Blue Gray Review | American Civil War more or less

peanut prophecy

Posted on August 8, 2020 by SUMPTER

From the July 16, 1870 issue of Harper’s Weekly:

PEA-NUTS.

OUR illustration on this page represents a scene which is perfectly familiar to those who have visited our Southern cities; and we dare say some of our readers who have sauntered along the Savannah docks may recognize the features of the good-natured and almost superannuated aunty whose bent figure, sheltered by the tattered umbrella, and surrounded by heaping baskets of roasted pea-nuts, forms the principle object in our picture. It was drawn from life, greatly to the delight of the old woman, who had never before been honored by the attentions of an artist.

Come get your goobers

The pea-nut, though almost universally liked, is considered very “ungenteel.” Its cheapness, and the ease with which the soft shell is broken, make it a favorite with boys; and it is rare indeed to empty a little fellow’s pocket and not find among its wonderfully miscellaneous contents two or three pea-nuts or the debris of their crumbling shells. Outside of boydom the popularity of the pea-nut is chiefly confined to people who frequent such places of amusement as the Bowery Theatre, the atmosphere of which is always redolent of the pea-nut stand and the beer gardens. Such people, indeed, munch them every where – as they walk the street, on the cars, in the stages, and aboard the ferry boats, scattering the shells abroad with the utmost indifference, and littering the dress of every person in their neighborhood. Pea-nuts impart a pungent odor to the breath, which makes the eater almost as great a nuisance in a crowd as one who indulges in the luxury of Limburger cheese.

pungent peanut place

In this city there are hundreds of stands where pea-nuts are sold, and the trade in them must be very large, if not particularly remunerative. There must be several hundred old men and old women in New York alone who make their living at these stands – their entire sales consisting, on any day, of a few shillings worth of pea-nuts, with perhaps a dozen or two apples, whose surface shines with a polish too suggestive of the process by which it is obtained for delicate stomachs. Occasionally you may see a gentleman purchasing at these stands; but generally it is done with a furtive glance to see that nobody is near whose observation might be unpleasant. If one like pea-nuts, and is thus sensitive, it is convenient to have the protection of a little son or nephew, who may not, however, in all cases reap the benefit of the purchase.

The pea-nut is not recognized in polite society. It is not found at dessert. Yet a few years ago an American in Munich placed on the dinner-table of the Hôtel de Bavière a dish of these with other nuts peculiar to this continent, for the benefit of his German friends, and the unanimous verdict of the foreign members of the party was, that the pea-nut was most excellent eating. Thus pea-nuts, like prophets, are not without honor save in their own country; and it is not likely they will ever rise above their present position here.

When I read this piece I thought of a book I read years ago (I don’t have the reference). The author referred to hamburger (and maybe potatoes) as an inferior food or inferior good. That kind of surprised me – what about McDonald’s?

I’m not sure about peanuts. I don’t think adults try to hide their use of them. You might never be able to order peanuts as a main course in hotels in Bavaria or any other place, but 150 years later peanuts do seem to be a highly valued food. Peanut butter and jelly sandwiches might not have the same cachet as other entrees, but they have a good deal of nutritional value. As scientists have analyzed food in greater and greater detail, we now know that peanut butter is kind of high in fat, but it has 0 cholesterol and 0 trans fat. And that’s a good thing, at least for now. [September 8, 2020: For example, the September 5th 2020 issue of The Economist (page 8) mentions that up to 240 million people around the world have food allergies and peanut allergy is the most common, although thanks to science, there is now an approved remedy.]

Tuskegee teacher

peanut power

Peanuts were one of the crops that George Washington Carver, an earlier scientist, urged farmers to grow to offset the ravages of King Cotton:

good steward of the soil

“While a professor at Tuskegee Institute, Carver developed techniques to improve soils depleted by repeated plantings of cotton. He wanted poor farmers to grow other crops, such as peanuts and sweet potatoes, as a source of their own food and to improve their quality of life. The most popular of his 44 practical bulletins for farmers contained 105 food recipes using peanuts. Although he spent years developing and promoting numerous products made from peanuts, none became commercially successful.” Rotating cotton with crops that returned nitrogen to the soil, for example sweet potatoes and legumes such as peanuts, would improve the soil.

In his 1917 How to grow the peanut : and 105 ways of preparing it for human consumption George Washington Carver saw a bright future for peanuts:

“By reason of its superior food value the peanut has become almost
a universal diet for man, and when we learn its real value, I think
I am perfectly safe in the assertion that it will not only become a
prime essential in every well-balanced dietary, but a real necessity.
Indeed, I do not know of any one vegetable that has such a wide range
of food possibilities.”

Gotham goobers

wash it down with a Billy Beer … or two

peanuts worth?

_________________________________

Life isn’t always as peaceful as that snapshot of the peanut vendor at the Savannah docks. On December 22, 1869 General Alfred Howe Terry began serving as “the last military governor of the Third Military District, based in Atlanta.” According to the January 1, 1870 issue of Harper’s Weekly even before that he had reported that the Klu Klux Klan was still active in the state. The newspaper editorialized:

MURDER AND SENTIMENTALITY.

A FEW weeks ago, while the Boston Cadets were feasting General MAGRUDER, the rebel commander at Great Bethel, Union men in Georgia, according to General TERRY, were murdered at the pleasure of the Ku Klux hands. There is, he says, no security for life or property, and magistrates neither will nor can do justice. Do the worthy members of the Company of Cadets see no relation between the two facts? Their invitation to General MAGRUDER does not, indeed, directly occasion the slaughter of Union men; but it does indirectly. The lesson which the disaffected element in the Southern States is so painfully slow to learn is that we understand our own victory, not as one of vengeance, but of principle. And how can we ever expect them to learn it if we do not show it in every intelligible way? General MAGRUDER threw up the commission of his country to fight against his flag, at the command of a State, for the purpose of perpetuating human slavery. Is this an act which the Boston Cadets think worthy of especial honor? Or is it to show that they have no ill feeling? But nobody charged it upon them. Or is done because they think that General MAGRUDER was as honest as they were?

… we would not certainly honor conspicuous rebels while the rebel spirit slaughtered our brethren …

… There is this advantage in the councils of extreme men, as they are called – that they understand each other. Set a thief, if you choose, to stop a thief. Fight fire with fire. These are exhortations that grow out of the depths of experience. It may not be an agreeable truth, but it is a truth, that such a man as THADDEUS STEVENS understood better how to deal with rebels than any more moderate man; and for the reason that he was of a like resolution and temper with them, but patriotically and nobly directed. The policy of reconstruction which has been adopted was the result of a situation which Mr. STEVENS, and men like him instinctively divined. When he spoke of confiscation and military rule and territorial condition, there was a general shuddering even among his own party friends. He was vigorously denounced as blood-thirsty and vindictive by the opposition. But he always quietly answered in substance, why is the blood of enemies more precious than that of friends?

He did not indeed advise bloodshed. But he was of the opinion that the blood of rebels should be spilled rather that of Union men of any color. He knew, also, that it was necessary, by a thorough and radical reorganization of society in the rebel States, to show the rebel spirit that the country fully comprehended its own victory, and would certainly secure it. He knew that the contempt of “the North” was ingrained and traditional in the South,” and that the shortest and surest way of peace was to show a perfect readiness upon the part of “the North” to use its superior strength to establish its policy.

feted in Boston

fire fighter

Georgia on his mind

His view of the situation was correct. It implied nothing vindictive, nothing unjust. Gradually events showed its wisdom. … [events including massacres, Black Codes, and the Ku Klux Klan] …

That condition virtually remains. Nobody, of course, expects that any system will instantly pacify a State so long demoralized by the barbarism of slavery, and then so riven with Civil War as Georgia. But because every thing may not be done at once, it would be extremely foolish to endeavor to do nothing. The removal of the colored members of the Legislature was a deliberate defiance of the authority of the United States. Had it been instantly accepted as such by Congress, and the territorial condition been restored, there would be at this moment much more security for life and property in that State than General TERRY reports. So, likewise, when it was proposed that the Cadets in Boston should honor General MAGRUDER, magistrates and juries in Georgia would have been stronger had the Cadets decisively declined.

The remedy is, first of all, moral, then physical. Let the South perceive that we regard the war as a very sober matter – as an enormous crime, the memories and lessons of which are not to be drowned in a slop of sentimentality. Then the leaders will act accordingly; and if not now, then in the next generation. It is a very great mistake that we can not wait. Experience proves that we can. Then the immediate remedy is physical. It is a disgrace to the country that it suffers such a condition of things any where in its domain as that reported by General TERRY. If it is proved that Georgia does not protect lives and property, let the United States protect them by any necessary number of soldiers, and for any length of time whatever.

According to the New Georgia Encyclopedia General Terry took some action soon after he took over:

“In June 1869 in White v. Clements, the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled two-to-one that blacks did indeed have a constitutional right to hold office in Georgia. Ironically, one of the two deciding justices was Chief Justice Joseph E. Brown, appointed by Bullock in July 1868. In January 1870, Alfred H. Terry, the third and final commanding general of the District of Georgia, conducted “Terry’s Purge.” He removed the General Assembly’s ex-Confederates, replaced them with the Republican runners-up, and then reinstated the expelled black legislators, thus creating a heavy Republican majority in the legislature. In February 1870 the newly constituted legislature ratified the Fifteenth Amendment and chose new senators to send to Washington. The following July, Georgia was again readmitted to the Union.”

“Shelling peanuts, Wolf Creek, Georgia” 1935

I think I remember years ago reading a quote from George Washington Carver about peanuts. I’m not sure if this is it or not:

When I was young, I said to God, ‘God, tell me the mystery of the universe.’ But God answered, ‘That knowledge is for me alone.’ So I said, ‘God, tell me the mystery of the peanut.’ Then God said, ‘Well George, that’s more nearly your size.’ And he told me.

You can read that and many more interesting quotes from Mr. Carver at AZ Quotes

The picture isn’t big enough to show, but the Library of Congress has a cartoon by Denys Wortman from 1945 in which the value of peanut butter was debated: “Mopey Dick and the Duke. ‘I can’t decide whether to give up peanut butter on account of its calories, or to eat it on account of its vitamines’ [sic]”

Plains, Georgia

Dothan, Alabama

Savannah, Georgia

From the Internet Archive: Harper’s Weekly for 1870 and George Washington Carver’s 1917 book.

The World War II era poster is from the National Archives via Wikimedia Commons. It is dated 1943; Mr. Carver died on January 5, 1943. Also from Wikimedia Commons – the Bowery Theatre in July 1867.

From the Library of Congress: Chemistry laboratory at Tuskegee Institute about 1902 – Mr. Carver is second from right; Carol M. Highsmith’s photograph of the statue of Mr. Carver “outside the George Washington Carver Museum and Cultural Center, in the 1926-43 segregated Phoenix Union Colored High School in Phoenix, Arizona;” Peanut stand on West 42nd Street, NY City; the huge peanut float in Washington, D.C. on January 20, 1977 for the inauguration of Jimmy Carter as U.S. president – Mr. Carter was a peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia – his brother Billy promoted the beer named after himself; Carter peanut novelties; the portrait of John Bankhead Magruder – apparently Prince John could be kind of fluid, after the Civil War he fled to Mexico, where he worked for the Mexican government for awhile, he left Mexico in November 1866, you can read a short bio at Duke University; the image of Thaddeus Stevens; General Alfred H. Terry; three more from Carol M. Highsmith – Plains, a mural in Dothan Alabama (a Mural City which is also named the “Peanut Capital of the World), “Felix de Weldon’s Waving Girl statue on Savannah, Georgia’s, waterfront” (“it depicts Florence Martus, who took it upon herself to be the unofficial greeter of all ships that entered and left the Port of Savannah between 1887 and 1931. According to legend, not a ship was missed in her forty-four years on watch.”); peanut shelling in Georgia; Polly in the patch, said to be between 1900 and 1905.

“Polly in the peanut patch”

Posted in 150 Years Ago This Month, Aftermath, Postbellum Society, Reconstruction, Southern Society | Tagged Alfred Howe Terry, Bowery Theatre, food bias, George Washington Carver, Georgia, Hôtel de Bavière, John Bankhead Magruder, Ku Klux Klan, peanuts, Savannah Georgia, Thaddeus Stevens | Leave a comment

reading the reasons

Posted on July 9, 2020 by SUMPTER

On July 2, 1776 the Continental Congress meeting in Philadelphia voted for independence from Great Britain. On July 4th the Congress agreed to the words in the written Declaration. July 8th was a “great day of celebration” in Philadelphia as the Declaration was read aloud to crowd in the State House Yard; bells rang, bonfires burned, candles illuminated windows and the King’s Arms was removed from a room at the State House and thrown on a huge fire. ^[1]. 244 years ago today the Declaration of Independence was read to the American army in New York City. From the July 9, 1870 issue of Harper’s Weekly:

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.

THE illustration underneath commemorates one of the most interesting events in the history of New York – the first reading of the Declaration of Independence to the American army, by order of General WASHINGTON – of which we find the following account in LOSSING’S “Field-Book of the Revolution:” “WASHINGTON received the Declaration on the 9th of July, 1776, with instructions to have it read to the army. He immediately issued an order for the several brigades, then in and near the city, to be drawn up at six o’clock that evening, to hear it read by their several commanders or their aids. The brigades were formed in hollow squares on their respective parades. The venerable ZACHARIAH GREENE (commonly known as ‘Parson Greene,’ the father-in-law of Mr. THOMPSON, historian of Long Island, yet (1855) living at Hempstead, at the age of ninety-six years, informed me that he belonged to the brigade then encamped on the ‘Common,’ where the City Hall now stands. The hollow square was formed at about the spot where the Park fountain now is. He says WASHINGTON was within the square, on horseback, and that the Declaration was read in a clear voice by one of his aids. When it was concluded three hearty cheers were given. HOLT’S Journal for July 11, 1776, says: ‘In pursuance of the Declaration of Independence, a general jail delivery took place with respect to debtors.’ Ten days afterward, the people assembled at the City Hall, at the head of Broad Street, to hear the Declaration read. They then took the British arms from over the seat of justice in the court-room, also the arms wrought in stone in front of the building, and the picture of the king in the council chamber, and destroyed them, by fire, in the street. They also ordered the British arms in all the churches in the city to be destroyed. This order seems not to have been obeyed. Those in Trinity Church were taken down and carried to New Brunswick by the Rev. CHARLES INGLIS, at the close of the war, and now hang upon the walls of a Protestant Episcopal church in St. John.”

what we’re fighting for

According to Scientific American, during the evening of July 9, 1776 a crowd pulled down a statue of King George III in Bowling Green on Manhattan. The article agrees with Harper’s that patriots also practiced “defacing and destroying examples of the royal arms where they were found.”

but slaves also built up the pyramids [***probably wrong see below]

something like that

the royal nemesis

On July 3, 1776 John Adams wrote two letters to his wife Abigail. He thought the day before, when the Continental Congress voted for independence from Great Britain, would be the big day Americans celebrated in the future, fireworks on the Second. From Familiar Letters of John Adams and His Wife
Abigail Adams During the Revolution:

114. John Adams.

3 July, 1776.

… Yesterday, the greatest question was decided which ever was debated in America, and a greater, perhaps, never was nor will be decided among men. A Resolution was passed without one dissenting Colony “that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, and as such they have, and of right ought to have, full power to make war, conclude peace, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which other States may rightfully do.” You will see, in a few days, a Declaration setting forth the causes which have impelled us to this mighty revolution, and the reasons which will justify it in the sight of God and man. A plan of confederation will be taken up in a few days.

When I look back to the year 1761, and recollect the argument concerning writs of assistance in the superior court, which I have hitherto considered as the commencement of this controversy between Great Britain and America, and run through the whole period from that time to this, and recollect the series of political events, the chain of causes and effects, I am surprised at the suddenness as well as greatness of this revolution. Britain has been filled with folly, and America with wisdom; at least, this is my judgment. Time must determine. It is the will of Heaven that the two countries should be sundered forever. It may be the will of Heaven that America shall suffer calamities still more wasting, and distresses yet more dreadful. If this is to be the case, it will have this good effect at least. It will inspire us with many virtues which we have not, and correct many errors, follies, and vices which threaten to disturb, dishonor, and destroy us. The furnace of affliction produces refinement in states as well as individuals. And the new Governments we are assuming in every part will require a purification from our vices, and an augmentation of our virtues, or they will be no[192] blessings. The people will have unbounded power, and the people are extremely addicted to corruption and venality, as well as the great. But I must submit all my hopes and fears to an overruling Providence, in which, unfashionable as the faith may be, I firmly believe.

115. John Adams.

Philadelphia, 3 July, 1776.

Had a Declaration of Independency been made seven months ago, it would have been attended with many great and glorious effects. We might, before this hour, have formed alliances with foreign states. We should have mastered Quebec, and been in possession of Canada. You will perhaps wonder how such a declaration would have influenced our affairs in Canada, but if I could write with freedom, I could easily convince you that it would, and explain to you the manner how. Many gentlemen in high stations, and of great influence, have been duped by the ministerial bubble of Commissioners to treat. And in real, sincere expectation of this event, which they so fondly wished, they have been slow and languid in promoting measures for the reduction of that province. Others there are in the Colonies who really wished that our enterprise in Canada would be defeated, that the Colonies might be brought into danger and distress between two fires, and be thus induced to submit. Others really wished to defeat the expedition to Canada, lest the conquest of it should elevate the minds of the people too much to hearken to those terms of reconciliation which, they believed, would be offered us. These jarring views, wishes, and designs occasioned an opposition to many salutary measures which were proposed for the support of that expedition, and caused obstructions, embarrassments, and studied delays, which have finally lost us the province.

All these causes, however, in conjunction would not have disappointed us, if it had not been for a misfortune which could not be foreseen, and perhaps could not have been prevented; I mean the prevalence of the small-pox among our troops. This fatal pestilence completed our destruction. It is a frown of Providence upon us, which we ought to lay to heart.

But, on the other hand, the delay of this Declaration to this time has many great advantages attending it. The hopes of reconciliation which were fondly entertained by multitudes of honest and well-meaning, though weak and mistaken people, have been gradually, and at last totally extinguished. Time has been given for the whole people maturely to consider the great question of independence, and to ripen their judgment, dissipate their fears, and allure their hopes, by discussing it in newspapers and pamphlets, by debating it in assemblies, conventions, committees of safety and inspection, in town and county meetings, as well as in private conversations, so that the whole people, in every colony of the thirteen, have now adopted it as their own act. This will cement the union, and avoid those heats, and perhaps convulsions, which might have been occasioned by such a Declaration six months ago.

But the day is past. The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epocha in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forevermore.

You will think me transported with enthusiasm, but I am not. I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure that it will cost us to maintain this Declaration and support and defend these States. Yet, through all the gloom, I can see the rays of ravishing light and glory. I can see that the end is more than worth all the means. And that posterity will triumph in that day’s transaction, even although we should rue it, which I trust in God we shall not.

The book of letters was edited by John and Abigail’s grandson, Charles Francis Adams, who, in a footnote, said he checked the facts and corrected a previous “slight alteration” by relative.

FOOTNOTES:

[146] The practice has been to celebrate the 4th of July, the day upon which the form of the Declaration of Independence was agreed to, rather than the 2d, the day upon which the resolution making that declaration was determined upon by the Congress. A friend of Mr. Adams, who had during his lifetime an opportunity to read the two letters dated on the 3d, was so much struck with them, that he procured the liberty to publish them. But thinking, probably, that a slight alteration would better fit them for the taste of the day, and gain for them a higher character for prophecy, than if printed as they were, he obtained leave to put together only the most remarkable paragraphs, and make one letter out of the two. He then changed the date from the 3d to the 5th, and the word second to fourth, and published it, the public being made aware of these alterations. In this form, and as connected with the anniversary of our National Independence, these letters have ever since enjoyed great popularity. The editor at first entertained some doubt of the expediency of making a variation by printing them in their original shape. But upon considering the matter maturely, his determination to adhere, in all cases, to the text prevailed. If any injury to the reputation of Mr. Adams for prophecy should ensue, it will be more in form than in substance, and will not be, perhaps, without compensation in the restoration of the unpublished portion. This friend was a nephew, William S. Shaw. But the letters had been correctly and fully printed before. See Niles’s Principles and Acts of the Revolution, p. 330.

According to Wikipedia:

“Following the British occupation of New York in 1777, [Charles] Inglis was promoted from curate to rector of Trinity Church. As a Loyalist, it is recorded that Inglis prayed aloud for King George III while George Washington was in the congregation. The church was quickly surrounded by militia. Inglis’ home was plundered. In November 1783, upon the evacuation of Loyalists from New York, Inglis returned to England. However, his whole congregation of Trinity Church went to Nova Scotia.” [George Washington might have been in the congregation in 1776]

According to Find a Grave, Reverend Zachariah Greene “Served three years in the Revolutionary War (from Jan 1776 to Jan 1779); during which time he was engaged in three severe battles: Throgg’s Point, White Plains, and White Marsh (northwest of Philadelphia). He was wounded at the Battle of White Marsh on Dec 7, 1777, a musket ball entering his left shoulder fracturing the scapula and clavicle.” He later became a preacher and served as pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Brookhaven (Setauket) on Long Island from 1797 until his death in 1858.

Harper’s Weekly for 1870 is at the Internet Archive

You can find the Adams book of correspondence at Project Gutenberg. The two letters here are on pages 190-194.

From the Library of Congress: the print said to be from 1851; statue pulled down by slaves (there might have been slaves in the crowd, but they wouldn’t have done all the tearing down; apparently King George was dressed as an ancient Roman, Marcus Aurelius); Johannes A. Oertel’s romanticized picture; His most gracious majesty King George the Third

[July 10, 2020]I added the fake history tag. *** A little embarrassing, maybe I’ve been watching too many movies; there’s evidence that no slaves, Hebrew or otherwise, helped build the pyramids. I apologize.

^[1]McCullough, David. John Adams. New York: Simon & Schuster paperbacks, 2004. Print. pages 136-137.↩

Posted in 150 Years Ago, American History | Tagged American revolution, Charles Inglis (bishop), Declaration of Independence, fake history, George Washington, Independence Day, John Adams, Zachariah Greene | Leave a comment

“Eighty-odd years since …”

Posted on July 4, 2020 by SUMPTER

The Fourth of July 1863 was a glad day for the Union during the American Civil War. Rebels surrendered Vicksburg, Mississippi to Union forces under General Ulysses S. Grant, and that evening the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia began to head back South after three bloody days at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. A few days later President Abraham Lincoln focused on Independence Day in some off the cuff remarks to a group of serenaders. From The Papers And Writings Of Abraham Lincoln, Volume Six at Project Gutenberg:

“All Men Are Created Equal” and “Stand by the Declaration.”

RESPONSE TO A SERENADE,
JULY 7, 1863.

FELLOW-CITIZENS:—I am very glad indeed to see you to-night, and yet I will not say I thank you for this call; but I do most sincerely thank Almighty God for the occasion on which you have called. How long ago is it Eighty-odd years since, on the Fourth of July, for the first time in the history of the world, a nation, by its representatives, assembled and declared as a self-evident truth “that all men are created equal.” That was the birthday of the United States of America. Since then the Fourth of July has had several very peculiar recognitions. The two men most distinguished in the framing and support of the Declaration were Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, the one having penned it, and the other sustained it the most forcibly in debate—the only two of the fifty-five who signed it and were elected Presidents of the United States. Precisely fifty years after they put their hands to the paper, it pleased Almighty God to take both from this stage of action. This was indeed an extraordinary and remarkable event in our history. Another President, five years after, was called from this stage of existence on the same day and month of the year; and now on this last Fourth of July just passed, when we have a gigantic rebellion, at the bottom of which is an effort to overthrow the principle that all men were created equal, we have the surrender of a most powerful position and army on that very day. And not only so, but in the succession of battles in Pennsylvania, near to us, through three days, so rapidly fought that they might be called one great battle, on the first, second, and third of the month of July; and on the fourth the cohorts of those who opposed the Declaration that all men are created equal, “turned tail” and run.

President Lincoln November 8, 1863

Gentlemen, this is a glorious theme, and the occasion for a speech, but I am not prepared to make one worthy of the occasion. I would like to speak in terms of praise due to the many brave officers and soldiers who have fought in the cause of the Union and liberties of their country from the beginning of the war. These are trying occasions, not only in success, but for the want of success. I dislike to mention the name of one single officer, lest I might do wrong to those I might forget. Recent events bring up glorious names, and particularly prominent ones; but these I will not mention. Having said this much, I will now take the music.

The president did prepare a speech with a couple of these ideas for his visit to Gettysburg about four months later. Many people think his words there for the dedication of the soldiers’ national cemetery were “worthy of the occasion.”

Based on correspondence all around July 7th, it seems that President Lincoln wanted a little more success from General Meade and his Army of the Potomac as the rebels retreated from Gettysburg:

“turned tail” and run?

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEWS FROM GETTYSBURG.
WASHINGTON,

July 4, 10.30 A.M.

The President announces to the country that news from the Army of the Potomac, up to 10 P.M. of the 3d, is such as to cover that army with the highest honor, to promise a great success to the cause of the Union, and to claim the condolence of all for the many gallant fallen; and that for this he especially desires that on this day He whose will, not ours, should ever be done be everywhere remembered and reverenced with profoundest gratitude.

A. LINCOLN.

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL FRENCH. [Cipher] WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C.,

July 5, 1863.
MAJOR-GENERAL FRENCH, Fredericktown, Md.:

I see your despatch about destruction of pontoons. Cannot the enemy ford the river?

A. LINCOLN.

CONTINUED FAILURE TO PURSUE ENEMY
TELEGRAM TO GENERAL H. W. HALLECK.

SOLDIERS’ HOME, WASHINGTON, JULY 6 1863.7 P.M., MAJOR-GENERAL HALLECK:

I left the telegraph office a good deal dissatisfied. You know I did not like the phrase—in Orders, No. 68, I believe—”Drive the invaders from our soil.” Since that, I see a despatch from General French, saying the enemy is crossing his wounded over the river in flats, without saying why he does not stop it, or even intimating a thought that it ought to be stopped. Still later, another despatch from General Pleasonton, by direction of General Meade, to General French, stating that the main army is halted because it is believed the rebels are concentrating “on the road towards Hagerstown, beyond Fairfield,” and is not to move until it is ascertained that the rebels intend to evacuate Cumberland Valley.

These things appear to me to be connected with a purpose to cover Baltimore and Washington and to get the enemy across the river again without a further collision, and they do not appear connected with a purpose to prevent his crossing and to destroy him. I do fear the former purpose is acted upon and the latter rejected.

If you are satisfied the latter purpose is entertained, and is judiciously pursued, I am content. If you are not so satisfied, please look to it.

Yours truly,

A. LINCOLN.

…

SURRENDER OF VICKSBURG TO GENERAL GRANT
TELEGRAM FROM GENERAL HALLECK TO GENERAL G. C. MEADE.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 7, 1863.

MAJOR-GENERAL MEADE, Army of the Potomac:

I have received from the President the following note, which I respectfully communicate:

“We have certain information that Vicksburg surrendered to General Grant on the Fourth of July. Now if General Meade can complete his work, so gloriously prosecuted this far, by the literal or substantial destruction of Lee’s army, the rebellion will be over.

“Yours truly,

“A. LINCOLN.”

H. W. HALLECK. General-in-Chief.

TELEGRAM FROM GENERAL HALLECK TO GENERAL G. C. MEADE.
WASHINGTON, D. C., July 8, 1863.

MAJOR-GENERAL MEADE, Frederick, Md.:

There is reliable information that the enemy is crossing at Williamsport. The opportunity to attack his divided forces should not be lost. The President is urgent and anxious that your army should move against him by forced marches.

H. W. HALLECK, General-in-Chief

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL THOMAS.
WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, July 8, 1863.12.30 P.M.

GENERAL LORENZO THOMAS, Harrisburg, Pa.:

Your despatch of this morning to the Secretary of War is before me. The forces you speak of will be of no imaginable service if they cannot go forward with a little more expedition. Lee is now passing the Potomac faster than the forces you mention are passing Carlisle. Forces now beyond Carlisle to be joined by regiments still at Harrisburg, and the united force again to join Pierce somewhere, and the whole to move down the Cumberland Valley, will in my unprofessional opinion be quite as likely to capture the “man in the moon” as any part of Lee’s army.

A. LINCOLN.

the getaway

The third U.S. president alluded to by Mr. Lincoln was James Monroe, who died on July 4, 1831.

[07/04/2020 PM] Of course, It would take many years for “all men” to include all women.

Hal Jespersen’s map of the retreat from Gettysburg (Map by Hal Jespersen, www.posix.com/CW) is licensed under Creative Commons

From the Library of Congress: the illustrated Declaration circa 1861, when emancipation was still in the future; Alexander Gardner’s portrait; Edwin Forbes’ Escape over the Potomac near Williamsport;

Posted in Gettysburg Campaign, Vicksburg Campaign | Tagged Abraham Lincoln, Battle of Gettysburg, Declaration of Independence, Gettysburg, Gettysburg Address, Independence Day, James Monroe, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Vicksburg | Leave a comment

virtual vacation

Posted on June 29, 2020 by SUMPTER

Apparently some people weren’t venturing too far from home 150 years ago.

vacationing in place

What they might have been missing:

from the Canadian side

I’m so old I sort of remember when they turned off the American Falls when I was going to school. As it turns out that happened the same year a couple men walked on the moon and a whole bunch of people rocked Woodstock. The CBC explains scientists studied the erosion that “threatened to ‘flatten out the American Falls and make them disappear altogether'”.

flattening the fall (1931)

holiday in the head

I’ve never been to Newport but no problem, thanks to Youtube. According to its documentation this performance took place exactly a month before 9/11.

tripsavvy suggests twelve other virtual vacations.

real solitude?

According to Project Gutenberg the cartoons were published in Punchinello – Niagara on July 23, 1870 and Newport on July 30, 1870. The Canadian view before rock falls in 1931 and 1954 shortened the American drop (CBC) comes from The Falls of Niagara and Other Famous Cataracts, by George W. Holley also at Project Gutenberg. I found the photo of the Maid of the Mist (1859) at Wikimedia. The bird’s eye view from 1931 is from the National Archives and also at Wikimedia. Four from the Library of Congress said to be published by George Stacy between 1860 and ca. 1865: group portrait; on the edge; sitting solo lower and higher

virtual vicarious vacation

Posted in 150 Years Ago, American Culture, American Society, Postbellum Society | Tagged Newport Rhode Island, Niagara Falls, tourism | Leave a comment

lapping it up

Posted on June 15, 2020 by SUMPTER

Here’s a man that might have fit right in with Stonewall Jackson’s foot cavalry – except that he hailed from north of Mason-Dixon.

still life (temporary)

From Harper’s Weekly June 11, 1870:

WESTON, THE PEDESTRIAN.

WE give on this page a portrait of Mr. EDWARD PAYSON WESTON, the well-known pedestrian, who has just accomplished the feat of walking one hundred miles in twenty-one hours and forty minutes – twenty minutes less than the time required by his wager. The performance took place at the Empire Rink, in Third Avenue. He made about nine stoppages for rest during his walk, none of which was longer than ten minutes. His chief nourishment was beef-tea, together with crackers, raw eggs, and lemonade. He accomplished the one hundred miles without giving evidences of any great strain on his mental or physical system, being nearly as fresh at the finish as he was at the opening. The first fifty miles were made in ten hours and thirty-five minutes. His quickest mile was done in about eleven minutes, and his best single circuit of the rink in one minute and twenty seconds. The close of his performance was witnessed by an audience of at least 5000 people, who greeted his triumph with enthusiastic applause.

5000 people crowded into a building for a sporting event? What were they thinking?

You can learn more about the Empire City Skating Rink (and see a picture) at Daytonian in Manhattan. Mr. Weston isn’t mentioned, but: “The building continued to be home not only of the annual fairs, but of athletic events and other spectacles. In the spring of 1877 a five-mile walking race took place here.”

Edward Payson Weston was a life-long long distance walker. An article at the Running Past website begins with his famous 1861 walk from Boston to Washington, D.C. to honor a wager: If Abraham Lincoln won the 1860 presidential election, he would walk the 478 miles in ten days to attend the inauguration. But that was just the beginning of some amazing feats, only ending when Mr. Weston was a septuagenarian: After a couple coast-to-coast walks at 70 and 71-72, “His last big hike was in 1913 at age 74, from New York to Minneapolis.”

“American apostle of the gospel of walking”

Matthew Algeo, author of Pedestrianism – When Watching People Walk Was America’s Favorite Spectator Sport, in an interview at NPR, said that mass urbanization after the Civil War created huge numbers of people with a good deal of time in their hands, “so pedestrianism — competitive walking matches — filled a void for people. It became quite popular quite quickly.” Mr. Algeo mentioned Edward Payson Weston and one of his great rivals Dan O’Leary and compared them to Muhammad Ali/Joe Frazier. O’Leary was like Smokin’ Joe – quiet, serious, and focused on the competition. On the other hand, “Weston was a flashy guy. He wore ruffled shirts and sashes and capes and carried a cane … he really understood that it was about entertainment as much as it was an athletic event.” The NPR article shows a drawing of Weston walking in 1874 in a ruffled shirt and high boots.

O’Leary vs. Weston, London 1877

___________________________

Self-promotion might have added to the entertainment value. E. P. Weston wrote several books/pamphlets about his exploits, beginning with his 1861 walk to Washington for the Lincoln inauguration. The Pedestrian; being a correct journal of “incidents” on a walk from the state house, Boston, Mass., to the U.S. capitol at Washington, D. C. … between February 22d and March 4th, 1861 is available at HathiTrust. The book also includes his time-table for a planned May 1862 eight day walk from Washington to Boston and an account of a journey that began in late April 1861. Dressed in a disguise furnished by Brooks Brothers, Mr. Weston delivered mail from New York City and Boston to soldiers and officials in the Annapolis and Washington D.C. area. The missives were also disguised: “These letter’s being confined in an enameled cloth bag, furnished by the Rubber Clothing Co., which was sewed into my clothes.” Unsurprisingly, much of the trip was by foot from Philadelphia. He didn’t have any real trouble in a riled up Baltimore: “Passing through the city at that late hour, I observed a motley crowd on almost every corner, and did not feel inclined to make any longer stay in Baltimore at that time, although but a few weeks previous [before Fort Sumter and the Baltimore riot of April 19th] I had been kindly entertained by a number of the citizens on my way east, after having walked to Washington [for the Inauguration].” As Mr. Weston approached Annapolis he was detained for over a day and half by the 69th New York Militia. For part of that time he was held in the “guard-house, a nasty, filthy place, about ten feet square, wherein were confined three or four of their own men. I thought it was an elegant place to invite a man into who had walked seventy miles in less than twenty-four hours, and who needed at least a decent place to sit down in. But I had to ‘go in and bear it.'” Finally the 69th’s Colonel Michael Corcoran and it’s chaplain Father Mooney interrogated the pedestrian, examined the letters he was carrying, and telegraphed the Howard Hotel in NYC for a reference. The 69th released Weston after receiving a good word from the hotel. He successfully completed his mission and met General B.F. Butler in Annapolis.

walking in a war zone

questioned the pedestrian

churchman militant

According to King of the Peds “Pedestrianism hit its zenith in 1879.” The documentation at the Library of Congress says the three card-type images below and the big group picture at the bottom were all published in 1879. Weston, O’Leary, and Rowell are all candidates for the title of champion at the King of the Peds.

going coastal in … 76 days

You can read all of Harper’s Weekly for 1870 at the Internet Archive. I got the image of the 1877 London duel from Wikimedia.

From the Library of Congress: walking groupies; 1861 Seat of War; General Michael Corcoran; Father Thomas Mooney – according to Irish in the American Civil War “Father Mooney would get into hot-water during the militia’s time at Fort Corcoran for blessing an artillery piece, an action that led to his recall.”; generic pedestrian; John Ennis Charles Rowell.

The age 70 portrait of the Pedestrian and the page about his upcoming nationwide stroll is from: Weston and his walks; souvenir programme of the great transcontinental … Weston and his walks; souvenir programme of the great transcontinental …

pedestrianism emulated

Posted in 150 Years Ago, Aftermath, American Culture, Postbellum Society | Tagged 69th New York, Daniel O'Leary, Edward Payson Weston, Empire City Skating Rink, Father Thomas Mooney, Michael Corcoran, pedestrianism, spectator sports | Leave a comment

floral tributes

Posted on May 30, 2020 by SUMPTER

From the May 31, 1870 issue of The New-York Times.
Except the day on which is celebrated the independence of these United States, there is no day that calls out the patriotic feelings of our people more than “Memorial Day.” The 30th of May has come to be a National holiday — not by any enactment of Congress, not by any enactment of Legislature, but by the general consent of the people. On this day, when the earth is robed in its most beautiful verdure — when everything bids the soul lift itself up to things superterrestrial — it has been well chosen that the nation should pay homage and reverence to the manes [names?] of those who bared their breasts to the battle’s front when treason sought to overthrow our national institutions, and discord sought to make of an hitherto united people a dissevered and divided nation. All over the Union yesterday was celebrated as a fit and appropriate occasion on which to testify the honor in which is held the memory of the heroic dead who,

“Fighting in freedom’s cause, bravely fell.”

The tradition of services at Arlington National Cemetery continued, including a song performed by the Marine band and a chorus of 500 at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldiers:

remembering and decorating

Luther’s “A Strong Castle is Our Lord”

Comrade John A. Logan was main orator

big demand day

Services were also held at Antietam National Cemetery. In his long main oration Colonel Ephraim F. Anderson began by focusing on the common soldier as he commemorated the Union cause:

Ladies and Gentlemen :

We have come here to-day with evergreens and flowers to decorate the graves of our fallen heroes. The 30th of May, which has been designated as our “Memorial Day,” is indeed becoming a national anniversary — the saddest yet the sweetest of all the days we celebrate. These tender observances help to humanize our feelings and purify our patriotism. — Our annual pilgrimages to these sacred little mounds make our hearts better and inspire us with a purer love of country. While people everywhere, both civilized and barbarous, have fondly cherished the memory of their brave ones slain in battle, yet their tributes of sorrow and gratitude have been commemorative rather of their great national triumphs, or lavished upon their victorious chieftains alone. Monuments have been reared to the very heavens to point where battles were fought and won, or to mark where famous leaders fell, and pyramids have been erected for the sepulture of kings ; but the rank and file of armies have passed unnoticed as individuals, and have been allowed to commingle their dust in shallow, evenly covered ditches, in forgotten or unfrequented places.

We are not here to-day to gaze up toward the apex of some proud pillar, as it pierces the sky; nor are we come where our sentiment for the dead will be lost in admiration of the splendid mausoleum or costly cenotaph. Within these cemetery walls five thousand of our brave defenders lie slumbering, and we are come to this bivouac of our gallant dead, bringing with us the bloom and fragrance of early spring-time — beautiful flowers, delicate and tender as the emotions which they symbolize — beautiful flowers with which God’s love has made our earth smile — beautiful flowers to be arranged by fair hands over each humble yet honored grave. I know not whether the departed turn back to view the honors bestowed upon their remains, but if such be their wont, I imagine the spirits of those whose bones repose here are hovering about these memorial services; and these lovely flowers are only less grateful to them than the nation’s starry flag which they hallowed by their blood.

While this occasion is mainly in honor of the cause for which our soldiers gave up their lives, it at the same time engages the tenderest affections of our hearts, for we are sensible that those who sleep here are our sons and our brothers, and we perform, though imperfectly, the sweet offices which their dearer kindred would esteem their sacred privilege. In all times, it has been a fond desire of the human race to be buried, after death, among their kindred in the family graveyard, where surviving friends might often stray and bestow their tributes of affection. …

Our offerings to-day are for the Union Soldier, who sleeps among strangers far away from the family vault. But it is pleasing to know that, though the mother and sisters may never come to plant the white rose and train the myrtle, yet the Soldier boy’s grave is not neglected — with his life’s blood he purchased a fond mother and gentle sisters in every home defended by his valor, and they will come, by-times, to deck his modest tomb with choice flowers and moisten its verdure with grateful tears. …

You can read all of Colonel Anderson’s address at HathiTrust

Posted in 150 Years Ago, 150 Years Ago This Week, Aftermath, American Society, Veterans | Tagged Antietam National Cemetery, Arlington National Cemetery, Ephraim F. Anderson, John Alexander Logan, Memorial (Decoration) Day, Tomb of the Unknown Soldiers | Leave a comment

spring chicken

Posted on May 14, 2020 by SUMPTER

____________________

Come to find out, Meherrin Station Virginia is the site of a historical marker which commemorates two Civil War-related events. Federal cavalry units were in the area during the Wilson–Kautz Raid in late June 1864. The raid’s mission was to destroy Confederate railroad track and bridges as the Richmond–Petersburg campaign began. As The Siege of Petersburg explains the raid had only limited success from a Union point of view. The Federal cavalry suffered substantial casualties given that it failed to accomplish one of its main objectives – destroying the Staunton River Bridge on the Richmond & Dansville Railroad. Quite a bit of track was torn up and Confederate supplies ran low for awhile, but in about nine weeks the tracks were repaired. That would explain the second event mentioned on the historical marker – as Richmond was burning and the Confederate government was fleeing, Jefferson Davis and associates passed through Meherrin Station on the Richmond & Dansville as they made their way all the way to Dansville, where they temporarily set up the government.

wrecking rebel railroads

rough raid route

You can read all of Harper’s Weekly at the Internet Archive, including pages 288, 320, and 336. Hal Jespersen’s map of the Wilson-Kautz raid is licensed under Creative Commons, Map by Hal Jespersen, www.posix.com/CW. From the Library of Congress: rail disruption; vacated Davis house; burnt districts map; the Danville Address.

the house that Jeff left

what got burnt

Montgomery, Richmond, … Danville

Posted in 150 Years Ago, Aftermath, Postbellum Society, Reconstruction, Southern Society, War Consequences | Tagged agriculture, davis, education, Emancipation, Jefferson Davis, Meherrin Station Virginia, Reconstruction, Virginia, Wilson–Kautz Raid | Leave a comment

Old Pap gone

Posted on April 30, 2020 by SUMPTER

dark days

I first knew of him as “The Rock of Chickamauga.” In September 1863 Union General George H. Thomas and his men held off the Confederate Army of Tennessee while about a third of the Union Army of the Cumberland was fleeing back to Chattanooga from the fight in northern Georgia. Thanks to their determined defense the Union army was able to regroup enough to fight another day, with reinforcements. Of course, there was much more to George Thomas’s life and career than the Battle of Chickamauga. His career was all army from his West Point graduation in 1840 through the Civil War and beyond. His last post was as commander of the Military Division of the Pacific, where he died in San Francisco on March 28, 1870. In response to news of his death, a New York City newspaper published a brief bio of the native Virginian. The next week it described the funeral and burial services. At least three of Thomas’s fellow generals from the Chattanooga campaign of October and November 1863 attended – the U.S. president, the army’s general-in-chief, and Joe Hooker.

From the April 16, 1870 edition of Harper’s Weekly:

GEN. GEORGE H. THOMAS.

On the 29th of March the sorrowful intelligence was communicated to us of the death of Major-General GEORGE H. THOMAS. He died at eight o’clock on the 28th from a stroke of apoploxy, at San Francisco, his post of duty. General THOMAS was born on July 31, 1816, in the county of Southampton, Virginia. In his early boyhood he accepted a subordinate position under his uncle, the clerk of the county, and at the same commenced the study of law. It is worthy of notice that he was a native of Virginia, belonging, as did General ROBERT E. LEE, to wealthy and respectable family of that State. Like General LEE, also, he was sent from Virginia to West Point, where he graduated June 30, 1840, ranking twelfth in a class of forty-two.

His military career previous to our Civil War is soon told. Immediately after his graduation at West Point he took part in the Indian campaign in Florida, serving as Lieutenant. He took a prominent part in the Mexican War, and for gallant conduct in the several conflicts at Monterey, on the 21st, 22d, and 23d of September 1846, was brevetted Captain. February 23, 1847 he was brevetted Major “for gallant and meritorious conduct in the Battle of Buena Vista.”

November, 1860, found THOMAS in Texas. General TWIGGS had surrendered, and Major THOMAS at Carlisle Barracks took command of the Sixth Cavalry, and entered into the great conflict for the preservation of the Union. We do not purpose in this brief sketch to follow his military career during the Civil War in all its details. Unlike General LEE, he did not consider it his duty to sacrifice his allegiance to the nation to that which he owed to Virginia. On May 3, 1861, we find him Colonel of the Fifth Cavalry (the old Second), in the place of General LEE, who had resigned. He commanded the first brigade of General PATTERSON’s army of Northern Virginia until August 26, 1861, when he was made Brigadier-General of Volunteers, and ordered to Kentucky. Thenceforth his career was eminently successful, and in many respects more remarkable than that of any other Federal general during the war.

General THOMAS was never defeated. After his victory over General ZOLLICOFFER at Mill Spring, in January, 1862, he moved forward and, after the fall of Fort Donelson, occupied Nashville. On the second day of the battle of Pittsburgh Landing he commanded the reserve of the Union army. He was made a Major-General April 25, 1862, and at the close of the year we find him in command of a corps under ROSECRANS’s command. In the official report of the battle of Stone River General ROSECRANS alluded to General THOMAS as “true and prudent, distinguished in counsel and on many battle-fields for his courage.”

In the summer and autumn of 1863 General THOMAS especially distinguished himself in the Chattanooga campaign. But for his wise precautions ROSECRANS could never have concentrated his army at Chickamauga, and must have been overcome in detail by BRAGG. ROSECRANS would have it that BRAGG was retreating in confusion into Georgia. But THOMAS knew better. When the army was finally concentrated at Chickamauga General THOMAS commanded the left wing, which he held in position on the 19th of September, retrieving the battle which ROSECRANS had already given up as lost. In October THOMAS was assigned to the command of the Army of the Cumberland, succeeding ROSECRANS.

In the Atlanta campaign, early in 1864, THOMAS took a prominent part. After its successful completion General SHERMAN, setting out for his March to the Sea, sent THOMAS back to Nashville to attend to HOOD, who had succeeded General BRAGG. HOOD’S design was to compel SHERMAN’S retreat by a bold march northward, looking to the occupation of Nashville.

The result of the battle of Nashville, near the close of 1864, gave General THOMAS his most characteristic distinction. He will ever be known as “the hero of Nashville.” His patience before the battle, when the wiseacres at Washington were clamoring for an immediate advance on his part, was not less remarkable than his tactics on the battle-field after that [sic] he had mustered all his forces and entered upon the conflict. His victory over HOOD was the most complete victory of the war. HOOD’S forces were utterly demoralized, and the rebel power in the Southwest never recovered from the blow. For this THOMAS was made a Major-General in the regular army.

Since the close of the war General THOMAS has been assigned to department duty in Tennessee and Kentucky, and latterly California. During the few weeks preceding his death he enjoyed remarkably good health; but on the 28th, at half past five o’clock, P.M., he was seized with a fit of apoplexy while attending to business in his office. In less than three hours after the attack he died. His death is truly a national calamity. As a man and as a soldier his character is unreproached and irreproachable.

From the April 23, 1870 issue of Harper’s Weekly:

THE FUNERAL OF GEN. THOMAS.

On the 8th inst. the remains of Major-General GEORGE H. THOMAS, the Hero of Mill Spring and Nashville, were buried with appropriate civil and military honors in Oakwood Cemetery, at Troy. The occasion drew together a vast concourse of people desirous of paying the last tribute of respect to one whose services to the Union will ever cause his memory to be held in the highest veneration by his countrymen. The funeral services were held in St. Paul’s Church, which was appropriately draped for the occasion. The remains of the lamented soldier, in a metallic burial casket, were deposited on a dais in front of the chancel. A ribbon of immortelles and wreaths of ivory were twined around the edge of the casket in California, and were deposited with it in the grave. As it lay in the chancel an elegant crown of evergreens and roses, surmounted by a cross of immortelles, was placed at the head, and a wreath of japonicas [my best guess] and lilies at the foot of the casket. A plain silver plate bore the simple inscription: “Gen. GEORGE HENRY THOMAS, U.S. Army. Born July 31, 1816. Died March 28, 1870.” President GRANT, General SHERMAN, and General HOOKER, and many other distinguished men were present to do honor to his memory.

The sketch underneath represents the scene in the cemetery at the moment of depositing the remains in the vault belonging to the family of the deceased soldier’s wife. The burial service was read by Bishop DOANE, after which the customary burial salute was fired by the United States Infantry, and the procession left the cemetery, each portion of it wheeling out of line on the return, as it reached its appropriate place. In the evening a funeral oration was delivered, in Dr. BALDWIN’S church, by General STEWART L. WOODFORD, on the life, character, and services of the late General, there having been, at the special request of Mrs. THOMAS, no panegyric or eulogy pronounced over the remains. After a rapid sketch of his military career the orator gave some interesting personal reminiscences of the General, which served to illustrate his character and show the estimate in which he was held by his soldiers. Silent, sedate, never familiar, though always kind, he had none of the petty arts and practiced none of the stage devices that sometimes attract a short-lived popularity. His men had always known him to be thoughtful of their wants and considerate of their comforts. He had never exacted from them useless work. He had never tolerated the slightest evasion of duty, from his brigadiers down to his orderlies. Always, when possible opportunity was afforded, he had visited the regimental hospitals and looked himself after the condition of the sick. Many a hospital steward and company cook in the old Cumberland Army remember the unexpected and personal inspection which the sick-quarters and the company kitchen received from the Major-General himself. And not soon will they forget how once his face hardened into a white heat of passion when he found that a drunken commissary had neglected to provide sufficient food, and how, taking out his penknife, he ripped off the fellow’s shoulder-straps, and simply said, “Go home, Sir, by the next train. You may do to feed cattle; you shall not feed my soldiers.” His soldiers called him “Old Pap THOMAS.” The name was not over-respectful, perhaps; but it fitly expressed the love and fealty of the brave men who followed him from victory to victory. Our hardy volunteers, while as obedient to discipline as they were steady in fight, when off duty and around the camp-fires, retained their democratic habits and their sturdy personal independence of thought and language. They picked off the shoulder-straps and dissected the uniforms, and looked down below the commission and into the man, and measured his real worth and work with unerring instinct. The judgments they formed of their leaders, expressed in quaint and familiar epithets, have undoubtedly anticipated the graver verdict of the historian.

circa 1866

the general’s last post

funeral orator

___________________

A good quick biography of General Thomas from the National Park Service mentions that during the Mexican-American War Thomas became good friends with his superior Braxton Bragg, the future commander of the Confederate forces during the battles of Chickamauga and Chattanooga. In antebellum days Bragg would recommend Thomas for a teaching position at West Point (where he met his wife, Frances Lucretia Kellogg) and as a “major in the newly created 2nd United States Cavalry” out in California. Robert E. Lee was West Point superintendent while Thomas taught there and became Lieutenant Colonel of the Second Cavalry. The Park Service piece also mentions the agonizing decision Thomas had to make as the Civil War broke out – whether to stay loyal to the Union or go with his home state. Whereas Robert E. Lee went with Virginia, George Thomas was disowned by his family because he stayed true to the Union.

And it wasn’t just his family that knew about his decision. George H. Thomas was Number 8 on a list of Virginians considered traitors to their State. From the Richmond Daily Dispatch September 11. 1861:

Notes of the war.

The Enquirer publishes the following 11st [list?] of Virginia Officer[s] in Lincoln’s Army:

blue blood?

1. Brevet Lieutenant General Winfield Scott.
2. Colonel P. St. George Cooke, Second Cavalry.
3. Lieutenant-Colonel Washington Sea well, Eighth Infantry.
4. Lieutenant-Colonel Edward J. Steptor, Ninth Infantry.
5. Lieutenant-Colonel James D. Graham, Engineers.
6. Major Campbell Graham, Engineers.
7. Major Lawrence P. Graham, Second Dragoons.
8. Major George H. Thomas, Second Cavalry.
9. Major N. C. MeRae, Third Infantry.
10. Major T. L. Alexander, Eighth Infantry.
11. Major Albert J. Smith, Paymaster.
12. Major Benj. W. Bryce, Paymaster.
13. Major G. D. Ramsey, Ordnance.
14. Major T. S. S. Laidly, Ordnance.
15. Major F. N. Page, Assistant Adjutant General:
16. Major John F. Lee, Judge Advocate General.
17. Major William Hayes, Second Artillery.
18. Major William H. Gordon, Third Infantry.
19. Major George C. Waggaman, Assistant Quartermaster General.
20. Captain John Newton, Engineers.
21. Capt. J. W. Davidson, First Dragoons.
22. Capt. W. J. Newton, Second Dragoons.
23. Capt. T. G. Williams, First Infantry.
24. Capt. T. A. Washington, First Infantry.
25. Capt. G. Chapin, Seventh Infantry.
26. Capt. L. H. Marshall, Tenth Infantry.
27. Capt. Jesse L. Reno, Ordnance.
28. Capt. E, W. B. Newby, First Cavalry.

Several in the above list have been rewarded by Lincoln with promotion. Two of them, Majors George H. Thomas and Lawrence P. Graham, have been made Brigadier-Generals. Col. Cooke, who has been for some time in Utah, it was supposed, would retire from the Yankee service, and link his destiny with his native land for weal or woe. Possibly he may yet do so. The friends of Col. Steptoe have asserted with confidence that he, too, would be true to his State and to his name, and we are still unwilling to place his name on the list of Scott traitors. Before the commencement of our present troubles, in consequence of ill health, he obtained a furlough with a view to a somewhat protracted absence from the country. He returned from Europe, however, some weeks since, and was in Montreal the last we heard of him.

A couple months later (November 13) the Richmond Daily Dispatch reported the Virginia and/or Confederacy was taking action against the traitors. I don’t understand how it worked out but the government was trying to take property of alien enemies or those associated with the enemies:

Sequestration proceedings.

–Since our last report, proceedings have been instituted in the Confederate States District Court against the following persons, to sequester property of alien enemies:

… Camilla Loyal — David G. Farragut, alien enemy. … Thos. W. Thomas — George H. Thomas, alien enemy Bolling W. Haxall–Mrs. Maria Scott, (wife of Gen. Winfield Scott,) alien enemy. …

_______________

In its October 10, 1863 issue (at Son of the South) Harper’s Weekly covered the Battle of Chickamauga and included some reporting by the Herald’s Mr. W. F. G. Shank, who described General Thomas’s grim composure while his men were holding off the rebel onslaught at the close the second day:

stalwart defense

Just behind Harker’s brigade, posted in the key of the position, there was a slight hollow in a large open field, in which were still standing about a dozen dead trees. In this deflection of the field, at the time the last fight of Sunday began, there were gathered together Generals Thomas, Gordon Granger, Garfield, Wood, Brannan, Steadman, Whittaker, and Colonel Harker. As the fight opened, Harker and Wood ran up the hill to their brigade and division, both being the one and the same. Steadman, Brannan, and Whittaker, rode off to join their commands. Garfield continued to indite his dispatch. Granger and Thomas remained, the latter on his horse, his arms folded, listening to the awful fire that soon raged along the line with the coolness of assured victory or the calmness of despair. His lips were compressed. His eyes glanced from right to left as the shell and canister exploded about the field, and once I saw him, just as the fight opened, most furiously glance up at a large, beautiful white pigeon or dove which alighted upon a dead tree above him and watched the battle from her dangerous nest. The representative man of that line, in unfaltering courage (Thomas), may be also said to have represented by his thoughts at that moment the thoughts of all. Watching him, we could see his anxiety at the reflection that if that line did not stand all would be lost; and each and every man there knew that the safety of themselves, but more the safety of the whole army, depended upon them. To be defeated there was to be cut to pieces or captured. To be routed was to fall back upon Chattanooga in disgrace, to be ignominiously taken in flight. There was no help to be expected save in the darkness of the slowly approaching night.

Happily Thomas’s men did hold out till night, and the army was saved.

_______________

About 15 months after Chickamauga the Union army under General Thomas thoroughly destroyed the Army of the Tennessee commanded by John Bell Hood at the Battle of Nashville. Before the battle General Thomas’s superiors were worried that Hood would give him the slip and have clear marching all the way to the Ohio River. Generals Halleck and Grant ordered Thomas to attack immediately. General Thomas explained that he wanted to refit his cavalry first and then he had to wait for a sheet of ice to melt before he could successfully attack. Here’s a description from Was General Thomas Slow at Nashville? at Project Gutenberg (pages 30-35):

pressure from Washington

THE PANIC AT WASHINGTON.

In spite of the plainest statements of the situation, of the great disparity of forces, of the dictates of prudence to remain on the defensive until he could strike an effective blow, which he expected to deliver in a few days, Thomas was prodded and nagged from City Point and Washington as no officer in command of an army had been before, and treated day by day as if he needed tutelage. In the last dispatch of the series of clear explanations,—which under other circumstances than the seething of that inside panic which a full appreciation of the complications that Sherman’s march to the sea had caused would doubtless have been accepted,—General Thomas was peremptorily ordered to “attack Hood at once without waiting for a remount of your cavalry. There is great danger in delay resulting in a campaign back to the Ohio.” This was sent in reply to a telegram of Thomas showing that there was the greatest activity in getting the cavalry ready, and he hoped to have it remounted “in three days from this time.” To this Thomas replied that he would make all dispositions and attack according to orders, adding, “though I believe it will be hazardous with the small force of cavalry now at my service.” Orders to prepare for attack were immediately sent out, and dispositions for the attack began. Meantime a sleet storm came on which covered the country with a glaze of ice over which neither horses, men, nor artillery could move even on level ground, to say nothing of assaulting an enemy intrenched on the hills. The same day Halleck telegraphed: “If you wait till General Wilson mounts all his cavalry you will wait till doomsday, for the waste equals the supply.” And General Grant telegraphed orders relieving Thomas. The latter telegraphed Halleck that he was conscious of having done everything possible to prepare the troops to attack, and if he was removed he would submit without a murmur.

and from City Point

The order of relief was suspended. The sleet storm continued. All of General Thomas’s officers agreed that it was impracticable to attack. Some of them even found it impossible to ride to headquarters because of the ice, and in the midst of it came an order from Grant: “I am in hopes of receiving a dispatch from you to-day announcing you have moved. Delay no longer for weather or reinforcements.”

Thomas replied:

“I will obey the order as promptly as possible, however much I regret it, as the attack will have to be made under every disadvantage. The whole country is covered with a perfect sheet of ice and sleet, and it is with difficulty the troops are able to move about on level ground.”

To Halleck, Thomas replied:

“Sledge of Nashville”

“I have the troops ready to make the attack on the enemy as soon as the sleet which now covers the ground has melted sufficiently to enable the men to march, as the whole country is now covered with a sheet of ice so hard and slippery that it is utterly impossible for troops to ascend the slopes, or even move upon level ground in anything like order. Under these circumstances I believe an attack at this time would only result in a useless sacrifice of life.”

The reply to this, unquestionably born of the panic to which allusion has been made, was an order sending General Logan to relieve Thomas. Grant himself then started from City Point for Nashville to assume general command. But the ice having melted, he was met at Washington by the news of Thomas’s victory.

The delay that Thomas had insisted upon, in the face of orders twice given for his relief, gave him the cavalry force he required for the decisive blow he intended to strike.

While the official inside at City Point and Washington bordered on panic, everything at Nashville was being pressed forward with activity and vigilance, and at the same time with deliberation, prudence, and the utmost imperturbability. At length, and at the first moment possible consistent with a reasonable expectation of success, the attack began. …

big role for Wilson’s cavalry

ice-free Federal outer line at Nashville, December 16, 1864

Nashville 1864

__________________________________

Henry V. Boynton is credited with being the author of Was General Thomas Slow at Nashville?, but in his Preface he points out that much of the material was first published as an article in the New York Sun of August 9, 1896. At any rate, the Union cavalry was very important (pages 36-39):

“The developments of the battle, the energy and success of the pursuit, and the marvelous results of the whole, namely, the virtual destruction of a veteran army, reveal at every step what General Thomas had in mind when he insisted upon waiting till he could remount his cavalry.

“In no other battle of the war did cavalry play such a prominent part as in that of Nashville. In no other pursuit did it so distinguish itself. …

“Many officers have organized and built up an effective cavalry force in times of rest and peace, but no one except General Wilson ever did it in the heat and hurry of a desperate midwinter campaign. And he could not have succeeded, nor could any man have accomplished it, in the face of the interferences which were attempted, but for the protection and support of the peerless and imperturbable Thomas.”

As it turned out Philip St. George Cooke did stay true to the Union, unlike a couple family members: “The issue of secession deeply divided Cooke’s family. Cooke himself remained loyal to the Union, but his son, John Rogers Cooke, became an infantry brigade commander in the Army of Northern Virginia. J.E.B. Stuart, the famous Confederate cavalry commander, was Cooke’s son-in-law. Cooke and Stuart never spoke again, Stuart saying, ‘He will regret it only once, and that will be continually.'”

a rock in a hard place

The Herald’s reporter William Franklin Gore Shanks wrote 1866’s Personal Recollections of Distinguished Generals. He remembered General Thomas and included this snippet from Chickamauga (see Project Gutenberg pages 63-65):

This methodical and systematic feature of his character found an admirable illustration in an incident to which I was a witness during the battle of Chickamauga. After the rout of the principal part of the corps of McCook and Crittenden, Thomas was left to fight the entire rebel army with a single corps of less than twenty thousand men. The enemy, desirous of capturing this force, moved in heavy columns on both its flanks. His artillery opened upon Thomas’s troops from front and both flanks; but still they held their ground until Steedman, of Granger’s corps, reached them with re-enforcements. I was sitting on my horse near General Thomas when General Steedman came up and saluted him.

“I am very glad to see you, general,” said Thomas in welcoming him. General Steedman made some inquiries as to how the battle was going, when General Thomas, in a vexed manner, replied,

“The damned scoundrels are fighting without any system.”

Steedman thereupon suggested that he should pay the enemy back in his own coin. Thomas followed his suggestion. As soon as Granger came up with the rest of his corps, he assumed the offensive; and while Bragg continued to move on his flanks, he pushed forward against the rebel centre, so scattering it by a vigorous blow that, fearful of having his army severed in two, the rebel abandoned his flank movement in order to restore his centre. This delayed the resumption of the battle until nearly sunset, and Thomas was enabled to hold his position until nightfall covered the retirement to Rossville Gap.

Thomas is not easily ruffled. It is difficult alike to provoke his anger or enlist his enthusiasm. He is by no means blind to the gallantry of his men, and never fails to notice and appreciate their deeds, but they never win from him any other than the coldest words in the coldest, but, at the same time, kindest of commendatory tones. He grows really enthusiastic over nothing, though occasionally his anger may be aroused. When it is, his rage is terrible. …

Thomas war flag

Chickamauga survivor

Georgia monument at Chickamauga & Chattanooga National Military Park

You can read all of Harper’s Weekly for 1870, including pages 253 and 257, at the Internet Archive.

I found “Thomas’s Bivouac at Chickamauga” at Wikimedia. AgnosticPreachersKid’s 2009 photo of the west side of the Thomas equestrian statue in Washington D.C. is licensed under Creative Commons. Hal Jespersen’s map of the last part of Chickamauga is also licensed under Creative Commons. You can find the map of Battle of Nashville at Wikimedia The non-stereo image of the general in profile was published in Was General Thomas Slow at Nashville? now at Project Gutenberg.

From the Library of Congress: Alfred R. Waud’s drawing of Confederate troops advancing at Chickamauga; from Russain Hill; the Presidio circa 1856; the portrait of Stewart Lyndon Woodford circa 1870; Thomas portrait in stereo; Halleck; “Grant and staff at City Point , summer 1864″;Federal outer line; Nashville depot; Thomas war flag; survivor – “C.S.A. Veterans, Sgt. J.J. Dackett, Co. I. 3rd S.C.V., wearing hat with bullet holes received in the Battle of Chickamauga Sept. 20, 1863”; Carol M. Highsmith’s 2017 photograph of the Georgia Monument at Chickamauga military park; San Francisco paying its respects

_________________

west coast mourners

More April Funerals

When I was looking for pictures of San Francisco I found the stereograph above. Five years before General Thomas’s death the people of San Francisco paid their respects for the slain Abraham Lincoln, even though his actual funeral took place in Washington, D.C. According to the April 19, 2019 issue of The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY, page A2), that was a pretty common occurrence across the country. The article begins with a comparison – Even given today’s uncertainties over the corona virus pandemic, it’s hard to imagine the manic week Americans endured beginning April 9, 1865, from Lee’s surrender on Sunday to the assassination of President Lincoln on Friday night and his death on Saturday morning. “Here in Syracuse, like many other cities around the country, the profound national grief took the cathartic form of a mock funeral for the martyred President, a sad tribute indeed.” The mayor shut down schools, churches, and businesses on April 19th for a citywide procession; cannon fired, church bells rang. The eulogist praised Lincoln and the end of slavery. “He is gone, but he has left us the rich inheritance of a redeemed and regenerate and free country.”

________________

gone but not forgotten

Posted in 150 Years Ago, 150 Years Ago This Month, Aftermath, Veterans | Tagged Battle of Chickamauga, Battle of Nashville, David E. Twiggs, Felix Zollicoffer, George Henry Thomas, James Harrison Wilson, John Bell Hood, Philip St. George Cooke, Stewart Lyndon Woodford, William Croswell Doane, William Rosecrans | Leave a comment

down with dramshops

Posted on April 8, 2020 by SUMPTER

Ever since I was a kid, I’ve been aware of the saying, “If March comes in like a lion, it goes out like a lamb” (and I thought vice versa, but that seems to return a lot fewer search results). According to documentation at the Library of Congress, a 19th century American social reformer had a different take on the changeable month. Gerrit Smith wanted March to come in dry, stay dry, and go out dry, not just in March but in every month and in every year. Alcohol was freely and legally available for sale in much of the United States 150 years ago, so Mr. Smith took a couple steps to change that in March 1870.

Gerrit Smith: focus on panel 2

On March 2nd he reported the relative success of the New York State Anti-Dramshop Party in a local election in the town of Smithfield (itself dry since 1842). I don’t think it won any particular race, but it did better than the Democrats. Gerrit Smith referred to both the Democrats and Republicans as dramshop parties because neither was confronting the evil of dramselling, even though both parties had non-drinking members. The name of his party also indicated its narrow focus. “The great principle on which our party is founded and the happily-chosen name of our party afforded us a great advantage in arguing for our ticket. This principle—viz. the duty of Government to protect person and property — none could gainsay. Nor could any deny that it grossly violates this duty, when it establishes or permits the dramshop.” The party didn’t want to criminalize drinking at home, or even the manufacture and importation of alcohol because a ban on selling alcoholic drinks would dampen the demand so much that making and/or importing wouldn’t be profitable.

Mr. Smith saw a potential rift in the temperance movement between his party’s purpose and those who wanted to make any use of alcohol illegal:

Just here, is one of the very greatest perils of our cause. Just here, is where the friends of temperance are divided—perhaps, fatally divided. Whilst many of them would wage political war upon dramselling only, many of them would wage it against alcohol, every where. Such universal war would, probably, result in nothing but a reaction against the cause of temperance. On the other hand, if the war is against dramselling only, it will be espoused by tens of thousands, who, though they may continue to drink liquor at their homes, are, nevertheless, too much the friends of peace and order and too studious of the safety of person and property, to be patient with the dramshop. Moreover, such of them, as have young sons or young grandsons, take no pleasure in the thought of their growing up under the influence of the dramshop.

Mr. Smith writes to Washington

In a letter to Henry Wilson dated March 29, 1870, Gerrit Smith picked a bone with his fellow abolitionist and temperance supporter. He criticized a paper by the U.S. Senator from Massachusetts for not getting down to the nitty-gritty of politicizing the temperance movement by abolishing the dramshop. It wasn’t enough for the church to be in favor of temperance – it had to focus on voting the dramshop out of existence. Any movement that combined temperance with protestantism would be ineffective for eliminating the use of alcohol because the temperance movement needed support from people of all religions:

What in your paper before me most surprises and pains me is its perfect silence in respect to voting. For years, you were earnestly engaged in the work of voting slavery to death. Hence you connected yourself with an independent anti-slavery political party, and eloquently summoned your fellow citizens to do likewise. Why is it that you are not now at work to get the dramshop voted out of existence? I notice that you speak of the labor we have had with slavery and with its consequences as a “political” labor, and of that we have with temperance as a “moral” one. I beg you to inform the public of your grounds for this distinction. Is not the dramshop as much as slavery the creature of law? — and is not political action to shut it up as necessarily and as loudly called for, as it was to terminate slavery?

relying too much on THE CHURCH?

Your reliance for carrying forward the cause of temperance is on the reviving of an interest in it in the church. “The church must take up the matter,” say you in capitals. Now, if you had said: “the church must take up the matter of voting for temperance or, in other words, of voting against the dramshop,” my whole heart would have fallen in with your injunction. I like sermons and prayers, when their avowed end is to promote the doing of the work, that is to be done: — but I loathe them when they are made a substitute for doing it. A church, that expressly preaches and prays for men to vote the shutting up of the dramshop, is a church that I like. But such a church is not common. Nay, uncommon is the church, whose votes do not go to keep open this overflowing fountain of the heaviest curses. You refer to the guilty conduct of the church in our old struggle with slavery. Guilty wherein? She failed not to preach and pray against oppression. Her guilt was in clinging to pro-slavery parties and refusing to testify against slavery at the polls. Similar to this is her guilt in the matter of the dramshop and drunkenness; —and you must pardon me for adding that you, instead of entirely ignoring the wickedness of her dramshop voting, are, from your influential position in the church, under special obligation to bring home to her and press upon her this great wickedness. Would that, instead of writing this paper which I am criticising, you had called on the church to persuade all her voters to join the national political party organized last September for the suppression of dramselling. Some of these voters are joining it. Some of them are still foolish enough to believe that their dramshop parties will yet abolish the dramshop, just as there were persons who were foolish enough to believe that the old Whig and Democratic parties would abolish slavery. To hang upon these parties which, as a general remark, have not the least idea of ever making war upon the dramshop, is, surely, a very poor way to help temperance. Some of these voters would quit their dramshop parties to join a party (if there were such a one) which goes against the dramshop and also against certain things that they greatly dislike. But the party, which fights the dramshop, will have its hands full, though it shall fight nothing else. It will need, too, all the help it can get — Catholic as well as Protestant voters; men of whatever views of the Common School; Jews, Seventh day Baptists and No-Sabbath men as well as Sunday men. It is true that a party for temperance and protestantism might, as it is claimed it would, “sweep the State.” Such a party would, however, sweep it not with temperance — but with a protestant frenzy. It would bring no help, but, on the contrary, immense harm to temperance. No good whatever would come of such a party; whilst the sectarian animosity it would engender is an evil beyond computation. I have now referred to some of the different courses of different church members. I close under this head with saying that a large share of the church members manifest no interest whatever in the cause of temperance.

“criminality of dramselling.”

“This is a world of shams”

next up – freedom from alcohol?

_____________

not even wine on her wedding

It seems that both Gerrit Smith and Henry Wilson prioritized progressive causes. Since slavery had been abolished and reconstruction was “substantially complete,” temperance should take center stage (Mr. Smith also mentioned repudiation). Women’s rights was another movement intertwined with abolition and temperance, as Seneca County Historian Walt Gable pointed out in an excellent article about Amelia Bloomer (Finger Lakes Times, March 29, 2020, page 4B). She got married to a local newspaper publisher and moved to Seneca Falls, New York in 1840. At the wedding reception she “sweetly refused to drink wine.” Seneca Falls would have made Gerrit Smith very happy in 1842 when it passed a law forbidding the sale of liquor. She became a member of the Ladies Total Abstinence Society of Seneca Falls that formed in 1848. That Society began publishing The Lily in 1849; from 1850 Amelia Bloomer was editor and publisher until she sold the paper in 1854. The Lily publicized the newfangled pants with knee-length dress, which became known as “bloomers,” even though Amelia didn’t invent them. On May 12, 1851 Bloomer introduced Susan B. Anthony to Elizabeth Cady Stanton after a public program during which William Lloyd Garrison and a British abolitionist spoke. Sometime after their first meeting Anthony was invited to spend several days at the Stanton home. “Thus began the great working collaboration between Anthony and Stanton in both the temperance and women’s rights causes.” In 1853 the Bloomers began moving west and ended up in Iowa: “During the Civil War, she [Amelia] started the Soldier’s Aid Society of Council Bluffs to help Union soldiers.”

dry prose?

Gerrit Smith eventually got his wish. The 18th or “Prohibition” amendment went into effect in January 2020. It banned not only the sale, but also the manufacture, transportation, and importation of alcohol. Although there is evidence that the amendment did lead to some healthy results, apparently it didn’t dampen demand enough because the 21st amendment repealed prohibition in 1933 and with it the demand for speakeasies, alcohol smuggling, and bathtub gin.

I read a couple articles recently that provide a little local, upstate New York color for the prohibition era. The January 23, 2020 issue of The Post-Standard (Syracuse, New York pages A10-A11) flashbacked 100 years. The evening before the 18th amendment kicked in was a relatively sober affair in Syracuse, possibly because it was cold with three inches of snow falling and people were frugal – if they had any alcohol left, they wouldn’t down it all at once but would nurse it for as long as possibly during the coming months. Also, the city’s Internal Revenue collector warned that the new amendment would be strictly enforced. There were two pharmacies in Syracuse that were allowed to sell alcohol – but only with a doctor’s prescription. The travel business picked up – there was increased interest in taking a trip to “Cuba, Bermuda and the Bahamas.” “Maybe it was to get from Syracuse’s cold weather, or, maybe, it was because these were the nearest “wet” foreign countries.”

The February 2020 issue of the New York Farm Bureau’s Grassroots (page 19) tells that Utica, New York’s West End Brewing Company (now F.X. Matt) was the first brewery in the nation to legally sell (full strength) beer after prohibition was repealed. F.X. Matt I kept his company going and his workers employed during prohibition by producing soft drinks and Utica Club, a malt tonic. The tonic’s label included a disclaimer: “Caution: Do not ferment, do not add yeast, or you will create beer.” But the Matt company fervently lobbied the federal government for repeal of prohibition; the company got the first license to sell beer post-prohibition because Frank Matt was in Washington lobbying at the time. F.X. Matt I wrote his distributors that they could have all the beer they wanted at 12:05 AM on December 6, 1833 – the first wet day. Right after I wrote this summary I found out you can see it all, the original article, at the New York State Brewers Association, which even shows pictures of Mr. Matt’s notes to distributors.

I think the national political party that Gerrit Smith referenced in his letter to Henry Wilson would be the Prohibition Party:

“On September 1, 1869, almost five hundred delegates from twenty states and Washington, D.C. met in Farwell Hall, Chicago and John Russell was selected to serve as the temporary chairman and James Black serving as president of the convention. The party was the first to accept women as members and gave those who attended full delegate rights. Former anti-slavery activist Gerrit Smith, who had served in the House of Representatives from 1853 to 1854 and ran for president in 1848, 1856, 1860 with the Liberty Party nomination, served as a delegate from New York and gave a speech at the convention. The organization was referred to as either the National Prohibition Party or the Prohibition Reform Party.”

The party is still in existence. Phil Andrew Collins is its 2020 presidential nominee; the nominating convention was held by conference call last August.

Sunday morning respite

D.A.’s door

Prohibition Party symbol

The Prohibition Party symbol comes from Wikipedia. I also got The Lily masthead from Wikipedia, which got it from a blog post about Elizabeth Cady Stanton – a good example of the close relationship between temperance and women’s rights is a newspaper notice for the first annual meeting of The Woman’s N.Y. State Temperance Society, with Cady Santton as President and Bloomer as Cor. Sec.: “Although best known for their joint work on behalf of women’s suffrage, Stanton and Anthony first joined the temperance movement. Together, they were instrumental in founding the short-lived Women’s New York State Temperance Society (1852–1853). During her presidency of the organization, Stanton scandalized many supporters by suggesting that drunkenness be made sufficient cause for divorce.” The image of Amelia Bloomer was published in History of Woman Suffrage, Volume I and can be found at Project Gutenberg.

From the Library of Congress: Drunkard’s Progress from about 1826; Gerrit Smith; Senator Henry Wilson; Carol M. Highsmith’s photograph of Ted Aub’s statue “When Anthony [l] Met Stanton [r]”, Amelia Bloomer (m) introduced them – I was happy to find out Ms. Highsmith was here in 2018, 170 years after the first women’s right convention … and the founding of the Ladies Total Abstinence Society of Seneca Falls; Pioneers of freedom from about 1866 – Gerrit Smith, Henry Wilson, and William Lloyd Garrison all appear.

The photos of D.A.’s on Bridge Street, Seneca Falls, New York were taken on March 29, 2020 during the corona virus pandemic. New York State deems liquor stores essential businesses, but the owners want patrons to keep their distance inside.

A,B,CS: a spark for temperance and women’s rights, but social distancing concern

Posted in 150 Years Ago, Aftermath, Postbellum Society | Tagged Amelia Bloomer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Gerrit Smith, Henry Wilson, New York State Anti-Dramshop Party, progressivism, Prohibition Party, temperance, temperance movement, The Lily (newspaper) | Leave a comment

long career, short retirement

Posted on March 22, 2020 by SUMPTER

Mediterranean calm before the American storm

When the recently-launched (January) USS Richmond departed for the Mediterranean on October 13, 1860, its namesake was the capital of one of the United States, albeit one of the original thirteen – Virginia, the Old Dominion. When the ship returned to New York on July 3, 1861, Richmond was still Virginia’s state capital, but it had taken on another role – the national capital of the breakaway Confederate States of America. According to the September 7, 1919 issue of the New York Tribune, the Richmond spent the American Civil War helping force the rebels back into the Union.

sixty years service

I haven’t seen any evidence that the Richmond ever served as David Farragut’s flagship, but it was actively engaged throughout the Civil War. According to the U.S. Navy this second iteration of the USS Richmond began its war career in late July 1861 by sailing for Jamaica, looking for “the elusive Confederate raider Sumter commanded by Raphael Semmes”. The Richmond couldn’t find the Sumter either, so then joined the Gulf Blockading Squadron and patrolled the mouth of the Mississippi. During the Battle of the Head of Passes on October 12, 1861 the Confederate ram Manassas rammed but did not disable the Richmond. Later in 1861 the ship’s crew suffered some casualties and the ship was furthered damaged from rebel fire during the bombardment of Pensacola Navy Yard.

rammed at the Southwest Pass

Port Hudson battle, March 1863

the current issue

__________________

After repairs in New York the Richmond joined the West Gulf Blockading Squadron under Flag Officer David Farragut and was actively involved in the Union operations that captured New Orleans. Farragut’s fleet continued to focus on the Mississippi River until the Union capture of Vicksburg and Port Hudson in July 1863. During that period one of the war’s “fiercest engagements” occurred when the fleet, heading upriver, attempted to pass rebel fortifications at Port Hudson in March 1863. “Richmond, lashed alongside Genesee, found she could make no headway against the strong current as she came under fire from the shore batteries. Her executive officer, Comdr. Andrew B. Cummings, was mortally wounded. Richmond was struck soon afterward by a 42-pounder shell which ruptured her steam lines, filling the engine room and berth deck with live steam. As Genessee [sic; Genesee] was unable to tow Richmond against the current, the two ships reversed course, passing again through heavy shore fire.”

The Richmond was again repaired in New York and then rejoined the blockading squadron by November 1863. It participated in Admiral Farragut’s assault on Mobile Bay on August 5, 1864. This time the Richmond was lashed to the Port Royal as it proceeded across the bar with the rest of the Union fleet and ran the gauntlet between two Confederate forts and through a channel planted with torpedoes (mines). After the monitor Tecumseh struck a torpedo and quickly sunk, the other Union ships hesitated. At this point, Admiral Farragut, lashed to the mast of his flagship Hartford, ordered the Union ships to sail full-speed through the minefield. Once in the bay, the Union ships defeated the Confederate fleet that same morning. “Richmond suffered no casualties in the action and only slight damage.”

battle at the bay

fort fight

Farragut’s diagram

________________

After the war Richmond got a new set of engines, was recommissioned in 1869, and returned to the Mediterranean. 150 years ago this year the ship “was stationed at Villefranche and Marseille [sic; Marseilles] to protect U.S. citizens potentially endangered by the Franco-Prussian War”. Later on Richmond did serve as a flagship: first with the South Pacific Station (1874-1877); then with the Asiatic Fleet (1879-83) – “For 4 years Richmond cruised among the principal ports of China, Japan, and the Philippines;” from 1889 to 1890 Richmond was the flagship of the South Atlantic Station. For the rest of its career it was used as a training ship, receiving ship, and finally at Norfolk as an “auxiliary to the receiving ship Franklin until after the end of World War I”.

Richmond as auxiliary receiving ship to the bigger Richmond (Norfolk Navy Yard early 1900s)

“Richmond was struck from the Navy list on 31 June 1919 and sold to Joseph Hyman & Sons, Philadelphia, Pa., on 23 July. She was delivered to that firm on 6 August for breaking up.”

According to other documentation at the U.S. Navy website, the Richmond was burned for scrap in Eastport Maine. Even though the ship had apparently been sold to a private company, Assistant Secretary of the Navy F.D. Roosevelt “witnessed this event”:

“Captain Turner is on the stern hauling down his flag”

burning for scrap

Oh, to be an auxiliary to a receiving ship … A couple months ago I read a seemingly pertinent essay. ^[1] Arthur Brooks contrasted the careers of two famous geniuses. Both Charles Darwin and Johann Sebastian Bach achieved enormous success and notoriety when they were young, and both were unable to emulate their achievements later on in life; but Mr. Darwin had more trouble adapting to changed circumstances. His research abilities plateaued during his 50s, and he became depressed. Mr. Bach was a gifted baroque composer and musician, but then classical music replaced baroque in popularity. Unlike Darwin, J.S. Bach didn’t become embittered; instead he redesigned his life and spent his last years writing a baroque instruction manual. Mr. Brooks advises those over 50 to avoid the despondency and inactivity of Charles Darwin and be like Bach, the beloved, fulfilled, respected Bach.

embittered in old age?

happier?

last act: writer

Or Ulysses S. Grant? I recently noticed Grant’s famous visage in an article about retiring early. ^[2] Back when MONEY published a paper magazine, it asked experts for books that they’d suggest for those seeking “financial independence and early retirement.” Ron Chernow’s Grant surprisingly made the list even though it isn’t “about retiring early, per se.” John Challenger, a CEO of an outplacement firm, sees Grant’s life as an example of “how people were able to pivot and adapt to their situations to make significant advances in their careers.” The general and president repeatedly reinvented himself. He was famously working hard at the very end of his life, this time as a memoirist, and not because he had the financial independence to do a little writing in a larger amount of spare time – he was trying to put his family finances back in shape after a ponzi scheme left his family destitute. And toward the end he was trying to finish the second volume of his memoirs before his imminent death.

It might be a stretch to say that the Richmond reinvented itself, but the ship did seem to take on several different roles throughout its career, and, perhaps a bit like Bach, it was able to stay useful as society’s/technology’s cutting edge left it behind. I’ve never been a genius or a flagship sailing the Seven Seas; it seems most of my career has been trying to work out a career, but my body and my brain are definitely slowing down and I’m more and more out of step with societal changes. If I make it to retirement, I’m hoping for something of the usefulness of an auxiliary receiving ship, probably with time for a few more naps. [March 23, 2020 – that might be what they call semi-retirement, although there are many ways to be useful without paid work].

“Stripped for action, at Pensacola, Florida, on 3 August 1864, just prior to the Battle of Mobile Bay ( Richmond on the left with the Lackawanna)

“In the harbor of Ville Franche, France, in 1872. USS FRANKLIN is on the left.”

a flagship’s crew

According to the Encyclopedia Virginia, “In the midst of evacuating Richmond to Union forces on April 3, 1865, Confederate soldiers set fire to tobacco warehouses and the conflagration spread throughout the commercial heart of the city, leaving nine-tenths of the business district in ruins.” The site provides a slideshow of some of the destruction.

You can read a bio of F.D. Roosevelt as Assistant Secretary of the Navy during the Wilson Administration at the National Park Service.

More information about the Richmond is available at NavSource Naval History, which verifies that the ship was burned in Eastport in 1920.

Lieutenant Commander Andrew Boyd Cummings mortally wounded at Port Hudson

Admiral Farragut at Mobile Bay on the Hartford

watched Richmond burn

From the Library of Congress: Southwest Pass from the December 7, 1861 issue of Harper’s Weekly, is it old age? I don’t seem to be able to make out the Manassas; Mobile Bay chart; fighting past Fort Morgan; Lieutenant Commander Andrew Boyd Cummings; Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt; Charles Darwin about 1870; J.S. Bach; at Baton Rouge

From the U.S. Navy: in the Mediterranean in 1861 – KN-715; preparing for Mobile Bay – NH 51184; back to the Mediterranean in 1872 – NH 61880; at quarters – NH 119215; housed over in Norfolk – NH 75371; at Eastport – NH 44800 (flag removal) and NH 44801.

According to the Navy Site, the USS Franklin was in service from 1867-1915, so I’m not sure the Richmond was an auxiliary to the Franklin until the end of the First World War.

The Port Hudson attack map is said to be from the Official Records – you can find at Wikipedia; the image of the Battle of Port Hudson is from the April 18, 1863 issue of Harper’s Weekly at the Son of the South; Farragut’s diagram is from J.C. Watson’s 1916 paper “Farragut and Mobile Bay – Personal Reminiscences” at Project Hathi. The image of David Farragut in the Hartford’s rigging was published in the April 11, 1868 issue of Harper’s Weekly (page 228) at the Internet Archive – the engraving was based on William Page’s painting, said to very accurately represent the looks of the admiral and his flagship (page 227). You can find Grant’s Memoirs, including the cover at Project Gutenberg – From the inroduction: “The first volume, as well as a portion of the second, was written before I had reason to suppose I was in a critical condition of health. Later I was reduced almost to the point of death, and it became impossible for me to attend to anything for weeks. I have, however, somewhat regained my strength, and am able, often, to devote as many hours a day as a person should devote to such work. I would have more hope of satisfying the expectation of the public if I could have allowed myself more time. I have used my best efforts, with the aid of my eldest son, F. D. Grant, assisted by his brothers, to verify from the records every statement of fact given. The comments are my own, and show how I saw the matters treated of whether others saw them in the same light or not.” This was dated July 1, 1885; Mr. Grant died on July 23, 1885.

at Baton Rouge 1863

^[1]“Learning to accept your decline,” by Arthur Brooks, The Week January 17, 2020, pages 32-33. The Week edited the essay originally published in The Atlantic↩
^[2]“5 Books to Help You Retire Early,” by Martha C. White, Money December 2018, pages 34-35. ↩

Posted in 100 Years Ago, 150 Years Ago, Naval Matters | Tagged Battle of Mobile Bay, Battle of the Head of Passes, Capture of New Orleans, David G. Farragut, Mobile Alabama, Ulysses S. Grant, Union Navy, USS Richmond | Leave a comment

MURDER AND SENTIMENTALITY.

… we would not certainly honor conspicuous rebels while the rebel spirit slaughtered our brethren …

His view of the situation was correct. It implied nothing vindictive, nothing unjust. Gradually events showed its wisdom. … [events including massacres, Black Codes, and the Ku Klux Klan] …

From the Internet Archive: Harper’s Weekly for 1870 and George Washington Carver’s 1917 book.

The World War II era poster is from the National Archives via Wikimedia Commons. It is dated 1943; Mr. Carver died on January 5, 1943. Also from Wikimedia Commons – the Bowery Theatre in July 1867.

114. John Adams.

3 July, 1776.

115. John Adams.

Philadelphia, 3 July, 1776.

The book of letters was edited by John and Abigail’s grandson, Charles Francis Adams, who, in a footnote, said he checked the facts and corrected a previous “slight alteration” by relative.

FOOTNOTES:

According to Wikipedia:

Harper’s Weekly for 1870 is at the Internet Archive

You can find the Adams book of correspondence at Project Gutenberg. The two letters here are on pages 190-194.

Based on correspondence all around July 7th, it seems that President Lincoln wanted a little more success from General Meade and his Army of the Potomac as the rebels retreated from Gettysburg:

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEWS FROM GETTYSBURG. WASHINGTON,

July 4, 10.30 A.M.

A. LINCOLN.

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL FRENCH. [Cipher] WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C.,

July 5, 1863. MAJOR-GENERAL FRENCH, Fredericktown, Md.:

I see your despatch about destruction of pontoons. Cannot the enemy ford the river?

A. LINCOLN.

CONTINUED FAILURE TO PURSUE ENEMY TELEGRAM TO GENERAL H. W. HALLECK.

SOLDIERS’ HOME, WASHINGTON, JULY 6 1863.7 P.M., MAJOR-GENERAL HALLECK:

If you are satisfied the latter purpose is entertained, and is judiciously pursued, I am content. If you are not so satisfied, please look to it.

Yours truly,

A. LINCOLN.

…

SURRENDER OF VICKSBURG TO GENERAL GRANT TELEGRAM FROM GENERAL HALLECK TO GENERAL G. C. MEADE.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 7, 1863.

MAJOR-GENERAL MEADE, Army of the Potomac:

I have received from the President the following note, which I respectfully communicate:

“We have certain information that Vicksburg surrendered to General Grant on the Fourth of July. Now if General Meade can complete his work, so gloriously prosecuted this far, by the literal or substantial destruction of Lee’s army, the rebellion will be over.

“Yours truly,

“A. LINCOLN.”

H. W. HALLECK. General-in-Chief.

TELEGRAM FROM GENERAL HALLECK TO GENERAL G. C. MEADE. WASHINGTON, D. C., July 8, 1863.

MAJOR-GENERAL MEADE, Frederick, Md.:

There is reliable information that the enemy is crossing at Williamsport. The opportunity to attack his divided forces should not be lost. The President is urgent and anxious that your army should move against him by forced marches.

H. W. HALLECK, General-in-Chief

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL THOMAS. WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, July 8, 1863.12.30 P.M.

GENERAL LORENZO THOMAS, Harrisburg, Pa.:

A. LINCOLN.

The third U.S. president alluded to by Mr. Lincoln was James Monroe, who died on July 4, 1831.

[07/04/2020 PM] Of course, It would take many years for “all men” to include all women.

Hal Jespersen’s map of the retreat from Gettysburg (Map by Hal Jespersen, www.posix.com/CW) is licensed under Creative Commons

From the Library of Congress: the illustrated Declaration circa 1861, when emancipation was still in the future; Alexander Gardner’s portrait; Edwin Forbes’ Escape over the Potomac near Williamsport;

I’ve never been to Newport but no problem, thanks to Youtube. According to its documentation this performance took place exactly a month before 9/11.

tripsavvy suggests twelve other virtual vacations.

The age 70 portrait of the Pedestrian and the page about his upcoming nationwide stroll is from: Weston and his walks; souvenir programme of the great transcontinental … Weston and his walks; souvenir programme of the great transcontinental …

You can read all of Colonel Anderson’s address at HathiTrust

The Herald’s reporter William Franklin Gore Shanks wrote 1866’s Personal Recollections of Distinguished Generals. He remembered General Thomas and included this snippet from Chickamauga (see Project Gutenberg pages 63-65):

“I am very glad to see you, general,” said Thomas in welcoming him. General Steedman made some inquiries as to how the battle was going, when General Thomas, in a vexed manner, replied,

“The damned scoundrels are fighting without any system.”

You can read all of Harper’s Weekly for 1870, including pages 253 and 257, at the Internet Archive.

I think the national political party that Gerrit Smith referenced in his letter to Henry Wilson would be the Prohibition Party:

The party is still in existence. Phil Andrew Collins is its 2020 presidential nominee; the nominating convention was held by conference call last August.

The photos of D.A.’s on Bridge Street, Seneca Falls, New York were taken on March 29, 2020 during the corona virus pandemic. New York State deems liquor stores essential businesses, but the owners want patrons to keep their distance inside.

You can read a bio of F.D. Roosevelt as Assistant Secretary of the Navy during the Wilson Administration at the National Park Service.

More information about the Richmond is available at NavSource Naval History, which verifies that the ship was burned in Eastport in 1920.

From the U.S. Navy: in the Mediterranean in 1861 – KN-715; preparing for Mobile Bay – NH 51184; back to the Mediterranean in 1872 – NH 61880; at quarters – NH 119215; housed over in Norfolk – NH 75371; at Eastport – NH 44800 (flag removal) and NH 44801.

According to the Navy Site, the USS Franklin was in service from 1867-1915, so I’m not sure the Richmond was an auxiliary to the Franklin until the end of the First World War.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Daily News - 150 Years Ago

General Civil War Sites

Other Resources

WordPress

Topical Paradise

Categories

Subscribe by Feed

Subscribe by Email

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEWS FROM GETTYSBURG.
WASHINGTON,

July 5, 1863.
MAJOR-GENERAL FRENCH, Fredericktown, Md.:

CONTINUED FAILURE TO PURSUE ENEMY
TELEGRAM TO GENERAL H. W. HALLECK.

SURRENDER OF VICKSBURG TO GENERAL GRANT
TELEGRAM FROM GENERAL HALLECK TO GENERAL G. C. MEADE.

TELEGRAM FROM GENERAL HALLECK TO GENERAL G. C. MEADE.
WASHINGTON, D. C., July 8, 1863.

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL THOMAS.
WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, July 8, 1863.12.30 P.M.