1854 Commentary on Abolitionists

I know this is a short post without much research, but I found it to be an interesting take and another reminder that even a newspaper in a "free state" like Ohio could oppose abolition

This is from the Cincinnati Enquirer of June 1, 1854

If Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Abby Folsom  Mrs. Rose  Horace Greeley, Fred. Douglass and company, male and female, with all their disorganizing and seditious newspaper organs will only join in this Abolition exodus to Kansas Territory, we shall promptly contribute a thousand dollars to the emigrating fund, in order to remove these nuisances west of the Mississippi River; for on our side, or east of the Mississippi, their loss would be the public gain. — New York Herald

What sin has been committed by the virgin soil of Nebraska, that it should be cursed with such a gang of pestilential, social sores! 

“I am Fighting to Put Down Rebellion”

I found these stories in the Cincinnati Enquirer of January 26, 1862 and felt this perspective was worth sharing. 

It is not unusual to read of a Union soldier or group of soldiers opposed to the abolition of slavery as a war aim, so seeing anti-abolition sentiments in this letter from a soldier in the first few months of the war is not a shock. I do find myself wondering what this private felt about the Emancipation Proclamation, preliminarily issued about 8 months later, if he survived that long. 

This story further interests me because the 44th Ohio was one of the units in the northern Kentucky area around or just after the Siege of Cincinnati, a topic this blog has mentioned several times. It is kind of a local angle to this story. 

Also note that both this newspaper and the individual who wrote the letter were from Ohio, a “free state” in the North, yet both still expressed anti-abolitionist attitudes. That is not surprising from Cincinnati, which had many ties to the South, and is pretty typical of the Enquirer’s attitudes.

Abolition Tracts Among the Volunteers

Camp Piatt, January 12, 1862

To the Editors of the Enquirer:

SIR: Inclosed you will find a cursed Abolition document - it will speak for itself - which the negro worshippers are distributing among the soldiers in large quantities. Comment, if it is worth comment - and of course it is - I leave you to make. If I had time, I would write a long article on the subject, but I have not, as I’m but a private - and that is the reason I got the document. Privates are supposed to have no sense, or just sense enough to be made to believe and do anything; but the paper got into the wrong hands this time. And, further, I will say, or ask, if such papers are allowed to be distributed among the soldiers so profusely, when will this war end? This much I would like to say to them: I am not fighting to free negroes; and if they want them freed, let them do the fighting themselves. I will not. I would as soon shoot a real Abolitionist as a Secesh. I consider that they are as much the instigators of this war as any man in the South, and even more so; yet they claim to be Union men. Such Union men ought to be in purgatory. They now boldly declare their purpose, and are distributing their infernal trash among the ignorant soldiers, as they suppose; But there are some of them sharp enough to see what they are driving at. 

I am a native of Ohio, but not an Abolitionist, by any means; and I am fighting to put down rebellion, not to free negroes.

A Soldier,

Forty-fourth Ohio Regiment

———————

Here is how the editor reacted to this letter. In the first paragraph, I added the emphasis in bold because that is a line I’ve often seen or heard in discussions of slavery, but it is the first time I remember seeing it so explicitly stated in a period newspaper.

Cincinnati Enquirer January 26, 1862   

VOICE OF A SOLDIER 

We publish elsewhere a letter from a volunteer in the Forty-fourth Ohio Regiment  in relation to the distribution among the troops of Abolition documents. Accompanying the letter was a tract Entitled “CATECHISM FOR WORKINGMEN.”  It purports you have been  published by the “American Reform and Tract and Book Society of Cincinnati, Ohio.”  We have before noticed Abolition tracts issued from this manufactory, and designed for circulation among the troops. The one before us is filled with the usual Abolition sophistries, that slavery produced the war and ought to be destroyed. Purporting to be written “by the son of a blacksmith,” it makes an appeal to workingmen to aid in wiping slavery from off the face of the land. Every intelligent workingman knows that liberating four million slaves, to be the competitors in the field of voluntary labor with laboring whites, is not going to elevate but rather degrade the whites. The laboring whites at the South, though poor, know that they are not on a level with the blacks, as this tract asserts they are, but are a superior race. It is that knowledge that makes them take the interest they do in thwarting the schemes of the Abolitionists. The tract before us aims to induce the white laboring man and woman to aid in putting themselves on a level with the blacks. 

“A SOLDIER” sees through the game, and tells the intermeddlers, who are the primary cause of the war, that he regards them in the same light he does the rebels, that he is fighting to put down the rebellion, not to free the slaves, and that he can not be made their tool. That is plain talk, and we rejoice to hear it from such a source. 

John Rankin: Abolitionist

In a previous entry, I mentioned Reverend John Rankin, a man who had led a long anti-slavery career and life and I decided to do a post on him and his life's work. It took me quite a while to research, write and organize it, but here it finally is and I hope these few paragraphs do justice to his life-long efforts to end slavery. 

John Rankin courtesy aaregistry.org

John Rankin was born in Jefferson County, Tennessee on February 4, 1793, to Richard and Jane Rankin.

In his childhood home, education was a top priority, particularly in regards to reading and religion. Reading the Bible was likely a part of his daily life. According to

http://www.reverendjohnrankin.org/biography, (I just found that this link no longer works) John credited his mother for being especially influential in his moral development, as she voiced opposition to vices such as whiskey, tobacco, Free Masonry and dancing while placing a special emphasis on the evils of slavery. The ongoing Second Great Awakening may have influenced his family life and upbringing.

John furthered his studies at nearby Washington College, where he learned under abolitionist Reverend Samuel Doak. He studied subjects like Greek, history and theology, among others and graduated in 1816.

He married Jean Lowry, who was Reverend Doak's granddaughter and an active church member. John and Jean did not wish to remain in the slave state of Tennessee (at least partially because his anti-slavery views were unpopular and led some people to encourage him to leave the state if he planned to continue expressing them) so, taking their first-born child with them, they left the state in 1817. They settled in north-central Kentucky, where John took a preaching  job at Concord Presbyterian Church in Carlisle (Nicholas County.)  Slavery was legal here, but this church strongly opposed the peculiar institution and had joined other churches in an abolition society.  The church and its new preacher were a good fit for each other as he began preaching here and in other nearby towns. He also started a school for slaves. 

  

John & Jean Rankin, courtesy Ohio History Central

Despite this anti-slavery sentiment John found, pro-slavery opinions were also strong in this area of the border state and, similarly to when he left Tennessee, slavery supporters made his life uncomfortable enough to convince him to leave, after having forced his school to move between buildings several times before it failed. Financial issues, especially trouble in collecting his pay from the church, also contributed to his decision to head north.

In 1822, the Rankins finally moved to a free state when John accepted a preaching job in the Ohio town of Ripley, located along the Ohio River across from Kentucky and about 50 miles southeast of Cincinnati. (Including the new branch of the church he later helped form, he kept this preaching job in Ripley for over 40 years.) After living near the river for a few years, John bought a new house on higher ground with a view overlooking the river and the Kentucky shore. 

John Rankin house, courtesy cincinnati.com

View from Rankin house,  courtesy fineartamerica.com

View of house from Ohio River courtesy Underground Railroadconductor.com

Here he continued his preaching career as the higher location and better view aided his work as part of the Underground Railroad. He signalled runaway slaves when it was safe to cross the river with a light (such as a candle or lantern) in a window or on a flag pole. He hid the fugitives until they could move or be moved further north, especially after the stronger Fugitive Slave Law passed  in 1850.

According to Ohio History Central, he (and his family, which included nine sons and four daughters) aided perhaps 2,000 runaways, with his sons often taking the fugitives from his house to safer places farther north. His work also served as one of the inspirations for Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin. 

Ohio was a free state, but was close enough to the slave state of Kentucky that he became well-known to slave owners. A bounty was placed on his head, and owners of runaway slaves often came to his house searching for fugitives or information on where they might be.

In 1824, John discovered that his own brother Thomas had become a slaveholder in Virginia. This displeased John, who wrote a series of letters to his brother. These letters were published serially in a local newspaper at first but soon came out in book format, entitled Letters on American Slavery, which became an influential early anti-slavery work, espousing the need for immediate emancipation. (The letters also helped persuade Thomas to get rid of his slaves. He later moved to Ohio.) This publication helped make Rankin more well-known nationally for his abolitionist views.

Courtesy globalauctionguide.com

John was one of the founders of Ripley College (which I have seen described as a Presbyterian Academy) in 1829; the school admitted its first African-American student just two years later. One of its students possibly was Hiram Ulysses Grant, from nearby Georgetown, who may have attended it for one year before enrolling at West Point and becoming Ulysses S. Grant.

John was a founding member of the Ohio Anti-Slavery Society in early 1835 as well as the Ripley Anti-Slavery Society later that same year. (More information on this society and Ripley is here.) This second group was similar to the statewide version, but did not limit membership by race or gender. He was also involved in the American Anti-Slavery Society, even lecturing on its behalf in the northern part of the country for a year. He also raised funds for the national society and dealt with various threats against him. (This group republished his book Letters on American Society soon after its founding.)

In the late 1840s, while continuing his work with fugitive slaves, he helped form a new branch of the Presbyterian Church, the Free Presbyterian Church of America (or Free Presbyterian Church Synod of the United States. Please forgive me for resorting to a Wikipedia link, but it does list sources. I have seen both names used for the new organization.) This new branch of the church opposed slavery and the admission of slaveowners to the church.

He also joined and led other organizations, such as the American Reform Tract and Book Society, a group dedicated to anti-slavery religious teachings and publications. He served as President of this group, as my previous post showed.

When the Civil War began, the Rankin family remained active in the fight against slavery as six of John's sons and one of his grandsons fought in and survived the conflict.

The Rankin family's work, along with that of another member of the Underground Railroad, John Parker, and other figures in the city (along with the town's location so close to a slave state) helped Ripley become an important point on the Underground Railroad, one through which many escaping slaves found their way to freedom in the North or Canada. According to this site, one of Confederate General John Hunt Morgan's goals in his 1863 raid of Indiana and Ohio was to "attack the hell-hole of Ripley." Morgan and his men neared the town, but did not actually reach it.

Rankin's decades of fighting slavery made him one of the more famous abolitionists in the country and influenced other well-known slavery opponents.

One of these was Henry Ward Beecher. A story I have seen here and at other websites says that after the Civil War, someone asked Beecher who abolished slavery and his response was "The Reverend John Rankin and his sons did it."

Another was Wendell Lloyd Garrison. According to the New World Encyclopedia, "Garrison credited Reverend John Rankin of Ohio as a primary influence on his career, calling him his "anti-slavery father" and saying that Rankin's "book on slavery was the cause of my entering the anti-slavery conflict."

John Rankin died on March 12, 1886 at age 93 and was buried in Maplewood Cemetery in Ripley, alongside his wife Jean who had died in 1878.  His house still stands as a museum and National Historic Landmark in Ripley. See the site's website or  Facebook page for more information on the house and its important inhabitant.

Rankin monument, Maplewood Cemetery, courtesy answers.com

Here is a list of sources I used and  consulted in late 2014 and early 2015 (others are linked inside the post). There are many other links if you search John Rankin on your favorite search engine. Many have similar info, some with other details.

http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/John_Rankin

http://www.reverendjohnrankin.org/biography  (link no longer works)

http://www.undergroundrailroadconductor.com/Ripley.htm

http://www.nationalabolitionhalloffameandmuseum.org/jrankin.html 

http://medicolegal.tripod.com/rankin1823.htm

http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/john-rankin-committed-abolitionist

http://library.cincymuseum.org/aag/history/ohioantislaverysociety.html

http://freedomcenter.org/content/rev-john-and-jean-rankin

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Presbyterian_Church_Synod_of_the_United_States 

http://ripleyohio.net/htm/rankin.htm

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/southern-abolitionists-part-2-reverend-john-rankin.107887/ 

http://civilwaref.blogspot.com/2014/02/john-rankin-born-febuary-5-1793.html

http://presidentusgrant.com/picture-archives/1838-1839-winter-in-ripley-ohio/

https://books.google.com/books?id=t7NfldpgtyYC&pg=PA84&lpg=PA84&dq=rankin+american+anti-slavery+society&source=bl&ots=XSh7KamqkK&sig=x21Qabatv8FxY-7IECGerM-ZWrY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9MRkVeiwNI60yATA4oPQDw&ved=0CBIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=rankin%20american%20anti-slavery%20society&f=false

John Parker video

I found this video on YouTube and thought it worth sharing. It focuses on Mr. Parker quite a bit, but also discusses John Rankin as well as Ripley itself. I thought it was a nice approach to the subjects.

John Parker, from Slave to Abolitionist

I found this video while looking for more information on John Rankin and was going to include it in that post,  but since this video also discussed another member of the Underground Railroad, John Parker, I decided it would be better to start a new post for a discussion of Mr. Parker, who may be even lesser-known than John Rankin.  It starts discussing Parker about halfway through. I had some trouble embedding the video, so if it does not work (I have had trouble with the sound), please use the link below it.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AxRkm9GtVC4&autoplay=1

Photo of John Parker from  http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/underground/oh2.htm

Born in Norfolk, Virginia on February 2, 1827, John Parker was the son of a free white man and a slave woman, not an uncommon occurrence in that era. At the age of 8, he was sold to a slave agent. This agent then sold him to a new master in Mobile, Alabama. According to Ohio History Central John's new owner, a doctor, took the unusual step of teaching his new property to read and write and even permitted John to work as an apprentice in a local foundry. John was later sent to New Orleans, where he worked in another foundry and at the local shipping docks. He saved money and was able to able to purchase his own freedom at the age of eighteen for $1800.

In 1845, the year he purchased his freedom, he moved north to Indiana, where he found work in various foundries close to Cincinnati, then one of the largest cities in the country. In 1848, he opened a general store in Beachwood Factory, Ohio, and in 1850 moved to Ripley, Ohio, located along the Ohio River, about 50 miles southeast from Cincinnati. In the years before arriving in Ripley, he had started his life as an abolitionist and conductor on the Underground Railroad, helping escaped slaves find their way north. Once in Ripley, he was able to make many trips across the river into the slave-holding state of Kentucky to help more runaway slaves cross that river into the free sta te of Ohio, where they hoped to find their freedom or a way further north, farther away from the slave states.  He helped perhaps hundreds of these individuals make their escape, sometimes taking them to homes of other abolitionists in or around Ripley such as the Reverend John Rankin. Interestingly, Parker did not associate himself with religious groups or churches as did Rankin and many other abolitionists.

Location of Ripley, map from 

http://www.bestplaces.net

In 1854, he opened his own foundry and earned several U.S. patents for inventions in the next few decades.

Once the Civil War began and the Emancipation Proclamation was issued, Parker served as a recruiter for the 27th regiment of U.S. Colored Troops, which was formed in early 1864. It was Ohio's second regiment  of African American soldiers. See the following links for more information on this unit.  http://www.ohiocivilwar150.org/omeka/exhibits/show/fighting-for-freedom/ohio-second-colored-infantry and http://www.civilwarintheeast.com/USA/US/USCT27.php

His foundry also produced items for the army during the war.

After the war and the ratification of the 13th Amendment, which permanently ended slavery, Parker focused on his foundry business. He remained in this industry until he died on January 30, 1900, just
a few days shy of his 73rd birthday.

His house in Ripley still exists as a museum and is a National Historic Landmark. Here is its website: http://johnparkerhouse.org/

Photo of John Parker house from http://www.nku.edu/~undergroundrr/photographs/pages/johnparkerhouse.php

Sources consulted, April and May 2015, for this post:

http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/john-p-parker-abolitonist-and-inventor

http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/John_P._Parker

http://www.ohiocivilwar150.org/omeka/exhibits/show/fighting-for-freedom/ohio-second-colored-infantry

http://www.civilwarintheeast.com/USA/US/USCT27.php 

https://webfiles.uci.edu/mcbrown/display/parker.html

Ripley and Oberlin: Two Homes of Abolition in Ohio

As I have been working on my post on John Rankin, I have found a few neat links. Here is a really nice blog post I really liked and thought I would go ahead and share even before my Rankin post is organized and done.

http://www.oberlinheritagecenter.org/blog/2012/12/a-tale-of-two-abolitionist-towns/

Emancipation Proclamation January 1, 1863

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/

Obviously, this will be an easy and popular post on Civil War blogs tonight and tomorrow, but it's a subject important enough to deserve much commemoration and celebration.

Plus, from a selfish standpoint, as 2012 progressed, I found myself using my tablet ( thank you Santa Claus 2011) more than my desktop, and that has hindered my posting. I'm hoping that this Blogger app will make it easier for me to post updates like this one, the first I have done like this.

Nevertheless, January 1, 1863 was a tremendously important day in United States history. Lincoln's proclamation was not perfect, of course, and it did not immediately end slavery throughout the land or defeat racism (Northern or Southern), but it was a large step forward for an American President to issue an official anti- slavery document for the nation (and world) to see. It established the ending of slavery as an official U.S. government aim of the ongoing war.

I hope people other than "history buffs" read and think about this tomorrow, even if just briefly. This is more than just another Civil War milestone.

Another Editorial on Contrabands

The Covington Journal of May 17, 1862 published this opinion piece. I chopped this into two paragraphs to make it easier to read and added the bold emphasis at the end.

The "Contrabands
The name of "contrabands" has been given to slaves who have escaped to the Federal camp, and the management of them has given a great deal of trouble to the military authorities. This evil cannot be avoided. But, the difficulties inevitable from this natural state of things, in a time of civil war between the slave and free States, has been aggravated by measures adopted by the anti-slavery people, to treat the enfranchised negores as objects of particular regard, above those of the gallant soldiers who were the means of liberating them. 

A lot of schoolmasters and schoolmistresses has been sent out to educate them, thus interfering with the business of the war. The negroes while they shrink from work for daily pay, laugh at the philanthropist, for there is enough of human nature in "Cuffee" to enable him to discover humbug. One of the young ladies, upon landing at Port Royal, ran up to a colored girl, and calling her sister, kissed her. The surprised girl, stepping back, exclaimed: "White gal! white gal! whar did you get your whiskey?" We are surprised that the Government should tolerate such ridiculous nonsense, as educating the negroes while the war is in progress.

A Dear Cup of Coffee

Here is yet another article from the May 3, 1862 Covington Journal. I'm sorry to post so many from the same edition, but the paper's focus on issues concerning abolition during this week really caught my attention.

This story tries to offer an example of the consequences of the abolition of slavery, using the Civil War's effects on markets to illustrate the writer's expectations for what the end of slavery would mean for farmers in what was then considered the northwestern part of the nation.

Of course, this story is reprinted from a paper called the Caucasian, which gives a major hint about its owners or editors feelings. This may refer to a newspaper form North Carolina, owned by Marion Butler, but I am not totally sure. Also, the writer seems to assume that if African Americans do not do any of the farm work, that nobody else will, and that no other markets can open without slave labor. A popular saying still says "change can be scary" so perhaps that is part of writer's motivation.
--
A gentleman, recently from the West, informed us that a Missouri farmer gave him an example of what "hard times" in the West mean. he said he took thirty bushels of corn to market, a distance of twelve miles. It took himself and his team of two horses one entire day to go and come,: "and what do you suppose," said  he, "I got for it? Just seven  pounds of coffee and no more!" The account current stood as follows:
      
       30 bushels of corn at 7c. per bush......$2.10
       7 lbs. of coffee at 30c. per lb.............$2.10
                  Balance...............................$0.00

Here is a delightful prospect for farmers! Seven cents a bushel for corn is the result of no market down the Mississippi. There is a lesson to be learned from this, however, in more ways than one. The Western farmer an see from this just what his Southern market would be worth to him, if Mr. Lincoln's idea of free negroism is carried out. 

Emancipation would be just equivalent to the present blockade, for the negroes turned loose, would cease the cultivation of cotton and sugar, as they have in Jamaica, and get their living off little patches of ground, which they would cultivate just enough to keep body and soul together. They would not be consumers of Western pork and grain. The Mississippi, therefore, might just as well be blockaded as it is now to the crack of doom, so far as benefiting the West is concerned, if Mr. Lincoln's idea of free negroism is adopted. The Western farmer never got good prices for his product until the Gulf States were opened up to negro labor, and now it is proposed to destroy them in order to gratify a few crazy theorists, who practically don't know a "hawk from a handsaw."  - [Caucasian]

A Pair of Covington Journal articles on Race

These two stories come from the Covington Jounral of April 19, 1862, one right under the other as printed below. The first one shows the Journal's bitterness toward the idea of the abolition of slavery and the second is seems to try to mention every negative stereotype whites had about blacks and how they would react to the end of slavery. 


The Negro in Congress
The correspondent of the New York Evening Post (Republican) is not far wrong when he says -

"Every measure before Congress has some connection with slavery."
The Senate has passed a bill permitting negroes to carry the mails.
Senator Wilson has introduced a bill to modify the Fugitive Slave Law.

The House has passed the Senate bill abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia. Attempts to amend, with a a view to gradual emancipation, to submit the  question to a vote of the people of the District, &c., were promptly voted down. Full discussion was not allowed. The bill was rushed through by a drilled party, without amendment.

So it goes on. One day the Senate discussed Emancipation and the House Confiscation of slaves. The next day the Senate devotes its time to Confiscation and the House to Emancipation.

Is it a Misfortune to be White
The Fortress Monroe correspondent of the Philadelphia Inquirer says the contrabands care very little who rules. They say the were just ass well with their masters as now and seem totally indifferent to everything but eating, lunging and sleeping. They are represented as shirking work, inclined to thieving and lying, and yet, useless for good as they are, the write says they are far better off than our soldiers who bivouac in the open air, while the negroes enjoy shelter, good food and plenty of warmth. The soldiers complain bitterly of this, and no wonder, It is atrocious. 

Covington Journal articles on abolition and race

These come from the February 8, 1862 edition of the paper

Abolition Cowardice
The Chicago Times says "If abolitionism was not the embodiment of the meanest cowardice, it would not seek to introduce the black element into the war while the white population  of the loyal States is twenty-one millions against seven millions in the disloyal States. If we cannot whip out the rebels with these odds in our favor, we had better abandon the contest and plead guilty to the rebel taunt that we are an inferior people."


The Poor Negro
The Boston Herald exposes the fact that a notorious Abolition firm in that city, the members of which have sighed and groaned and cast up their eyes of the sufferings of the poor negro, until they have obtained a rich contract for supplying the army with drawers, are paying women sixpence a pair for making them. By hard word and over hours, the women thus employed can finish two pair a day. Twelve cents for a day and half a nights work! Oh, the poor, overtasked, suffering negro!

untitled article
A short-haired, thick lipped negro from Chicago was  hustled out of Kenosha in double quick time on Friday afternoon, for attempting to marry a white woman who came with him for the delectable purpose. The "roughs" got wind of the affair, and after (word missing, perhaps catching?) the darkey, escorted him to the depot, and gave him some good advice for regulating his conduct in such cases hereafter. 


As the train moved off bearing this colored Caesar minus his fortunes, we mused on the uncertainty of human affairs in general, and the absolute inconsistency of Abolitionists in particular. This poor fellow had heard of the social equality doctrines of Wisconsin Abolitionists, and was "stabbed in the house of his friends." After all, "blood will tell."  [Kinosha (Wis) Sentinel]

Book Review: Our Lincoln, edited by Eric Foner

Our Lincoln: New Perspectives on Lincoln and His World

Edited by Eric Foner

copyright 2008

W.W. Norton & Company

As the bicentennial of Abraham Lincoln's birth approached in 2009, many new books exploring his life, times and legacy came out and I purchased several of them.

Among them was Our Lincoln, a collection of essays edited by Eric Foner, yet somehow this book sat on my shelf until late in 2011, three years after it was published. 

This collection consists of four parts, which are the major topics of the book, and eleven essays, each by a distinguished Lincoln scholar. The sections are "The President," "The Emancipator,' "The Man," and "Politics and Memory." 

The book starts with four essays about Lincoln's role as president. James McPherson describes Lincoln's role as Commander-in-Chief of the Union military forces and how he as a non-professional military man, was able to exert his leadership and influence on the American army and navy during the war.

Mark Neely Jr.  then explores civil liberties under Lincoln's administration. One idea I found fascinating was his description of the well-known controversy over Lincoln's suspension of Habeus Corpus and Judge Roger Taney's opinion that this suspension was unconstitutional. Neely mentions the possibility that Taney's ruling may not have been totally constitutional either, based on at least one reading of the Judiciary Act of 1789.

Sean Wilentz contributes a discussion of Lincoln's political beliefs if relation to his beloved Whig party, the hated Jacksonian Democracy and how these worked together for Lincoln the Republican. He claims Lincoln was not only just a Whig, but that he used theories and practices that Andrew Jackson had espoused as well, despite the Whigs' dislike of "King Andrew." He shows that just because a person like Lincoln accepted a political party as a home did not mean that this person could only understand or believe in one line of political thought, especially with so many issues being vital to American politics.

The next essay, by Harold Holzer, does a fine job of describing how Lincoln controlled his image through the use of the new medium of photography. This section also does a remarkable job of showing how photography worked with and for existing artistic media such as sculpture and painting to shape the President's image. Artists of each of these styles frequently used the others to help them accomplish their goals, such as using photographs to complete a painting or looking at a painting to complete a sculpture. This was an especially educational chapter for me. I had understood how Lincoln had used photography to establish his image, but the inter-relation of the different ways of creating his image was new to me.

In part two, Lincoln's role in emancipating the slaves and his beliefs in race relations are the topics. James Oakes begins it with a discussion of the various types of rights that people at the time, including Lincoln, belidved existed. He shows how Lincoln believed African-Americans deserved "natural rights" (such as described in the Declaration of Independence) and "citizenship rights" (being treated as a citizen of the country, or at least of a state) , but that the concept of "political rights" (such as voting, holding office and serving on juries) was a state's choice. In this case, he argues, Lincoln supported "states rights" and if a state decided not to enfranchise African Americans, that was the state's choice and Lincoln did not oppose it.  I admit I struggled with this concept as it struck me that by denying the so-called "political rights," states could in effect prevent African Americans from enjoying their natural or citizenship rights. Perhaps this is one essay I will need to read and study again.

Eric Foner then contributes his own essay to this section, discussing Lincoln's long-held support of colonization,but also describing how this idea had taken hold in the United States and had quite a few supporters for many years. It is a good overview of colonization, the support it enjoyed at times, and some of the opposition this idea encountered, especially from African-Americans as well as many abolitionists.

Following that discussion comes a view of Lincoln and his relationships with abolitionists, especially black abolitionists, by Manisha Sinha. This essay describes Lincoln's evolution into a supporter of emancipation during the war, and shows how abolitionists helped lead Lincoln to this conclusion. It tries to focus on black abolitionists but I found it to be most effective in describing the role of abolitionists as a whole, not the smaller segment of black abolitionists. Black abolitionists were smaller in numbers and that seems to come across in this essay. Despite that, it is a good review of how those people (white and black) who favored a more immediate abolition of slavery worked with and influenced the President as he moved towards a policy of emancipation.

Part three begins with Andrew Delbanco's review of Lincoln's writing and the language he used, and how it compared to American writing styles that came before him. This was certainly an interesting part of this book. He describes the question of whether Lincoln's words carry the same weight to modern readers as they did to people who heard and read those words in Lincoln's era.

Richard Carwardine's essay Lincoln's Religion describes not just the long argument over what Lincoln actually believed and how he should be listed ( as a Christian or as a member of a specific denomination) but also on Lincoln's ability to understand the importance of religion to a large number of Americans at the time and how he shaped his language to communicate with them and get their support. Carwardine argues that the main instrument that aided the North in its ultimate victory was not just the amount of resources it possessed had, but, rather, its ability to maintain a patriotic spirit and avoid a war weariness that may have lead to a willingness to give up the fight. Many evangelistic Northerners and organizations played a role in maintaining this patriotism.

This section of the book concludes with Catherin Clinton describing the families of Abraham Lincoln - not only that consisting of his wife and children, but also a description of Lincoln's family as  a child, including his father, mother, step-mother and sister. This also includes a discussion of Nancy Hank's ancestry and how it may have influenced Abraham's development and beliefs, a point I had not read or considered before. (His relationship with his father is mentioned too, but that is a bit more common in Lincoln studies than the talk of his mother's background.)

The book concludes with its fourth part, a single essay by David Blight about the theft of Lincoln and his image in politics and memory. This started out as what I thought was a very good look about Lincoln's image is used commercially so frequently (a trend that was noticed in the 1920s" and how some modern writers have used Lincoln and his image and decisions as a basis to further their political agendas. It then evolved into a discussion of how the modern Republican Party has made attempts to use Lincoln and his memory to show this party as being in favor of Civil Rights. "The Party of Lincoln" is a phrase that he shows they have used (or variations of) to try to garner votes from African-Americans. At times, it appeared to me that the author made his own political beliefs a part of this essay, such as his use of the phrase "disaster in Iraq" on page 272 (instead of simply "war in Iraq), but as I read this more and saw how he was tying in Lincoln's image and the concept of memory (a concept which I would like to study more), I found that to be a minor issue. Blight uses several examples to show how certain conservatives have tried o use Lincoln's memory in their favor even when what he believed in may not be the same as what they believe. It is a very interesting essay, one I should ponder again, and a good way to end this book. 

Overall, this was a very good book, covering many aspects of Lincoln, his life and image, and how these factors influence our views of him today.  Our Lincoln is a book I certainly feel that students interested in our 16th President should consider reading and studying. 

Designs of the Abolitionists

From the Covington Journal of December 28,1861 comes this piece.

Perhaps the coolest thing since the war began, says the Chicago Times, is the purpose of the Abolitionists to convert the army, three quarters of whom are Democrats, into an instrumentality of Abolition. It is in prosecution of this purpose that the onslaught alluded to by our Washington correspondent is made upon Gen. McClellan. The Abolitionists understand that they cannot convert him into such an instrumentality, and believing that, if they can depose him, they can capture the President, they have set all their dogs upon him. It does not occur to them that, when he shall be deposed by their machinations, three-quarters of the army will lay down their arms; or, if this does occur to them, they are utterly reckless of the consequences of it. Or possibly their contemplated remedy for such event is a proclamation of universal emancipation and the arming of the negroes. What a state of things we should have, to be sure, three months hence, if the Abolitionists should have there way.

George McClellan, courtesy mrlincolnswhitehouse.org

The War and Slavery: A Speech by Union Colonel John Cochrane

John Cochrane, courtesy dmna.state.ny.us

  
Here is a story from the Covington Journal of November 23, 1861. All emphasis is repeated as published in this story.

A recent speech by Col. JOHN COCHRANE, his regiment stationed near Washington has been brought into prominent notice by the fact that SIMON CAMERON, Secretary of War, was present at the delivery and heartily endorsed the sentiments uttered. The gist of Cochrane'e speech, to which we invite the close attention of the reader, is thus reported:

"Shall we not seize the cotton at Beaufort, the munitions of war? And if you would open their ports, seize their property and even destroy their lives, I ask you whether you would not use their slaves? Whether you would not ARM THEIR SLAVES [great applause] AND CARRY THEM IN BATTALIONS AGAINST THEIR MASTERS? [Renewed and tumultuous applause.] If necessary to save this government, I would plunge their whole community, black and white, IN ONE INDISCRIMINATE SEA OF BLOOD, so that in the end we should have a government which should be the vicegerent of God."


After Col. Cochrane had concluded, Secretary Cameron said: 
"I APPROVE OF EVERY SENTIMENT UTTERED BY YOUR NOBLE COMMANDER. All the doctrines he has laid down, I approve of, as if it were uttered in my own words. They are my sentiments, and the sentiments which will eventually lead to victory. It is no time to talk to these people about meeting them on their own terms. We must treat them as our enemies, and punish them as our enemies, until they learn to behave themselves. Every means which God has placed in our hands, we must use until they are subdued." 


In this connection we give an extract from an editorial article in a late number of the New York Tribune, the most influential Administration paper in the country:


"God favoring, circumstances permitting, the way opened by a Providence which will indeed be divine, SHALL WE NOT RID OURSELVES OF SLAVERY ONCE AND  FOREVER! Where is the intelligent Northern man, we care not how he may politically style himself,who will not say from the bottom of his heart, to such a question "Yes!" If this is to be an "Abolitionist," we should like to look in the face of the poor creature who will say that he is not one. This is no longer a question of morals, but one of common sense and of common safety; of ordinary prudence and the least possible foresight. We are arguing for no particular scheme; we are demanding no hasty action; we feel as much as any the need of a circumspect policy; BUT UPON THE NAKED QUESTION OF "ABOLITION" OR "NO ABOLITION" WE BELIEVE THAT EVERY HONEST, THINKING MAN WILL BE READY TO AVOW HIMSELF AN "ABOLITIONIST." 




Here we have as the programme not Abolitionism merely but the arming of slaves against their masters, and if deemed necessary by the North, and God favoring, "plunging the South, black and white, in one indiscriminate sea of blood."

We submit the facts, without comment. 


--
Cochrane's speech may have come across as quite controversial, at least according to this clarification of his intents that the New York Times published on November 24, 1861. He apparently did not wish to be associated with the term "abolitionist" in any way at all.

Simon Cameron, courtesy senate.gov

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.

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.

Marvellous Changes

The March 23, 1861 edition of the Covington Journal offers up a few opinions on a pair of the more prominent Republicans and soon-to-be Cabinet members in the following article.

In the rapid mutations which many of our public men have undergone within a month or two past, none is more marvelous than that which presents Seward and Chase as conservative politicians.

For twenty years Mr. Seward has been unceasing in his efforts to build up a sectional party based upon opposition to slavery. He has by his teachings made an irrepressible conflict where in fact there was no cause or reason for such a conflict. He has arrayed one section of the Union against the other section. By appealing to the passions and prejudices of the North he has installed a governmental policy which has forced seven Southern States to the last resort of an oppressed people.

Salmon P. Chase is undoubtedly a man of ability. But with all his ability he is distinguished for nothing but his opposition to slavery.

Sine the year 1845, when he was presented by the negroes of Cincinnati with a silver pitcher on which occasion he declared that the negro "was entitled to every original right enjoyed by any other member of the community," he has been noted for nothing but his incessant demands for office and his ultra views upon the slavery question.


Have these men really changed their opinions? Is it to be supposed that at the moment of their greatest triumph they will repudiate the opinions which have given them place and power? Mr. Seward, after having seen the Executive and Legislative Departments of the Government pass into the hands of his sectional party, has uttered some very guarded and indefinite expressions about "saving the Union;" but if he has at any time or on any occasion given as much as a hint that he would concede an iota to the just demands of the South, the fact has escaped our notice. In 1848 he declared that "slavery must be abolished." And we undertake to say - basing the assertion upon his record of twenty years past - that it is his fixed purpose to aid by all the powers under his control in the attainment of that end. If at times he has seemed to halt in his purpose, it has been only for the purpose of renewing his strength and making the attainment of his ultimate object the more certain.

But Chase, a Radical of Radicals, is also a conservative man - so we are told. About the time Chase took charge of the Treasury Department some confiding individual in Washington had a conversation with him and was "gratified to learn that he was quite conservative in his views." This loose opinion was made the subject of a telegraphic dispatch, which is being copied with apparent avidity by the "Union" papers of Kentucky. On this unsubstantial basis lays the claim set up for S.P. Chase's conservatism.


When we are asked to trust to the moderation and forbearance of such men as Seward and Chase we must beg be excused.

Pardons for people who helped slaves escape in KY?

The article I am linking here is from May of 2010, and I don't know how I missed it the first time, but I find it interesting and a good idea.

The timing is actually not bad for me, as I'm currently reading Creating a Confederate Kentucky, a very fine book by Anne Marshall, and this article mentions how Kentucky's role in the Civil War was "ambivalent," a description much more understandable when considered alongside Marshall's book. Also the concept of offering pardons for this type of crime, yet no  descendants of those convicted of these offenses offers an interesting perspective on how the war and slavery are remembered in current times.

This article does not mention the names of all 44 who were to be pardoned, and I have not yet found out if the pardons have yet occurred, but I will look into it more and see what I can find.(One quick question: did the people undertaking this project ever list all of the names or publicize them somehow? If not, then it is no wonder at all that no descendants have expressed interest in this work.)

Also, I do wonder if it is accurate for the writer of the article's headline to use the word "abolitionists." I tend to think of that word as being for those who wanted slavery eliminated, but does it also count for those who simply helped (or tried to help) slaves escape? Is it safe to assume that these people (I've seen them called "operators" on the Underground Railroad) favored the abolition of slavery? Is helping a slave escape the same as wanting the entire institution prohibited? I'll have to think about that some more while wondering if I'm being too finicky in asking these questions.

I also recommend reading the New York Times' Editorial on this story. The article linked above includes a link to it as well, but I am also linking it in case that makes it easier to find. It is worth the click.

(And again, it is interesting to find this commentary in the New York Times, a newspaper frequently referred to in Marshall's book for its observations and thoughts about Kentucky in the late 1800s. The use of the phrase "Modern Kentucky" in the editorial quickly caught my attention, presumably because I'm reading the book about Kentucky of the past.)

Patriotic Cover: Persuasive Eloquence of the Sunny South

During the Civil War, and even in later wars, such as World War II, one way of displaying American patriotism was through the use of patriotic covers, which were envelopes with a patriotic scene on the front of it. These were envelopes to be used to deliver the mail, as well as a patriotic message. (In current times, one similar collectible item is a "first day" cover, an envelope issued to commemorate a historic place or event, with a stamp and a cancellation mark from the post office on it, though these are issued to be collectible, not to be used as the patriotic covers were).

Not only did these covers display pro-American messages, but they also could show support for the United States by insulting or belittling the opposing side, such as the Confederacy or the South in general. In the one displayed below, entitled "The persuasive eloquence of the Sunny South," an African American is shown tied to a pole, with a whip coming down on his back, serving as an expression of not only anti-slavery sentiments, but also as a commentary about the Confederacy and the printer's perspective of Southern culture and life.

They were simply another form of war propaganda, and not intended to claim any sort of objectivity, since their intended audience was not looking for "fair and balanced" portrayals.

King & Baird, of Cansom Street in Philadelphia,were the printers of this particular cover.I have not been able to determine a date when this one was created, but it could have been at any point during the war.

Also, I did find this blog entry that has more interesting examples and discussion of patriotic covers from the Civil War era.

Book Review: Patriotic Treason by Evan Carton

Patriotic Treason: John Brown and the Soul of America

Evan Carton

copyright 2006

Free Press

As I began this book, a paragraph on page x, in the "author's note" section scared me and made me wonder if this is the type of non-fiction writing I'm really interested in reading. The last sentence describes how he handles situations that have very little historical documentation to describe them : " I deriver the voices, ideas, and feelings of the historical actors as closely as possible from surviving letters and from contemporary third-person accounts of their character and style."

My immediate thought was "Oh-oh. He's making up parts of the story to fill out the book" and it reminded me of a past book that did so and that I did not enjoy.

Once I began reading this book, however, I forgot that unnecessary concern. Mr. Carton writes in a very fluid, narrative-like style that is easy and enjoyable to read. He tells the story of John Brown's life and death in a terrific, descriptive way that grabs the reader's attention and holds it.

I really did enjoy this biography of Brown and the life he lived from his childhood through those last days in a Charlestown, Virginia jail. The influences of his father, the church and the death of his mother during his youth are all described in this book.

Carton continues this story by looking at Brown's life as a young man, and then as he matured. He praises Brown for his work ethic and the reputation he built in Pennsylvania, but does not hesitate to criticize Brown's mistakes and even, at times, hypocrisy, regarding his feelings towards his family.

Brown's development from someone who hated slavery but took no actions upon those feelings into an aggressive anti-slavery crusader is a big part of the story and book, as it should be. Brown gradually decided that mere talk was not good enough, a feeling that took hold in the early days of "Bleeding Kansas" in the mid- 1850's when Brown was in his fifth decade alive. 

The affects that Brown's beliefs and actions had on his family are another theme throughout this entire story.

I will admit that I did not check the notes on this book often, as it would have proved disruptive to the enjoyable reading I was pursuing, but the author does provide source notes for each chapter, making it possible to determine how much of his material came from historical sources and which parts where ones he filled in to the best of his ability. I wish the notes used the numbers in subscript form for each note instead of a page number and first few words of a quote, but that was not a big deal at all, just a minor preference that I have. 

Patriotic Treason is a very enjoyable, informative book, giving a wonderful account of John Brown's life, what he believed, what he did, and why he had those beliefs and took those actions. I definitely recommend this for anyone interested in the coming of the Civil War and/or the history of slavery and abolition.