One hundred fifty years ago today the Chicago (IL) Tribune published excerpts from two Kentucky newspapers that condemned former US Senator John Bell for announcing his support for the Confederacy. Bell was the Constitutional Union Party’s candidate for President in 1860 and he had opposed secession  after Abraham Lincoln’s victory. Yet in April 1861 after the attack on Fort Sumter and President Lincoln’s call for 75,000 troops  Bell changed his mind. In a speech in Nashville Bell had been “clear and loud to every Tennessean – to arms! to arms!” Not only did the speech prove that Bell was “a rank secessionist, but a traitor and a coward” as the Tribune explained. In addition, the Tribune included excerpts of two editorials from papers based in Lexington, Kentucky. The Journal had supported Bell in the 1860 election and now noted that “we cannot but recall the striking advice given by some prudent sage – ‘Never praise a man till he is dead.’” The Democrat, which argued that Bell “never had brains enough to stand up in a storm,” also condemned Bell and concluded that:

“And thus John Bell has sunk without a ripple to mark the place where he went down. – As the Judge always says when he sentences a murderer, “May the Almighty have mercy on your soul.”

You can read more about Bell and the secession crisis in the Upper South in Daniel W. Crofts’ Reluctant Confederates: Upper South Unionists in the Secession Crisis (1989). You can listen to this article by clicking on the play button below:

Listen to the Chicago (IL) Tribune article:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

One hundred fifty years ago today Abraham Lincoln became the sixteenth President of the United States. After he delivered his Inaugural Address from the central portico of the U.S. Capitol, Chief Justice Roger Taney administered the oath of office. Newspapers throughout the country published Lincoln’s speech and debated what it meant for the future of  the country.  The New York Times, which supported the Republican party, argued that Lincoln had been  “highly conciliatory towards all who have been led to entertain unjust and unfounded apprehensions” about the new administration. Other Republican papers such as the Cleveland (OH) Herald also praised the speech. “The Inaugural of President Lincoln will take its place in history as one of the most remarkable state papers of the present age,” as the Herald explained. In addition, the Herald believed  that “the Union men of the South cannot fail to be pleased” since Lincoln had indicated that “the constitutional rights of each section of the Union shall be respected and protected. ” One southern unionist newspaper, the Fayetteville (NC) Observer, noted that “there is much in Mr. Lincoln’s words to assure the South that it need anticipate no violation of its rights from his administration.” The Observer argued that President Lincoln would not “resort to ‘coercion’” because “it would be the maddest of follies.” Some southern editors, however, were accused of distorting the text of the speech in an attempt to support secessionists. While the Republican editor of the Chicago (IL) Tribune knew from experience that “a long document [rarely] is transmitted over the wires without undergoing more or less transformation,” Joseph Medill believed in this case that some editors had deliberately included errors. “Evidently the conductors of the secession press are unwilling that the people whom they have hurried into rebellion without a cause, shall have the opportunity of learning the truth,” as Medill concluded. You can read more about Lincoln’s Inaugural Address in chapter 3 of Douglas L. Wilson’s Lincoln’s Sword: The Presidency and the Power of Words (2006) and chapter 20 of Michael Burlingame’s Abraham Lincoln: A Life (2008).

One hundred fifty years ago today the Charleston (SC) Mercury published part of New York City Mayor Fernando Wood’s speech that he gave during President-Elect Abraham Lincoln’s visit in late February 1861. Lincoln had left his home in Springfield, Illinois on February 11 for Washington DC. On the way he stopped at a number of cities, including Albany, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia. While Lincoln arrived in New York City with his wife on February 19, he did not meet with Mayor Wood until the afternoon of February 20. The Charleston (SC) Mercury described “Mayor Wood’s address of welcome to the Abolition President” as “too good to be lost.” As Lincoln entered “office with… a disconnected and hostile people to reconcile,” Wood told the President-Elect that “it will require a high patriotism and an elevated comprehension of the whole country and its varied interests, opinions and prejudices to so conduct public affairs as to bring it back again to its former harmonious, consolidated and prosperous condition.” In addition, Wood warned that “[New York’s] material interests are paralyzed” and “her commercial greatness is endangered.” Yet Wood also supported southern Democrats and he wanted the crisis to be resolved through compromise. Wood noted that he expected Lincoln to use “peaceful and conciliatory means” to ensure the “restoration of fraternal relations between the States.” Lincoln responded the same day to Wood’s remarks, noting that “there is nothing that can ever bring me willingly to consent to the destruction of this Union.” The following day Lincoln left for Trenton, New Jersey. You can read more about President-Elect Lincoln’s journey from Springfield to Washington, DC in Harold Holzer’s Lincoln: President-Elect (2008).

New York “is one of the most unhealthy cities on the globe” and, as the Lowell (MA) Citizen & News explained in March 1859, “the unhealthiness of the city” had once again “attract[ed] the attention of the legislators at Albany.” Two years later the situation in that city had not improved. After the health officer for New York City released a report in early 1861, James Gordon Bennett’s New York Herald examined several of “the secret sources of excessive disease and death.” The Herald believed that while their city was “naturally more healthy than” any other one in North America, they noted that the “excessive mortality” rate did not reflect that fact. While the “filthy conditions” was an obvious “source of mortality,” other important factors included the lack of vaccination. The Herald argued that the city should follow the example of other countries like Sweden and enact “a compulsory law for vaccination.” If “the vaccination [for smallpox] has been perfectly performed,” the Herald explained that “the mortality is found to be uniformly reduced to less than one in every two hundred cases.” Immigrants were also identified as a cause of the “excessive mortality.” “Most of the children who die under one year of age are the offspring of foreigners” who had “recently arrived” in the United States, as the Heraldclaimed. Other factors included abortions through “violent means” and those “killed…by quack medicine.” Yet not all cities faced this kind of health crisis. An editorial in the Cleveland (OH) Herald was optimistic as the city’s mortality rate had declined even as the city’s population increased. “The introduction of pure water in unlimited quantity has doubtless had much to do with the improved sanitary condition of the city,” as the Cleveland Herald explained.

Newspapers across the country published President Abraham Lincoln’s first Inaugural Address in March 1861, but not all included the correct version. Editors in New Orleans had, as the Chicago (IL) Tribune explained, “horribly botched” the speech. Not only had “words [been] altered,” but sentences [were] cut in two in the middle and other sentences [were] run together.” As a result, Lincoln’s speech had been turned “into a ridiculous jumble and mass of nonsense.” While Tribune editor Joseph Medill knew from experience that “a long document [rarely] is transmitted over the wires without undergoing more or less transformation,” he believed in this case that New Orleans editors deliberately included errors in order to further their disunion agenda. “Evidently the conductors of the secession press are unwilling that the people whom they have hurried into rebellion without a cause, shall have the opportunity of learning the truth or of listening to exhortations of loyalty,” as Medill concluded. The only “parallel instance of meanness” that Medill could recall had occurred during the Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858. As the Tribune noted in September 1858, Democratic editors told their reporters “to report [Lincoln’s speeches] incorrectly, to leave out words and sentences, and otherwise to mutilate his arguments so as to destroy their force and effect on the minds of those who read the Douglas papers.” You can read more about the Lincoln-Douglas debates in Michael Burlingame’s “Mucilating Douglas and Mutilating Lincoln: How Shorthand Reporters Covered the Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858,” Lincoln Herald (1994) and Allen C. Guelzo’s Lincoln and Douglas: The Debates That Defined America (2008). As for President Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address, see chapter 3 of Douglas L. Wilson’s Lincoln’s Sword: The Presidency and the Power of Words (2006).

After Confederates shelled Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861, President Abraham Lincoln called for volunteers to restore order. Many northerners responded and rushed to create volunteer regiments. Yet when African Americans offered to serve, northern officials turned them down. After Ohio Governor William Dennison denied a request, the Cleveland Herald called his decision “eminently proper.” While the Herald did not want to “impugn the motives of those…who wish to raise military companies,” the editor believed that “the enlistment of colored troops would dampen, if not kill, the ardor of the masses now rushing to arms.” The Herald was also concerned that such action “would embitter the present contest and render utterly hopeless any prospect of peace.” Two years later, however, the War Department authorized the creation of the United States Colored Troops. Within months new USCT regiments were participating in battles, including those at Milliken’s Bend and Fort Wagner. The Cleveland Herald joined other northern newspapers which changed their editorial stance on African Americans in the military and even supported the call for USCT troops to receive pay equal to white soldiers. After Congress passed the necessary legislation in 1864, the Herald noted that “this simple act of justice has been quite too long delayed.” Joseph T. Glatthaar’s Forged in Battle: The Civil War Alliance of Black Soldiers and White Officers (1990), Howard C. Westwood’s Black Troops, White Commanders and Freedmen During the Civil War (1992), and John David Smith’s Black Soldiers in Blue (2002).

“Beyond the Log Cabin: Kentucky’s Abraham Lincoln” is a great online exhibit created by the Kentucky Historical Society. This interactive site includes manuscripts and artifacts from over 40 repositories nationwide and the content is divided into four overall categories – Themes, Timeline, Treasures, and Resources. Themes include topics such as “Frontier World of Abraham Lincoln,” “Lincoln’s Rise,” “Lincoln and Kentucky at War,” and “Remembering Lincoln: Then and Now.” Each one has a short essay as well as relevant documents, images, and other relevant artifacts. The Timeline section explores Lincoln’s life in Kentucky as well as how the state has commemorated the Sixteenth President after April 1865. The Treasures section allows visitors to explore all of the photographs, manuscripts, and other artifacts in an interactive display. Resources include a Teacher’s guide, a bibliography, and an essay originally published in the Kentucky Historical Society Chronicle.

When Democrats held a rally in Carlisle, Pennsylvania on October 6, 1860, the Carlisle (PA) American Volunteer reported that no one had been ready for the “overwhelming avalanche” of delegates from “every town and township in the county.” Over 8,000 people filled the streets before noon, according to some estimates. The American Volunteer backed Senator Stephen Douglas and supported this event as a means to rally Democratic voters before a critical election. In the months before the election, the American Volunteer tried to convince Cumberland County residents that the Republican party represented a serious threat. “The election of LINCOLN will be the death-knell to our Republic,” as the American Volunteer warned. As Republican “Wide Awake” groups held parades in northern cities, the American Volunteer reported that “each man carried a six-barreled revolver” in order to demonstrate that “LINCOLN and his party are determined to carry out their sectional doctrines at all hazards and at any sacrifice.” The American Volunteer saw Republicans as a “sectional Abolition party” which was determined to “humble the South [and] root out slavery.” If Republicans carried out their plan, the American Volunteer predicted that “every State in the Union will be bathed in blood.” Only a Democratic victory in November 1860 would ensure a future for the Union. If Lincoln won, the American Volunteer observed that it “will be regarded as a declaration of war.” Yet the American Volunteer’s arguments failed to convince a sufficient number of Cumberland County voters – Lincoln ended up with a 400 vote majority. “A long dreary winter is ahead,” the American Volunteer predicted.

After African American soldiers were not allowed to participate in the Union army’s Grand Review in Washington DC in May 1865, Harrisburg residents organized their own event on November 14, 1865 for those who served in the United States Colored Troops. While this earlier post provides an overview, several other newspaper articles offer interesting accounts about the event. “No day could have been chosen more propitious for the occasion,” as the correspondent for the Philadelphia (PA) Inquirer observed that November 14 was “one of the finest of this most pleasant Indian summer.” After Simon Cameron delivered a speech, letters from those who could not attend were read aloud. General Benjamin F. Butler explained that he had “witnessed…[African American soldiers’] bravery and good conduct on the battle-field, and, above all, their devotion and unswerving loyalty to the flag and government.” Even “when their offers of service in the beginning of the way were rejected with contumely,” George L. Stearns noted that they still “promptly volunteered at the call of their country when she needed them to help conquer a relentless foe.” Others used the event to argue for equal rights. “All constitutional privileges, all laws, all ordinances, all regulations of States, discriminating against colored men, must be made null and void,” as Senator Henry Wilson proclaimed. The event ended with “the John Brown Song,” which as the Philadelphia (PA) Inquirer correspondent described, “the assemblage sang…with great zeal.” You can also read more about the ceremony in an excerpt from Ceremonies at the Reception of Welcome to the Colored Soldiers of Pennsylvania (1865)

As the 150th anniversary of the 1860 election is next week, the House Divided project has just published seven interactive essays at Journal Divided that focus on different aspects of Abraham Lincoln’s campaign. These essays have been adapted with permission from the unedited manuscript of Michael Burlingame’s Abraham Lincoln: A Life (2008). One can read about the origins of the “rail-splitter” image and Lincoln’s efforts to gain support from the Know Nothings. In addition, one will find an overview of the Republican National Convention as well as a detailed look at how Lincoln won the nomination. While Lincoln instructed his allies at the convention to “make no contracts that will bind me,” Burlingame discusses the contradictory claims and evidence about the deals made to secure Lincoln’s nomination. In the final essay Burlingame examines the political conditions that produced a Republican victory in November 1860. As you read the essays, be sure to click through the sidenotes  on every page. These contain links to relevant records on House Divided, including those for documents, events, people, place, major topics, and sources. For example, the Gott resolution is mentioned on page 5 of the “Lincoln Know Nothing” essay. If you are unfamiliar with that topic, simply click on the “Events” sidenote to learn more. Each essay also has a video, which you can watch by clicking on the YouTube icon.