USA > Indiana > Public men of Indiana : a political history from 1860 to 1890, v. 1 > Part 3
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
30
The candidate of the Southern Democrats for president was John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, then vice-president. Abraham Lincoln was the Republican candidate for president, and Hannibal Hamlin of Maine was the candidate for vice-pres- ident. At the election that followed, Lincoln and Hamlin received a plurality of votes and the elec- toral vote of the State, and became president and vice-president of the United States.
There was no Breckinridge candidate for gov- ernor of Indiana. Henry S. Lane of Montgom- ery County was the Republican nominee for gov- ernor, and Oliver P. Morton of Wayne County was the nominee for lieutenant governor. The Douglas Democratic candidate for governor was Thomas A. Hendricks of Shelby County, and David Turpie of White County was the candidate for lieutenant governor. Lane and Morton were elected.
The legislature of 1861 elected Lane to the United States Senate, and Morton became ex- officio governor and was soon known to the entire country as Indiana's great war governor.
The election of Lincoln as president was made the excuse of the southerners for renewing their threats to secede from the Union and to form their States into an independent confederacy, and their declarations clearly foreshadowed the war that they began. They committed the first overt act of war by firing upon the American flag at Fort Sumter and demanding its surrender. Up to this time public sentiment in the Northern States was di-
31
vided, many in Indiana were of the opinion that the separation of the Union would be preferable to a war to maintain it, but the bombardment of Fort Sumter and its surrender by Major Ander- son of the United States Army aroused a univer- sal sentiment of indignation and touched every patriotic sensibility, and the cry went up every- where that rebellion must be suppressed and war to that end vigorously prosecuted. An instance of the sudden change in sentiments may be given.
General Robert H. Milroy, who had been edu- cated at a military academy at Norwich, Connecti- cut, and had served as a captain in the First In- diana Regiment in the war with Mexico, foresee- ing the coming conflict before it began, attempted to raise a company of volunteers, and several weeks of solicitation only brought two enlistments, but on the day following the firing on Fort Sumter, he filled his company of one hundred men before breakfast and had them prepared to march to the front before supper. On the first call for 75,000 to fill Indiana's quota of six thousand they were mustered into the United States service for three months in the 9th Indiana Regiment, with Milroy as their captain. He was soon after made the colonel of the regiment that re-enlisted at the ex- piration of the three months service, and he was soon thereafter promoted to brigadier general and attained and maintained much celebrity during the entire war; was called by his comrades the "Gray Eagle," because of his fearless and restless eyes and gray hair. His early days were spent in Car-
32
roll County, where his father brought him in his youth. At the time of his entering the civil war he was engaged in the law practice at Rensselaer. His brother John B. Milroy enlisted and served with him throughout the war as major of the 9th Indiana Regiment, and in after years served as a member of the Indiana legislature and in other county official positions.
General Milroy received but scant reward for his great military services by being appointed as an Indian Agent in the territory of Washington, where he died a few years later. Major John B. Milroy died in Carroll County in 1896.
Another instance of the quick responses to the call for troops was when Colonel James Gavin of the 7th Indiana Regiment mustered six hundred citizens of Decatur County in a few hours and on the same day telegraphed to Governor Morton: "These are fighting men and want to fight, and I want to take them where there is danger." Colo- nel Gavin served with distinction throughout the war. Before it began he had become a prominent lawyer and was associated with Oscar B. Hord, another able lawyer, in revising and annotating the statutes of Indiana, known to all lawyers as "Gavin and Hord's Statutes."
These are only two of many similar instances of the determination of the people throughout the State to aid in the suppression of the rebellion.
The people of the State generally were most liberal in their donations of money to aid in organ- izing regiments, and in making provisions for the
33
support of the families whose heads entered the service. In many instances money contributions were notably large, one of these is recalled in the act of Thomas J. Brooks, a farmer and merchant of Loogootee, Martin County, who donated a thousand dollars to Colonel Nathan Kimball to enable him to equip the 13th Indiana Regiment for service. His son, Louis Brooks, was a cap- tain of one of the companies of that regiment. Kimball was soon promoted to be a brigadier general, and Charles Denby of Evansville suc- ceeded him as colonel, and upon Denby's resigna- tion later in the war Louis Brooks succeeded him as colonel and remained with the regiment until the war closed.
Thomas J. Brooks, a son of Louis, after getting a thorough education became a lawyer and prac- ticed his profession successfully at Bedford, In- diana, for many years, and served in the state senate as one of its ablest members.
The enthusiasm and determination of the peo- ple in the early periods of the war were greatly diminished when its horrors and burdens were ex- perienced and a realization of the purposes for which it was waged became manifest in the neces- sity for destroying slavery, and many declared they would not have enlisted for such a purpose.
So rapidly did the opposition to the war grow that there were many desertions from the army and many proposals for the termination of the war by any means that could be contrived were heard: the clamor for peace at any price was so loud as
:
34
to almost produce mutiny in the army that had been so quickly mobilized. This opposition was seized upon by the opponents of the political party in power in their determination to humiliate Gov- ernor Morton, who it was claimed had caused the arrest of many citizens on groundless charges of disloyalty, and because of this opposition the Democratic party carried the state election and the state legislature in 1862 by a decisive majority, and at an early day in the legislative session that followed, in January, 1863, a preamble and reso- lution were introduced declaring that many citi- zens of the State had been arrested by the author- ity of the general government at the suggestion of Governor Morton, and confined in military pris- ons and camps without public charges being pre- ferred against them, and without any opportunity of being allowed to learn or discover the charges made or alleged against them, and refused a trial, and demanding that these outrages should cease; also resolutions declaring against the abolition of slavery, and that not another man or another dol- lar should be contributed for such a purpose. In the debates upon the plans for ending the war, the proposition of a northwestern confederacy that would include the States north and west of the Ohio river, as a means of becoming separated from the Eastern States was urged, notwithstanding that it embodied the very essence of treason.
The bitterness between Morton and the legis- lature was so intense that instead of his being in- vited and given an opportunity to deliver his mes-
35 111580
4 1767813
sage to them at the opening of the session, it took a recess until the week following, and upon its recon- vening he sent his message to them in printed form. This act on his part was followed by a resolution that was introduced in the house, declaring that he had failed and neglected to deliver any message and therefore that the house approved and adopted "the exalted and patriotic sentiments contained in the message lately delivered to the legislature of the State of New York by His Excelleney Governor Horatio Seymour," and extending its thanks and felicitations to him. But the resolution did not pass.
Another measure introduced provided for the creation of a military board to be composed of the newly elected State officers to take all matters per- taining to the war out of the governor's hands. The introduction of this revolutionary measure led to a bolt by the Republican members, who left the State capitol and went to Madison, Indiana. and remained until they received assurances from Thom- as A. Hendricks and others of the more conser- vative Democrats that the measure should not pass. While the legislature was still in session, and to stem the tide of opposition to the war that had set in, an address to the Democracy of Indiana was published from Democratic officers in the army reading as follows:
HELENA, ARK., Feb. 2, 1863.
To the Democracy of Indiana:
Having a deep interest in the future glory and wel- fare of our country and believing that we occupy a
36
position in which we can see the effects of the politi- cal struggles at home upon the hopes and fears of the rebels, we deem it our duty to speak to you openly and plainly in regard to the same.
The rebels of the South are leaning on the Northern democracy for support, and it is unquestionably true that unjustifiable opposition to the administration is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
While it is the duty of patriots to oppose usurpa- tion of power, it is alike their duty to avoid captious criticism that might create the very evils they attempt to avoid. The name Democrat, associated with all that is bright and glorious in the history of the past, is being sullied and disgraced by demagogues who are appealing to the lowest prejudices and passions of our people. We have nothing to expect from the South and nothing to hope without their conquest.
They are now using their money freely to subsidize the press and politicians of the North, and with what effect the tone of some of our journals and the speeches of some of their leaders too plainly and painfully testify.
We see with deep solicitude and regret that there is an undercurrent in Indiana tending toward a coali- tion of the northwest with the south against the east- ern States. Be not deceived. Pause for the love you bear to your country and reflect. This movement is only a rebel scheme in disguise that would involve you alike with themselves in the crime of rebellion and bring to your own hearthstones the desolation of a French Revolution. Separation on either side with peace in the future is impossible, and we are com- pelled by self-interest, by every principle of honor and every impulse of manhood to bring the unholy contest to a successful termination.
What! Admit that we are whipped? That twenty- three millions of northern men are unequal to nine
37
millions of the south? Shame on the State that would entertain so disgraceful a proposition.
Shame upon the Democrat who would submit to it and raise his cowardly voice and claim that he was an Indianian. He and such dastards and their off- spring are fit "Mud-sills" upon which should be built the lordly structure of their southern aristocracy! And with whom would this unholy alliance be formed? With men who have forgotten their fath- ers, their oaths, their country, and their God; with guerillas, cotton burners, with those who force every male inhabitant of the South capable of bearing arms into the field, though starving wives and babes are left behind! Men who persecute and hang or drive from their lines every man, woman, and child who will not fall down and worship the Southern God. And yet free born men of our own State will sympa- thize with such tyrants and dare even to dream of coalition! Indiana's proud and loyal legions number at least seventy-five thousand effective men in the field, and as with one great heart we know they would repudiate all unholy combinations tending to dismember our government.
In this dark hour of our country's trial there is but one road to success and peace and that is to be as firmly united for our government as rebels are against it. Small differences of opinion amount to nothing in this great struggle for a nation's existence. Do not place even one straw in the way and remem- ber that every word you speak to encourage the South nerves the arm and strikes the blow which is aimed at the hearts' blood of your kindred.
Signed : ALVIN P. HOVEY, Brigadier General. WILLIAM T. SPICELY, Colonel 2-1th Ind. WILLIAM E. MCLEAN, Colonel 43d Ind. GEORGE F. MCGINNIS, Colonel 11th Ind. JAMES R. SLACK, Colonel 47th Ind.
38
This timely, vigorous and effective address was published broadcast throughout the State, and was credited to the gifted pen and intellect of Colonel William E. McLean. Colonel James R. Slack became brigadier general, was a conspicuous Democrat after the war and was circuit judge for many years. General Hovey, a Democrat before the war, was elected governor on the Republican ticket in 1888 and died in office. Colonel McGin- nis was promoted to be brigadier general, served with distinction throughout the war and was elected as a Republican auditor of Marion County. Colonel McLean was a member of the Military Commission that tried Milligan and others for treason.
It is a coincidence in the record of tragedies that the surrender of Fort Sumter occurred on the 14th day of April, 1861, that on the evening of that day President Lincoln wrote his proclamation, dated on the 15th, calling on the American peo- ple to assist him in preserving public peace and order and to aid him in maintaining the honor, integrity and existence of the national union, and calling the special session of congress that de- clared war, and that on the night of the 14th day of April, 1865, at about the same hour that he signed his proclamation of four years before, he was assassinated.
It is not the author's intention to attempt to follow the progress of the war or give a description of its many tragedies and events that have been made the subjects of so many complete, accurate
39
ยท
and ably written histories, but he will refer here- after to some of these events that have a connec- tion with the reconstruction period that followed. His next narrations will begin in the month of April, 1865, as an event and experience in his own life that then occurred made such impressions as to cause him to become a close observer of the conduct of public men who were actors in the pub- lic events that followed.
Having the liberty of choosing his own course in life and the kind of employment he preferred, the left the little town of Galveston in Cass County, Indiana, on the first day of April, 1865, to seek employment more congenial to his inclinations than working on a farm, with only funds sufficient to pay his railroad fare to Chicago and for his board at a cheap lodging house for a very few days. No great philanthropist like the "Honorable Hinky Dink," later a local celebrity and municipal legis- lator of that city, was then providing a lodging and refreshing place for so-called "Hobos," and he had to subsist on very seant meals for a number of days, but the excitement of the times aided in keep- ing him alive.
On the 9th day of April, 1865, four years after 1
the rebel march to Fort Sumter began, the news came of the surrender of General Lee to General Grant that ended the war. Those who witnessed the scenes on the 11th day of November, 1918, when the news was confirmed about the ending of the World War can imagine the excitement on the 9th day of April, 1865.
40
The great rejoicing in the city of Chicago then was mixed with bitter reproaches of those called "Copperheads." Painted on the sidewalks and in other public places in large black letters were these words:
"Wanted-The men who in the month of Au- gust, 1864, in Convention Assembled in this City declared the war a failure to now show themselves."
The writer begs to digress here to say that the indignation the publishers of these words then felt was no deeper than that experienced by many when a United States Senator from Oregon, in 1917, declared that the agencies of the administra- tion and its military directors had "fallen down" in the prosecution of the World War, when in fact over two million brave American soldiers had been landed in France without the loss of a single life, to end it.
The reference of the painted words, mentioned, to the Democratic National Convention of 1864, that had nominated General George B. McClellan for president, provoked feelings and demonstra- tions of the most intense anger and many street quarrels and discussions that were very exciting.
This bitterness was more intensified when on the fourth anniversary of the surrender of Fort Sumter the world was shocked and sorrowed by the news of the assassination of the president. This tragic and historie event east grief, gloom and de- spondency everywhere, and in every doorway of the city where he had been nominated for presi-
41
.
dent in 1860 appeared his picture, wreathed in the badges and drapery of woe.
This gloom and the disappointments, distress and fears experienced by a homeless and penniless youth were not dispelled by the belief that "the brighest lightning is kindled in the darkest clouds," and he determined to leave the city. It so happened that there were then no gates to prevent entrance to railroad coaches, one of which he boarded with much less than half the return trip fare. It still more fortunately happened that the conductor of the train, named Workman, was the possessor of such humane and charitable characteristics that he did not impose the discomforts and humiliation of expulsion upon the returning wanderer, but landed him back to the place from which he started, where he remained until an opportunity came to him that enabled him to observe future events from a quieter place than Chicago. It was not his intention to ever again see that city, but by a concatenation of fortuitous circumstances it became his residence twenty-six years later, where he resided for twenty- eight years without losing his affections for the old Hoosier State.
>
42
THOMAS A. HENDRICKS
CHAPTER III
T THE accession of Andrew Johnson to the pres- idency that immediately followed the death of President Lincoln caused that personage's actions to be closely watched from the hour that he took the oath of office and at once incited criticisms and distrust. It was whispered by some and boldly declared by others that he was intoxicated on that occasion, his followers indignantly denying the charge and some of them later convincing them- selves that it must have been true.
What his policy would be in the work of recon- struction was the uppermost subject of inquiry in the public mind.
The course that the minority party in Congress would take towards him was watched with quite as much eagerness as was that of the majority party that had nominated and elected him for vice- president.
Thomas A. Hendricks of Indiana was then the minority leader in the United States Senate. His Republican constituents in Indiana were charging that he had withheld his support from President Lincoln, and demanding that it be given to the new president. This demand was made before it was known what Johnson's policies would be and so
43
acute was it that a public meeting was called at Indianapolis to instruct him as to the wishes of those who called it and to demand a public pledge from him. His personal friends advised him that to attend this meeting or to face the mob that it would be composed of meant personal violence to him, but nevertheless, he courageously faced it and declared that he would cheerfully give his support to the president if his policies were consistent with his own views of constitutional construction, other- wise he would not.
The charge previously made that Hendricks had not possessed courage or qualities of leader- ship was not thereafter repeated.
The few days that had intervened between the end of the war and the death of President Lincoln were so given up to general rejoicing over its close that no plans of reconstruction had then been pub- licly stated by President Lincoln or proposed from any source. The status of the States that had se- ceded in their then and future relations to the Fed- eral Union presented puzzling questions that neither jurists or statesmen had yet ventured posi- tive opinions upon. The prevailing opinion soon afterward was that they had forfeited and lost their status as States of the Union by reason of their attempts to secede from it, and that they should be held as conquered provinces and sub- jected to federal control by military agencies or otherwise as congress might determine.
Johnson had been a loyal Union man before the war, was a military governor of it when nominated
44
and elected vice-president in 1864, and it was be- lieved that he would concur in this prevailing popular opinion, but those who so believed over- looked the natural thirst and appetite for power that seizes everyone who gets in position to exer- cise it, and did not take into account the vanities of mankind in their desires to become great lead- ers in thought and action.
To concede such great powers to congress would lessen his own and in effect abdicate them; con- sequently he was not slow in declaring his own policies that he proposed to enforce either with or without the concurrence of congress.
He very soon indicated that it would be the policy of his administration to withdraw any con- trol over the seceding States by military governors or other agencies of the Federal Government and to restore to them all the rights of independent state governments and all civil rights of their citi- zens as fully as they had existed before their seces- sion, and that test oath acts and other acts of congress that had disfranchised their leaders and participants in rebellion should be set aside. In short, he seemingly proposed to fully reanimate the old doctrine of "States rights," notwithstanding that the war had been fought and won to establish the supremacy of federal control and had prac- tically, or at least theoretically, settled that they had forfeited and lost all the rights reserved to them when the Federal Union was formed. It is probable that his policies would have been prem- ature for many years at least, but for the fact
45
that the Southern States, already devastated by the war, were being overrun by unscrupulous "Carpet Baggers" and other adventurers from the north, who were imposing unbearable burdens upon them, and but for the fact that in dealing with the situa- tion congress threatened Johnson's impeachment, and by its acts showed a determination to keep alive the partisan clamor that would long prevent either reconciliation or reconstruction.
A clear statement of the issues and differences between congress and the president appears in a published address delivered by Honorable Hugh McCulloch at his home at Fort Wayne, Indiana, on the 11th day of October, 1865, following one along the same lines delivered at Richmond, In- diana, by Governor Morton on the 20th day of September, 1865, that is preserved in the state library at Indianapolis, in which he took strong grounds in opposition to negro suffrage at that time, and strongly commended the reconstruction policies of President Johnson. contending that they were in harmony with the intended purposes of President Lincoln. The facts that he stated are convincing in support of his conclusion that Johnson was "simply carrying out the policy left to him by his lamented predecessor-a policy that had been endorsed by the whole nation in the re- election of Mr. Lincoln and had been promulgated to the whole world nearly one year before the time of his last election." Viewing this speech in itself without challenging or commenting upon the con- sistency of its author in changing his attitude to-
46
ward Johnson, and voting for his conviction on his impeachment trial it must be said that it is perhaps the ablest of all the great speeches ever delivered by that intellectual giant, but yet none of his biog- raphers have given it prominence or publicity.
It was not, as often contended by his political opponents, an absolute and unqualified argument against negro suffrage, but was an able argument in support of his contention that there should be a period of probation education and preparation be- fore the negroes should be brought "to the exercise of political power." In concluding his remarks on this subject he said: "I submit then, however, clearly and strongly we may admit the natural rights of the negro-I submit to the intelligence of the people-that colored state governments are not desirable; that they will bring about results that are not to be hoped for; that finally they would threaten to bring about, and I believe would result in a war of races."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.