This Site:
Civil War
Civil War Overview
Civil War 1861
Civil War 1862
Civil War 1863
Civil War 1864
Civil War 1865
Civil War Battles
Confederate Generals
Union Generals
Confederate History
Robert E. Lee
Civil War Medicine
Lincoln Assassination
Slavery
Site Search
Civil War Links
Civil War Art
Mexican War
Republic of Texas
Indians
Winslow Homer
Thomas Nast
Mathew Brady
Western Art
Civil War Gifts
Robert E. Lee Portrait
|
PORT ROYAL FERRY.
WE publish on the
preceding page
a view of PORT
ROYAL FERRY, where the fight took place between our troops, under
General Stevens, and the rebels. The following account from the Herald explains
the affair :
We have received news of a
victory over the rebels on the 1st inst., in a brisk fight near
Port Royal Ferry, about twenty-five miles from
Hilton Head. The expedition which achieved this
victory was a combined military and naval one, and was under the joint command
of Brigadier-General I. I. Stevens and Captain Rogers of the flag-ship
Wabash. The troops engaged consisted of the
Eighth Michigan regiment, Pennsylvania Round Heads, Fiftieth Pennsylvania,
Seventy-ninth New York Militia, Forty-seventh and Forty-eighth New York
Volunteers. The naval vessels consisted of the gun-boats Ellen, Seneca, Pembina,
and Ottawa.
General Stevens's brigade
advanced on Port Royal on the 1st instant, and took possession of the rebel
batteries after short resistance of the rebels. The brigade was assisted by the
gun-boats, which shelled the batteries. General Stevens then followed up the
blow until he arrived within six miles of the Charleston Railroad.
A flag of truce was sent by the
rebels, who desired permission to collect and bury their dead, which was
granted. One hour was allowed for that purpose, after which the rebels fell back
upon the fortifications near the railroad, which are very extensive, leaving
behind them one large gun, which they had spiked. The rebel force engaged was
estimated at eight thousand men, under Generals Gregg and Pope. The Federal
force engaged was four thousand five hundred men. Our loss was nine wounded—one
mortally, Major Watson, of the Eighth Michigan Regiment, who has since died. The
rebel loss is not positively known, but it is said to be pretty large.
We learn by telegraph, through
rebel sources, that on the following day our troops advanced, drove back the
rebels, and took possession of a station on the railroad.
EUROPEAN Dealers will he supplied
with HARPER'S WEEKLY
by John Adams Knight, Publisher of the London American, 100 Fleet Street,
London, England, where Subscriptions and Advertisements will be received, and
single copies of HARPER'S MONTHLY and WEEKLY furnished.
HARPER'S WEEKLY.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 18, 1862.
THE WEEK AND THE PROSPECT.
BY the time this Number of
Harper's Weekly is laid before its readers the work of suppressing the rebellion
will have begun in real earnest. The long period of preparation will have ended,
and the final tussle will have commenced.
There have been many among us who
have complained of the long stage of inaction which has succeeded the
battle of Bull Run. Many well-meaning but
weak-minded and limp-backed citizens would have liked to see an advance of our
armies within a month after the Bull Run defeat ; and have never ceased, since
August last, to deplore the inaction of the Union forces, and the apparent
progress of the rebellion. The fact is, that the Bull Run defeat was followed by
a general disintegration of the Union army. The bulk of the troops who fought on
that disastrous day were three months' men, who went home directly after the
battle.
General McClellan, on assuming command of the
army of the Potomac, found it to consist of raw
levies, unacquainted with discipline, unprovided with arms, unable to move in
masses, without military knowledge, equipments, or competent officers. It was a
mere mob, in fact. His first duty was to convert this mob into an army. Jomini,
quoting Napoleon, says that it takes six months to make infantry recruits fit
for service in the field, and twelve months to drill cavalry. If they are taken
into action before they are soldiers, he adds, they are more likely to do harm
than good. General McClellan's first orders, when he took the command at
Washington, were, first, a police order putting
an end to the loose discipline which had previously prevailed among the
volunteers ; and, secondly, an order brigading the troops as fast as they
arrived at the capital.
General Burnside spent several weeks in the
duty of brigading the regiments which poured into Washington, and daily brigade
drills were ordered. When a sufficient number of brigades had been organized
they were formed into divisions, and division commanders—Buell, Porter,
Franklin, Heintzelman,
Hooker,
McCall,
Banks,
McDowell, etc. —were placed in command, and
directed to train the men to move by divisions. All this naturally took time.
The twenty-two weeks which have elapsed since the Battle of Bull Run are if any
thing too short a period to perfect the officers in their duties, and the men in
the various evolutions of company, battalion, regimental, brigade, and division
movement. So far from complaining of McClellan's inaction experienced soldiers
would rather advise his keeping his men in training for another month or two. No
man would undertake to make boots, or coats, or books, or cotton cloth, or to
sell merchandise or stocks, or to cure diseases, or plead lawsuits, after an
apprenticeship of only five months and a half. If McClellan has educated his mob
of volunteers to the proper pitch of military discipline in that period, all
that can be said is that he has done wonders.
At any rate, we are led to
believe that the real work is now about to begin in earnest. Before
this paper meets the public eye,
General Burnside's column will have commenced operations. It seems to be
universally understood that it is to operate on the York, James, or Rappahannock
rivers—being in fact a flank attack on the rebel army of the Potomac. General
Magruder appears to be satisfied that it is to ascend the York River.
Simultaneously with its operations, it may be expected that General Hooker will
assail the rebel Batteries at Evansport, General McClellan will make a forward
movement on the line of the Occoquan, and General Lander, who has taken the
place of General Kelley, will move on Winchester, while General Banks moves on
Leesburg. Thus assailed at all points, it is assumed that
General Johnston will be compelled to give
battle in the open field, and it is taken for granted that he will labor under
such disadvantages that he can not but meet with defeat.
Meanwhile it may be gathered from
the various contradictory reports from Kentucky and the line of the
Mississippi River, that, by the time these
lines are read, the bulk of the army under General Don Carlos Buell will have
crossed the
Green River and will either have assaulted the
rebel works at Bowling Green or will have turned the position. The new
bridge over the Green River was to have been
completed by 1st January. General Buell's antagonist,
General Albert Sydney Johnston, is a very able
officer, and was the commander of our army in Utah. He has seen active service
in Texas and Mexico. Still, it is known to be General McClellan's opinion that
he will find his match in General Buell ; and in numbers, equipment, arms, and
discipline, our army is sure to be superior to that of the rebels. General Buell
can not have far short of 75,000 fighting men under his command.
We look also, during the current
week, for news of movements down the Mississippi. At latest dates the whole of
General Halleck's fleet of gun and
mortar boats had mustered at Cairo, and a land
army of some 30,000 men was there to support them. It is expected that before
these lines are read this army will be nearly doubled, and the flotilla will be
ready for work. Opinions differ among military men with regard to the policy
General Halleck will pursue. Some authorities pretend that he will send his army
in transports down the Cumberland and Tennessee rivers until a point is reached
due east of Memphis, and that he will march on that city while his flotilla
fights its way down the river. Others, again, look for a direct march from Cairo
and
Paducah upon
Columbus, in conjunction with the
advance of the fleet. Whichever course be adopted, it is safe to expect that
within a day or two the great Mississippi expedition will have begun its work.
In either event Union men count upon success as reasonably certain.
We have made no allusion, in the
above brief review, to the movements of our armies at the South. They will,
however, naturally exercise a potent influence upon the grand result. At the
time we write the whole sea-coast, from
Savannah to
Charleston, is in the hands of our forces, and
we hold the railroad between those two cities. No forces or news can be sent
from Savannah to Charleston, or vice versa, except by making a great detour. It
is in our power to take either city at any time, and doubtless one or both will
be captured very shortly.
Simultaneously the
Butler expedition is operating vigorously in
the Gulf. General Phelps, who is an excellent soldier, though a poor
proclamation-maker, has occupied
Ship Island, which commands the channel between
New Orleans and
Mobile, and also Biloxi, on the
main land.
The Constitution has since sailed with
reinforcements, under command of General Butler in person, and it is well
understood that his arrival will be followed by movements of great interest to
the rebels in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The final operations against
New Orleans will probably be deferred until
Commodore Porter's flotilla, which is now
rapidly fitting out, reaches the mouth of the river ; but in the mean time it is
likely that other places of scarcely less importance will fall into our hands.
The fate of battles rests with
God alone, and no one can tell what fortune our brave volunteers may encounter.
At the same time it generally happens that the heaviest artillery and the
biggest battalions carry the day, and we believe we have the advantage in this
respect. A few days now will tell the tale.
THE
LOUNGER.
WHAT NEXT?
ALTHOUGH the immediate occasion
of collision between this country and Great Britain may have been removed, the
maudlin ferocity of the British feeling, as shown in the rhodomontade of the
newspapers, is quite enough to apprise every sensible man that only the
occasion, and not the cause, has been removed. Still further—the attitude of the
British Government from the beginning of the rebellion has been passively
hostile to the United States. Before Mr. Dallas left London,
Lord John Russell explained himself very
vaguely and unsatisfactorily in regard to the recognition of the rebels as an
independent power; and the Queen's Proclamation, issued upon the very day of Mr.
Adams's arrival in London, showed beyond debate,
the intention of the British
Government to prejudge the question, and to act without authorized intelligence
of the views and purposes of the United States. At the same time the British and
French governments came to an understanding to act together in regard to our
condition ; and they informed other European states that they were expected to
concur with them in whatever measures might be taken.
In the early summer began the
movement of troops to Canada, and the shipping of great quantities of military
stores to the same point, with the sailing of armed ships into our waters. The
offer of the United States made to Great Britain and France to accede to the
Treaty of Paris was simultaneously declined by both those powers, except upon
condition of our assuming obligations which they declined to assume for
themselves. The Mexican intervention was agreed upon by Great Britain, France,
and Spain, in the development of which a large foreign fleet will be thrown into
the Gulf of Mexico. Meanwhile the British Government, through an agent here, had
privately, not officially, approached the rebel authorities to invite their
virtual adhesion to the Treaty of Paris. The agent of this business was Robert
Bunch, British Consul at Charleston. The letter proving the fact was found upon
the person of Robert Mure. The removal of Bunch was instantly demanded by
Mr. Seward. The matter was opened to Lord
Russell by Mr. Adams ; and the secret instructions to Bunch, " which are only
now acknowledged because they have come to light," as Mr. Adams remarks, were
confessed by the British Government, which declined to remove Bunch. Mr. Seward,
by the President's direction, thereupon instantly withdrew his exequatur,
notwithstanding the declaration of Earl Russell that his Government had not
authorized Bunch to say that what he did was the first step toward recognition.
The interior history of our
relations with Great Britain since the outbreak of the rebellion fully authorize
Mr. Seward to say, as he does in his dispatch of July 21, to Mr. Adams: " The
United States and Great Britain have assumed incompatible and thus far
irreconcilable positions on the subject of the existing insurrection." The total
alienation of feeling which has ensued between the nations, and its bitter
expression culminating upon the part of England in the ludicrous drivel of the
London Times, which calls the people of the United States " a degraded mob;" the
wild and wanton British hatred and insolence developed by the
affair of the Trent; the steady assumption of
the destruction of this Government; the open aid given to rebel ships and the
common courtesies refused to ours, notwithstanding the claim of " friendly
neutrality" between an allied power and a faction of its citizens seeking to
overthrow it—all these things are signs no less sure than the rising cloud and
the muttering thunder.
If in the year which ends in
April the Government has not substantially suppressed the insurrection, or is
not clearly suppressing it, Great Britain, France, and the lesser powers will
recognize the independence of the rebellious section. As the rebel ministers are
received at foreign courts our ministers retire. Treaties between the new nation
and the old will follow. It is to be reasonably supposed that the British navy,
perhaps united with the French, will try to open the blockade. That act is war
between us and those powers.
Three winter months are not a
long time to complete so great a work. It can be done only by the utmost effort
of the nation. Every means is now a military necessity. The victory over
rebellion must be overwhelming, radical, and final. Can we justly spare any
effort ? The right of the Government to summon the insurgents to surrender under
peril of losing the labor of their slaves is as unquestionable as that of
summoning them to do so under peril of loss of property and life. If such a
measure be adopted, and the nation is saved, the endangered peace of the world
confirmed, and the root of all our troubles is removed, will any honest citizen
regret that a great act of justice was done by the way? If such a measure be
delayed, and the inevitable recognition of the rebellion leads to foreign war
and domestic disunion, will the Government, legislative and executive, have done
all it ought to have done to avert so tragical a disaster ?
MR. SEWARD'S LETTER.
TIME enough has now elapsed to
perceive that Mr. Seward has performed one of the most difficult and delicate
tasks that ever devolved upon a statesman with such calmness, dignity, and
consummate ability, that there is universal national assent. There are many who
think that the surrender must have been made, right or wrong, to avoid a war for
which we were not prepared ; and they are glad that a humiliating necessity has
been met so adroitly. There are others who think that the question was, at best,
doubtful ; and they are glad that, at this time, it has been decided against
ourselves. There are still others who think that the true American doctrine
honorably required the surrender ; and they are glad that the nation has
maintained its own principle even under the implied threat of war. " If I decide
this case in favor of my own Government," says Mr. Seward, "I must disavow its
most cherished principles, and reverse and forever abandon its essential
policy." He therefore decides as an American statesman ought to decide. The
national pride may be wounded, because pride always insists upon sticking to
what has been done, right or wrong. But the national honor is entirely
unstained. And the business of a statesman is to vindicate the honor of his
nation, even at the expense of its pride.
We are not of those who regard
Mr. Seward's letter as making the best of a bad case. On the contrary, if we
were at perfect peace, and a similar case should arise, it would be the duty of
the United States to take precisely the same ground. Some kind of visitation and
search of neutrals by belligerents is universally conceded. That some things are
contraband of war
is equally recognized. That
some persons may be contraband is
not disputed. But the decision of what is contraband in property must be
referred to prize courts ; and if property must be so referred, how much more
must persons? The judgment is too momentous to be left to a naval officer. If,
therefore, in this case, the
Trent had been taken into some prize port and
condemned, and
Slidell and Mason held to be contraband, we
could not have released them without dishonor. If Mr. Seward could have answered
his fifth question as easily and finally as he did the first four, his
conclusion, by his own reasoning and upon our great principle, would have been,
The demand of the British Government can not be granted. If war must follow, we
have fought that Government before upon the same question, and not
unsuccessfully. We sneer at the claim of Great Britain to make her whim maritime
law ; but how could we have respected ourselves in fighting against the
principle in 1862 that we fought so well for in 1812 ?
That Great Britain had always
done what Captain Wilkes did, and with no provocation whatever, is true enough.
But Great Britain is not our model, thank God ! in politics, in manners, or in
morality.
DO THE DOCTORS DISAGREE?
IF we were so entirely in the
right in the Trent affair as Mr. Everett and other eminent Doctors assured us,
why do we consent to give up the two traitors, except because we can't help
ourselves? Are Mr. Everett and the other Doctors all wrong? This is a question
which a great many people are quietly asking.
Let us frankly grant, then, to
begin with, that very few of us know any thing whatever about the legal right or
wrong of the question. International and maritime law are definitely settled
only upon certain points; and no man, without especial attention to them, can
say what those points are.
Now every thing that Mr. Everett
asserts as good and recognized law in this case is confirmed by Mr. Seward. They
quote the same authorities, often the same words. Mr. Everett's most elaborate
consideration of the case is contained in his paper of the 7th December,
published in the Ledger. He there recounts the circumstances, and then considers
all the points of law that establish the right of a belligerent state ship, like
the San Jacinto, to stop a neutral contract merchant vessel carrying passengers
and mails, like the Trent: and, in the words of Sir William Scott, " to stop the
embassador of your enemy upon his passage."
Mr. Everett establishes the point
beyond question. He introduces, indeed, some arguments which Mr. Seward, as
Secretary of State, can not admit. Mr. Everett, for instance, lays great stress
upon the Queen's proclamation of neutrality, forbidding subjects to carry
dispatches, officers, etc., at their peril. Obviously the Secretary of State can
not allow that mere rebels are belligerents. The English proclamation, in his
view, is the declaration of an unfriendly purpose toward this Government; but
this Government prefers to disregard the purpose and await the overt act of
unfriendliness which is implied by the proclamation. When Great Britain follows
the proclamation to its logical result, and recognizes the rebels as an
independent Power, it will be time for this Government to act also. If Mr.
Seward argued upon the ground of the proclamation, he would argue against the
carrying of his own dispatches to our foreign ministers by English ships. Mr.
Everett may use the argument for his purpose, and he uses it ably, but the
Secretary of State can not.
Nevertheless, by perfectly
conclusive reasoning they reach the same result—namely, that Captain Wilkes had
a right to stop the ship and the embassadors. There, however, Mr. Everett's
argument ends and Mr. Seward's begins. He agrees entirely with Mr. Everett, that
the rebels were contraband ; that Captain Wilkes might lawfully stop the ship
that he did it properly ; that having found the contraband he had a right to
capture them ; but that he did not exercise the right in conformity to the law
of nations.
Therefore we were right, but not
entirely right, and in such cases an incomplete right is not enough. The eminent
Doctors justly establish the right of stopping the ship and the embassadors; but
they none of them establish, because none of them but the Secretary discusses,
the right of deciding the question as Captain Wilkes decided. Therefore, also,
we do not give up the traitors because we should have war if we did not, but
because every part of the law is equally vital, and the act was not altogether
lawful.
A DANIEL COME TO JUDGMENT.
TIME, like Portia, is a Daniel
when it comes to judgment. For years, when we had no navy, when we had twelve
ships and Great Britain had nine hundred, she wantonly insulted our flag by
stopping our merchantmen and taking out whatever persons the British captains
might choose to call British subjects, although without any complaint against
them. And this business was openly approved and supported by the British
Government.
A few weeks ago a loyal and brave
captain in our navy, upon his own responsibility, takes from a British
merchantman two American citizens publicly known as conspirators against the
existence of this Government. Great Britain trembles with rage, and roars out :
" It thus appears that certain individuals have been forcibly taken from on
board a British vessel, the ship of a neutral Power, while such vessel was
pursuing a lawful and innocent voyage—an act of violence which was an affront to
the British flag, and a violation of international law."
The demand is stern, but not in
terms uncourteous. As the United States neither authorized the act nor justified
the method, the certain individuals were "cheerfully liberated."
But now mark, Jew, a Daniel, a
Daniel come to judgment. If at any time hereafter, in her European or other
wars, British cruisers should stop (Next
Page)
|