Chapter 1:
- Massachusetts -- civil Government -- election, 1860 -- Legislature -- Presidentof the Senate -- Speaker of the House -- State of the country -- Farewelladdress of Governor Banks -- Governor Andrew's inaugural -- their Viewsof the crisis -- sketch of Governor Andrew -- Lieutenant-Governor -- Executive Council -- Adjutant-General -- military staff -- Congressmen -- the volunteer Militia -- military equipment -- early preparations -- salutes, 8th ofJanuary -- General order no. 2 -- report of Adjutant-General -- Generalorder no. 4 -- proceedings of the Legislature -- regular session -- emergency fund -- loan credit of State -- delegates to peace Convention -- Southcarolina to Massachusetts -- two thousand overcoats -- order of inquiry -- letter of Adjutant-General -- letter of Colonel Henry Lee, Jr. -- meeting ofOfficers in Governor's room -- Colonel Ritchie sent to Washington -- his letters to the Governor -- Secretary Seward's letter -- letter of Colonel Lee -- charter of transports -- John M. Forbes, Esq. -- meeting in Faneuil Hall -- meeting in Cambridge -- speech of Wendell Phillips, Esq., at New Bedford -- remarks -- the President calls for troops -- the eve of battle.
To write the part taken by Massachusetts in the civil war which began in April, 1861, and continued until the capture, by General Grant, of Lee and his army in Virginia, and the surrender of Johnston and his forces to General Sherman in North Carolina, in 1865, requires patient research, a mind not distracted by other duties, and a purpose to speak truthfully of men and of events. Massachusetts bore a prominent part in this war, from the beginning to the end; not only in furnishing soldiers for the army, sailors for the navy, and financial aid to the Government, but in advancing ideas, which, though scouted [2] at in the early months of the war, were afterwards accepted by the nation, before the war could be brought to a successful end. Massachusetts is a small State, in territory and in population. With the exception of Maine, it lies the farthest eastward of all the States in the Union. Its capital is four hundred and fifty miles east of Washington, and is separated from it by the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland. It contains seven thousand eight hundred square miles of land, river, lakes, and sea. In 1860, it had a population of 1,231,066, engaged in farming, manufacturing, fishing, and mercantile pursuits. Less than one-half the land is improved. It is about 1/380 part of the whole Union, ranking the thirty-sixth in size among the forty States and Territories. It is divided into fourteen counties, and three hundred and thirty-five cities and towns. Its governor, lieutenant-governor, eight councillors, forty senators, and two hundred and forty representatives, are elected every year, in the month of November, by the free suffrage of the qualified voters. The executive department of the Government is vested in the governor and Executive Council,—the governor, however, being the supreme executive magistrate, whose title is, His Excellency; the legislative, in a Senate and House of Representatives, each having a negative upon the other, and known and designated as the General Court. The judicial department is composed of different courts, the judges of which are appointed by the governor, and hold their offices during good behavior, and can only be removed upon the address of both houses of the Legislature, or by the abolishment of the court; this to ‘the end, that it may be a government of laws, and not of men.’ In the election for governor, in 1860, there were four candidates and four political parties. John A. Andrew, of Boston, was the candidate of the Republicans; Erasmus D. Beach, of Springfield, of the Douglas wing of the Democrats; Amos A. Lawrence, of Boston, of the conservative party; and Benjamin F. Butler, of Lowell, of the Breckenridge wing of the Democratic [3] party. John A. Andrew received 104,527 votes; Erasmus D. Beach, 35,191; Amos A. Lawrence, 23,816; Benjamin F. Butler, 6,000; all others, 75. Mr. Andrew's majority over all the opposing candidates was 39,445. The eight councillors elected were all Republicans, as were all the members of Congress. The presidential electors in favor of the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin, for President and Vice-President of the United States, received about the same majority Mr. Andrew did for Governor. Nearly all of the members of the Senate and House of Representatives were of the Republican party. The newly elected Legislature met on the first Wednesday in January, 1861. Hon. William Claflin, of Newton, was chosen President of the Senate, and Stephen N. Gifford, Esq., of Duxbury, clerk. Hon. John A. Goodwin, of Lowell, was chosen Speaker of the House of Representatives, and William Stowe, Esq., of Springfield, clerk. On assuming the duties of President of the Senate, Mr. Claflin made a brief address, in the course of which he said,—
While we meet under circumstances auspicious in our own State, a deep agitation pervades other parts of our country, causing every true patriot to feel the greatest anxiety. Disunion is attempted in some States, because, as is alleged, laws have been passed in others contrary to the Constitution of the United States. Massachusetts is accused of unfaithfulness in this matter in some of her enactments, although she has always been ready to submit to judicial decisions, and is so still. She has ever guarded jealously the liberties of her citizens, and, I trust, ever will. We cannot falter now without disgrace and dishonor. Whatever action we may take, let us be careful of the rights of others, but faithful to our trust, that we may return them to our constituents unimpaired.Mr. Goodwin, on taking the Speaker's chair, referred to national affairs in the following words:—
The session before us may become second in importance to none that has been held in these halls, since, threescore years ago, our fathers consecrated them to popular legislation. For the second time in our history, we see a State of our Union setting at naught the common compact, and raising the hand of remorseless violence against a whole section of her sister States, and against the Union itself. But for [4] the first time in our history are unrebuked traitors seen in the high places of the nation, where, with undaunted front, they awe into treasonable inaction the hand the people have solemnly deputed to hold the scales of justice, and wield her imperial sword. To what points this ignominious crisis may compel our legislative attention, cannot now be stated; nor is it for the Chair to allude to particular measures of legislation. But it is to be remembered, that Massachusetts sacrificed much to establish the Union, and to defend and perpetuate it. She is ready to sacrifice more, provided it touch not her honor or the principles of free government,—principles interwoven with her whole history, and never dearer to the hearts of her people of all classes and parties than they are to-day. Let us approach this portion of our duties with coolness and deliberation, and with a generous patriotism.Not since the days of the Revolution had a legislature assembled at a time of more imminent peril, when wise counsels, firm resolution, and patriotic devotion to the Constitution and the Union, were imperatively demanded. James Buchanan was still President of the United States; Floyd was Secretary of War; Cobb, Secretary of the Treasury; Thompson, Secretary of the Interior; and Toucey, who, although a New-England man, was believed to sympathize with the South, Secretary of the Navy. John C. Breckenridge was Vice-President of the United States, and presided over the deliberations of the Senate, of which Jefferson Davis, Judah P. Benjamin, John Slidell, James M. Mason, and Robert Toombs were members; all of whom proved traitors to the Government, were plotting daily and nightly to effect its overthrow, and to prevent the inauguration of Abraham Lincoln on the fourth of March. South Carolina had already voted itself out of the Union, and had assumed a hostile front to the Union garrison in Fort Sumter, in Charleston harbor. Other Southern States had called conventions to consider what steps they should take in the emergency which had been precipitated upon them by the South-Carolina secession ordinance. Our navy was scattered over far-off seas, the United-States arsenals were stripped of arms by orders from the Secretary of War, and the treasury of the General Government was well-nigh depleted by the Secretary of the Treasury. The debates in Congress were warm and exciting. The speeches of the disunionists were rank with treason. The power [5] of the North to prevent, by armed force, the South from seceding was sneered at and derided. Some of the Republicans in Congress replied with equal warmth and animation to the threats of the Southern men; others counselled moderation, and expressed a hope that the difficulties which threatened our peace might yet be adjusted. Prominent among those who expressed these views were Mr. Adams, of Massachusetts, and Mr. Seward, of New York. To gain time was a great point,—time to get Mr. Buchanan and his Cabinet out of power and out of Washington, and to get Mr. Lincoln and his new Cabinet into power and into Washington. I have good reason to believe, that neither of the distinguished statesmen whom I have named had a full belief that an appeal to arms could, for a great length of time, be avoided; but they felt, that, when it did come, it was all important that the Government should be in the hands of its friends, and not of its enemies. They argued, that, if the clash of arms could be put off until the inauguration of the new President on the fourth of March, the advantage to the Union side would be incalculable. It was wise strategy, as well as able statesmanship, so to guide the debates as to accomplish this great purpose; and to these two gentlemen acting in concert, one in the Senate and the other in the House, are we, in a great degree, indebted for the wise delay. Mr. Lincoln was inaugurated, and the Union ship of state was fairly launched, not indeed with fair winds and a clear sky, but with stout hands and wise heads to guide her course; and after long years of terrible disaster, and amid obstacles which at times appeared insurmountable, finally weathered them all, and was brought safely to a peaceful haven. Hon. Nathaniel P. Banks was Governor of Massachusetts the three years immediately preceding the election and inauguration of John A. Andrew. His administration had been highly successful and popular. He had met public expectation on every point. Many important measures had been passed during his term; and, upon retiring from office, he deemed it proper ‘to present to the Legislature a statement of the condition of public affairs, with such considerations as his experience might suggest;’ and enforced this departure from the course pursued [6] by his predecessors in the gubernatorial office, with many cogent reasons. He delivered his valedictory address on the 3d of January, 1861, in which he gave a review of the legislation, and a statement of the finances of the State for the three years during which he had been the chief executive officer. It is my purpose to speak upon but two of the topics discussed in the address, which have a direct bearing on the war which was so soon to open, and in which Governor Banks was to take a prominent part, as a major-general in the Union army. The Legislature of 1858 had passed what was known as an act for the protection of personal liberty. It was intended to mitigate the harsh and unjust provisions of the act of Congress passed in 1850, known as the Fugitive-slave Law. Several persons, held in the South as slaves, had made their way to Massachusetts; and, being afterwards arrested, had been returned to their masters. The entire provisions of that act were abhorrent to our people, notwithstanding its friends and supporters claimed for it an exact conformity to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States. The opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, pronounced by Judge Story, himself a Massachusetts man, declared that the Constitution contemplated the existence of ‘a positive, unqualified right, on the part of the owner of the slave, which no State law or regulation can in any way qualify, regulate, control, or restrain.’ This opinion of the Supreme Court, Governor Banks said, ‘has been approved by the Legislature of this State, and confirmed by its Supreme Judicial Court.’ He then invited the attention of the Legislature to the sections of the State act relating to the writ of habeas corpus and the State act for the protection of personal liberty, which he thought conflicted with the act of Congress regarding fugitive slaves; and said ‘It is not my purpose to defend the constitutionality of the Fugitive-slave Act. The omission of a provision for jury trial, however harsh and cruel, cannot in any event be supplied by State legislation. While I am constrained to doubt the right of this State to enact such laws, I do not admit that, in any just sense, it is a violation of the national compact. It is [7] only when unconstitutional legislation is enforced by executive authority, that it assumes that character, and no such result has occurred in this State.’ He then remarked, that Massachusetts had given unimpeachable evidence of her devotion to law; and it was because she had been faithful that he wished to see her legislation in harmony with her acts. ‘It is because I do not like to see her representatives in Congress, and her sons everywhere, put upon the defensive when they have just cause to be proud of her loyalty; . . . it is because, in the face of her just claims to high honor, I do not love to hear unjust reproaches cast upon her fame,—that I say, as I do, in the presence of God, and with a heart filled with the responsibilities that must rest upon every American citizen in these distempered times, I cannot but regard the maintenance of a statute, although it may be within the extremest limits of constitutional power, which is so unnecessary to the public service and so detrimental to the public peace, as an inexcusable public wrong. I hope, by common consent, it may be removed from the statute-book, and such guaranties as individual freedom demands be sought in new legislation.’ I have referred to these matters because they were prominent pretexts, made by the disunion party to justify a dissolution of the Union. The State acts named were condemned by many of our wisest men, who never had a thought unfriendly to the Union, nor would, by their acts or votes, sanction the existence of human slavery, or extend the area of its domain. The views of Governor Banks at this time are also important and interesting as in contrast to those expressed, a few days after, in the inaugural address of Governor Andrew. Governor Banks, in concluding his address, referred in direct terms to the secession ordinance of South Carolina, and said, ‘While I would not withhold from the South what belongs to that section, I cannot consent that we should yield what belongs to us. The right to the Territories, so far as the people are concerned, must be a common right; and their status should be determined upon the rights of men, and not upon privileges of property.’ He was opposed to founding government upon the right to hold slaves. ‘There is no species of property [8] entitled to such protection as will exclude men from Territories, aside from all considerations of property. Neither do I believe that a geographical line will give peace to the country. The lapse of time alone will heal all dissensions. There can be no peaceable secession of the States. The Government has pledged its faith to every land, and that pledge of faith cannot be broken.’ He drew encouragement from the thrill of joy which touched every true heart, when Major Anderson moved his little garrison from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter. ‘Certainly, never an act, so slight in itself, touched the hearts of so many millions of people like fire from heaven, as the recent simple, soldier-like, and patriotic movement of Major Anderson at Fort Moultrie.’ He closed this part of his address with these grand words: ‘But no such result can follow as the destruction of the American Government. The contest will be too terrible, the sacrifice too momentous, the difficulties in our path are too slight, the capacity of our people is too manifest, and the future too brilliant, to justify forebodings, or to excite permanent fears. The life of every man is lengthened by trial; and the strength of every government must be tested by revolt and revolution. I doubt not that the providence of God, that has protected us hitherto, will preserve us now and hereafter.’
