_The American Conflict_: A History of the Great Rebellion in
the United States of America, 1860-64. By HORACE GREELEY.
Vol. I. 8vo. pp. 648. Hartford: O. D. Case & Co.
The plan of this work contemplates not only a faithful and complete
historical description of the leading events in the stupendous conflict
now raging between the interests of Slavery and the principles of
Freedom, but an accurate analysis and lucid exposition of the antagonist
ideas which have attained their full development in the present civil
war. With this purpose, the issue of the portion now submitted to the
American public cannot be regarded as premature or unseasonable. If the
time has not arrived for the elaboration of a thorough historic survey
of the mighty struggle which has convulsed the nation to its deepest
heart, there are ample materials for a profound review of the past, and
an instructive exhibition of the moral and intellectual movement, the
pregnant conflict of thought, which has found its ultimate issue in the
bloody death-throes of the battle-field. No nobler theme could tempt the
pen of the philosophic historian. No subject of study could present more
attractive features, or prove of more fruitful import to every
intelligent American thinker.
Mr. Greeley's position and professional training as a prominent
journalist give him, in many respects, excellent facilities for the
accomplishment of his delicate and by no means easy task. Nor is he less
admirably qualified for its execution by the native bent of his mind,
and his experience as one of the leaders of a great political party.
With an instinctive passion for freedom, a profound faith in social and
humanitary progress, and an ardent devotion to the interests of the
masses, irrespective of artificial and temporary distinctions, he has
long watched the conflict of opinions and the development of ideas with
reference to their bearing on the great American principle of political
justice and individual right. Without following the lead of any special
class of reformers, he has been keenly sensitive to the wrongs and
outrages which, under the semblance of freedom, have blended themselves
with the institutions of the country. His clear-headed sagacity has
enabled him to foresee the perilous consequences of political
inconsistencies. For many years he has anticipated the disastrous
effects of the social anomalies for which our statesmen of all parties
have sought a remedy in compromises and concealment. He has adhered to
the policy of attacking political evils with political weapons. The
institution of Slavery, in his view, was one of the crying wrongs for
which the cure was to be found in the ballot-box. Not so much by
denouncing and exhorting as by giving effect to popular sentiment
through the elections, has he aimed at social regeneration. To this
principle he has steadily adhered throughout his public life. His
political relations have been formed in accordance with this idea. The
character and tendency of parties have been judged by this standard.
Hence the present work is eminently the record of his personal
experience. It presents in vivid outlines and with striking
illustrations the action of political causes with which he has been as
familiar as with the alphabet of his mother-tongue. The principles of
the great rebellion are traced back to the little germs which have since
expanded into a tree of such mighty proportions and of such baleful
character. Few men, we may perhaps safely say no man, among us, could
bring to the composition of a work with this intent such a rich fund of
observation, such intimate knowledge of the practical working of
parties, such true insight into the aims and motives of the conspicuous
American statesmen, such accurate judgment in regard to the leading
measures of governmental policy, combined with such prevailing fairness
of mind, and such a high degree of literary skill and mastership.
Regarded as a contribution to the historical treasures of which American
literature can boast such rare wealth, Mr. Greeley's work may challenge,
if not perhaps unqualified, sincere and respectful commendation. His
style is eminently his own. Familiar with the best models, he follows
none. Although aiming at vigor and popular effect, rather than at
graceful and polished elegance, it shows a remarkable sense of the power
and aptness of words, and an unusual command of the resources of
expression. He does not hesitate at a certain quaintness of phrase which
gives an antique air to many of his sentences; but he is never dull,
never languid, never commonplace, always free, emphatic, and racy. The
purely narrative portions of the volume are truly excellent. In the
immense range of his productions as a journalist, to our thinking, Mr.
Greeley has written nothing better. Compact, sustained, and enlivened
with a choice variety of coloring, the story as it comes from his pen is
uniformly clear even to transparency, and never fails to read with
singular interest, while it abounds in fresh and novel information. He
cannot always resist the temptation to a little episodical pleasantry;
but his humor is never ill-timed, and often mercilessly effective by its
keenness and truth, though for the most part genial and good-natured.
Sometimes, however, we notice a mischievous delight in calling attention
to the dead flies in the apothecary's ointment. The author's sincerity
of conviction and honesty of purpose are apparent on every page of his
work, and give it a sterling, permanent value, irrespective of its other
merits.
In the selection of his materials, Mr. Greeley has made great use of the
speeches, messages, letters, and other public documents relating to the
different branches of his subject, the essential points of which he
often interweaves into his narrative, though in all suitable cases he
does not scruple to present from them full and copious citations. In
most instances which involve the opinions of his political antagonists,
he has confined himself to the latter method. Impressed with the
difficulty of exhibiting the views of an opponent with fairness and
accuracy, he has wisely preferred to employ the very language of his
original authorities, wherever the exercise of perfect impartiality
might appear too sublime a virtue for our fallen and frail human nature.
In the mutations of opinion, moreover, many persons are apt to forget
that the faith, which they zealously defended but two years ago is at
war with their present creed. The surest guaranty of exact and
satisfactory statements, accordingly, is to fall back on the primitive
authentic platform.
The subject of compromises, under the Federal Constitution, between the
conflicting interests of the country, occupies, of course, a prominent
place in these pages, and is treated by Mr. Greeley, as we think, with
signal discretion and ability. His views on this point are marked by
candor and moderation, though he is firm and uncompromising in his
hostility to concession for the purpose of conciliating the Slave-Power.
Political compromises, he maintains, though liable to abuse, are the
necessary incidents of all governments, excepting pure and simple
despotisms. Liberty cannot exist without diversity of opinions. Unless
one will is permitted the supremacy over all others, a medium must be
sought between widely differing convictions. If a legislature composed
of two distinct bodies differs with regard to a special appropriation, a
partial concession on each side is often the only practicable mode of
adjustment. When the object is unprecedented, or not essential to the
general efficiency of the public service, such as the construction of a
new railroad, canal, or other public work, the opposition of either
house should suffice for its defeat, or, at least, for its postponement.
Neither branch has a right to demand from the other conformity with its
views on a disputed point as the price of its own concurrence in
measures essential to the existence of the government. Hence the
movement of the United States Senate in 1849, dictating to the House a
certain organization of the Territories, under penalty of defeating the
Civil Appropriation Bill, was totally unjustifiable. But the fact should
never be lost sight of, that differences of opinion often occur on
momentous questions where the rights of each party are equal, and where
an ultimate concurrence in one common line of action is essential.
Without some mutual concession to adverse views, the union of the States
would have been impossible. In cases, moreover, where the Executive is
permitted a veto on legislative measures, a certain deference to his
views is necessary to the practical working of the government. A
compromise, accordingly, is at times indispensable and laudable. But no
valid defence can be made of the celebrated compromise of 1850. It was
a monstrous corruption in legislation, which not even the great name of
Henry Clay could shield from subsequent opprobrium.
Still, this compromise was accepted and ratified by a great majority of
the American people, both in the North and in the South. The
announcement that all sectional differences had been adjusted was hailed
with almost universal joy. The terms of settlement were regarded as of
subordinate consequence. The people wanted peace and prosperity, and
were content with driving a lucrative business. They had no disposition
to shed each other's blood in a quarrel concerning the condition of
negroes. The compromise had taken no money from their pockets. It had
imposed upon them no pecuniary burdens. It had exposed them to no
personal dangers. It had rather appeased the terrors of disunion,
increased the facilities for money-making, and opened a brilliant
prospect of national greatness, security, and peace.
But this same compromise contained the seeds of disunion and civil war.
The extreme State-Rights party in the South resolved not to submit to
it, but to prepare the people for forcible resistance. Still, the time
had not yet come for open demonstrations. The new Fugitive-Slave Law
produced a wide-spread excitement at the North. This was increased by
the frequent cases of brutality which occurred under its execution. The
progress of opinion was rapid and decisive, preparing for the bloody
conflict which commenced with the attack on Fort Sumter.
The development of events from this cardinal epoch to the defeat of the
Union arms at Ball's Bluff, is traced by Mr. Greeley with a vigorous and
discriminating pen. His comments may not always command conviction, but
they can never fail to win respect. He expresses himself with freedom,
although temperately, in regard to the character of the prominent
military leaders, and subsequent facts have confirmed the sagacity of
his judgment. He holds General Scott to a rigid responsibility for the
inglorious days of Bull Run, which dispelled all lingering illusions as
to his capacity for the conduct of a great war. The Fabian policy of
General McClellan in the campaign of the succeeding winter is ably
discussed. According to Mr. Greeley, this is not to be accounted for by
a constitutional aversion on the part of our young Napoleon to the
shedding of blood,--that is, of other men's; since he was eager to
involve the country in another war by the refusal to surrender Mason and
Slidell. Natural timidity and irresolution no doubt had their influence.
But beyond this was the slowly awakened consciousness that Slavery was
the real assailant of our national existence. General McClellan saw,
that, in order to carry out the policy to which he had been long
committed, in order to save both slavery and the Union, there must be
little fighting and a speedy compromise. It is only on this hypothesis
that his course while in high command, but especially during that long
autumn and winter, admits of a consistent and intelligible explanation.
_The Iliad of Homer faithfully translated into Unrhymed
English Metre._ By F. W. NEWMAN. London. 1856.
Mr. Newman executed this translation upon the theory that Homer was a
"noble savage"; that his congener would be found in a "lively African
from the Gold-Coast"; that his style of language and thought was to the
age of Pericles what that of the very oldest ballads is to ours; that he
must be rendered, therefore, in English by a ballad-metre and an
antiquated diction. To this capricious and indefensible theory, and to
the translation, so far as founded upon it, Mr. Matthew Arnold seems to
have given the _coup de grace_. We come, accordingly, not to criticize,
but to bury.
_Hic jacet_, therefore, what was mortal of Newman's Homer,--a work
executed upon a theory which no art of performance could redeem, while
to that theory it was rather clumsily than skilfully adapted. Yet was it
the work of a scholar so thorough, of a writer so able, of a translator
so faithful to his original, that no error of theory could wholly
vitiate his performance. The pictures of Homer, despite the crudity of
his coloring and the spots and daubs with which his rendering was
conscientiously sprinkled, he brought out more clearly than any had done
before him. His work, therefore, being dead, still lives; its ashes glow
and shine from the urn which contains them. Its ill-fortune was, that
it was only antiquarian literature from its birth; its good-fortune is,
that it shall never cease to be cherished as such. _Honestas mortem
vincit_: the high degrees of intellectual sincerity and power conquer
even literary damnation.