NORTH AND WEST.
From Niagara we determined to proceed north-west; as far to the
north-west as we could go with any reasonable hope of finding
American citizens in a state of political civilization, and perhaps
guided also in some measure by our hopes as to hotel accommodation.
Looking to these two matters we resolved to get across to the
Mississippi, and to go up that river as far as the town of St. Paul
and the falls of St. Anthony, which are some twelve miles above the
town; then to descend the river as far as the States of Iowa on
the west and Illinois on the east; and to return eastwards through
Chicago and the large cities on the southern shores of Lake Erie,
from whence we would go across to Albany, the capital of New York
State, and down the Hudson to New York, the capital of the Western
world. For such a journey, in which scenery was one great object,
we were rather late, as we did not leave Niagara till the 10th of
October; but though the winters are extremely cold through all this
portion of the American continent--15, 20, and even 25 degrees below
zero being an ordinary state of the atmosphere in latitudes equal
to those of Florence, Nice, and Turin--nevertheless the autumns are
mild, the noon day being always warm, and the colours of the foliage
are then in all their glory. I was also very anxious to ascertain,
if it might be in my power to do so, with what spirit or true feeling
as to the matter, the work of recruiting for the now enormous army
of the States was going on in those remote regions. That men should
be on fire in Boston and New York, in Philadelphia, and along the
borders of secession, I could understand. I could understand also
that they should be on fire throughout the cotton, sugar, and rice
plantations of the South. But I could hardly understand that this
political fervour should have communicated itself to the far-off
farmers who had thinly spread themselves over the enormous
wheat-growing districts of the North-West. St. Paul, the capital
of Minnesota, is 900 miles directly north of St. Louis, the most
northern point to which slavery extends in the Western States of the
Union, and the farming lands of Minnesota stretch away again for some
hundreds of miles north and west of St. Paul. Could it be that those
scanty and far-off pioneers of agriculture, those frontier farmers
who are nearly one half German and nearly the other half Irish, would
desert their clearings and ruin their chances of progress in the
world for distant wars of which the causes must, as I thought, be
to them unintelligible? I had been told that distance had but lent
enchantment to the view, and that the war was even more popular in
the remote and newly settled States than in those which have been
longer known as great political bodies. So I resolved that I would go
and see.
It may be as well to explain here that that great political Union
hitherto called the United States of America may be more properly
divided into three than into two distinct interests. In England we
have long heard of North and South as pitted against each other, and
we have always understood that the southern politicians or democrats
have prevailed over the northern politicians or republicans, because
they were assisted in their views by northern men of mark who have
held southern principles;--that is, by northern men who have been
willing to obtain political power by joining themselves to the
southern party. That as far as I can understand has been the general
idea in England, and in a broad way it has been true. But as years
have advanced and as the States have extended themselves westward, a
third large party has been formed, which sometimes rejoices to call
itself The Great West; and though at the present time the West and
the North are joined together against the South, the interests of the
North and the West are not, I think, more closely interwoven than are
those of the West and South; and when the final settlement of this
question shall be made, there will doubtless be great difficulty in
satisfying the different aspirations and feelings of two great free
soil populations. The North, I think, will ultimately perceive that
it will gain much by the secession of the South; but it will be very
difficult to make the West believe that secession will suit its
views.
I will attempt in a rough way to divide the States, as they seem to
divide themselves, into these three parties. As to the majority of
them there is no difficulty in locating them; but this cannot be done
with absolute certainty as to some few that lie on the borders.
New England consists of six States, of which all of course belong
to the North. They are Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, and Connecticut; the six States which should be most
dear to England, and in which the political success of the United
States as a nation is to my eyes the most apparent. But even in them
there was till quite of late a strong section so opposed to the
republican party as to give a material aid to the South. This, I
think, was particularly so in New Hampshire, from whence President
Pierce came. He had been one of the senators from New Hampshire; and
yet to him, as President, is affixed the disgrace,--whether truly
affixed or not I do not say,--of having first used his power in
secretly organizing those arrangements which led to secession and
assisted at its birth. In Massachusetts also itself there was a
strong democratic party, of which Massachusetts now seems to be
somewhat ashamed. Then, to make up the North, must be added the two
great States of New York and Pennsylvania, and the small State of New
Jersey. The West will not agree even to this absolutely, seeing that
they claim all territory west of the Alleghenies, and that a portion
of Pennsylvania, and some part also of New York lie westward of
that range; but in endeavouring to make these divisions ordinarily
intelligible I may say that the North consists of the nine States
above named. But the North will also claim Maryland and Delaware, and
the eastern half of Virginia. The North will claim them though they
are attached to the South by joint participation in the great social
institution of slavery, for Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia are
slave States;--and I think that the North will ultimately make good
its claim. Maryland and Delaware lie, as it were, behind the capital,
and Eastern Virginia is close upon the capital. And these regions are
not tropical in their climate or influences. They are and have been
slave States; but will probably rid themselves of that taint and
become a portion of the free North.
The southern or slave States, properly so called, are easily defined.
They are Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. The South will also
claim Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Virginia, Delaware, and
Maryland, and will endeavour to prove its right to the claim by the
fact of the social institution being the law of the land in those
States. Of Delaware, Maryland, and Eastern Virginia, I have already
spoken. Western Virginia is, I think, so little tainted with slavery,
that, as she stands even at present, she properly belongs to the
West. As I now write the struggle is going on in Kentucky and
Missouri. In Missouri the slave population is barely more than a
tenth of the whole, while in South Carolina and Mississippi it is
more than half. And, therefore, I venture to count Missouri among the
western States, although slavery is still the law of the land within
its borders. It is surrounded on three sides by free States of the
West, and its soil, let us hope, must become free. Kentucky I must
leave as doubtful, though I am inclined to believe that slavery will
be abolished there also. Kentucky at any rate will never throw in its
lot with the southern States. As to Tennessee, it seceded heart and
soul, and I fear that it must be accounted as southern, although the
northern army has now, in May 1862, possessed itself of the greater
part of the State.
To the great West remains an enormous territory, of which, however,
the population is as yet but scanty; though perhaps no portion of
the world has increased so fast in population as have these western
States. The list is as follows: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas,--to which I would add Missouri,
and probably the western half of Virginia. We have then to account
for the two already admitted States on the Pacific, California and
Oregon, and also for the unadmitted Territories, Dacotah, Nebraska,
Washington, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, and Neveda. I should be
refining too much for my present very general purpose, if I were to
attempt to marshal these huge but thinly populated regions in either
rank. Of California and Oregon it may probably be said that it is
their ambition to form themselves into a separate division;--a
division which may be called the further West.
I know that all statistical statements are tedious, and I believe
that but few readers believe them. I will, however, venture to give
the populations of these States in the order I have named them,
seeing that power in America depends almost entirely on population.
The census of 1860 gave the following results:--
In the North.
Maine 619,000
New Hampshire 326,872
Vermont 325,827
Massachusetts 1,231,494
Rhode Island 174,621
Connecticut 460,670
New York 3,851,563
Pennsylvania 2,916,018
New Jersey 676,034
----------
Total 10,582,099
In the South--the population of which must be divided into free and
slave.
FREE. SLAVE. TOTAL.
Texas 415,999 184,956 600,955
Louisiana 354,245 312,186 666,431
Arkansas 331,710 109,065 440,775
Mississippi 407,051 479,607 886,658
Alabama 520,444 435,473 955,917
Florida 81,885 63,809 145,694
Georgia 615,366 467,461 1,082,827
South Carolina 308,186 407,185 715,371
North Carolina 679,965 328,377 1,008,342
Tennessee 859,578 287,112 1,146,690
--------- --------- ---------
Total 4,574,429 3,075,231 7,649,660
In the West.
Ohio 2,377,917
Indiana 1,350,802
Illinois 1,691,238
Michigan 754,291
Wisconsin 763,485
Minnesota 172,796
Iowa 682,002
Kansas 143,645
Missouri *1,204,214
---------
Total 9,140,390
*Of which number, in Missouri, 115,619 are slaves.
In the doubtful States.
FREE. SLAVE. TOTAL.
Maryland 646,183 85,382 731,565
Delaware 110,548 1,805 112,353
Virginia 1,097,373 495,826 1,593,199
Kentucky 920,077 225,490 1,145,567
--------- ------- ---------
Total 2,774,181 808,503 3,582,684
To these must be added to make up the population of the United
States, as it stood in 1860.
The separate district of Columbia,
in which is included Washington,
the seat of the Federal Government 75,321
California 384,770
Oregon 52,566
The Territories of
Dacotah 4,839
Nebraska 28,892
Washington 11,624
Utah 49,000
New Mexico 93,024
Colorado 34,197
Neveda 6,857
-------
Total 741,090
And thus the total population may be given as follows:--
North 10,582,099
South 7,649,660
West 9,140,390
Doubtful 3,582,684
Outlying States and Territories 741,090
----------
Total 31,695,923
Each of the three interests would consider itself wronged by the
division above made, but the South would probably be the loudest in
asserting its grievance. The South claims all the slave States, and
would point to secession in Virginia to justify such claim,--and
would point also to Maryland and Baltimore, declaring that secession
would be as strong there as at New Orleans, if secession were
practicable. Maryland and Baltimore lie behind Washington, and are
under the heels of the northern troops, so that secession is not
practicable; but the South would say that they have seceded in heart.
In this the South would have some show of reason for its assertion;
but, nevertheless, I shall best convey a true idea of the position of
these States by classing them as doubtful. When secession shall have
been accomplished,--if ever it be accomplished,--it will hardly be
possible that they should adhere to the South.
It will be seen by the above tables that the population of the West
is nearly equal to that of the North, and that therefore western
power is almost as great as northern. It is almost as great already,
and as population in the West increases faster than it does in the
North, the two will soon be equalized. They are already sufficiently
on a par to enable them to fight on equal terms, and they will be
prepared for fighting--political fighting, if no other--as soon as
they have established their supremacy over a common enemy.
Whilst I am on the subject of population, I should explain--though
the point is not one which concerns the present argument--that the
numbers given, as they regard the South, include both the whites and
the blacks, the free men and the slaves. The political power of the
South is of course in the hands of the white race only, and the total
white population should therefore be taken as the number indicating
the southern power. The political power of the South, however, as
contrasted with that of the North, has, since the commencement of the
Union, been much increased by the slave population. The slaves have
been taken into account in determining the number of representatives
which should be sent to Congress by each State. That number depends
on the population, but it was decided in 1787, that in counting up
the number of representatives to which each State should be held to
be entitled, five slaves should represent three white men. A Southern
population, therefore, of five thousand free men and five thousand
slaves would claim as many representatives as a Northern population
of eight thousand free men, although the voting would be confined to
the free population. This has ever since been the law of the United
States.
The western power is nearly equal to that of the North, and this
fact, somewhat exaggerated in terms, is a frequent boast in the
mouths of western men. "We ran Fremont for President," they say, "and
had it not been for northern men with southern principles, we should
have put him in the White House instead of the traitor Buchanan. If
that had been done, there would have been no secession." How things
might have gone had Fremont been elected in lieu of Buchanan, I
will not pretend to say; but the nature of the argument shows the
difference that exists between northern and western feeling. At the
time that I was in the West, General Fremont was the great topic of
public interest. Every newspaper was discussing his conduct, his
ability as a soldier, his energy, and his fate. At that time General
Maclellan was in command at Washington on the Potomac, it being
understood that he held his power directly under the President,--free
from the exercise of control on the part of the veteran General
Scott, though at that time General Scott had not actually resigned
his position as head of the army. And General Fremont, who some five
years before had been "run" for President by the Western States, held
another command of nearly equal independence in Missouri. He had been
put over General Lyon in the western command, and directly after
this General Lyon had fallen in battle at Springfield, in the first
action in which the opposing armies were engaged in the West. General
Fremont at once proceeded to carry matters with a very high hand.
On the 30th of August, 1861, he issued a proclamation by which he
declared martial law at St. Louis, the city at which he held his head
quarters, and indeed throughout the State of Missouri generally. In
this proclamation he declared his intention of exercising a severity
beyond that ever threatened, as I believe, in modern warfare. He
defines the region presumed to be held by his army of occupation,
drawing his lines across the State, and then declares "that all
persons who shall be taken with arms in their hands within those
lines shall be tried by Court Martial, and if found guilty will
be shot." He then goes on to say that he will confiscate all the
property of persons in the State who shall have taken up arms against
the Union, or who shall have taken part with the enemies of the
Union, and that he will make free all slaves belonging to such
persons. This proclamation was not approved at Washington, and was
modified by the order of the President. It was understood also that
he issued orders for military expenditure, which were not recognized
at Washington, and men began to understand that the army in the West
was gradually assuming that irresponsible military position, which
in disturbed countries and in times of civil war has so frequently
resulted in a military dictatorship. Then there arose a clamour
for the removal of General Fremont. A semi-official account of his
proceedings, which had reached Washington from an officer under his
command, was made public; and also the correspondence which took
place on the subject between the President and General Fremont's
wife. The officer in question was thereupon placed under arrest, but
immediately released by orders from Washington. He then made official
complaint of his General, sending forward a list of charges in which
Fremont was accused of rashness, incompetency, want of fidelity of
the interests of the Government, and disobedience to orders from
head quarters. After a while the Secretary of War himself proceeded
from Washington to the quarters of General Fremont at St. Louis, and
remained there for a day or two, making or pretending to make inquiry
into the matter. But when he returned he left the General still in
command. During the whole month of October the papers were occupied
in declaring in the morning that General Fremont had been recalled
from his command, and in the evening that he was to remain. In the
mean time they who befriended his cause, and this included the whole
West, were hoping from day to day that he would settle the matter
for himself and silence his accusers, by some great military success.
General Price held the command opposed to him, and men said that
Fremont would sweep General Price and his army down the valley of the
Mississippi into the sea. But General Price would not be so swept,
and it began to appear that a guerilla warfare would prevail; that
General Price, if driven southwards, would reappear behind the backs
of his pursuers, and that General Fremont would not accomplish all
that was expected of him with that rapidity for which his friends had
given him credit. So the newspapers still went on waging the war, and
every morning General Fremont was recalled, and every evening they
who had recalled him were shown up as having known nothing of the
matter.
"Never mind; he is a pioneer man, and will do a'most anything he puts
his hand to," his friends in the West still said. "He understands the
frontier." Understanding the frontier is a great thing in Western
America, across which the vanguard of civilization continues to march
on in advance from year to year. "And it's he that is bound to sweep
slavery from off the face of this Continent. He's the man, and he's
about the only man." I am not qualified to write the life of General
Fremont, and can at present only make this slight reference to the
details of his romantic career. That it has been full of romance,
and that the man himself is indued with a singular energy and a high
romantic idea of what may be done by power and will, there is no
doubt. Five times he has crossed the continent of North America
from Missouri to Oregon and California, enduring great hardships in
the service of advancing civilization and knowledge. That he has
considerable talent, immense energy, and strong self-confidence,
I believe. He is a frontier man; one of those who care nothing for
danger, and who would dare anything with the hope of accomplishing a
great career. But I have never heard that he has shown any practical
knowledge of high military matters. It may be doubted whether a man
of this stamp is well fitted to hold the command of a nation's army
for great national purposes. May it not even be presumed that a man
of this class is of all men the least fitted for such a work? The
officer required should be a man with two specialities--a speciality
for military tactics, and a speciality for national duty. The army
in the West was far removed from head quarters in Washington, and
it was peculiarly desirable that the General commanding it should
be one possessing a strong idea of obedience to the control of his
own Government. Those frontier capabilities, that self-dependent
energy for which his friends gave Fremont,--and probably justly gave
him,--such unlimited credit are exactly the qualities which are most
dangerous in such a position.
I have endeavoured to explain the circumstances of the Western
command in Missouri, as they existed at the time when I was in the
North-Western States, in order that the double action of the North
and West may be understood. I, of course, was not in the secret
of any official persons, but I could not but feel sure that the
Government in Washington would have been glad to have removed Fremont
at once from the command, had they not feared that by doing so they
would have created a schism, as it were, in their own camp, and have
done much to break up the integrity or oneness of Northern loyalty.
The western people almost to a man desired abolition. The States
there were sending out their tens of thousands of young men into
the army with a prodigality as to their only source of wealth which
they hardly recognized themselves, because this to them was a fight
against slavery. The western population has been increased to a
wonderful degree by a German infusion;--so much so that the western
towns appear to have been peopled with Germans. I found regiments
of volunteers consisting wholly of Germans. And the Germans are all
abolitionists. To all the men of the West the name of Fremont is
dear. He is their hero, and their Hercules. He is to cleanse the
stables of the southern king, and turn the waters of emancipation
through the foul stalls of slavery. And, therefore, though the
Cabinet in Washington would have been glad for many reasons to
have removed Fremont in October last, it was at first scared from
committing itself to so strong a measure. At last, however, the
charges made against him were too fully substantiated to allow of
their being set on one side, and early in November, 1861, he was
superseded. I shall be obliged to allude again to General Fremont's
career as I go on with my narrative.
At this time the North was looking for a victory on the Potomac; but
they were no longer looking for it with that impatience which in the
summer had led to the disgrace at Bull's Run. They had recognized the
fact that their troops must be equipped, drilled, and instructed; and
they had also recognized the perhaps greater fact, that their enemies
were neither weak, cowardly, nor badly officered. I have always
thought that the tone and manner with which the North bore the defeat
at Bull's Run was creditable to it. It was never denied, never
explained away, never set down as trifling. "We have been whipped!"
was what all Northerners said,--"We've got an almighty whipping, and
here we are." I have heard many Englishmen complain of this, saying
that the matter was taken almost as a joke,--that no disgrace was
felt, and the licking was owned by a people who ought never to have
allowed that they had been licked. To all this, however, I demur.
Their only chance of speedy success consisted in their seeing and
recognizing the truth. Had they confessed the whipping and then sat
down with their hands in their pockets,--had they done as second-rate
boys at school will do,--declare that they had been licked, and then
feel that all the trouble is over,--they would indeed have been open
to reproach. The old mother across the water would in such case have
disowned her son. But they did the very reverse of this. "I have been
whipped," Jonathan said, and he immediately went into training under
a new system for another fight.
And so all through September and October the great armies on the
Potomac rested comparatively in quiet, the Northern forces drawing to
themselves immense levies. The general confidence in Maclellan was
then very great, and the cautious measures by which he endeavoured to
bring his vast untrained body of men under discipline were such as
did at that time recommend themselves to most military critics. Early
in September the northern party obtained a considerable advantage
by taking the fort at Cape Hatteras, in North Carolina, situated
on one of those long banks which lie along the shores of the
Southern States; but towards the end of October they experienced a
considerable reverse in an attack which was made on the Secessionists
by General Stone, and in which Colonel Baker was killed. Colonel
Baker had been senator for Oregon, and was well known as an orator.
Taking all things together, however, nothing material had been
done up to the end of October; and at that time northern men were
waiting--not perhaps impatiently, considering the great hopes,
and perhaps great fears which filled their hearts, but with eager
expectation for some event of which they might talk with pride.
The man to whom they had trusted all their hopes was young for so
great a command. I think that at this time (October 1861) General
Maclellan was not yet thirty-five. He had served early in life in the
Mexican war, having come originally from Pennsylvania, and having
been educated at the military college at West Point. During our
war with Russia he was sent to the Crimea by his own Government
in conjunction with two other officers of the United States army,
that they might learn all that was to be learned there as to
military tactics, and report especially as to the manner in which
fortifications were made and attacked. I have been informed that a
very able report was sent in by them to the Government, on their
return, and that this was drawn up by Maclellan. But in America a
man is not only a soldier or always a soldier; nor is he always a
clergyman if once a clergyman. He takes a spell at anything suitable
that may be going. And in this way Maclellan was for some years
engaged on the Central Illinois Railway, and was for a considerable
time the head manager of that concern. We all know with what
suddenness he rose to the highest command in the army immediately
after the defeat at Bull's Run.
I have endeavoured to describe what were the feelings of the West
in the autumn of 1861 with regard to the war. The excitement and
eagerness there were very great, and they were perhaps as great in
the North. But in the North the matter seemed to me to be regarded
from a different point of view. As a rule, the men of the North are
not abolitionists. It is quite certain that they were not so before
secession began. They hate slavery as we in England hate it; but they
are aware, as also are we, that the disposition of four million of
black men and women forms a question which cannot be solved by the
chivalry of any modern Orlando. The property invested in these four
million slaves forms the entire wealth of the South. If they could
be wafted by a philanthropic breeze back to the shores of Africa,--a
breeze of which the philanthropy would certainly not be appreciated
by those so wafted--the South would be a wilderness. The subject is
one as full of difficulty as any with which politicians of these days
are tormented. The Northerners fully appreciate this, and as a rule
are not abolitionists in the western sense of the word. To them the
war is recommended by precisely those feelings which animated us when
we fought for our colonies,--when we strove to put down American
independence. Secession is rebellion against the Government: and is
all the more bitter to the North because that rebellion broke out at
the first moment of northern ascendancy. "We submitted," the North
says, "to southern Presidents, and southern statesmen, and southern
councils, because we obeyed the vote of the people. But as to
you--the voice of the people is nothing in your estimation! At
the first moment in which the popular vote places at Washington a
President with northern feelings, you rebel. We submitted in your
days; and by heaven, you shall submit in ours! We submitted loyally;
through love of the law and the Constitution. You have disregarded
the law, and thrown over the Constitution. But you shall be made to
submit, as a child is made to submit to its governor."
It must also be remembered that on commercial questions the North
and the West are divided. The Morrill tariff is as odious to the
West as it is to the South. The South and West are both agricultural
productive regions, desirous of sending cotton and corn to foreign
countries and of receiving back foreign manufactures on the best
terms. But the North is a manufacturing country--a poor manufacturing
country as regards excellence of manufacture--and therefore the more
anxious to foster its own growth by protective laws. The Morrill
tariff is very injurious to the West, and is odious there. I might
add that its folly has already been so far recognized even in the
North, as to make it very generally odious there also.
So much I have said endeavouring to make it understood how far the
North and West were united in feeling against the South in the autumn
of 1861, and how far there existed between them a diversity of
interests.