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
ONE MAN KILLED TODAY.
THERE are tears and sobs iu the
little brown house On the hill-side slope to-day;
Though the sunlight gleams on the
outer world There the clouds drift cold and gray.
"Only one man killed," so the
"Our loss was trifling: we
triumphed," 'twas said—
And only here in the home on the
Did the words breathe aught but
of triumph still.
They had watched and waited, had
prayed and wept, Those loving hearts by the cottage hearth,
And the hope was strong that
their darling would walk Unscathed and safe 'mid the battle's wrath.
They would gladly have shielded
his life from ill,
But their trust was all in their
They had felt so sure His love
The pride of their hearts from a
Now His wisdom had ordered what
most they feared,
And their hearts are crushed by
the news to-day,
"Only one man killed"—so the
But for them life's beauty has
And all the glory and triumph
Seems a matter small to the woe
blood-stained, That in sorrowful strokes, like a tolling bell,
Throbs "Only one man killed," as
a funeral knell.
"Only one man killed"—so we read
And rejoice that the loss on our
side was small; Forgetting meanwhile that some loving heart
Felt all the force of that
"Only one man killed," comes
again and again:
One hero more 'mong the martyred
"Only one man killed," carries
sorrow for life
To those whose darlings fall in
STILL RIVER, MASS. A. M. L.
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1863.
BY the time this paper reaches
Charleston may, perhaps, attract more attention than any other
Vicksburg. For it is suspected that the rebels of South
Carolina are going to have another opportunity of proving their devotion to the
cause which has plunged this continent into the present bloody war.
At the time we write the great
Southern expedition which has been assembling at Beaufort, North Carolina, must
have started, and an army of 35,000 or 40,000 men, with a fleet of thirty to
forty armed vessels, must be approaching—if they have not already reached—their
destination. Of course no one knows whither they are bound. It may be
Wilmington, or it may be Savannah, and it may be Charleston. Among the "sporting
fraternity" odds are offered on Charleston; perhaps because there prevails so
intense a wish to see that accursed city punished for the woes it has brought
upon the country. The possession of Charleston would not only gratify a very
general and natural desire on the part of the North, but the moral effect of its
capture would be immense, and in a material point of view it would be important,
as it would put an end to most of the contraband trade which is now carried on
between the South and Nassau.
Charleston certainly seems
anxious to invite attack. On 31st ult., as is stated in dispatches published on
next page, the rebels, under Ingraham, made a very vigorous sortie from the
port, and, if their accounts are to be believed, sunk one of our gun-boats—the
Mercedita—and drove off the others. The rebel reporters and officers commanding
assert that the blockade of the port was actually raised; though on the
following day "at least twenty blockaders were off the bar again." Whether, in
view of this latter fact, Charleston will gain much by the official proclamation
of the reopening of the port seems at least doubtful. But there can be no doubt
but the occurrence of the 31st, however the results may have been exaggerated or
misrepresented by the rebels, will convince
Admiral Dupont and
the necessity of no longer delaying the long-threatened attack on the hot-bed of
treason. It is in our power to take and destroy Charleston: we hope to be able
to announce, before the end of the month, that we have done so.
THE FRENCH EMPEROR'S POLICY IN
A DISPATCH from the Emperor
Napoleon to General Forey, commanding the French army in Mexico, has revived the
alarms of those well-meaning but ignorant people who have all along expected
France to interfere in our civil war, has prompted a Senator to move resolutions
of inquiry into the purposes of the French, and has furnished the secession
sympathizers of the North with fresh capital wherewith to distract the Northern
mind and shake Northern credit. The papers are full of diatribes against Louis
Napoleon, who is represented as being on the point of recognizing a confederacy
based on the corner-stone of African slavery—an institution execrated by the
French, and of menacing the North, the hereditary friend of France, her best
customer, and her most reliable ally in the event of trouble between France and
We trust that the subscribers and
readers of Harper's Weekly need no instruction from us to enable them to form a
correct judgment on the subject.
The people of France, whose organ
and executive is the Emperor Napoleon, are very different in temper and
disposition from the English. Frenchmen, as a rule, never barter principle for
gain. An Englishman will sell his most cherished dogma for an advance of one per
cent. on his goods; they are, as Napoleon truly said, a nation of shop-keepers.
Frenchmen, on the contrary, though flighty and idealists, are never sordid.
History exhibits them constantly as sacrificing material gain for the sake of
ideal notions. They will spend a thousand millions to free Italy, or establish
liberal principles in France or Germany. But there is no instance on record
where a single well-established principle of French policy was sacrificed, or
even suspended for a time, for the sake of benefiting the operatives of Lyons,
Rouen, St. Etienne, or Paris. This distinction between them and their British
neighbors must ever be borne in mind by students of modern French policy.
England, after emancipating the slaves in the British West Indies, and claiming
the first rank among opponents of human slavery throughout the world, no sooner
saw a prospect of a fine market for British manufactures in our Southern Slave
States than she shifted her ground on the slave question, and the leading organs
of British opinion devoted their energies to a justification of the system of
slavery. Not so France. French writers have criticised our military operations
with a severity which perhaps was not undeserved; but no Frenchman of any
standing, no man of character or influence in Parisian society, has been base
enough to depart from the traditionary anti-slavery principles of French policy,
for the sake of securing the prospect of a market for French silks, wines,
gloves, and jewelry in the kingdom of
Vigorous efforts have been made
by the British press to represent the Emperor Napoleon as the chief enemy of the
restoration of the Union. These efforts have been seconded by correspondents of
and contributors to American journals, who had doubtless excellent reasons for
espousing the Anglo-Rebel view of the subject. Letter - writers from Paris for
British and American journals have repeated at weekly or monthly intervals
stereotyped lies about the Emperor's hostility to the United States; the more
base and detestable their forgeries, the more they have persisted in them. The
agent of the Associated Press of New York has done his best to give circulation
to these British impositions upon American credulity. And now, in the face of
all this lying, what are the facts?
For twelve mouths after the
outbreak of the war the Emperor was never even suspected of being unfriendly to
us. He was induced by the English—as we learn from the published volume of
diplomatic correspondence—to concede to the rebels belligerent rights; when he
discovered the construction which we placed upon the act, he caused Mr. Dayton
to be told that he would have recalled it, but for his conviction that it would
operate to the disadvantage of the insurgents and to our gain. A few months ago,
he was informed by the individual who unfortunately represents him at
Washington, that we were ready for a compromise or foreign intervention, and,
with prompt candor, he tendered it. Accident prevented the measure from being
consummated; but the official organ of the French Government has stated
distinctly that it was not designed to operate against the United States in any
way, or in favor of the rebels, and the highest official authority in France has
borne testimony to the Emperor's desire that the Republic should be reunited
under one Government.
By a trick similar to that which
led the Emperor to concede belligerent rights to the rebels, the British
Government beguiled him into the war against Mexico. It was a gigantic fraud.
Napoleon was led to believe that the Mexicans would gladly welcome his troops as
deliverers and restorers of peace and order. The British and Spaniards, who knew
better, made their exit before the drama began. The French, less tricky and more
consistent, having commenced the campaign, persevered in it. It has proved a
blunder. The Mexicans have forgotten their internal feuds to unite against the
common enemy; and it will need great outlay of money, men, and skill to
extricate General Forey's army from its present perplexing predicament. From
first to last the Emperor has been endeavoring to disabuse the Mexicans of the
idea that he was their national enemy; and in his last letter to General Forey
he endeavors to rouse their pride as a race, by talking about preserving the
equilibrium between the Latin and the Anglo-Saxon races on this continent. Every
one sees easily that this is mere clap-trap, and that the real object of the
Emperor is not conquest, or hostility to the United States, but simply the
conclusion of such a treaty with Mexico as may restore the old friendly
relations between that republic and the French empire, and enable the French to
withdraw from Mexico without sacrifice of honor.
In one word, the Emperor has said
and done nothing as yet which fairly justifies the imputation that he is hostile
to us or to the Union. On the contrary, he has done and said much which implies
a friendly feeling and a desire to see the Union re-established. He has the
misfortune of being represented at
a man who is an ardent
secessionist, and takes no pains to conceal it. And, like all powerful monarchs,
he has at his court at the Tuileries men of base origin and corrupt instincts,
who have proved readily accessible to the rebel emissaries, and have earned
their hire by abusing us in semi-official journals. But no man, with all the
facts before him, can honestly declare that the Emperor has been our enemy.
FOOTING UP AN ACCOUNT.
WHAT is the net result of the
"Conservative" movement thus far? Its programme was a more constitutional method
of suppressing the rebellion than that of the Administration. Are not the
following points already established?
That the rebels hailed the
movement with delight, reprinting the "Conservative" speeches, as indicative of
returning reason on the part of the Yankees? What do they mean by "returning
That the rebels delighted in the
"Conservative" triumphs at the polls?
That the election of
"Conservative" Senators in Illinois, Indiana, and Pennsylvania is greeted by the
Richmond Examiner as proof that the "Lincoln tyranny"—by which is meant the
United States Government—can not prosecute the war with the support of a
That the scenes in the
Pennsylvania Legislature and in that of New York, which point straight at
anarchy, are the action of the party professedly "Conservative?"
That the tone of the
"Conservative" papers, in speaking of the duty of the soldiers in regard to the
war order of the President concerning slavery, tends directly, and is intended;
to excite mutiny and disaffection, and consequent disaster?
That, in fine, the "Conservative"
reaction has organized an opposition to the Government, which takes the ground
that its policy in the war is unconstitutional, and that good citizens ought not
to support it; that upon that ground it has drawn party lines, so that at this
moment the Government has lost much of that unity of sentiment without which
success is delayed and endangered?
These things are known. There is
but one answer. It is that the Government is no longer waging the war for the
restoration of the Union, but for what is called Abolition. But the answer says
what is not true. The President, as Commander-in-chief, has decreed the
liberation of slaves, by the same power and for the same purpose that he decrees
the movement of the army. Slavery exists among the rebels. It is a source of
peculiar strength to them. By the plain command of common sense the
Commander-in-chief is bound to weaken them in every warlike way he can. If the
Constitution suffers him to deprive the rebel of the use of his arms, legs, or
life, it certainly authorizes him to take from the same rebel the use of his
slave. And, in aiming to do this, he must do it in the way most certain to
secure the object. If there are loyal men among the holders, the President must
assume their assent to his exercising a necessary and lawful power according to
To say, therefore, that because
of the proclamation the war is diverted from its object, is as foolish and
untrue as to say that it is diverted because of the desolation of Virginia. The
object of the war is the maintenance of the Government—and the desolation and
emancipation are inevitable incidents of thorough warlike operations. The object
of the "conservative reaction" is the restoration of a party to power, and to
effect that object it exposes the Government to destruction.
If a man likes the supremacy of
that party more than the supremacy of the Government—or if he hates the
Republicans more than he hates the rebels, then under the name of "conservatism"
he will continue to favor the course which Vallandigham,
Fernando Wood, and
Jefferson Davis applaud. But if he loves his country more than a party, order
more than anarchy, peace more than war, he will support a Government which does
not believe any thing to be unconstitutional which is necessary to save the
Constitution; nor any thing truly dangerous to the liberty of any citizen which
is essential to the guarantee of the liberty of all the people.
MR. WEED'S RETIREMENT.
MR. THURLOW WEED has retired from
active public life. By his withdrawal one of the shrewdest political managers in
our history disappears. His valedictory address to his friends in the columns of
the Evening Journal, which he has edited for thirty-two years, is simple,
genial, and pathetic. He retires at a moment of the greatest public peril,
because he no longer agrees with the party which he has so long served, and
because he does not wish to embarrass by constant opposition the policy of an
Administration which he helped bring into power. Yet he makes no new party ties,
nor is it likely he ever will. His old political friends are still "my party;"
and while he can not think them wise, he wishes them God-speed as he says
The simplicity and frankness of
his valedictory disarm criticism. His retirement establishes at least the
earnest sincerity of his later course. That that course tended to the very
result which he so stringently deprecated seems clear enough to us, but does not
affect our estimate of his honest conviction. Party vehemence has pursued him
with bitter calumny. But he will doubtless see in that very vehemence a tribute
to the power he was felt to wield. When the threat of rebellion ripened into
war, it was not strange that men of the same general political sympathy differed
upon points of policy. The same principles of human nature that create parties
divide them; and each division believes that its own policy is essential to
is a pity, but it is unavoidable,
that personal accusation and acerbity should mingle in discussions which might
be entirely impersonal. Mr. Weed has not been spared, neither has he spared, in
such acrimonious contests. His retirement is therefore the more magnanimous.
With winning personal traits that
no party asperity denies—with comfort secured by long service in his
profession—with the agreeable consciousness, to a man ambitious of the substance
rather than the show of power, that he has played a more influential part in the
political history of this State during the last dozen years than any other
man—with the kindest regard of his associates and friends —Mr. Weed turns away
from the great arena of public affairs. But, like Sir William Temple, who
retired to his garden and library in the dark days of the revolutionary period
in England, but came forth again when summoned by his country, so Mr. Weed holds
himself ready to serve, when he can, his country and his friends, while, "so far
as all things personal are concerned," his work is done.
THE INEVITABLE QUESTION.
THE question that every body has
seen from the beginning of the war must be answered has at last been asked.
Shall there be colored soldiers? It is a question upon which there need be no
loss of temper. If a man says that he is willing to see the Government lost
rather than maintained by such allies, he must answer the question whether,
then, he cares enough for the Government to fight for it. He must then answer
the other question, why it is not as shameful to save the Government by bribing
men by enormous bounties to be soldiers, while men who have the most vital
interest in the success of the war are ready to fight. If saving the Government
is a matter of pride and not of principle, and the most earnest conviction of
the necessity of its salvation, that pride may be gratified in any whimsical
way. It may be more agreeable to it to have the work done by grenadiers six feet
high, whose regulation weight shall be a hundred and ninety pounds. Or it may
gratify pride to have it accomplished only by men whose ancestors came over two
generations since. Or by the Anglo-Saxon blood merely; or by the Celtic, or by
the Teutonic, or by volunteers who fight for the love of it, and who scorn
Indeed, if you make your point of
honor any thing short of the salvation of the Government and nation, by all fair
warlike means and at all costs, you have already virtually relinquished the
The Government is waging a fierce
war with a wicked rebellion. It wants all the soldiers it can muster. If it
rejects a good fighting man because he is a Spaniard, or a Scotchman, or a
Frenchman, or an Irishman, it is guilty of utter folly. If it rejects a good
fighter because he has every reason to fight to the death rather than
surrender—because victory is a palpable, tangible, incalculable advantage to
him—because he is native to the soil and acclimated to the region of the war,
and because he has proved himself the most faithful ally, and is by habit and
training the most docile of soldiers, then the Government is mad.
Now the people are really the
Government, and, right or wrong, you say that they are bitterly prejudiced
against the colored ally. Yes; but suppose that party-leaders stopped appealing
to that prejudice, and that a colored regiment should rout in the field a South
Carolina regiment—just by way of poetic justice. Do you think that, if the
people is really earnest in its resolution to destroy the rebellion, its
prejudice would stand against that? Not unless patriotism and honor are extinct
in its heart.
The common sense of the matter is
very simple. For many years it has been considered an unanswerable argument in
the great question to say: "It may be unjust to deprive these men of personal
liberty for no crime but color, but we must take things as they are. What can we
do with them if they are emancipated? Passion is a stronger impulse with a
slaveholder than interest; and as he now gratifies his anger by maiming his
property, he would then indulge his fury by starving rather than turning to hire
his late slave. What will you do with the facts of the case?"
Granting that the facts are as
stated, we have reached a point in the rebellion when, as an expedient of war,
that is made possible which was not so in peace.
Emancipation is declared. The
exigency demands and therefore justifies it. The late slaves know that our lines
are the lines of liberty. Thus hundreds of thousands of able-bodied men are made
dependent upon the guidance of the Government, which requires, and will long
require, a large military force. The men so dependent are trained to obedience.
They are by nature docile and brave. They have every thing to fight for, and
they know it. The war has the same desperate earnestness to them that it has to
their late masters. One side fights for property: the other for life and
Is not the solution providential?
Do we absolutely insist upon rejecting such soldiers because of some absurd
theory of occiput and shin-bones? They are not of the same race. True; and
neither are the French and the Irish; but we do not reject them; we are heartily
grateful to get them. Here is a letter, lately in our possession, front one of
the privates in the first South Carolina Volunteers. He was lately a slave. The
letter is written in a shapely hand. Scarcely a word is misspelled. It is an
intelligent and self-respecting man who writes, and he says that of course he
and his friends must fight, because there is no hope for them if taken.
Let it be left to men like
Vallandigliam and Cox and Wickliffe to envenom a prejudice that a nation may be
"A TALK WITH MY PUPILS."
IN many a happy household all
over the land one of the clearest and pleasantest points of memory is the quiet
little town of Lenox among the solemn Berkshire hills. It was there for many
years that Mrs. Charles Sedgwick had her school for girls; and now that she has
relinquished its (Next Page)