Week 9 Blog Post Part 2

Week 9 Blog Post Part 2

NC Legislature Protests the Confederate Draft and Martial Law, May 1864 (cont.): In Paul Escott’s essay “Confederate Policymaking Produces Innovation and Controversy,” he stated that Jefferson Davis took the conscription law to the state Supreme Courts. I noticed that North Carolina was not in the list of states that Escott said upheld conscription on the part of the central government. I wonder if the North Carolina Supreme Court heard such a case. (P & T, 281-282)

The NC legislature was also protesting Confederate powers late in the war, May 1864. Habeus corpus had previously been suspended in 1862 for a year. North Carolina’s protest fell during the second suspension which according to Escott was from February 15 to July 31, 1864. (P & T, 278)

Catherine Edmonston of North Carolina Discusses Matters Public and Domestic, Jan. 1865: Edmonston was vehemently opposed to the Confederacy emancipating the slaves so they can fight in the army. She called the Richmond Enquirer newspaper an abolitionist because it endorsed the idea! She didn’t want the “degraded race” of the Negro to be put on par with the whites by allowing them to be soldiers. We can tell from Edmonston’s comments that she was well informed about current politics. She spoke of “the Constitution [being] daily trampled underfoot by Impressment Laws & Government Schedules.” (P & T, 252) She also commented that the slave emancipation was a political act to appease England and France whose governments had already banned slavery. Her diary entry contained a lot of venting about politics and government which was carefully thought out. She mentioned thinking about it for the “past fortnight” which meant two weeks.

As an introduction to her family’s activities, she commented that their Negroes were the only ones who got a holiday at Christmas. She and her husband were busy working slaughtering and preserving meat! She poked fun at the parts of the hog that her slaves ate and said that the only presents that a Negro child needed were a hog bladder and hog tail. (P & T, 253)

Cornelia Peake McDonald Comments on Class and Conscription, March 1865: I assume this is a diary entry; the editor does not say. McDonald made clear that she was against deserters but understood why they wanted to run away. One reason she gave was that they needed to keep their families from starving which was a consequence of their being low born and poor. Although she admitted that “the plainer people” who had died on the battlefield must have “had true soldierly hearts and bore themselves bravely in the shock of battle.” (P & T, 254) She thought that there wouldn’t have been any desertion from the army “if the brave, the well born and the chivalrous could have done all the fighting.” (P & T, 254) Clearly, McDonald was not thinking of any upper class man who had paid for a substitute. I wonder what she thought of those plantation owners or managers who got exemptions.

Regarding the government, McDonald considered conscription to be tyranny even though it “was made necessary by the exigency of the times.” (P & T, 254) She also vented about the lawlessness when people both upper class (like herself) and poor (butcher’s wife) were robbed of their food and property. (P & T, 253-255)

Elizabeth Patterson of Virginia Tries to Reconcile Her Loyalty and Her “Misfortune,” March 1865: Amy Murrell Taylor mentions Patterson’s petition in her essay, “Southern Families and Their Appeals for Protection” where she provides the reader with more details of the family than given in the document. (P & T, 255, 273-274) Patterson expressed her patriotism and sacrifice having lost her husband and three sons in the war. It seems like a reasonable request to want a discharge for her “only living adult son” from the army as a bonded agriculturist. Patterson further attested that her son’s health was feeble. (P & T, 255-256) Taylor stated that “the Confederate Congress passed a new series of laws in 1864 and 1865” in response to letters like Patterson’s. (P & T, 274) She did not say whether Patterson’s request was granted. “Only 7 percent of the special exemption requests in [her] sample were granted.” (P & T, 270)

Written by Molly Kettler

Week 9 Blog Post

Week 9 Blog Post

Comments on Major Problems in the Civil War and Reconstruction Documents and Essays:

Gov. Joseph E. Brown: It is an ironic dilemma that the Confederacy placed itself in by forming a separate nation. By going to war, the new nation found out that a strong central government and military was necessary if the country was going to have any chance at beating the Union forces. It is interesting that Gov. Brown had not anticipated that the need for martial law would arise in time of war. Also noteworthy was that he was writing to Vice-President Stephens who was already at odds with President Davis.

Eliza Adams: It was very bold and brave of Mrs. Adams to write to Pres. Davis to request an exemption for her son Matthew. She certainly had just cause in my mind as did the other women that Amy M. Taylor wrote about in her essay “Southern Families and Their Appeals for Protection.” Adams also anticipated needing corroboration of her hardship. She offered to get a petition from her neighbors. She also referenced that he could inquire of Gen. Lawton’s Brigade.

Plain Folk: Keeping the misspellings in the document shows the education level of its writers. Writing to the governor of NC was undoubtedly a big step for them born out of their hunger. They see the large plantation owners as taking advantage of them by jacking up prices especially of corn. At least they are letting the governor know that they will take matters into their own hands, presumably threatening violence, if he does not do something to stop the inflation.

NC Legislature: Significant in this document is that the legislature did not accept the possibility of needing “emergency powers” even in time of war. They wrote, the People of North Carolina … declare that ‘no conditions of public danger,’ present or prospective, probable or possible, can render the liberties of the people incompatible with the public safety.” (P & T, 251) The document further equated a draft with military despotism and a violation of state rights. This again demonstrates that the states were not in favor of the national government exercising any authority over them which is why the Confederate Constitution’s preamble stated, “We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent government …” (McPherson & Hogue, A-1) The NC legislature had a good case to say that the Confederate government was acting against its own Constitution by trying to enforce draft requirements of the states and suspending habeas corpus.

I will post on the essays tonight.

Written by Molly Kettler

Week 8 Blog Post Continued - Comments on Schwalm

Comments on A Hard Fight For We by Leslie A. Schwalm: Schwalm gave a detailed account of the hardships faced by newly emancipated freedmen and especially freedwomen. It was especially brutal that the Union troops in Sherman’s march took everything the slaves had, not only their food but their cooking utensils as well. (Schwalm, 123-124, 151) It is amazing that the Union army would then wonder why so many freedpeople would show up to receive rations! They would then characterize the blacks as lazy when their soldiers were the ones who took away all their means of sustenance destroying their property and confiscating their food and animals.

General Saxton’s view that “slavery had totally eradicated in slave women any self-restraint in their sexual expression” seems totally bizarre by our standards today. (Schwalm, 141) Yet, it was in keeping with the racism of the times.

It was interesting to read of Col. James C. Beecher’s change of heart concerning sympathy for the freedpeople after he had observed the “former slaves’ capacity for revenge as well as their violent defense of freedom and independence.” (Schwalm, 170-171) In my opinion, Beecher’s use of violence to attempt to force the freedpeople into working according to the plantation contracts was as unjustified as the freedpeople’s violence. His form of “discipline” was and not an effective method of obtaining compliance.

I was glad to see Schwalm point out the double standard with which freedpeople viewed their post-emancipation circumstances. “Freedpeople expected bureau agents and the military’s provost courts to enforce planters’ obligations under the labor contracts, and yet freely violated the terms of those contracts themselves.” (Schwalm, p. 185)

Written by Molly Kettler

Week 8 Blog Post

Week 8 Blog Post

Comments on Ordeal by Fire Appendices:

The Emancipation Proclamation: The proclamation stated that the military and navy “will recognize and maintain the freedom” of the freed slaves and do nothing to repress them. That order was not consistently enforced especially in terms of the camp followers consisting of women and children as the Perman & Taylor documents highlighted.

It was not only stereotypical prejudice that caused Lincoln to admonish freedpeople from committing violence. It is human nature for any oppressed people to want to retaliate against their oppressors if given the opportunity. Schwalm in A Hard Fight for We detailed the violence committed by freed blacks both men and women in South Carolina especially in 1865, over two years after the Emancipation Proclamation was enacted.

As we discussed in class, Lincoln felt that he could only free the slaves in the states that were in rebellion in order to be in compliance with the Constitution. Northern Democrats still felt that he had violated the Constitution.

The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution: Lincoln hoped to avoid a Constitutional challenge to his freeing of the slaves which is why he proposed the 13^th amendment to outlaw slavery completely. It was fortunate that the amendment was still able to be ratified by a sufficient number of states even after his April assassination. It was ratified in December of 1865.

Comments on Major Problems in the Civil War and Reconstruction Documents and Essays:

General Benjamin Butler was concerned for the blacks, especially those who were unfit for military duty such as old men, women and children. He understood what a hindrance these camp followers were going to be to the army if they were allowed to stay. This was very early in the war, July 1861, to have 900 Negroes already approaching Union lines. Butler was correct to ask the secretary of war what to do about them. Schwalm mentioned that Butler was one of the first generals to refuse to return fugitive slaves. (Can’t find page in Schwalm)

The Conkling Letter: Lincoln’s arguments defending his Emancipation Proclamation were very insightful and showed his skill as a lawyer. His use of if, then logical reasoning painted his adversaries into a corner. He spelled it out for the Republican Party when he stated, “I issued the proclamation on purpose to aid you in saving the Union.” (P & T, 290)

Joseph Miller, U.S.A., Protests the Mistreatment of His Family by the U.S. Army, Nov. 1864: Miller’s affidavit was very sad. He was correct to blame the army for the severe conditions that resulted in his son’s death. Living conditions would have been difficult enough in the tent Miller’s wife and children were first assigned. Tents are normally not very warm, but according to the document, the tent was providing enough shelter for his sick son to slowly recover. Miller blamed the cold wind for killing his son. The living conditions for both soldiers and camp followers during the war were tragic.

James H Payne, Aug. 1864: Payne had a valid complaint that the black regiment was not reinforced by the whites. It is good that documents such as this remain to counter any claims that whites made afterwards that the blacks did not distinguish themselves enough in battle.

Frederick Douglass: It is interesting that Douglass brought up that women also were denied the right to vote, but that did not mean that the government should “justify one wrong by another” in denying African-Americans the right to vote. He said that he approves of women’s suffrage but it is a difference argument. Douglass also argued that denying blacks the right to vote contributed to their low self-esteem. If Douglass understood that keeping blacks low was precisely what white supremacists intended to achieve, it was not a good argument to use to get them to change their minds. Lincoln was much better at using psychology. Douglass’ advocacy for justice as opposed to benevolence, pity, or sympathy had more resonance.  His entreaty of “Do nothing with us!” was likely to have better appeal to latent racists. Even though racists would still prefer to deny blacks voting rights, they would be more willing to see the Negro fall if he “cannot stand on his own legs.”

Gertrude Thomas: I was struck by Gertrude’s comment, “I assisted [Patsy] in wiping the breakfast dishes, a thing I never remember to have done more than once or twice in my life.” (P & T, 297) I totally sympathize with the Southern white women. I wish that I never had to wash dishes. I positively hate washing dishes and even with a family of only three and a dishwasher, the stream of dishes throughout the day seems constant. I even let my dishes air dry and the chore is still endless!

I think that Southern women after emancipation deserve more sympathy than they’ve gotten. I certainly wouldn’t want to be faced with trying to run a plantation or even the manor house with ex-slaves, now paid servants, who refuse to work and still expect to be fed and taken care of. It is no wonder the whites viewed their ex-slaves as immature and childlike. The freedwomen especially had no concept of economics. I am reminded of my fourteen year old daughter.

The African American Role in Union Victory: This was a very good, concise essay on the blacks’ participation in the military and sabotage on the Confederate homefront. One fact that I underlined was Glatthaar’s comment, “There were more white volunteers than the government could accept into uniform.” (P & T, 310) I did not think that was true since even the Union needed to start a draft in 1863. Glatthaar gives no reference date for his comment.

It was interesting to learn that Butler was one of the first generals to allow blacks to work for the army which led to the First Confiscation Act. Also interesting was the account of Edmund Ruffin wondering why his slaves would want to run away from his care. Ruffin evidently didn’t understand the lure of freedom. As Glatthaar pointed out, “[T]he situation challenged their core beliefs.” (P & T, 313)

Douglass was right that blacks fighting in the army would prove that they had earned their right to citizenship. (P & T, 314) This is precisely what the Confederates feared as embodied in the quote from Georgia governor Joseph E. Brown, “Whenever we establish the fact that they are a military race, we destroy our whole theory that they are unfit to be free.” (P & T, 310)

I found Glatthaar’s section on the effect of white officers upon black troops enlightening. He pointed out the white officers were volunteers but also “men of their time” who couldn’t help being burdened with “some degree of racial prejudice.” New information to me was that these officers had to pass competency examinations and provide character references. So the black regiments benefited from having “talented, experienced officers who could prepare them for battle” more so than the all volunteer regiments. (P & T, 317) Still, that did not make up for the black regiments being unsupported by white regiments in battle as told in the document by James Payne mentioned above. (P & T, 294-295)

Comments on A Hard Fight For We by Leslie A. Schwalm to follow in next post.

Written by Molly Kettler

Week 7 Blog Post

Week 7 Blog Post

Comments on Ordeal by Fire Appendices:

Lincoln’s Inaugural Address: Lincoln directed the bulk of his address to the states which had already seceded from the Union. He attempted to convince those states that no violation of the Constitution had occurred to justify their secession. He also stated that the fugitive slave clause already in the Constitution (Article IV, Section 2.3) was sufficient to required slaves to be returned to their owners. It should not matter whether the clause was “enforced by national or by state authority.” (Perman & Taylor, A-8)

In general, Lincoln was trying to get the seceding states to admit the error of their ways and seek reconciliation. The Confederacy had taken great pains to justify their secession and subsequent establishment of a separate nation as legal according to the U.S. Constitution. Lincoln used his inaugural address to refute that claim. I thought that Lincoln’s argument concerning the “perfect Union” was very creative. (P & T, A-9) The Constitution was enacted “to form a more perfect Union.” By seceding, each state in the Confederacy essentially made the Union less perfect, thereby, behaving counter to the Constitution’s original intent.

Another one of Lincoln’s arguments that I found interesting was when he told the Confederacy that they were setting a precedent for a minority to cause permanent division by not accepting majority rule. Lincoln warned that parts of the Confederacy would secede in the future if they disagreed with their new national government. (P & T, A-10) The war united the Confederacy. I wonder if Lincoln’s prediction would have come true if a war had been averted.

The Gettysburg Address: I think it is ironic that Lincoln did not expect his Gettysburg address to be remembered. He stated, “The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.” (P & T, A-17) Most people today likely recognize the first sentence of the address, “Fourscore and seven years ago … all men are created equal” and that Pres. Lincoln said it. (P & T, A-16) Many of these same people probably know very little if anything about the Gettysburg battle itself.

Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address: Lincoln began his address by basically stating that there is not much new. He was not overly boastful about the chances of the Union winning the war. Instead, he said that the public knew as much about the progress of the war as he did. (P & T, A-19) He did not say the Confederacy is going to be defeated. “With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.

Lincoln discussed the civil war of the previous four years as though both sides were at fault but they were clearly at opposite poles. One side wanted to destroy the Union, the other save it. One party wanted to make war, the other accepted it. (P & T, A-19) Interestingly, Lincoln spoke of the slaves as though they had emancipated themselves. He did not mention his part in the “cause of the conflict,” slavery, ceasing to exist before the war ended. (P & T, A-20).

Lincoln realized and reminded his constituents that God was the common denominator between and Union and the Confederacy. “Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other.” (P & T, A-20) There can be no doubt that Lincoln understood the pain and anguish of civil war when he said, “[L]et us judge not that we be not judged.” (P & T, A-20) Just as many Union and Confederate soldiers turned their individual fates and that of their army over to God, Lincoln turned the fate of the war over to God also.  

Written by Molly Kettler

Week 6 Bolg Post

Week 6 Blog Post

Comments on Major Problems in the Civil War and Reconstruction Documents and Essays:

Document 1: General McClellan’s Harrison’s Landing letter amply illustrated the contempt McClellan held for Lincoln even though his actual choice of language was respectful. It is truly amazing that McClellan would think that he needed to tell the president that “the Constitution and the Union must be preserved.” (Perman and Taylor, 140) He also should not have had to tell the president that the Union was in a “War” a year after the fighting began. McClellan was living in a fantasy world if he thought that the Union armies would respect Southern private property and leave it in tact. This had been Lincoln’s intention a year earlier, but he realized that it was no longer practical.

I did not understand exactly what McClellan meant by the statement, “[Y]ou will require a Commander in Chief of the Army …” (P & T, 141). By the Constitution, Pres. Lincoln was Commander in Chief of all the military. By the time of the letter, July 7, 1862, Lincoln had already made McClellan Chief of Staff.

I thought it was interesting that McClellan closed his letter with, “Very respectfully your obdt svt [obedient servant] when he disobeyed Lincoln’s orders to attack on several occasions. (P & T, 141)

Document 2: I noticed that the General Orders, No. 75 document from General Lee was actually written by his assistant general, Chilton, referring to Lee in the third person. The letter switched to second person in the last paragraph so that it could thank the soldiers directly. General Lee gave thanks to God for the victory in battle in keeping with a tradition that dates back thousands of years in Western Civilization. That opening sentence seems to contradict itself. God is “the only Giver of all the victory,” yet it was the “valor” of Lee’s men that made it all possible. (P & T, 142)

Document 3: Gen. Lee’s letter to Pres. Davis was much more appropriate than Gen. McClellan’s letter above. Lee’s subject outlined a specific battle strategy which was in keeping with his position as commanding general. He supported his position with outlines of the conditions within both armies. He was also implicitly asking for Davis’ permission to undertake the offensive. Lee’s signing of his letter, “your ob’t servant” is more believable than with McClellan. (P & T, 143-44)

Document 4: This letter is a good example of Gen. Grant’s battle strategy. He gave detailed instructions to Gen. Meade about the coordination of troops under different commanders.

Document 5: Grant memoirs show that he remembered the Overland campaign as a standoff with inevitably high losses on either side. It gives a grim indication that Grant was aware of the high death toll on both sides that had not accomplished much towards ending the war as of mid-1864. (P & T, 146)

Document 6: I find it interesting that Gen. Sherman even took the time to respond in writing to a petition by the mayor of Atlanta. I don’t know the actual events of Sherman’s march because we haven’t gotten that far in this course yet. From the letter, it seems that Sherman gave the citizens of Atlanta notice to evacuate the city so that they wouldn’t be wounded or killed when his army came through. He did not apologize for any of the hardships of war and basically blames the people of Atlanta for bringing the war upon themselves by Georgia taking part in the secession. He told them that they must admit the error of their ways in order to end the war. He is willing to destroy the city in order to force them into obeying “the laws of the United States.” (P & T, 147-48) Sherman emphasized that he is just doing his duty as a Union officer. To reinforce that concept, he asserted that once peace has been achieved (meaning after Georgia rejoins the Union), Sherman will defend Atlanta’s “homes and families against danger from any quarter.” (P & T, 148)

Document 7: I noticed that General Grant referred to the war as “the rebellion” in his report made at the end of the war.  He noted that he surmised from the beginning that peace between the North and South would not come from diplomatic negotiations. Only after the South had been defeated militarily would peace be possible. (P & T, 148-49) He admitted that it was a problem that the Union armies of the East and West did not work together which gave the enemy an advantage. Grant realized that his actions were apt to be criticized the most by those who lost loved ones or property in the war, but that he served to the best of his ability.

Essay 1: Gallagher made a good point that armies “operate within a complicated web of military, political, and social constraints.” (P& T, 150) As such, he gave a good summary of influencing factors leading up to the Richmond campaign. I found his argument convincing for why the Eastern Theater battles received more attention and significance from the public. It is interesting to learn that Pres. Lincoln was not happy with that fact since he necessarily had to view the war as a whole in order to preserve the Union. He highlighted the Northern political divide over emancipation. As the Richmond campaign approached, the North expected to continue their victories while the South was demoralized from losses. Another of Gallagher’s insights was that Lee took over the Richmond campaign without the benefit of public confidence in his abilities as McClellan had. Paradoxically, McClellan was the one undeserving of such confidence when he retreated from the offensive. Politics played a leading role since McClellan Democratic political views in addition to his ego caused him to chafe with Pres. Lincoln. It was after the Richmond campaign that McClellan presented Lincoln with his Harrison’s Landing Letter mentioned above. Gallagher noted that after this campaign, Lincoln moved much closer to emancipation.

I also found it interesting that Gen. Lee’s impressive performance at keeping Richmond from falling to Union forces influenced foreign opinion. There was more support in the British Parliament for granting diplomatic recognition to the Confederacy since Lee took command.

Essay 2: I thought that Mark Grimsley’s essay on the Overland Campaign was a good assessment of generalship. (P & T, 162-65) It was difficult to put into context since we do not read about the Overland Campaign in Ordeal by Fire until later (I found it on page 454). The campaign does not take place until the spring of 1864. The discussion of the relationship between generals Grant and Meade was revealing (P & T, 166-67) Also interesting was the brief paragraph on the statistical cost of just one of Grant’s campaigns at $48,000 per day. (P & T, 170) I wonder how much the cost figures were quoted to the public then. We were inundated with cost factors over the Iraq wars, especially the controversial second war. Was it millions per day and billions per month? I don’t remember. I only remember wishing the money had been spent at home in the U.S. or saved in the treasury. At least during the Civil War, the money was spent on trying to preserve our own country although, again, it is unfortunate that the money needed to be spent on war. I suppose the Confederacy would have asserted that the Union (North) could have left them alone to form their separate nation and not engage in a war.

Written by Molly Kettler