Civil War Overview
Civil War 1861
Civil War 1862
Civil War 1863
Civil War 1864
Civil War 1865
Civil War Battles
Robert E. Lee
Civil War Medicine
Civil War Links
Civil War Art
Republic of Texas
Civil War Gifts
Robert E. Lee Portrait
WHEN a hero goes
Unto his last repose,
When earth's trump of fame shall
waken him no more; When in the heavenly land
Another soul doth stand
Who perished for a nation ere he
reached the shore; Whose eyes should sorrow dim?
Say, who should mourn for him?
Mourn for the traitor—mourn
When honor is forsworn,
When the base wretch who sells
his land for gold
Stands up unblushingly
And boosts his perfidy,
Then, then, O patriots! let your
grief be told!
But when God's soldier yieldeth
up his breath,
Oh, mourn ye not for him! It is
Where is the flag he bore?
Where is the sword he wore?
Lay one upon his breast, the
other spread Around his wasted form,
That perished in the storm,
And name him reverently whom ye
call dead. Name him not silently
Shout all, exultingly!
"Lander! Lander! awake!
Thy heavenly armor take,
And gird upon thy thigh again thy
Beside the great white throne,
Where sits the Blessed One,
Stand thou forth in the army of
Soldier of Christ, arise!
And join Him in the skies!"
THE Publishers of Harper's Weekly
congratulate their readers upon the appearance in last Number of the first part
of a new serial tale entitled "NO NAME," by WILKIE COLLINS, Esq., author of "The
Woman in White." Its opening gives promise of the same wonderful power and
matchless dramatic skill which entranced the readers of "The Woman in White." It
is seldom that a periodical is enabled to furnish its subscribers with such a
series of attractive tales as have appeared consecutively for the past two years
in Harper's Weekly, from the pens of Dickens, Wilkie Collins, and
Bulwer. The commencement of this Tale affords a
good opportunity for parties residing in the country to form clubs, and obtain
Harper's Weekly at the reduced price of subscription.
The crisis which the war has
reached imparts fresh interest to the war-pictures which are appearing in every
number of Harper's Weekly. We have now regular Artist Correspondents, to wit:
MR. A. R. WAUD, with the army of
the Potomac; MR. ALEXANDER SIMPLOT, with
Gen. Grant's army;
MR. HENRY MOSLER, with
Gen. Buell's army;
MR. THEO. R. Davis, with Gen.
Sherman's army; MR. ANGELO WISER, with
Gen. Burnside's army;
besides a large number of
occasional and volunteer correspondents in the Army and Navy at various points.
These gentlemen will furnish us faithful sketches of every battle which takes
place, and every other event of interest, which will be reproduced in our pages
in the best style. People who do not see Harper's Weekly will have but a limited
comprehension of the momentous events which are occurring.
The circulation of Harper's
Weekly being now over 120,000 copies each week, it is the best advertising
medium in the country.
In reply to numerous inquiries we
would say, that, as Harper's Weekly is electrotyped, we can at any time supply
the Numbers for the past year, or from the commencement of the paper (January 3,
1857), if desired.
Persons wishing to complete their
files can have the missing Numbers furnished by remitting direct to the
To Postmasters and others getting
up clubs of ten subscribers we will send an extra copy gratis. To those who
prefer them we will send the Numbers of the past year as premium for the club,
instead of those for the current Volume.
SATURDAY, MARCH 22, 1862.
THE PROGRESS OF EVENTS.
AT last events are moving with
breathless rapidity. The fall of
Leesburg is followed by the fall of
the abandonment of the rebel batteries on the Potomac is no sooner announced
than we hear of the capture of Brunswick and Fernandina; the evacuation of
Columbus is succeeded by the evacuation of Manassas, now held by Union troops.
One by one every rebel strong-hold is forced or turned.
From the far West, where our
Curtis is driving the tatterdemalions of McIntosh and
Price before him,
to the shore of the Atlantic, whose bosom now reflects the
stars and stripes,
and no other flag, from North Edisto to Key West, the soldiers and sailors of
the Union are pressing onward with steady tread, and crushing rebellion as they
go. There is not a point in the line of three thousand miles at which the rebels
can make a stand.
Last week we announced the
commencement of the work of reconstruction in Tennessee by the appointment of
Andrew Johnson as Military Governor. As we write, men are discussing whether
John Minor Botts should not be Governor of Virginia under the President. In a
week or two Governor Harris of Tennessee and Governor Letcher of Virginia will
be as thoroughly wiped out as Governor Claib. Jackson of Missouri and the rebel
Governor of Kentucky, whose name we have forgotten. Before the anniversary of
bombardment of Fort Sumter we may hear of "reconstruction" in Louisiana,
Arkansas, and North Carolina. And what is done is done well.
is-No Step Backward!
The night was very dark and very
gloomy; but the dawn is bright indeed, and surpassingly glorious.
ABOLITION IN HIGH PLACES.
THE President last week sent in
to Congress a Message recommending the passage of the following or a similar
Resolved, That the United States
ought to co-operate with any State which may adopt a gradual abolishment of
slavery, giving to such State pecuniary aid, to be used by such State in its
discretion to compensate for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by
such change of system.
This Message has been applauded
with equal fervor by the opponents and by the supporters of slavery. It is
equally approved by the Herald and by the Tribune, by the Evening Post and by
the Journal of Commerce.
The old friends of slavery
commend it because it recognizes the right of the Southern slave-owners to their
slave property, and the exclusive right of the slave States to regulate or
abolish the institution within their limits.
The friends of freedom rejoice at
it because it places the United States Government squarely on the record as
preferring freedom to slavery, in the abstract, and as looking forward, in some
future time, and in some yet undetermined way, to the
abolition of slavery, and
the emancipation of the negro race.
In fact, the difference between
the two great parties in the North has been narrowed down by the Message to an
almost imperceptible line. So far as can be judged by the public press, there is
no party in the North which sets its face positively against the abolition of
slavery, at some future time, and under some possible conditions: and, on the
other hand, there is no evidence to show that any substantial body of men in any
section of the North is opposed to the recognition of slavery as an existing and
lawful institution at the South, for the purpose of compassing its abolition. We
are all brought by this common-sense Message upon the same platform. The
Fort Sumter effaced three-fourths of our political lines:
the President's Message has wiped out the remaining fourth.
It is very instructive to read
articles in the Herald recommending the Border States to
abolish slavery, and
articles in the Journal of Commerce commending the abstract righteousness of
emancipation, and admitting that the writers only differ with Garrison and
Wendell Phillips in respect of way, time, and detail. Such indications are
cheering proofs that even in our time the world moves. Lord Cockburn, in his
charming Memorials, tells us that in his youth a man who professed Whig
principles was a pariah in that Edinburgh society which now regards with
contemptuous curiosity the few remaining adherents of principles not Whig. The
Cockburn of our country and our time will record, for the admiration of
posterity, that he has seen infuriated New York mobs, encouraged by New York
merchants, assail and silence orators whose only crime was that they were
opposed to an institution which, a few months afterward, had not a single
supporter left in New York.
The Message has achieved another
useful result. It has placed the North on a platform of square antagonism to the
rebels. Henceforth, no compromise will be possible which obliges the North to
recognize the abstract justice or policy of slavery, or to forego the desire
that it may some day be abolished. Henceforth, the Northern people may be
considered a unit against slavery in principle, and only differing among
themselves with regard to the time and way of abolition. When we remember Mr.
Adams's proposition of last winter, and how narrowly it escaped being accepted
by the rebels, we can measure the stride which the civilization of the North has
made during the past twelve months.
THE LATE PRESIDENT FELTON.
IT is seldom that a public man
passes away with such strong claims upon the grateful remembrance of the
community as the late President of Harvard College. In the best sense of the
term, he was peculiarly a man of the people. Born of a quiet New England family,
whose modest industry was their only title to distinction, he was early inured
to habits of self-reliance and active effort. He was never dandled on the lap of
luxury into the pride of exclusive privileges. His native love of learning
prompted him to seek a liberal education; but the golden prize did not drop into
his hands spontaneously; it was the fruit only of strenuous toil and self-denial
on his part. From the first he was obliged to contribute to his own support
while pursuing the usual studies of his class. But in Spite of every drawback he
attained a high position as a scholar, which he never lost. Not content with the
prescribed range of college study, he was ambitious of higher attainments, and
marked out a path for himself which few could follow. While yet an undergraduate
he became familiar with the principles of physical science, and commenced the
study of many languages, in which he subsequently became a master. From the day
of leaving college his course was onward and upward. He devoted himself to the
drudgery of teaching, if it must so be called, with a peculiar zest; his success
in appealing to the best faculties of the young was strongly marked; while the
original productions of his pen evinced at once the brilliancy of his intellect
and the soundness of his
cultivation. At the age of twenty-two he was appointed tutor in Harvard College;
in three years more he became Professor of Greek; and before he was twenty-seven
years old he succeeded to the important chair of Greek literature, which had
been made famous by the splendid erudition of Mr. Edward Everett, and the
classical enthusiasm of Professor Popkin, whose towering figure seemed
irradiated by the spirit of Homer and Sophocles. Following such eminent
examples, Professor Felton gave a powerful impulse to the study of Greek
letters, and became himself certainly one of the best, if not the very best
scholar in that department of whom the country can boast. But he never yielded
to the indulgences of a recluse student. He had nothing of the arrogance or the
exclusiveness of literature. His interest in public affairs was constant and
vivid. He was not, indeed, an active politician, but no man watched more closely
the course of our statesmen, or was more ardent in the support of the principles
which he deemed essential to the national welfare. Without being a partisan, he
was the strenuous advocate of a conservative policy, and conscientiously avoided
the extremes to which he might have been tempted by private friendship or
personal relations with their champions. The cause of general education
commanded his warmest sympathies. He never made his position an excuse for
declining an active part in popular instruction. As an earnest friend of common
schools, as a public lecturer, and a literary counselor, he exerted a wide
influence, and invariably challenged the confidence of the community by his
wisdom and zeal. He possessed an uncommonly genial temperament; entirely unknown
to him were the formality and reserve of the scholar. He had the keenest sense
of the ludicrous aspects of social life; and his presence was often indicated by
his hearty ringing laugh before you fairly recognized the sunshine of his
benignant face. On the resignation of Dr. Walker as President of Harvard College
in 1860, Professor Felton was universally looked to as his fittest successor;
and his career, after his accession to that high office, amply rewarded the
hopes that were formed, but which are now forever quenched by his lamented
departure in the glorious ripeness of his manhood and the fullness of his fame.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
A YEAR ago there were a great
many men who said, and a great many more who felt, "Oh for an Andrew Jackson!"
It was thought that he would have laid a heavy hand upon the rebellion, and have
ended it by a vigorous blow. That thought was the natural result of impatience
and ignorance. Alexander the Great, Hannibal, and Napoleon, all combined in one
great military genius, could not have done the work which it was supposed
Jackson would have done. The world could be easily moved at any time if you
could only get a place to stand upon.
Besides, while all praise that is
his due will be gladly granted to Andrew Jackson, it is a great mistake to
suppose that he suppressed a rebellion. He compromised with it—he did not
conquer it. He suppressed the symptom, but encouraged the disease. If Jackson
had finally and absolutely shot away treason and punished traitors in 1833,
there would have been no rebellion in 1861. Jackson was neither a philosopher
nor a statesman; he was a soldier. But to destroy this rebellion requires more
than military skill. Shot and shell may subdue the form of the symptom, but what
will annihilate the disease?
It is fortunate for the country
and for the world that at this moment it is a wise and calm civilian, and not a
soldier, who is our Chief Magistrate. And it is a peculiar satisfaction that,
throughout the astonishing events of the last year, this journal has not
faltered in its faith in the ability of the President, or in its support of the
patriotic policy of his Administration. The country rocked with civil war. Every
citizen and editor had his special nostrum for peace. No man was ever called to
a task so difficult as the President's. When he left Springfield to undertake
it, he said that no President since Washington had a work so weighty. But
Washington's work as Chief Magistrate was not greater than
Lincoln's. And thus
far, at least, History will record that it has been wrought with similar wisdom.
Throughout the wild uproar of the
year the President of the United States has held upon his way undisturbed.
Openly slandered by his political enemies before the inauguration, he has been
stealthily slandered by many of his political friends since. Because he and the
Secretary of State, although known to be friendly to a peaceful annihilation of
the political supremacy of the slaveholding interest in the Government, did not
upon their accession to power advocate an immediate emancipation, they have been
pursued with a bitter suspicion of moral cowardice, or pricked with the sharp
taunt of treachery to their cause, or insulted by the imputation of incapacity.
Meanwhile the policy of the
President slowly vindicates itself. The end and the method proposed by him were
clearly stated in two sentences of his December Message. First, "The Union must
be preserved, and hence all indispensable means must be employed;" and, second,
the sentence that immediately follows it: "We should not be in haste to
determine that radical and extreme measures, which may reach the loyal as well
as the disloyal, are indispensable." To these he now adds a third in his Message
of March 6: "A practical reacknowledgment of the National authority would render
the war unnecessary, and it would at once cease. If, however, resistance
continues, the war must also continue, and it is impossible to foresee all the
incidents which may attend, and all the ruin that may follow it. Such as may
seem indispensable, or may obviously promise great efficiency
toward ending the struggle, must
and will come."
These words are in perfect
harmony with every serious word of
Mr. Lincoln's political life. His
convictions, evidently, are as profound as ever. Certainly no man who said, as
he did, on the 17th June, 1858, "I believe this Government can not endure
permanently half slave and half free," has found any reason in the events of the
last four years to change his opinion. But Mr. Lincoln and his friends have
never desired that the disease should be removed by the sword. He and they do
not desire it now. But he and they and all good patriots are resolved that the
disease shall not conquer. If the sword must end slavery, it will end it. And it
is for the rebellion to decide.
JOHN BRIGHT VERSUS JOHN BULL.
IT is not surprising that the
name of John Bright, whenever it was mentioned at the great meeting at the
Cooper Institute on Washington's birthday, was hailed with a tumult of applause.
Throughout our difficulties of the last year John Bright has been one of the few
men in England who truly saw and frankly stated the scope of this rebellion.
When Great Britain flamed into rage at the Trent affair, John Bright laid his
finger upon the arm of John Bull, and begged that testy and foolish old person
not to make himself ridiculous by losing his temper in advance of the occasion,
but to wait and hear whether an insult was intended, or whether it was an
accident. An accident it proved to be, and the reparation was made which mutual
honor demanded; and it is surprising that when Mr. Bright called the affair an
accident, and was oh, oh'd from the benches of the Government party in
Parliament, he had not covered Lord Palmerston with confusion by stating the
notorious fact that at the very time when, as Palmerston had just said, the
British Government had every reason to fear war with America, that Government
knew officially that war would not spring out of the difficulty.
John Bright is the present
representative of that strong common sense and intelligence which has always
saved John Bull against the encroachment of privilege. He stands as the Barons
stood against King John. It is his spirit, and the nerve, and eloquence, and
sagacity of men like him, that perpetually wrests Magna Charta from the itching
fingers of despotic power. A representative of the great middle class, the
industrial interest of the kingdom, he stands for the peaceful development of
popular liberty under law, on the one hand against the aristocracy and on the
other against the mob which is at once the consequence and the tool of an
aristocracy. In a country so Hindoobound with caste as England, of course such a
man stands much alone, for even those who theoretically and politically
sympathize with him, may be otherwise alienated by inexorable social prejudice.
During this war of ours his have
been the only speeches in England which show a truly comprehensive and sagacious
statesmanship. Lord John's, or the Earl Russell's, speeches have been quibbles
and subterfuges. Lord Palmerston's have been the bland plausibilities which he
always palms off upon the British public as practical common-sense views.
Politically, the Earl Russell figures as the artful Dodger, and the spruce,
complaisant Palmerston as Charley Bates. Unquestionably the conviction which
John Bright so amply and pointedly expresses in his speeches, whether
acknowledged by the Government or not, is the conviction which has withheld that
Government from blundering into war with this country. The Earls Russell and
Palmerston have "forborne" in Parliament: the London Times and the other
journals, with a very few noble exceptions, have "forborne" in their daily
leaders: private British correspondence and conversation have "forborne," and
all in the same way, by torturing the language for insult and invective, by an
absurdly haughty assumption of the destruction of this Government as already
accomplished, and by an affected impartiality of belligerent concessions.
John Bright sums it all up in one
ringing sentence: "The course taken by the Government, not in the demand, not in
the dispatch, not in the courteous way in which Lord Lyons managed every thing
be had to do with regard to it [hear, hear], but in the instantaneous and
alarming menaces of war, followed and accompanied every day by incessant and
offensive charges from the press supposed directly to represent the Government—I
say that that tends to leave on the minds of even the most moderate men in
America the feeling that England in the hour of her trial has not treated them
in the magnanimous and friendly manner which they had a right to expect from
There is a moral in the position
of John Bright which we shall all do well to take to heart. We respect and love
him to-day more than any Englishman, and yet we feel that every drop of his
blood and particle of his flesh is British. But he dares to expose and criticise
the faults of England. Justice, he knows, like charity begins at home. He has
not the least respect for venerable error, and crime, although hoary with
dignity and respectable with law, is simply criminal in his eyes.
How such a member of the Imperial
Parliament would astonish some Republican Senators of the United States !
THE text is Conservatism, of
which, brethren, there are two kinds. Let us suppose the case.
A rattlesnake is in your nursery,
and trying to dart at your children.
Conservatism number one rushes at
the reptile; seizes it; if it has lost a fang, puts it back in its place; if it
has dropped any venom, restores it for future emergencies; then shuts the
rattlesnake into the closet, saying, "Go, and sting no more."
Conservatism number two rushes at
the snake, grinds its head beneath its iron heel, and flings it dead from the
Here are two kinds of
conservatism. Number one conserves rattlesnakes; number two conserves (Next