Looking Forward---The Road To The Precipice, June 2010

At the Precipice: Americans North and South during the Secession Crisis , Shearer Davis Bowman, University of North Carolina Press, 480 pp., $30.00, June 2010.

Why did eleven slave states secede from the Union in 1860-61? Why did the eighteen free states loyal to the Union deny the legitimacy of secession, and take concrete steps after Fort Sumter to subdue what President Abraham Lincoln deemed treasonous rebellion?

At the Precipice seeks to answer these and related questions by focusing on the different ways in which Americans, North and South, black and white, understood their interests, rights, and honor during the late antebellum years. Rather than give a narrative account of the crisis, Shearer Davis Bowman takes readers into the minds of the leading actors, examining the lives and thoughts of such key figures as Abraham Lincoln, James Buchanan, Jefferson Davis, John Tyler, and Martin Van Buren.

Bowman also provides an especially vivid glimpse into what less famous men and women in both sections thought about themselves and the political, social, and cultural worlds in which they lived, and how their thoughts informed their actions in the secession period. Intriguingly, secessionists and Unionists alike glorified the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, yet they interpreted those sacred documents in markedly different ways and held very different notions of what constituted "American" values.

Text Source: Amazon.com

News---Secession As A Political Philosophy

Scholars Nostalgic for the Old South Study the Virtues of Secession, Quietly The Chronicle of Higher Education, December 12, 2009 as presented in History News Network

In 1991, Donald W. Livingston threw a party—well, a conference—and nobody showed up.
It was during the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and Mr. Livingston, a professor of philosophy at Emory University and raised in South Carolina, decided there should be more thoughtful discourse on the topic of secession.

A political philosopher who specializes in David Hume, he searched philosophy papers published since 1940 and turned up only seven on the matter of secession from federal unions: five reviews of a book and two articles about Quebec. Thinking he had the market to himself, he held a conference on secession at the 1991 meeting of the American Philosophical Association. He was right about his share of the market. Nobody came.

Today Mr. Livingston is drawing slightly larger crowds. In 2003 he started the Abbeville Institute, named after the South Carolina birthplace of John C. Calhoun, seventh vice president of the United States and a forceful advocate of slavery and states' rights. The institute now has 64 associated scholars from various colleges and disciplines. They gather to discuss topics about the South that they feel are misrepresented in today's classrooms. Feeling a chilly reception to its ideas—officials of the Southern Poverty Law Center say its work borders on white supremacy—the group has kept a low profile. Mr. Livingston's own department chair, as well as a number of Emory history professors, say they have never heard of it.

That may change. Mr. Livingston says Abbeville is, for the first time, publicly advertising a conference, on secession and nullification—the refusal of states to recognize given federal laws within their territory—to be held February 4 to 7 in Charleston, S.C. It is the institute's eighth annual conference. The group does not endorse secession but does say the idea has moral and political validity...

... The other Abbeville scholars teach history, philosophy, economics, and literature at institutions including Emory, the University of South Carolina, the University of Georgia, and the University of Virginia. They write books with titles like Defending Dixie: Essays in Southern History and Culture (published by the Foundation for American Education, a nonprofit group "dedicated to the preservation of American culture and learning") and The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, his Agenda, and an Unnecessary War (Prima). They say the institute's work, although academic in nature, is really about values. Its members study the South in search of a history of piety, humility, and manners. The scholars acknowledge a history of bigotry and slavery, but they focus primarily on what they say are the positive aspects of Southern history and culture...

Text Source: History News Network
Image Source: Donald W. Livingston, Chronicle of Higher Education

Upcoming Discussion---James Buchanan and the Political Crisis of the 1850s

Heavy hitters of history will converge on Franklin and Marshall College, Pennsylvania to run the bases on James Buchanan, 15th President. A symposium organized by the James Buchanan Historical Society and the Lancaster County Historical Society and funded by the Richard C. von Hess Foundation will convene September 19-20 at Wheatland (the Buchanan homestead) and Franklin & Marshall College.

The political crisis of the 1850s will set forth by William W. Freehling (Virginia Foundation for the Humanities) and Michael Holt (University of Virginia). Because of the likely divergence of opinions between Freehling and Holt, John W. Quist (Shippensburg University) will moderate the discussion) on Friday evening at Wheatland. Slated for Saturday morning at Franklin & Marshall College, the constitutional crisis of 1857 will be discussed along with Buchanan's foreign policy. The Dred Scott Supreme Court decision and Bleeding Kansas will be presented noted writers Paul Finkelman, Nicole Etcheson and John Belohlavek. Before and after lunch Buchanan will be taken apart as political party leader and cabinet manager. The rebellions by the Mormons in Utah and the Secessionists in the South will be reviewed, as well as the various perceptions by the North of the secessionist movement. Jean Baker, Daniel Crofts and William Shade, each a noted scholar will be the presenters.

An interesting feature of the symposium is that secondary teachers receive in-service credits. High school teachers will meet with the speakers and will bef provided with lesson plans and classroom materials. Lancaster County Community Foundation and the James Buchanan Foundation will host the teacher/scholar discussion. Early registration of $25 is encouraged because a cap has been set on the number of attendees. Secondary, undergraduate and graduate student have the registration fee waived. A lunch is available; the cost is $10.50.

Visit the wwwsite of James Buchanan's Wheatland to view the registration materials. Wheatland and Franklin & Marshall College are about an hour and a quarter east of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

New In Paper---"Ma Rats" ? Notions of Self Government 1789-1865

Self-Government, The American Theme: Presidents of the Founding and Civil War, Will Morrisey, Rowan Littlefield Publishers, 290 pp $29.95 (Paper)

Americans introduced themselves to the world by declaring their independence. They recognized that their "unalienable rights" were secured by institutionalized government that derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. In Self-Government, The American Theme, Will Morrisey defines the concept of self-government and tracks its permutations in the ardent writings of key American presidents. He shows how the transition to a more powerful national state was managed on political soil where "self-government" was not an indigenous crop. Morrisey considers the genesis of "self-government" in the political thought of the founding U.S. presidents, comparing their understanding of the term with that of President Abraham Lincoln and Confederate States of America President, Jefferson Davis.

In this text Morrisey aptly demonstrates how the regime of the founders was replaced by a much more statist regime during the Civil War. He offers salient interpretations of the writings of the key presidents of founding and civil war periods, and interpretations centered on the key word, "self-government". This book is an essential contribution to the understanding of early American history and politics.

Table of Contents
Self-Government and the Founding Era: Prospects and Contingencies
Self-Government and the American Father: George Washington
Self-Government and the Fiery Spirit: John Adams
Self-Government as Natural Right: Thomas Jefferson
Self-Government and the Antebellum Era: Crisis of the Self Divided
Self-Government and Secession: Jefferson Davis
What Is "The New Birth of Freedom"? Abraham Lincoln
Conclusion: Davis and Lincoln Compared
Conclusion: Self-Government, The American Theme

About the Author
Will Morrisey is assistant professor of history and political science at Hillsdale College.

Text: from publisher

Forthcoming in Paperback---Treason in 1775 and 1860

"Whom Can We Trust Now?": The Meaning of Treason in the United States, from the Revolution through the Civil War,Brian F. Carso, Jr., 262 pp., Rowan Littlefield Publishers, $50.00. (paperback expected in late 2008)

For several hours in August 1787, the delegates to the Philadelphia Convention debated the two sentences defining treason that would serve as the only criminal law in the U.S. Constitution. As storied and controversial as this ancient crime was, the meaning of treason for the new democratic republic was difficult to foresee. Historian and lawyer Brian Carso demonstrates that although treason law was conflicted and awkward, the broader idea of treason gave recognizable shape to abstract ideas of loyalty, betrayal, allegiance, and political obligation in the United States. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, Carso begins by exploring the nature of loyalty and betrayal in a democratic republic, using examples ranging from Socrates in Plato's Crito to the dilemma of Robert E. Lee in 1861 and the trial of Timothy McVeigh in 1997. Turning to legal history, the study considers the historical antecedents of the Treason Clause of the U.S. Constitution and examines the utility of American treason law as it was applied in a variety of cases, most notably in the 1807 trial of Aaron Burr, in which Supreme Court Justice John Marshall used twenty-five thousand words to explicate the Treason Clause. Finding that the antinomies of treason law in a democratic republic make successful prosecutions against treason nearly impossible, Carso turns to the political, intellectual, and cultural realms of civic life to identify and to explain the broader meaning of treason. The study investigates the perpetual condemnation of Benedict Arnold and the many ways treason animated civic discourse during the Civil war. By examining editorials, sermons, histories, orations, art, literature, and political cartoons, Carso identifies how the meaning of treason engaged the public imagination in a variety of compelling forms and instructed citizens on loyalty and betrayal outside the courtroom as much as within it.

Table of Contents
"What is a Traitor?" Loyalty, Betrayal and the State
"A Republic, if you can Keep It" The Evolution of Treason in America, 1620-1787
"Seasons of Insurrection" Early Rebellions and the Trial of Aaron Burr
"The Damnation of His Fame" Benedict Arnold and the Cultural Punishment of Betrayal
"With Malice Toward None" Treason, Amnesty, and the Language of Betrayal During the Civil War

About the Author
Brian F. Carso, Jr., holds graduate degrees from the University of Rochester, SUNY Buffalo School of Law, and Boston University, where he received his PhD in American Studies. A practicing attorney, he has held public office in both county and state government. He is currently an assistant professor of history at College Misericordia in Dallas, Pennsylvania.

Text: from publisher

CWL --- Faithful Traitors: The Creation of West Virginia

The Tarnished Thirty-Fifth Star, C. Stuart McGehee, in Virginia at War, 1861, William C. Davis and James I. Robertson, Jr., University of Kentucky, 2005, pp. 149-158.

"I should show those traitors at Richmond . . . that we are not to be transferred like the cattle on the hills or the slaves on their plantations, without our knowledge and consent," wrote a delegate from Ohio County, Virginia upon hearing of the April 1861 secession ordinance. Because of sentiments like this one and due to the fact the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad passed through the northern counties of Virginia, 20,000 Union troops were rushed into the region immediately after the ordinance passed in a May plebiscite.

In the summer skirmishes of Philippi, Rich Mountain and Carnifex Ferry Union troops roughly handled Confederate forces. Within two years, this region would repudiate Virginia secession ordinace and choose to remain in the Union. The Mountain State was offically recognized on June 20, 1863 in a ceremony at Wheeling, which lies about 20 miles from Pennsylvania to the east and the width of the Ohio River from Ohio on the west. Voters who had cast their ballots for Breckinridge in the 1860 presidential election, were soon to be voting in the 1864 election.

The completion of the state's constitution in February 1862 provided for a govenor with a two-year term, established the position of lieutenant governor, withdrew the powers of county courts and gave them to newly formed townships, established an appellate court system, switched to paper ballots from voice ballots in all elections, created three new counties, made Wheeling the state capital, institution a state wide system of education with support for teacher training colleges (normal schools), put a university in Morgantown and a state prison in Moundsville and exluded negroes from the state. The U.S. Congress sent the document back to the assembly, the exclusion clause was removed and the document sent back to the U.S. Congress, which then accepted it. The likely first governor of West Virginia dropped out of the race, when the negroe exclusion clause was removed.

In Washington, D. C. Lincoln and his party relished the forthcoming Republican delegation which Democrats reviewed what the Constitution said about no state being created from a that was already in the Union. Lincoln signed the bill that admitted the new state of West Virginia on December 31, 1862 not quite 24 hours before the Emancipation Proclamation was signed on January 1, 1863. Fifty counties of the Old Dominion, a number greater than the new state's founders imagined, came into the Union. West Virginia's membership in the Union was a mixed blessing for the Republican Party. The citizens of the state were primarily Democrats and validated their memberships in the party in the next several national elections. By 1870, the founders were out of office.

The history of West Virginia, as it was written in the first 125 years, did not speak of the intense political animosities between the Republican founders and the Democratic voters. State history as taught in the Mountaineer school books often deflected, disguised or hid elements of the intense political, social and economic struggles of West Virginia families. The school books attempted to generate pride for a state whose national reputation included stereotypes of hillbillies and mountain dew. The books reported that the creation of West Virginia in 1862-1863 was a product of genuine loyalty to the Union, a devotion to democracy, and the nation as a whole. C. Stuart McGehee, the essay's author, states that "history is not an instrument of patriotic sympathy; it is the effort to study the past to undestand the rpesent and learn lesons that may help prepare for a brighter future."

On West Virginia's Civil War: http://www.randolphcountywv.com/HistoricSites/CivilWarDrivingTouroftheHeartofWestVirginia.htm

CWL --- 'At The Mercy of Decisions Made Elsewhere": Virginia's Secession Convention

The Virginia State Convention of 1861, James I. Robertson Jr., in Virginia at War, 1861, William C. Davis and James I. Roberston Jr. editors, University of Kentucky Press, 2005, pages 1-26.

Roberston sets forth three stages of the Virginia convention of 1861: February 13 through March 9, March 15 through April 3, and April 4 through April April 16. He traces the dissolution of the Unionist and Moderate ranks over the period of sixty days. The first stage begins with the failure of the Washington Peace Conference, the second stage ends with the submission of the Committee on Federal Relations report, and the third stage ends with Lincoln's call for 2,340 troops from Virginia.

On February 4, of the 152 delegates selected by 145,700 voters, less than 20% were secessionists. Of the remainder their were 92 moderates and 30 Unionists. These Unionist appeared to be conditional Union men; separation from the Union was unbearable unless the Federal government did not guarantee the protection of slavery in all states and territories. Pointedly, the Fugitive Slave Act had to be rigorously enforced. For these Unionist, the thought of Virginia leaving the Union was nearly unimaginable but the idea of taking up arms against the other slave holding states was unthinkable.

The March 4 inaugural speech of Lincoln did not guarantee the rigorous enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law and insinuated that the Federal government would leave slavery alone where it existed but expeditiously relief the territories of any expansionist threat by slaveholders. The April 12 firing on Sumter and the April 15 call for troops dissolved the commitment of the Unionist and moderate state convention. The first vote for secession was 88 in favor and 55 against. Surprising, the Valley representatives were 10 in favor and 17 against secession. The state referendum on May 23 produced 125,950 votes in favor of secession and 20,373 against.
The four northwest counties of Virginia, the panhandle of Wheeling and close to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania voted against secession by a 20-1 ratio of the popular vote.

Robertson's essay, along with Ernest Ferguson's From Ashes to Glory: Richmond at War, emphasizes the place of Richmond newspapers as being one of the several excoriating forces at work during December 1860 through April 1861. On March 21 The Richmond Examiner stated "The conceited old ghosts who crawled from a hundred damp graves to manacle their State and deliver her as a hand-maid to the hideous Chimpanzee from Illinois have determined that not one word of their rubbish and gabble will be lost to posterity." To me this sounds much like how Hunter S. Thompson in the The Rolling Stone worked on Richard M. Nixon.