CHAPTER VI.

REMINISCENCES OF ROUSSEAU.

All failures find their special apologies, and some curious ones were

originated by the admirers of McClellan to account for the singular

ineffective policy of that officer. That policy is now generally known

as the "McNapoleonic," in contradistinction to the Fabian policy, from

which it differed only in that Fabian attained valuable results, while

McClellan did not. Every thing was to have been effected by the young

Napoleon, according to his admirers, by pure, unalloyed strategy, and

the rebellion and its armies were to be crushed without bloodshed. This

great strategist, according to these authorities, was without parallel;

all the rest of the generals, like Thomas, Grant, Hooker, etc., were,

according to the McClellan theory, _only_ "fighting generals." Their

battles were mere massacres; Grant was a butcher; they quote his

Wilderness campaign even to this day to prove it, and declare that he

lost a hundred thousand men in his battles north of the James, but

never reflect that McClellan lost ninety thousand without doing any

fighting, and while retreating instead of advancing to that same river.

Sheridan, to their mind, is a mere raider, without an idea of strategy,

and Thomas, Hooker, Hancock, and all the rest, were "_only_ fighting

generals."

Belonging to this "despised" class of fighting generals, of which

Hooker and Sheridan, as I have endeavored to show, despite this

McClellan theory, are brilliant graduates, are Major Generals John

A. Logan, of Illinois, and Lovell H. Rousseau, of Kentucky. Each of

these four is endowed mentally, and constituted by nature, to be a

leader of men. Hooker and Sheridan have been confirmed generals by

education. Rousseau and Logan owe every thing to nature, and are

leaders, not generals, intuitively. The first two have been educated

at West Point into being good directors of armed battalions, but it

goes "against the grain" with either to confine himself solely to the

direction of a battle, and hence they are often seen in battle obeying

the dictates of nature, and leading charges which they should direct.

Rousseau and Logan never enjoyed the advantages of West Point, and, as

nature is unchecked in them by education, he who hunts for them on the

battle-field must look along the front line, and not with the reserves.

Neither Logan nor Rousseau would be content--it can not really be

said that they are competent--to direct a battle on a grand scale: it

would simply be an impossible task on the part of either, for they are

neither educated nor constituted naturally to be commanders, in the

technical sense of the term. They are neither strategists nor even

tacticians. Both are bold, daring, enthusiastic in spirit; one has a

commanding presence, and the other an inspiring eye, and the natural

and most effective position of each is at the head of forlorn hopes, or

leading desperate charges to successful issues.

The same contrast in person between "Fighting Joe Hooker," tall,

towering, and always graceful, and "Little Phil Sheridan," short,

quick, and rough, can be traced between Rousseau, a huge, magnificent,

ponderous, and handsome figure, and "Black Jack Logan," a somewhat

short but graceful figure, in whose forehead is set the finest pair of

eyes ever possessed by a man. The _personnel_ of these four warriors

differs very much. Hooker and Rousseau are very different types of the

tall and elegant "human form divine," and Logan and Sheridan illustrate

the graceful and the graceless in little men; but the great hearts of

each beat alike, and on the battle-field the daring and boldness of

each are equally conspicuous and effective.

Of all these heroes, however, Rousseau is most naturally a leader. His

whole career, civil and military, illustrates him as such; and only in

a country of the extent of ours, with such varied and complex interests

existing within each other, could any man attain the success with which

he has been rewarded, without at the same time gaining such fame as

would have made his name as familiar in every home as household words,

and invested him with a national reputation. It is a fact illustrative

of the vast extent of the late war, and of the existence of the various

sectional interests which were second to the great, absorbing feeling

of devotion to the whole Union, that there are thousands of people

in the East who do not know aught of the geographical position of

Western battle-fields, or the history of the military career of the

more distinguished officers of the Western armies. The case is also

reversed, and such distinguished men as Meade, Hancock, and Sickles,

and hundreds less renowned, are hardly known at the West. The people

of the East, naturally absorbed in the interests which are nearest

and dearest to them, are intimately acquainted with the history and

achievements of the chosen leaders of their sons and brothers of

the Potomac armies, but know little in detail of the leaders of the

Western armies. To the people of the East, Rosecrans is a myth of whom

they remember only that he met disaster at Chickamauga; and of Thomas

they know little more than that he was the hero of that same defeat.

They know little of McPherson, McClernand, Dodge, Blair, Oglesby,

Osterhaus, and others, save that they "were with Grant" at Vicksburg

and elsewhere. Indeed, the whole army of the West enjoy in the East

a mythical existence, and Logan and Rousseau live in our memories as

undefinedly, though as firmly, as many of the characters of romance.

Nine out of every ten who are asked to tell who and what they are will

be puzzled for a reply, and will state much that is pure romance, and

nothing illustrative of their characters. And yet no two men have been

more prominent or more popular in the armies with which they were

connected than these two rising men of the West.

General Rousseau, of whom it is proposed to speak in this chapter, is

not a strategist nor a tactician according to the rules of West Point,

in whose sciences he is uneducated save by the practical experience of

the past four years of war. He makes no pretensions to a knowledge of

engineering, or strategy, or grand tactics, is not even versed in the

details of logistics; but of all those who have won reputation as hard,

pertinacious, and dashing fighters, none more deserve their fame than

he. His battles have been brilliant, if short; desperate and bloody

contests, in which more has resulted from courage and the enthusiasm

imparted to the men than from strategy and tactics. If examination is

made into Rousseau's career, it will be found that he has ever been in

the front line of battle, not only at Buena Vista, in our miniature

contest with Mexico, at Shiloh, Perryville, and Stone River, but

in every aspect, and under all circumstances of his career, always

ahead, and leading his people in politics as in war. A self-educated

and self-made man, of strong intellectual and reasoning powers, quick

to resolve and prompt to act, he appears at all times in that noble

attitude of one who has led instead of following public sentiment. In

youth he was left the junior member of an orphaned family, of which his

habit of decision made him the head and chief dependence. Emigrating

in 1841 to Indiana, he made himself, by his talents, the leader of a

party which had never attained success before his advent, and never

won it after his retirement. His personal popularity retained him a

seat in the Senate of Indiana for six years. In the middle of the term

for which he was elected in 1848, he returned to Kentucky, and began

the practice of law at Louisville. The Democrats of the Indiana Senate

insisted he should resign, because a non-resident, but his constituents

would not allow him to retire; and Rousseau threatened in retaliation

to return to reside in Indiana and again run for the Senate. The

Democrats were afraid of this very thing, and opposition to Rousseau's

retention of his seat for the rest of the term was silenced. The

Democrats contented themselves with trying to throw ridicule on him by

calling him "the member from Louisville."

Returning to Kentucky in 1849, Rousseau was one of the few of her sons

who were prepared to second or adopt the views then agitated by Henry

Clay in regard to emancipating slaves. In 1855, when "Know-Nothingism"

had swallowed up his old party--the Whig--and held temporarily a great

majority in his city, county, and state, Rousseau became the leader of

the small minority which rejected the false doctrines of the "American"

party. His bitter denunciation of its practices, its tendencies to

mob violence, and his persistent opposition to its encroachments on

individual rights, nearly cost him his life at the hands of a mob who

attacked him while defending a German in the act of depositing his

vote. He was shot through the abdomen, and confined for two months to

his bed, but had the satisfaction to know, when well again, that the

party he had fought almost single-handed had no longer an organized

existence. He was also instrumental, in 1855, in saving two of the

Catholic churches of Louisville from destruction at the hands of a

mob of Know-Nothings, and gained in popularity with both parties,

when the passion and excitement of the time had passed away, by these

exhibitions of his great courage and sense of right and justice.

It was not merely, however, through the political excitement of the

day that Rousseau won his popularity and established his character.

For many years past--for at least two generations before the war--the

courts of Kentucky have been noted for the many important and exciting

criminal trials which have come up in them, and no bar presented finer

opportunities for a young criminal lawyer. From the time of Rousseau's

return to Kentucky in 1849 to the period when he went into the army

in 1861, no important criminal case was tried in the Kentucky courts

in which he did not figure on one side or the other. In 1843, the old

system of pleading in the common law courts of England, as it existed

before it had been clipped and modified by legislation, was in vogue

at the Indiana bar, and on his advent in that state Rousseau soon

found that no lawyer could practice respectably there without special

pleading. A lawyer who was not a special pleader would in those days

frequently find his case and himself thrown out of court, without

exactly understanding how it was done. He therefore studied special

pleading as a system in itself, taking the old English authors on the

subject, and, after a few years' hard study and practice, soon made

himself one of the best special pleaders in the West. When he returned

to Kentucky, this system, not so thoroughly in use there, gave him

several triumphs, which at once established his character and gave

him plenty of practice. As a jury lawyer Rousseau has had no rival in

his district since 1855; and the late Attorney General of the United

States, James Speed, acknowledges himself indebted to Rousseau for

several of his worst defeats before juries. Knowing the particular and

peculiar legal talents of Rousseau, the attorney general employed him

to aid in the prosecution of Jeff Davis for treason, and to assist

Hon. John H. Clifford and William M. Evarts in the important duty of

endeavoring to define treason.

There occurred in Louisville in 1857 a trial of a very remarkable

character, which illustrates in a very interesting manner Rousseau's

legal ability and his decision and daring. A family of five or six

persons, named Joyce, were murdered, and their bodies burned in their

house near the city. Suspicion fell upon some negroes on the adjoining

plantation, and they were seized by the neighbors and threatened with

hanging if they did not confess. One or two of them were hung up for

a few moments and then let down nearly exhausted, but still persisted

in declaring their innocence. Another, however, tied to a stake, and

the fagots fired around him, agreed to confess, and, to avoid death

by burning, confessed that himself and the others arrested with him

had committed the murder. The negroes--four of them, all belonging to

one man--were thrown into jail to await their trial. Their master was

satisfied that they were innocent, and determined to engage the best

available counsel for them. This was easier to propose than to do, for

so great was the excitement among the people that, extending to the

lawyers, no other counsel besides Rousseau could be retained, and he

was compelled to undertake the defense unaided. He had always been very

popular in the district in which the murder had been committed, and

many of his old friends from the neighborhood visited him, and urged

him not to sacrifice his popularity with them by defending such abased

and brutal criminals as these negroes. In vain Rousseau urged that the

greater the guilt the greater the necessity for a lawyer. His friends

could listen to no reason, and saw no justification in defending

negroes who deserved to be hung according to their own confession. When

Rousseau intimated that he did not believe the confession, and alluded

to the manner in which it had been extorted, they would go away in

disgust, and many cursed him for "a damned abolitionist."

When the trial came on, the people of the district in which the murder

had been committed crowded the court-house night and day. The sole

surviving member of the family, a young man also named Joyce, occupied

a seat within the railing of the court-room, while the crowd of his

friends were kept outside of the bar. The feeling of animosity in the

crowd against the negroes was only kept from breaking out into fury

by the certainty of their conviction and punishment by law; but fears

were justly entertained that some development of the trial might so

excite the by-standers as to cause the instantaneous hanging of the

negroes. This fear was fully justified, and an attempt to hang them was

only frustrated by the prompt action and daring of Rousseau. The sole

evidence for the prosecution was that of the negro who had confessed,

and he was put upon the stand, after the usual preliminaries, to

give his statement in open court. The negro went on, in a hesitating

manner, to give, with many contradictions, the story of how the murder

had been committed, and the house fired in several places. He stated

that, after the house was almost encircled in flames, the youngest

child of the murdered family, a little girl of two years, who had

been overlooked in the hurry of the massacre, aroused by the light,

sat up in bed and asked, calling to her mother, to know "if she was

cooking breakfast." At this part of the evidence there was a deathlike

stillness through the court-room. The crowd, horrified, seemed afraid

to draw a breath for a moment, and the negro witness himself appeared

to fully comprehend the danger of the situation and hesitated. At

last one old gentleman--I think he was one of the jury--shading his

eye with his hands as if to shut out the scene, uttered, in a pitiful

tone through his clenched teeth, the sound which I can only express by

"tut! tut! tut! tut!" The half hissing sound could be heard all over

the court-room, and as it was heard a cold shudder ran through the

crowd, followed a moment after by crimson flushes of passion on bronzed

cheeks. In the midst of the silent excitement--for it was an excitement

so profound as almost robbed men of the power of speech--young Joyce

sprang to his feet and exclaimed,

"I want all my friends who think these negroes are guilty to help me

hang them."

He was answered by a wild shout and by the click of hundreds of

pistols. As he had spoken, young Joyce drew a huge knife from a sheath

fastened to his body, and, encouraged by the answering cry of his

friends, sprang toward the negroes. As he did so, however, Rousseau,

who stood between him and the prisoners, caught him by the throat with

one hand, and with the other clasped the wrist of the arm which held

the uplifted knife. It was but the work of a moment for a powerful man

like Rousseau to thrust Joyce back again in his seat and pinion him

there while he turned and confronted the crowd, who had made a rush for

the negroes, but who were being beaten back by the sheriff and one or

two policemen. As soon as they saw the position of young Joyce, still

held in his chair by the powerful arm of Rousseau, the crowd made a

rush in that direction. Rousseau was again prompt and decisive.

"Mr. Joyce," he said, "tell your friends that while they hang the

negroes I'll attend to you."

Joyce waved his friends back with the only hand left free, and quiet

again succeeded. It is hardly probable that even this promptness would

have saved Rousseau had he not been personally popular with the crowd.

As the crowd shrank back he released Joyce and turned abruptly to the

judge, who had ordered the sheriff to summon a force of the police to

protect the prisoners, and said,

"Don't do any thing of the sort. Don't do any thing of the sort, your

honor. We can protect the prisoners and ourselves. There are enough

true men here to protect them from the fury of this young man."

"Where are your friends?" cried the still furious crowd.

"You are!" exclaimed Rousseau, turning abruptly to them--I might say on

them. And then, without a single second's hesitation, he began a brief

speech, in which he passionately urged and entreated them to aid him

in preventing Joyce, whom he characterized as "this unfortunate young

man," from committing a deed which would forever be a curse to him as

long as he had a memory of it, and which would forever disgrace them

as a law-abiding community. While he was yet speaking the crowd calmed

down, and when he had finished painting the enormity of the offense

and the remorse of the young man if he had been permitted to commit so

great a crime, they cheered him, and through the room went frequent

and repeated whispers, "He's right;" "he's right;" "Rousseau's always

right!"

The trial thenceforth proceeded in quiet until the announcement of

the verdict of "not guilty," when another terrible scene ensued; but

provision having been made for such an occurrence, the negroes were

carried off to jail for protection. The people were satisfied that the

negroes were guilty, and the verdict (obtained by Rousseau by showing

the inconsistencies of the confession and the circumstances, the

threats and the terror, under which it was extorted) only increased

their passion. The jail was surrounded, and the night after the

acquittal the negroes were taken out by the mob and hung on the trees

in the City Hall grounds. During the riot the mayor of the city, Mr.

Pilcher, while endeavoring to quiet the crowd, was struck by a missile

in the head, and died soon after from the effects of the injury

received.

This and several other trials eventually resulted in increasing

Rousseau's popularity. Two or three of his most important cases

embraced the defense of men accused and undoubtedly guilty of aiding

negroes to escape from slavery. It is hardly comprehensible that less

than a decade ago this offense was considered the most criminal act a

man could commit in Kentucky, or that men were sentenced to fifteen

years' hard labor for such offenses, or that convicts are still working

out their term for these offenses in Southern penitentiaries. To engage

in the defense of such criminals a few years ago, even in the latitude

of Louisville, was to be set down as an "abolitionist," and but few of

the Kentucky lawyers of the decade just before the war cared to bear

such a character. Rousseau, without courting the reputation, did not

fear it; and his manly bearing in all such cases, and in the political

excitement of the time, so advanced him in popular estimation that in

1860 he was elected to the State Senate of Kentucky without opposition

and as the candidate of both parties, whose only rivalry with regard

to him was as to which should first secure his acceptance of the

nomination. It was while holding this position as state senator that

Rousseau began his bold opposition to Kentucky neutrality, which

brought him so prominently before the country, and opened to him that

career in which he has won so much honor and such a high rank.

The true story of Kentucky neutrality is one of the most romantic

episodes of the war. The visionary schemers who planned the Southern

Confederacy were guilty of dozens of chimerical and fallacious schemes,

whose shallowness is now so apparent that one wonders how the Southern

people were ever deceived by them. The rebel leaders declared--and

declared it so often that they actually believed it themselves--that

the Northern people would not fight. They boasted, and boasted so

frequently that they began after a time to believe, that one Southern

man could really whip five Yankees. They deceived themselves for so

many years with the doctrine of States Rights that leaders and people

began to believe that a fraction of the body corporate could exist

without the aid of the rest, and offered to this modern and enlightened

age a national illustration of Æsop's fable of the stomach's folly.

When the schemes of the rebel leaders were culminating, and they found

that the people of the Border States were not disposed, like those of

the Cotton States, to be hurried, regardless of consequences, into a

war in which they had nothing to gain and every thing to lose, they

instituted, with a shrewdness worthy the fame of a Philadelphia

lawyer, the no less visionary schemes that there could be law without

power, and that a portion of the body, and that portion the heart,

could suspend its operations while the rest was being violently

agitated. In Tennessee, where the first-named scheme was successful,

the rebels deceived the Union men into advocating the doctrine of "no

coercion." In Kentucky, where their complete success in carrying out

the second design was frustrated only by the sagacity of Rousseau,

the rebels deceived the Unionists into advocating the doctrine of

"neutrality." Twice the people of Tennessee voted against co-operation

with the rebel states; and when the rebels again dared to test the

question at the polls, they embodied in the contest the principle

that "the general government could not coerce a sovereign state," and

into the support of this doctrine the anti-secessionists foolishly

acquiesced. The first act of the President in calling for troops to

enforce the laws was construed into coercion, and the state seceded.

Three times the State of Kentucky voted by large majorities against

secession, but the rebels did not despair, and, having failed to get

the people to secede, or to declare against the right of coercion, they

endeavored, with but partial success, to commit the authorities and the

Unionists to what was called "a strict neutrality."

The rebels in Kentucky were under the leadership of a Cassius-like

character named Simon Bolivar Buckner. He had been in the secrets and

the interests of the dis-union leaders for years before the first overt

act of secession was committed, and for three or four years previous

to 1861 had been engaged in schemes for carrying the state out of the

Union, and for furnishing troops to the rebel army that was to be. The

principal of these schemes was the organization of the very irregular

militia of the state into a strong body, known as the "State Guard."

Buckner, by every means in his reach--and his associates in treason,

who were also in power, gave him great assistance--fostered this

scheme. He created a martial spirit among the young men of Kentucky,

and by the aid of Tilghman, Hunt, Hanson, and others, who eventually

became rebel generals, extended this spirit to every part of the state.

He was a man eminently fitted for such a task, and by his duplicity and

skill undermined the faith in and love for the Union existing among

the young men who formed the State Guard. Years before the majority of

them suspected that secession would ever be attempted, they had grown

to look upon the institutions, doctrines, and even the flag of the

Union with indifference, if not contempt. The flag of Kentucky became

the flag of the guard, and Buckner even attempted to expel that of the

government from the organization. The various uniforms of the different

militia organizations of different districts were discarded, under

Buckner's orders, for a uniform of gray, which eventually proved to be

that of the rebel army. The various arms of the different companies

were discarded for weapons of a uniform calibre. The organization,

which had originally embraced only companies, was extended to divisions

and regiments, and brigades were formed and drilled in encampments as

such. In fact, nearly a year before South Carolina seceded, the State

Guard of Kentucky, with Simon Bolivar Buckner as Inspector General

commanding, was simply a body of recruits for the embryo rebel army.

It is slightly foreign to the subject, but I may as well add here the

fact I have never heard stated before, that, at the same time, and

undoubtedly for the same purpose, the martial spirit of the youth of

all the Southern States was being encouraged. Militia organization of

the various states were being thoroughly remodeled and systematized,

the best of arms obtained, uniforms of the same kind purchased, and,

to all appearances, the rebel army, as it afterward existed, was being

recruited in 1858-9 and '60.

This organization, under Buckner, existed when neutrality was

instituted, and the new doctrines gave it and the traitors who led it

additional strength, while it served to cloak their designs. Great

numbers of the leading Unionists of the state joined with the rebel

leaders in support of this doctrine, ridiculous and inconsistent as it

now appears to have been. A large majority of the people who had voted

against secession also became committed to the visionary doctrine,

until it came to be the accepted policy of the state; so that, when

Lovell Rousseau, in the Senate, in May, 1861, denounced neutrality as a

mask of the secessionists on the one hand, and a disgraceful yielding

of the Unionists on the other, he found few who agreed with him, and

less who seconded him in his avowed purpose of abolishing neutrality,

and placing the state, at all times, in her proper position as a true

member of the Union, amid the disasters of war as well as in the

prosperity of peace.

The public were not prepared to follow him, and he was forced to

accept neutrality as a compromise between union and secession, between

right and wrong, but doing so under public protest in the Senate

of the state, and declaring on every occasion which offered that it

was a debasing position, which he intended to abandon as soon as he

could induce the state to follow him. He found little support in this

honorable war upon neutrality until the secessionists, under Buckner,

went a step farther, and proposed, after hostilities had fairly begun,

to make the neutrality of Kentucky an "armed neutrality," urging that

the state troops be armed to resist encroachments from either rebel

or Union troops. In this proposition Rousseau saw an opportunity for

forcing a direct issue with the rebels, and he was quick to take

advantage of it. He saw in it actual aid to the rebellion. Against

this scheme, which proposed the appropriation of three millions of

dollars to arm the "Kentucky State Guard," he at once began a crusade

as earnest as it was untiring. He denounced the State Guard and its

leaders as secessionists and traitors, stormed at them in Senate-halls

and on the stump, and not only defeated the bill, but succeeded very

happily in dividing the State Guard into two rival organizations,

known as the "Home Guards" (Unionists) and "State Guardsmen" (rebels).

He called it at the time "separating the sheep from the goats." It

was a most fortunate achievement; for it not only saved thousands of

young men belonging to the State Guard from being unwittingly drawn

into the rebel army, but precipitated the designs of the rebels, and

hastened the defection which was inevitable. This was accomplished

under personal difficulties, opposition, and dangers, which only made

the labor more delightful to a person of Rousseau's temperament. He

delights in opposition; is in his element only when in the minority,

and strongly opposed; and his belligerent disposition led him to gladly

accept not only the numerous stump and street discussions and disputes,

but even street quarrels and fights with the secessionists. The rebel

sympathizers seldom dared attack him openly, his bold front, at all

times maintained, making them prefer to exercise their strategy and

trickery against him rather than come to open warfare. Upon him, as the

head and front of the offending party, they poured all their abuse and

vituperation, but dared to do little more.

This split in the State Guard soon proved a serious affair, and the

"defection," as the traitors called the retirement of the Union men,

became quite general. Every incident increased the feeling; every

day saw the differences of opinions and the breach grow wider. On

one occasion Buckner was reviewing the regiment of the Guard which

was stationed at Lexington, Ky. The feeling between the partisans

composing the regiment had become quite demonstrative, and on this

occasion Captain Saunders D. Bruce, a Union officer of the regiment

(subsequently colonel of the Twentieth Kentucky Infantry, now a

resident of New York, and editor of the "Field, Turf, and Farm"

newspaper), made his appearance in the line with two small United

States flags as guidons for his company. Buckner, noticing them,

approached Captain Bruce, ordered him to the front, in full view

of the regiment, explained to him that Kentucky was neutral in the

"unfortunate struggle" then going on, and directed him to replace the

guidons by flags of the state. Bruce, without replying, turned to

his company, and, as if about to obey, gave the orders, "Attention,

company;" "Shoulder arms;" "Right face;" "Forward march," and away went

the "Lexington Chasseurs" out of the line, and for that matter out of

the State Guard. No attempt was made to stop the company, or to call

Bruce to account for his "insubordination."

No sooner had the work of dividing the State Guard been thus

accomplished, than Rousseau hastened to Washington to obtain permission

from the President to raise troops in the state for the United

States service. While on the way to Washington, he had an interview

with General McClellan, then commanding the Western Department, at

Cincinnati, and found him opposed to his scheme. McClellan sent to

Washington his aid, Colonel Key (subsequently dismissed the service

for disloyal utterances), to represent Rousseau's scheme as rash and

ill-advised. At the same time, others were sent to Washington by the

"mild-mannered" Unionists to urge the President not to grant Rousseau

permission to raise troops, arguing that it would at once precipitate

the invasion of the state by the rebels. Rousseau consequently found

great difficulty in obtaining the required authority, but went at the

question boldly.

He was introduced to the President and the cabinet by Secretary Chase,

who was his energetic friend in the matter, and who subsequently

aided him materially in getting around the President's objections to

the project. Before he had finished shaking hands with the stalwart

Kentuckian and soldier, the President good-humoredly said, "Rousseau, I

want you to tell me where you got that joke about Senator Johnson, of

your state."

The "joke" alluded to was one of the neatest of Mr. Lincoln's numerous

dry humors, and was as follows: A state senator from Paducah, Ky., John

M. Johnson by name, who had made himself notorious as a secessionist,

wrote to Mr. Lincoln in May, 1861, a very solemn and emphatic protest,

in the name of the sovereign State of Kentucky, against the occupation

and fortification of Cairo, on the Illinois side of the Ohio River.

Mr. Lincoln replied in a letter written in his own peculiar vein,

apologizing for the movement, promising it should not be done again,

and declaring that if he had half suspected that Cairo, Illinois, was

in Dr. Johnson's Kentucky senatorial district, he would have thought

twice before sending troops there. Rousseau had heard the story, and

had repeated it in a speech in the Senate, and an explanation of how

it had gained publicity was what the President requested. Rousseau

explained.

"The joke was too good to keep, sir, and so Johnson told it himself."

The interview, thus auspiciously began, proved a failure. Cameron and

Chase were the only ones in the cabinet who favored the enlistment of

troops in Kentucky; and on their declaring this opinion, the President

advised them not to be too hasty, remarking,

"You know we have seen another man from Kentucky to-day."

"I don't ask you to say who that man was, Mr. President," said

Rousseau, suspecting it to have been Colonel Key, and anxious to

forestall him, as he had declared his intention to oppose the scheme;

"but Colonel Key is not a Kentuckian, and does not know or comprehend

our people. If you want troops in my state, I can and will raise

them; and I think it is your duty to our people in Kentucky to begin

the work of enlistment there, for if the rebels raise troops and we do

not, why, naturally, many young men will be led away from duty by their

sympathies for kindred and associates; while if you begin the work of

enlistment, the loyal youth will have something to guide and direct

them in the right course."

In this way Rousseau represented to the President what he had done

in the way of defeating the schemes of the rebels to arm themselves

at the expense of Kentucky, and in dividing the state militia into

two classes. He had inspired the loyal Home Guards with an _esprit de

corps_, which would save the greater part of them from any connection

with the secessionists; but he represented also that there were

thousands of young men in the state who had not decided to follow

either the rebel or loyal banner, and that, knowing this, the rebels

were recruiting in every part of the state. Thousands of the young and

thoughtless would be, and hundreds were being, drawn into the rebel

army by this means, and he argued that the government ought to recruit

in this neutral state as an encouragement to the young men to join the

loyal army.

But the President took time to consider, and Rousseau withdrew. The

next day Mr. Chase drew up in regular form the authority Rousseau

desired, and Cameron signed it and gave him a commission as colonel,

the rank dating from June 15th, 1861. Both Chase and Cameron promised

to endeavor to obtain the President's sanction of the act, that

Rousseau might feel perfectly free to go to work. Rousseau was granted

another interview with the President, who, after some farther

conversation on the subject, indorsed Rousseau's original application

to be permitted to raise troops as follows:

"When Judge Pirtle, James Guthrie, George D. Prentice, Harney, the

Speeds, and the Ballards shall think it proper to raise troops for the

United States service in Kentucky, Lovell H. Rousseau is authorized to

do so."

This he handed to Rousseau and asked, "Will that do?"

Rousseau read it carefully, and then replied, somewhat disappointed,

"No, Mr. President, that won't do."

"Why not, why not, Rousseau? These men are good Union men."

"Yes, sir, good men and loyal, Mr. Lincoln, but nearly all of them

differ with me on this subject, are committed to the abominable

doctrine of neutrality, and it would be too late when the majority of

them conclude that it would be proper to raise troops. Then I fear the

state will have seceded. I had hoped, sir, that what the War Department

has done in my case would be acceptable to you."

"What has Cameron done?" asked the President.

"He has, by the advice of Mr. Chase, authorized me to raise two

regiments in Kentucky."

"Oh!" said Mr. Lincoln, after reading the documents, "if the War

Department has acted in the matter, I have nothing to say in

opposition."

Rousseau, fearful that too much might be said, at once arose, shook the

President's hand, and vanished.

On his return to Kentucky, Rousseau, in deference to the President's

wishes, as implied in the indorsement of his paper, consulted James

Speed, and through him called a meeting of the gentlemen named, and

also of others in the city of Louisville and interior counties of the

state. Much to the surprise of Mr. Speed, only himself, his brother

Joshua, Bland and John P. Ballard, Samuel Lusk, Morgan Vance, and John

H. Ward, a minority of the meeting, hardly respectable in numbers, were

in favor of the project. Pirtle, Guthrie, Prentice, Harney, Bramlette,

Boyle, and others, opposed it strongly, and in the end adopted

resolutions to the effect that the time had not come; that it was then

impolitic, unwise, and improper to enlist troops for the United States

service in Kentucky; but adding that when the time did arrive, they all

wished Rousseau, in whom they expressed every confidence, to head the

movement. Rousseau had made up his mind that such would be the result

of their deliberations (from which he had retired before the final

action), and had decided upon his course; so that when Joshua Speed

next day handed him the resolutions, Rousseau was neither surprised nor

chagrined, but very much disgusted. A few minutes after leaving Mr.

Speed on this occasion, he met Bramlette, subsequently governor of the

state, and that gentleman began to defend the majority of the meeting

of the night before for their action in the matter, when Rousseau

interrupted him by asking if any thing had been said in opposition to

the enlistment of troops by him in other states. Bramlette replied in

the negative, when the two parted, and Rousseau immediately began the

enlistment of Kentuckians, but established his camp and swore in his

recruits in Indiana. Being compelled to do this was very humiliating

to Rousseau, but it did not dishearten him, and he went at his work

energetically. There were greater obstacles in his way at that time

than the mere opposition of men as to time and place. When he began

the work of enlistment, the government had no credit in Kentucky, and

the expenses of enlisting and feeding his two thousand recruits were

defrayed by himself and a gentleman living in Indiana named Samuel

Patterson, whose name, for the sake of his devoted loyalty, deserves

to go down to history. Despite these obstacles, despite the fact that

every paper in the state ridiculed the project and laughed at the

projector, nevertheless Rousseau's recruits--the rebels called them

"Rousseau's ragamuffins"--increased in numbers and grew in discipline

until they became formidable, and eventually saved the city from rebel

occupation.

From the time that loyal recruiting began, the issue between unionism

and secession became direct, and neutrality was practically a dead

letter. The mask of the rebels was stripped off, and the people were

no longer deceived by the schemes of the secessionists. Throughout

Kentucky, and particularly in Louisville, where the issue was

most saliently presented, singular scenes were the result of the

situation; and from this time until the occupation of the state by

the contending armies, Louisville was in a curious condition. Rebel

and Union recruiting stations were found in the same streets, and

presenting the same appearance, save that the rebels dared not plant

their flag, and displayed only that of Kentucky. Squads of Union and

rebel recruits daily passed each other on the streets _en route_ to

their camps, and saluted each other with groans, and hisses, and

ridicule, but attempted no violence. Day was made noisy with the

huzzas of the rebels "for Jeff. Davis and the Confederacy," and night

made hideous by rebel songs from rebel throats that had not the lame

excuse of being husky with liquor. Many of their songs were set to

very beautiful airs, and often large crowds of enthusiastic young men

would gather in the principal drinking saloons of the city and join

in these choruses, producing a very beautiful melody, but uttering

devilish poor sentiments. Frequently these songs were inspired by the

appearance of some well-known Union man, around whom they would gather,

like the witches in Macbeth, and at whom they sung their songs as if in

defiance. These scenes and songs often led to dangerous encounters and

riotous proceedings. The division of sentiment created by this state of

affairs entered into families, and extended even to the congregations

of churches. I remember one sad instance, in the family of Col. Henry

Clay, son of the sage of Ashland, and the one who fell so gloriously

at Buena Vista. In 1861, his two sons, Thomas and Henry Clay, were

living at Louisville. One of them, Thomas, became fascinated with the

manner and imbued with the ideas of Buckner, and followed him to the

Confederacy, and, as it happened, to ruin and to the grave. Henry, the

younger brother, a more thoughtful, quiet young man, less enthusiastic,

but more persistent than Thomas, joined the Union army, and served,

until his early death, on the staff of Gen. Richard W. Johnson. One of

the most amusing instances of the effects produced by the prevailing

sentiments occurred in one of the churches at Louisville, where, on

the occasion of a prayer-meeting, a notorious secessionist and a

prominent Union man had what was called at the time "a praying match."

During the prayer-meeting the minister asked the secession brother

to pray, which he did, asking, among other things, the "removal of

our evil rulers." He did not explain whom he meant by "evil rulers,"

but the congregation knew; so, not waiting to be called on, the Union

brother requested the congregation to join him in prayer, and prayed

for "the rulers set over us, and the removal from his place of power

of Kentucky's traitorous governor." This was a positive defiance; the

rebelliously-inclined brother felt it his duty to reply, and did so

in a regular secession prayer, asking the blessing of heaven on "the

Confederate government, rulers, and people," and "confusion upon the

councils of the Northern abolitionists and vandals." To close the bout

and end the affray of words, the Unionist replied in a regular true

blue Union prayer, asking that God would bless and prosper the Union

cause, smile upon her arms, lead her soldiers to triumph, smite the

traitors, and bring back to their allegiance our misguided brethren of

the South; and capped the climax which he had reached by giving out the

hymn beginning

"Oh, conquer this rebellious will."

The secessionist did not reply, and thus the Unionist won his first

victory. He was a graduate of West Point, but I do not know that what

he learned there aided him much in his praying match.

The excitement of this conflict of ideas and passions reached its

culminating point at Louisville on the day following the battle of

Bull Run, and produced one of the most remarkable scenes I have ever

witnessed. The first telegraphic news of the battle, published on the

morning after the engagement, was of a highly favorable character,

and the Unionists of Louisville ate their breakfasts and digested the

good news of the first great victory with the firm conviction that

Mr. Seward was right, and that the war would be over in ninety days,

if not sooner. That morning every thing was _couleur de rose_ to even

less sanguine natures than Mr. Seward. About noon of the same day

the bad news began to arrive, but the people knew nothing definite

regarding the final result of the battle until about three o'clock

P.M., when the afternoon editions of the papers made their appearance.

Then the news of the rebel victory spread like wildfire, and in half

an hour--at the time, it seemed as if it were instantaneous--the

whole city was a perfect pandemonium. The rebel flag, which had until

then shrunk from the light, flaunted from buildings and dwellings,

from carriage windows in the hands of women, on omnibuses, and carts,

and trucks, and wagons in the hands of men wild with excitement.

Men on horseback, with the rebel flag flying, dashed wildly through

the principal streets, crying with husky voices, "Hurrah for Jeff.

Davis." The streets were alive with drunken and noisy rebels, who

hooted at Unionists, cheered secessionists, embraced each other, and

yelled themselves hoarse in bravos for "Jafe Davis." For nearly two

hours the rebels had full possession of the city, and crowded about

their ringleader, a notorious fellow named John Tompkins, with every

expression of their delight. It was decided, and Tompkins announced his

intention, to raise a flag-staff and display the rebel flag from the

roof of the Courier newspaper office, and to aid him in this the rebels

gathered around him. But it was destined that this feat should not be

accomplished. One of the policemen of the city, named Green, having

received orders to suppress all noisy demonstrations such as Tompkins

was guilty of in hallooing for Davis and the Confederacy, approached

him and ordered him to desist. The only reply was a repetition of the

offense. Green again repeated his order, explaining that these were

his instructions, when Tompkins drew a pistol, and, retreating a few

steps, fired at the policeman. Simultaneously Green had also retreated

a few steps, drawing his pistol at the same time, and, in answer to the

other's ineffective fire, shot the rioter directly through the heart,

killing him instantly. Never was a riot so cheaply suppressed nor so

instantaneously. In ten minutes after the death of the ringleader the

rioters dispersed, rebel flags disappeared, the huzzas for Davis were

hushed: not a rebel remained on the streets, not a flag was to be seen

unfurled, not a huzza was to be heard, and Louisville slept sounder

that night than she had slept for months.

The secessionists of Louisville did not, however, entirely desist from

their efforts to aid the rebels, but on the 17th of August they called

a meeting of sympathy with the South. At night, in pursuance of the

call, they early mustered their strength at the court-house. Their

leaders were on the stand, which was handsomely decorated with white or

"peace" flags, awaiting the filling of the hall by their friends, and

somewhat anxious at the appearance of numerous well-known Unionists, or

"abolitionists," as they were then called by the rebel sympathizers.

Every thing was in readiness to open the peace meeting, and James

Trabue, the principal secession leader, had risen to call the assembly

to order, when James S. Speed, late United States Attorney General,

quietly walked upon the stand and approached the desk prepared for the

chairman. He called the attention of the house by rapping on the desk

with his cane, knocked aside with an air of contempt the "peace" flags

on either side of him, and was about to speak, when he was interrupted

by the clamor of the rebel leaders, who insisted that the house was

theirs, and that the meeting was to be addressed by them. Amid the

excitement, and above the clamor which ensued, was heard the stentorian

voice of Rousseau, proposing Judge Speed as president of the meeting.

He immediately put the question to a vote. A deafening "Ay!" drowned

the "Noes" of the rebels, and, perfectly calm and cool, Mr. Speed

reached forward, removed the white flags from the stand, and unfurled

two small star-spangled banners in their stead. In an instant, as if by

preconcerted arrangement, from different parts of the hall, large and

small United States flags were unfurled, and ten minutes afterward the

secessionists had left the hall, amid the groans of the loyal citizens.

Judges Speed and Harlan, and Messrs. Wolfe, Rousseau, and others,

followed in strong Union anti-neutral speeches, and the meeting adopted

several very strong resolutions. Next to Rousseau's establishment of

the Union recruiting camp opposite Louisville, this affair was the

first determined step taken by the Unionists of Kentucky to keep the

state in the Union.

Meantime Rousseau had quietly, but rapidly, filled up his two regiments

as authorized, and they were sworn into the service. Fremont was then

in want of troops in Missouri, and sent his aid, Richard Corwin, of

Ohio, to inspect Rousseau's force, and, if found available for field

service, to make application at Washington for it. An intimation

came to Rousseau that he would be sent to Missouri (he was growing

anxious to go to any department in which active work would afford him

opportunities to win promotion and reputation), and he determined to

invade Kentucky soil at least once before going, and so announced his

intention of parading his corps through the streets of Louisville. A

delegation of rebel and neutral citizens waited on him, and begged him

to forbear his intention, representing that the indignant citizens

would rise up in their anger and attack his soldiers.

"By Heaven!" exclaimed Rousseau, "the d--d scoundrels shall have enough

of it, then, before I am done with them."

The march of the brigade through the city was undisturbed, and it

returned to camp without having received any more deadly volley than a

few curses from the neutrals and secessionists. One of the effects of

the parade, and the announcement of the intention to send Rousseau to

Missouri, was the presentation of an appeal to the President, signed

by the principal of the Union men, protesting against the removal

of Rousseau from the vicinity of the city. A copy of this protest

was shown by a friend to Colonel Rousseau. When he read it he grew

furiously enraged, cursing the protesting individuals as a set of

marplots who had opposed him at every turn, and he immediately took

steps to break up camp and be on the march to Missouri before the

countermanding order could come. He was stopped in the midst of his

preparations, however, and ordered by President Lincoln to remain in

camp at "Camp Joe Holt," the name given to his encampment, in honor of

the Secretary of War, Colonel Joseph Holt, now Judge Advocate General

of the Army. It was a fortunate order, that, for the fair "City of the

Falls."

Buckner had not been idle all this time, and recruiting for "Camp

Boone," the rebel Kentucky encampment, had proceeded really under

his directions, but ostensibly in opposition to his wishes; and a

few thousand Kentuckians, and a large force of Tennesseeans and

other Southern troops, had gathered upon the southern border of the

state for the purpose of seizing Louisville and other places, and

establishing a defensive line along the Ohio River. Had that project

not been frustrated by the position and force of Rousseau, the fate

of the Confederacy would not have been sealed as soon as it was. The

line of the Ohio, occupied in force by the rebels, would have been

very difficult to break. If the Ohio River had been blockaded by rebel

guns, the Union forces along it would have been fed and moved with

great difficulty. Subsequently to the frustration of this project by

Rousseau, Kentucky furnished ninety thousand men to the Union army,

few or none of which would have been raised with the state under rebel

occupation, and numbers of whom would have been conscripted into the

rebel army. These would have been some of the results of the occupation

of the Ohio, and serious disasters they would have proved to the Union

cause. In the prosecution of this scheme, Buckner labored with a zeal

that one could confidently expect from a man of his Cassius-like

proportions. In the prosecution of the plan he went to Washington,

represented himself as a Union man, and obtained from Generals Scott

and McDowell much valuable information. When about to return to

Kentucky he called upon General McDowell, and, in parting with him,

placed both hands upon McDowell's shoulders, looked him steadily in the

eye, and said,

"Mack, I am going back to Kentucky to raise troops for my country."

McDowell wished him "God speed" in the undertaking, and they parted.

Buckner returned to Louisville, halted but a day, and hastened

southward to the rebel "Camp Boone" to doff his garb of neutrality for

the Confederate gray. A change can not be said to have been necessary,

for, as the rebels practiced neutrality in Kentucky, it was _bona fide_

rebellion, and wore the same outward garb. Three nights after the

countermanding of the order to Rousseau to march to Missouri, Buckner

invaded Kentucky and occupied Bowling Green. On the next day, September

17, 1861, he advanced with a large force upon Louisville, and Rousseau,

the rejected, with the "Home Guards," which he had preserved from the

defection which seized the State Guard, were the only defenders of

the city to be found. On the night of September 17, 1861, Rousseau

crossed the Ohio River, and marched through the uproarious streets of

the excited and endangered city to meet the invader. With this little

band he penetrated forty miles into the interior of the state, hourly

expecting to meet the enemy, and intending to fight him whenever and

wherever he did meet him. He made the passage of Rolling Fork River,

and occupied the heights of Muldraugh's Hills, where Buckner was

reported to be, but found the rebel had retired to Green River.

Ever since this memorable era, Kentucky has persisted in showing

herself on every important occasion as belonging to the neuter gender

of states, and her unenviable position on several questions of national

interest within the last five or six years has all been owing to

the influence of the same class of politicians as those who opposed

action in 1861. A few independent, energetic men, with opinions of

their own, and a spirit of progress consonant with that of the Union,

like Rousseau, Cyrus H. Burnham, and one or two others, have hardly

proven the leaven to the corrupt whole. Many of those who were neutral

when the success of secession was doubtful, when the constitutional

amendment was pending, would now like to present a different record;

and one or two of this class have written me, since the publication

of this sketch in "Harper's Magazine," to prove that they were not

neutrals in 1861. I have not considered their claims worth notice.

There are any number of men in Kentucky who would now like to have

it appear that they stood with Rousseau in 1861, but it would be

falsifying history to say so. I have written here the true story of

Kentucky neutrality, and do not propose to alter it. The sponsor of

that neutrality--the editor of the Louisville Journal--has corroborated

this story as I tell it. On the evening of the 17th of June, 1862,

exactly one year after having rejected Rousseau, and driven him to

encamp his troops in another state, the Union men of Louisville

welcomed him from the battle-field of Shiloh at a grand banquet, at

which George D. Prentice, the editor of the Journal, thus narrated the

trials and efforts of Rousseau, and condemned, as mistaken, himself and

his neutral comrades who had opposed Rousseau:

"We have come together," he said, "to honor a man, a patriot, a hero,

whom we can scarcely honor too much. A great debt is due to General

Rousseau from our city, from our state, from our nation. At the hands

of Louisville he deserves a civic wreath and a marble statue. He has

stood between her and desolation. We all know what bitter hostilities

on the one side, and what deep apprehensions and misgivings on the

other, he had to contend against when he undertook the bold enterprise

of raising a brigade to resist the rebellion. The best patriots among

us doubted, and hesitated, and faltered, and attempted to divert him

from his purpose, and he was even constrained by their appeals to go

beyond the river, and erect upon the soil of another state the glorious

standard around which he invoked Kentuckians to rally. Denounced,

maligned, and cursed by all the rebels, he received, at best, but a

cold, reluctant, and timid support from the masses of our loyal men.

When he came, one day, from his encampment with two full and splendid

regiments to pass a single hour in our city, the city of his home and

his love, he marched his gleaming columns through our streets amid

an almost deathless stillness, his enemies awed to silence by the

appalling spectacle before them, and his friends scarcely deeming it

prudent to give expression to the enthusiasm secretly swelling in their

bosoms. It must have been with a keen sense of disappointment, if not

of injustice and ingratitude, that he returned to the Indiana shore.

But ere long there came to us all a night of mystery and terror.

Suddenly the electric telegraph between our city and Nashville ceased

to give forth its signs, and the railroad train, anxiously awaited for

hours, came not. In every loyal soul there was a deep presentiment of

impending calamity. It pervaded and burdened the atmosphere. Brave men

gazed into each other's faces and whispered their fears. Then it was

that all loyal eyes and hearts turned instantly to General Rousseau and

his brigade. A signal apprised him of apprehended danger, and in an

incredibly brief space of time, in less than two hours, he crossed the

Ohio, and passed with his brigade so noiselessly through our streets,

that even our citizens, living within thirty yards of his route, heard

him not, and before midnight he was far on his way to meet the expected

invaders. He took his position between Louisville and that rebel army

which would have seized and despoiled her. He was her shield and her

sword. He was her salvation. For this, among other things, we tender

him our gratitude to-night; for this, we tender him our gratitude

forever."

This episode of neutrality must always remain the most remarkable event

of Rousseau's career. Very few lives find two such opportunities, and

half the credit due Rousseau has been lost to him by the fact that

it occurred amid a revolution which saw many more startling events.

Only the Union people of the interior of Kentucky seemed to appreciate

the magnitude of his service, and on every occasion expressed, in

their strange way, their admiration of and gratitude to the man. The

Army of the Ohio, under Sherman and Buell, was known to them only as

"Rousseau's Army." They never talked and hardly ever heard of Sherman,

or Buell, or Thomas; and Rousseau could never make them clearly

understand that he was not the supreme power and highest authority. His

popularity among the Union people of the state had a rather pleasing

illustration in October, 1862, when he was on the march to Perryville.

At Maxville the mountaineers from the district gathered around his

quarters in great numbers, and almost every family of the many which

visited the general had with it an infant named after him, either

"Lovell" or "Rousseau." When the first infant was presented, instead

of blessing it in the usual patriarchal style, the general picked out

one from among a number of silver half dollars he had and gave it to

the child's mother. Several of the other infant Rousseaus received

other half dollars, until the general began to suspect that the infants

would be produced as long as the money lasted, and so he announced a

suspension of specie payment. The children, however, continued to make

their appearance, until it became apparent that the name was never

likely to die out among the mountaineers. Rousseau used to tell with

great glee how two blind and deaf brothers presented themselves at his

quarters, and said that they "had walked five miles to _see_ Rousseau

and _hear_ him talk." The demonstrations of the poor mountaineers of

Chaplin Hills, as the region was called, greatly affected the general,

and, as a singular mode of expressing his gratification, he always

insisted on calling the battle of Perryville, which he fought next day

in the vicinity of Maxville, "the battle of Chaplin Hills."

Although Rousseau's military career was of the greatest credit to

him, nothing of it reflects such honor on the soldier, or illustrates

so nobly the character of the man, as did his conduct during the

operations which I have sketched. Still, his military career won for

him as great popularity with the army as his action in destroying

neutrality had done with the people. His principal achievements were

at Shiloh, Perryville, Stone River, the pursuit and defeat of Wheeler

in Tennessee, the defense of Fortress Rosecrans, and in the admirably

conducted and highly successful raid into Alabama. At Shiloh his post

was subordinate, and he will not occupy the foreground of the pictures

which history will paint of that field, though he won recognition from

Sherman, McClernand, and Grant for his gallantry. At Perryville the

glory is all his own, while no story of Stone River can be truthfully

written that does not give him much of the credit for that very

desperate "rough-and-tumble" fight, where, holding the reserve line,

he sent word to Rosecrans that, "though the right wing was gone," he

"would not budge a step--not a d--d inch, sir."

Without having the education, Rousseau had in him the military instinct

which lights the fire and gives inspiration to others, and his every

battle displays him in this light. During the engagement at Perryville

he displayed great courage, and inspired his men with the same spirit.

He laid no claim to tactical ability, and did not endeavor to manœuvre

his troops, but by his presence with them kept them well together, and

retained his organization during the whole day, although withstanding

with a single division the repeated attacks of Cheatham's, Buckner's,

and Anderson's divisions of Bragg's army, under the latter's personal

direction. Perhaps like a reckless general, but certainly like a

brave man, he was always with the front line, and as he rode among

the men encouraging them, they hailed him with enthusiastic cheers.

At one time during the battle, seeing preparations making on the part

of the rebels to repeat an attack on Harris's brigade, by which they

had just been repulsed, Rousseau dashed up to the commanding officer

of the Second Ohio, Major Anson McCook, who was on foot fighting his

regiment, and was warning him of the approaching attack, when the men

of the regiment, with shouts and hurrahs, gathered around him, hugging

his legs and grasping his hands, throwing their caps in the air, and

swearing to die with him. It was one of the most singular scenes ever

witnessed on a battle-field, and was subsequently alluded to by rebel

officers who had witnessed it, and who stated to our prisoners taken

during the day that they frequently saw and recognized Rousseau riding

up and down the line during the battle.

Rousseau was much predisposed, by reason of his mental organization, to

excitability under fire, but it did not detract from his administrative

power. He was as clearly administrative in danger as the more

phlegmatic Thomas or Grant, but in a different way. Rousseau made

very little, if any, use of his aids. If he had an order to give, he

galloped across the field and gave it himself. If he had an advance

to order, it was done by leading the troops in person. During this

battle of Perryville, General McCook sent me to inform Rousseau, who

was on the extreme left of the line, that his right was being turned

and was falling back. Rousseau galloped to the endangered part of the

line and rallied the troops in retreat, beating and cursing them into

line, and actually breaking his sword over the head of one demoralized

individual, who was thus brought to a stand. The enemy, however,

continued to advance, and Rousseau was compelled to look around for

farther assistance. Seeing Captain Charles O. Loomis's battery in

position, in reserve, commanding a little valley into which the enemy

had deployed, and through which they were rapidly advancing, he rode up

to Captain Loomis and ordered him to open with canister. Loomis had not

perceived the advancing enemy, and explained to Rousseau that he had

been ordered into reserve by General McCook, and told to reserve his

fire for close work.

"Close work!" exclaimed Rousseau; "what the devil do you call that,

Captain Loomis?"

He pointed down the valley, and Loomis saw in an instant the

advancing foe and his own danger. Loomis was a minute-man--one of the

quickest-witted and brightest-eyed men I ever met--and in a second

his six guns were pouring a destructive cross-fire into the rebel

ranks that at once played havoc with the enemy and encouraged our own

forces. The enemy thus advancing had flanked Lytle's brigade, and it

was now falling back toward Loomis's position, but Rousseau's personal

direction and appearance (Lytle had been left for dead on the field),

and the opening guns of Loomis, soon reassured the men in retreat, and

the line re-formed. About the same time Sheridan's brigade was ordered

in on the left by General Buell, and the enemy were speedily and

bloodily repulsed.

His conduct in this engagement gained Rousseau his promotion to a major

generalcy. The commission read, "promoted for distinguished gallantry,"

and was the first of the numerous promotions for gallantry issued

during the war for the Union. His great popularity with the troops may

be said to have dated from this day; and it grew still greater after

the battle of Stone River, where, though commanding the reserves, he

was among the first engaged. The love of the men became so intense

that it broke out on every occasion. On the march, in camp, on parade,

their admiration grew demonstrative, and cheers greeted him wherever he

went. During the winter of 1862-'63, while the troops were in camp at

Murfreesborough, great numbers of rabbits were frequently frightened

from their burrows, when an entire regiment would start in pursuit with

noisy yells. The demonstrations of admiration for Rousseau and these

noisy pursuits of the rabbits became so frequent that it was a common

remark, whenever the cheering of the soldiers was heard, that they were

either after "Rousseau or a rabbit."

I have said that Rousseau was clearly administrative under all

circumstances. He was once, and once only, known to betray any

considerable nervousness under fire. It was during a brief engagement

fought at Chehaw Station, when on his famous Alabama raid. He had sent

forward Colonel Thomas Harrison, of the Eighth Indiana Cavalry (better

known as the Thirty-ninth Mounted Infantry), to destroy a part of the

railroad in his rear--the expedition then being on its return, having

performed its principal purpose. Colonel Harrison unexpectedly became

briskly engaged with the rebel forces under General James H. Clanton.

Rousseau was some distance in the rear of the fight, and the extent of

the engagement was only known to him by the amount of the firing and

the number of wounded men brought to the rear. One of his aids--Captain

Elkin--observed Rousseau's nervousness gradually increasing, as evinced

by his twirling his long black mustache, and repeating aloud, but

evidently communing with himself,

"I shouldn't have got into this affair. I'm very much afraid this isn't

judicious."

Elkin penetrated through the swamps to Harrison's front, and returned

with the information that the enemy were being driven, and that the

result was not at all doubtful.

"There's no reason," he said, "to be uneasy about Harrison, general."

"Uneasy about Harrison!" exclaimed the general. "Tom Harrison can whip

all the militia in Alabama. But what shall I do with my poor wounded

boys? We are a thousand miles from home, and no way to carry them

comfortably?"

He had to leave his wounded, and he took rather odd but effective means

to have them well cared for. Having succeeded in capturing a company

of Montgomery Cadets, the members of which were all young boys of less

than seventeen years of age, he had them drawn up near his quarters,

and released them unconditionally, with this suggestion:

"Boys," he said, "go home and tell your parents that Rousseau does not

war on women and children; and, mark you! do _you_ see that they don't

make war on wounded prisoners."

The Cadets were modest enough to be glad to be considered and laughed

at as boys on condition of their release; and on returning home showed

their gratitude to Rousseau by taking as good care of his wounded as

they were permitted to do.

When Sherman sent Rousseau on this raid to the rear of Hood's army (it

was Joe Johnston's when Rousseau started), he did not anticipate his

early return, nor expect him and his force to escape capture. When

Rousseau reported to him on his return from the raid, Sherman was

as much surprised as delighted, He made Rousseau detail the work of

destruction which he had accomplished. After he had done so, Sherman

said,

"That's well done, Rousseau, well done; but I didn't expect to see you

back."

"Why not?" asked Rousseau, somewhat surprised.

"I expected you to tear up the road, but I thought they would gobble

you."

"You are a pretty fellow," said Rousseau, laughingly, "to send me off

on such a trip."

"You proposed it yourself," returned Sherman; "besides, I knew they

wouldn't hurt you, and I thought you would pay for yourself."

On the occasion of the passage of Rolling Fork of Salt river there

occurred an incident which is illustrative of the view which I have

taken of the character of Rousseau as a natural-born leader. When

giving the command to cross the river, which was then flood-high--it

was a very cold morning besides--Rousseau rose in his saddle, and

crying out to his men, "Follow me, boys! I expect no soldier to

undergo any hardship that I will not share!" he sprang from his horse,

entered the ford, and waded to the other shore. His men followed with

cheers and bravos, and the brigade followed, soon disappearing on the

wood-lined road which leads to the summit of Muldraugh's Hills.

I have not space here to enter as I could wish into the details of

Rousseau's military career. He must always remain a representative of

one of the peculiar phases of the late war, and every event I could

give will in the future be valuable; but at this time it is impossible

to allude farther to his military career. He left the army soon after

the battle of Nashville (during which engagement he held the left

position of Thomas's line at Fortress Rosecrans, near Murfreesborough),

and returned to Louisville at the request of his friends, to contest

with Robert Mallory, Esq., the latter's place in Congress. That

congressional race was nothing more nor less than a crusade against

the remnant of slavery left by the war in Kentucky, probably as a

punishment for her attempted crime of neutrality. It was another

brilliant triumph won by the exercise of the same decisive action which

has always characterized him. The Convention which nominated Rousseau

was, in political parlance, merely a "pocket convention," and its

nominee found, on leaving the military field to examine the political

course, that he had really no party to back him. He had to build up a

party, and without hesitation he decided that it should be an avowedly

abolition party in principle and purpose. He began by announcing that

he favored the adoption by the State of Kentucky of the constitutional

amendment abolishing slavery, and denounced slavery as unjust, unwise,

and impolitic--a curse and blight on the state. When he first made the

speech in which he declared this, the people wildly stared at him, and

when he had done they pronounced him insane. They were so completely

blinded by their prejudices that they could or would not see the truth

of his arguments, and at last he resorted to ridicule with better

effect.

"I wish to say again," he said, on one occasion, "that slavery, thank

God, is dead. Its own friends have destroyed it. They placed it at

the foundation of Jeff Davis's government, and invited, nay, forced

us to assail it. They forced the whole liberal world to make war upon

it, and presented to us the alternative to destroy slavery or see

our government perish. Our duty was a plain one, to kill slavery and

rebellion with it, and let the government live. Both of these things

are accomplished facts, and in the whole Christian world there remain

but three slave states--_Cuba, Brazil, and Kentucky_."

This climax, so ridiculous to every Kentuckian with any state pride

in his soul, was hailed wherever heard with shouts of laughter; and

Rousseau once remarked that it was a curious fact that the laughter

generally began with the returned rebel soldiers, who possess less

pro-slavery prejudices than the rebels who stayed at home. Rousseau

generally followed up this effective ridicule with what he called

his "special argument against slavery." "We in Kentucky," he would

say, "are in the habit of arguing the slavery question more from the

economical than the moral stand-point;" and he would then go on to

show how the institution had curtailed the prosperity of Kentucky and

of the South. "But," he would add, "I wish to add a little argument of

my own. I want to tell you why slavery will not pay. It is because we

have a God in heaven, who has arranged the affairs of men in such a way

that wrong and injustice won't pay, and don't pay. Has not the South

lost more in the destruction of houses, and fences, and railroads, and

crops, and other property, and expenditures for munitions of war, etc.,

in the last four years of a rebellion, carried on for the benefit of

slavery, than it wrung out of the sweat of the slave in the forty years

preceding? Add to this the half a million of her brave sons who died

or were crippled in battle and in camp, half the entire arms-bearing

population of the rebel states, and tell me if slavery was a paying

institution to them? And do you think it can be restored now and not

lead to a bloodier and fiercer war? And why is this? Simply because God

in his wisdom has arranged the world so that in the long-run a system

of wrong will not and can not pay."

After four weeks active canvassing of the district Rousseau was

returned to Congress by a heavy majority, although the opposition

pro-slavery party employed a former United States officer to make the

race in order to split the Union or amendment vote. The scheme failed.

Rousseau's personal popularity, and his positive, determined, and

patriotic stand, carried him successfully through, and he was shortly

after nominated for the Senate, which position he will doubtless

attain. In these crusades against neutrality and slavery Rousseau has

established a character for firmness and persistence which have made

him a most popular leader and the first man of his state; and he is

already accepted as the true successor in principles, purposes, and

patriotism of the late great leader in Kentucky, Henry Clay.

The very close intimacy existing between Sherman and Rousseau is

a fine illustration of the rule that opposite natures are often

kindred spirits. Two natures in greater contrast can hardly be

conceived. Rousseau has none of Sherman's nervousness of thought or

action, while Sherman has nothing of the excitability of Rousseau

under fire. Rousseau is personally a most conspicuous--perhaps _the_

most conspicuous officer in the United States army, while Sherman

is among the most commonplace in appearance. Yet their friendship,

which began early in the war, is hardly the less remarkable than that

existing between Grant and Sherman, and is much more demonstrative,

because Rousseau and Sherman are of affectionate and demonstrative

dispositions, while Grant is rather cold and formal. Sherman was very

fond of quoting Rousseau's speech about him, delivered at the banquet

to the latter at Louisville in 1862. Rousseau had then said of Sherman:

"Of all the men I ever saw, he is the most untiring, vigilant, and

patient. No man that ever lived could surprise him. His enemies say

he was surprised at Shiloh. I tell you no. He was not surprised, nor

whipped, for he fights by the week. Devoid of ambition, incapable of

envy, he is brave, gallant, and just. At Shiloh his old legion met him

just as the battle was ended, and at the sight of him, placing their

hats upon their bayonets, gave him three cheers. It was a touching and

fitting compliment to the gallant chieftain. I am thankful for this

occasion to do justice to a brave, honest, and knightly gentleman."

When Sherman first read this speech, immediately after the battle, when

he was still laboring under the insanity charge, he jumped from his

seat, ran around his quarters from tent to tent, reading the speech to

all his staff, and swearing that there was "one sensible man in the

country who understood him."

As may be rightly suspected from this article, Rousseau is rather a

hero of mine. He has many of the most admirable qualities of man; and

in long years of intercourse with him I saw a great deal to admire,

and but little to condemn. I defy any man with an honest love of bold,

albeit rugged honesty, to know the man and not to admire him. He was

loyal, true, and affectionate to the back-bone. He stuck to his friends

to the last, and only the firmer in adversity. The strong pressure

of his mighty hand gave you no fear of what the clenched fist might

do, but inspired confidence. He was, perhaps, too unsuspicious, and

too hopeful and buoyant: these were the faults of his character, if

faults it had, for knaves frequently imposed on him in the guise of

honest poverty, and his hopeful nature sometimes led him to promise

his friends more than he had the power, but not more than he had the

disposition to perform.

Rousseau is fully six feet two, perhaps three inches high, and

otherwise Herculean in build and strength. When mounted--he always

rides great, ponderous, and invariably blooded horses--he displays

to great advantage, and no more graceful and impressive figure can

be conceived than Rousseau mounted. He was born a gentleman, and his

elegant manners are as natural as his bravery and high sense of honor

are intuitive.

Personal Recollections of Distinguished Generals · 第 6 / 8 章