Showing posts with label John Bell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Bell. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 17, 2023

John Tyler to Robert Tyler, July 22, 1860

VILLA MARGARET,1 July 22, 1860.

MY DEAR ROBERT: . . . We begin to have more numerous calls by visitors to this region, and I become daily better informed of the status of public opinion. The effort is making in Virginia to concentrate the Democratic vote by running the same ticket for Breckenridge and Douglas, the electors to cast their vote according to the sense of the majority. Breckenridge would lead the ticket by a large majority, and the Democratic ascendency would be secure. Without some such arrangement, the divisions in the Democratic ranks may, and most probably will, lead to conferring on the Bell ticket the plurality vote. I find with many a positive aversion to Douglas,—so great that they denounce all fraternity with him, while similar feelings are ascribed to very many Douglas men. I have much doubt whether any harmony of action can be brought about. There were for the Southrons at Charleston but two courses to pursue, and they adopted neither. The first was to press the nomination of some one whose name would have constituted a platform in itself, or universally to have seceded and proceeded at once to the declaration of their platform and the nomination of candidates. My own feelings ran strongly in favor of Lane, and Bayard of Delaware; the first as the pioneer of the West, the last as coterminous in more than mere residence with New Jersey and Pennsylvania. By splitting up at Charleston they lost the prestige of victory; in other words, they played the game badly by throwing away their trump card.

The consequences of Lincoln's election I cannot foretell. Neither Virginia, nor North Carolina, nor Maryland (to which you may add Kentucky, Tennessee and Missouri) will secede for that. My apprehension, however, is that South Carolina and others of the cotton States will do so, and any attempt to coerce such seceding States will most probably be resisted by all the South. When such an issue comes, then comes also the end of the Confederacy. I know the value of the Roman maxim "never to despair of the Republic,” but confess to the gloom which overspreads and enshrouds the country. I can now do nothing more than fold my arms and pray for deliverance of the country from the evils which beset it. Does not every day render the difficulties which assail a confederacy of States in the selection of their chief magistrate more and more conspicuous?

The President, in his late speech, has acquitted himself well. You did right to preserve silence. He has been uniformly polite to you, and for that I thank him; but he is altogether your debtor. No one has been so true to him or rendered him greater service. Heretofore he could not have spared you from your position in Pennsylvania; but now his political days are numbered, and his sand nearly run. He might now reciprocate by rendering you service. Will he volunteer to do it? or, having squeezed the orange, will he throw the rind away? Nous verrons. I may do him injustice in regarding him as a mere politician without heart. I hope I am mistaken.

On Thursday next I propose going to Sherwood Forest, where I may remain for some weeks. Give my devoted affection to all your family.

Your father,
JOHN TYLER.
_______________

1 Mr. Tyler's summer residence at Hampton, Virginia.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 559-60

John Tyler to Robert Tyler, August 14, 1860

VILLA MARGARET, August 14, 1860.

DEAR ROBERT: The country is undoubtedly in an alarming condition. While I think you are too bitter on Douglas, yet I consider his course, and that of his friends, unfortunate. In truth, I see nothing to approve on either side. The eight Southern States, had they remained in the Charleston convention, might easily have defeated him, and, making a proper selection, might have waived a platform altogether. Bell becomes stronger every day, as is proven in the Missouri election; but still I persuade myself that Breckenridge will carry majorities in most of the Southern States and the plurality in Virginia; but of course everything is in doubt by the division in the Democratic ranks. Let things result as they may, I fear that the great Republic has seen its last days.

But I did not mean to do more than to say to you that you had better make us a visit here for a short time. We have a delightful place, and a change of air would benefit you in all probability. Your friend, C. H. Mallory, expresses a great desire to see you.

Love to all.
Your father,
J. TYLER.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 560

John Tyler to Henry S. Foote, August 26, 1860

SHERWOOD FOREST, August 26, 1860.

MY DEAR SIR: Your letter of August 21st was forwarded to me from the summer residence of my family, near Hampton, to this place, and only reached me an hour ago, asking of me a declaration in writing expressive of the opinion that the Breckenridge and Lane ticket should not be run in the Free States, and that the Northern field should be left exclusively in the possession of their adversaries. Pardon me, my dear sir, for declining the public expression of such an opinion on a subject with which I am so little acquainted as the relative strength of the several candidates in the unfortunate quadrangular contest which now prevails. It may very well be that in some of the Northern States Mr. Breckenridge is stronger than either Mr. Douglas or Mr. Bell, in which event it would be altogether out of place to advise his withdrawal from the canvass in those States. My remarks to Mr. Withers, to which you refer, had exclusive reference to the State of New York, where, according to the newspaper editors, Mr. Breckenridge has no available force, and where it is said a combination of all the conservative forces is necessary to defeat Mr. Lincoln. To detach New York from his support, or some other of the Free States, is supposed to be the only "open sesame" to the hopes of the other candidates. Whether it is necessary for any one of the other candidates to withdraw, you will much better understand than myself. The rivalry between Messrs Breckenridge, Douglas, and Bell, in the Southern States, is not so much for majorities as puralities, which count as majorities in the end." Non nostrum componere lites." In the midst of faction I should only meet with ridicule for interposing my opinions. Excuse me for preferring the profound quiet which I desire to enjoy.

You do me no more than justice in ascribing to me conservative opinions. The expanding power of these States has been the subject of my warmest contemplation. The future glory of the Union has wrapped me in a vision of ecstasy. Exeter Hall for a season was not permitted by its impertinent interference in our affairs to cast a shadow over so bright a vision. The separation between this country and Great Britain, I flattered myself, had been completed, alike in opinion and government, by the surrender at Yorktown. It is only in these latter days, when that Hall has sent over its agents to foment sectional divisions among us, and American citizens have crossed the ocean to enter into its conferences, esteeming themselves as honored by the plaudits they have received, that I have painfully felt for the condition of the country. The English sentiment engendering bitterness and enmity has to a great extent superseded the American of harmony and love. However, my dear sir, every free government has had its Catalines, and it is hoping against hope to expect that we should escape the fate of other nations. My only reliance is on the good sense of the American people to crush out all wicked designs and put their heels on the necks of the workers of mischief. With high respect and esteem, faithfully yours,

JOHN TYLER.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 560-1

John Tyler to Robert Tyler, August 27, 1860

SHERWOOD FOREST, August 27, 1860.

DEAR ROBERT: I think it best to enclose you these letters. There are parts of mine you may not be able to decipher accurately. It is the first draft. The gentleman alluded to—Colonel Withers, of Mississippi—called on me at the Villa Margaret, and, as the condition of the times is the fruitful subject of conversation, it came soon to be introduced. I expressed to him the gratification I had felt at the fusion between the Douglas and Bell men in New York, and expressed the hope that all conservatives would unite on the same ticket; that in my view the defeat of Lincoln was the great matter at issue, and that all others were subordinate; and probably said that if I lived in New York, although I was decidedly a Breckenridge man, I would advocate the fusion ticket. This, it seems, he reported to General Foote, and hence the correspondence.

There can be no possible doubt of Lincoln's election unless some one of the so-called free States is snatched from him. I presented also another idea to Colonel Withers, and that was that to defeat Lincoln was to elect Breckenridge or Lane, I cared not which, by throwing the first before the House, the last before the Senate. This has called forth the letter of my old friend General Foote, who is a Douglas man. I enclose it to you, so that if you should see any reference made to my opinions by General Foote, or any other which may call for explanation, you may be in proper position to make it by the publication, if necessary, of my letter. I said to Colonel Withers (and hence the reference to Cataline) that I regarded Seward as the Cataline of our day, and that to reach the presidency he would quaff blood with his fellows, as did Cataline of old, and expressed the hope that there would still arise a Cicero to denounce him in the Senate chamber.

I am here to superintend the delivery of my crop of wheat, which, although full of promise on the 1st of June, turns out a miserable failure. I shall remain during the week, and then back to Hampton.

Do give me some account of Pennsylvania. How goes the night? I think, after all, that everything depends on her. If I deceive not myself, Breckenridge will carry pluralities in a large majority of the Southern States, so as to present Lane to the Senate, should Lincoln not be elected by the popular vote. I live in the hope that a defeat of the negro-men now will dissolve their party. Write me soon. Love to all.

Your father,
JOHN TYLER.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 561-2

Saturday, July 30, 2022

William T. Sherman to David F. Boyd, September 16, 1860

LANCASTER, Ohio, Sept. 16, 1860.

MY DEAR FRIEND: I came up from Cincinnati last evening, whither I had gone to prove the sheets of our regulations of which I will have one thousand copies fifty of which with a blank leaf at the end of each article, so that amendments may be made and noted as they arise. I will not have them bound but covered with stiff paper. I doubt if I can send any till about the 1st of October when or soon after I will have all boxed and shipped from Cincinnati to New Orleans, where about October 15 I will meet them and our other stores.

By the way on my arrival last night I found your letter of September 3, which put me in possession of a correct knowledge of the status of things on that day, enabling me to prepare: the bedding, 80 mattresses, cases, etc., 500 volumes of books, 1000 of text-books, arms, accoutrements, etc., about 8 boxes of 150 lbs. each, etc., will have to be transported up before November 1. The clothing can follow. If Red River be dead low as you say and on my arrival at New Orleans my information confirm it, I will write you to hire from four to five wagons under one leader if possible, to meet me at the mouth (of Red River) on a certain day say about the 20th, with my horse all saddled, when I can load the wagons and conduct them to the Seminary. See Coats and agree on a price per hundred pounds, but don't close a bargain till the last moment. Baden who has the crapshop in Pineville has a fine team and wagon, the very thing for a load of mattresses.

We have hit on an unfavorable year—low river, undefined powers, unfortunate political crisis, unlimited expectations on the part of the community, but all these must only stimulate us to more strenuous exertions. I know this year will decide our fate, another the fate of the institution confided to us, and I will give it all my best energies and experiences, but I confess the combination of ill influences are calculated to damp my ardor.

I cannot take my family from their present comfortable and bounteously supplied home, for those desolate pine woods, but I will try and cause the coming session to pass off as smoothly and harmoniously as the past, which can only be done by making the studies and duties flow in an uninterrupted current, from the first to the last day of the session.

J. has not the requisite energy and I fear he will be so cramped with debt as to impair what little efficiency he does possess. His department is all important, but as I regard it, he is independent of me. He is steward by lawful appointment. I am only as superintendent or kind of supervisor. "Supervision” is the word, and if any failure occur in his department, I shall claim to be absolved from all responsibility. By a personal introduction to my personal friend in New Orleans, I gave him credit, which I fear he has abused, and it shall not occur again. I cannot incur personal liability in that manner again.

I think the three boys can get out enough wood for the winter and if the fallen timber encumber the ground too much we can make heaps or burn it up, so as to be ready next spring for embellishment. I will try to have one or two white boys for drummer and fifer who can clean the section rooms, tend the lamps, and do some writing. I have not got them yet but will try at Cincinnati and New Orleans on my way down. I could get them here, but I feel a delicacy in taking white men from here lest they should excite undue suspicion.

I admit I am uneasy about political causes or rather local prejudices. Reason can be combated, but suspicion cannot. Here I must resist the opinion that the South is aggressive, that they have made compacts of compromise of 1821 and 1850 which are broken and slavery made national instead of local – in the South that the North are aggressive endangering southern safety and prosperity, both factions argue their sides with warmth and an array of facts, that is hard to answer and I must content myself with awaiting the result.

I send you a speech made by my brother John in Philadelphia a few days ago. I heard him here and had much talk with him, and he told me he should prepare his speech for Philadelphia with care and stand by it. Therefore this speech is the Republican view of this section of the Confederacy.

An unexampled prosperity now prevails here and it is a pity that so much division pervades the Democratic Party, as it enables the Republicans to succeed. Even Bennett's Herald admits the probability of Lincoln's success. But I would prefer Bell to succeed because it would give us four years truce, but I fear it is not to be. But I am equally convinced that Lincoln's success would be attended with no violence. He is a man of nerve, and is connected by marriage and friendship with the Prestons of Kentucky and Virginia, and I have no doubt he will administer the government with moderation. No practical question can arise, whereby men of the South would be declared on the statute book as unequal to their northern brethren. There is now abundant slave territory and we have no other land fit for it, but Texas, and that is all slave territory by treaty.

If we go to Civil War for a mere theory, we deserve a monarch and that would be the final result, for you know perfectly well the South is no more a unit on that question than the North – Kentucky and Carolina have no sympathy. I heard Leslie Combs speak at Circleville a few days ago, and his language would have been Republicanism in Carolina. He has been elected clerk by twenty-three thousand majority in Kentucky.

In Ohio here we have all sorts of political parties and clubs, but it is admitted that it will vote the Republican ticket. My brother has no opposition at all in his district, and is therefore helping others in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. He resides at Mansfield, seventy-five miles north of this. I will go up to visit him and my sister in about ten days; but as to modifying his opinions further I cannot expect it.

I wanted him to repudiate openly the “irrepressible conflict” doctrine—but he has not done so, though he made a left handed wipe at Seward and Giddings as extremists. These men represent the radicals of that party but John laughs at me when I tell him in the nature of things that class of men will get control of his party. He contends that they – the Republicans – are the old Whig Party, revived solely by the unwise repeal of the Missouri Compromise. Of course you and I are outside observers of political events, and can influence the result but little, but this is no reason why we should not feel a deep and lively interest in the development of a result that for better or worse must interest us all.

At Cincinnati I attended the U.S. Agricultural Fair. Joe Lane was there and I esteem him a humbug, from his Mexican War reputation; other notorieties were there, among which fat hogs, calves, pumpkins, apples, etc., competed for prizes, and I think on a fair unbiased opinion the pumpkins were entitled to the first premium over vain conceited men.

I wish however we had Cincinnati near us at the Seminary. We should not then be troubled to get provisions, books, or furniture. If Red River were navigable, and I would find a boat for Alexandria or Shreveport direct, which often occurs in season, I would buy a full outfit of everything for my house at a blow. As it is I now must wait, as transportation by wagon must be out of all reason.

SOURCES: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 277-82

David F. Boyd to William T. Sherman, September 27, 1860

September 27, 1860.

I am much obliged to you for the copy of your brother's speech. It is an able production and marks him, as he had already proved himself to be, a deep thinker and a strong reasoner. I regret very much that he is on the wrong side – his premises I do not grant him. I believe he designs no other injustice to the South than to keep slaves out of the territories, and since the Supreme Court says that under the Constitution they can be carried there, the mere agitation of that matter, free-soilism (not abolitionism), is not sufficient cause for the South to attempt to break up the Union; but I am afraid Seward and many others will never rest till they attempt the abolition of slavery in the states, and when that comes, then “let the Union slide" (according to Governor Banks).

As long as Seward is the acknowledged leader of the Republicans, has not the South reason to fear that the abolition of slavery in the Territories is but the entering wedge to overthrow it in the States? I think, and hope, that your brother will yet openly renounce Seward's “irrepressible conflict” doctrine. But I must say, I like to read Seward's speeches. I have learned more politics of him lately than from all the rest of the politicians put together. However false his position, he talks more like a philosopher than any of them. There is nothing of the humbug about him; he is honest in his views, and for that very reason, he is the more dangerous enemy, first to the South, and finally to the whole Union.

However unpleasant it is to be separated so much from your family, I think you have acted wisely in not bringing them down to Louisiana. If you could see the Pinewoods now, after they have been burnt so bare that there is hardly a sprig of vegetation to be seen, you could not help exclaiming, What a picture of starvation! And it is reported that some poor devils are actually starving in Natchitoches; but I suppose they are of the “rosin heel” tribe, and are really too lazy to live.

Bell will certainly carry Louisiana. Poor Breck! I am afraid he will only carry S. S. Prentiss's “Harry Percy of the Union,” South Carolina, and, maybe, he is not ultra enough for the Fire-eaters. . .

SOURCES: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 286-8

William T. Sherman to Ellen Ewing Sherman, November 10, 1860

ALEXANDRIA, Nov. 10, 1860.

. . . We have had a week of cold rains but it has cleared off, and to-day is bright and warm. I am going into town today and will leave this at the post-office. The election came off on Tuesday and resulted in Alexandria in a majority for Breckenridge, next Bell, next Douglas. Of course there were no votes for Lincoln. Indeed he has no ticket in this state.

I received a note from a friend advising me to vote. I thought the matter over and concluded I would not vote. Technically I was entitled to a vote as I entered Louisiana just a year ago, but I thought I ought not to vote in this election, and did not. I would have preferred Bell, but I think he has no chance, and I do not wish to be subject to any political conditions. If I am to hold my place by a political tenure I prefer again to turn vagabond.

I would not be surprised to learn that my not voting was construed into a friendly regard for Lincoln, and that it might result in my being declared a public enemy. I shall however rest under a belief that now as the election is over all this hard feeling will subside and peace once more settle on the country. We have no returns as yet. Maybe the mail tonight will bring some returns from New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, those large states that determine this election, but I do not count on any clear knowledge till next Monday.

We began our recitations last Monday, and things have settled down into order and system. . .

No matter which way we turn there arise difficulties which seem insurmountable. In case Lincoln is elected they say that South Carolina will secede and that the Southern States will not see her forced back. Secession must result in Civil War, anarchy, and ruin to our present form of government. If it is attempted it would be unwise for us to be here. Still I hope for quiet. . .

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 304-5

Monday, May 23, 2022

William T. Sherman to David F. Boyd, August 13, 1860

LANCASTER, O. (Monday), Aug. 13, 1860.

MY DEAR FRIEND: I arrived here yesterday morning, and found my family well. I left Miss Whittington in Cincinnati with Mrs. Ewing to rest over Sunday and to come here to-day. On Wednesday I will go to Washington, and on Saturday to New York, and as soon as I make up my catalogue of books I will send it to you. My chief idea in going to New York is to elect some one person of good credit who can buy for us such books as any of us want. My only acquaintance with booksellers now is of that general character that is formed by dropping in and buying a single or couple [of] volumes. This time I will come to clear distinct terms as to purchase, commissions, credits, etc., same with clothing, and same for hats, caps, and shoes. But your five hundred dollars of books shall be purchased absolutely, paid for and shipped in all September, and I advise you to have prepared a case of shelves. The textbooks must also be bought on a credit, and then they can remain in their own boxes till issued and sold to cadets – same of clothing, shoes, hats, etc.

Now Red River will not be navigable by October 15, and I foresee trouble, but trouble only stimulates my endeavors. I will arrange that all purchases go to New Orleans; if Red River be navigable October 15, then these things to be shipped, if Red River be dry, then I will want to hire five wagons at or near the Seminary, so that on my arrival there I can conduct them to Snaggy Point, or even the Mississippi River, and haul up those things, such as bedding, textbooks, etc., which must be on hand to the hour. Therefore, if about October 1 the river be as now, unreliable, see Coats, or Baden the cooper in Pineville, or some other of that class, and tell them on my arrival October 15 I will want to hire five wagons, and for them to be prepared for an offer.

Keep the carpenters well at the tables, bookcases, and wardrobes, the woodcutters to their work, and I foresee a plain easy beginning to our critical session.

It is utterly impossible to conceive of a wider contrast than exists between the Pinewoods and where I now am. Since the first settlement of Ohio, there has been no season of such prolific yield as the present: wheat, oats, hay, fruit, corn, everything have been or are perfect. I never saw such corn fields; not a stack missing, high, strong and well-eared. If I could transfer the products of this county to Natchitoches I would prefer it to all the mines of California. Horses and cattle roll with fat. I hear this is the condition of things in all this region, and God grant it may be one of the many causes to teach men of prejudice and fanaticism of the beautiful relation that should exist between parts of the same country.

The same diversity of opinion in politics exists here as elsewhere, but Lincoln will doubtless carry this state, partly from the diversion caused by the nomination of the three adverse candidates, Douglas, Breckenridge, and Bell. Mr. Ewing tells me he was consulted about the organization of the Union Party. He advised it, but against the nomination of a candidate – intending to hold their strength in reserve, to be cast in favor of the most national of the candidates of the adverse party. He thinks this sentiment forced the Republicans to reject Seward and take Lincoln, of whom he speaks in moderately favorable terms. My brother John is in the north of this state, where a more violent anti-slavery feeling prevails, and where a moderate conservatism would be styled Dough-facism. Therefore he is radical. I shall see him this summer, but can not expect to influence him. Still, I know that even if Lincoln be elected, he will not dare do anything hostile to any section. Political majority has passed to the North, and they are determined to have it. Let us hope they will not abuse it.

I saw Roelofson in Cincinnati, and though not entirely satisfied at my not going to London he had to say that I had a right to be cautious of all new financial schemes. He will go himself to London. I hope the Board of Supervisors to meet at Alexandria to-day will not modify materially my plans, but even if they do, I will execute their plan another year, and if we find the mixed system too weak for success, I feel assured they will yield. If, however, they devise some impracticable scheme I will be disposed to hesitate to risk my comfort and reputation in a doubtful result.

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 257-9

Sunday, May 22, 2022

William T. Sherman to David F. Boyd, August 19, 1860

WASHINGTON, D.C., Sunday, Aug. 19, 1860.

DEAR MR. BOYD: I wrote you from Lancaster. I left there last Wednesday reached here Thursday evening deposited my charge, Miss Whittington, in the convent same day, and have been two days well employed here. I have a large acquaintance here, and was thereby enabled promptly to succeed in my undertaking of getting arms for our institution – orders are already issued for the shipment to Alexandria of 145 cadet muskets, making with 55 on hand 200 – 10 long range minnie rifles, with sabre bayonets – 10 pistols for belts – 200 cartridge boxes, bayonet scabbards, belts, etc., for 200 cadets 10 sergeant's swords and belts, 10 musicians' swords and belts and a whole lot of extra springs, screws, etc., to keep all in repair. This will give us a good outfit for 210 cadets, a number as great as we can hope for some years to come. I did want ammunition but this is not allowed by law, and I may provide some at New York, wherewith to teach the practical use of these modern long range weapons.

Of course politics here are on every tongue, but I keep aloof. I notice a few facts, which to me are far more convincing than any political platform or dogmas. All the public buildings here are being built in a style of magnificent proportions and development, which looks like increasing rather than diminishing the proportions of our country. All the hotels are cleaning and painting ready for the usual winter influx of politicians. There is no diminution in the price of property, rents, or even of negroes.

You know that money is as sensitive as the mercury and in Europe an ugly remark of Louis Napoleon will affect stocks. So would any political event here, if people believed it – but nobody believes in a secession, though they talk and write of it. Lincoln's chances of election were very good, but two events have just transpired which to me look important. In New York the Bell and Douglas parties have fused - and have made a joint elective ticket, which can cast the vote of New York for Douglas or Bell, as events may make necessary. Again Seward at Boston made another of his characteristic speeches in which he renewed his assertion of the irreconcilability of slave and free labor. Now if Lincoln remains silent as he doubtless will, the moderates will accuse him of thinking as Seward does, whereas if he does, as he should, announce his belief that our government as framed is harmonious in all its parts, he will lose the Seward wing or faction.

There have been magnificent crops made in all the Northern and Middle States and they will have in abundance, corn, hay, flour, bacon, and those thousand and one things needed at the South, and as this commercial dependence and exchange should, they no doubt will have a good effect, in showing the mutual dependence of all the parts of this vast and magnificent country, the one on the other. Whilst Lincoln loses strength in the way I have stated, Breckenridge has lost vastly by the vote of his own state, being so overwhelming against him, and the press is gradually settling into identifying him with a secession faction. Between this faction of the South and Lincoln of the North, Bell or Douglas if united as they have done in the New York may be elected by the people and that gives us four years of peace, during which I trust this ugly feeling of suspicion may subside, a consummation devoutly to be wished.

To-morrow I will commence the purchase of books and will fill out your list first. I will then see to clothing and make such arrangements that in the future we can order as we need and have the means of payment. I wish you would keep me advised at Lancaster, Ohio, of the progress of things. In boxing up the space under the stairway, have a double bolted door made to fasten to an upright stancheon, which can be taken out – this will be necessary, as we must store there large boxes, which will require a large opening. Please also have the space E of the hall boxed up for a guard room. We will need that for storage at first. In all November we will have a good many stores to receive, distribute, and issue. Your book case you will need in October, as I will direct the shipment of books in September.

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 259-62

David F. Boyd to William T. Sherman, August 30, 1860

LOUISIANA STATE SEMINARY OF LEARNING AND MILITARY ACADEMY,
Alexandria, Aug. 30, 1860.

SIR: . . . Altho' nothing new has transpired here, still I had better drop you a line to say that everything is going on well. Floyd has nearly finished the tables, and I think there is no doubt of his making, in proper time, all the shelves or presses, and also fixing the stairway. He has worked faithfully since you left. I will see, too, that Mills fixes the partitions. He is now busily at work at the professors' houses, and though he seems a little behindhand with them, he can still complete them in time. You know that carpenters have had a poor chance to get lumber this summer, as the drought and scarcity of water have stopped what St. Ange calls the sewing machines.

I have kept the negro boys constantly getting wood, within your Seminary enclosure. A good deal has been cut and hauled, but the timber is so heavy that you can scarcely miss it. I have perhaps had cut down more of the pine trees than you wished, and I believe it would be well to cut them all down at once. In the winter we occasionally have some terrific blows, and when once a pine forest has been thinned out, it is so easy for those left standing to come down. Ledoux and Poussin offer to hire a boy apiece. What say you? I think they might be profitably employed.

Cooper has not yet put up the chimneys, as you directed, but he makes such a fair promise that they will be fixed soon, that I am inclined to wait with him a little longer. Have no fears about them, for either he shall fix them or they shall be run up with sheet iron.

I have bargained with a carpenter to put up my bookcase, and it shall be ready. By the way, we have commenced begging for books, maps, etc., for a library. Can't you do something in Ohio? How do you think it would do to have a circular letter printed and sent over the state, calling on the public to send us all books and specimens of minerals and fossils that they can spare? If you write a short letter to that effect in your capacity as superintendent, I think I could get it printed in Alexandria free of charge, and it might meet with much success. Politics is beginning to wax pretty warm.

Bell's prospects are brightening fast, and there is no doubt of his carrying this state. My own impression is (and I am sorry to say it), that Breckenridge will carry but one Southern State, and that is South Carolina. Nor would he carry that state if the vote were submitted to the people. Bell's party is very strong all over the South, and even Douglas has many more supporters than the blind advocates of Breckenridge can see.

Whilst I deprecate the unfortunate split at Charleston and Baltimore, and think the territorial question entirely illtimed, still as the issue has been thrust upon us, and I believe Breckenridge's views to be correct although they may never meet with a practical application, I shall vote for him. If we who approve his views fail to support him, then the people of the North would say that the South disapproves those views, when really a large majority of us think it hard that there should be any law which either expressly or impliedly denies us equal rights with our northern brethren to the common property of the whole union. We don't wish to appear on the statute books as inferiors.

I am beginning to think that Lincoln will not be elected. If he should be, there is no telling what trouble we may have. I do not believe any state will formally secede, but disunion might be brought about in many ways. In many places in the South, whoever accepts or hold office under Lincoln will be lynched. He (Lincoln) will of course attempt to enforce the laws; that attempt will be resisted, and once the strife is begun God only knows where it will stop. What is the use of that Republican Party? As you say, slavery will always go where it pays, in spite of Sewardism, and it will never go where it does not pay, in spite of Yanceyism. Let the law of nature say you shall not take your slave here or there, but let not a clause of the Constitution, or an enactment of Congress, say it. It then becomes a threat hurled by one section at the other, and threats ill-become the people of a union. But whatever be the result of the election, let us hope there will be no disunion. Rather, like Governor Wise, radical as he is, let us settle our troubles in the union and not out of it.

The burning of the towns in Texas has produced much excitement here, and a negro was arrested near Nacogdoches, Tex., who said that among other towns to be burnt soon was Alexandria, La.; consequently a guard is stationed to watch for the coming incendiary, and no doubt Bootjack (Biossat) and Co.1 will be much disappointed if he doesn't make his appearance.

I have received several letters making applications for admission of cadets, and others asking for information. General Graham's unfortunate publication last fall – that only five could be admitted from each senatorial district - is still injuring us; and we have no money with which to advertise, I begged Boyce to publish in his paper next Monday an article enlightening the public on that point, muskets, etc., with the request that all the city and parish papers publish it, and he promised to do his part.

[P.S.] The crops here are almost a total failure. Very little corn and sugar, and only about one-third the usual crops of cotton will be raised. Suppose there is disunion, will they keep all the corn north of Mason's and Dixon's fence?

Don't think of the river being in boating order in October. I will see to the wagons.
_______________

1 Editors of local newspapers. – ED.

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 270-3

Wednesday, March 16, 2022

Speech of Senator John Bell of Tennessee, May 24 & 25, 1854

Mr. President, I did not expect to provoke a personal assault on my course in relation to the measure before the Senate by anything which I said this morning. I trust that I did not touch the honorable gentleman’s [Mr. Toombs] sensibilities when I stated that I supposed his only object was to remove what he considered a violation of the Constitution of the United states from the Statute-book; and that that seemed to be the great to be the great principle which he had in view in giving his support to this bill. I leave it to the Senate to say whether I did not state with sufficient distinctness that I wanted to know from those gentlemen who had expressed themselves so vehemently, so loudly, and so eloquently, if you please, in favor of some great fundamental principle which they wished to establish by this bill, what that great principle really was? Each one said that there was a great principle in it, which they did not risk even by voting for a proposition which their judgments approved. I turned to the honorable Senator from Georgia, I trust in no offensive manner, and asked what principle he wanted to establish by the bill. He said he wished to repeal that odious or infamous restriction called the Missouri compromise.

Mr. Toombs—I did not use the term. I said unconstitutional.

Mr. Atchison—I said infamous.

Mr. Bell.—I know some Senators spoke of it is infamous; but it does not matter in what terms that compromise is denounced. My object was to know what was the great principle to be established by this bill, which was so important that honorable Senators would sacrifice their own opinions and principles upon other questions, in order to effect that object. My honorable friend from Missouri [Mr. Atchison] said that if the bill contained a thousand objectionable features, they would not prevent him from voting to get rid of that infamous Missouri compromise. If such views—if that was the only object—had been avowed at the outset of this proceeding, how many supporters do you think the bill would have had even from the South? I believe, though I am not certain, that the honorable Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Butler] expressed the same sentiments in his remarks upon the Nebraska bill, before it passed the Senate. That honorable Senator, said that to repeal the Missouri compromise would be plucking a thorn from his side which had been a long time rankling there, and that consideration recommended the bill to his favor.

I had no idea of provoking the honorable Senator from Georgia, with whom I have been on relations of friendship, to attack upon me when I called upon him to know what was the great principle which he saw in the bill. I believe he is the only Senator from the South with whom I ever conversed, who thought that this was a good thing in itself. Of all other southern Senators with whom I have ever conversed on the subject, I do not remember a single one besides who did not deprecate the introduction of this measure of repeal. But they thought that they could not go against it, presented, as it seemed to be, from the North; though they believed no practical good would come to the South from it.

Now, it seems that the great subject of the honorable Senator from Georgia in supporting the bill as sent from the House of Representatives, is to get clear of the restriction of 1820—which, by-the-by, I will say, gave the highest renown to the authors of it which a public man in this country can attain—which gave repose to the country and preserved the harmony of the sections for a period of thirty years; and which has been acquiesced in by both sections of the Union from 1820 up to a very recent period. Now it is said to be infamous, and gentlemen say they are quite willing to risk the boiling cauldron at the North alluded to by the Senator from Indiana [Mr. Pettit,] in order to get released from that odious restriction. Sir, did the honorable Senator, when he first gave his adhesion to the repeal of the Missouri compromise, anticipate such a state of things as now exists at the North? I did not believe myself, during the period of the initiation of this measure, that the excitement would be so great at the North. I spoke with northern gentlemen about it. They thought there would be a deep feeling implanted at the North against the measure, but no great excitement would be created, except, perhaps, at the meetings which might be got up in the populous cities. Did any gentleman of the South, however, believe that such a state of things as now appears to exist at the North would arise? It may be that excitement and agitation at the North may subside. The present bubbling of the cauldron may soon evaporate after the passage of the bill; but the cauldron certainly exhibits a very high degree of fermentation and excitement just now.

Now, does the Senator mean to say that, merely to get rid of that statute—the restriction of 1820—as a lover of the Union, he would risk all the mischievious consequences which the honorable Senator from Indiana has held up to our view as likely to arise in the North? Is there no locus poenitentia.1

Mr. Toombs—You have a right to change.

Mr. Bell—But the honorable Senator will not. I suppose that the honorable Senator from Indiana [Mr. Pettit] would be prepared to change his opinion in regard to the importance of establishing what he regards as a great principle of this bill, if he were to find the consequences, which he described to-day as likely to arise before another session of Congress, would follow the repeal of the Missouri compromise. I do not think he would be so stubborn and obstinate as to insist, at all hazards upon getting his great principle established—upon furnishing that white sheet of paper, the tabula rasa,2 upon which the people of the Territory might write what they pleased and thus inaugurate the doctrine of squatter sovereignty, as promulgated by the Senator from Michigan, amended and improved by the admission to the right of suffrage foreigners not Naturalized as well as natives. Would he convulse the country for the sake of establishing such a principle, in violation all our territorial legislation for sixty years? I think he would not be so obstinate as the honorable Senator from Georgia; nor do I think he would have the same vindictive feeling against others for any change of their views on this subject. However I might have thought at first that I should be forced under the circumstances, to support this measure, however much I disapproved it, yet I tho’t better afterwards, and when I became satisfied that the mischiefs were likely to be far greater that I at first supposed they would be.

Now, sir, with regard to the constitution or anything else, which is to be vindicated or established by this bill as it now stands, what is the great principle involved in it? Why, sir, if you should acquire Cuba, what is the first thing you have to do [to] conform to the doctrine proclaimed in this bill? The first step to be taken will be to abolish slavery as a legally established institution. How else can the great principle contended for by the Senator from Indiana be inaugurated or established? [Freedom] in the operation of squatter sovereignty would require that Cuba should first be made a free territory, as you have provided in this bill that Nebraska shall be. I voted for the amendment to which the Senator has referred. I had no idea that such a principle was intended to be established, but still I do not say that that consideration regulated my vote. The principle contended for, when carried out, requires that you shall take the stylus and rub out or eradicate everything that is written on the tablet, and leave the inhabitants free to prescribe what shall be written upon it, untrammeled by any existing institution. That is the great principle, in addition to the repeal of the Missouri compromise, which the South are now so much determined upon; so zealous and united in supporting, that they will sacrifice any other principle, however substantial and important to the grand object. The squatter sovereignty clause is the grand feature in the bill. What has the South to gain by all this? But the honorable Senator from Georgia says he is not merely legislating for the South in the advocacy of this bill.  I know he is not. But this broad principle of squatter sovereignty was not the idea on which the repeal clause of this bill was inserted. I was assured then that the South had some interest in it; that it would secure, practically, a slave territory west of Missouri; that slavery would go into Kansas when the restriction of 1820 was removed. It was not dwelt on in argument; but my honorable friend from Missouri [Mr. Atchison] knows that that view was taken by him, and I differed from him in regard to it. I thought slavery could not go there; the honorable Senator though it could.

Mr. Atchison—And I still think so.

Mr. Bell.—Ay, more; the idea was diffused gradually throughout the south that another slave state might be secured west of Missouri. I said in my speech there would scarcely be a chance for it, as the bill then stood, or in any shape.

It is very well for the honorable Senator from Georgia to proclaim now that he is not legislating for any section; he certainly is not going for the South! I think that no southern man can show that the South has any particular interest in this bill, because it is not like the compromise of 1850; for in New Mexico and Utah you let the territory stand legally restricted or barred against slavery, as it was by public law. When that Territory was brought into the Union, Mr. Calhoun and some other honorable Senators contended that the Constitution would operate as a repeal of the Mexican law, abolishing slavery, and give protection to the slaveholder. Some other Senators doubted on that point.  The honorable Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Brown] can, perhaps, explain the different doctrines which then were held in the South on this subject.  At all events, the compromise acts of 1850 left the Territory as it was when annexed and allowed the people to interdict or establish slavery, as they please, when they should form their state constitution. That was the doctrine of the non-intervention then. What is it in this bill? I am in favor of the principle of non-intervention. Such non-intervention as would have given to the South Cuba as a slave state, should it ever be annexed to the United States; such non-intervention as that, if there had been no compact with regard to the admission of slave States to be carved out of Texas, would have secured to us those slave States, independent of the compact by which the United states are bound to admit them[.] But now, under the state of things now produced—under the feeling of distrust and resentment getting up at the North against the South—I predict—no, I will not predict, because it is too serious a subject—I will state that, if this state of thing shall not change essentially, the time will never come when a slave State can be admitted out of Texas. The non-intervention of 1850, was to let the Territories which come into the Union as slave territory be considered slave territory until the inhabitants determine, when they form a State constitution, that slavery should be abolished; and if it came in as a free territory, then the inhabitants to restrict or adopt slavery, at their discretion, when they form a State constitution. But by this bill you interpose to repeal the Missouri compromise, which would restore the territory to the condition of slave territory, as it was when annexed; but not content with that, you further interfere to make it a free territory. You then provide, without limitation of time or numbers, that the inhabitants shall decide in their Territorial Legislature to establish or prohibit slavery. Well, suppose the first Legislature shall admit slavery may not in the next abolish it, and thus keep up a perpetual struggle; while Congress, at the same time, may be agitated again by questions of further investigation? Yet this is a measure of peace to the country! It is to give quiet; all agitation is to cease under it!

I have further answer to make the honorable Senator from Georgia, though I find myself much exhausted. It was not my intention, when I rose to-day to explain the vote I should give on the amendment of the Senator from Maryland, [Mr. Pearce,] to provoke a debate upon the general merits or demerits of the bill, and still less had I any design to say anything offensive to any Senator; but the Senator from Georgia has thought proper to avail himself of the occasion to review my course in relation to this measure in a manner which calls for more special notice.

Several Senators.  Let us adjourn.

Mr. Bell.  I will not give way for an adjournment.

Mr. Clayton. I hope the Senator will give way.

Mr. Bell.  I cannot give way for an adjournment now. I must answer the honorable Senator. I was inquiring of honorable Senators what the great principle of the bill really was, which they had stated to be of so much importance to the country, but which none of them stated distinctly. I wished to see how far they agreed, or whether they could be reconciled, one with the other. The honorable Senator from Georgia said I ought to know what the principles of the bill were; that I had consultations with the friend of the measure at divers[e] times; that I met with them, heard everything discussed, and concurred with them. I do not know what meeting it was to which the Senator referred, and at which he supposes that I concurred in, authorizing the Senator from North Carolina to make his Statement.

Mr. Toombs.  I said that the southern Senators who were present authorized the Senator from North Carolina to make the statement which he did. I did not say that the Senator from Tennessee expressed any opinion; but he was present at the meeting.

Mr. Bell.  I was invited to attend meetings of the friends of the Nebraska bill. I went with pleasure to hear their discussions, because I had not made up my mind as to what course I could take upon the subject; but all the discussion which I heard at the two meetings which I attended was to the phraseology or form in which the Missouri compromise should be repealed or made inoperative, and the principle of popular sovereignty recognized, or how far it should be recognized or whether it should be recognized at all. The distinguished Senator from Michigan [Mr. Cass,] the Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. Brown,] and the Senator from Indiana, [Mr. Pettit,] were the principal speakers, and spoke of what they would or would not accept. I do not like to tell tales out of school; but as I have been arraigned, I think I may speak of such facts as may be pertinent to my case. Those points, as I remember, were not settled at the first meeting. I attended a second meeting, at which the differences appeared to be settled. The discussion at the two meetings when I attend did not enlighten me in the least. My mind was on the question whether there was anything in those featured of the bill which I ought to support, or which ought to be supported. I took no part in the discussion. It is true that at the same time I thought I might be forced to go for the measure; but the mere phraseology of the bill was then indifferent to me. Those meetings were held, if I am not mistaken, within a few days after the discussion opened in the Senate, and when the debate between the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] and the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Chase] were having their full effect. In commencing the discussion, the Senator from Illinois displayed admirable tact in pouring such a fire as he did upon the Senators from Ohio, [Mr. Chase] and Massachusetts, [Mr. Sumner] and, as a consequence, exerting from them a response in sentiment so repugnant and offensive to southern Senators as was well calculated to stir the blood of every southern man, and to [diffuse] the impression through the country that the issue presented by the bill was between the advocates of southern rights and the ultra Free Soilers and Abolitionists of the North. I repeat, that I never saw a higher degree of parliamentary tact displayed than by the Senator from Illinois upon that occasion. The honorable Senator knows that I happened to see the inflammatory publication, on which he commented with such severity in his opening speech, before he did, and called his attention to it. It was of such a nature as to strongly incline the feelings and sympathies of southern Senators to the support of the bill, whatever they might think of its wisdom.

Mr. President, honorable Senators will perceive that this obtrusion of any matter personal to myself is not volunteered by me on this occasion. I have generally, heretofore, rested on my character, humble as it may be, to shield me from all imputations of gross impropriety or inconsistency, without troubling myself with attacks aliunde, or not arising directly out of the proceedings in the body to which I belong. The honorable Senator from Georgia has done me the honor, however, to notice me personally on this floor, and to arraign my conduct, as did a colleague of mine, [Mr. Churchwell,] in the other house, a few days ago. I have not the printed speech of that member. I do not know that it has been printed. I do not know whether his attack was so forcible, or eloquent, or so much to the satisfaction of gentlemen who would like to see me writhing under such personal charges, as the attack of the honorable Senator from Georgia; but I understood he was, in his manner, quite as offensive as in the matter of his attack. He produced and read from a paper, as I learn, which purported to be a copy of the proceedings of a meeting of southern Whig Senators, by which it appeared that a resolution was adopted declaring that the course of the National Intelligencer on the Nebraska bill was in opposition to the sentiment and interest of the South, and in opposition to the views of Southern Whig Senators; and that a committee was appointed to remonstrate or confer with the editors upon the subject. The paper also contained a statement of the southern Senators present, and that I was appointed chairman of a committee of three—all certified by the secretary of this meeting. When he was called upon for the name of the person who certified it, he said it would appear in print.

I will state the circumstances of the meeting, so far as I was connected to it. On the adjournment of the Senate, on the day of the meeting, a Senator took me by the arm, and asked me to walk into the ante-room. I asked him the object. He replied that there was to be a meeting of southern Whig Senators, upon some motion of a Senator, (naming him.) I went into the room with the gentlemen, and while standing with my hat in my hand, was surprised at hearing a Senator state that he thought some step should be taken in relation to the course of the Intelligencer, on the Nebraska bill, stating his reasons briefly. Another Senator made a few remarks, and on the suggestion of some one present, a resolution was drawn up, read and adopted. The voices of two or three, perhaps, were heard in assenting to it, but no one openly objected. Two Senators were named to be of the committee, one of whom objected, and named me in his place. On the question put by a senator, “Should the gentlemen named be the committee?” the proposition was acquiesced in. When the question was put on the committee, several Senators were on their feet, and I supposing that the meeting was over left the room. I had not taken my seat during the meeting.

My colleague [Mr. Churchwell] paraded, as I understand, a certified transcript of the resolution adopted at the meeting, and of the order appointing the committee, from which it would seem that all the proceedings were in regular form. I was made prominent on the committee as its chairman. A committee of three was certified. I know that was not true. Whoever gave the certificate of the proceedings, or drew it up, but have been mistaken—I will use no harsher term. I was not present at the meeting more than 10 minutes, or fifteen at the farthest. I regarded the whole proceeding, at the time, as I have treated it since, without feeling, and without and resentment against honorable Senators, as having been gotten up or suggested for some other object than the one I heard avowed. I believed that there were some present who thought they would be doing a very great service if they could get me committed on the Nebraska bill in such a way as to make it impossible for me to retrace my steps; and some of those present knew that I did not consider myself committed to the support of the bill. I suppose there were not more than seven or eight Senators present when I went into the room. I heard no roll called; I heard of the appointment of no secretary, no chairman. I was the last nominated on the committee; but before that, I had made up my mind as to the probable object of the meeting, or, at least of whoever prompted it. I know I should soon ascertain whether I was right or wrong in my conjecture as to the object of that meeting; but the only revenge I meditated was that no one should be the wiser from what they might hear from me in relation to it.

I have to sate further on this point, that although I have been almost daily associating on friendly terms with the gentlemen who attended the meeting in question, yet not one of the number has mentioned to me anything about the meeting since the day it took place. Not even after my colleague in the House arraigned me on the subject, has any honorable Senator, who was present at the meeting referred to, lisped to me anything about it. Nor was any resolution ever put into my hand as one of the committee by a secretary or any one else. No Senator ever inquired of me if I had executed the commission to which I was appointed at the meeting. No one ever asked me whether there was any change to be expected in the course of the National Intelligencer upon the subject.

But, sir, I had sufficient confirmation, a short time after the meeting, of the correctness of my conclusion as to the object of it. I allude to the speech of the honorable Senator from North Carolina, [Mr. Badger.] I am sorry that he is not now in his seat; but I will proceed, for I will not say anything personally offensive to him in his absence. The honorable Senator from North Carolina, who had been in that meeting of southern Whigs, when he came to make his speech, announced, at the close of it, that however southern Whig Senators might differ as to the reasoning on the doctrines which were involved in the discussion, he was authorized to say they were a unit on the main feature of the bill. Now, sir, that Senator could, by asking me, at any stage of the discussion, have ascertained my position. Soon after the commencement of the discussion, I was under the impression that I should be forced to go for the measure, whether I approved it or not, because I did not see how I could separate from my southern Whig friends and the southern delegation in Congress. If the Senator had asked me then what my course would be on the bill, I would have said to him frankly what I said to others, when they made the inquiry, that though I disapproved the measure, yet I did not see how I could separate from the southern delegation. At a later stage of the discussion I would have replied, that I was strongly disposed to oppose the measure; but, that still I would not commit myself to that course. The violation of Indian treaties proposed by the provisions of the bill would, at any time, have made it impossible that I could vote for it. The honorable Senator from Missouri [Mr. Atchison] knows better than any other Senator, that I could not vote for the bill with its present provisions, with any consistency of character or principle, but at the commencement of the discussion, I supposed that that difficulty would be removed by postponing the operation of the bill until the President could have time to make new treaties with the Indian tribes and, at least, qualify the wrong which was proposed to be done to them.

Mr. Atchison.  I will state now, that I understood from the honorable Senator from Tennessee, at the last session, when this question was pending before the Senate, as well as at the present session, that his great objections to the organization of territorial governments in Kansas and Nebraska, were, first, that there was no necessity, there being no white population there; and secondly, that it could not be without greatly disturbing our Indian relations.

Mr. Bell. And then will not the honorable Senator say that I thought the territory of west of Missouri was obliged to become a free state?

Mr. Atchison.  Most assuredly; but I told the honorable Senator that my opinion as to Kansas was different.

Mr. Bell.  I repeat, that I supposed, at one time, that the difficulty on the score of Indian compacts cold be obviated by an amendment postponing the operation of the bill till new treaties could be formed. I consulted the Senator from Missouri on the subject; but he said that no such amendment could be carried; that the people could not be restrained from entering the Indian country. That was when I supposed I should have to yield to the pressure of the storm of feeling which was excited on the question in the Senate; and it required all the nerve I had afterwards to resist its force.

But, sir, I was going on to say that the honorable Senator from North Carolina, standing in the relation of a personal friend to me should have ascertained from my own lips what course I proposed to adopt in relation to the bill, before he made the declaration he did at the close of his speech. He could scarcely have supposed that I was so dull and stupid as not to comprehend the true purpose of the meeting out southern Whigs which I attended, or a test of the bill by anything which took place there. I have said before, that I had no unkind feelings againse the members of that meeting, for some of them told me over and over again, that I would be dead politically, that my standing as a public man would be utterly destroyed, if  I should vote against the bill. I was told again and again, that no southern men could vote with the northern Abolitionists upon this bill without losing the confidence of the South, as it was all-important that the South should present an unbroken front on such a question. That was one reason why I pressed so strongly to-day to know what was the great fundamental principle in the bill so much affecting the southern interests; what was the greater and larger principle which had loomed up to imposingly before the visions of southern gentlemen, that every other principle or consideration of policy should yield to it.

The honorable Senator from North Carolina is now present, and I will repeat what I have said in relation to his statement, at the close of his speech. I thought I had a right to complain of him, as a friend, that he did not inquire of me what course I had determined to pursue, when I could have done it so conveniently, before making the announcement that the southern Whigs were a unit on the Nebraska bill. That senator and myself had occupied seats very near each other during the whole discussion. Our relations, personally and socially, were kind and friendly; notwithstanding, he did not think proper to ask my opinion, but, at the close of his speech, said he was authorized to say every Whig Senator from the south concurred in the conclusion to support the bill.

Mr. Badger.  Will the Senator allow me to explain?

Mr. Bell.  I am willing that the Senator shall explain, but I do not wish any material interruption for I have a great deal more to say.

Mr. Badger.  My dear sir, I do not want a statement of that kind, as to a matter of fact, to go out without having an opportunity of stating what the fact is, as I understand it.

The Presiding Officer. (Mr. Weller is in the chair.)  Unless the honorable Senator from Tennessee yields the floor, the Senator from North Carolina is not entitled to proceed.

Mr. Bell.  I yield the floor.

Mr. Badger.  The statement which I made at the close of the remarks which I submitted to the Senate, on the Nebraska bill, I believe was to this effect that, although I did not hold my southern Whig friends responsible for the course of argument which I had adopted, yet, I thought I was authorized to say, that as to the conclusion at which I had arrived, we all stood as one man; and that I thought I had their authority for saying so. That was the statement which I made. I must say, sir, without going into particulars, that I thought, at that time, I had just the same reason to suppose that my fried from Tennessee was going for the bill, as I had to suppose that I was. In the meeting which has been alluded to by my friend from Georgia, it was suggested that the southern Whig members of this body were liable to this difficulty; that no vote was being taken, it was a matter of doubt in the country, what course they would pursue in regard to this subject, and that inconvenient consequences were resulting from that position. It was understood that I had the floor, to speak either on that day, or the next. I forget which, and I said: “Well, then, gentlemen, I had better take the occasion to say, in the course of my remarks that we are all agreed in the support of this bill.” I heard a general response: “Yes, do so by all means.” Whether my friend from Tennessee joined in this response or not, I do not know; because as witnesses very frequently say, when they are called upon to state particulars, in courts of justice, as all of us know, “I cannot answer that precisely, as I did not expect to be called upon.” [Laughter.] I certainly thought I was requested by the meeting of Whig Senators, then and there present, of whom my friend from Tennessee was one—not only authorized, but requested—in order to anticipate the delay which must take place before they could either vote or speak on the subject, that whatever course of reasoning we might adopt in bringing us to the conclusion, in support of the bill, we were all united.

Mr. Bell.  In consequence of that meeting?

Mr. Badger.  I made that remark in the conclusion of my speech. My honorable fried from Tennessee sat immediately before me. He said nothing by way of dissent, after I had concluded my speech, and passed out—

Mr. Bell.  Passed out where?

Mr. Badger.  Right there, just out of my seat. The Senator came to me and said: “why have you committed me to support this bill.”

Mr. Bell.  I said no such thing.

Mr. Badger.  Something of that sort.

Mr. Bell.  What I said was: “Mr. Badger, you had no right to commit me to support of the bill.”

Mr. Badger.  Probably that was it.

Mr. Clayton.  Let me interfere between my friends?

Mr. Badger.  Not yet.  I am willing to make any statement about the language, because, as I said, I did not expect to be called upon; but only say, a remark of that kind was made by my friend, which attracted my attention, because I had supposed I was speaking, not only by his authority, but at his instance, in making that remark.

Mr. Bell.  On what occasion?

Mr. Badger.  This very occasion now referred to.

Mr. Bell.  That is what I suppose, and I consider it full confirmation of my conjectures in regard to that transaction.

Mr. Clayton.  Will my friend now give me the floor for a moment?

Mr. Bell.  Certainly.

Mr. Clayton.  These are my friends, and I think I understand exactly the state of the case. There is a misapprehension between them, that I am anxious to correct it. There is no reason whatever for any feeling between them, and whom I have made the explanation which I am about to make, I think they will both agree that neither of them has any occasion whatever to complain of the other.

Mr. Badger.  I have no feeling whatever about it.

Mr. Clayton.  The facts were these.  The southern Whigs in this body were unanimous in favor of the repeal of the Missouri compromise. They had consulted with each other, not in a caucus, but we understood from private conversations with each other, that we all thought that the Missouri compromise line ought to be repealed.

Mr. Badger.  That we were all in favor of the provision as it stood in the bill. That is what I understood.

Mr. Clayton.  Then the Intelligencer paper took ground hostile to the position—

Mr. Bell.  I must stop the Senator from Delaware. I cannot admit his statement. We should soon get into a quarrel.

Mr. Clayton.  If that is the case I will give up. I do not wish to get into a quarrel with my friend from Tennessee.

Mr. Bell.  The Senator says we were all agreed that the Missouri compromise shold be repealed. That is the statement of the honorable Senator from Delaware.

Mr. Clayton.  Did not the honorable Senator himself take that ground in his speech?

Mr. Bell.  I never did.

Mr. Clayton.  Then I entirely misunderstood the honorable Senator, and beg his pardon.

Mr. Bell.  I know that the honorable Senator from Delaware did not intend to misrepresent me.

Mr. Clayton.  Not at all.

Mr. Bell.  But the honorable Senator from North Carolina, though it was so easy for him to have ascertained my opinion, spoke of the opinion of all the Southern Whigs. He did not ask me about it.

Mr. Badger.  I thought I had the Senator’s authority already.

Mr. Bell.  From anything I ever said?

Mr. Badger.  I have already said that we had a meeting, at which the Senator from Tennessee was present; and, when I suggested this, there was a general expression of approbation that I should—

Mr. Bell.  Do what?

Mr. Badger.  That I should state we were all agreed in support of the bill.

Mr. Bell.  That all the southern Whigs were agreed upon it?

Mr. Badger.  Yes. That is what I understood. It was a meeting of the southern Whigs.

Mr. Bell.  I could not make such a declaration. Did the honorable Senator from Delaware hear such a proposition?

Mr. Clayton.  I was proceeding to explain, but the Senator would not permit me.

Mr. Bell.  I pronounce that there was no such question put. The honorable Senator from North Carolina is mistaken.

Mr. Badger.  I do not say there was any question put.

Mr. Bell.  Nor was it asked in my hearing.

Mr. Badger.  As we were breaking up, the suggestion was thrown out that it was uncertain in the country, how southern Whig Senators stood on this bill; and I then suggested that, as I was to make a speech, it would perhaps be well for me to take the occasion of saying we were all agreed. I think my friend from Louisiana [Mr. Benjamin,] was at that meeting, and he can say whether I am right or not. There was a general declaration, “By all means do it!”

Mr. Bell.  Then I was not at that meeting.

Mr. Badger.  I will not say the Senator from Tennessee was there but I thought he was.

Mr. Bell. Now, sir, the honorable Senator from North Carolina could easily have ascertained my sentiments at any moment.

Mr. Badger.  I thought I knew these already.

Mr. Bell.  I say that no such question as that stated by the honorable Senator was asked at that meeting when I was present. If it were, it was out of my hearing.  I have before referred to the course of one of my colleagues in the House [Mr. Churchwell] on this subject. My colleagues stated that I was the chairman of the committee appointed at the meeting of the southern Whig Senators, and, as I was present and did not object, he very naturally and rationally inferred that I was in favor of the repeal of the Missouri compromise at that time, so upon no other supposition would I have undertaken such a commission to remonstrate with the editors of an independent journal against their course on the Nebraska bill. I therefore have no feeling against him on that ground; but I have some faults to find with him on the same ground that I found with the honorable Senator from North Carolina.

The honorable gentleman to whom I allude had my confidence, and was well informed as to my views and opinions on the subject of the Nebraska bill from the time of its introduction in the Senate. He professed to be my personal friend during the whole period of the pendency of the bill in the Senate; and conferred with me frequently on the subject before the meeting of the southern Whig Senators, and afterwards. In one of those conferences he was pleased to say that he had more confidence in my judgment, on questions of this description than in that of any other public man he knew; and that he should defer very much to my views, though he did not say he would be guided by them.

Some few days, or a week, after the discussion on the bill commenced, he came to my seat in the Senate, while the debate was going on, and asked me if I had made up my mind on the question. I replied that I had not. He then said that he was going home for his family, and, as the people would be making inquiries of him as to my course on the subject, he wished to know what to say to them and he wished to know on his own account. I then told him that I would not decide on my course until he returned, unless the bill should be brought to a vote before he got back. During his absence, in my conversations with other colleagues of mine in the House, I told them repeatedly that if I took ground in opposition to the measure, I thought I might rely on having our colleague [Mr. Churchwell] with me; and I told them, confidentially, the grounds upon which my confidence was based. After he returned I met him, and told him that I had determined to oppose the bill, and I then asked him what he thought he should do. He said he would reserve his decision as long as he could; perhaps until the close of the debate in the House.

I do not think that I would be mistaken in stating that not more than three or four days or a week elapsed, from that time until he made his speech in the House, without my having some conversation with him, as to the course he proposed to take on the Nebraska bill, and I was left in doubt as to what it would be until the evening before he made his speech when he informed me that he would vote for the bill. I said to him: “You are surely not sincere?” He replied that he was.”

At this point the honorable Senator yielded, at the solicitation of several Senators, and the Senate adjourned.

_______________

1 Place of repentance.

2 Clean slate.

SOURCE:  “Speech of Hon. John Bell of Tennessee,” The Tennessean, Nashville, Tennessee, Tuesday, June 13, 1854, p. 2

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Brigadier-General James Edward Raines

JAMES EDWARD Rains, [Class of 1854,] son of John Rains, was born in Wilson Co., Tenn., April 10, 1833, and entered college Sophomore year, a resident of Nashville, Tenn.

After teaching for a short time, he studied law and entered on the practice of his profession in Nashville.

In the Confederate army he held the rank of Colonel, and subsequently of Brigadier General, and fell, shot through the heart, at Murfreesboro', Dec. 31, 1862.

He married Miss Yeatman, a step-daughter of John Bell, formerly U. S. Senator from Tennessee.

SOURCE: Obituary Record of Graduates of Yale College Deceased from July, 1859, to July 1870, p. 140-1

Friday, August 9, 2019

Diary of to Amos A. Lawrence: November 7, 1860

Lincoln chosen president by immense majorities in almost all the free States. Breckinridge comes next in electoral votes; then Bell, and Douglas last. Andrew chosen governor of Massachusetts by an immense majority.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 156

Monday, October 15, 2018

Abraham Lincoln’s Address to the Mayor Bishop and the Citizens of Cincinnati, Ohio, February 12, 1861

Mr. Mayor, Ladies, and Gentlemen: Twenty-four hours ago, at the capital of Indiana. I said to myself I have never seen so many people assembled together in winter weather. I am no longer able to say that. But it is what might reasonably have been expected — that this great city of Cincinnati would thus acquit herself on such an occasion. My friends, I am entirely overwhelmed by the magnificence of the reception which has been given, I will not say to me, but to the President-elect of the United States of America. Most heartily do I thank you, one and all, for it.

I am reminded by the address of your worthy mayor that this reception is given not by any one political party, and even if I had not been so reminded by his Honor I could not have failed to know the fact by the extent of the multitude I see before me now. I could not look upon this vast assemblage without being made aware that all parties were united in this reception. This is as it should be. It is as it should have been if Senator Douglas had been elected. It is as it should have been if Mr. Bell had been elected; as it should have been if Mr. Breckinridge had been elected; as it should ever be when any citizen of the United States is constitutionally elected President of the United States. Allow me to say that I think what has occurred here today could not have occurred in any other country on the face of the globe, without the influence of the free institutions which we have unceasingly enjoyed for three quarters of a century.

There is no country where the people can turn out and enjoy this day precisely as they please, save under the benign influence of the free institutions of our land.

I hope that, although we have some threatening national difficulties now — I hope that while these free institutions shall continue to be in the enjoyment of millions of free people of the United States, we will see repeated every four years what we now witness.

In a few short years, I, and every other individual man who is now living, will pass away; I hope that our national difficulties will also pass away, and I hope we shall see in the streets of Cincinnati — food old Cincinnati — for centuries to come, once every four years, her people give such a reception as this to the constitutionally elected President of the whole United States. I hope you shall all join in that reception, and that you shall also welcome your brethren from across the river to participate in it. We will welcome them in every State of the Union, no matter where they are from. From away South we shall extend them a cordial good-will, when our present difficulties shall have been forgotten and blown to the winds forever.

I have spoken but once before this in Cincinnati. That was a year previous to the late presidential election. On that occasion, in a playful manner, but with sincere words, I addressed much of what I said to the Kentuckians. I gave my opinion that we as Republicans would ultimately beat them as Democrats, but that they could postpone that result longer by nominating Senator Douglas for the presidency than they could in any other way. They did not, in any true sense of the word, nominate Mr. Douglas, and the result has come certainly as soon as ever I expected. I also told them how I expected they would be treated after they should have been beaten; and I now wish to recall their attention to what I then said upon that subject. I then said, “When we do as we say, — beat you, — you perhaps want to know what we will do with you. I will tell you, so far as lam authorized to speak for the opposition, what we mean to do with you. We mean to treat you, as near as we possibly can, as Washington, Jefferson, and Madison treated you. We mean to leave you alone, and in no way to interfere with your institutions; to abide by all and every compromise of the Constitution; and, in a word, coming back to the original proposition, to treat you, so far as degenerate men — if we have degenerated — may, according to the examples of those noble fathers, Washington, Jefferson, and Madison. We mean to remember that you are as good as we; that there is no difference between us other than the difference of circumstances. We mean to recognize and bear in mind always that you have as good hearts in your bosoms as other people, or as we claim to have, and treat you accordingly.”

Fellow-citizens of Kentucky! — friends!—brethren! may I call you in my new position? I see no occasion, and feel no inclination, to retract a word of this. If it shall not be made good, be assured the fault shall not be mine.

And now, fellow-citizens of Ohio, have you, who agree with him who now addresses you in political sentiment— have you ever entertained other sentiments toward our brethren of Kentucky than those I have expressed to you? If not, then why shall we not, as heretofore, be recognized and acknowledged as brethren again, living in peace and harmony again one with another? I take your response as the most reliable evidence that it may be so, trusting, through the good sense of the American people, on all sides of all rivers in America, under the providence of God, who has never deserted us. that we shall again be brethren, forgetting all parties, ignoring all parties. My friends, I now bid you farewell.

SOURCES: John G. Nicolay and John Hay, Editors, Abraham Lincoln: Complete Works, Volume 1, p. 674-6