This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
 at Cooper Institute, New York, in which he said: ‘The North, under the persistent clamors of the press and pulpit to punish the South for treason, is in danger of committing the mean crime of the age. Lips and pen no more influential than mine can do but little to avert this danger, but what little they can do shall be done. * * * All over the North there is clamor for the blood of the leading rebels whom we have captured and those whom we hope to capture. I have no sympathy with this clamor. The South fully surrendering, let bloodshed cease and all punishment.’ But while strongly opposing prosecutions for treason, he echoed the sentiment that the landed estates in the South should be parceled out, and on the subject of suffrage he said: ‘All the disloyal must be kept away from the ballot-box—the masses for ten years and the leaders for life.’ Horace Greeley spoke at the same meeting, saying that the trial of men paroled under the laws of war would be ‘a black violation of faith.’ The New York Commercial Advertiser said editorially: ‘We do not see how General Lee or any of his soldiers can be arrested without violating a solemn compact and our national faith and honor. General Lee and others may have merited the severest punishment, but we cannot now mete it out to them. The terms were perhaps too liberal, but they secured an immediate peace, and we must not repudiate them. Let not our fair names be tarnished by any such acts of blighted faith and infidelity.’ The great military chieftains who had fought and won the late war, headed by General Grant, were foremost in taking a decided stand against the violation of the terms of surrender, and their attitude upon that question had potent influence in averting the threatened prosecutions. The New York World published an elaborate argument against confiscation of Southern property, and other Northern papers quoted and approved its views. Indications of moderation such as these inspired the people of Texas with the hope that the evils they had feared would at least be mitigated, and that civil government under the Constitution would soon be restored. This seemed to be promised by the appointment of Andrew J. Hamilton provisional governor by the proclamation of President Johnson on June 17, 1865. The late Hon. Charles Stewart has described Governor Hamilton as ‘in many respects a remarkable man,’ and as ‘a man of generous impulses and of extraordinary intellectual power.’ He was a member of Congress at the time of
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.