Adam Badeau, Grant in peace: from Appomattox to Mount McGregor, a personal memoir

This conduct was in complete harmony with Grant's character. It was the practical man who spoke, and who saw that worse remained behind if the South failed to submit now. But besides this sagacious foresight Grant showed a warmth of feeling at this time that was more conspicuous because of his inexcitability during the war. He seemed to have a keener personal interest, an unwillingness to lose what had been secured at so much cost. Perhaps he did not want to see his own work undone, his clemency made subject for arraignment. Of course no such word was uttered to or by him, but he certainly never in his career appeared more anxious or ardent in any task than in his efforts now to induce the South to accept the terms which he believed the easiest the North would ever offer.

The following letter to General Richard Taylor, the brother-in-law of Jefferson Davis, and one of the most influential of the Southern leaders, shows that this view is no imaginative speculation or far-fetched criticism:

headquarters armies of the United States, Washington, D. C., Nov. 25, 1866.

dear General,—Your letter of the 20th is just received. My letter to Pride, with which this is enclosed, answers a part of yours.

The day after you left here the President sent for me, as I expected he would after my conversation with the AttorneyGen-eral. I told him my views candidly about the course I thought he should take, in view of the verdict of the late elections. It elicited nothing satisfactory from him, but did not bring out the strong opposition he sometimes shows to views not agreeing with his own. I was followed by General Sickles, who expressed about the same opinion I did.

Since that I have talked with several members of Congress who are classed with the Radicals; Schenck and Bidwell for instance. They express the most generous views as to what would be done if the constitutional amendments proposed by Congress