The Life of Jefferson Davis
by Frank H. Alfriend · English · Gutenberg #43329 · 1,229,100 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Life of Jefferson Davis
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The Life of Jefferson Davis
Author: Frank H. Alfriend
Release date: July 27, 2013 [eBook #43329]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43329
Credits: Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE LIFE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS ***
THE LIFE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS
[Illustration: Jefferson Davis]
THE LIFE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS.
_BY FRANK H. ALFRIEND,
Late Editor of The Southern Literary Messenger._
CINCINNATI AND CHICAGO:
CAXTON PUBLISHING HOUSE.
PHILADELPHIA, RICHMOND, ATLANTA AND ST. LOUIS:
NATIONAL PUBLISHING CO.
BALDWYN, MISS.: P. M. SAVERY & COMPANY.
SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.: J. LAWS & CO.
1868.
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1867, by FRANK H.
ALFRIEND, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United
States, for the District of Virginia.
PREFACE.
In offering this volume to the public, the occasion is embraced to avow,
with unfeigned candor, a painful sense of the inadequate manner in which
the design has been executed. Emboldened rather by his own earnest
convictions, than by confidence in his capacity, the author has undertaken
to contribute to American History, an extended narration of the more
prominent incidents in the life of JEFFERSON DAVIS. Whatever may be the
decision of the reader upon the merits of the performance, the author has
the satisfaction arising from a conscientious endeavor to subserve the
ends of truth. In pursuit of the purpose to write _facts_ only, to the aid
of familiar acquaintance with many of the topics discussed, and to
information derived from the most accurate sources, has been brought
laborious investigation of numerous interesting papers, which his
avocation made accessible. It is therefore claimed that no statement is to
be found in this volume, which is not generally conceded to be true, or
which is not a conclusion amply justified by indisputable evidence.
Nor is it to be fairly alleged that the work exhibits undue sectional
bias. As a Southern man, who, in common with his countrymen of the South,
was taught to believe the principles underlying the movement for Southern
independence, the only possible basis of Republicanism, the author has
regarded, as a worthy incentive, the desire to vindicate, as best he
might, the motives and conduct of the South and its late leader.
Disclaiming the purpose of promoting sectional bitterness, or of a
wholesale indictment of the Northern people, he deems it needless to dwell
upon the obvious propriety of discrimination. Holding in utter abhorrence
the authors of those outrages, wanton barbarities and petty persecutions,
of which her people were the victims, the South yet feels the respect of
an honorable enemy for those distinguished soldiers, Buell, Hancock,
McClellan and others, who served efficiently the cause in which they were
employed, and still illustrated the practices of Christian warfare. To
fitly characterize the remorseless faction in antagonism to the sentiments
of these honorable men, it is only necessary to recall the malice which
assails a "lost cause" with every form of detraction, and aspires to crown
a triumph of arms with the degradation and despair of a conquered people.
In his especial solicitude for a favorable appreciation of his efforts, by
his Southern countrymen, the author has striven to avoid affront to those
considerations of delicacy which yet affect many incidents of the late
war. He has not sought to revive, unnecessarily, questions upon which
Southern sentiment was divided, and has rarely assailed the motives or
capacity of individuals in recognized antagonism to the policy of
President Davis. Perhaps a different course would have imparted interest
to his work, and have more clearly established the vindication of its
subject. But besides being wholly repugnant to the tastes of the author,
it would have been in marked conflict with the consistent aim of Mr.
Davis' career, which was to heal, not to aggravate, the differences of the
South.
A large part of the labor, which would otherwise have devolved upon this
enterprise, if adequately performed, had already been supplied by the
writings of Professor Bledsoe. To the profound erudition and philosophical
genius of that eminent writer, as conspicuously displayed in his work
entitled, "Is Davis a Traitor?" the South may, with confidence, intrust
its claims upon the esteem of posterity.
The author heartily acknowledges the intelligent aid, and generous
encouragement, which he has received from his publishers.
JANUARY, 1868.
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTION. (Page 13-19.)
ATTRACTIONS OF THE LATE WAR TO POSTERITY--MR. LINCOLN'S
REMARK--DISADVANTAGES OF MR. DAVIS' SITUATION--SUCCESS NOT SYNONYMOUS
WITH MERIT--ORIGIN OF THE INJUSTICE DONE MR. DAVIS--REMARK OF
MACAULAY--REMARK OF MR. GLADSTONE--THE EFFECT THAT CONFEDERATE SUCCESS
WOULD HAVE HAD UPON THE FAME OF MR. DAVIS--POPULAR AFFECTION FOR HIM
IN THE SOUTH--HIS VINDICATION ASSURED.
CHAPTER I. (Page 20-33.)
BIRTH--EDUCATION--AT WEST POINT--IN THE ARMY--RETIREMENT--POLITICAL
TRAINING IN AMERICA--MR. DAVIS NOT EDUCATED FOR POLITICAL LIFE AFTER
THE AMERICAN MODEL--BEGINS HIS POLITICAL CAREER BY A SPEECH AT THE
MISSISSIPPI DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION--A GLANCE PROSPECTIVELY AT HIS
FUTURE PARTY ASSOCIATIONS--HIS CONSISTENT ATTACHMENT TO STATES' RIGHTS
PRINCIPLES--A SKETCH OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUESTION OF STATES'
RIGHTS--MR. CALHOUN NOT THE AUTHOR OF THAT PRINCIPLE--HIS VINDICATION
FROM THE CHARGE OF DISUNIONISM--MR. DAVIS THE SUCCESSOR OF MR. CALHOUN
AS THE STATES' RIGHTS LEADER.
CHAPTER II. (Page 34-48.)
RESULTS OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN 1844--MR. DAVIS ELECTED TO
CONGRESS--HIS FIRST SESSION--PROMINENT MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE--DOUGLAS,
HUNTER, SEDDON, ETC.--DAVIS' RAPID ADVANCEMENT IN REPUTATION--
RESOLUTIONS OFFERED BY HIM--SPEECHES ON THE OREGON EXCITEMENT, AND ON
THE RESOLUTION OF THANKS TO GENERAL TAYLOR AND HIS ARMY--NATIONAL
SENTIMENTS EMBODIED IN THESE AND OTHER SPEECHES--A CONTRAST IN THE
MATTER OF PATRIOTISM--MASSACHUSETTS AND MISSISSIPPI IN THE MEXICAN
WAR--DEBATE WITH ANDREW JOHNSON--JOHN QUINCY ADAMS' ESTIMATE OF
JEFFERSON DAVIS.
CHAPTER III. (Page 49-67.)
THE NAME OF JEFFERSON DAVIS INSEPARABLE FROM THE HISTORY OF THE
MEXICAN WAR--HIS ESSENTIALLY MILITARY CHARACTER AND TASTES--JOINS
GENERAL TAYLOR'S ARMY ON THE RIO GRANDE, AS COLONEL OF THE FAMOUS
"MISSISSIPPI RIFLES"--MONTEREY--BUENA VISTA--GENERAL TAYLOR'S ACCOUNT
OF DAVIS' CONDUCT--DAVIS' REPORT OF THE ACTION--NOVELTY AND
ORIGINALITY OF HIS STRATEGY AT BUENA VISTA--INTERESTING STATEMENT OF
HON. CALEB CUSHING--RETURN OF DAVIS TO THE UNITED STATES--TRIUMPHANT
RECEPTION AT HOME--PRESIDENT POLK TENDERS HIM A BRIGADIER'S
COMMISSION, WHICH HE DECLINES ON PRINCIPLE.
CHAPTER IV. (Page 68-84.)
MR. DAVIS IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, FIRST BY EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENT,
AND SUBSEQUENTLY BY UNANIMOUS CHOICE OF THE LEGISLATURE OF HIS
STATE--POPULAR ADMIRATION NOT LESS FOR HIS CIVIC TALENTS THAN HIS
MILITARY SERVICES--FEATURES OF HIS PUBLIC CAREER--HIS CHARACTER AND
CONDUCT AS A SENATOR--AS AN ORATOR AND PARLIAMENTARY LEADER--HIS
INTREPIDITY--AN INCIDENT WITH HENRY CLAY--DAVIS THE LEADER OF THE
STATES' RIGHTS PARTY IN CONGRESS--THE AGITATION OF 1850--DAVIS OPPOSES
THE COMPROMISE--FOLLY OF THE SOUTH IN ASSENTING TO THAT
SETTLEMENT--DAVIS NOT A DISUNIONIST IN 1850, NOR A REBEL IN 1861--HIS
CONCEPTION OF THE CHARACTER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--LOGICAL
ABSURDITY OF CLAY'S POSITION EXPOSED BY DAVIS--THE IDEAL UNION OF THE
LATTER--WHY HE OPPOSED THE COMPROMISE--THE NEW MEXICO BILL--DAVIS'
GROWING FAME AT THIS PERIOD--HIS FREQUENT ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAY, AND
WARM FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN THEM--SIGNAL TRIUMPH OF THE UNION SENTIMENT,
AND ACQUIESCENCE OF THE SOUTH.
CHAPTER V. (Page 85-97.)
OPPOSITION TO THE COMPROMISE IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND MISSISSIPPI--DAVIS
A CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR--HIS DEFEAT REALLY A PERSONAL TRIUMPH--IN
RETIREMENT, SUPPORTS GENERAL PIERCE'S ELECTION--DECLINES AN
APPOINTMENT IN PIERCE'S CABINET, BUT SUBSEQUENTLY ACCEPTS
SECRETARYSHIP OF WAR--REMARKABLE UNITY OF PIERCE'S ADMINISTRATION, AND
HIGH CHARACTER OF THE EXECUTIVE--DAVIS AS SECRETARY OF WAR--
KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL AND THE EXCITEMENT WHICH FOLLOWED--DAVIS AGAIN
ELECTED TO THE SENATE--SPEECHES AT PASS CHRISTIAN AND OTHER POINTS
WHILE ON HIS WAY TO WASHINGTON.
CHAPTER VI. (Page 98-191.)
RETURN OF MR. DAVIS TO THE SENATE--OPENING EVENTS OF MR. BUCHANAN'S
ADMINISTRATION--TRUE INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGISLATION OF
1854--SENATOR DOUGLAS THE INSTRUMENT OF DISORGANIZATION IN THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY--HIS ANTECEDENTS AND CHARACTER--AN ACCOMPLISHED
DEMAGOGUE--DAVIS AND DOUGLAS CONTRASTED--BOTH REPRESENTATIVES OF THEIR
RESPECTIVE SECTIONS--DOUGLAS' AMBITION--HIS COUP D'ETAT, AND ITS
RESULTS--THE KANSAS QUESTION--DOUGLAS TRIUMPHS OVER THE SOUTH AND THE
UNITY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY LOST--"SQUATTER SOVEREIGNTY"--PROPERLY
CHARACTERIZED--DAVIS' COURSE IN THE KANSAS STRUGGLE--DEBATE WITH
SENATOR FESSENDEN--PEN-AND-INK SKETCH OF MR. DAVIS AT THIS
PERIOD--TRUE SIGNIFICANCE OF POLITICAL EVENTS TO THE SOUTH--SHE
RIGHTLY INTERPRETS THEM--MR. DAVIS' COURSE SUBSEQUENT TO THE KANSAS
IMBROGLIO--HIS DEBATES WITH DOUGLAS--TWO DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF
PARLIAMENTARY SPEAKING--DAVIS THE LEADER OF THE REGULAR DEMOCRACY IN
THE THIRTY-SIXTH CONGRESS--HIS RESOLUTIONS--HIS CONSISTENCY--COURSE AS
TO GENERAL LEGISLATION--VISITS THE NORTH--SPEAKS IN PORTLAND, BOSTON,
NEW YORK, AND OTHER PLACES--REPLY To AN INVITATION TO ATTEND THE
WEBSTER BIRTH-DAY FESTIVAL--MR. SEWARD'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE
"IRREPRESSIBLE CONFLICT"--MR. DAVIS BEFORE MISSISSIPPI DEMOCRATIC
STATE CONVENTION--PROGRESS OF DISUNION--DISSOLUTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY--SPEECHES OF MR. DAVIS AT PORTLAND AND IN SENATE.
CHAPTER VII. (Page 192-232.)
ELECTION OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN--HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE OF THE EVENT--THE
OBJECTS AIMED AT BY HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY IDENTICAL IN THE DISCUSSION
OF EVENTS OF THE LATE WAR--NORTHERN EVASION OF THE REAL QUESTION--THE
SOUTH DID NOT ATTEMPT REVOLUTION--SECESSION A JUSTIFIABLE RIGHT
EXERCISED BY SOVEREIGN STATES--BRIEF REVIEW OF THE QUESTION--WHAT THE
FEDERALIST SAYS--CHIEF-JUSTICE MARSHALL--MR. MADISON--COERCION NOT
JUSTIFIED AT THE NORTH PREVIOUS TO THE LATE WAR--REMARKS OF JOHN
QUINCY ADAMS--OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN--OF HORACE GREELEY--SUCCESSFUL
PERVERSION OF TRUTH BY THE NORTH--PROVOCATIONS TO SECESSION BY THE
SOUTH--AGGRESSIONS BY THE NORTH--ITS PUNIC FAITH--LOSS OF THE BALANCE
OF POWER--PATIENCE OF THE SOUTH--REMARKS OF HON. C. C. CLAY--WHAT THE
ELECTION OF MR. LINCOLN MEANT--HIS ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY--REVELATIONS
OF THE OBJECTS OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY--WENDELL PHILLIPS--NO SECURITY
FOR THE SOUTH IN THE UNION--MEETING OF CONGRESS--MR. DAVIS' ASSURANCE
TO PRESIDENT BUCHANAN--CONCILIATORY COURSE OF MR. DAVIS--HIS
CONSISTENT DEVOTION TO THE UNION, AND EFFORTS TO SAVE IT--FORESEES WAR
AS THE RESULT OF SECESSION, AND URGES THE EXHAUSTION OF EVERY
EXPEDIENT TO AVERT IT--THE CRITTENDEN AMENDMENT--HOPES OF ITS
ADOPTION--DAVIS WILLING TO ACCEPT IT IN SPITE OF ITS INJUSTICE TO THE
SOUTH--REPUBLICAN SENATORS DECLINE ALL CONCILIATORY MEASURES--THE
CLARKE AMENDMENT--WHERE RESTS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DISUNION?--
STATEMENTS OF MESSRS. DOUGLAS AND COX--SECESSION OF THE COTTON
STATES--A LETTER FROM JEFFERSON DAVIS TO R. B. RHETT, JR.--MR. DAVIS'
FAREWELL TO THE SENATE--HIS REASONS FOR WITHDRAWING--RETURNS TO
MISSISSIPPI--MAJOR-GENERAL OF STATE FORCES--ORGANIZATION OF THE
CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT--MR. DAVIS PRESIDENT OF THE CONFEDERATE STATES.
CHAPTER VIII. (Page 233-265.)
THE CONFEDERACY ESTABLISHED AND IN OPERATION--CALMNESS AND MODERATION
OF THE SOUTH--THE MONTGOMERY CONSTITUTION--THE IMPROVEMENTS UPON THE
FEDERAL INSTRUMENT--POPULAR DELIGHT AT THE SELECTION OF MR. DAVIS AS
PRESIDENT--MOTIVES OF HIS ACCEPTANCE--HIS PREFERENCE FOR THE
ARMY--DAVIS THE SYMBOL OF SOUTHERN CHARACTER AND HOPES--ON HIS WAY TO
MONTGOMERY--A CONTRAST--INAUGURATION AND INAUGURAL ADDRESS--THE
CONFEDERATE CABINET--TOOMBS--WALKER--MEMMINGER--BENJAMIN--MALLORY--
REAGAN--HISTORICAL POSITION OF PRESIDENT DAVIS--THE TWO POWERS--
EXTREME DEMOCRACY OF THE NORTH--NOBLE IDEAL OF REPUBLICANISM CHERISHED
BY THE SOUTH--DAVIS' REPRESENTATIVE QUALITIES AND DISTINGUISHED
SERVICES--THE HISTORIC REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CONFEDERATE CAUSE--EARLY
HISTORY OF THE GOVERNMENT AT MONTGOMERY--CONFIDENCE IN PRESIDENT DAVIS
UNLIMITED--PRESIDENT DAVIS' ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY--HIS MILITARY
ADMINISTRATION--THE CONFEDERATE ARMY--WEST POINT--NEGOTIATIONS FOR
SURRENDER OF FORTS SUMTER AND PICKENS--MR. BUCHANAN'S PITIABLE
POLICY--THE ISSUE OF PEACE OR WAR--PERFIDIOUS COURSE OF THE LINCOLN
ADMINISTRATION--MR. SEWARD'S DALLIANCE WITH THE CONFEDERATE
COMMISSIONERS--HIS DECEPTIONS--THE EXPEDITION TO PROVISION THE
GARRISON OF SUMTER--REDUCTION OF THE FORT--WAR--GUILT OF THE
NORTH--ITS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WAR.
CHAPTER IX. (Page 266-293.)
EVENTS CONSEQUENT UPON THE BOMBARDMENT OF FORT SUMTER--MR. LINCOLN
BEGINS THE WAR BY USURPATION--THE BORDER STATES--CONTINUED DUPLICITY
OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--VIRGINIA JOINS THE COTTON STATES--AFFAIRS
IN MARYLAND, MISSOURI, AND KENTUCKY--UNPROMISING PHASES OF THE
SITUATION, AFFECTING THE PROSPECTS OF THE SOUTH--DIVISIONS IN SOUTHERN
SENTIMENT--THE NORTHERN DEMOCRACY--PRESIDENT DAVIS' ANTICIPATIONS
REALIZED--HIS RESPONSE TO MR. LINCOLN'S PROCLAMATION OF WAR--PUBLIC
ENTHUSIASM IN THE SOUTH--PRESIDENT DAVIS' MESSAGE--VIRGINIA THE
FLANDERS OF THE WAR--REMOVAL OF THE CONFEDERATE CAPITAL TO
RICHMOND--POLICY OF THAT STEP CONSIDERED--POPULAR REGARD FOR MR. DAVIS
IN VIRGINIA--ACTION OF THE VIRGINIAN AUTHORITIES--NORTH CAROLINA; HER
NOBLE CONDUCT, AND EFFICIENT AID TO THE CONFEDERACY--MILITARY
PREPARATIONS IN VIRGINIA--GENERAL LEE--HIS SERVICES IN THE EARLY
MONTHS OF THE WAR--MINOR ENGAGEMENTS--PREPARATIONS FOR THE GREAT
STRUGGLE IN VIRGINIA--AN IMPORTANT HISTORICAL QUESTION--CHARGES
AGAINST MR. DAVIS CONSIDERED--HIS STATESMAN-LIKE PREVISION--DID HE
ANTICIPATE AND PROVIDE FOR WAR?--WHEN MR. DAVIS' RESPONSIBILITY
BEGAN--HIS ENERGETIC PREPARATION--THE PREVAILING SENTIMENT AT
MONTGOMERY AS TO THE WAR--QUOTATIONS FROM GENERAL EARLY AND GENERAL
VON MOLKTE.
CHAPTER X. (Page 294-325.)
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WAR IN 1861--THE TWO GOVERNMENTS MORE DIRECTLY
CONNECTED WITH RESULTS IN THE FIELD THAN AT SUBSEQUENT PERIODS--MR.
DAVIS' CONNECTION WITH THE MILITARY POLICY OF THE CONFEDERACY--THE
CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT ADOPTS, IN THE MAIN, THE DEFENSIVE POLICY OF
THE VIRGINIAN AUTHORITIES--FEDERAL PREPARATIONS--GENERAL SCOTT--
DEFENSIVE PLANS OF THE CONFEDERATES--DISTRIBUTION OF THEIR FORCES--THE
CONFEDERATE CAMPAIGN OF 1861 JUSTIFIED--DISTRIBUTION OF THE FEDERAL
FORCES--PROGRESS OF THE CAMPAIGN--GENERALS PATTERSON AND JOHNSTON--
JUNCTION OF BEAUREGARD AND JOHNSTON--MANASSAS--PRESIDENT DAVIS ON THE
BATTLE-FIELD--HIS DISPATCH--HIS RETURN TO RICHMOND--A SPEECH NEVER
PUBLISHED BEFORE--REFLECTIONS UPON THE RESULTS OF MANASSAS--MR. DAVIS
NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ABSENCE OF PURSUIT--STONEWALL JACKSON'S
VIEWS--DAVIS IN FAVOR OF PURSUIT OF THE FEDERALS--MISREPRESENTATIONS--
MILITARY MOVEMENTS IN VARIOUS QUARTERS--THE "TRENT AFFAIR"--RESULTS OF
THE FIRST YEAR OF THE WAR.
CHAPTER XI. (Page 326-360.)
PROSPECTS AT THE BEGINNING OF 1862--EXTREME CONFIDENCE OF THE
SOUTH--EXTRAVAGANT EXPECTATIONS--THE RICHMOND EXAMINER ON CONFEDERATE
PROSPECTS--WAR BETWEEN ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES PREDICTED--THE
BLOCKADE TO BE RAISED--THE SOUTHERN CONFEDERACY DECREED BY HEAVEN--
RESULT OF THE BOASTFUL TONE OF THE SOUTHERN PRESS--THE CONFEDERATE
GOVERNMENT NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISASTERS OF 1862--PRESIDENT DAVIS
URGES PREPARATION FOR A LONG WAR--HIS WISE OPPOSITION TO SHORT
ENLISTMENTS OF TROOPS--PREMONITIONS OF MISFORTUNES IN THE WEST--THE
CONFEDERATE FORCES IN KENTUCKY--GENERAL ALBERT SIDNEY JOHNSTON--HIS
CAREER BEFORE THE WAR--CHARACTER--APPEARANCE--THE FRIEND OF JEFFERSON
DAVIS--MUTUAL ESTEEM--SIDNEY JOHNSTON IN KENTUCKY--HIS PLANS--HIS
DIFFICULTIES--THE FORCES OF GRANT AND BUELL--CRUEL DILEMMA OF GENERAL
SIDNEY JOHNSTON--A REVERSE--GRANT CAPTURES FORTS HENRY AND DONELSON--
LOSS OF KENTUCKY AND TENNESSEE--FEDERAL DESIGNS IN THE EAST--BURNSIDE
CAPTURES ROANOKE ISLAND--SERIOUS NATURE OF THESE REVERSES--POPULAR
DISAPPOINTMENT--ORGANIZED OPPOSITION TO THE CONFEDERATE
ADMINISTRATION--CHARACTER AND MOTIVES OF THIS OPPOSITION--AN EFFORT TO
REVOLUTIONIZE PRESIDENT DAVIS' CABINET--ASSAULTS UPON SECRETARIES
BENJAMIN AND MALLORY--CORRECT EXPLANATION OF THE CONFEDERATE
REVERSES--CONGRESSIONAL CENSURE OF MR. BENJAMIN--SECRETARY
MALLORY--CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SOUTHERN MIND--THE PERMANENT
GOVERNMENT--SECOND INAUGURATION OF MR. DAVIS--SEVERITY OF THE
SEASON--THE CEREMONIES--APPEARANCE OF PRESIDENT DAVIS--HIS INAUGURAL
ADDRESS--ITS EFFECT--POPULAR RE-ASSURANCE--MESSAGE TO CONGRESS--
COMMENTS OF RICHMOND PRESS.
CHAPTER XII. (Page 361-389.)
POPULAR DELUSIONS IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THE WAR--A FEW CONFLICTS AND
SACRIFICES NOT SUFFICIENT--MORE POSITIVE RECOGNITION OF MR. DAVIS'
VIEWS--HIS CANDID AND PROPHETIC ANNOUNCEMENTS--MILITARY REFORMS--
CONSCRIPTION LAW OF THE CONFEDERACY--THE PRESIDENT'S VIEWS AND COURSE
AS TO THIS LAW--HIS CONSISTENT REGARD FOR CIVIL LIBERTY AND OPPOSITION
TO CENTRALIZATION--RECOMMENDS CONSCRIPTION--BENEFICIAL RESULTS OF THE
LAW--GENERAL LEE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, "UNDER THE PRESIDENT"--NATURE OF
THE APPOINTMENT--FALSE IMPRESSIONS CORRECTED--MR. DAVIS' CONFIDENCE IN
LEE, DESPITE POPULAR CENSURE OF THE LATTER--CHANGES IN THE CABINET--
MR. BENJAMIN'S MANAGEMENT OF THE WAR OFFICE--DIFFICULTIES OF THAT
POSITION--THE CHARGE OF FAVORITISM AGAINST MR. DAVIS IN THE SELECTION
OF HIS CABINET--HIS PERSONAL RELATIONS WITH THE VARIOUS MEMBERS OF HIS
CABINET--ACTIVITY IN MILITARY OPERATIONS--THE TRANS-MISSISSIPPI--
BATTLE OF ELK HORN--OPERATIONS EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI--GENERALS
SIDNEY JOHNSTON AND BEAUREGARD--ISLAND NO. 10--CONCENTRATION OF TROOPS
BY THE CONFEDERATE AUTHORITIES--FAVORABLE SITUATION--SHILOH--A
DISAPPOINTMENT--DEATH OF SIDNEY JOHNSTON--TRIBUTE OF PRESIDENT
DAVIS--POPULAR VERDICT UPON THE BATTLE OF SHILOH--GENERALS BEAUREGARD,
BRAGG, AND POLK ON THE BATTLE--THE PRESIDENT AGAIN CHARGED WITH
"INJUSTICE" TO BEAUREGARD--THE CHARGE ANSWERED--FALL OF NEW
ORLEANS--NAVAL BATTLE IN HAMPTON ROADS--NAVAL SUCCESSES OF THE ENEMY.
CHAPTER XIII. (Page 390-421.)
THE "ANACONDA SYSTEM"--HOW FAR IT WAS SUCCESSFUL--TERRITORIAL
CONFIGURATION OF THE SOUTH FAVORABLE TO THE ENEMY--ONE THEATRE OF WAR
FAVORABLE TO THE CONFEDERATES--THE FEDERAL FORCES IN VIRGINIA--THE
CONFEDERATE FORCES--THE POTOMAC LINES--CRITICAL SITUATION IN
VIRGINIA--EVACUATION OF MANASSAS--TRANSFER OF OPERATIONS TO THE
PENINSULA--MAGRUDER'S LINES--EVACUATION OF YORKTOWN--STRENGTH OF THE
OPPOSING FORCES BEFORE RICHMOND--DESTRUCTION OF THE "VIRGINIA"--PANIC
IN RICHMOND--MR. DAVIS' CALMNESS AND CONFIDENCE--HE AVOWS HIMSELF
"READY TO LEAVE HIS BONES IN THE CAPITAL OF THE CONFEDERACY"--REPULSE
OF THE GUNBOATS--"MEMENTOES OF HEROISM"--JACKSON'S VALLEY CAMPAIGN--A
SERIES OF VICTORIES, WITH IMPORTANT RESULTS--BATTLE OF "SEVEN
PINES"--A FAILURE--GENERAL JOHNSTON WOUNDED--PRESIDENT DAVIS ON THE
FIELD--PRESIDENT DAVIS AND GENERAL JOHNSTON--AN ATTEMPT TO FORESTALL
THE DECISION OF HISTORY--RESULTS OF LEE'S ACCESSION TO COMMAND--
JOHNSTON'S GENERALSHIP--MR. DAVIS' ESTIMATE OF LEE--LEE'S PLANS--THE
ADVISORY RELATION BETWEEN DAVIS AND LEE--THEIR MUTUAL CONFIDENCE NEVER
INTERRUPTED--CONFEDERATE STRATEGY AFTER M'CLELLAN'S DEFEAT BEFORE
RICHMOND--MAGICAL CHANGE IN THE FORTUNES OF THE CONFEDERACY--THE
INVASION OF MARYLAND--ANTIETAM--TANGIBLE PROOFS OF CONFEDERATE
SUCCESS--GENERAL BRAGG--HIS KENTUCKY CAMPAIGN--CONFEDERATE HOPES--
BATTLE OF PERRYVILLE--BRAGG RETREATS--ESTIMATE OF THE KENTUCKY
CAMPAIGN OF 1862--OTHER INCIDENTS OF THE WESTERN CAMPAIGN--REMOVAL OF
M'CLELLAN--A SOUTHERN OPINION OF M'CLELLAN--BATTLE OF FREDERICKSBURG--
BATTLE OF MURFREESBORO'--BATTLE OF PRAIRIE GROVE--THE SITUATION AT THE
CLOSE OF 1862--PRESIDENT DAVIS' RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS--HIS VISIT
TO THE SOUTH-WEST--ADDRESS BEFORE THE MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE.
CHAPTER XIV. (Page 422-449.)
RESPECT OF MANKIND FOR THE SOUTH--THE MOST PROSPEROUS PERIOD OF THE
WAR--HOW MR. DAVIS CONTRIBUTED TO THE DISTINCTION OF THE SOUTH--
FACTION SILENCED--THE EUROPEAN ESTIMATE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS--HOW HE
DIGNIFIED THE CAUSE OF THE SOUTH--HIS STATE PAPERS--HIS ADMINISTRATION
OF CIVIL MATTERS--THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE TWO PRESIDENTS--MR. DAVIS'
OBSERVANCE OF CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRAINTS--ARBITRARY ADMINISTRATION OF
MR. LINCOLN--MR. DAVIS' MODERATION--HE SEEKS TO CONDUCT THE WAR UPON
CIVILIZED IDEAS--AN ENGLISH CHARACTERIZATION OF DAVIS--COLONEL
FREEMANTLE'S INTERVIEW WITH HIM--MR. GLADSTONE'S OPINION--THE PURELY
PERSONAL AND SENTIMENTAL ADMIRATION OF EUROPE FOR THE
SOUTH--INCONSISTENT CONDUCT OF THE EUROPEAN GREAT POWERS--THE LONDON
"TIMES" BEFORE M'CLELLAN'S DEFEAT--THE CONFEDERACY ENTITLED TO
RECOGNITION BY EUROPE--ENGLAND'S SYMPATHY WITH THE NORTH--DIGNIFIED
ATTITUDE OF PRESIDENT DAVIS UPON THE SUBJECT OF RECOGNITION--HIS EARLY
PREDICTION UPON THE SUBJECT--FRANCE AND ENGLAND EXPOSED TO INJURIOUS
SUSPICIONS--TERGIVERSATIONS OF THE PALMERSTON CABINET--THE BROAD FARCE
OF "BRITISH NEUTRALITY"--ENGLAND DECLINES TO UNITE WITH FRANCE IN AN
OFFER OF MEDIATION BETWEEN THE AMERICAN BELLIGERENTS--ENGLAND'S
"POLICY"--SHE SOUGHT THE RUIN OF BOTH SECTIONS OF AMERICA--CULMINATION
OF THE ANTISLAVERY POLICY OF THE NORTH--MR. LINCOLN'S CONVERSATION
WITH A KENTUCKY MEMBER OF CONGRESS--THE WAR A "CRIME" BY MR. LINCOLN'S
OWN SHOWING--VIOLATION OF PLEDGES AND ARBITRARY ACTS OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT--THE MASK REMOVED AFTER THE BATTLE OF ANTIETAM--THE REAL
PURPOSE OF EMANCIPATION--MR. DAVIS' ALLUSION TO THE
SUBJECT--INDIGNATION OF THE SOUTH AT THE MEASURE--MILITARY OPERATIONS
IN TEXAS AND MISSISSIPPI--VICKSBURG--PORT HUDSON--LOSS OF ARKANSAS
POST--FEDERAL FLEET REPULSED AT CHARLESTON--PREPARATIONS FOR THE
CAMPAIGN--UNITY AND CONFIDENCE OF THE SOUTH--MR. DAVIS' ADDRESS TO THE
COUNTRY--IMPORTANT EXTRACTS--GENERAL LEE PREPARES FOR BATTLE--HIS
CONFIDENCE--CONDITION OF HIS ARMY--BATTLE OF CHANCELLORSVILLE--
JEFFERSON DAVIS' TRIBUTE TO STONEWALL JACKSON.
CHAPTER XV. (Page 450-476.)
CONFEDERATE PROSPECTS AFTER THE BATTLE OF CHANCELLORSVILLE--THE
MILITARY SITUATION--PRIMARY OBJECTS OF THE CONFEDERATES--AFFAIRS IN
THE WEST--A BRIEF CONSIDERATION OF SEVERAL PLANS OF CAMPAIGN SUGGESTED
TO THE CONFEDERATE AUTHORITIES--VISIONARY STRATEGY--AN OFFENSIVE
CAMPAIGN ADOPTED--THE INVASION OF PENNSYLVANIA JUSTIFIED--CONDITION OF
THE ARMY OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA AT THIS PERIOD--THE MOVEMENT FROM THE
RAPPAHANNOCK--LEADING FEATURES OF THE CONFEDERATE PLAN--LEE'S STRATEGY
AGAIN ILLUSTRATED--GETTYSBURG--A FATAL BLOW TO THE SOUTH--LEE RETURNS
TO VIRGINIA--THE SURRENDER OF VICKSBURG--OTHER REVERSES--EXULTATION OF
THE NORTH--THE CONFEDERATE ADMINISTRATION AGAIN ARRAIGNED BY ITS
OPPONENTS--THE CASE OF GENERAL PEMBERTON--POPULAR INJUSTICE TO A
GALLANT OFFICER--A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE SUBJECT--PEMBERTON'S
APPOINTMENT RECOMMENDED BY DISTINGUISHED OFFICERS--HIS ABLE
ADMINISTRATION IN MISSISSIPPI--HIS RESOLUTION TO HOLD VICKSBURG, AS
THE GREAT END OF THE CAMPAIGN--HIS GALLANTRY AND RESOURCES--NOBLE
CONDUCT OF THIS PERSECUTED OFFICER--A FURTHER STATEMENT--THE MISSION
OF VICE-PRESIDENT STEPHENS--ITS OBJECTS--PRESIDENT DAVIS SEEKS TO
ALLEVIATE THE SUFFERINGS OF WAR--MAGNANIMITY AND HUMANITY OF THE
OFFER--PROUD POSITION IN THIS MATTER OF THE SOUTH AND HER RULER--THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DECLINES INTERCOURSE WITH MR. STEPHENS--EXPLANATION
OF ITS MOTIVES--CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MESSRS. DAVIS AND STEPHENS.
CHAPTER XVI. (Page 477-501.)
OPERATIONS OF GENERAL TAYLOR IN LOUISIANA--THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY
IRRECOVERABLY LOST TO THE CONFEDERACY--FEDERALS FOILED AT
CHARLESTON--THE DIMINISHED CONFIDENCE OF THE SOUTH--FINANCIAL
DERANGEMENT--DEFECTIVE FINANCIAL SYSTEM OF THE SOUTH--MR. DAVIS'
LIMITED CONNECTION WITH IT--THE REASONS FOR THE FINANCIAL FAILURE OF
THE CONFEDERACY--INFLUENCE OF SPECULATION--ANOMALOUS SITUATION OF THE
SOUTH--MR. DAVIS' VIEWS OF THE FINANCIAL POLICY OF THE SOUTH AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE WAR--MILITARY OPERATIONS IN TENNESSEE--BRAGG RETREATS
TO CHATTANOOGA--MORGAN'S EXPEDITION--SURRENDER OF CUMBERLAND
GAP--FEDERAL OCCUPATION OF CHATTANOOGA--BATTLE OF CHICKAMAUGA--BRAGG'S
EXPECTATIONS--GRANT'S OPERATIONS--BRAGG BADLY DEFEATED--PRESIDENT
DAVIS' VIEW OF THE DISASTER--GENERAL BRAGG RELIEVED FROM COMMAND OF
THE WESTERN ARMY--CENSURE OF THIS OFFICER--HIS MERITS AND
SERVICES--THE UNJUST CENSURE OF MR. DAVIS AND GENERAL BRAGG FOR THE
REVERSES IN THE WEST--OPERATIONS IN VIRGINIA IN THE LATTER PART OF
1863--CONDITION OF THE SOUTH AT THE CLOSE OF THE YEAR--SIGNS OF
EXHAUSTION--PRESIDENT DAVIS' RECOMMENDATIONS--PUBLIC DESPONDENCY--THE
WORK OF FACTION--ABUSE OF MR. DAVIS IN CONGRESS--THE CONTRAST BETWEEN
HIMSELF AND HIS ASSAILANTS--DEFICIENCY OF FOOD--HOW CAUSED--THE
CONFEDERACY EVENTUALLY CONQUERED BY STARVATION.
CHAPTER XVII. (Page 502-532.)
AN EFFORT TO BLACKEN THE CHARACTER OF THE SOUTH--THE PERSECUTION OF
MR. DAVIS AS THE SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ASSUMED OFFENSES OF THE
SOUTH--REPUTATION OF THE SOUTH FOR HUMANITY--TREATMENT OF PRISONERS OF
WAR--EARLY ACTION OF THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT UPON THE SUBJECT--MR.
DAVIS' LETTER TO MR. LINCOLN--THE COBB-WOOL NEGOTIATIONS--PERFIDIOUS
CONDUCT OF THE FEDERAL AUTHORITIES--A CARTEL ARRANGED BY GENERALS DIX
AND HILL--COMMISSIONER OULD--HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE FEDERAL AGENT
OF EXCHANGE--REPEATED PERFIDY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--SUSPENSION
OF THE CARTEL CAUSED BY THE BAD FAITH OF THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION,
AND THE SUFFERING WHICH IT CAUSED--EFFORTS OF THE CONFEDERATE
AUTHORITIES TO RENEW THE OPERATION OF THE CARTEL--HUMANE OFFER OF
COMMISSIONER OULD--JUSTIFICATION OF THE CONFEDERATE AUTHORITIES--GUILT
OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--MR. DAVIS' STATEMENT OF THE MATTER--COLONEL
OULD'S LETTER TO MR. ELDRIDGE--NORTHERN STATEMENTS: GENERAL BUTLER,
NEW YORK TRIBUNE, ETC.--THE CHARGE OF CRUELTY AGAINST THE SOUTH--A
CONTRAST BETWEEN ANDERSONVILLE AND ELMIRA--IMPOVERISHMENT OF THE
SOUTH--DISREPUTABLE MEANS EMPLOYED TO AROUSE RESENTMENT OF THE
NORTH--THE VINDICATION OF THE SOUTH AND OF MR. DAVIS--HIS STAINLESS
CHARACTER, HIS HUMANITY AND FORBEARANCE--AN INQUIRY OF HISTORY.
CHAPTER XVIII. (Page 533-562.)
INDICATIONS OF POPULAR FEELING AT THE BEGINNING OF 1864--APATHY AND
DESPONDENCY OF THE NORTH--IMPROVED FEELING IN THE CONFEDERACY--THE
PROBLEM OF ENDURANCE--PREPARATIONS OF THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT--
MILITARY SUCCESS THE GREAT DESIDERATUM--A SERIES OF SUCCESSES--
FINNEGAN'S VICTORY IN FLORIDA--SHERMAN'S EXPEDITION--FORREST'S
VICTORY--THE RAID OF DAHLGREN--TAYLOR DEFEATS BANKS--FORREST'S
TENNESSEE CAMPAIGN--HOKE'S VICTORY--THE VALUE OF THESE MINOR
VICTORIES--CONCENTRATION FOR THE GREAT STRUGGLES IN VIRGINIA AND
GEORGIA--FEDERAL PREPARATIONS--GENERAL GRANT--HIS THEORY OF WAR--HIS
PLANS--THE FEDERAL FORCES IN VIRGINIA--SHERMAN--FEEBLE RESOURCES OF
THE CONFEDERACY--THE "ON TO RICHMOND" AND "ON TO ATLANTA"--GENERAL
GRANT BAFFLED--HE NARROWLY ESCAPES RUIN--HIS OVERLAND MOVEMENT A TOTAL
FAILURE--SHERIDAN THREATENS RICHMOND--DEATH OF STUART--BUTLER'S
ADVANCE UPON RICHMOND--THE CITY IN GREAT PERIL--BEAUREGARD'S PLAN OF
OPERATIONS--VIEWS OF MR. DAVIS--DEFEAT OF BUTLER, AND HIS CONFINEMENT
IN A "CUL DE SAC"--FAILURE OF GRANT'S COMBINATIONS--CONSTANTLY BAFFLED
BY LEE--TERRIBLE LOSSES OF THE FEDERAL ARMY--GRANT CROSSES THE
JAMES--HIS FAILURES REPEATED--HIS NEW COMBINATIONS--EARLY'S OPERATIONS
IN THE VALLEY AND ACROSS THE POTOMAC--THE FEDERAL COMBINATIONS AGAIN
BROKEN DOWN--FAVORABLE SITUATION IN VIRGINIA--THE MISSION OF MESSRS.
CLAY, THOMPSON, AND HOLCOMBE--CORRESPONDENCE WITH MR. LINCOLN--THE
ARROGANT AND MOCKING REPLY OF THE FEDERAL PRESIDENT.
CHAPTER XIX. (Page 563-589.)
DISAPPOINTMENT AT RESULTS OF THE GEORGIA CAMPAIGN--HOW FAR IT WAS
PARALLEL WITH THE VIRGINIA CAMPAIGN--DIFFERENT TACTICS ON BOTH
SIDES--REMOVAL OF GENERAL JOHNSTON--THE EXPLANATION OF THAT STEP--A
QUESTION FOR MILITARY JUDGMENT--THE NEGATIVE VINDICATION OF GENERAL
JOHNSTON--DIFFERENT THEORIES OF WAR--THE REAL PHILOSOPHY OF THE
SOUTHERN FAILURE--THE ODDS IN NUMBERS AND RESOURCES AGAINST THE
SOUTH--WATER FACILITIES OF THE ENEMY--STRATEGIC DIFFICULTIES OF THE
SOUTH--THE BLOCKADE--INSIGNIFICANCE OF MINOR QUESTIONS--JEFFERSON
DAVIS THE WASHINGTON OF THE SOUTH--GENERAL JOHN B. HOOD--HIS
DISTINGUISHED CAREER--HOPE OF THE SOUTH RENEWED--HOOD'S
OPERATIONS--LOSS OF ATLANTA--IMPORTANT QUESTIONS--PRESIDENT DAVIS IN
GEORGIA--PERVERSE CONDUCT OF GOVERNOR BROWN--MR. DAVIS IN MACON--AT
HOOD'S HEAD-QUARTERS--HOW HOOD'S TENNESSEE CAMPAIGN VARIED FROM MR.
DAVIS' INTENTIONS--SHERMAN'S PROMPT AND BOLD CONDUCT--HOOD'S
MAGNANIMOUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT--DESTRUCTION OF THE CONFEDERATE POWER IN
THE SOUTH-WEST.
CHAPTER XX. (Page 590-613.)
INCIDENTS ON THE LINES OF RICHMOND AND PETERSBURG DURING THE SUMMER
AND AUTUMN--CAPTURE OF FORT HARRISON--OTHER DEMONSTRATIONS BY
GRANT--THE SITUATION NEAR THE CONFEDERATE CAPITAL--EARLY'S VALLEY
CAMPAIGN--POPULAR CENSURE OF EARLY--INFLUENCE OF THE VALLEY CAMPAIGN
UPON THE SITUATION NEAR RICHMOND--WHAT THE AGGREGATE OF CONFEDERATE
DISASTERS SIGNIFIED--DESPONDENCY OF THE SOUTH--THE INJURIOUS EXAMPLES
OF PROMINENT MEN--THE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL LEE--MR. DAVIS'
POPULARITY--WHY HE DID NOT FULLY COMPREHEND THE DEMORALIZATION OF THE
PEOPLE--HE HOPES FOR POPULAR REANIMATION--WAS THE CASE OF THE
CONFEDERACY HOPELESS?--VACILLATING CONDUCT OF CONGRESS--THE
CONFEDERATE CONGRESS A WEAK BODY--MR. DAVIS' RELATIONS WITH
CONGRESS--PROPOSED CONSCRIPTION OF SLAVES--FAVORED BY DAVIS AND
LEE--DEFEATED BY CONGRESS--LEGISLATION DIRECTED AGAINST THE
PRESIDENT--DAVIS' OPINION OF LEE--RUMORS OF PEACE--HAMPTON ROADS
CONFERENCE--THE FEDERAL ULTIMATUM--THE ABSURD CHARGE AGAINST MR. DAVIS
OF OBSTRUCTING NEGOTIATIONS--HIS RECORD ON THE SUBJECT OF PEACE--A
RICHMOND NEWSPAPER ON THE FEDERAL ULTIMATUM--DELUSIVE SIGNS OF PUBLIC
SPIRIT--NO ALTERNATIVE BUT CONTINUED RESISTANCE--REPORT OF THE HAMPTON
ROADS CONFERENCE.
CHAPTER XXI. (Page 614-636.)
MILITARY OPERATIONS IN THE EARLY PART OF 1865--LAST PHASE OF THE
MILITARY POLICY OF THE CONFEDERACY--THE PLAN TO CRUSH SHERMAN--CALM
DEMEANOR OF PRESIDENT DAVIS--CHEERFULNESS OF GENERAL LEE--THE QUESTION
AS TO THE SAFETY OF RICHMOND--WEAKNESS OF GENERAL LEE'S ARMY--
PREPARATIONS TO EVACUATE RICHMOND BEFORE THE CAMPAIGN OPENED--A NEW
BASIS OF HOPE--WHAT WAS TO BE REASONABLY ANTICIPATED--THE CONTRACTED
THEATRE OF WAR--THE FATAL DISASTERS AT PETERSBURG--MR. DAVIS RECEIVES
THE INTELLIGENCE WHILE IN CHURCH--RICHMOND EVACUATED--PRESIDENT DAVIS
AT DANVILLE--HIS PROCLAMATION--SURRENDER OF LEE--DANVILLE
EVACUATED--THE LAST OFFICIAL INTERVIEW OF MR. DAVIS WITH GENERALS
JOHNSTON AND BEAUREGARD--HIS ARRIVAL AT CHARLOTTE--INCIDENTS AT
CHARLOTTE--REJECTION OF THE SHERMAN-JOHNSTON SETTLEMENT--MR. DAVIS'
INTENTIONS AFTER THAT EVENT--HIS MOVEMENTS SOUTHWARD--INTERESTING
DETAILS--CAPTURE OF MR. DAVIS AND HIS IMPRISONMENT AT FORTRESS MONROE.
CHAPTER XXII. (Page 637-645.)
MOTIVE OF MR. DAVIS' ARREST--AN AFTER-THOUGHT OF STANTON AND THE
BUREAU OF MILITARY JUSTICE--THE EMBARRASSMENT PRODUCED BY HIS
CAPTURE--THE INFAMOUS CHARGES AGAINST HIM--WHY MR. DAVIS WAS TREATED
WITH EXCEPTIONAL CRUELTY--THE OUTRAGES AND INDIGNITIES OFFERED
HIM--HIS PATIENT AND HEROIC ENDURANCE OF PERSECUTION--HIS RELEASE FROM
FORTRESS MONROE--BAILED BY THE FEDERAL COURT AT RICHMOND--JOY OF THE
COMMUNITY--IN CANADA--RE-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE FEDERAL COURT--HIS
TRIAL AGAIN POSTPONED--CONCLUSION.
LIFE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS.
INTRODUCTION.
ATTRACTIONS OF THE LATE WAR TO POSTERITY--MR. LINCOLN'S REMARK--
DISADVANTAGES OF MR. DAVIS' SITUATION--SUCCESS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH
MERIT--ORIGIN OF THE INJUSTICE DONE MR. DAVIS--REMARK OF MACAULAY--
REMARK OF MR. GLADSTONE--THE EFFECT THAT CONFEDERATE SUCCESS WOULD
HAVE HAD UPON THE FAME OF MR. DAVIS--POPULAR AFFECTION FOR HIM IN THE
SOUTH--HIS VINDICATION ASSURED.
To future generations the period in American history, of most absorbing
interest and profound inquiry, will be that embracing the incipiency,
progress, and termination of the revolution which had its most pronounced
phase in the memorable war of 1861. Historians rarely concur in their
estimates of the limits of a revolution, and usually we find quite as much
divergence in their views of the scope of its operations, as in their
speculations as to its origin and causes, and their statements of its
incidents and results. If, however, it is difficult to assign, with minute
accuracy, the exact limits and proper scope of those grand trains of
consecutive events, which swerve society from the beaten track of ages,
divert nations from the old path of progress into what seems to be the
direction of a new destiny, and often transform the aspect of continents,
it is comparatively an easy task to reach a reliable statement of their
more salient and conspicuous incidents. It is in this aspect that the
Titanic conflict, which had its beginning with the booming of the guns in
Charleston harbor in April, 1861, and its crowning catastrophe at
Appomattox Court-house in April, 1865, will be chiefly attractive to the
future student. As a point of departure from the hitherto unbroken
monotony of American history, the beginning of a new order of things, the
extinction of important elements of previous national existence, embracing
much that was consecrated in the popular affections; in short, as a
complete political and social transformation, an abrupt, but thorough
perversion of the government from its original purposes and previous
policy, this period must take its place, with important suggestions of
theory and illustration, among the most impressive lessons of history.
The profound interest which shall center upon the period that we have
under consideration, must necessarily subject to a rigid investigation the
lives, characters, and conduct of those to whom were allotted conspicuous
parts in the great drama. It is both a natural and reasonable test that
the world applies in seeking to solve, through the qualities and
capacities of those who direct great measures of governmental policy, the
merits of the movements themselves. The late President of the United
States, Mr. Lincoln, avowed his inability to escape the judgment of
history, and the bare statement sufficiently describes the inevitable
necessity, not only of his own situation, but of all who bore a prominent
part on either side of the great controversy.
JEFFERSON DAVIS confronts posterity burdened with the disadvantage of
having been the leader of an unsuccessful political movement. "Nothing
succeeds like success," was the pithy maxim of Talleyrand, to whose astute
observation nothing was more obvious than the disposition of mankind to
make success the touchstone of merit. It is, nevertheless, a vulgar and
often an erroneous criterion. What could be more absurd than to determine
by such a test the comparative valor, generalship, and military character
of the two contestants in the late war? Concede its applicability,
however, and we exalt the soldiership of the North above all precedent,
and consign the unequaled valor of the Southern soldiery to reproach,
instead of the deathless fame which shall survive them. To such a judgment
every battle-field of the war gives emphatic and indignant contradiction.
History abounds with evidence of the influence of accident and of
extraneous circumstances, in the decision of results, which, if controlled
by the question of merit, as understood by the predominant sense of
mankind, would have borne a vastly different character.
But, in addition to the disparaging influence of the failure of the cause
which he represented, Mr. Davis has encountered an unparalleled degree of
personal hate, partizan rancor, of malignant and gratuitous
misrepresentation, the result, to a great extent, of old partizan
rivalries and jealousies, engendered in former periods of the history of
the Union, and also of the spirit of domestic disaffection and agitation
which inevitably arises against every administration of public affairs,
especially at times of unusual danger and embarrassment.[1] The almost
fanatical hatred of the Northern masses against Mr. Davis, as the wicked
leader of a causeless rebellion against the Government of his country, as
a conspirator against the peace and happiness of his fellow-citizens, and
as a relentless monster, who tortured and starved prisoners of war,
springs from the persistent calumnies of such leaders of Northern opinion,
as have an ignoble purpose of vindictive hatred to gratify by the
invention of these atrocious charges. Yet this feeling of the North hardly
exceeds in violence, the resentment with which it was sought to inflame
the Southern people against him, at critical stages of the war, as an
unworthy leader, whose incapacity, pragmatism, nepotism, and vanity were
rushing them into material and political perdition. Of popular
disaffection to the Confederate cause, or dislike of Mr. Davis, there was
an insignificantly small element, never dangerous in the sense of
attempted revolt against the authorities, but often hurtful, because it
constituted the basis of support to such prominent men as fancied their
personal ambition, or _amour propre_, offended by the President. A
misfortune of the South was that there were not a few such characters, and
their influence upon certain occasions was as baleful to the public
interests as their animus was malignant against Mr. Davis. Hoping to
advance themselves by misrepresentations of him, during the war they
persistently charged upon him every disaster, and do not scruple to impute
to his blame those final failures so largely traceable to themselves. A
patriotic regard for the public safety imposed silence upon Mr. Davis
while the war continued, and a magnanimity which they have neither
deserved nor appreciated, coupled with a proper sense of personal dignity,
have impelled him since to refrain from refutation of misstatements
utterly scandalous and inexcusable.
The distinguished English statesman,[2] who, during the progress of the
late war, declared that "Mr. Jefferson Davis had created a nation," stated
more than the truth, though he hardly exaggerated the flattering estimate
which the intelligent public of Europe places upon the unsurpassed ability
and energy with which the limited resources of the South, as compared with
those of her enemies, were, for the most part, wielded by the Confederate
administration. Nor, indeed, would such an estimate have been too
extravagant to be entertained by his own countrymen, had the South
achieved her independence by any stroke of mere good fortune, such as
repeatedly favored her adversaries at critical moments of the war, when,
apparently, the most trifling incidents regulated the balance. More than
once the South stood upon the very threshold of the full fruition of her
aspirations for independence and nationality. Had Jackson not fallen at
Chancellorsville, the Federal Army of the Potomac, the bulwark of the
Union in the Atlantic States, would have disappeared into history under
circumstances far different from those which marked its dissolution two
years later. At Gettysburg the Confederacy was truthfully said to have
been "within a stone's-throw of peace." If at these fateful moments the
treacherous scales of fortune had not strangely turned, and in the very
flush of triumph, who doubts that now and hereafter there would have come
from Southern hearts, an ascription of praise to Jefferson Davis, no less
earnest than to his illustrious colaborers? At all events, it is
undeniable that, as the Confederate arms prospered, so the affection of
the people for Mr. Davis was always more enthusiastic and demonstrative.
Only in moments of extreme public depression could the malcontents obtain
even a patient audience of their assaults upon the chosen President of
the Confederacy.
The people of the late Confederate States, whose destinies Jefferson Davis
directed during four years, the most momentous in their history, are
competent witnesses as to the fidelity, ability, and devotion with which
he discharged the trust confided to him.
Their judgment is revealed in the affectionate confidence with which,
during their struggle for liberty, they upheld him, and in the joyful
acclaim, which echoed from the Potomac to the Rio Grande upon the
announcement of his release from his vicarious captivity. As he was the
chosen representative of the power, the will, and the aspirations of a
chivalrous people, so they will prove themselves the jealous custodians of
his fame. Be the verdict of posterity as it may, they will not shrink from
their share of the odium, and will be common participants with him in the
award of eulogy. There is more than an unreasoning presentiment, something
more tangible than vague hope, in the calm and cheerful confidence with
which both look forward to that ample vindication of truth which always
follows candid and impartial inquiry.
That time will triumphantly vindicate Mr. Davis is as certain, as that it
will dispel the twilight mazes which yet obscure the grand effort of
patriotism which he directed. The rank luxuriance of prejudice, asperity,
and falsehood must eventually yield to the irresistible progress of reason
and truth. Bribery, perjury, every appliance which the most subtle
ingenuity of eager and unscrupulous malice could invent, have been
exhausted in the vain effort to make infamous, in the sight of mankind, a
noble cause, by imputation of personal odium upon its most distinguished
representative. Day by day he rises beyond the reach of calumny, and his
character expands into the fair proportions of the grandest ideals of
excellence. An adamantine heroism of the _antique_ pattern; purity exalted
to an altitude beyond conception even of the vulgar mind; devotion which
shrank from no sacrifice and quailed before no peril, were qualities
giving tone to the genius, which, wielding the inadequate means of a
feeble Confederacy, for years, withstood the shock of powerful invasion,
baffled and humiliated a nation, unlimited in resources, and in spite of
disastrous failure, lends unexampled dignity to the cause in which it was
employed.
CHAPTER I.
BIRTH--EDUCATION--AT WEST POINT--IN THE ARMY--RETIREMENT--POLITICAL
TRAINING IN AMERICA--MR. DAVIS NOT EDUCATED FOR POLITICAL LIFE AFTER
THE AMERICAN MODEL--BEGINS HIS POLITICAL CAREER BY A SPEECH AT THE
MISSISSIPPI DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION--A GLANCE PROSPECTIVELY AT HIS
FUTURE PARTY ASSOCIATIONS--HIS CONSISTENT ATTACHMENT TO STATES' RIGHTS
PRINCIPLES--A SKETCH OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUESTION OF STATES'
RIGHTS--MR. CALHOUN NOT THE AUTHOR OF THAT PRINCIPLE--HIS VINDICATION
FROM THE CHARGE OF DISUNIONISM--MR. DAVIS THE SUCCESSOR OF MR. CALHOUN
AS THE STATES' RIGHTS LEADER.
Jefferson Davis was born on the third day of June, 1808, in that portion
of Christian County, Kentucky, which, by subsequent act of the
Legislature, was made Todd County. His father, Samuel Davis, a planter,
during the Revolutionary war served as an officer in the mounted force of
Georgia, an organization of local troops. Subsequently to the Revolution
Samuel Davis removed to Kentucky, and continued to reside in that state
until a few years after the birth of his son JEFFERSON, when he removed
with his family to the neighborhood of Woodville, Wilkinson County, in the
then territory of Mississippi. At the period of his father's removal to
Mississippi, Jefferson was a child of tender years. After having enjoyed
the benefits of a partial academic training at home, he was sent, at an
earlier age than is usual, to Transylvania University, Kentucky, where he
remained until he reached the age of sixteen. In 1824 he was appointed,
by President Monroe, a cadet at the West Point Military Academy.
Among his contemporaries at the academy were Robert E. Lee, Joseph E.
Johnston, Albert Sidney Johnston, Leonidas Polk, John B. Magruder, and
others who have since earned distinction. Ordinary merit could not have
commanded in such an association of talent and character the position
which Davis held as a cadet. A fellow-cadet thus speaks of him: "Jefferson
Davis was distinguished in the corps for his manly bearing, his high-toned
and lofty character. His figure was very soldier-like and rather robust;
his step springy, resembling the tread of an Indian 'brave' on the
war-path." He graduated in June, 1828, receiving the customary appointment
of Brevet Second Lieutenant, which is conferred upon the graduates of the
academy. Assigned to the infantry, he served with such fidelity in that
branch of the service, and with such especial distinction as a staff
officer on the North-western frontier in 1831-32, that he was promoted to
the rank of First Lieutenant and Adjutant of a new regiment of dragoons in
March, 1833.
About this period the Indians, on various portions of the frontier,
stimulated by dissatisfaction with the course of the Government concerning
certain claims and guarantees, which had been accorded them in previous
treaties, were excessively annoying, and the Government was forced to
resort to energetic military measures to suppress them. Lieutenant Davis
had ample opportunity for the exhibition of his high soldierly qualities,
cool courage, and admirable self-possession, in the Black Hawk war, during
which he was frequently employed in duties of an important and dangerous
character. During the captivity of Black Hawk, that famous Indian
chieftain and warrior is said to have conceived a very strong attachment
for Lieutenant Davis, whose gallantry and pleasing amenities of bearing
greatly impressed the captive enemy. After his transfer to the dragoons,
Lieutenant Davis saw two years of very active service in the various
expeditions against the Pawnees, Camanches, and other Indian tribes, and
accompanied the first expedition which successfully penetrated the
strongholds of the savages, and conquered a peace by reducing them to
subjection.
Though attached to the profession of arms, for which he has on repeated
occasions, during his subsequent life, evinced an almost passionate
fondness and a most unusual aptitude, Lieutenant Davis resigned his
commission in June, 1835, and returning to Mississippi devoted his
attention to the cultivation of cotton and to the assiduous pursuit of
letters. Not long after his resignation, he had married the daughter of
Col. Zachary Taylor, under whose eye he was destined, in a few years, to
win such immortal renown upon the fields of Mexico. Living upon his
plantation in great seclusion, he devoted himself with zeal and enthusiasm
to those studies which were to qualify him for the eminent position in
politics and statesmanship which he had resolved to assume. In that
retirement were sown the seed, whose abundant fruits were seen in those
splendid specimens of senatorial and popular eloquence, at once models of
taste and exhibitions of intellectual power; in the pure, terse, and
elegant English of his matchless state papers, which will forever be the
delight of scholars and the study of statesmen, and in that elevated and
enlightened statesmanship, which scorning the low ambition of demagogues
and striving always for the ends of patriotism and principle, illumines,
for more than a score of years, the legislative history of the Union.
The period of Mr. Davis' retirement is embraced within the interval of
his withdrawal from the army, in 1835, and the beginning of his active
participation in the local politics of Mississippi, in 1843, a term of
eight years. The diligent application with which he was employed daring
these years of seclusion constituted a most fortunate preparation for the
distinguished career upon which he at once entered. There is not, in the
whole range of American biography, an instance of more thorough
preparation, of more ample intellectual discipline, and elaborate
education for political life.
The _trade_ of politics is an avocation familiar to Americans, and in the
more ordinary maneuvers of party tactics, in that lower species of
political strategy which, in our party vocabulary, is aptly termed
"wire-pulling," our politicians may boast an eminence in their class not
surpassed in the most corrupt ages of the most profligate political
establishments which have ever existed. Statesmanship, in that broad and
elevated conception which suggests the noblest models among those who have
adorned and illustrated the science of government, combining those higher
attributes of administrative capacity which are realized equally in a
pure, sound, and just polity, and in a free, prosperous, and contented
community, is a subject utterly unexplored by American politicians at the
outset of their career, and is comparatively an after-thought with those
intrusted with the most responsible duties of state.
The political training of Mr. Davis was pursued upon a basis very
different from the American model. It has been more akin to the English
method, under which the faculties and the tastes are first cultivated, and
the mind qualified by all the light which theory and previous example
afford for the practical labors which are before it. The tastes and habits
formed during those eight years of retirement have adhered to Mr. Davis
in his subsequent life. When not engrossed by the absorbing cares of
state, he has, with rare enthusiasm and satisfaction, resorted to those
refining pleasures which are accessible only to intellects which have
known the elevating influences of culture.
Emerging from his seclusion in 1843, when the initiatory measures of party
organization were in course of preparation for the gubernatorial canvass
of that year and the Presidential campaign of the next, he immediately
assumed a prominent position among the leaders of the Democratic party in
Mississippi. At this time, probably, no state in the Union, of equal
population, excelled Mississippi in the number and distinction of her
brilliant politicians. Especially was this true of Vicksburg, and of the
general neighborhood in which Mr. Davis resided.[3] The genius of Seargent
S. Prentiss was then in its meridian splendor, and his reputation and
popularity were coëxtensive with the Union. Besides Prentiss were Foote,
Thompson, Claiborne, Gholson, Brown, and many others, all comparatively
young men, who have since achieved professional or political distinction.
The appearance of Mr. Davis was soon recognized as the addition of a star
of no unworthy effulgence to this brilliant galaxy.
The Democratic State Convention, held for the purpose of organization for
the gubernatorial canvass, and for the appointment of delegates to the
National Convention, assembled at Jackson in the summer of 1843. From the
meeting of this convention, which Mr. Davis attended as a delegate, may be
dated the beginning of his political life. In the course of its
deliberations he delivered his first public address, which immediately
attracted toward him much attention, and a most partial consideration by
his party associates. The occasion is interesting from this circumstance,
and as indicating that consistent political bias which, beginning in early
manhood, constituted the controlling inspiration of a long career of
eminent public service. The undoubted preference of the convention, as of
an overwhelming majority of the masses of the Southern Democracy, was for
Mr. Van Buren, and its entire action in the selection of delegates, and
formal expressions of feeling, was in accordance with this
well-ascertained preference. To a proposition instructing the delegates to
the National Convention, to support the nomination of Mr. Van Buren so
long as there was a reasonable hope of his selection by the party, Mr.
Davis proposed an amendment instructing the delegates to support Mr.
Calhoun as the second choice of the Democracy of Mississippi, in the event
of such a contingency as should render clearly hopeless the choice of Mr.
Van Buren. In response to an inquiry from an acquaintance if his amendment
was meant in good faith, and did not contemplate detriment to the
interests of Mr. Van Buren, Mr. Davis rose and addressed the convention in
explanation of his purpose, and in terms of such earnest and appropriate
eulogy of Mr. Calhoun and his principles as to elicit the most
enthusiastic commendation.
So favorable was the impression which Mr. Davis made upon his party, and
so rapid his progress as a popular speaker, that in the Presidential
campaign of 1844, the Democracy conferred upon him the distinction of a
place upon its electoral ticket. In this canvass he acquired great
reputation, and established himself immovably in the confidence and
admiration of the people of Mississippi.
This seems an appropriate point from which to glance prospectively at the
political principles and party associations of Mr. Davis in his after
career. Until its virtual dissolution at Charleston, in 1860, he was an
earnest and consistent member of the Democratic party. To those who are
familiar with the party nomenclature of the country, no inconsistency with
this assertion will appear involved in the statement, that he has also
been an ardent disciple of the doctrine of States' Rights. The Democratic
party and the States' Rights party were indeed identical, when a
profession of political faith in this country was significant of something
ennobling upon the score of principle, something higher than a mere
aspiration for the spoils of office. When, in subsequent years, to the
large majority of its leaders, the chief significance of a party triumph,
consisted in its being the occasion of a new division of the spoils, many
of the most eminent statesmen of the South became in a measure indifferent
to its success. Its prurient aspiration for the rewards of place provoked
the sarcasm of Mr. Calhoun, that it "was held together by the cohesive
power of the public plunder," and the still more caustic satire of John
Randolph, of Roanoke, that it had "seven principles: five loaves and two
fishes."
Nevertheless, in its spirit thoroughly national, catholic in all its
impulses, for many years shaping its policy in harmony with the protection
of Southern institutions, and with few features of sectionalism in its
organization, it worthily commanded the preference of a large majority of
the Southern people. To this organization Mr. Davis adhered until the
inception of the late conflict, supporting its Presidential nominations,
in the main favoring such public measures as were incorporated in the
policy of the party, and he was, for several years prior to the war, by
no means the least prominent of those named in connection with its choice
for the Presidency in 1860.
It is no part of the task which has been undertaken in these pages to
sketch the mutations of political parties, or to trace the historical
order and significance of events, save in their immediate and
indispensable connection with our appropriate subject. So closely
identified, however, has been the public life of Mr. Davis with the
question of States' Rights, so ardent has been his profession of that
faith, and so able and zealous was he in its advocacy and practice, that
his life virtually becomes an epitome of the most important incidents in
the development of this great historical question. His earliest appearance
upon the arena of politics was at a period when the various issues which
were submitted to the arbitrament of arms in the late war began to assume
a practical shape of most portentous aspect. The address which first
challenged public attention, and that extensive interest which has rarely
been withdrawn since, was an emphatic indorsement of the political
philosophy of Mr. Calhoun and a glowing panegyric upon the character and
principles of that immortal statesman and expounder. Unreservedly
committing himself, then, he has steadfastly held to the States' Rights
creed, as the basis of his political faith and the guide of his public
conduct.
If it be true that the decision of the sword only establishes facts, and
does not determine questions of principle, then the principle of States'
Rights will be commemorated as something more valuable, than as the mere
pretext upon which a few agitators inaugurated an unjustifiable revolt for
the overthrow of the Government of the Union. Nothing is more likely than
that many who recently rejoiced at its suppression by physical force, may
mourn its departure as of that one vital inspiration, which alone could
have averted the decay of the public liberties. Practically a "dead
letter" now in the partizan slang of the demagogues who rule the hour,
since its prostration by military power in the service of the antipodal
principle of consolidation, it will live forever as the motive and
occasion of a struggle, unparalleled in its heroism and sacrifices in
behalf of constitutional liberty.
There is little ground for wonder at the total ignorance and persistent
misconception in the mind of Europe, at the commencement of the war, of
the motives and purposes of the Confederates in seeking a dissolution of
the Union, when we consider the limited information and perverted views of
the Northern people and politicians respecting the nature of the Federal
Government and the intentions of its authors. Naturally enough, perhaps,
the North, seeing in the Union the source of its marvelous material
prosperity, and with an astute appreciation of its ability, by its
rapidly-growing numerical majority, to pervert the Government to any
purpose of sectional aggression agreeable to its ambition or interests,
refused to tolerate, as either rational or honest, any theory that
contemplated disunion as possible in any contingency. In their willful
ignorance and misapprehension most Northern orators and writers denounced
the doctrines of States' Rights as _new inventions_--as innovations upon
the faith of the fathers of the Republic--and professed to regard the most
enlightened and patriotic statesmen of the South, the pupils and followers
of illustrious Virginians and Carolinians of the Revolutionary era, as
agitators, conspirators, and plotters of treason against the Union. Upon
the score of antiquity, States' Rights principles have a claim to
respectability--not for a moment to be compared with the wretched devices
of expediency or the hybrid products of political atheism, to which the
brazen audacity and hypocrisy of the times apply the misnomer of
"principles."
They are, in fact, older than the Union, and antedate, not only the
present Constitution, but even the famous Articles of Confederation, under
which our forefathers fought through the first Revolution. The Congress
which adopted the Declaration of Independence emphatically negatived a
proposition looking to consolidation, offered by New Hampshire on the 15th
of June, 1776, that the Thirteen Colonies be declared a "free and
independent State," and expressly affirmed their separate sovereignty by
declaring them to be "free and independent States." The declaration of the
Articles of Confederation was still more explicit--that "each State
retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power,
jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly
delegated to the United States in Congress assembled." The Convention of
1787 clearly designed the present Constitution to be the instrument of a
closer association of the States than had been effected by the Articles of
Confederation, but the proof is exceedingly meager of any general desire
that it should establish a consolidated nationality.
At this early period the antagonism of the two schools of American
politics was plainly discernible. The conflict of faith is easily
indicated. The advocates of States' Rights regarded the Union as a
_compact between the States_--something more than a mere league formed for
purposes of mutual safety, but still a strictly _voluntary_ association of
Sovereignties, in which certain general powers were specifically delegated
to the Union; and all others not so delegated were reserved by the States
in their separate characters. The advocates of Consolidation considered
the Union a _National_ Government--in other words, a centralized power--to
which the several States occupied the relation of separate provinces.
The famous resolutions of '98, adopted respectively by the Virginia and
Kentucky Legislatures, were the formal declarations of principles upon
which the States' Rights party was distinctly organized under Mr.
Jefferson, whom it successfully supported for the Presidency against the
elder Adams at the expiration of the term of the latter. With the progress
of time the practical significance of these opposing principles became
more and more apparent, and their respective followers strove, with
constantly-increasing energy, to make their party creed paramount in the
policy of the Government. A majority of the Northern people embraced the
idea of a perpetual Union, whose authority was supreme over all the
States, and regulated by the will of a numerical majority, which majority,
it should be observed, they had already secured, and were yearly
increasing in an enormous ratio. The South, in the course of years, with
even more unanimity, clung to the idea of State Sovereignty, and the
interpretation of the Government as one of limited powers, as its shield
and bulwark against the Northern majority in the collision which it was
foreseen the aggressive spirit of the latter would eventually occasion.
A common and totally erroneous impression of the Northern mind is that
John C. Calhoun _invented_ the idea of State Sovereignty for selfish and
unpatriotic designs, and as the pretext of a morbid hatred to the Union.
That eminent statesman and sincere patriot never asserted any claim to the
paternity of the faith which he professed. It is true that, in a certain
sense, he was the founder of the States' Rights party as it existed in his
day, and which survived him to make a last unsuccessful struggle to save
first the Union, and, failing in that, to rescue the imperiled liberties
of the South. During the eventful life of Mr. Calhoun the question of the
relative powers of the Federal and State Governments assumed a more
practical bearing than before, and his far-reaching sagacity was
illustrated in his efforts to avert the impending evils of consolidation.
He was the authoritative exponent and revered leader of the votaries of
those principles which he advocated, but did not originate or invent, and
sought to apply as the legitimate and safe solution of the circumstances
by which he was surrounded.
Equally absurd and unfounded with the pretense, asserted at the North, of
the novelty of the idea of State Sovereignty and its incompatibility with
the spirit of the Constitution, was the charge so persistently iterated
against Mr. Calhoun and his followers, of disunionism; of a restless,
morbid discontent, which sought continually revenge for imaginary wrongs
in a dissolution of the Union. To the contrary we have the irrefutable
arguments of Mr. Calhoun himself in favor of the superior efficacy of the
States' Rights interpretation, as an agency for the preservation of the
Union as it was designed to exist by its authors. So far from having an
anarchical or disorganizing tendency, he, on all occasions, maintained
that his theory was "the only solid foundation of our system and the Union
itself."
To this faith the public life of Jefferson Davis has been dedicated. For
more than twenty years he sought to illustrate it in the realization of a
splendid but barren vision of a time-honored and time-strengthened Union,
consecrated in the common affections and joint aspirations of a people,
now, alas! united only in name.
During the period of their public service together, Mr. Davis received a
large share of the confidence and regard of Mr. Calhoun, and when the
death of the latter deprived the South of the counsels of an illustrious
public servant, Mr. Davis, though comparatively a young man, stood
foremost as heir to the mantle of the great apostle of States' Rights.[4]
CHAPTER II.
RESULTS OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN 1844--MR. DAVIS ELECTED TO
CONGRESS--HIS FIRST SESSION--PROMINENT MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE--DOUGLAS,
HUNTER, SEDDON, ETC.--DAVIS' RAPID ADVANCEMENT IN REPUTATION--
RESOLUTIONS OFFERED BY HIM--SPEECHES ON THE OREGON EXCITEMENT, AND ON
THE RESOLUTION OF THANKS TO GENERAL TAYLOR AND HIS ARMY--NATIONAL
SENTIMENTS EMBODIED IN THESE AND OTHER SPEECHES--A CONTRAST IN THE
MATTER OF PATRIOTISM--MASSACHUSETTS AND MISSISSIPPI IN THE MEXICAN
WAR--DEBATE WITH ANDREW JOHNSON--JOHN QUINCY ADAMS' ESTIMATE OF
JEFFERSON DAVIS.
The Presidential canvass of 1844 was one of the most memorable and
exciting in the annals of American politics. By its results the popular
verdict was rendered upon vital questions involved in the administrative
and legislative policy of the Government. The Democratic party was fully
committed to the annexation of Texas, with the prospect of war with Mexico
as an almost inevitable condition of the acquisition of that immense
territory, desirable to the Union at large, but especially popular with
the South, for obvious and sufficient reasons. But apart from the signal
victory achieved by the Democracy, in favor of this and other leading
measures of that party, the election of 1844 had an incidental
significance, which the country generally recognized, in its final and
irrevocable disappointment of the Presidential aspirations of Henry Clay.
This canvass, too, has a peculiar historical interest in the demonstration
which it gave of the real popular strength of the respective parties
which had so long divided the country. Comparatively few temporary issues,
of a character to excite strong popular feeling respecting either party or
its candidates, were made, and there was a square and obstinate battle of
Democracy against Whiggery, of what Governor Wise called the old-fashioned
"Thomas-Jefferson-Simon-Snyder-red-waistcoat-Democracy," against Henry
Clay and his "American System."
The canvass was remarkable not only for its duration and the ardor with
which it was conducted, but for its unsurpassed exhibitions of "stump
oratory." The best men of both parties were summoned to the fierce
conflict; and many were the youthful paladins, hitherto unknown to fame,
who won their golden spurs upon this their first battle-field. Mr. Davis
had borne a leading part in support of Polk and Dallas and Texas
annexation in Mississippi. His services were not of a character to be
forgotten by his party, nor did an intelligent and appreciative public
fail to discover in the young man whose eloquence and manly bearing had so
enlisted their admiration, such abilities and acquirements as qualified
him to represent the honor of his State in any capacity which they might
intrust to his keeping.
Of Mississippi it might have been said, as of Virginia, that "the sun of
her Democracy knew no setting." If possible, however, the State was more
closely than ever confirmed in her Democratic moorings by the decisive
results of the election in 1844. When Mr. Davis received the appropriate
acknowledgment of popular appreciation in his election to the House of
Representatives, in November, 1845, Mississippi sent an unbroken
Democratic delegation to Washington. His associates were Messrs. Roberts
and Jacob Thompson (afterward Secretary of the Interior under Mr.
Buchanan) in the House, and Messrs. Foote and Speight in the Senate.
On Monday, December 8, 1845, Mr. Davis was qualified as a member of the
House of Representatives, and from that day dates his eventful and
brilliant legislative career. The Twenty-ninth Congress was charged with
some of the gravest duties of legislation. The questions of the tariff,
the Oregon excitement, during which war with England was so imminent, and
the settlement of important details pertaining to the Texas question, were
the absorbing concerns which engaged its attention until the provisions
and appropriations necessary to the successful prosecution of the Mexican
war imposed still more serious labors. The records of this Congress reveal
many interesting facts concerning individuals who have since figured
prominently in the history of the country. The fact to which we have
alluded of the unusual interest which had been exhibited in the recent
Presidential contest, doubtless had a considerable influence in the choice
of members of Congress in the various States, and largely contributed to
its elevated standard of ability.
The debates in the House of Representatives of the Twenty-ninth Congress,
are unsurpassed in ability and eloquence by those of any preceding or
subsequent session of that body, and upon its rolls are to be found many
names, now national in reputation, which were then but recently introduced
to public attention. Stephen A. Douglas, the most thoroughly
representative American politician of his time, uniting to a more than
average proportion of the respectability of his class, his full share of
its vicious characteristics, politic, adroit, and ambitious, was
comparatively a new member, and, at this time, in the morning of his
reputation. R. M. T. Hunter, of Virginia, a statesman of sound judgment
and accurate information, who based his arguments upon the facts, and
reduced the complicated problems of governmental economy to the conditions
of a mathematical demonstration, had not yet been transferred to the
Senate. James A. Seddon, the safe theorist, whose study, like Edmund
Burke's, was "_rerum cognoscere causas_," the acute dialectician, who, in
his mental characteristics, no less than in his principles, was so closely
allied to Mr. Calhoun, was, like Jefferson Davis, for the first time a
member of Congress. Andrew Johnson was then a member of the House and at
the outset of his remarkable career; and in addition to these were
Brinkerhoff, Washington Hunt, Dromgoole, George S. Houston, and a score of
others, whose names recall interesting reminiscences of the day in which
they figured.
To a man of ordinary purpose, or doubtful of himself, the prospect of
competition with such men, at the very outset of his public career, would
not have been encouraging. But there are men, designed by nature, to
rejoice at, rather than to shrink from those arduous and hazardous
positions to which their responsibilities summon them. An attribute of
genius is the consciousness of strength, and that sublime confidence in
the success of its own efforts, which doubly assures victory in the battle
of life. It was with an assurance of triumph, far different from the
harlequin-like effrontery which is often witnessed in the political arena,
that Jefferson Davis advanced to contest the awards of intellectual
distinction. With the activity and vigor of the disciplined gladiator,
with the _gaudia certaminis_ beaming in every feature, with the calm
confidence of the trained statesman, and yet with all the radiant _elan_
of a youthful knight contending for his spurs at Templestowe, he pursued
his brief but impressive career in the lower house of Congress.
As a member of the House of Representatives Mr. Davis rapidly and steadily
won upon the good opinion of his associates, and the favorable estimate of
him, entertained by his constituents and friends, was confirmed by his
greatly advanced reputation at the period of his withdrawal from Congress
in the ensuing summer. He became prominent, less by the frequency with
which he claimed the attention of the House, than by the accuracy of his
information, the substantial value of his suggestions and the easy dignity
of his demeanor. His speeches, though not comparable with his senatorial
efforts, were characterized by great perspicuity, argumentative force, and
propriety of taste, and frequently rose to the dignity of true eloquence.
They, in every instance, gave promise of that rhetorical finish, power of
statement, unity of thought and logical coherence, which, in subsequent
years, were so appropriately illustrated on other theaters of intellectual
effort. Mr. Davis participated prominently in the debates upon the Oregon
excitement, Native Americanism, and the various other contemporary topics
of interest, which were then before Congress, but was especially prominent
in the discussion of military affairs, the interests and requirements of
the army, and the measures devised for the prosecution of the Mexican war.
Upon the latter subjects his experience was of great practical value.
On the 19th of December, 1845, he offered the following resolutions:
"_Resolved_, That the Committee on Military Affairs be instructed to
inquire into the expediency of converting a portion of the forts of the
United States into schools for military instruction, on the basis of
substituting their present garrisons of enlisted men, by detachments
furnished from each State of our Union, in the ratio of their several
representation in the Congress of the United States."
"_Resolved_, That the Committee on the Post-office and Post-roads be
required to inquire into the expediency of establishing a direct daily
mail route from Montgomery, Alabama, to Jackson, Mississippi."
The occasion of these motions was the first upon which he occupied the
floor of the House.
On the 29th of December, Mr. Davis spoke in a very earnest and impressive
manner upon Native Americanism, which he strongly opposed, and on
subsequent occasions addressed the House in favor of the bill to receive
arms, barracks, fortifications, and other public property, the cession of
which to the Federal Government, by Texas, had been provided to take place
upon its admission to the Union; in favor of the proposition to raise
additional regiments of riflemen; in opposition to appropriations for
improvement of rivers and harbors; upon the Oregon question, and in favor
of a resolution of thanks to General Taylor and his army.
The extracts from his speech on the Oregon question, and the speech in
favor of thanks to General Taylor and his army, which is here given in
full, are taken from the reports of the _Congressional Globe_. The
intelligent reader will appreciate their real value, as to accuracy,
without any suggestion from us.
On February 6, 1846, the House, having resolved itself into Committee of
the Whole, and having under consideration the joint resolution of notice
to the British Government concerning the abrogation of the Convention
between the United States and Great Britain respecting the territory of
Oregon, Mr. Davis spoke at some length, and in an attractive and
instructive style, upon the subject before the House. A great portion of
the speech consists of interesting historical details, evincing a most
accurate acquaintance with the subject, and giving a clear and valuable
analysis of facts. We have space for only brief extracts, which are
sufficient to reveal Mr. Davis' position upon this important question:
... "Sir, why has the South been assailed in this discussion? Has it been
with the hope of sowing dissensions between us and our Western friends?
Thus far, I think, it has failed. Why the frequent reference to the
conduct of the South on the Texas question? Sir, those who have made
reflections on the South as having sustained Texas annexation from
sectional views have been of those who opposed that great measure and are
most eager for this. The suspicion is but natural in them. But, sir, let
me tell them that this doctrine of the political balance between different
portions of the Union is no Southern doctrine. We, sir, advocated the
annexation of Texas from high national considerations. It was not a mere
Southern question; it lay coterminous to the Western States, and extended
as far north as the forty-second degree of latitude. Nor, sir, do we wish
to divide the territory of Oregon; we would preserve it all for the
extension of our Union. We would not arrest the onward progress of our
pioneers; we would not, as has been done in this debate, ask why our
citizens have left the repose of civil government and gone to Oregon? We
find in it but that energy which has heretofore been characteristic of our
people, and which has developed much that has illustrated our history. It
is the onward progress of our people toward the Pacific which alone can
arrest their westward march, and on the banks of which, to use the
language of our lamented Linn, the pioneer will sit down to weep that
there are no more forests to subdue.... It is, as the representative of a
high-spirited and patriotic people, that I am called on to resist this
war clamor. My constituents need no such excitements to prepare their
hearts for all that patriotism demands. Whenever the honor of the country
demands redress; whenever its territory is invaded--if, then, it shall be
sought to intimidate by the fiery cross of St. George--if, then, we are
threatened with the unfolding of English banners if we resent or
resist--from the gulf shore to the banks of that great river, throughout
out the length and breadth--Mississippi will come. And whether the
question be one of Northern or Southern, of Eastern or Western aggression,
we will not stop to count the cost, but act as becomes the descendants of
those who, in the war of the Revolution, engaged in unequal strife to aid
our brethren of the North in redressing their injuries.... We turn from
present hostility to former friendship--from recent defection to the time
when Massachusetts and Virginia, the stronger brothers of our family,
stood foremost and united to defend our common rights. From sire to son
has descended the love of our Union in our hearts, as in our history are
mingled the names of Concord and Camden, of Yorktown and Saratoga, of
Moultrie and Plattsburgh, of Chippewa and Erie, of Bowyer and Guildford,
and New Orleans and Bunker Hill. Grouped together, they form a monument to
the common glory of our common country; and where is the Southern man who
would wish that monument were less by one of the Northern names that
constitute the mass? Who, standing on the ground made sacred by the blood
of Warren, could allow sectional feeling to curb his enthusiasm as he
looked upon that obelisk which rises a monument to freedom's and his
country's triumph, and stands a type of the time, the men and event that
it commemorates; built of material that mocks the waves of time, without
niche or molding for parasite or creeping thing to rest on, and pointing
like a finger to the sky, to raise man's thoughts to philanthropic and
noble deeds."
It is well known that, upon this subject, there was considerable division
among the Democracy. The effort to commit the party, as a unit, to a
position which would have inevitably produced war with England signally
failed. The country had not then reached its present pitch of arrogant
inflation, which emboldens it to seek opportunity for exhibition in the
vainglorious role of braggadocio. Mr. Davis, upon this and other
occasions, significantly rebuked the demagogical clamor which would have
precipitated the country into a calamitous war. His reply, on the 17th of
April, 1846, to Stephen A. Douglas, who was among the leading instigators
of the war-feeling in the House, is exceedingly forcible and spirited.
The following speech in favor of the resolution of thanks to General
Taylor, the officers and men of his army, for their recent successes on
the Rio Grande, was delivered May 28, 1846:
"As a friend to the army, he rejoiced at the evidence, now afforded, of a
disposition in this House to deal justly, to feel generously toward those
to whom the honor of our flag has been intrusted. Too often and too long
had we listened to harsh and invidious reflections upon our gallant little
army and the accomplished officers who command it. A partial opportunity
had been offered to exhibit their soldierly qualities in their true light,
and he trusted these aspersions were hushed--hushed now forever. As an
American, whose heart promptly responds to all which illustrates our
national character, and adds new glory to our national name, he rejoiced
with exceeding joy at the recent triumph of our arms. Yet it is no more
than he expected from the gallant soldiers who hold our post upon the Rio
Grande--no more than, when occasion offers, they will achieve again. It
was the triumph of American courage, professional skill, and that
patriotic pride which blooms in the breast of our educated soldier, and
which droops not under the withering scoff of political revilers.
"These men will feel, deeply feel, the expression of your gratitude. It
will nerve their hearts in the hour of future conflicts, to know that
their country honors and acknowledges their devotion. It will shed a
solace on the dying moments of those who fall, to be assured their country
mourns their loss. This is the meed for which the soldier bleeds and dies.
This he will remember long after the paltry pittance of one month's extra
pay has been forgotten.
"Beyond this expression of the nation's thanks, he liked the _principle_
of the proposition offered by the gentleman from South Carolina. We have a
pension system providing for the disabled soldier, but he seeks well and
wisely to extend it to all who may be wounded, however slightly. It is a
reward offered to those who seek for danger, who first and foremost plunge
into the fight. It has been this incentive, extended so as to cover all
feats of gallantry, that has so often crowned the British arms with
victory, and caused their prowess to be recognized in every quarter of the
globe. It was the sure and high reward of gallantry, the confident
reliance upon their nation's gratitude, which led Napoleon's armies over
Europe, conquering and to conquer; and it was these influences which, in
an earlier time, rendered the Roman arms invincible, and brought their
eagle back victorious from every land on which it gazed. Sir, let not that
parsimony (for he did not deem it economy) prevent us from adopting a
system which in war will add so much to the efficiency of troops. Instead
of seeking to fill the ranks of your army by increased pay, let the
soldier feel that a liberal pension will relieve him from the fear of want
in the event of disability, provide for his family in the event of death,
and that he wins his way to gratitude and the reward of his countrymen by
periling all for honor in the field.
"The achievement which we now propose to honor richly deserves it. Seldom,
sir, in the annals of military history has there been one in which
desperate daring and military skill were more happily combined. The enemy
selected his own ground, and united to the advantage of a strong position
a numerical majority of three to one. Driven from his first position by an
attack in which it is hard to say whether professional skill or manly
courage is to be more admired, he retired and posted his artillery on a
narrow defile, to sweep the ground over which our troops were compelled to
pass. There, posted in strength three times greater than our own, they
waited the approach of our gallant little army.
"General Taylor knew the danger and destitution of the band he left to
hold his camp opposite Matamoras, and he paused for no regular approaches,
but opened his field artillery, and dashed with sword and bayonet on the
foe. A single charge left him master of their battery, and the number of
slain attests the skill and discipline of his army. Mr. D. referred to a
gentleman who, a short time since, expressed extreme distrust in our army,
and poured out the vials of his denunciation upon the graduates of the
Military Academy, He hoped now the gentleman will withdraw these
denunciations; that now he will learn the value of military science; that
he will see, in the location, the construction, the defenses of the
bastioned field-works opposite Matamoras, the utility, the necessity of a
military education. Let him compare the few men who held that with the
army who assailed it; let him mark the comparative safety with which they
stood within that temporary work; let him consider why the guns along its
ramparts were preserved, whilst they silenced the batteries of the enemy;
why that intrenchment stands unharmed by Mexican shot, whilst its guns
have crumbled the stone walls in Matamoras to the ground, and then say
whether he believes a blacksmith or a tailor could have secured the same
results. He trusted the gentleman would be convinced that arms, like every
occupation, requires to be studied before it can be understood; and from
these things to which he had called his attention, he will learn the power
and advantage of military science. He would make but one other allusion to
the remarks of the gentleman he had noticed, who said nine-tenths of the
graduates of the Military Academy abandoned the service of the United
States. If he would take the trouble to examine the records upon this
point, he doubted not he would be surprised at the extent of his mistake.
There he would learn that a majority of all the graduates are still in
service; and if he would push his inquiry a little further, he would find
that a large majority of the commissioned officers who bled in the action
of the 8th and 9th were graduates of that academy.
"He would not enter into a discussion on the military at this time. His
pride, his gratification arose from the success of our arms. Much was due
to the courage which Americans have displayed on many battle-fields in
former times; but this courage, characteristic of our people, and
pervading all sections and all classes, could never have availed so much
had it not been combined with military science. And the occasion seemed
suited to enforce this lesson on the minds of those who have been
accustomed, in season and out of season, to rail at the scientific
attainments of our officers.
"The influence of military skill--the advantage of discipline in the
troops--the power derived from the science of war, increases with the
increased size of the contending armies. With two thousand we had beaten
six thousand; with twenty thousand we would far more easily beat sixty
thousand, because the general must be an educated soldier who wields large
bodies of men, and the troops, to act efficiently, must be disciplined and
commanded by able officers. He but said what he had long thought and often
said, when he expressed his confidence in the ability of our officers to
meet those of any service--favorably to compare, in all that constitutes
the soldier, with any army in the world; and as the field widened for the
exhibition, so would their merits shine more brightly still.
"With many of the officers now serving on the Rio Grande he had enjoyed a
personal acquaintance, and hesitated not to say that all which skill, and
courage, and patriotism could perform, might be expected from them. He had
forborne to speak of the general commanding on the Rio Grande on any
former occasion; but he would now say to those who had expressed distrust,
that the world held not a soldier better qualified for the service he was
engaged in than General Taylor. Trained from his youth to arms, having
spent the greater portion of his life on our frontier, his experience
peculiarly fits him for the command he holds. Such as his conduct was in
Fort Harrison, on the Upper Mississippi, in Florida, and on the Rio
Grande, will it be wherever he meets the enemy of his country.
"Those soldiers, to whom so many have applied depreciatory epithets, upon
whom it has been so often said no reliance could be placed, they too will
be found, in every emergency renewing such feats as have recently graced
our arms, bearing the American flag to honorable triumphs, or falling
beneath its folds, as devotees to our common cause, to die a soldier's
death.
"He rejoiced that the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Black) had shown
himself so ready to pay this tribute to our army. He hoped not a voice
would be raised in opposition to it--that nothing but the stern regret
which is prompted by remembrance of those who bravely fought and nobly
died will break the joy, the pride, the patriotic gratulation with which
we hail this triumph of our brethren on the Rio Grande."
A striking feature of these two speeches, as, indeed, of all Mr. Davis'
Congressional speeches, is the strong and outspoken _national_ feeling
which pervades them. It is a part of the history of these times, that
while Jefferson Davis eloquently avowed a noble and generous sympathy with
his heroic compatriots in Mexico, a prominent Northern politician bespoke
for the American army, "a welcome with bloody hands to hospitable graves."
When, a few months afterwards, the names of Jefferson Davis and his
Mississippi Rifles were baptized in blood amid those frowning redoubts at
Monterey, and when, upon the ensanguined plain of Buena Vista, he fell
stricken in the very moment of victory, just as his genius and the valor
of his comrades had broken that last, furious onset of the Mexican
lancers, New England and her leaders stood indifferent spectators of the
scene.[5] Yet the same New England bounded eagerly to the conquest and
spoliation of their countrymen, and the same leaders clamored valiantly
for the humiliation, for the blood even, of Jefferson Davis, _as a traitor
and a rebel. Quosque tandem._
An interesting sequel of this speech was the debate, which it occasioned
two days afterwards, between Mr. Davis and Andrew Johnson, now President
of the United States. Mr. Johnson, who boasts so proudly of his plebeian
origin, and is yet said to be morbidly sensitive of the slightest allusion
to it by others, excepted to Mr. Davis' reference to the "tailor and
blacksmith," warmly eulogized those callings and mechanical avocations in
general, and took occasion to expatiate extensively upon the virtue and
intelligence of the masses. Mr. Davis, whose language is clearly not
susceptible of any interpretation disparaging to "blacksmiths and
tailors," disclaimed the imputation, saying that he had designed merely to
illustrate his argument, that the profession of arms, to be understood,
must be studied, and that a mechanic could no more fill the place of an
educated soldier, than could the latter supply the qualifications of the
former. Mr. Johnson, however, was resolved to seize the opportunity for a
panegyric upon the populace, and no explanations could avail. The _Globe_
reports this debate as, "in all its stages, not being of an entirely
pleasant nature."
As an appropriate conclusion to this sketch of Mr. Davis' career in the
House of Representatives, we quote the following extract from an
interesting work,[6] published some years since: "John Quincy Adams had a
habit of always observing new members. He would sit near them on the
occasion of their Congressional _debut_, closely eyeing and attentively
listening if the speech pleased him, but quickly departing if it did not.
When Davis first arose in the House, the Ex-President took a seat close
by. Davis proceeded, and Adams did not move. The one continued speaking
and the other listening; and those who knew Mr. Adams' habits were fully
aware that the new member had deeply impressed him. At the close of the
speech the 'Old Man Eloquent' crossed over to some friends and said, 'That
young man, gentlemen, is no ordinary man. He will make his mark yet, mind
me.'"
CHAPTER III.
THE NAME OF JEFFERSON DAVIS INSEPARABLE FROM THE HISTORY OF THE
MEXICAN WAR--HIS ESSENTIALLY MILITARY CHARACTER AND TASTES--JOINS
GENERAL TAYLOR'S ARMY ON THE RIO GRANDE, AS COLONEL OF THE FAMOUS
"MISSISSIPPI RIFLES"--MONTEREY--BUENA VISTA--GENERAL TAYLOR'S ACCOUNT
OF DAVIS' CONDUCT--DAVIS' REPORT OF THE ACTION--NOVELTY AND
ORIGINALITY OF HIS STRATEGY AT BUENA VISTA--INTERESTING STATEMENT OF
HON. CALEB CUSHING--RETURN OF DAVIS TO THE UNITED STATES--TRIUMPHANT
RECEPTION AT HOME--PRESIDENT POLK TENDERS HIM A BRIGADIER'S
COMMISSION, WHICH HE DECLINES ON PRINCIPLE.
The name of Davis is inseparable from those lettered glories of the
American Union, which were the brilliant trophies of the Mexican war. In
those bright annals it was engraven with unfading lustre upon the
conquering banners of the Republic, and his genius and valor were rewarded
with a fame which rests securely upon the laurels of Monterey and Buena
Vista.
Jefferson Davis is a born soldier. Even if we could forget the glories of
the assault upon Teneria and El Diablo, and banish the thrilling
recollection of that movement at Buena Vista, the genius, novelty, and
intrepidity of which electrified the world of military science, and
extorted the enthusiastic admiration of the victor of Waterloo, we must
yet recognize the impress of those rare gifts and graces which are the
titles to authority. The erect yet easy carriage, the true martial dignity
of bearing, which is altogether removed from the supercilious _hauteur_
of the mere martinet, the almost fascinating expression of _suaviter in
modo_, which yet does not for an instant conceal the _fortiter in re_,
constitute in him that imperial semblance, to which the mind involuntarily
concedes the right to supreme command. It is impossible, in the presence
of Mr. Davis, to deny this recognition of his intuitive soldiership. Not
only is obvious to the eye the commanding mien of the soldier, but the
order, the discipline of the educated soldier, whose nature, stern and
unflinching, was yet plastic to receive the impressions of an art with
which it felt an intuitive alliance. This military precision is
characteristic of Mr. Davis in every aspect in which he appears. There is
the constant fixedness of gaze upon the object to be reached, and the
cautious calculation of the chances of success with the means and forces
ready at hand; a constant regard for bases of supply and a proper concern
for lines of retreat, and, above all, the prompt and vigorous execution,
if success be practicable and the attack determined upon. Even in his
oratory and statesmanship are these characteristics evinced. In the former
there is far more of rhetorical order, harmony, and symmetry, than of
rhetorical ornament and display; and in the latter there is purpose,
consistency, and method, with little regard for the shifts of expediency
and the suggestions of hap-hazard temerity.
The attachment of Mr. Davis for the profession of arms is little less than
a passion--an inspiration. True, he voluntarily abandoned the army, at an
age when military life is most attractive to men, but the field of
politics was far more inviting to a commendable aspiration for fame, than
the army at a season of profound peace. But a more potent consideration,
of a domestic nature, urged his withdrawal from military life. He was
about to be married, and preferred not to remain in the army after having
assumed the responsibilities of that relation. His speeches in the House
of Representatives, indicating his earnest interest in military affairs,
his solicitude in behalf of the army, his enthusiastic championship of the
Military Academy, and his thorough information respecting all subjects
pertaining to the military interests of the country, show his ambitious
and absorbing study of his favorite science.
In common with an overwhelming majority of the Southern people, he had
favored the annexation of Texas, and cordially sustained Mr. Polk's
Administration, in all the measures which were necessary to the triumphant
success of its policy. While in the midst of his useful labors, as a
member of Congress, in promoting the war policy of the Government, he
received, with delight, the announcement of his selection to the command
of the First Regiment of Mississippi Volunteers. He immediately resigned
his seat in Congress and started to take command of his regiment, after
obtaining for it, with great difficulty, the rifles which were afterwards
used with such deadly effect upon the enemy. Overtaking his men, who were
already _en route_ for the scene of action, at New Orleans, by midsummer
he had reinforced General Taylor on the Rio Grande.
The incidents of the Mexican war are too fresh in the recollection of the
country to justify here a detailed narrative of the operations of the
gallant army of General Taylor in its progress toward the interior from
the scenes of its splendid exploits at Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma.
For several weeks after the arrival of Colonel Davis and his
Mississippians, active hostilities were suspended. When the preparations
for the campaign were completed, the army advanced, and reached Walnut
Springs, about three miles from Monterey, on the 19th of September, 1846.
Two days afterwards began those series of actions which finally resulted
in the capitulation of a fortified city of great strength, and defended
with obstinate valor. Of the part borne in these brilliant operations
which so exalted the glory of the American name, and immortalized the
heroism of Southern volunteers, by Colonel Davis and his "Mississippi
Rifles," an able and graphic pen shall relate the story:
"In the storming of Monterey, Colonel Davis and his riflemen played a most
gallant part. The storming of one of its strongest forts (Teneria) on the
21st of September was a desperate and hard-fought fight. The Mexicans had
dealt such death by their cross-fires that they ran up a new flag in
exultation, and in defiance of the assault which, at this time, was being
made in front and rear. The Fourth Infantry, in the advance, had been
terribly cut up, but the Mississippians and Tennesseeans steadily pressed
forward, under a galling fire of copper grape. They approached to within a
hundred yards of the fort, when they were lost in a volume of smoke.
McClung,[7] inciting a company which formerly had been under his command,
dashed on, followed by Captain Willis. Anticipating General Quitman,
Colonel Davis, about the same time, gave the order to charge. With wild
desperation, his men followed him. The escalade was made with the fury of
a tempest, the men flinging themselves upon the guns of the enemy. Sword
in hand, McClung has sprung over the ditch. After him dashes Davis,
cheering on the Mississippians, and then Campbell, with his Tennesseeans
and others, brothers in the fight, and rivals for its honors. Then was
wild work. The assault was irresistible. The Mexicans, terror-stricken,
fled like an Alpine village from the avalanche, and, taking position in a
strongly-fortified building, some seventy-five yards in the rear, opened a
heavy fire of musketry. But, like their mighty river, nothing could stay
the Mississippians. They are after the Mexicans. Davis and McClung are
simultaneously masters of the fortifications, having got in by different
entrances. In the fervor of victory the brigade does not halt, but, led on
by Colonel Davis, are preparing to charge on the second post, (El Diablo,)
about three hundred yards in the rear, when they are restrained by
Quitman. This desperate conflict lasted over two hours. The charge of the
Mississippi Rifle Regiment, without bayonets, upon Fort Teneria, gained
for the State a triumph which stands unparalleled.
"Placed in possession of El Diablo, on the dawn of the 23d Colonel Davis
was exposed to a sharp fire from a half-moon redoubt, about one hundred
and fifty yards distant, which was connected with heavy stone buildings
and walls adjoining a block of the city. Returning the fire, he proceeded,
with eight men, to reconnoitre the ground in advance. Having reported, he
was ordered, with three companies of his regiment and one of Tennesseeans,
to advance on the works.
"When they reached the half-moon work a tremendous fire was opened from
the stone buildings in the rear. Taking a less-exposed position, Davis was
reinforced, and, the balance of the Mississippians coming up, the
engagement became general in the street, while, from the house-tops, a
heavy fire was kept up by the Mexicans. 'The gallant Davis, leading the
advance with detached parties, was rapidly entering the city, penetrating
into buildings, and gradually driving the enemy from the position,' when
General Henderson and the Texan Rangers dismounted, entered the city, and,
through musketry and grape, made their way to the advance. The conflict
increased, and still Davis continued to lead his command through the
streets to within a square of the Grand Plaza, when, the afternoon being
far advanced, General Taylor withdrew the Americans to the captured
forts."[8]
Thus, in their first engagement, the Mississippians and their commander
achieved a reputation which shall endure so long as men commemorate deeds
of heroism and devotion. Veteran troops, trained to despise death by the
dangers of a score of battles, have been immortalized in song and story
for exploits inferior to those of the "Mississippi Rifles" at Monterey.
Colonel Davis became one of the idols of the army, and took a prominent
place among the heroes of the war. The nation rang with the fame of "Davis
and his Mississippi Rifles;" the journals of the day were largely occupied
with graphic descriptions of their exploits; and the reports of superior
officers contributed their proud testimony to the history of the country,
to the chivalrous daring and consummate skill of Colonel Davis. A becoming
acknowledgment of his conduct was made by General Taylor in assigning him
a place on the commission of officers appointed to arrange with the
Mexicans the terms of capitulation. The result of the negotiations,
though approved by General Taylor, was not approved by the Administration,
which ordered a termination of the armistice agreed upon by the
commissioners from the respective armies and a speedy resumption of
hostilities. The terms of capitulation were assailed by many, who thought
them too lenient to the Mexicans; among others, by General Quitman, the
warm, personal, and political friend of Colonel Davis. A very important
portion of the history of the war consists of the latter's defense of the
terms of surrender and his memoranda of the incidents occurring in the
conferences with the Mexican officers.
To sustain the proud prestige of Monterey--if possible to surpass it,
became henceforth the aspiration of the Mississippians. But the name of
Mississippi was to be made radiant with a new glory, beside which the
lustre of Monterey paled, as did the dawn of Lodi by the full-orbed
splendor of Austerlitz. All the world knows of the conduct of Jefferson
Davis at Buena Vista. How he virtually won a battle, which, considering
the disparity of the contending forces, must forever be a marvel to the
student of military science; how like Dessaix, at Marengo, he thought
there was "still time to win another battle," even when a portion of our
line was broken and in inglorious retreat, and acting upon the impulse
rescued victory from the jaws of defeat; saving an army from destruction,
and flooding with a blaze of triumph a field shrouded with the gloom of
disaster, are memories forever enshrined in the Temple of Fame. Americans
can never weary of listening to the thrilling incidents of that
ever-memorable day. By the South, the lesson of Buena Vista and kindred
scenes of the valor of her children, can never be forgotton. In these days
of her humiliation and despair, their proud memories throng upon her, as
do a thousand noble emotions upon the modern Greek, who stands upon the
sacred ground of Marathon and Plætea.
The following vivid and powerful description of the more prominent
incidents of the battle is from the pen of Hon. J. F. H. Claiborne, of
Mississippi:
"The battle had been raging sometime with fluctuating fortunes, and was
setting against us, when General Taylor, with Colonel Davis and others,
arrived on the field. Several regiments (which were subsequently rallied
and fought bravely) were in full retreat. O'Brien, after having his men
and horses completely cut up, had been compelled to draw off his guns, and
Bragg, with almost superhuman energy, was sustaining the brunt of the
fight. Many officers of distinction had fallen. Colonel Davis rode forward
to examine the position of the enemy, and concluding that the best way to
arrest our fugitives would be to make a bold demonstration, he resolved at
once to attack the enemy, there posted in force, immediately in front,
supported by cavalry, and two divisions in reserve in his rear. It was a
resolution bold almost to rashness, but the emergency was pressing. With a
handful of Indiana volunteers, who still stood by their brave old colonel
(Bowles) and his own regiment, he advanced at double-quick time, firing as
he advanced. His own brave fellows fell fast under the rolling musketry of
the enemy, but their rapid and fatal volleys carried dismay and death into
the adverse ranks. A deep ravine separated the combatants. Leaping into
it, the Mississippians soon appeared on the other side, and with a shout
that was heard over the battle-field, they poured in a well-directed fire,
and rushed upon the enemy. Their deadly aim and wild enthusiasm were
irresistible. The Mexicans fled in confusion to their reserves, and Davis
seized the commanding position they had occupied. He next fell upon a
party of cavalry and compelled it to fly, with the loss of their leader
and other officers. Immediately afterwards a brigade of lancers, one
thousand strong, were seen approaching at a gallop, in beautiful array,
with sounding bugles and fluttering pennons. It was an appalling
spectacle, but not a man flinched from his position. The time between our
devoted band and eternity seemed brief indeed. But conscious that the eye
of the army was upon them, that the honor of Mississippi was at stake, and
knowing that, if they gave way, or were ridden down, our unprotected
batteries in the rear, upon which the fortunes of the day depended, would
be captured, each man resolved to die in his place sooner than retreat.
Not the Spartan martyrs at Thermopylæ--not the sacred battalion of
Epaminondas--not the Tenth Legion of Julius Cæsar--not the Old Guard of
Napoleon--ever evinced more fortitude than these young volunteers in a
crisis when death seemed inevitable. They stood like statues, as frigid
and motionless as the marble itself. Impressed with this extraordinary
firmness, when they had anticipated panic and flight, the lancers advanced
more deliberately, as though they saw, for the first time, the dark shadow
of the fate that was impending over them. Colonel Davis had thrown his men
into the form of a reëntering angle, (familiarly known as his famous V
movement,) both flanks resting on ravines, the lancers coming down on the
intervening ridge. This exposed them to a converging fire, and the moment
they came within rifle range each man singled out his object, and the
whole head of the column fell. A more deadly fire never was delivered, and
the brilliant array recoiled and retreated, paralyzed and dismayed.
"Shortly afterwards the Mexicans, having concentrated a large force on the
right for their final attack, Colonel Davis was ordered in that direction.
His regiment had been in action all day, exhausted by thirst and fatigue,
much reduced by the carnage of the morning engagement, and many in the
ranks suffering from wounds, yet the noble fellows moved at double-quick
time. Bowles' little band of Indiana volunteers still acted with them.
After marching several hundred yards they perceived the Mexican infantry
advancing, in three lines, upon Bragg's battery, which, though entirely
unsupported, held its position with a resolution worthy of his fame. The
pressure upon him stimulated the Mississippians. They increased their
speed, and when the enemy were within one hundred yards of the battery and
confident of its capture, they took him in flank and reverse, and poured
in a raking and destructive fire. This broke his right line, and the rest
soon gave way and fell back precipitately. Here Colonel Davis was severely
wounded."
The wound here alluded to was from a musket ball in the heel, and was
exceedingly painful, though Colonel Davis refused to leave the field until
the action was over. For some time grave apprehensions were entertained
lest it should prove dangerous by the setting in of erysipelas.
General Taylor, who was deeply impressed with the large share of credit
due to Colonel Davis, in his official report of the battle, says: "The
Mississippi Riflemen, under Colonel Davis, were highly conspicuous for
their gallantry and steadiness, and sustained throughout the engagement,
the reputation of veteran troops. Brought into action against an immensely
superior force, they maintained themselves for a long time, unsupported
and with heavy loss, and held an important part of the field until
reinforced. Colonel Davis, though severely wounded, remained in the saddle
until the close of the action. His distinguished coolness and gallantry,
at the head of his regiment on this day, entitle him to the particular
notice of the Government."
The report of Colonel Davis, of the operations of his regiment, is highly
important as a description of the most important features of the action,
and as an explanation of his celebrated strategic movement. We omit such
portions as embrace mere details not relevant to our purpose.
"SALTILLO, MEXICO, 2d March, 1847.
"SIR: In compliance with your note of yesterday, I have the honor to
present the following report of the service of the Mississippi
Riflemen on the 23d ultimo:
"Early in the morning of that day the regiment was drawn out from the
head-quarters encampment, which stood in advance of and overlooked the
town of Saltillo. Conformably to instructions, two companies were
detached for the protection of that encampment, and to defend the
adjacent entrance of the town. The remaining eight companies were put
in march to return to the position of the preceding day, now known as
the battle-field of Buena Vista. We had approached to within about two
miles of that position, when the report of artillery firing, which
reached us, gave assurance that a battle had commenced. Excited by the
sound, the regiment pressed rapidly forward, manifesting, upon this,
as upon other occasions, their more than willingness to meet the
enemy. At the first convenient place the column was halted for the
purpose of filling their canteens with water; and the march being
resumed, was directed toward the position which had been indicated to
me, on the previous evening, as the post of our regiment. As we
approached the scene of action, horsemen, recognized as of our troops,
were seen running, dispersed and confusedly from the field; and our
first view of the line of battle presented the mortifying spectacle of
a regiment of infantry flying disorganized from before the enemy.
These sights, so well calculated to destroy confidence and dispirit
troops just coming into action, it is my pride and pleasure to
believe, only nerved the resolution of the regiment I have the honor
to command.
"Our order of march was in column of companies, advancing by their
centers. The point which had just been abandoned by the regiment
alluded to, was now taken as our direction. I rode forward to examine
the ground upon which we were going to operate, and in passing through
the fugitives, appealed to them to return with us and renew the fight,
pointing to our regiment as a mass of men behind which they might
securely form.
"With a few honorable exceptions, the appeal was as unheeded, as were
the offers which, I am informed, were made by our men to give their
canteens of water to those who complained of thirst, on condition that
they would go back. General Wool was upon the ground making great
efforts to rally the men who had given way. I approached him and asked
if he would send another regiment to sustain me in an attack upon the
enemy before us. He was alone, and, after promising the support, went
in person to send it. Upon further examination, I found that the slope
we were ascending was intersected by a deep ravine, which, uniting
obliquely with a still larger one on our right, formed between them a
point of land difficult of access by us, but which, spreading in a
plain toward the base of the mountain, had easy communication with
the main body of the enemy. This position, important from its natural
strength, derived a far greater value from the relation it bore to our
order of battle and line of communication with the rear. The enemy, in
number many times greater than ourselves, supported by strong
reserves, flanked by cavalry and elated by recent success, was
advancing upon it. The moment seemed to me critical and the occasion
to require whatever sacrifice it might cost to check the enemy.
"My regiment, having continued to advance, was near at hand. I met and
formed it rapidly into order of battle; the line then advanced in
double-quick time, until within the estimated range of our rifles,
when it was halted, and ordered to 'fire advancing.'
"The progress of the enemy was arrested. We crossed the difficult
chasm before us, under a galling fire, and in good order renewed the
attack upon the other side. The contest was severe--the destruction
great upon both sides. We steadily advanced, and, as the distance
diminished, the ratio of loss increased rapidly against the enemy; he
yielded, and was driven back on his reserves. A plain now lay behind
us--the enemy's cavalry had passed around our right flank, which
rested on the main ravine, and gone to our rear. The support I had
expected to join us was nowhere to be seen. I therefore ordered the
regiment to retire, and went in person to find the cavalry, which,
after passing round our right, had been concealed by the inequality of
the ground. I found them at the first point where the bank was
practicable for horsemen, in the act of descending into the ravine--no
doubt for the purpose of charging upon our rear. The nearest of our
men ran quickly to my call, attacked this body, and dispersed it with
some loss. I think their commander was among the killed.
"The regiment was formed again in line of battle behind the first
ravine we had crossed; soon after which we were joined upon our left
by Lieutenant Kilbourn, with a piece of light artillery, and Colonel
Lane's (the Third) regiment of Indiana volunteers.... We had proceeded
but a short distance when I saw a large body of cavalry debouche from
his cover upon the left of the position from which we had retired, and
advance rapidly upon us. The Mississippi regiment was filed to the
right, and fronted in line across the plain; the Indiana regiment was
formed on the bank of the ravine, in advance of our right flank, by
which a reëntering angle was presented to the enemy. Whilst this
preparation was being made, Sergeant-Major Miller, of our regiment,
was sent to Captain Sherman for one or more pieces of artillery from
his battery.
"The enemy, who was now seen to be a body of richly-caparisoned
lancers, came forward rapidly, and in beautiful order--the files and
ranks so closed as to look like a mass of men and horses. Perfect
silence and the greatest steadiness prevailed in both lines of our
troops, as they stood at shouldered arms waiting an attack. Confident
of success, and anxious to obtain the full advantage of a cross-fire
at a short distance, I repeatedly called to the men not to shoot.
"As the enemy approached, his speed regularly diminished, until, when,
within eighty or a hundred yards, he had drawn up to a walk, and
seemed about to halt. A few files fired without orders, and both lines
then instantly poured in a volley so destructive that the mass yielded
to the blow and the survivors fled.... At this time, the enemy made
his last attack upon the right, and I received the General's order to
march to that portion of the field. The broken character of the
intervening ground concealed the scene of action from our view; but
the heavy firing of musketry formed a sufficient guide for our course.
After marching two or three hundred yards, we saw the enemy's infantry
advancing in three lines upon Captain Bragg's battery; which, though
entirely unsupported, resolutely held its position, and met the attack
with a fire worthy the former achievements of that battery, and of the
reputation of its present meritorious commander. We pressed on,
climbed the rocky slope of the plain on which this combat occurred,
reached its brow so as to take the enemy in flank and reverse when he
was about one hundred yards from the battery. Our first fire--raking
each of his lines, and opened close upon his flank--was eminently
destructive. His right gave way, and he fled in confusion.
"In this, the last contest of the day, my regiment equaled--it was
impossible to exceed--my expectations. Though worn down by many hours
of fatigue and thirst, the ranks thinned by our heavy loss in the
morning, they yet advanced upon the enemy with the alacrity and
eagerness of men fresh to the combat. In every approbatory sense of
these remarks I wish to be included a party of Colonel Bowles' Indiana
regiment, which served with us during the greater part of the day,
under the immediate command of an officer from that regiment, whose
gallantry attracted my particular attention, but whose name, I regret,
is unknown to me. When hostile demonstrations had ceased, I retired to
a tent upon the field for surgical aid, having been wounded by a
musket ball when we first went into action.... Every part of the
action having been fought under the eye of the commanding General, the
importance and manner of any service it was our fortune to render,
will be best estimated by him. But in view of my own responsibility,
it may be permitted me to say, in relation to our first attack upon
the enemy, that I considered the necessity absolute and immediate. No
one could have failed to perceive the hazard. The enemy, in greatly
disproportionate numbers, was rapidly advancing. We saw no friendly
troops coming to our support, and probably none except myself expected
reinforcement. Under such circumstances, the men cheerfully, ardently
entered into the conflict; and though we lost, in that single
engagement, more than thirty killed and forty wounded, the regiment
never faltered nor moved, except as it was ordered. Had the expected
reinforcement arrived, we could have prevented the enemy's cavalry
from passing to our rear, results more decisive might have been
obtained, and a part of our loss have been avoided....
"I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant.
"JEFFERSON DAVIS,
"_Colonel Mississippi Rifles_.
"MAJOR W. W. S. BLISS, _Assistant Adjutant-General_."
The reputation earned by Colonel Davis at Buena Vista could not fail to
provoke the assaults of envy. An effort, equally unwarranted and
unsuccessful, has since been made to deprive him of a portion of his
merited fame of having conceived and executed a movement decisive of the
battle. It has been pretended, in disparagement of the strategy of Colonel
Davis, that his celebrated V movement (for so it is, and will always be
known) had not the merit of originality, and besides was forced upon him
by the circumstances in which he was placed, and especially by the
conformation of the ground, which would not admit of a different
disposition of his troops. Such a judgment is merely hypercritical. There
is no account in military history, from the campaigns of Cæsar to those of
Napoleon, of such a tactical conception, unless we include a
slightly-analogous case at Waterloo. The movement in the latter
engagement, however, differs essentially from that executed by Davis at
Buena Vista. A party of Hanoverian cavalry, assailed by French huzzars, at
the intersection of two roads, by forming a salient, repulsed their
assailants almost as effectually as did the reëntrant angle of the
Mississippians at Buena Vista. As to the second criticism, it is certainly
a novel accusation against an officer, that he should, by a quick
appreciation of his situation, avail himself of the only possible means by
which he could not only extricate his own command from imminent peril of
destruction, but also avert a blow delivered at the safety of the entire
army.
In a lecture on "The Expatriated Irish in Europe and America," delivered
in Boston, February 11, 1858, the Hon. Caleb Cushing thus alludes to this
subject: "In another of the dramatic incidents of that field, a man of
Celtic race (Jefferson Davis) at the head of the Rifles of Mississippi,
had ventured to do that of which there is, perhaps, but one other example
in the military history of modern times. In the desperate conflicts of the
Crimea, at the battle of Inkermann, in one of those desperate charges,
there was a British officer who ventured to receive the charge of the
enemy without the precaution of having his men formed in a hollow square.
They were drawn up in two lines, meeting at a point like an open fan, and
received the charge of the Russians at the muzzle of their guns, and
repelled it. Sir Colin Campbell, for this feat of arms, among others, was
selected as the man to retrieve the fallen fortunes of England in India.
He did, however, but imitate what Jefferson Davis had previously done in
Mexico, who, in that trying hour, when, with one last desperate effort to
break the line of the American army, the cavalry of Mexico was
concentrated in one charge against the American line; then, I say,
Jefferson Davis commanded his men to form in two lines, extended as I have
shown, and receive that charge of the Mexican horse, with a plunging fire
from the right and left from the Mississippi Rifles, which repelled, and
repelled for the last time, the charge of the hosts of Mexico."
These puerile criticisms, however, were unavailing against the concurrent
testimony of Taylor, Quitman, and Lane, and the grateful plaudits of the
army, to shake the popular judgment, which rarely fails, in the end, to
discriminate between the false glare of cheaply-earned glory and the just
renown of true heroism.
The term of enlistment of his regiment having expired, Colonel Davis, in
July, 1847, just twelve months after the resignation of his seat in the
House of Representatives, returned to the United States. His progress
toward his home was attended by a series of congratulatory receptions, the
people every-where assembling _en masse_ to do honor to the "Hero of Buena
Vista." Mississippi extended a triumphant greeting to her
soldier-statesman, who, resigning the civic trust which she had confided
to his keeping, had carried her flag in triumph amid the thunders of
battle and the wastes of carnage, carving the name of Mississippi in an
inscription of enduring renown.
During his journey homeward, there occurred a most impressive illustration
of that strict devotion to principle which, above all other
considerations, is the real solution of every act of his life, public and
private. While in New Orleans, Colonel Davis was offered, by President
Polk, a commission as Brigadier-General of Volunteers, an honor which he
unhesitatingly declined, on the ground that no such commission could be
conferred by Federal authority, either by appointment of the President or
by act of Congress. As an advocate of States' Rights, he could not
countenance, even for the gratification of his own ambition, a plain
infraction of the rights of the States, to which respectively, the
Constitution reserves the appointment of officers of the militia.[9] The
soldier's pride in deserved promotion for distinguished services, could
not induce the statesman to forego his convictions of Constitutional
right. The declination of this high distinction was entirely consistent
with his opinions previously entertained and expressed. Before he resigned
his seat in the House of Representatives, the bill authorizing such
appointments by the President was introduced, and rapidly pressed to its
passage. Mr. Davis detected the Constitutional infraction which it
involved, and opposed it. He designed to address the House, but was
suddenly called away from Washington, and before leaving had an
understanding with the Chairman of the Committee from which the bill had
come, that it would not be called up before the ensuing Monday. On his
return, however, he found that the friends of the measure had forced its
passage on the previous Saturday.
This is but one in a thousand evidences of an incorruptible loyalty to his
convictions, which would dare face all opposition and has braved all
reproach. It is an attribute of true greatness in the character of
Jefferson Davis, which not even his enemies have called in question, to
which candor must ever accord the tribute of infinite admiration.
CHAPTER IV.
MR. DAVIS IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, FIRST BY EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENT,
AND SUBSEQUENTLY BY UNANIMOUS CHOICE OF THE LEGISLATURE OF HIS
STATE--POPULAR ADMIRATION NOT LESS FOR HIS CIVIC TALENTS THAN HIS
MILITARY SERVICES--FEATURES OF HIS PUBLIC CAREER--HIS CHARACTER AND
CONDUCT AS A SENATOR--AS AN ORATOR AND PARLIAMENTARY LEADER--HIS
INTREPIDITY--AN INCIDENT WITH HENRY CLAY--DAVIS THE LEADER OF THE
STATES' RIGHTS PARTY IN CONGRESS--THE AGITATION OF 1850--DAVIS OPPOSES
THE COMPROMISE--FOLLY OF THE SOUTH IN ASSENTING TO THAT SETTLEMENT--
DAVIS NOT A DISUNIONIST IN 1850, NOR A REBEL IN 1861--HIS CONCEPTION
OF THE CHARACTER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--LOGICAL ABSURDITY OF
CLAY'S POSITION EXPOSED BY DAVIS--THE IDEAL UNION OF THE LATTER--WHY
HE OPPOSED THE COMPROMISE--THE NEW MEXICO BILL--DAVIS' GROWING FAME AT
THIS PERIOD--HIS FREQUENT ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAY, AND WARM FRIENDSHIP
BETWEEN THEM--SIGNAL TRIUMPH OF THE UNION SENTIMENT, AND ACQUIESCENCE
OF THE SOUTH.
Within less than two months from his return to Mississippi, Colonel Davis
was appointed by the Governor of the State to fill the vacancy in the
United States Senate occasioned by the death of General Speight. At a
subsequent session of the Legislature, the selection of the Governor was
confirmed by his unanimous election for the residue of the unexpired term.
Seldom has there been a tender of public honor more deserved by the
recipient, and more cheerfully accorded by the constituent body. It was
the grateful tribute of popular appreciation to the hero who had risked
his life for the glory of his country, and the worthy recognition of
abilities which had been proven adequate to the responsibilities of the
highest civic trust. Doubtless Colonel Davis owed much of the signal
unanimity and enthusiasm which accompanied this expression of popular
favor to his brilliant services in Mexico. The military passion is strong
in the human breast, and the sentiment of homage to prowess, illustrated
on the battle-field and in the face of danger, is one of the few
chivalrous instincts which survive the influence of the sordid vices and
vulgarisms of human nature. In all ages men have declaimed and reasoned
against the expediency of confiding civil authority to the keeping of
soldiers, and have cautioned the masses against the risk of entrusting the
public liberties to the stern and dictatorial will educated in the rugged
discipline and habits of the camp. Yet the masses, in all time, will
continue their awards of distinction to martial exploits with a fervor not
characteristic of their recognition of any other public service.
But the tribute had a higher motive, if possible, than the generous
impulse of gratitude to the "Hero of Buena Vista," in the universal
conviction of his eminent fitness for the position. His service in the
House of Representatives, brief as it was, had designated him, months
before his Mexican laurels had been earned, as a man, not only of mark,
but of promise; of decided and progressive intellectual power; of
pronounced mental and moral individuality.
Of all the public men of America, Jefferson Davis is the least indebted
for his long and noble career of distinction to adventitious influences or
merely temporary popular impulses. The sources of his strength have been
the elements of his character and the resources of his genius. Never
hoping to _stumble_ upon success, by a stolid indifference amid the
fluctuations of fortune, nor engaged in the role of the trimmer, who
adjusts his conduct conformably with every turn of the popular current,
his hopes of success have rested upon the merits of principle alone. He
has succeeded in all things _where success was possible_, and failed, at
last, in contradiction of every lesson of previous experience, with the
light of all history pleading his vindication, and to the disappointment
of the nearly unanimous judgment of disinterested mankind.
A peculiar feature in the public career of Mr. Davis was its steady and
consecutive development. He has accepted service, always and only, in
obedience to the concurrent confidence of his fellow-citizens in his
peculiar qualifications for the emergency. From the beginning he gave the
promise of those high capacities which the fervid eulogy of Grattan
accorded to Chatham--to "strike a blow in the world that should resound
through its history." His first election to Congress was the spontaneous
acknowledgment of the profound impression produced by his earliest
intellectual efforts. The consummate triumph of his genius and valor at
Buena Vista did not exceed the anticipations of his friends, who knew the
ardor and assiduity of his devotion to his cherished science, and now in
the noble arena of the American Senate his star was still to be in the
ascendant.
At the first session of the Thirtieth Congress, Jefferson Davis took his
seat as a Senator of the United States from the State of Mississippi. The
entire period of his connection with the Senate, from 1847 to 1851, and
from 1857 to 1861, scarcely comprises eight years; but those were years
pregnant with the fate of a nation, and in their brief progress he stood
in that august body the equal of giant intellects, and grappled, with the
power and skill of a master, the great ideas and events of those
momentous days. Mr. Davis could safely trust, whatever of ambition he may
cherish for the distinguished consideration of posterity, to a faithful
record of his service in the Senate. His senatorial fame is a beautiful
harmony of the most pronounced and attractive features of the best
parliamentary models. He was as intrepid and defiant as Chatham, but as
scholarly as Brougham; as elegant and perspicuous in diction as Canning,
and often as profound and philosophical in his comprehension of general
principles as Burke; when roused by a sense of injury, or by the force of
his earnest conviction, as much the incarnation of fervor and zeal as
Grattan, but, like Fox, subtle, ready, and always armed _cap a pie_ for
the quick encounters of debate.
Among all the eminent associates of Mr. Davis in that body, there were
very few who possessed his peculiar qualifications for its most
distinguished honors. His character, no less than his demeanor, may be
aptly termed senatorial, and his bearing was always attuned to his noble
conception of the Senate as an august assemblage of the embassadors of
sovereign States. He carried to the Senate the loftiest sense of the
dignity and responsibility of his trust, and convictions upon political
questions, which were the result of the most thorough and elaborate
investigation. Never for one instant varying from the principles of his
creed, he never doubted as to the course of duty; profound, accurate in
information, there was no question pertaining to the science of government
or its administration that he did not illuminate with a light, clear,
powerful, and original.
It has been remarked of Mr. Davis' style as a speaker, that it is "orderly
rather than ornate," and the remark is correct so far as it relates to the
mere statement of the conditions of the discussion. For mere rhetorical
glitter, Mr. Davis' speeches afford but poor models, but for clear logic
and convincing argument, apt illustration, bold and original imagery, and
genuine pathos, they are unsurpassed by any ever delivered in the American
Senate. Though the Senate was, undoubtedly, his appropriate arena as an
orator, and though it may well be doubted whether he was rivaled in
senatorial eloquence by any contemporary, Mr. Davis is hardly less gifted
in the attributes of popular eloquence. Upon great occasions he will move
a large crowd with an irresistible power. As a popular orator, he does not
seek to sway and toss the will with violent and passionate emotion, but
his eloquence is more a triumph of argument aided by an enlistment of
passion and persuasion to reason and conviction. He has less of the
characteristics of Mirabeau, than of that higher type of eloquence, of
which Cicero, Burke, and George Canning were representatives, and which is
pervaded by passion, subordinated to the severer tribunal of intellect. It
was the privilege of the writer, on repeated occasions, during the late
war, to witness the triumph of Mr. Davis' eloquence over a popular
assemblage. Usually the theme and the occasion were worthy of the orator,
and difficult indeed would it be to realize a nobler vision of the majesty
of intellect. To a current of thought, perennial and inexhaustible,
compact, logical and irresistible, was added a fire that threw its warmth
into the coldest bosom, and infused a glow of light into the very core of
the subject. His voice, flexible and articulate, reaching any compass that
was requisite, attitude and gestures, all conspired to give power and
expression to his language, and the hearer was impressed as though in the
presence of the very transfiguration of eloquence. The printed efforts of
Mr. Davis will not only live as memorials of parliamentary and popular
eloquence, but as invaluable stores of information to the political and
historical student. They epitomize some of the most important periods of
American history, and embrace the amplest discussion of an extended range
of subjects pertaining to almost every science.
The development in Mr. Davis of the high and rare qualities, requisite to
parliamentary leadership, was rapid and decisive. His nature instinctively
aspires to influence and power, and under no circumstances could it rest
contented in an attitude of inferiority. Independence, originality, and
intrepidity, added to earnest and intelligent conviction; unwavering
devotion to principle and purpose; a will stern and inexorable, and a
disposition frank, courteous, and generous, are features of character
which rarely fail to make a representative man. After the death of Mr.
Calhoun, he was incomparably the ablest exponent of States' Rights
principles, and even during the life of that great publicist, Mr. Davis,
almost equally with him, shared the labors and responsibilities of
leadership. His personal courage is of that knightly order, which in an
age of chivalry would have sought the trophies of the tourney, and his
moral heroism fixed him immovably upon the solid rock of principle,
indifferent to the inconvenience of being in a minority and in no dread of
the storms of popular passion. His faith in his principles was no less
earnest than his confidence in his ability to triumphantly defend them. In
the midst of the agitation and excitement of 1850, Henry Clay, the Great
Compromiser, whose brilliant but erring genius so long and fatally led
estray, from the correct understanding of the vital issue at stake between
the North and the South, a numerous party of noble and true-hearted
Southern gentlemen, furnished the occasion of an impressive illustration
of this quality. Turning, in debate, to the Mississippi Senator, he
notified the latter of his purpose, at some future day, to debate with him
elaborately, an important question of principle. "Now is the moment," was
the reply of the intrepid Davis, ever eager to champion his beloved and
imperiled South, equally against her avowed enemies, and the not less
fatal policy of those who were but too willing to compromise upon an issue
vital to her rights and dignity. And what a shock of arms might then have
been witnessed, could Clay have dispelled thirty years of his ripe
three-score and ten! Each would have found a foeman worthy of his steel.
In answer to this bold defiance, Clay, like Hotspur, would have rushed to
the charge, with visor up and lance _couchant_; and Davis, another
Saladin, no less frank than his adversary, but far more dexterous, would
have met him with a flash of that Damascus scymetar, whose first blow
severed the neck of the foeman.
That would have been a bold ambition that could demand a formal tender of
leadership from the brilliant array of gallant gentlemen, ripe scholars,
distinguished orators and statesmen, who, for twenty years before the war,
were the valiant champions in Congress of the principles and aspirations
of the South. Yet few will deny the preëminence of Mr. Davis, in the eye
of the country and the world, among States' Rights leaders. Equally with
Mr. Calhoun, as the leader of a great intellectual movement, he stamped
his impress upon the enduring tablets of time.
Like Mr. Calhoun, too, Mr. Davis gave little evidence of capacity or taste
for mere party tactics. Neither would have performed the duties of
drill-sergeant, in local organizations, for the purposes of a political
canvass, so well as hundreds of men of far lighter calibre and less
stability. Happily, both sought and found a more congenial field of
action.
The unexpired term, for which Mr. Davis had been elected in 1847, ended in
1851, and, though he was immediately reëlected, in consequence of his
subsequent resignation his first service in the Senate ended with the term
for which he had first been elected. A recurrence to the records of
Congress will exhibit the eventful nature of this period, especially in
its conclusion. In the earlier portion of his senatorial service, Mr.
Davis participated conspicuously in debate and in the general business of
legislation. Here, as in the House of Representatives, his views upon
military affairs were always received with marked respect, and no measure
looking to the improvement of the army failed to receive his cordial
coöperation.
The extensive conquests of the army in Mexico, and the necessity of
maintaining the authority of the Federal Government in the conquered
country until the objects of the war could be consummated, created
considerable embarrassment. Upon this subject Mr. Davis spoke frequently
and intelligently. His sagacity indicated a policy equally protective of
the advantages which the valor of the army had achieved, and humane to the
conquered. In a debate with Mr. John Bell, in February, 1848, he defined
himself as favoring such a military occupation as would "prevent the
General Government of Mexico, against which this war had been directed,
from reëstablishing its power and again concentrating the scattered
fragments of its army to renew active hostilities against us." He
disclaimed the motive, in this policy, of territorial acquisition, and
earnestly deprecated interference with the political institutions of the
Mexicans. The estimate entertained by the Senate, of his judgment and
information upon military subjects, was indicated by his almost unanimous
election, (thirty-two for Mr. Davis, and five for all others,) during the
session of the Thirty-first Congress, as Chairman of the Committee on
Military Affairs. His speeches on the subject of offering congratulations
to the French people upon their recent successful political revolution,
resulting in the establishment of a republican form of government, the
proposed organization of the territorial government of Oregon, upon
various subjects of practical and scientific interest, and his incidental
discussions of the subject of slavery, were able, eloquent, and
characteristic.
The session of Congress in 1849 and 1850 brought with it a most angry and
menacing renewal of sectional agitation. Previous events and innumerable
indications of popular sentiment had clearly revealed to candid minds,
every-where, that the increasing sectional preponderance of the North, and
its growing hostility to slavery, portended results utterly ruinous to the
rights and institutions of the South. To the South it was literally a
question of vitality, to secure some competent check upon the aggressive
strength of the North. To maintain any thing like a sectional balance, the
South must necessarily secure to her institutions, at least, a fair share
of the common domain to be hereafter created into States. The immense
territorial acquisitions resulting from the Mexican war were now the
subjects of controversy. After a contest, protracted through several
months, and eliciting the most violent exhibitions of sectional feeling, a
plan of adjustment, under the auspices chiefly of Henry Clay, whose fatal
gift was to preserve, for a time, the peace of the country by the
concession of the most precious and vital rights of his section to an
insolent and insatiate fanaticism, was finally reached. This settlement,
known, by way of distinction, as the "Compromise of 1850," averting for
the time the dangers of disunion and civil war, met the approval of the
advocates of expediency, but was opposed, with heroic pertinacity, by Mr.
Davis and his associates of the States' Rights party. They saw the
hollowness of its pretended justice, its utter worthlessness as a
guarantee to the South, and sought to defeat it--first in Congress, and
afterwards by the popular voice. But the sentiment of attachment to the
Union triumphed over every consideration of interest, principle, even
security, and the snare succeeded. Again the South receded, again received
the stone instead of the asked-for loaf, and again did she _compromise_
her most sacred rights and dearest interests, receiving, in return, the
reluctant and insincere guarantee of the recovery of her stolen slaves.
The folly of the South in assenting to this adjustment is now obvious to
the dullest understanding, and subsequent events were swift to vindicate
the wisdom, patriotism, and foresight of Mr. Davis and those who sustained
him in opposition to the much-vaunted Union-saving compromise. Yet, they
were no more disunionists in 1850 than rebels and traitors in 1861. The
charge of disunionism was freely iterated against them, and not without
effect, even in their own section, where the sentimental attachment to the
Union was stronger, just as its sacrifices in behalf of the Union were
greater, than those of the North. Jefferson Davis never was a disunionist,
not even in his subsequent approval of secession, in the sense of a wanton
and treasonable disposition to sever the bonds of that association of
co-equal sovereignties which the founders of the Federal Government
bequeathed to their posterity.
His action, at all times, has been thoroughly consistent with his
declared opinions, and with the earnest attachment to the Union, avowed in
his congressional speeches and in his public addresses every-where. In
1850 and in 1861 his course was the logical sequence of his opinions,
maintained and asserted from his introduction to public life. To save the
Union, upon the only basis upon which it could rest as a guarantee of
liberty,--the basis of absolute equality among the States; to blend
Federal power and States' Rights, was the grand, paramount object to which
all his aspirations and all his investigations of political science were
directed. Repudiating the power of a State to nullify an act of Congress,
and yet not surrender its normal relations as a member of the Union, he
always asserted the right of secession, in the last resort, as an
original, inherent, and vital attribute of State Sovereignty. The Federal
Government, to his mind, was a mere agent of the States, created by them
for a few general and intestate purposes, but having in it no principle
subversive of the paramount sovereignty of the States. Rapidly extending
its power by enactments of Congress and judicial constructions, he
foresaw, and sought to counteract, its tendency to obliterate all State
individuality, and ultimately absorb into its own keeping the liberties of
the people. With dread and indignation, he contemplated its progress
towards that _monstrum horrendum_, a consolidated democracy--the Union of
to-day, in which we see that the _will of the majority is the sole measure
of its powers_.
Such was his consistency, and such his sagacity, as vindicated in the
light of subsequent events, and patent to the eyes of the world to-day.
Who can now doubt which was the better and more logical theory? Clay said:
"I owe allegiance to two sovereignties, and only two: one is to the
sovereignty of this Union, and the other is to the sovereignty of the
State of Kentucky." Thus he held to the paradox of an _imperium in
imperio_, that obvious absurdity in our system of government, a divided
sovereignty. In his ardent Unionism, the great exponent of expediency
disavowed allegiance to the _South_, though still holding to his
allegiance to Kentucky. But suppose Kentucky asserts her sovereignty, and
chooses to unite with the South, what, then, becomes of State Sovereignty
and State allegiance? Just here was the _hiatus_ in Clay's logic, and,
closely pressed by Davis, he emphatically declared his _first_ allegiance
to the Union as the supreme authority; and the State Sovereignty of Clay's
conception was seen to be as intangible and unreal as the "baseless fabric
of a vision."
Far more fair in its semblance, noble in its proportions, and beautiful in
its harmonies, was the ideal of Davis. In his speech on the compromise
measures, July 31, 1850, he said:
"Give to each section of the Union justice; give to every citizen of
the United States his rights as guaranteed by the Constitution; leave
this Confederacy to rest upon that basis from which it arose--the
fraternal feelings of the people--and I, for one, have no fear of its
perpetuity; none that it will not survive beyond the limits of human
speculation, expanding and hardening with the lapse of time, to extend
its blessings to ages unnumbered, and a people innumerable; to include
within its empire all the useful products of the earth, and exemplify
the capacity of a confederacy, with general, well-defined powers, to
extend illimitably without impairing its harmony or its strength."
The grounds of Mr. Davis' opposition to the so-called "Compromise"
programme of Mr. Clay were far otherwise than a factious and impracticable
hostility to an amicable adjustment of sectional differences. He
conscientiously doubted the disposition of the North to abstain from all
future interference with Southern institutions, and he detected and
exposed the utter want of efficacy of the compromise measures as an
assurance of protection against future aggression. He abhorred the
substitution of expediency for principle; could see no _compromise_ where
one side simply _surrendered_ what the other had no right to demand, and
correctly estimated this settlement, like those which had preceded it, as
but an invitation to still more intolerable exactions by an implacable
sectional majority. While discussing, in private conversation with Mr.
Clay, the merits of Mr. Webster's memorable speech of the 7th of March,
1850, a few days after its delivery, he briefly, but sufficiently defined
his position. "Come," said Mr. Clay, "my young friend; join us in these
measures of pacification. Let us rally Congress and the people to their
support, and they will assure to the country thirty years of peace. By
that time" (turning to John M. Berrien, who was a party to the
conversation) "you and I will be under the sod, and my young friend may
then have trouble again." "No," said Davis, "I can not consent to transfer
to posterity a question which is as much ours as theirs, when it is
evident that the sectional inequality, as it will be greater then than
now, will render hopeless the attainment of justice."
His clear, penetrating glance discovered, under the guise of a friendly
and pacific purpose, the insidious presence so mischievous to Southern
interests, just as George Mason, more than fifty years before, had seen
the "poison under the wing of the Federal Constitution." While the bill
for the organization of the Territory of New Mexico was pending, the
vigilance and sagacity of Mr. Davis elicited the most flattering
commendation from his Southern associates. In this bill there was a
general grant, in loose and ambiguous phraseology, of legislative power,
with a reservation that no law should be passed "in respect to African
slavery." Strangely enough, this provision, though obviously involving an
inhibition against the enactment of laws for the protection of Southern
property, escaped general detection. Mr. Davis promptly exposed its
purpose, and offered an amendment, striking out the restraint against
legislation "in respect to African slavery," and prohibiting the enactment
of any law interfering "with those rights of property growing out of the
institution of African slavery as it exists in any of the States of this
Union." To meet the concurrence of other Senators, the amendment was
variously modified, until, as explained by Mr. Davis, it embodied "the
general proposition that the Territorial Legislature should not be
prevented from passing the laws necessary for the protection of the rights
of property of every kind which might be legally and constitutionally held
in that territory." It is needless to say that so just a proposition,
affording equal protection to Southern with Northern institutions, was
defeated.
While there was little in Mr. Clay's plan of pacification to recommend it
to Southern support, beyond the merely temporary staving off of a
dissolution of the Union and civil war, it embodied propositions utterly
incompatible with the security of the South. Mr. Davis especially and
persistently combated its provision for the abolition of the slave-trade
in the District of Columbia, and the concession that slavery did not
legally exist in the newly-acquired territory. His position upon the
general issues involved can not be more clearly and forcibly stated than
in his own language:
"But, sir, we are called upon to receive this as a measure of
compromise!--as a measure in which we of the minority are to receive
something. A measure of compromise! I look upon it as a modest mode of
taking that, the claim to which has been more boldly asserted by
others; and that I may be understood upon this question, and that my
position may go forth to the country in the same columns that convey
the sentiments of the Senator from Kentucky, I here assert that never
will I take less than the Missouri Compromise line to the Pacific
Ocean, with specific right to hold slaves in the territory below that
line; and that before such territories are admitted into the Union as
States, slaves may be taken there from any of the United States, at
the option of the owners. I can never consent to give additional power
to a majority to commit further aggression upon the minority in this
Union; and I will never consent to any proposition which will have
such a tendency without a full guarantee or counteracting measure is
connected with it."
The parliamentary annals of the Union embrace no period more prolific of
grand intellectual efforts than the debates incident to this gigantic
struggle. The prominence of Mr. Davis, with his extreme ardor in behalf of
the rights and interests of his section, brought him constantly into
conflict with the most eminent leaders of both the great political
parties, who had cordially agreed to ignore all minor issues and unite in
the paramount purpose of saving the Union. Cass, Douglas, Bright,
Dickinson, and King, earnestly coöperated with Clay, Webster, and other
Whig champions, in the advocacy of the measures of compromise. That Davis,
younger in years and experience than most of these distinguished men,
amply sustained his honorable and responsible role as the foremost
champion of the South, contemporary public opinion and the Congressional
records give abundant testimony. The great compromise chieftain, between
whom and Davis occurred such obstinate and protracted encounters in
debate, delighted to testify his respect for the talents and intrepidity
of his "young friend," which was his habitual salutation to Davis. Despite
the pronounced antagonism between them, on all measures of public policy,
and their comparatively brief acquaintance, Mr. Clay repeatedly evinced,
in a most touching manner, his warm regard for one who had been the
companion-in-arms and cherished friend of a noble son,[10] who lost his
life on the same field, upon which Davis won such deathless distinction.
"My poor boy," were his words to the latter, upon his return from Mexico,
"usually occupied about one-half of his letters home in praising you." A
still more touching incident, illustrative of his friendly regard, at the
moment not understood by those present, occurred, in the heat of
discussion during the exciting period, which we have had under
consideration. Replying to Davis, said Mr. Clay: "My friend from
Mississippi--and I trust that he will permit me to call him my friend, for
between us there is a tie, the nature of which we both well understand."
At this moment the utterance of the aged statesman became tremulous with
emotion, and, bowing his head, his eyes were seen to fill with tears. This
friendship was warmly reciprocated by Mr. Davis, and its recollections are
among those the most highly-cherished of his public life.
With the defeat of those who had opposed the compromise, terminated, for
the present, Southern resistance in Congress, though it did not for an
instant check Northern aggression. Yet many prominent public characters at
the South, and, as the sequel demonstrated, indorsed by popular
sentiment, avowed themselves fully satisfied with a mere show of triumph
and pretense of justice--a few paltry concessions, not worth the parchment
upon which they were written. In the meantime, upon another arena, Mr.
Davis entered upon a gallant struggle, in opposition to a policy from
which he foresaw and predicted a fruitful yield of disaster in the
future.
CHAPTER V.
OPPOSITION TO THE COMPROMISE IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND MISSISSIPPI--DAVIS
A CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR--HIS DEFEAT REALLY A PERSONAL TRIUMPH--IN
RETIREMENT, SUPPORTS GENERAL PIERCE'S ELECTION--DECLINES AN
APPOINTMENT IN PIERCE'S CABINET, BUT SUBSEQUENTLY ACCEPTS
SECRETARYSHIP OF WAR--REMARKABLE UNITY OF PIERCE'S ADMINISTRATION, AND
HIGH CHARACTER OF THE EXECUTIVE--DAVIS AS SECRETARY OF WAR--
KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL AND THE EXCITEMENT WHICH FOLLOWED--DAVIS AGAIN
ELECTED TO THE SENATE--SPEECHES AT PASS CHRISTIAN AND OTHER POINTS
WHILE ON HIS WAY TO WASHINGTON.
But, though the battle had been fought and won in Congress, and it was
evident, at an early date, that the weight of great names in favor of the
Compromise, aided by the ever-timid counsels of capital and commerce,
would command for that measure the overwhelming support of the country,
the States' Rights men were resolved upon a test of popular sentiment.
Accordingly, in South Carolina and Mississippi, States at all times the
most advanced in Southern feeling, the opponents of the Compromise
organized, as did its friends also. The issue, though substantially the
same, was presented in a somewhat different form in these two States.
In South Carolina, where public sentiment was always singularly unanimous,
upon all questions affecting the honor and interests of the South, and in
entire accord as to the mode and measure of redress for the grievances of
the States, the propriety of resistance was a foregone conclusion. The
only question was, whether South Carolina should act separately, or await
the coöperation of other Southern States. The party of coöperation
triumphed in the election of members to a State convention, by the
decisive popular majority of seven thousand votes.
In Mississippi the issue was one of _resistance_ or _acquiescence_. The
States' Rights, or resistance party, embraced four-fifths of the Democracy
of the State and a small accession of States' Rights Whigs; while the
Union, or Compromise party, was composed of the Clay Whigs and a fraction
of the Democracy.
The Legislature provided an election for members of a State convention to
consider the subject of Federal aggressions, to be held in September,
1851, and, in the ensuing November the regular election of Governor
occurred. Much interest centred upon the gubernatorial contest, and the
State was for months previous to the election the scene of great
excitement. General John A. Quitman, one of the most distinguished
officers of the army, during the Mexican war, a man of the loftiest
character, a reliable statesman, and sterling patriot, was nominated by
the States' Rights Convention. Mr. Henry S. Foote, then a Senator from
Mississippi, and an active supporter of the Compromise measures, was the
candidate of the Union party. While an exceedingly animated canvass
between these candidates was still in progress, the election for members
of the convention resulted in an aggregate majority of seven thousand five
hundred votes for the Union candidates. General Quitman, disappointed by
such an unexpected and decisive exhibition of public sentiment, and
viewing it as the forerunner of the result of the gubernatorial election
in November, withdrew from the contest.
Mr. Davis, who had already been elected for a second term to the Senate,
was now looked to as almost the sole dependence of the States' Rights men,
and they summoned him to take the field as the adversary of Mr. Foote.
There was little inducement, had he consulted selfish considerations, to
relinquish a high position, already secured, and become the leader of a
forlorn hope. Though greatly enfeebled in health, and at that time an
acute sufferer, he accepted the nomination. His sense of duty and devotion
to his principles triumphed even over his physical infirmities, and,
resigning his seat in the Senate, he entered upon the canvass.
The result was, as had been foreseen, the defeat of Mr. Davis. Mr. Foote,
a man of more than average ability, and of varied and extensive
attainments, whose excessive garrulity and total want of discretion
disqualified him for usefulness as a member of a legislative body, or for
any practical end of statesmanship, was, nevertheless, an adroit party
tactician. With great dexterity he had conducted the canvass with General
Quitman, by skillfully evading the real issue, introducing side questions,
and thus breaking the force of the plain and statesman-like arguments of
his more open and less dexterous adversary. When Mr. Davis entered the
field, under all the disadvantages to which we have alluded, the election
of Foote was almost universally conceded. Had the canvass lasted a few
weeks, however, the result, in all probability, would have been different.
The popularity of Mr. Davis was indicated by the paltry majority (nine
hundred and ninety-nine votes) given against him, as compared with the
Union majority at the election in September, for members of the
convention. Under all the circumstances, his friends rightly viewed it as
a personal triumph, and he emerged from the contest with increased
reputation and public regard.
The results of these appeals to popular judgment were scarcely less
decisive, in favor of the Compromise, than had been its congressional
victory. It was evident that the Southern people were yet far from being
ready for organized and practical resistance, and were not likely to be,
until some flagrant outrage should arouse their resentment.
Mr. Davis was now in retirement, and, though abiding the decision of
Mississippi, he was yet avowedly determined to devote his energies to the
efficient organization of the States' Rights party for future struggles.
Yet nothing was farther from his purpose than a factious agitation. His
aim was to secure for the States' Rights principle a moral and numerical
support in the ranks of the Democracy, which should enable its friends to
wield an appropriate influence upon the policy of that party. He
contemplated no organization outside of the Democracy, for the promotion
of disunionism _per se_; and, in the Presidential canvass of 1852,
separated himself from many of his closest personal and political friends,
who had nominated the Presidential ticket of Troup and Quitman, upon the
distinctive platform of States' Rights and separation.
The nomination of Franklin Pierce, upon the Baltimore platform, met his
cordial approbation, and received his active support. With General Pierce,
Mr. Davis held the most friendly relations, and in his constitutional
opinions he had entire confidence. His support of the platform was quite
as consistent as his advocacy of the nominee. Both indorsed, with
emphasis, the Compromise, which he had opposed, but which Mississippi had
ratified, and both avowed their acceptance of it, as a _finality_, beyond
which there was to be no farther agitation of the slavery question. In
Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee he participated actively in the
canvass, and rendered most efficient service to his party, especially in
the two latter States.
General Pierce indicated his estimate of Davis, by a prompt tender of a
position in his Cabinet. Considering himself committed to the fortunes of
his principles in Mississippi, he preferred to "remain and fight the issue
out there," and reluctantly declined. Subsequently the President-elect
addressed him a letter expressing a desire that, upon personal grounds at
least, Mr. Davis should be present at his inauguration. After he had
reached Washington the tender of a Cabinet appointment was repeated. The
obvious advantages to the States' Rights party of representation in the
Government, an argument earnestly urged upon him by prominent Southern
statesmen, at length overcame his personal preference, and he accepted the
position of Secretary of War.
With the policy of President Pierce's administration, Secretary Davis was,
of course, fully identified. Whatever of influence and sympathy he could
command, were employed in promoting its success, and between the President
and himself there was an uninterrupted harmony of personal and official
intercourse. Indeed the glory of this administration and the explanation
of its title to that high award which it earned from impartial criticism,
for its courageous pursuit of an upright, constitutional policy, was the
characteristic unity which prevailed between its head and his advisers.
During the four years of its existence the Cabinet of President Pierce
continued unchanged, at its close the head of each department surrendering
the seals of office which he had received at its inauguration. The history
of no other administration is adorned with such an instance of cordial and
unbroken coöperation, and the fact is equally creditable to the sagacity
of General Pierce in the selection of his advisers, and his consummate
tact in the reconciliation of those antagonisms, which are hardly to be
avoided in the operations of the complicated machinery of Government.
A common statement of its enemies, that the administration must eventually
break down by disorganization, in consequence of the utterly discordant
elements which composed it, was never realized. At one time Mr. Marcy, the
Secretary of State, was the wily Macchiavelli, against whose intrigues the
rest of the Cabinet was in arms, while Mr. Davis was charged with playing
alternately the roles of Richelieu and Marplot.
Of all American executives, Franklin Pierce is preëminently entitled to
the designation of the constitutional President. The great covenant of
American liberty, so ruthlessly despoiled in these degenerate days, when
opportunity and pretext are the sufficient justification of flagrant
violations of justice, was the guide whose precepts he followed without
deviation. His Northern birth and training did not swerve from his
obligations to extend an equal protection to the interests of other
sections, the patriotic executive, whom posterity will delight to honor,
for his wisdom, purity, and impartiality, just in proportion as those
qualities provoke the clamor of the dominant ignorance and passion of
to-day.
In a Cabinet, noted for its ability, of which William L. Marcy was the
Premier, and Caleb Cushing the Attorney-General, Secretary Davis occupied
a position worthy of his abilities and his previous reputation, and
peculiarly gratifying to his military tastes. It is no disparagement of
his associates to say that his strongly-marked character commanded a
constant and emphatic recognition in the policy of the Government.
Under his control the department of war was greatly advanced in dignity
and importance, receiving a character far more distinctive and independent
of other branches of the Government than it had previously claimed. He
infused into all its operations an energy till then unknown, introducing
improvements so extensive and comprehensive as to occasion apprehension of
an almost too powerful and independent system of military organization. It
is a fact universally conceded that his administration of the War Office
was incomparably superior to that of any official who has filled that
position--contributing more to the promotion of efficiency in the army, to
the advancement of those great national establishments so vital to the
security of the nation, and to the systematic, practical management of the
details of the office. In reviewing Mr. Davis' conduct of this important
department of the Government, the splendid improvements which he
inaugurated, his earnest and unceasing labors in behalf of the efficiency
of the army, it is impossible to overestimate his eminent services to the
Union, which even at that time his traducers and those of the South would
pretend he was plotting to destroy. In the Cabinet, as in the Senate,
there was no measure of national advantage to which he did not give his
cordial support, no great national institution which he would not have
fostered with generous and timely sympathy; nothing to which he was not
zealously committed, promising to redound to the glory, prosperity, and
perpetuity of that Union, in whose service he had been trained, whose
uniform he had proudly worn, and beneath whose banner he had braved a
soldier's death.
Secretary Davis made many recommendations contemplating radical
alterations in the military system of the Union. One of his first measures
was a recommendation for the thorough revision of the army regulations.
He opposed the placing of officers, at an early period of service,
permanently upon the staff, and advocated a system, which, he contended,
would improve the discipline and efficiency of officers, "whereby the
right of command should follow rank by one certain rule." The increase of
the medical corps; the introduction of camels; the introduction of the
light infantry or rifle system of tactics, rifled muskets, and the
Minie-ball were all measures advocated by Secretary Davis, and discussed
in his official papers with a force and intelligence that make them highly
valuable to the military student. He urged a thorough exploration of the
Western frontier, and important changes in the arrangement of defenses
against the Indians, demonstrating the inefficiency of the system of small
forts for the purposes of war with the savages. To obviate, in a measure,
the expense, and almost useless trouble, of locating military posts in
advance of settlement, he suggested the plan of maintaining large
garrisons at certain points, situated favorably for obtaining supplies and
accessible by steamboat or railway. From these posts strong detachments
could be supplied and equipped for service in the Indian country. His
efforts were most strenuous to obtain an increase of pay to officers of
the army, and pensions to the widows and orphans of officers and men, upon
a basis similar to that of the navy.
During the Crimean war, Secretary Davis sent a commission, of which
Major-General McClellan, then a captain of cavalry, was a member, to study
and report upon the science of war and the condition of European armies,
as illustrated in the operations incident to that struggle. At his
suggestion four new regiments--two of cavalry--were added to the army, and
numerous appropriations made for the construction of new forts,
improvements in small arms, and the accumulation of munitions of war.
The Presidential term of Pierce expired on the 4th of March, 1857, and
with it terminated the connection of Mr. Davis with the executive branch
of the Government. He retired with the hearty respect of his associates,
and in the enjoyment of the most confiding friendship with the late head
of the Government, a feeling which is cherished by both, with unabated
warmth, at this day. All parties concurred in pronouncing Mr. Davis'
conduct of his department successful, able, and brilliant, and in the
midst of the tide of misrepresentation, with which, during and since the
war, it has been sought to overwhelm his reputation, the least candid of
his accusers have been compelled to this reluctant confession.
Incidental to the late administration, but by no means traceable to its
influence, had been legislation by Congress of a most important character,
which was to give a powerful impulse to agencies long tending to the
destruction of the Union. The election of Pierce had been carried with a
unanimity unprecedented, upon the distinct pledge of the acceptance of the
Compromise as a _finality_. The country, for months subsequently, reposed
in profound quiet, produced by its confidence in an approaching season of
unequaled prosperity, and exempt from all danger of political agitation.
This hallucination was destined to be speedily and rudely dispelled by
events, which afford striking evidence of how completely the peace and
happiness of the American people have always been at the mercy of aspiring
and unscrupulous demagogues. Mr. Stephen A. Douglas must ever be held,
equally by both sections, responsible for the disastrous agitation, which
followed his introduction of certain measures, under the pretense of a
sentimental justice, or a concession of principle to the South, but in
reality prompted by his personal ambition, and which greatly aided to
precipitate the catastrophe of disunion.
Upon the application of the Territory of Nebraska for admission into the
Union, Senator Douglas, from the Committee on Territories, submitted a
bill creating the two Territories of Nebraska and Kansas, and affirming
the supersession of the Missouri restriction of 1820, which prohibited
slavery north of 36° 30', by the Compromise of 1850. It declared the
Missouri restriction inconsistent with the principle of _non-intervention_
by Congress with territorial affairs, which had been adopted in the
settlement of 1850, and therefore inoperative.
This bill was apparently a mere concession of principle to the South, not
likely to be of much practical value, but still gratifying, as it gave to
her citizens the right to carry their property into districts from which
it had been hitherto inhibited. Passing both houses of Congress, in 1854,
it was approved by the Pierce administration,[11] sanctioned by the
Democracy generally, and greeted by the South as a triumph. It was not
imagined that a victory, so purely sentimental and intangible, could be
accepted by the North, as a pretext for violent eruptions of sectional
jealousy, and least of all did the South believe its author capable of the
subsequent duplicity with which, by specious arguments and verbal
ingenuity, he claimed for the measure, a construction far more insidious,
but not less fatal to her interests, than the designs of proclaimed
Abolitionists. The immediate result was a tempest of excitement in the
Northern States, in the midst of which the so-called Republican party, for
the first time, appeared as a formidable contestant in political
struggles, and defeated the Democracy in almost every State election. The
latter, with extreme difficulty, elected Mr. Buchanan to the Presidency
two years afterwards.
In the meantime, while his term of office as Secretary of War was still
unexpired, Mr. Davis had been elected, by the Legislature of Mississippi,
to the Senate, for the term beginning March 4, 1857. On his return home,
he was received by the Democracy of the State with distinguished honors.
Dinners, receptions, and public entertainments of various kinds were
tendered him; and, during the summer and autumn, previous to his departure
for Washington, he addressed numerous large popular gatherings with his
accustomed force and boldness upon pending issues. These addresses
commanded universal attention, and were highly commended for their able,
dispassionate, and statesman-like character.
His speech at Pass Christian, while on his journey to Washington, was a
masterly and eloquent review of the condition of the country, with its
causes and remedies. He attributed the national difficulties chiefly to
the puritanical intolerance and growing disregard of constitutional
obligations of the North. These influences seriously menaced the safety of
the Union, for which he had no hope, unless in the event of a reaction in
Northern sentiment, or of such resolute action by a united South as should
compel her enemies to respect their constitutional duties. To the latter
policy he looked as the best guarantee of the security of the South and
the preservation of the Union. Interference by one State with the
institutions of another could not, under any circumstances, be tolerated,
even though resistance should eventually result in a dissolution of the
Union. The latter event was possible--indeed, might become necessary--but
should never be undertaken save in the last extremity. He would not
disguise the profound emotion with which he contemplated the possibility
of disunion. The fondest reminiscences of his life were associated with
the Union, into whose military service, while yet a boy, he had entered.
In his matured manhood he had followed its flag to victory; had seen its
graceful folds wave in the peaceful pageant, and, again, its colors
conspicuous amid the triumphs of the battle-field; he had seen that flag
in the East, brightened by the sun at its rising, and, in the West, gilded
by his declining rays--and the tearing of one star from its azure field
would be to him as would the loss of a child to a bereaved parent.
This speech--one of the most eloquent he has ever made--was received by
his audience with unbounded enthusiasm, and was approvingly noticed by the
press of both sections.
At Mississippi City he delivered an address in explanation of his personal
course, and in vindication of the administration of which he had lately
been a member. He had obeyed the will of Mississippi, respecting the
legislation of 1850, though against his convictions, and, in the present
disorders in Kansas, he saw the fruits of the unwise substitution of
expediency for principle. Of President Pierce he could speak only in terms
of eulogy, defended his vetoes of bills "for internal improvements and
eleemosynary purposes," depicting, in passages of rare and fervent
eloquence, his heroic adherence to the Constitution, elevated patriotism,
and distinguished virtues. Contrasting the conduct of the Fillmore and
Pierce administrations concerning the Cuban question, he avowed his belief
that Cuba would then be in possession of the United States had Congress
sustained General Pierce in his prompt and decided suggestions as to the
Black Warrior difficulty.
Mr. Davis expressed his approbation of the course pursued by the late
administration with reference to Nicaragua. "Unlawful expeditions" should
be suppressed, though he should rejoice at the establishment of American
institutions in Central America, and maintained the right of the United
States to a paramount influence in the affairs of the continent, with
which European interference should be, at all times, promptly checked.
When the Thirty-fifth Congress assembled in December, 1857, the Kansas
question had already developed a difficult and critical phase. The rock
upon which Mr. Buchanan's administration was to split had been
encountered, and the wedge prepared, with which the Democratic party was
destined to be torn asunder.
CHAPTER VI.
RETURN OF MR. DAVIS TO THE SENATE--OPENING EVENTS OF MR. BUCHANAN'S
ADMINISTRATION--TRUE INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGISLATION OF 1854--
SENATOR DOUGLAS THE INSTRUMENT OF DISORGANIZATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY--HIS ANTECEDENTS AND CHARACTER--AN ACCOMPLISHED DEMAGOGUE--DAVIS
AND DOUGLAS CONTRASTED--BOTH REPRESENTATIVES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE
SECTIONS--DOUGLAS AMBITION--HIS COUP D'ETAT, AND ITS RESULTS--THE
KANSAS QUESTION--DOUGLAS' TRIUMPHS OVER THE SOUTH AND THE UNITY OF THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY LOST--"SQUATTER SOVEREIGNTY"--PROPERLY
CHARACTERIZED--DAVIS' COURSE IN THE KANSAS STRUGGLE--DEBATE WITH
SENATOR FESSENDEN--PEN-AND-INK SKETCH OF MR. DAVIS AT THIS PERIOD--
TRUE SIGNIFICANCE OF POLITICAL EVENTS TO THE SOUTH--SHE RIGHTLY
INTERPRETS THEM--MR. DAVIS' COURSE SUBSEQUENT TO THE KANSAS
IMBROGLIO--HIS DEBATES WITH DOUGLAS--TWO DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF
PARLIAMENTARY SPEAKING--DAVIS THE LEADER OF THE REGULAR DEMOCRACY IN
THE THIRTY-SIXTH CONGRESS--HIS RESOLUTIONS--HIS CONSISTENCY--COURSE AS
TO GENERAL LEGISLATION--VISITS THE NORTH--SPEAKS IN PORTLAND, BOSTON,
NEW YORK, AND OTHER PLACES--REPLY TO AN INVITATION TO ATTEND THE
WEBSTER BIRTH-DAY FESTIVAL--MR. SEWARD'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE
"IRREPRESSIBLE CONFLICT"--MR. DAVIS BEFORE MISSISSIPPI DEMOCRATIC
STATE CONVENTION--PROGRESS OF DISUNION--DISSOLUTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY--SPEECHES OF MR. DAVIS AT PORTLAND AND IN SENATE.
Mr. Davis returned to the Senate at a period marked by agitation, no less
menacing to the Union than that which had so seriously threatened it in
1850. His health at this time was exceedingly infirm, and for several
months he was so much prostrated by his protracted sufferings, that a
proper regard for the suggestions of prudence would have justified his
entire abstinence from the labors and excitements of this stormy period.
Again and again, however, did his heroic devotion carry him from his sick
bed to the capitol, to engage in the death-struggle of the South, with her
leagued enemies, for safety in the Union, which she was still loath to
abandon, even under the pressure of intolerable wrong. Frequently, with
attenuated frame and bandaged eyes, he was to be seen in the Senate, at
moments critical in the fierce sectional conflict; and at the final
struggle upon the Kansas question, not even the earnest admonitions of his
physician, that to leave his chamber would probably be followed by the
most dangerous results, were availing to induce his absence from the
scene.
The opening events of the first session of the Thirty-fifth Congress, (the
first incidental to the administration of Mr. Buchanan,) were far from
being auspicious of the continued unity of the Democratic party, which,
for several years past, the intelligence of the country had correctly
appreciated as an essential condition to the preservation of the Union.
Mainly through the undivided support given him by the South, Mr. Buchanan
was elected upon the Cincinnati platform of 1856, which was a
re-affirmation of the cardinal tenets of the Democratic faith, involving
also emphatic approval of the Kansas-Nebraska legislation two years
previous. Not until months after his inauguration were there any
indications of hostility to his administration within the ranks of his own
party. Nor had there been any avowed difference of construction as to the
end and effect of the legislation of 1854. The rare unanimity with which
the South had been rallied to the support of the Democracy was based upon
the unreserved admission, by all parties, that the Kansas-Nebraska act
was designedly friendly in its _spirit_, at all events, to Southern
interests. No Southern statesman, for a moment, dreamed that it was
capable of an interpretation unfriendly to his section. That the plain
purpose of the bill was to remove the subject of slavery outside the
bounds of congressional discussion, and to place it in the disposition of
the States separately, and in the _Territories_, _when organizing for
admission as States_, was regarded by the South as the leading vital
principle which challenged her enthusiastic support. Such, indeed, was the
doctrine asserted by the entire Democratic party of the South, enunciated
by the administration, and tacitly approved by the Northern Democracy.
Very soon, however, after the meeting of Congress, the action of Senator
Douglas revealed him as the instrument of disorganization in his party. To
a proper understanding of his motives and conduct at this conjuncture, a
brief statement of his antecedents is essential.
Stephen A. Douglas was now in the meridian of life and the full maturity
of his unquestionably vigorous intellectual powers. For twenty-five years
he had been prominent in the arena of politics, and as a member of
Congress his course had been so eminently politic and judicious as to make
him a favorite with the Democracy, both North and South. To an unexampled
degree his public life illustrated the combination of those
characteristics of the demagogue, a fertile ingenuity, facile
accommodation to circumstances, and wonderful gifts of the _ad captandum_
species of oratory, so captivating to the populace, which in America
peculiarly constitute the attributes of the "rising man." Douglas was not
wanting in noble and attractive qualities of manhood. His courage was
undoubted, his generosity was princely in its munificence to his personal
friends, and he frequently manifested a lofty magnanimity. In his early
youth, deprived of the advantages of fortune and position, the discipline
of his career was not propitious to the development of the higher
qualities of statesmanship--with which, indeed, he was scantily endowed by
nature. It is as the accomplished politician, subtle, ready, fearless, and
indefatigable, that he must be remembered. In this latter character he was
unrivaled.
Not less than Davis was Douglas a representative man, yet no two men were
more essentially dissimilar, and no two lives ever actuated by aspirations
and instincts more unlike. Douglas was the representative of
expediency--Davis the exponent of principles. In his party associations
Douglas would tolerate the largest latitude of individual opinion, while
Davis was always for a policy clearly defined and unmistakable; and upon a
matter of vital principle, like Percy, would reluctantly surrender even
the "ninth part of a hair." To maintain the united action of the
Democratic party on election day, to defeat its opponents, to secure the
rewards of success, Douglas would allow a thousand different constructions
of the party creed by as many factions. Davis, on the other hand, would,
and eventually did, approve the dissolution of the party, when it refused
an open, manly enunciation of its faith. For mere party success Douglas
cared every thing, and Davis nothing, save as it ensured the triumph of
Constitutional principles. Both loved the Union and sought its perpetuity,
but by different methods; Douglas by never-ending compromises of a
quarrel, which he should have known that the North would never permit to
be amicably settled; by staving off and ignoring issues which were to be
solved only by being squarely met. Davis, too, was not unwilling to
compromise, but he wearied of perpetual concession by the South, in the
meanwhile the North continuing its hostility, both open and insidious,
and urged a settlement of all differences upon a basis of simple and exact
justice to both sections.
Douglas was preëminently the representative politician of his section, and
throughout his career was a favorite with that boastful, bloated, and
mongrel element, which is violently called the "American people," and
which is the ruling element in elections in the Northern cities. In
character and conduct he embodied many of its materialistic and
socialistic ideas, its false conception of liberty, its pernicious dogmas
of equality, and not a little of its rowdyism.
Davis was the champion of the South, her civilization, lights, honor, and
dignity. He was the fitting and adequate exponent of a civilization which
rested upon an intellectual and æsthetical development, upon lofty and
generous sentiments of manhood, a dignified conservatism, and the proud
associations of ancestral distinction in the history of the Union. Always
the Senator in the sense of the ideal of dignity and courtesy which is
suggested by that title, he was also the _gentleman_ upon all occasions;
never condescending to flatter or soothe the mob, or to court popular
favor, he lost none of that polished and distinguished manner, in the
presence of a "fierce Democracie," which made him the ornament of the
highest school of oratory and statesmanship of his country.
The ambition of Douglas was unbounded. The recognized leader, for several
years, of the Northern Democracy, his many fine personal qualities and
courageous resistance of the ultra Abolitionists secured for him a
considerable number of supporters in the Southern wing of that party. The
Presidency was the goal of his ambition, and for twenty years his course
had been sedulously adjusted to the attainment of that most coveted of
prizes to the American politician. On repeated occasions he had been
flattered by a highly complimentary vote in the nominating conventions of
the Democracy. Hitherto he had been compelled to yield his pretensions in
favor of older members of his party or upon considerations of temporary
availability. It was evident, however, that in order to be President, he
must secure the nomination in 1860. The continued ascendancy of the
Democracy was no longer, as heretofore, a foregone conclusion, and,
besides, there were others equally aspiring and available. His
Presidential aspirations appeared, indeed, to be without hope or resource,
save through the agency of some adroit _coup d'etat_, by which the
truculent and dominant free-soil sentiment of the North, which he had so
much affronted by his bid for Southern support in the introduction of the
Kansas-Nebraska bill, could be conciliated. In Illinois, his own State,
the Abolition strength was alarmingly on the increase, and to secure his
return to the Senate at the election to be held in 1858, an object of
prime importance in the promotion of his more ambitious pretensions, he
did not scruple to assume a position, falsifying his previous record,
wantonly insulting and defiant to his Southern associates, and in bold
antagonism to a Democratic administration. The sequel of this rash and
ill-judged course was the overthrow of his own political fortunes, the
disintegration of his party, and the attempted dissolution of the Union.
The earliest recommendations of Mr. Buchanan, respecting the Kansas
controversy, which, several months since, had developed in that Territory
into a species of predatory warfare, marked by deeds of violence and
atrocity, between the Abolition and Pro-slavery parties, were signalized
by a coalition of the followers of Douglas with the Abolitionists and
other opponents of the administration. The speedy pacification of the
disorders in Kansas, by the prompt admission of that Territory, was the
condition essential to the success of Mr. Buchanan's entire policy. He
accordingly recommended the admission of Kansas into the Union, with the
"Lecompton" constitution, which had been adopted in September, 1857, by
the decisive vote of six thousand two hundred and twenty-six in favor of
that constitution, with slavery, and five hundred and nine for it, without
slavery. A rival instrument, adopted by an election notoriously held
exclusively under the control of Abolitionists, prohibiting slavery, was
likewise presented.
For months the controversy was waged in Congress between the friends of
the administration and its enemies, and finally resulted in a practical
triumph of the Free-soil principle. The Anti-Lecompton coalition of
Douglas and the Abolitionists, aided by the defection of a few Southern
members, successfully embarrassed the policy of the administration by
defeating its recommendations, and eventually carried a measure acceptable
to Northern sentiments and interests.
Mr. Douglas thus triumphed over a Democratic administration, at the same
time giving a shock to the unity of the Democratic party, from which it
has never recovered, and effectually neutralized its power as a breakwater
of the Union against the waves of sectional dispute. The alienation
between himself and his former associates was destined never to be
adjusted, as indeed it never should have been, in consideration of his
inexcusable recreancy to the immemorial faith of his party. Mr. Douglas
simply abandoned the South, at the very first moment when his aid was
seriously demanded. Nay, more; he carried with him a quiver of Parthian
arrows, which he discharged into her bosom at a most critical moment in
her unequal contest.
It is not to be denied that Mr. Douglas' new interpretation of the
Kansas-Nebraska act was urged by himself and his advocates as having a
merit not to be overlooked by the North, in its suggestion of a method of
restricting slavery, presenting superior advantages. "Squatter
sovereignty," as advocated by Mr. Douglas, proposing the decision of the
slavery question by the people of the Territories, while yet unprepared to
ask admission as States, was far more effectual in its plans against
slavery, and only less prompt and open, than the designs of the
Abolitionists. It would enable the "Emigrant Aid Societies," and imported
janizaries of Abolition to exclude the institutions of the South from the
Territories, the joint possessions of the two sections, acquired by an
enormously disproportionate sacrifice on the part of the South, with a
certainty not to be realized, for years to come, perhaps, from the
Abolition policy of congressional prohibition.[12] According to Mr.
Douglas' theory, the existence of slavery in all the Territories was to
depend upon the verdict of a few hundred settlers or "squatters" upon the
public lands. It practically conceded to Northern interests and ideas
every State to be hereafter admitted, and under the operation of such a
policy it was not difficult to anticipate the fate of slavery, at last
even in the States.
From the inception of this controversy until its close Mr. Davis was fully
committed to the policy of Mr. Buchanan, and his position was in perfect
harmony with that of all the leading statesmen of the South. Less
prominent, perhaps, in debate, from his constant ill-health during the
first session, than at any other period of his public life, he was still
zealous and influential.
An interesting incident of the session was a discussion between Mr. Davis
and Mr. Fessenden, of Maine, a Senator second only to Mr. Seward among
Abolition leaders, in point of intellect, and behind none in his truculent
animosity to Southern institutions. Reviewing the message of Mr. Buchanan
with great severity, Fessenden took occasion to discuss elaborately the
slavery question, with all its incidental issues. Mr. Davis replied, not
at great length, but with much force and spirit. The discussion terminated
with the following colloquy, which is interesting chiefly in its personal
allusions:
"MR. FESSENDEN. ... Sir, I have avowed no disunion sentiments on this
floor--neither here nor elsewhere. Can the honorable gentleman from
Mississippi say as much?
"MR. DAVIS. Yes.
"MR. FESSENDEN. I am glad to hear it, then.
"MR. DAVIS. Yes. I have long sought for a respectable man who would
allege the contrary.
"MR. FESSENDEN. I make no allegation. I asked if he could say as much.
I am glad to hear him say so, because I must say to him that the
newspapers have represented him as making a speech in Mississippi, in
which he said he came into General Pierce's cabinet a disunion man. If
he never made it, very well.
"MR. DAVIS. I will thank you to produce that newspaper.
"MR. FESSENDEN. I can not produce it, but I can produce an extract
from it in another paper.
"MR. DAVIS. An extract! then that falsifies the text.
"MR. FESSENDEN. I am very glad to hear the Senator say so. I made no
accusation--I put the question to him. If he denies it, very well. I
only say that, with all the force and energy with which he denies it,
so do I. The accusation never has been made against me before. On what
ground does the Senator now put it?...
"MR. DAVIS. Does the Senator ask me for an answer?
"MR. FESSENDEN. Certainly, if the Senator feels disposed to give one.
"MR. DAVIS. If you ask me for an answer, it is easy. I said your
position was fruitful of such a result. I did not say you avowed the
object--nothing of the sort, but the reverse....
"MR. FESSENDEN. That is a matter of opinion, on which I have a right
to entertain my view as well as the Senator his....
"MR. DAVIS. Mr. President, I rise principally for the purpose of
saying that I do not know whence springs this habit of talking about
intimidation. I am not the first person toward whom a reply has been
made, that we are not to carry our ends by intimidation. I try to
intimidate nobody; I threaten nobody; and I do not believe--let me say
it once for all--that any body is afraid of me--and I do not want any
body to be afraid of me.
"MR. FESSENDEN. I am. [Laughter.]
"MR. DAVIS. I am sorry to hear it; and if the Senator is really so, I
shall never speak to him in decided terms again.
"MR. FESSENDEN. I speak of it only in an intellectual point of view.
[Laughter.]
"MR. DAVIS. Then, sir, the Senator was in a Pickwickian sense when he
began; there were no threats, no intimidations, and he is just where
he would have been if he had said nothing." [Laughter.]...
While the Kansas question was pending in Congress, a sketch of Mr. Davis,
in connection with two other prominent Southern Senators, which appeared
in the correspondence of a leading journal, was extensively copied in the
newspapers of the day. We extract that portion which relates specially to
Mr. Davis. The portrait is from the pen of one who had no sympathy with
his political views:
DAVIS, HUNTER, AND TOOMBS, THE SOUTHERN TRIUMVIRATE.
[Correspondence of the Missouri Democrat.]
"WASHINGTON CITY, January 21.
"Yesterday, when Hale was speaking, the right side of the chamber was
empty, (as it generally is during the delivery of an antislavery
speech,) with the exception of a group of three who sat near the
centre of the vacant space. This remarkable group, which wore the air
if not the ensigns of power, authority, and public care, was composed
of Senators Davis, Hunter, and Toombs. They were engaged in an earnest
colloquy, which, however, was foreign to the argument Hale was
elaborating; for though the connection of their words was broken
before it reached the gallery, their voices were distinctly audible,
and gave signs of their abstraction. They were thinking aloud. If they
had met together, under the supervision of some artist gifted with the
faculty of illustrating history and character by attitude and
expression, who designed to paint them, in fresco, on the walls of the
new Senate chamber, the combination could not have been more
appropriately arranged than chance arranged it on this occasion.
Toombs sits among the opposition on the left, Hunter and Davis on the
right; and the fact that the two first came to Davis' seat--the one
gravitating to it from a remote, the other from a near point--may be
held to indicate which of the three is the preponderating body in the
system, if preponderance there be; and whose figure should occupy the
foreground of the picture if any precedence is to be accorded. Davis
sat erect and composed; Hunter, listening, rested his head on his
hand; and Toombs, inclining forward, was speaking vehemently. Their
respective attitudes were no bad illustration of their individuality.
Davis impressed the spectator, who observed the easy but authoritative
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/43329