Posted on 06/16/2020 6:35:41 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson
Free Republic University, Department of History presents U.S. History, 1855-1860: Seminar and Discussion Forum
Bleeding Kansas, Dred Scott, Lincoln-Douglas, Harper’s Ferry, the election of 1860, secession – all the events leading up to the Civil War, as seen through news reports of the time and later historical accounts
First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: Sometime in the future.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.
Posting history, in reverse order
To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.
Lost in the Fog, in Two Chapters – 1, 3
The Swans in the Central Park – 2-4
Editorials – 4
The Lounger – 4-6
Humors of the Day – 6
The Regatta of the New York Yacht Club – 6-8
Palermo – 8-9
Domestic Intelligence – 8, 10-11
Foreign News – 11-12
General View of the Central Park – 13-14
A Story of Niagara – 14-16
The Woman in White, by Wilkie Collins, Walter Hartright’s Narrative Continued – 16-19
A Shark! A Shark! – 19-20
Shah Noshirwan, King of Persia – 20
Captain Brand of the Schooner “Centipede,” by Lieut. Henry A. Wise, U.S.N. (Harry Gringo). Chapter XX-XXI – 21-22
Muscular Education-The Private Tutor - 23
The Diary of George Templeton Strong, Edited by Allan Nevins and Milton Halsey Thomas
June 16, 1860. Brownlow’s Knoxville Whig, page 2. [Parson Brownlow never minced words, and was a great foe of the Confederates during the war]
“Our Forthcoming New Dress”- column 3. First paragraph is about some new type they have ordered for their newspaper.
Second paragraph includes the following:
“We are in for the Constitutional Union Ticket; and we shall fight to the bitter end,
— the thieving, lying, all-pervading corruptions, and wasteful extravagances of the Buchanan wing of Democracy;
— the fire eating, Union-dissolving, political charlatanism, truculence, impudence, unsoundness, and unfaithfulness of the Southern extremists;
— the Squatter Sovereignty, and disguised Abolitionism of the Douglas wing, and their treacherous adherents, who have traded alone upon the political capital of a petty demagogue;
— and last, but not least, we shall fight the sectionalism of the Northern Republicans, as a band of outlaws, menancing [sic] the integrity of the Union.
.
“Stumbling on the Truth” – column 5). ”Gen. Lane, a great favorite with some of our Southern Democrats by whom he is familiarly known as “Old Joe,” made a speech in the Senate on Thursday, in which he declared:”
“It is the fault of the Democratic party in dodging truth, in dodging principle, in dodging the Constitution itself, that has brought the trouble upon the country and the party that is experienced to day.”
"Washington Election" - column 4. "Mr. Wallach, Opposition, was beaten by Berret, Democrat, for Mayor of Washington, fourteen votes. Wallach has brought suit in the City Court, and alleged that 200 fraudulent votes were cast for Berret, and an almost equal number of legal votes refused because they were for Wallach."
"A murderous mob took the field, and were consived [?] at by the police, who were Democratic. Buchanan and his officials took the field for Barret. The rowdies attacked and stoned Wallach's residence, and fired pistols and other firearms against his house, destroying the windows and injuring the doors. Many persons were wounded, and some of them must die, as stated by the Star of the 5th inst."
"In the seventh ward, the Democrats carried the election by the use of fraudulent naturalization papers, in the hands of foreigners at work upon the public buildings. A more corrupt Administration is not to be found in existence."
"Ratification in Connecticut" - column 5. "A meeting for the ratification of the Union nominations made at Baltimore, was held at New Haven, on Wednesday evening. ..."
"Mr. Henry, of Tennessee, in the course of his speech described the sectional character of the Republican party, and pictured the tremendous ruin that must surely follow the election of its candidates. He showed the mutual dependence of the North and South."
"The Constitutional Union party, he said bears the olive branch -- the signal and token of peace that will follow the success of its candidates."
Mr. Strong at this time was not a Lincoln fan at all. The New York sophisticate seems to regard Abe as a Western rube.
But he’s not Never-Lincoln. Just waiting to see what develops. I can relate. I was the same in June 2016.
Here is a more detailed version of the Democrat mob attacking people who voted for the other side in the June 4 mayoral election in Washington DC:
June 5, 1860. Evening Star newspaper, Washington, DC. – column 1.
https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1860-06-05/ed-1/seq-3/#date1=05%2F01%2F1860&index=3&date2=06%2F12%2F1860&searchType=advanced&language=&sequence=0&lccn=&words=Berret+Mayor+mob+opposite+Opposition+opposition+shot+shots+Wallach+Wallachs&proxdistance=5&rows=20&ortext=mob+berret+wallach+opposition+mayor+shots&proxtext=&phrasetext=&andtext=wallach+mayor&dateFilterType=range&page=1’’;
[BALTIMORE, June 17, 1860.]
Your kind favor of the 15th is at hand. I have no business requiring my presence in Boston at this time; so that if I visit it, I must do so at your account . This, I shall, of course, be glad to do, as much for the pleasure it will afford me personally, as for the accommodation it may be to you.
Should Douglas be nominated by the convention now in session in this city the South will bolt, and Lincoln be elected President; in which case I do not think a movement to prevent his inauguration at all improbable. What would become of Kansas in the confusion which would follow such a proceeding, God only knows. Should Douglas not be nominated, but if the convention unites in some other candidate, Guthrie for example, then Lincoln would not probably be elected, but the Democratic candidate instead. The result of this would be that the present application for Kansas' admission would be discarded, and new proceedings instituted for another state organization founded on Democratic principles.
SOURCE: Preston Stearns, The Life and Public Services of George Luther Stearns, p. 228-9
BOSTON, June 18,1860.
MY DEAR MR. SENIOR, — Thinking you may be interested in the antecedents of our promised ruler Lincoln, I send through my bookseller a copy of his speeches (and Douglas's) during their great fight for the Illinois senatorship — which form his chief record.
From such of them as I have read I get the idea that he is an earnest, rough, quick-witted man, — persistent and determined, half educated, but self-reliant and self-taught. These speeches, made before Seward's, show that Lincoln originated in these latter days the utterance of the “irrepressible conflict,” — and what is more, stuck to it manfully. Those who know him assure me that he is honest and straightforward and owned by no clique of hackneyed politicians.
Seward was killed by his association with the politicians who joined in the plundering of the last New York legislature, and by his speech in the Senate ignoring the irrepressible conflict and smoothing over his supposed radicalism.
The first evil lost him the confidence of the right sort of men, not because they believed him corrupt, but from the bad company he had been in and would probably be in again! His latter-day conservatism conciliated his enemies, who would not, however, vote for him, happen what might; and cooled the zeal of his radical supporters, and especially of the country people. I think on the whole the actual nominee will run better and be quite as likely to administer well when in. We shall elect him, I think, triumphantly, by the people; and avoid that abominable expedient, an election by the House, — filled as it is with so large a proportion of mere politicians. There is some danger that we shall be disgusted with a repetition of the log-cabin and hard-cider style of campaigning which was so successful in the Harrison election, but this is a minor evil compared with either having Douglas, with his filibustering crew, or a set of Albany wire-pullers under a Republican administration. . . .
Although you say nothing about it, I still hope you will come out this summer and take care of your young prince and see our heir apparent!
J. M. FORBES.
SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 1, p.183-4
Grand are the liberators of mankind! Let them hear the grateful applause of the nations, whatever their fortune! Yesterday we gave our tears; to-day our hosannas are heard. Providence deals in these compensations. John Brown failed in America, but Garibaldi has triumphed in Europe. Mankind, shuddering at the infamous gallows of Charlestown, takes courage once more at the flashing sword of Catalafimi.1
_______________
1 Victor Hugo's “Actes et Paroles pendant l'Exil” (1859-60). In the Édition Definitive of his complete works, which was still going through the press at his death, in 1885, the author added this note to the passages cited above: "Victor Hugo avait, à propos de John Brown, prédit la guerre civile à l’Amérique, et, a propos de Garibaldi, prédit 1'unité à l’ltalie. Ces dcux prédictions se réalisèrent.” He had a right to claim this.
SOURCE: Franklin B. Sanborn, The Life and Letters of John Brown, p. 631
Good afternoon Teach.
Interesting describing Lincoln as, “half educated,” meaning didn’t go far enough in the system at the time, or not the “right” schools?
Almost like the caste system in India.
5.56mm
“A Difference” - column 2. [rb: A long discussion about two different interpretations of the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision.]
“The Express says that the language of the Supreme Court, in the Dred Scott case, is too plain to be misunderstood, and that it distinctly denies the power of a Territorial Legislature to regulate the question of slavery.”
”Hon. Reverdy Johnson, the late Attorney General of the United States, Attorney for the Southern Side of the question in the Dred Scott case, and present head of the American Bar, differs from the Express very materially, for he emphatically declares that the Supreme Court has decided no such thing. He says, speaking of the power to regulate slave property:”
“It has, however, been thought, and this too by gentlemen of unquestionable ability, that the Supreme Court in the case so often referred to, has decided that such power does not reside in a territorial government. This, it is submitted, is a misconception of the decision. The single question before the Court, in this connection, was, whether Congress possesses the power to prohibit the introduction of slave property in a territory. In rulling it adversely, the Court does not say or intimate that such property in a territory has other safe-guards, or that the owner is entitled to any further protection in its enjoyment, than exists in regard to other kinds of property.”
“Reverdy Johnson is of the opinion, therefore, that Judge Douglas is right, when he says that, according to the Constitution of the United States, slave property stands upon precisely the same footing in the territories as any other property does, and that it is to be treated in the same manner. He goes on:”
“It had been contended, that there was a peculiarity in slave property, that placed it on a different footing from other property. For this the laws and usages of other nations, and reasoning of statesmen and jurists upon the relation of master and slave, had been referred too [to?]. “
“ ‘These,’ says the Chief Justice, ‘cannot enlarge the powers of the government, or take from the citizens the rights they have received;’ and as ‘the Constitution recognizes the right of property owned by a citizen, no tribunal, acting under the authority of the United States, whether it be legislative, executive or judicial, has a right to draw such distinction, or to deny it to the benefit of the provisions and guarantees which have been provided for the protection of private property against the encroachments of government;’ and after referring to the fugitive clause as expressly ‘affirming the right of property in a slave,’ the Chief Justice thus concludes: “
“ ‘And no word can be found in the Constitution WHICH GIVES CONGRESS GREATER POWER OVER SLAVE PROPERTY, OR WHICH ENTITLES PROPERTY OF THAT KIND TO LESS PROTECTION THAN PROPERTY OF ANY OTHER DESCRIPTION.’ [rb: all capital letters in the proceeding as it appeared in the newspaper article] . . .
“ . . . whatever a constitutional government can do in regard to any other kind of property, it can do in regard to this. If any other kind can be excluded, this may be excluded; if any other kind may be more, or less, or not at all protected by legislation, the same is true as to this. If any other, after its legal introduction, can be, upon public grounds, excluded or abolished, it is also the case as to this. [rb: italics as in the newspaper[
. . .
” . . . Reverdy Johnson gives it one construction and the Express another. Which is right? We lean to the side of the great jurist.”
Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings 1859-1865, edited by Don E. Fehrenbacher
Continued from June 15 (reply #11).
With Lincoln in the White House: Letters, Memoranda, and Other Writings of John G. Nicolay, 1860-1865, edited by Michael Burlingame
The Diary of George Templeton Strong, Edited by Allan Nevins and Milton Halsey Thomas
Bruce Catton, The Coming Fury
The Diary of George Templeton Strong, Edited by Allan Nevins and Milton Halsey Thomas
Thanks, rusty, for the fantastic quotes!
You will see where I used & gave you credit for one, elsewhere.
I think we can be forever thankful that Democrats don't do anything like this today, do they?
The result as an "era of good feelings" until new parties asserted themselves.
By stark contrast, the Democrat party never was "swept out of existence" regardless of how awfully it behaved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
