awakened in time to avert them. - But the present hour looks dark and gloomy enough. The Journal of Commerce, with its usual consideration and sound judgment, briefly presents the case thus:
"If any good result could come out of using force against the seceded States, there might be a plausible reason for its exercise. As it is, the most cogent argument we have heard is, that we shall thus determine "whether we have a government." With all respect for those who feel solicitude on that point, we suggest that one thing is likely to be demonstrated, viz: that we have not, and in the event of the subjugation of the Southern States, are not likely to have such a government as the Constitution contemplates or such as our fathers understood to be instituted when the Union was formed. The government, when established, was a government of equals ,in which all the States would perform willing parts. The one which our warlike friends (it seems) by the Lincoln Administration would prove to exist, is a government of force, where a majority of States or of the Representatives as the case may be, shall hold the minority in subjection to their will. If it is to demonstrate this fact, that war is to be precipitated upon the country, then we doubt whether the motive is one of humanity - much less of right."
Subjugation
No matter how pure may be the intentions of the Administration - no matter that Mr. Seward or President Lincoln may honestly desire simply and solely to sustain the Constitution and perpetuate the Union - such a Constitution and such a Union as our fathers framed -- will be utterly destroyed. The indications afforded even by the telegraphic dispatches show that a spirit has been aroused which so difficult it may be to lay it, may subvert those republican liberties which the Constitution was to guard -- A military character will be impressed on our people; and hereafter it is to be feared there will be constantly in our midst hundreds of thousands of men who will be content with no peaceful occupation. They will be the ready instruments of any man popular enough to reach eminent station, and daring enough to abuse that station to his personal advancement, regardless of the checks of laws and Constitutions.
We the other day commented with painful interest upon an article in the Springfield (Ill) Journal, which claimed dictatorial powers for the President. We were astonished at the appearance of so elaborate a defense of Despotism in any American paper. But it may soon be that such championship of autocracy will be found so profitable and so common as no longer to excite surprise. The danger to all the reserved rights of the States seems well nigh overwhelming, and equally so the incoming of a consolidated power, which is substantially the equivalent of an imperial despotism
The subjugation of certain of the States is familiar talk. But that subjugation may be universal. Not only the sufferer will be the State which is carried by fire and sword; but all will finally share a common doom.
To prevent a fate like this, what appeal can be made? The question is one of terrible moment, and how it will be answered we confess our inability now to see. Perhaps a reaction may set in and a sense of the perils in store for us as a people, will be awakened in time to avert them. - But the present hour looks dark and gloomy enough. The Journal of Commerce, with its usual consideration and sound judgment, briefly presents the case thus:
"If any good result could come out of using force against the seceded States, there might be a plausible reason for its exercise. As it is, the most cogent argument we have heard is, that we shall thus determine "whether we have a government." With all respect for those who feel solicitude on that point, we suggest that one thing is likely to be demonstrated, viz: that we have not, and in the event of the subjugation of the Southern States, are not likely to have such a government as the Constitution contemplates or such as our fathers understood to be instituted when the Union was formed. The government, when established, was a government of equals ,in which all the States would perform willing parts. The one which our warlike friends (it seems) by the Lincoln Administration would prove to exist, is a government of force, where a majority of States or of the Representatives as the case may be, shall hold the minority in subjection to their will. If it is to demonstrate this fact, that war is to be precipitated upon the country, then we doubt whether the motive is one of humanity - much less of right."
Friday, June 3, 2011
The War - its Dreadful Results (a prediction)
The Covington Journal of June 1, 1861 republished this piece from the Baltimore Republican.
It is rather interesting. It does resort to some pro-Southern phrases and clearly favors that section, but its discussion about how horrible the war would turn out was rather accurate, though the prediction about the lasting effects of the war - on the nation and the people - proved to be a bit too dire. (I split it up into paragraphs to make it a bit more readable - it was all one paragraph in the newspaper.)
There can no longer be any doubt as to the determination of the Lincoln Administration to devastate the country with all the horrors of a bloody civil war. When we look at the spirit which animates the two sections of our country - the bitter, vindictive and unmerciful spirit of the North, and the firm, defiant and determined attitude of the South - we may form some faint ideas of the horrors of that contest which the madness of fanaticism is about to force upon the country. All the fiery and vengeful passions of human nature will be unloosed, and this war will be one of the most bloody which history ever recorded. The North has determined to subjugate or exterminate the South, and the South will fight with an energy and determination which nothing but extermination will subdue. We do not believe the South can be subjugated or exterminated by the North; but the whole country North and South will be subjected to shame and suffering and horror too dreadful to think upon.
Years of devastation and misery will leave the country impoverished and involved in a debt from which it can never be freed. The expenditures now incurring by the Washington Administration are such as were never thought of in this country before. The gigantic army called for by Mr. Lincoln's proclamation will, if assembled and maintained in the usual manner, involve a debt the first year of hundreds of millions of dollars. With such a large proportion of the productive labor of the country drawn from industrial pursuits, with our foreign commerce destroyed, and all interchange of commodities between North and South prohibited; the whole country will groan and languish under a burden of taxation and exaction too grevious to be borne.
And what is to be gained by all this incalculable amount of suffering and horror? Will is restore the Union? Will it bring back the love of the alienated States? No man can believe it. Those, who survive the horrors of the contest, will only be more intensely bitter against each and the future can have no hope of peace or Union for either party. Does not humanity and reason and every motive of interest combine to demand a peaceful settlement of the difficulties between the two sections?
If they can no longer live together in peace in the name of our common humanity and all that of which is holy and dear to us, let them part in peace and not with bloody and fratricidal hands destroy each other and make our country a desolation and a curse. Let every friend of peace and humanity, from every quarter of the land, raise up his hand and his voice against this unholy and inhuman war. It is too monstrous to be tolerated in a land calling itself Christian.
It is rather interesting. It does resort to some pro-Southern phrases and clearly favors that section, but its discussion about how horrible the war would turn out was rather accurate, though the prediction about the lasting effects of the war - on the nation and the people - proved to be a bit too dire. (I split it up into paragraphs to make it a bit more readable - it was all one paragraph in the newspaper.)
There can no longer be any doubt as to the determination of the Lincoln Administration to devastate the country with all the horrors of a bloody civil war. When we look at the spirit which animates the two sections of our country - the bitter, vindictive and unmerciful spirit of the North, and the firm, defiant and determined attitude of the South - we may form some faint ideas of the horrors of that contest which the madness of fanaticism is about to force upon the country. All the fiery and vengeful passions of human nature will be unloosed, and this war will be one of the most bloody which history ever recorded. The North has determined to subjugate or exterminate the South, and the South will fight with an energy and determination which nothing but extermination will subdue. We do not believe the South can be subjugated or exterminated by the North; but the whole country North and South will be subjected to shame and suffering and horror too dreadful to think upon.
Years of devastation and misery will leave the country impoverished and involved in a debt from which it can never be freed. The expenditures now incurring by the Washington Administration are such as were never thought of in this country before. The gigantic army called for by Mr. Lincoln's proclamation will, if assembled and maintained in the usual manner, involve a debt the first year of hundreds of millions of dollars. With such a large proportion of the productive labor of the country drawn from industrial pursuits, with our foreign commerce destroyed, and all interchange of commodities between North and South prohibited; the whole country will groan and languish under a burden of taxation and exaction too grevious to be borne.
And what is to be gained by all this incalculable amount of suffering and horror? Will is restore the Union? Will it bring back the love of the alienated States? No man can believe it. Those, who survive the horrors of the contest, will only be more intensely bitter against each and the future can have no hope of peace or Union for either party. Does not humanity and reason and every motive of interest combine to demand a peaceful settlement of the difficulties between the two sections?
If they can no longer live together in peace in the name of our common humanity and all that of which is holy and dear to us, let them part in peace and not with bloody and fratricidal hands destroy each other and make our country a desolation and a curse. Let every friend of peace and humanity, from every quarter of the land, raise up his hand and his voice against this unholy and inhuman war. It is too monstrous to be tolerated in a land calling itself Christian.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
More about US Arms in Kentucky
The Covington Journal of June 1, 1862 has this article as an update to a previous one
The Louisville Courier of the 27th says:
"In conversation, with an honorable and high-minded gentleman, who has the distribution of these arms in an important section of the State, a few days since, he frankly said that they were in the main going into the hands of those who would use them to drive Lincoln's troops back should they march into his county or vicinity!
And a Captain of a large company who have received these guns so unlawfully distributed in this State by those whose duty it is to execute the laws, assured a friend of ours, not two days ago, that his command would never fire a shot for Lincoln against Kentuckians or Southern soldiers
The Louisville Courier of the 27th says:
"In conversation, with an honorable and high-minded gentleman, who has the distribution of these arms in an important section of the State, a few days since, he frankly said that they were in the main going into the hands of those who would use them to drive Lincoln's troops back should they march into his county or vicinity!
And a Captain of a large company who have received these guns so unlawfully distributed in this State by those whose duty it is to execute the laws, assured a friend of ours, not two days ago, that his command would never fire a shot for Lincoln against Kentuckians or Southern soldiers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)