S1E5 – Stars and Banners

Welcome to Breaking Nation, a Civil War podcast. I'm your host, Scott Holmgren. My goal is simple to bring the American Civil War to life by exploring and discovering the people, the places, and the events of this critical era, as if we didn't know how it would turn out. This is episode five of season one. If you haven't listened to the previous episodes, feel free to jump right in with us. But you may want to go back and listen to the ones prior. There is a lot of background material to digest in order to fully appreciate what's happened prior to eighteen sixty. America then, like it is today, is a complex and unpredictable place. Not only do I love a great story told, but one set in the mid-19th century America will always get my attention. When people ask me for recommendations, I typically start with three films. Gettysburg, directed by Ron Maxwell, released in 1993, Glory, directed by Edward Zwick, released in 1989, and Steven Spielberg's Lincoln from 2012. Each is powerfully dramatic and gives an authentic look into the world of the Civil War, with great attention to detail. After those three, I'd also add uh Free State of Jones, directed by Gary Ross from 2016, The Conspirator, Robert Redford's film of 2010, and Gangs of New York from Martin Scorsese in 2002. These are also compelling stories worth watching. Finally, 12 Years a Slave from Steve McQueen in 2013 is a must-watch and an essential film to understand the context and reasons for the war. Unfortunately, one film I'd be hard pressed to recommend is Gods and Generals, also directed by Ron Maxwell, the guy who did Gettysburg, and it came out in 2003. On one hand, it is visually arresting. Its exactness and accuracy to detail is impressive. On the other, it is narratively sleep-inducing. I cannot think of another war movie so completely devoid of conflict at the character level. For me, the best part of the entire theatrical 219-minute runtime happens right at the very beginning. The opening credits. It's kind of all downhill after that. It's set against a montage of flags rippling in the wind. These are battle standards that represent regimental and organizational colors of Civil War units. And the progression of stars and banners is accompanied by a beautiful and moving song called Going Home by the musician Mary Fall. It's a tune that she actually wrote on spec before it even got into the movie, and it's got this haunting Celtic melody. The song features lyrics like this Love Waits for Me Round the Bend, leads me endlessly on. And I know what I've lost and all that I won when the road finally takes me home. These words allude to the idea of home. Home as a resting place, a place of haven and of love. Juxtaposed against the montage of the flags, the song reminds us that home meant different things to the characters of the story at that time. The words tell us what the flags show us. I think the balance of the movie is supposed to show how the four primary characters in the film, Lee, Jackson, Hancock, and Chamberlain, accept their beliefs about what home is and the sentimental longing each has to return home. Roman philosopher Pliny the Elder is often credited with the quote, home is where the heart is. And so certainly one's belief about one's home is a core pillar of one's thoughts, desires, and choices. All of this makes for compelling reflection upon the United States on the doorstep of civil war. What would a citizen say defined what, or better yet, where their home was in that election year of 1860? Our reality has been shaped by the 20th century and the first decades of the 21st. Regardless of how divided we may think we are, Americans do still have a very nationalistic mindset of our allegiance and our national loyalty, though we do seem to feel like we're drifting apart. But looking back, Americans responded to 9-11 together. We persevered and endured through the turbulence of the 60s together. We fought two world wars together in order to stop conquering powers. None of this history or memory existed in the national consciousness of 1860 Americans. There was a common bond of independence that forged our separation from Great Britain, and a then recent fight with Mexico to ensure the country reached from sea to shining sea. But the 1840s and 1850s revealed more and more divides within the country than they revealed growing and closer bonds. And so we come to the run-up to the election of 1860. I'd submit that there were competing beliefs and visions about what and where this thing called home was. De Tocqueville, in his Democracy in America, said of the free quote The American attaches himself to his home as the mountaineer clings to his hills, because the characteristic features of his country are there more distinctly marked than elsewhere. The American derives from his own home that love of order which he afterwards carries with him into public affairs. Americans clung to the deeply held concept of home. In contrast, the Tocqueville also spoke of the enslaved, having only a faint image of a home, which the shelter of his master's roof affords. For people in America during the first half of the nineteenth century, home was immediate. A great many people before the impact of railroads never traveled more than a dozen miles from their homes each year unless they lived or worked near rivers. They might migrate across regions or settle in another state. That happened often. Abraham Lincoln himself, born in Kentucky, moved to Indiana, moved to Illinois. But the day-to-day reality of living was their home, their community, their county, their immediate country. So by 1860, there's a great sense of immediacy and locality to the American consciousness. Even immigrants who came from Europe would establish homes and communities in specific places that they made central to their beliefs and visions. In this way, a state of the Union may have factored more as one's country than the United States itself did. South Carolina was your country, or Virginia, or Massachusetts. If it helps, take your college football allegiance, all right? Buckeyes, ducks, gators, wolverines, whatever it is, and now make that your citizenship. Okay, for some that's not much of a stretch. I get it. But seriously, make your citizenship a state-centered one. It may be easier if you've only ever lived in one state. I've lived in four. It's a little tougher for me. Once you adopt that mindset, I'm from this state, this is my country, then factor in the issue of slavery for those in 1860 and determine whether your country was part of the free block of country states or if it was part of the slave block of country states. Now your home might be as a northerner, a southerner or somewhere on the border. Now let's roll that up to one's actual national citizenry. And a person might be an American, but definitely a northerner or southerner, and they are most certainly a New Yorker or a Mississippian. And that American flag might have less and less significance along the way. One star might be more important than the entire flag. Your belief and vision for what you wanted and how you wanted the country to move forward would be directly shaped and molded by where you called home. We have to keep this all in mind as we prepare for the election of 1860, as if we were there and unaware what the outcome would be. Yes, there were definite and growing political divides, as we saw last episode, with the Whigs splintering into free soilers, know-nothings, and Republicans, but the geography of home would become the undoing of the Democratic Party as well. With the country still reeling from the shock of John Brown's bloody uprising and raid at Harper's Ferry in 1859, Americans turned their calendars to 1860, with several specific and political dates circled. The Democratic National Convention would begin on April 23rd in Charleston, South Carolina. The Constitutional Union Convention would start on May 9th in Baltimore, Maryland. And the Republican National Convention would kick off on May 16th in Chicago, Illinois. That spring, if you picked up the April 10th, 1860 issue of the New York Herald and turned to page six, here's what you'd learn. You would see that the cotton market was steady while corn took a decidedly upward turn. You'd also learn that there were 451 deaths in the city that week, which was up 73 from the same week the year before. And then you would read a commentary on the importance of the upcoming Democratic Convention in Charleston, set to begin in a couple weeks. It said this of the Democrats. Quote, it is the only one of the presidential conventions that will have full delegations from every state in the Union and thus possesses a truly national character. The country, however, is not blind to the fact that there is not among the thirty or forty aspirants for the nomination, a single man who dares to take on any great national question the position of statesman. The whole country waits to see if the men thus brought together will recognize the greatness of the emergency that is before them, and putting aside their petty local fancies, adopt a platform broad as the Union, and place it upon a man who will command the confidence of the conservative feeling now everywhere aroused by the sense of danger. There is one thing that the country will not sanction. No extremist can be elected. The next president must come from the states bordering on the central line where men know the value of the North and the South to each other. That great national question that the article talks about was slavery and what to do about it. Since 1850, the country had been, quote, aroused by the sense of danger, and had argued, wrestled, fought, and bled over slavery. Could a leader be found who would lead the nation forward? What would the Democratic Party do? Would they indeed choose a candidate from one of the border states, Missouri or Kentucky or Maryland, to run for the presidency? The New York Herald seemed to think that would be the wisest course of action. But there was another party now, the growing Republican Party, born in the 1850s, which drew together abolitionists who wanted to see slavery ended, know-nothings who wanted to mitigate the negative effects of immigration, free soilers who saw the expansion of slavery as the thing to oppose, and the remaining Whigs of the previous generation who had seen their party disappear, and the majority of them were in the North. It was not truly a national party across the board. If you lived in Richmond, Indiana, and picked up the May 17, 1860 issue of the Richmond Palladium, you could read the reprinted speech given by one of those very border politicians, Francis P. Blair Jr. of Missouri, a free soiler and a Republican. And Blair was a guest speaker to 1,500 people who attended the Republican State Convention of Virginia in Wheeling on May 2nd. You see, in 1860, there was no state of West Virginia. There was only Virginia, all of it together. And the Western counties of the state were strongly unionist and against the pro-slavery voices in the eastern part of the state. Blair said to his audience, quote, The Republican of today is the Republican Party of the early days of our Republic, that it holds essentially and precisely the same doctrines. I deem it a good omen for the country that Virginia has taken the initiatory steps to resume her old Republican attitude. She is, or rather was, the mother of statesmen and of the heroes of our revolution, and the men who molded our Constitution. Now under the counsels of this degenerate, this apostate democracy, hugging to their bosoms this fatal gift of slavery, she has sunk in her proportions, she has ceased to be the commanding state. In which direction would Virginia move in the coming election? Nobly forward toward republicanism as she had done before, or backward in retrograde fashion away from statesmen and heroes? Virginia, like the rest of the country, was unsure how its political landscape would turn and account for the growing tension and unease produced by slavery, by John Brown, by the Fugitive Slave Act, by the Dred Scott decision, by open war in Kansas, and all the other sparks of discord that we saw which filled the 1850s. The Democratic Party was the party in power in 1860. Democrat James Buchanan of Pennsylvania was in the White House. His vice president was Kentuckian John C. Breckinridge. His cabinet was a mix of Northerners and Southerners, including Lewis Cass of Michigan and Howell Cobb of Georgia, but all committed to the party. Thirty-eight Democrat senators held an 11-seat advantage and the majority in the upper chamber of Congress. Only in the House did the Democrats find themselves on the back foot, holding just 83 of 235 seats. There were 113 Republicans, with the remaining 39 seats filled by representatives of four other factions. But as the New York Herald had stated, the Democrats were the only true national party. The Republicans were a particularly northern faction. The Independents, Know Nothings, and opposition politicians were scattered across a handful of states. But the Democrats were both North and South, East and West, and all the borders in between. And a majority of Americans believed that the next president would have to be a Democrat, who would have to bring unity and leadership to the country. For as unhinged as the eighteen fifties had been, for eight years the Democrats had held the country together. And now it was time to elect another. But which Democrat? As Democrats from all over the country gathered in Charleston, South Carolina, in the latter half of April 1860, the Deep South had already been working to forge and hammer out a unified anti-Northern voting block led by the outspoken fire eater William Lowndes Yancey of Alabama. The pro-slavery platform they created would essentially never work for anyone who wasn't pro slavery. Morant Halstead, a journalist with the Cincinnati Commercial, reported on the Democratic Convention. Of Yancey, Halstead wrote, quote, he is a compact, middle sized man straight limbed with a square built head and face and an eye full of expression. No one would be likely to point him out in a group of gentlemen, as the redoubtable Yansey, who proposes to precipitate the cotton states into a revolution, dissolve the Union, and build up a southern empire. I very much doubt whether the Douglas men have a leader competent to cope with him in the coming fight. It is quite clear that while the North may be strongest in voters here and the most noisy, the South will have the intellect and the pluck to make its points. Halstead also describes Senator John Slidell, born in New York but who made Louisiana his home in this way. Quote His appearance here means war to the knife. His special mission is to see that Stephen A. Douglas is not nominated for the presidency. If I am not much mistaken, he just now manipulated a few of the Northeastern men with such marvelous art that they will presently find they are exceedingly anxious to defeat the nomination of Douglas, and they will believe that they arrived at that conclusion coming uppermost in their minds in their own way. End quote. Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, the great debater against Lincoln, the author of the Kansas Nebraska Act, the advocate for popular sovereignty, had supporters across the North, most importantly throughout New York and Ohio, and was sure to get three fifths of the convention's votes. Many Northerners considered him the presumptive nominee. Robert Hunter of Virginia and James Guthrie of Kentucky were the next convention. Candidates up. Choices more favorable to border and upper south states, and they even had supporters in Pennsylvania and New England. A third-tier candidate was Senator Andrew Johnson of Tennessee. The tradition of the day was that candidates did not attend conventions in person. Their supporters and representatives did all the work. And so the first order of business in Charleston was to adopt a party platform. And instantly it hit a roadblock over the fight between the pro-slavery platform and the northern platform, which was more restrictive via territorial legislation. On April 27th, Yancey stood up and spoke for Southerners and the pro-slavery platform that Congress had to uphold the constitutional right of slavery against antislavery forces. He assured the Assembly that no one was in favor of dissolving the Union, but that if the North failed to support the platform via the election in November, then that would be the cause of disunion. He said, Ours is the property invaded. Ours are the institutions which are at stake. Ours is the peace that is to be destroyed. Ours is the honor at stake, the honor of children, the honor of families, the lives, perhaps of all. Yield no position here until we are convinced we are wrong. That was going to be an impossibility. Yancy was using language about the honor of home as his hill to die on. As Southern delegates ran out of patience, so did the Northerners. At first the pro slavery platform was accepted until two days later, when the Douglas men pushed their platform through with a close but majority vote. Then came Monday, april thirtieth. It would be a turning point day in American political history. One by one, Southern states began withdrawing their votes for the platform. And then fifty delegates, all from the lower south, completely walked out of the hall. They were done. They left the convention, and the Southern delegates from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas all spilled out into the streets and saloons of the city. Yancey had won. That night Charleston had a sense of celebration like the Fourth of July. Crowds were laughing and excited. They surrounded and cheered the offices of the Charleston Mercury and its publisher, Robert Rhett, as the morning edition was being assembled. Talk was brewing of a new Southern Republic, and Yancey's name was being repeated often. Southerners swore against anyone becoming the first Republican president and that Douglas would be just as detestable. Halstead wrote in the Cincinnati commercial, quote, there was no mistaking the public sentiment of the city. It was overwhelmingly and enthusiastically in favor of the seceders. In all her history, Charleston had never enjoyed herself so hugely. What had just happened? The Democrats had assembled in Charleston to select a nominee for president. And then the Fire Eaters had just broken the Democratic Party. The sectionalism over the issue of slavery had not only fractured the party platform, but it now also had split the party assembly. Those who remained spent the next several days desperately trying to select a candidate, but Douglass repeatedly fell short of the needed votes by a wide margin. I mean, 50 delegates were gone. And the 57th presidential ballot of the convention was not that far different than the very first one. The discouraged remnant of the party decided to throw in the towel in Charleston and reconvene in Baltimore on June 18th. At this point, we see an epic failure of the American political party system. Because what happened was there was no compromise candidate. Going back through the conventions of the 1840s and 1850s, whenever parties were divided, they would push their way through the log jams and divisions by finding someone they could all get behind. Anyone. And then after multiple ballots, eventually landing on a compromise choice, like they'd done in the past, say Andrew Johnson of Tennessee. He was the third-tier guy. He was nobody's first pick, but he could be everybody's second or third pick. And then he would run as the one lone opponent against whoever the Republican candidate would be in 1860. And then he might have won with the full support of Democrats, both North and South. Think of that. Andrew Johnson, 16th president of the United States. What if? But the slavery divide would not allow for that. There would be no compromise. Instead, the situation was irreparable. After the Charleston debacle, Congressman Alexander Stevens of Georgia was speaking with a friend. Stevens had been a Whig, then a Democrat. He was staunchly pro slavery, but also a firm unionist. Seeing the situation from all angles, he spoke with foresight, saying, quote, in less than twelve months we shall be in a war, and that the bloodiest in history. The party is split forever. The only hope was at Charleston. If the party could have agreed there, we might carry the election. As it is, the cause is hopelessly lost. On june eighteenth, in Baltimore, the Democrats were in full on damage control mode. The day the convention opened, the New York Times wondered what would happen. Quote The Democrats renew their attempt to nominate a presidential candidate today at Baltimore. Everything at present indicates a stormy session. The delegates from this state will be much less obstinate in their adhesion to the fortunes of Mr. Douglas, but he could not command the support of the Southern states. We still believe that an attempt will be made by a portion of the New York delegation to induce the South to present Judge Nelson with a united party and a rational platform. Judge Nelson would certainly be a formidable candidate. End quote. First, the Democrats now had to decide if the Southern delegates who had walked out in Charleston would be readmitted, or if replacements would be allowed to take their spots as new pro-Douglas delegates were starting to be admitted. This caused another split, and 56 more Southern delegates walked out in protest. At that point, with nearly all the remaining delegates supporting Douglas, the convention voted that two-thirds of those present casting votes, and not two-thirds of all delegates initially present in Charleston would be required to secure the nomination. On the second ballot, Stephen A. Douglas won the Democratic nomination. Poor Judge Nelson of New York didn't receive a single vote. Ironically, a week later, also in Baltimore, all those Southern Democrats who had walked out in protest, both in Charleston and the week prior, gathered in the hall of the Maryland Institute. Declaring themselves to be the real Democratic Party, they got right to business. According to the Baltimore Sun, quote, all restraint of feeling had disappeared, the perfect restoration of that geniality of intercourse which is alone the earnest diagonal of a harmonious result, a feeling of sectional pride and loyalty to the Southern leaders that is superior to convictions of either principle or expediency. End quote. The delegates of this second but real Democratic Convention revised their two-thirds rule to allow for voting by just those present, and then they approved a pro-slavery platform and nominated the sitting vice president, John C. Breckinridge, on the first ballot. In 1860, there would be two Democratic candidates for president. Baltimore would continue to be center stage for national politics, when on May 9th, yet another party would gather there for its national convention. If you remember the breakdown of the House of Representatives at the start of 1860, there were 39 congressional seats held by lawmakers that didn't identify themselves as either Democrats or Republicans. Their constituents were leftover Whigs, straggling know-nothings, and an informal opposition party. At the center of this band of outliers was 70-year-old Senator John J. Crittenden of Kentucky, who had also served twice as Attorney General under Presidents Harrison and Fillmore. A longtime Whig, Crittenden sought to bring moderates together under the banner of the new Constitutional Union Party. Most were from border states like Maryland and the Upper South, like Tennessee and Virginia. Most thought the Republicans were way too radical and that the abolitionists needed to be put in their place. Most of them were sixty or older, earning the group the nickname the Old Gentlemen's Party. They were certainly respected as individuals. The Augusta Chronicle and Sentinel wrote that they quote are not demagogues, seeking power at the expense of the public good and the public peace, but plain old fashioned patriots, like the fathers of the Republic. Too much honesty, fidelity, and capacity we fear, for this corrupt and degenerate age, they might allay the fratricidal strife which bad men and mere politicians had wickedly or foolishly aroused. While advanced in years and small in number, the Constitutional Unionists played perhaps the most strategic game of brinkmanship that had a slim but real opportunity to shape the United States for the next four years. Their goal was simply to stop the Republicans from getting a majority of electoral votes. They knew they could not get enough votes to win, but perhaps they could get enough votes to push the election into the House of Representatives. There each state would get one vote, and perhaps there the constitutional unionists could form a sort of coalition with the Democrats to elect the next president. Someone who would not be a radical northerner nor a radical southerner. If that didn't happen by inauguration day, then the vice president chosen by the Democratic-controlled Senate would become president. It was a very narrow path to purpose, but still a path nonetheless. Senator John Bell of Tennessee got the party's nomination after two ballots. And now there were three candidates for president. Some Americans could remember back 26 years before. The last time an election seemed to be as unpredictable as this one was becoming. And because no candidate had a majority of electoral votes, it went to the House to decide. Though Andrew Jackson had won the most electoral votes and the popular vote in the general election, the House chose John Quincy Adams through the influential workings of none other than Henry Clay, who did not like Jackson at all, and who Adams, in appreciation, named his Secretary of State. Known as the Corrupt Bargain, would Americans see a replay of this script from 1824 as the election of 1860 approached? If Crittenden could play the role of Clay, perhaps no Republican would sit in the White House. All eyes turned to Chicago for the Republican National Convention. The may sixteenth, eighteen sixty edition of Harper's Weekly featured a center spread of all the leading Republican candidates who would be contending for their party's nomination. Front and center was William H. Seward of New York, who, like Douglas for the Democrats, was the presumptive favorite. On either side of Seward in the paper, were former Representative Edward Bates of Missouri and Governor Nathaniel P. Banks of Massachusetts. Down at the lower left were Salmon P. Chase and Supreme Court Justice John McLean, both from Ohio. Oh, and there was also a small image of a former one-term congressman from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln. Nearly forty thousand visitors poured into Chicago in the days leading up to the start of the convention, many by railroad. Dozens of trains made their way west from Buffalo, some going north into Canada and some going south of Lake Erie across Michigan and Indiana. The 538-mile journey, including stops, took 15 hours and 15 minutes. A 30-piece band that had performed for the Democrats in Charleston made the trip, wanting to see if Republicans could keep party unity in Chicago. One train roared through cities and towns averaging 47 miles per hour as cannon boomed in salute. Americans were certainly traveling faster than humans ever had before. Arriving New Yorkers celebrated their favorite son, Seward, who had spent much of 1859 on an impressive eight-month tour of Europe. Advisors said the trip would keep him out of controversy at home, while giving him international exposure, especially in London, where he met Prime Minister Lord Palmerston and Queen Victoria herself. Fellow New Yorker Thurlow Weed, known as the President Maker, who helped Harrison and Taylor get to the White House, was Seward's main backer. Three of the most famous professional boxers of the day, Tom Heyer, Patrick Branigan, and Ed Price, all traveled to Chicago to support their man. With influencers and celebrities zeroing in on the city, New York Papers reprinted a popular poem that anticipated their nominee's success. Quote They come, they come a gallant host, the chosen guard of freedom's van, from city plain and seagirt coast to choose and crown the coming man. A nation beats her morning drum and bids her sons to her behest, from north, from south, from east they come, To clasp the hand of Golden West. The Empire State, proud, leads the van, and throws her Seward's banner forth, the champion of the rights of man, the lion of awakened North. As Seward, Weed, Horace Greeley, and other luminaries arrived in Chicago, they were greeted by ranks of uniformed young men carrying oil torches on four foot poles, bearing banners and standards that featured a giant eye painted on them. They were members of the Wide Awakes, a new Republican paramilitary organization that started in Connecticut and spread across the North. They would march in parades and perform drills at ceremonies and gatherings. The Wide Awakes took it upon themselves to be the official escort brigade in Chicago. From the Lakefront train station, they would march en masse with arriving dignitaries to their hotels and to the epicenter of the convention, a building known as the Wigwam. The massive wood frame structure had been built for the convention and could seat 10,000 delegates and guests. Its acoustics were incredible, so that a speaker could be heard by all. On may eleventh, eighteen sixty, a Washington journalist wrote, The duty of the Chicago Convention is plain. Nominate a candidate who will carry out the wishes of the founders of the government. But like the Democrats, there was the very real possibility of a split in the party. For the powerful publisher and editor of the New York Tribune, Horace Greeley, did not want to see Seward nominated. His man was Edward Bates of Missouri, and Greeley bore a political grudge against Seward and Weed. The divides again might fracture the Republican golden opportunity. With Democrats divided, they couldn't risk bleeding moderate supporters to the constitutional unionists. The New York Daily Herald wrote on March 5, 1860, that the divide between the Seward and Bates factions would split the party. It would be demolished and disorganized by admixture of southern mire with northern metal, like the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar, whose feet were part of iron and part of clay, and which, for want of any principle of cohesion, fell in pieces and were scattered as chaff before the wind. The New York Times emphasized on april twenty first, eighteen sixty, the need to keep the Republican Party together. Quote, devotion to the success of the Republican Party and its principles was clearly stronger than personal attachments. Desire for success was paramount. Into this potential storm came the Lincoln men, led by David Davis, with an eye toward picking which battles to fight and which hills to die on. Lincoln was not the front runner. But his debates with Douglas in 1858, and more recently his Cooper Union speech in Manhattan on February 27th, had brought the single term congressman notoriety enough to be known by everyone in the Whig. On that night months ago in New York City, Lincoln had concluded by saying, quote, wrong as we think slavery is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is. But can we, while our votes will prevent it, allow it to spread into the national territories, and to overrun us here in these free states. If our sense of duty forbids this, then let us stand by our duty, fearlessly and effectively. Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith let us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it. By now, Lincoln had become known as the rail splitter. The month before, after being made Illinois' nominee for the party in Decatur, the convention erupted in celebration, and amidst all the cheering, friends of Lincoln's carried in split fence rails, symbolic of the hundreds he supposedly split all across the great state. Then in February, newspapers from Pennsylvania to Iowa had reprinted an account from an elderly man who remembered a young Abraham Lincoln who, quote, would split rails by daylight and then study surveying by candlelight. He was as honest as the sun. And so the rail splitter also became honest Abe. After the first day of the Chicago Convention, delegate and Batesman Horace Greeley spoke of Lincoln. Quote, Lincoln is a very adroit politician. He has a host of friends out here in Illinois who seem to see something in him that the rest of us haven't seen yet. He has a very interesting history that would make good campaign literature. But the trouble with Lincoln is this. He has no experience in national affairs. And facing a crisis as we all believe, I doubt if such a nomination would be acceptable. It is too risky an undertaking. I think Bates would be safer. End quote. But one group who would not support Bates were German Americans. 31% of all foreign-born Americans were German, and the fastest growing Western cities with Germans, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, St. Louis, and Chicago, were becoming very political. A Republican straw poll of German voters showed no support for Bates due to his nativist leanings. If a more moderate candidate than Seward was needed for Republican Germans, it would have to be someone besides Bates. And so as delegates began to vote, Seward was the front runner, while states got behind their favorite sons, Pennsylvania for Simon Cameron, Ohio for Salmon Chase, Missouri for Bates, and then Lincoln, who not only got support from Illinois, but also Indiana and parts of New England and even Virginia Republicans. On the second ballot, Pennsylvania shockingly switched to Lincoln, and then the run was on. Two ballots later, Lincoln had the nomination. The Republicans were able to do what the Democrats could not. The party needed to unify behind one candidate. Seward was too radical in his abolitionism. He too often emphasized the irrepressible conflict, which sounded like warmongering. Bates was too weak as a border candidate and had ties to the Know Nothings. Cameron and Chase both had too many questions about truly being moderate. Lincoln was the one and only consolidation candidate. While Northerners could rally behind Lincoln, and while many were growing more and more familiar of his name, not everyone was getting on the Honest Abe bandwagon. An abolitionist, Wendell Phillips, someone who we'd think would support Lincoln, described him on May 30th at an anti-slavery convention in New England, saying, quote, Who is this huckster in politics? Who is this country court advocate? Who is this who does not know if he has got any opinions? What is his recommendation? It is that nobody knows good or bad of him. And so now the fourth presidential candidate had been named. One who had the slimmest of political resumes in hand compared to Senators Douglas and Bell and Vice President Breckinridge. And no one had any idea how it would all turn out. Of course, in hindsight, years later when Frederick Douglass visited Chicago in eighteen sixty seven, he reflected on the significance of what had happened there at the convention in the Wigwam. From the March twenty fifth issue of the Chicago Tribune that year, he said, Without Chicago, we should have no wigwam. Without the wigwam, we should have had no Abraham Lincoln. Without a Lincoln, we might have today had no government. As the summer of eighteen sixty turned to the fall, Americans now had to reckon with the new political landscape produced by the different party conventions. Not the least of all, who was this upstart candidate from Illinois? The pro slavery Charleston Mercury said of Lincoln on june seventh, eighteen sixty A horrid looking wretch he is, sooty and scoundrelly in the aspect, a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse swapper, and the nightman, a creature fit evidently for petty treason, small stratagems and all sorts of spoils. He is a lank sided Yankee of the uncomliest visage and of the dirtiest complexion. While the nutmeg dealer reference sounds very interesting as a slap in the face, it's obviously not a flattering portrait. However, in the North, Lincoln's appeal grew in the eyes of Republicans, for the most part. Because he spoke through reason. He was a steady antislavery voice, but not too radical and outspoken. He did not fan flames of conflict, nor gag the words of opponents. Instead, he spoke clearly and reasonably. Considered this straightforward presentation of Southern and Northern views on slavery from his Cooper Union speech. All they, Southerners, ask we could readily grant if we thought slavery right. All we Northerners ask they could as readily grant if they thought it wrong. They're thinking it right and our thinking it wrong is the precise fact upon which depends the whole controversy. Thinking it right as they do, they are not to blame for desiring its full recognition as being right. But thinking it wrong as we do, can we yield to them? Now compare that laying out of the facts to Democratic Senator Robert Toomes of Georgia, who said this I will never surrender. In my judgment, this right, involving, as it does, political equality, is worth a dozen such unions as we have. I am its enemy, and I will then, if I can, bring my children and my constituents to the altar of liberty, and I will swear them to eternal hostility to your foul domination. Okay, who wants to fan some flames of conflict? That was typical rhetoric. And Lincoln offered something else. In addition to Lincoln's voice of reason, the Republican platform also tried to peaceably point towards several benefits for the country at large construction and improvements for use of harbors and rivers, a transcontinental railroad, a homestead act for settling westward. It included tariff language meant to benefit both North and South. It sought to preserve naturalization laws to mitigate nativism, and it warned against anyone considering treason. The slavery issue was not detailed, as it didn't need to be. The Republican Party itself was the statement on slavery. Northern Democrats, on the other hand, had to address two problems. First, how not to look like a party split by sectionalism. To this end, Douglass took the wildly unusual approach of actually campaigning for himself. And he did so in a way that severely affected his health. From July through October 1860, Douglass gave speeches all across the Northeast, then campaigned throughout Virginia and North Carolina. He also hit what he saw to be the key swing states of Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Tired and hoarse from speaking, Douglass struggled to get backing from local newspapers while seeing his campaign funds dwindle. His campaign was trending the wrong way. Second, the Northern Democrats had to handle growing corruption in the Buchanan administration. Postmasters regularly skimmed funds off the top, with New York's postmaster leaving the country when an audit showed his account short more than $150,000. The Democratic Party had bribed judges to speed immigration processes in order to influence voting in several states. Bribery was lathered all across the political machinations within the Kansas territory. Government printing contracts resulted in kickbacks filling the party's treasury funds. But no bigger sore festered for the Democrats than Buchanan's very own Secretary of War, John B. Floyd of Virginia. Inept, disorganized, and conniving, Floyd had sold government property at greatly reduced prices to unsavory persons. He inflated bills he'd submit to the War Department on behalf of a cash strapped contractor, who then used them to secure bank loans. Other bills converted bonds from a trust fund of the Department of the Interior, and he also began suspiciously directing federal weapons, muskets, and cannon southward to Southern Armories. Historian W. A. Swanberg in his book First Blood described the Secretary of War in this way Floyd was the worst possible man to head the war department at this critical time, and he should have been removed long before on the ground of incompetence alone. Yet there he was at Buchanan's elbow. As October came to a close, and Americans prepared to go to the polls. Someone else was busy trying to do his job. That someone was General Winfield Scott, commander of the US Army, hero of the war with Mexico, and one time candidate for president. Scott knew the election might create a situation where the military might have to ensure the security of the government and the country. He decided to put pen to paper and express his thoughts and opinions to President Buchanan, Secretary of War Floyd, and others he deemed appropriate. Scott's initiative was certainly the duty of the military leader of the country who had seen his fair share of conflicts. Dated October twenty ninth, eighteen sixty, the letter was titled Views Suggested by the imminent danger of a disruption of the Union by the secession of one or more of the southern states. It's as if Scott possessed a crystal ball. He wrote From a knowledge of our southern population, it is my solemn conviction that there is some danger of an early act of rashness preliminary to secession, namely the seizure of some or all of the following posts. He then names nine U. S. forts with little or no troops. In my opinion, all these works should be immediately so garrisoned. With the army faithful to its allegiance, there is good reason to hope that the danger of secession may be made to pass away without one conflict of arms. Beyond his military recommendations, Scott strayed by even suggesting perhaps the country be split into four separate and independent confederacies, the Northeast, Northwest, Southeast, and Southwest. Buchanan was not interested in the general's ideas on policy. Unfortunately, neither did he nor Floyd pay any attention to Scott's solid military recommendations. Buchanan, the Everdo face, was sympathetic to Southern Democrats and did not want to do anything that resembled action, even when it made sense militarily. He simply wanted to be done being president. The following week, election day dawned on November sixth, and Americans went to the ballot box. Nearly eighty two percent of eligible voters turned out, the most ever for a presidential election up until that time. As results trickled in, many wondered, would the Democrats somehow save the day and preserve the status quo? Would Lincoln become the first Republican president? Would no one get enough electoral votes? And would the decision be thrown to the House of Representatives? The Deep South was adamant in its position. Ten states did not even include Lincoln on their ballots. Fire eater Edmund Ruffin wrote in his diary that if Lincoln won the eighteen sixty election, it quote will serve to show whether the southern states are to remain free or to be politically enslaved, whether the institution of Negro slavery is to be secured by our resistance or to be abolished in a short time. To William Lowndes Yancey, Ruffin said Lincoln's election would be, quote, the beginning of a sure and speedy progress to the extermination of Negro slavery and the consequent and utter ruin of the prosperity of the South. And Mississippi Senator Jefferson Davis spoke to great applause from his home state the day before the election, saying, I glory in Mississippi's Star, but before I would see it dishonored, I would tear it from its place, to be set on the perilous ridge of battle as a sign around which her bravest and best shall meet the harvest home of death. It wasn't just Southerners who were readying themselves for the results. Reporting on Lincoln, Henry Villard of the New York Herald would write I doubt Mr. Lincoln's capacity for the task of bringing light and peace out of the chaos that will surround him. A man of good heart and good intentions, he is not firm. The Times demand a Jackson. In the end, Lincoln won, getting more than 1.8 million votes, the most for any presidential candidate at that time. And yet, it was just 39% of the national vote. But it didn't matter, because of the 303 electoral votes, he got 180. Breckinridge got 72, Bell 39, and Douglas just 12. Even if all the Democrats hadn't split their votes between Douglass and Breckinridge, they would have only won eleven more votes, giving Lincoln 169, still more than the 152 he needed to win. Douglas was second in the popular vote with 29% and had the widest geographical representation, but won only Missouri and some split votes in New Jersey. Breckinridge swept the Deep South with its 72 votes, but got just 18% of all ballots cast. And while the old Whig presence helped the constitutional unionists take Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia with thirty nine votes, Bell only got twelve percent of the national vote. It wasn't enough to stop the rail splitter from Illinois. Southern dominance and influence had been a chief ingredient of American politics since the Declaration of Independence. eighteen sixty ended it. Before the election, Southerners had predicted that a Lincoln victory would produce immediate consequences. It didn't take long after the election for things to begin to happen. The day after Lincoln's victory, the U.S. judges, tax officials, and other government employees in Charleston, South Carolina all resigned. The city's U.S. Federal District Court judicial processes were legally closed. On november ninth, in Pensacola, Florida, Lincoln was hanged in effigy. The governor, Madison Perry, wrote to his counterpart in South Carolina on the very same day. If there is sufficient manliness at the South to strike for our rights, honor, and safety, in God's name let it be done before the inauguration of Lincoln. The same day President Buchanan called his cabinet together. He wanted to convene a convention of states to formulate a compromise to head off any talk of secession. Secretary of State Cass and Attorney General Jeremiah Black wanted a show of force. Take a page from Andrew Jackson's playbook of the eighteen thirties. Treasury Secretary Howell Cobb believed that disunion was in fact a legal option. Secretary of the Interior Jacob Thompson said any show of force would push his state of Mississippi to secede. Secretary of War Floyd said that Lincoln ultimately would prove to be an utter failure. Guess it takes one to know one. On the tenth of November, Senators James Hammond and James Chestnut Jr. of South Carolina both resigned from From Congress. The state then called for a full convention on secession to begin on december seventeenth in the capital of Columbia. British consul Robert Bunch, based in Charleston, had a front row seat for the reaction to Lincoln's victory on election day. Christopher Dickey, in his compelling history Our Man in Charleston, gives Bunch's perspective on the attitude in the city. The Englishman wrote his superior, Lord Russell, on november tenth A state of things has arisen since the election of Mr Lincoln, very nearly akin to a revolution. The violent agitation which has prevailed throughout the state of South Carolina during the last fortnight seems to increase day by day in intensity. A few days later, Bunch also wrote about the feeling of hatred to the North, which has been steadily growing ever since it became evident that the rule and power of the South were rapidly vanishing before the superior population, wealth, industry, and enlightenment of the free states. Then a few weeks later, after the governor of South Carolina messaged the state legislature, Bunch wrote, quote, I have no hesitation in saying that in the present excited condition of the public mind, an opportunity for the shedding of blood would be eagerly welcomed. For honor, the people of Charleston, the people of South Carolina had chosen a hill to die on. Their home was not to be the United States. Their home was to be their state. Their home and their grandparents' home had been South Carolina before there was ever a United States. And so this issue of home that we talked about earlier would be the emotional force for preserving their way of life. Now not all Southerners were at that point. In neighboring Georgia on november fourteenth, former Congressman Alexander Stevens stood up in the state legislature to acknowledge state loyalties, but he also believed in the power of reason. Recalling the prior thirty years of history, he referred to the state of Massachusetts opposition to the tariff that sparked the nullification crisis of eighteen thirty three. Stevens said If reason and argument produced such changes in the sentiments of Massachusetts on the subject of the tariff, may not like changes be effected there by the same means reason and argument on the present vexed question. In other words, fellow Georgians, let us not get carried away by our passions. If New Englanders could find cooler heads to prevail, so can we. Like Stevens, Lincoln also recognized South Carolina's call for a convention in its historical context. The state was reenacting its own drama all over again from the nullification crisis. He saw Andrew Jackson's actions as a precedent. On november fifteenth, Lincoln remarked My own impression is at present, leaving myself room to modify the opinion if upon a further investigation I should see fit to do so, that this government possesses both the authority and the power to maintain its own integrity. The ugly point is the necessity of keeping the government together by force, as ours ought to be a government of fraternity. For Lincoln, home was still the entire fraternity of the entire United States. But Lincoln himself as a figure wasn't quite yet relevant because he was not yet the president, merely the president-elect. For an 1860 inauguration day, as specified in the Constitution at the time, wasn't scheduled until March 4th of 1861. It wouldn't be until 1933 when the 20th Amendment would move the date up to January 20th. So it would be a full three and a half months until Lincoln would take the oath of office. And a lot could happen in three and a half months. In fact, he wouldn't officially be declared the winner of the election until the electoral votes were certified on February 13th, nearly three months away. Now let's stop and think about this for a second. Lincoln wouldn't technically win the election held on November 6th until early the next year, 14 weeks later. How many different ways could that process get sidetracked? There were plenty of people, don't forget, 60% of Americans didn't vote for him. There were plenty of people who'd be just fine if the Republican wasn't declared the winner. And oh, who was responsible for the certification of votes? Who was the guy in charge of making Lincoln official? Well, the vice president, of course, and remind me who's the vice president? That would be the Democrat who ran against Lincoln, John C. Breckinridge, who was a southerner and a slave owner, and a loser of the election. It would be on Breckinridge to count and certify the Electoral College votes. How was this gonna turn out? What could possibly go wrong? People had to hope for the best. Would anyone prepare for the worst? Like maybe the sitting president. Buchanan, not the most perceptive chief executive, was beginning to realize he had a mess on his hands. It began to dawn on him that he was heading into uncharted territory. Maybe he should gather his thoughts and come up with a plan. So he turned to his attorney general, Jeremiah Black, who was one of the few competent men in Buchanan's government. At the president's request, Black wrote a 10-page opinion on November 20, 1860, on the scope of presidential authority to respond to secession. Constitutionally, what were Buchanan's options? Essentially, the president could use military force to defend federal property and to enforce the law in an obviously defensive fashion. It would be up to Congress to decide if it could order war upon seceded states. Black soberly closed by saying The Union must utterly perish at the moment when Congress shall arm one part of the people against another for any purpose beyond that of merely protecting the general government in the exercise of its proper constitutional functions. Buchanan could legally defend government property and enforce the law. What would Buchanan do with this opinion? How would he act? Perhaps his State of the Union message in a few weeks would shed light on his intentions. The next day, november twenty first, a fifty five year old US Army officer arrived in Charleston, South Carolina from New York. A graduate of West Point in eighteen twenty five, a veteran of the Mexican War and an artillery instructor, Major Robert Anderson, took command of all the federal forces around the city and the harbor. Why Anderson? Because he was from Kentucky, his wife was from Georgia. He had once owned slaves, and he was seen to be anything but a threat to the revolutionaries that were turning Charleston on its head. His superiors and General Scott hoped that he would help cooler heads prevail in the city and the state. That very night, scores of men from the YMSA, the Young Men's Secession Association, marched through the streets of Charleston, bearing torches and firing Roman candles. They carried a banner that read Here Lies the Union, born fourth july seventeen seventy six, died seventh november eighteen sixty. On december third, President Buchanan submitted his State of the Union message, but he did not read it in a speech like we're accustomed to. Prior to nineteen thirteen, the written message was given to Congress, where it was read by a clerk. Because of the recent election, the outcry across the South, and the steps South Carolina had begun to take, the New York Times reported that, quote, never was any document listened to with such marked attention before. Buchanan asked rhetorically, why was there a threat to the Union? What threatened it with destruction? His answer the crisis was because of northern antislavery fervor, because the ideas about freeing those who were enslaved was disrupting the security of the nation. What could be done? The answer, the president said, was simple. Quote, all that is necessary to accomplish the object, and all for which the slave states have ever contended is to be let alone and permitted to manage their domestic institutions in their own way. Buchanan also said that secession was not a constitutional right, but if a state did secede, neither he nor the government could do anything about it. The speech was a flat out failure and did nothing to quell the divisions racing across the country. William Seward summed up Buchanan's fumble. Quote, it shows conclusively that it is the duty of the president to execute the laws unless somebody opposes him, and that no state has the right to go out of the Union unless it wants to. The New York Times landed with even a heavier punch. Quote, the country has to struggle through three months more of this disgraceful imbecility and disloyalty to the Constitution. While Buchanan displayed zero leadership during the waning days of the year, not even an effort to try and do something, the spirit of Henry Clay did live on in the person of his fellow Kentuckian and self-styled political air, John Crittenden. Even though his gambit to throw the election into the House had fallen short, Crittenden at least couldn't sit on his hands. If the president was going to be a bump on a log, then that didn't mean Congress had to be as well. Crittenden got to work, revisiting the policies of the past and trying to solve the slavery problem once and for all. What would be known as the Crittenden Compromise was proposed to Congress on December 18th, and it included six amendments to the Constitution and four congressional resolutions. In order to assuage the Deep South, it essentially suggested the country turn back the clock to 1820 and the Missouri Compromise. Let's draw the free state slave state line across the country to the Pacific. Let's acknowledge slavery as legal where it existed, and enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. But here was the kicker. The final proposed amendment stated that no future amendment could change these amendments or authorize Congress to interfere with slavery in any state. Crittenden was saying that Henry Clay had it right and it should forever be the answer, no questions asked. Ever. Many in the South thought it was reasonable, though it prohibited slavery above the line, it seemed to settle once for all, the right of the peculiar institution to exist. For the North it was problematic. For Republicans it was a license for slavery to expand into Mexico, Cuba, and Central America. It meant an empire of slavery and an unholy crusade against the Union. The compromise was debated in the House and the Senate, gaining no traction in either for support. While Washington spun its wheels in this way, South Carolina took action. After moving its secession convention from Columbia to Charleston due to an outbreak of smallpox, the 169 delegates gathered on December 20th. These men represented South Carolina's social and influential elite. They were all wealthy, most owned slaves, and more than a dozen had held public office as either governor, senator, or congressman. As speaker after speaker fired up the gathering, even the handful of pro-union men had to concede that the United States was just a compact or an agreement between several independent states. And if they were to vote for what best represented their home, that vote would have to be for South Carolina. The incoming government in Washington would surely be offensive to them, so the reasoning went. Was it not time now to throw off the yoke of tyrants? With revolutionary fervor, the convention president David Jameson challenged the Carolinians to rise up and quoted the Frenchman George Jacques Danton, quote, to dare and again to dare and without end to dare. The vote was unanimous. A hundred and sixty nine to nothing. South Carolina was now an independent Commonwealth. The Charleston Mercury proclaimed it on its front page. The Union is dissolved in a massive headline. Its publisher Robert Rhett declared, quote, The T has been thrown overboard. The revolution of eighteen sixty has been initiated, end quote. Governor Francis Pickens suddenly found himself a new head of state, though he still used the term governor. And while celebrations erupted across the land, and the stars and stripes were replaced by the Palmetto flag, Pickens quickly got to work, organizing his new republic. The first order of business was to secure the defense of his most valuable city and port. On Christmas Eve, eighteen sixty, Pickens dispatched three commissioners from South Carolina to travel to Washington to negotiate the acquisition and handover of the forts and magazines of the federal government in Charleston to the new Commonwealth. The question was how to proceed without it sounding like a demand. The legal train of thought ran this way. First, the state had ceded the properties for the forts in eighteen oh five for use as long as they defended the state. Second, as South Carolina was no longer a state, this arrangement no longer existed. Third, so South Carolina now revoked the session and would take back control of the properties. And lastly, the new Commonwealth would then gladly pay and compensate the U.S. for the value of the works now constructed on the properties. That was all now very neat and tidy. Sounds like a simple real estate transaction, right? But it would remain to be seen how Buchanan and his administration would respond. There was no guidebook for how something like this should happen. The Founding Fathers hadn't tucked away some secret document somewhere that spelled out the steps for dealing with breakaway states who decided to jump ship. This would require some creativity, some innovation when it came to problem solving, a resolve if there were going to be differences of opinions, none of which existed in the White House in eighteen sixty as the year drew to a close. How it would go was anybody's guess. Meanwhile, Major Anderson watched with growing concern. The unit he commanded around Charleston Harbor was less than a hundred men. They roughly held four separate positions Fort Johnson, a worn down revolutionary war site, Castle Pinckney, near the city itself, Fort Moultrie on Sullivan's Island, and Fort Sumter, a brick bastion on an island in the middle of the harbor that was still under construction. While workers continued to labor away at Sumter, Anderson set up his headquarters at Fort Moultrie and placed most of his men there. Two of his officers would eventually make names for themselves for other reasons, Captain Abner Doubleday and a lieutenant, unfortunately also named Jefferson Davis, like the Mississippi Senator. On December 23rd, Anderson received a message from War Secretary Floyd that all but hinted that he should give up the fortifications around Charleston. Why cause a fuss? Why make matters worse? Just let the matter be and avoid an escalation. This did not sit well for Anderson. There had already been a squabble over getting weapons from the Charleston Armory, weapons that were legally to be used by federal troops, but Floyd had ordered Anderson to put them back, and so he did. Assessing the overall situation now surrounded by a separate Commonwealth, Anderson saw his two weakest positions as untenable. Fort Johnson and Castle Pinckney should be abandoned. They were too far from his strongest positions and too close to the city. Fort Moultrie, while substantial, was completely vulnerable from its rear. It was designed so that its guns and fortifications faced toward the water. But an enemy force attacking from inland would have an easier time taking Moultrie than one approaching from the sea. It was a good installation, it just faced the wrong way. Anderson's strong point was Fort Sumter. Its walls were 50 feet high and 12 feet thick at its base. At full capacity, it could garrison 650 men and more than 130 guns. Reading Floyd's message carefully, Anderson realized he did have the option to move his forces if he had to. Floyd was certainly suggesting that Anderson move completely out of Charleston. That would be the peaceful thing to do. But Anderson cleverly reasoned, why not move his forces to the strongest position? At Twilight, on December 26th, Anderson stealthily moved his entire garrison. Troops, their wives and children, hired workers, all of them from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter, via individual rowboats. No one in the city or surrounding area had any clue. The next day the city was stunned to find Moultrie's guns spiked and Anderson gone. Charleston's leaders responded by seizing what was left of Fort Moultrie, the U.S. Customs House, and the Charleston Arsenal with its 20,000 weapons. Governor Pickens ordered the state militia to take Fort Johnson and Castle Pinckney and dispatched an aide to row out to Fort Sumter and And meet with Anderson. The aide stated that Governor Pickens understood, by way of comments from War Secretary Floyd, that the president would not reinforce Sumter. Anderson clarified that no reinforcement had taken place. He had merely transferred his existing forces. The aide was authorized to say that Pickens directed Anderson to return to Fort Moultrie. Major Anderson politely declined. And that was that. And then the Southerners rode away. As this gentlemanly exchange was taking place, no one up in Washington had any idea what was going on. First of all, Buchanan's cabinet was coming undone. Back on December 14th, Secretary of State Lewis Cass of Michigan resigned. He completely opposed the idea of doing nothing to reinforce federal positions. Treasury Secretary Howell Cobb of Georgia also resigned in December. He decided his calling was to advocate for secession. And finally, Buchanan had had enough of Floyd's scandals and inactivity and asked for his resignation from the War Department. We might feel bad for the president, right? At this most critical moment in his administration, Buchanan's key trusted advisors abandoned him. His top three cabinet secretaries are gone, or soon to be gone. But remember, he's not prone to strong action anyways. His presidency had begun with the Dred Scott decision. And if you believed it could get any worse, it did. He had chosen his advisors and he had listened to them. When I read his words and compare what his contemporaries said about him, he comes he comes more across like a caretaker, right? A guy who believed his role was simply to keep the lights on and hang on to the keys until the next guy came along. When news of Anderson's relocation from Moultrie to Sumter arrived in Washington, Buchanan called his new and improved cabinet together for discussions that would span several days. With Cass and Cobb gone via resignation, former Attorney General Jeremiah Black was appointed the new Secretary of State. Philip Thomas was given treasury, and the assistant attorney general Edwin Stanton was now the outright attorney general. Now get this, John B. Floyd still showed up to the meeting, even though the president had asked for his resignation days before. Floyd wouldn't go quietly or be anyone's fall guy. He was certain that Anderson's actions were in violation of his orders, although they weren't when they were read right back to him. Floyd asked Buchanan's permission to order Anderson and his force to leave Charleston altogether. Black, the new Secretary of State and a northerner from Pennsylvania, opposed the idea. Black said that Anderson had done his duty to hold to the quote last extremity as originally directed by Floyd. With the cabinet shifting against him, Floyd used this as his dignified way of finally resigning on his own terms without violating his conscience. Buchanan could begin to feel momentum swaying beneath him. His cabinet was now decidedly more northern, and Anderson's decision to actually do something made him a gallant and heroic figure in newspapers across the country compared to the spineless Buchanan. The president began to see what he could not do. He said, quote, If I withdraw Anderson from Sumter, I can travel home by the light of my own burning effigies. End quote. As 1860 drew to a close, the three commissioners who had traveled to Washington from South Carolina demanded that Buchanan pull all Federal forces out of the harbor. They said Anderson's presence made negotiation impossible, and as the recent experience shows, threatens speedily to bring to a bloody issue questions which ought to be settled with temperance and judgment. Buchanan's response, assisted by his new cabinet members Black and Stanton, addressed the commissioner's request for evacuation saying, This I cannot do, this I will not do. They replied, By your course, you have probably rendered civil war inevitable, be it so. Now it was Governor Pickens' turn to act. Anderson had moved his men to Fort Sumter in this game of chess. So Pickens moved his pieces to Morris Island to the south. Militia and workers began the construction of fortified batteries of guns easily within range of Sumter. Anderson's men could hear hammering and the felling of trees. In response to this information, General Winfield Scott moved his chess piece. He covertly wrote to the president. His conscience as a soldier compelled him to suggest action. He requested Buchanan's permission to send the new 21-gun warship, the USS Brooklyn, and 250 troops with weapons and munitions to reinforce Anderson. The president himself had appointed a Unionist, Joseph Holt of Kentucky, to succeed Floyd as Secretary of War. Upon hearing that news, Senator Lewis Wigfall of Texas, who took it upon himself to become the official informant of all things happening in Washington to the Deep Southern delegates, telegraphed Charleston and Governor Pickens directly. Wigfall said, quote, Holt succeeds Floyd. It means war. Cut off supplies from Anderson and take Sumter as soon as possible. End quote. The handwriting was on the wall. Buchanan was seen as now influenced by Northerners who were paving the way for the Republican Lincoln to take control of the government and punish the South for its defense of slavery. Six other states, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas were all now preparing their own secession conventions after the first of the year. Senator Judah P. Benjamin gave a farewell speech in the Capitol on the final day of December, saying, quote, We desire, we beseech you, let this parting be in peace. Indulge in no vain delusion that duty or conscience, interest or honor imposes upon you the necessity of invading our states or shedding the blood of our people. You have no possible justification for it. The fortunes of war may be adverse to our arms, you may carry desolation into our peaceful land, and with torch and fire you may set our cities in flame, you may do all this, but you can never subjugate us. The first week of the new year, eighteen sixty one, meant one thing to the president, just sixty three days until he was free. Buchanan had to get through two more months, and then it would be over. He had to simply keep the status quo, not upset anyone further or give them a reason to do anything ridiculous. Time was both his adversary and his ally. Sixty three days was a long time. But those sixty three days might be long enough to let the boiling pot in Charleston fall to a simmer and perhaps even become cool to the touch. Could he keep the peace long enough? Maybe even South Carolina would realize its rash action and decide it would rejoin the Union. General Scott revised his plan to send troops and supplies to Anderson by putting them all aboard an unarmed ship instead of a powerful warship. Buchanan figured an unarmed ship would demonstrate a conciliatory attitude and be the best way to keep the peace, while simultaneously heeding the call of Northerners to do something for the hero Anderson. Scott ordered the commercial side wheeler Star of the West to leave New York on january 5th. Then the mail got in the way. Late the next day, a letter arrived in Washington from Anderson, painting the picture at Sumner as one not quite so cloudy. The garrison was actually in good spirits. Construction was progressing. They were purchasing some perishable foods with the governor's permission from Charleston merchants, and supplies would last for at least ninety days. Ninety days. Okay, uh Buchanan did the math. He'd be gone in less than sixty days. He didn't need to send supplies right this minute. There was no need to escalate the situation. There was no need to do anything now. He immediately canceled the mission and sent the fast warship Brooklyn to go and catch the Star of the West and tell it to turn around and get back to New York. But it didn't. On january ninth, the star arrived outside Charleston Harbor in the dark. The captain inched forward, taking soundings as he tried to locate the main channel across the bar. At daybreak, a small steamer guarding the entrance saw the ship and signaled for it to identify itself. When the captain didn't, the steamer sped into the harbor, shooting off rockets. The star kept moving, when suddenly a warning shot was fired from the new battery on Morris Island. When the ship continued, more guns opened from Fort Moultrie. Within minutes, three shells had struck the star but caused no real damage. Anderson and Doubleday were watching from Fort Sumter. What the heck was going on? They didn't know what was happening. They readied their gunners to start firing, but they were completely unaware that any ship was trying to reach them. What was the ship? Why were the Southerners firing at it? Anderson mine ticked through his options. He heard Doubleday chomping at the bit to help the ship, but he believed that if he opened fire, every gun on the mainland would turn toward the fort. He would be starting a war. This was the most horrible thing he could imagine. While he was completely for the Union, he also would not fire without orders. His oath of allegiance was sacred, as deep as his religious commitment to God. Anderson simply wanted peace. He had to weigh his every move against that objective. And so Anderson waited. The captain of the star also reached a decision point. As plumes of water splashed around his ship from incoming shells, he also had to avoid getting stranded on the sandy bar at the harbor entrance. If he got caught immovable, he'd be a sitting duck. He couldn't reach the fort without further risk. He turned back and out toward the ocean and New York. By the way, the Brooklyn never located the Star of the West. Anderson quickly sent a message to Governor Pickens asking if he had ordered the ship to be fired upon. Pickens did not address the question with his reply, but he did say that the act was perfectly justifiable. That non-answer was enough to prompt Anderson to send one of his officers up to Washington. With appropriate courtesy, Pickens allowed the officer to leave on the 10th with authorized passage north. This would be a first messenger sent north. Anderson wanted clear directions from the War Department so that he would not be caught without orders if another dilemma, like the Star of the West episode, presented itself. While Pickens was polite, he had another chess move up his sleeve. Because rumors swirled about the ship that appeared outside the harbor. Did it carry supplies? Did it have weapons? More troops? His request for Anderson to leave Sumter and return to Moultrie back in December had been politely declined. His diplomats in Washington were getting nowhere with meetings to negotiate the handover of the fort from the federal government. It was time to be more direct. On january eleventh, Pickens sent two Carolina diplomats to Fort Sumter. Stepping off their boat, they respectfully asked Anderson to surrender the fort. Dismissing himself, Anderson conferred with his officers, then returned. Because it wasn't his decision to make, Anderson declined and urged they should pursue a diplomatic route. Check. Pickens accepted the answer and insisted that two men would travel north on this mission, one of Anderson's aides and his own attorney general. While that first messenger that Anderson sent sought orders from the War Department, this second messenger mission left on January 12th to finish the job the three commissioners could not. As these envoys traveled north, the United States was convulsing with spasms of secessionist fervor. The other six Deep South states were all holding their conventions to decide whether or not they would join South Carolina in leaving the Union. In Jackson, Mississippi, that state's delegates voted to secede on january ninth. In Tallahassee, Florida passed its ordinance of secession the very next day, on the tenth. On january eleventh, Alabama seceded. Three days three states. Eight days later, Georgians in Milledgeville seceded on the nineteenth. Louisiana left the Union on the twenty sixth, and on february first, Texans in Austin seceded. Seven states were now gone all in less than a month. In Austin, Texas, sixty seven year old governor Sam Houston was grieving. He had fought to make Texas an independent republic and served twice as its president, but he also worked to bring Texas into the Union. During the violent days of bleeding Kansas years before, Houston proclaimed, Mark me, the day that produces a dissolution of this Union will be written in the blood of humanity. Of his own character and his own expression of how he defined this idea called home that we've considered, he said, I wish no prouder epitaph to mark my tomb than this. He loved his country, he was a patriot, he was devoted to the Union. Houston, however, was pushed aside. He was called a traitor to his face by Texan secessionists. They voted one hundred and sixty six to eight to leave the Union. Two weeks later, an Army Lieutenant Colonel at Fort Mason in Texas received orders to return to Washington. He packed his bags and began the long journey east. However, in San Antonio, he arrived to find the town celebrating secession, and that all federal troops in the state had been surrendered to state militia. The officer might now have been some sort of prisoner. He wasn't sure of his status, but he decided he had to follow through with his orders. He quickly changed out of his uniform and into civilian clothes, and went to departmental headquarters, requesting transportation out of town. The Texans in charge said only if he resigned his Federal Commission. The officer refused and demanded he be allowed to leave. After further review, the militia backed down, and the officer continued on his way, making it east by March first. In this way, Robert E. Lee got out of Texas. Historian Bruce Catton raises an interesting question in his book The Coming Fury had the sequence of events been a little different. Lee had been second in command in Texas, and his superior was out of state that winter. If by some chance he had been delayed in returning, Lee would have been the one to receive the demand to surrender all federal forces in the state. Catton's opinion was without question Lee would have given them a flat refusal, in which case it might have easily been Lee, and not Major Robert Anderson, who first received and returned the fire of secessionists, with San Antonio, rather than Fort Sumter, as the scene of the fight that began a great war. It's another fascinating alternative path of history. What was Lee thinking when he rolled into San Antonio? Would there be a fight? Would he be arrested as a federal officer? What would he learn if he ever made it back to Washington? The world was quickly changing around him. Meanwhile, the government in Washington stumbled and sputtered. How did Buchanan lead the country? On the eve of Mississippi's vote to secede, the president sent a special message to Congress. There he summarized and concluded At the beginning of these unhappy troubles, I determined that no act of mine should increase the excitement in either section of the country. If the political conflict were to end in civil war, it was my determined purpose not to commence it, nor even to furnish an excuse for it by any act of this government. In conclusion, it may be permitted to me to remark that I have often warned my countrymen of the dangers which now surround us. This may be the last time I shall refer to the subject officially. I feel that my duty has been faithfully, though it may be imperfectly performed, and whatever the result may be, I shall carry to my grave the consciousness that I at least meant well for my country. If you remember, way back at the beginning of this episode, I mentioned the film Gettysburg, right? And one of the most memorable scenes in that film is when Confederate General Isaac Trimble recounts fellow General Richard Ewell's absolute inaction during the battle at the end of the second day. And in an escalating tirade, Trimble speaks of Ewell saying, He put his arms behind him and blinked, and he said nothing. He just stood there. It's a great scene. Well, that was James Buchanan at this moment. The stars of the Union were being ripped from its flag, and the president of the United States gave himself a free pass. He did nothing. But as he said, at least he meant well. Elsewhere, Congress tried its best to govern and press forward toward March 4th, when the new president would be sworn into office. The House formed a select treason committee to investigate possible treasonous acts within the government. With secession happening all around them, they had to get a grip. Attorney General Stanton fed the committee information that would point at Secretary of the Navy, Isaac Tusey, as a person who Of interest due to the circumstances surrounding the capture of the Federal Navy Yard at Pensacola, Florida. While no direct accusations were leveled, the House did censure Tussi upon discovering that 28 ships were in disrepair and unavailable for service despite funds allocated for repairs. The committee also investigated growing rumors of the seizure of the Capitol by Southern forces. Dorothea Dix, who would become famous for her work caring for the mentally ill and improving asylums all across the country, had heard rumors while she was traveling throughout the South. She heard of secessionists plotting to cut railroads and seize Washington. She forwarded these reports to one railroad president who, in turn, forwarded them to the Pinkerton Detective Agency to investigate, and to General Winfield Scott. Seeing that there were only 400 Marines and Army officers present in Washington, Scott ordered 600 more federal troops to the city. As Buchanan and the House recoiled at the growing military presence in the Capitol, the new war secretary Holt had to simply point to a map to explain his concern. As states seceded from the country, federal properties were seized. Arsenals of weapons and munitions in Baton Rouge and Augusta came under state control. Forts Pulaski, Morgan, Jackson, Saint Philip, and Marion all had the U.S. flag lowered and replaced by the respective state flags. As U.S. regulars walked out, state militia walked in. If Scott did not prepare to defend Washington, the city would be wide open to takeover, whether there were plots to do so or not. Those arriving soldiers in the Capitol now would stay, and some of the anxiety abated. Congress also finally brought the Crittenden Compromise to a vote. The lawmakers had been debating for a month trying to bring this last ditch solution for the slavery problem across the finish line. But on January 16th, the Senate refused to bring it to the floor by a twenty five to twenty three vote. It would seem that there was nothing legislatively that could be done. The spirit of Henry Clay, the spirit of compromise, had no breath remaining in the halls of Congress. But in Virginia, where everyone was watching the lower South leave the Union and waiting to see what Buchanan and the government would do about it, the State Assembly decided they would take it upon themselves to solve the problem. On January twenty eighth, Senator James Mason of Virginia reported to the U.S. Senate the quote, Virginia has undertaken the office of mediating between the two great sections of the country, restoring the Union under guarantees and provisions that might be satisfactory to both. End quote. If the president and Congress couldn't solve the problem, let the real statesmen and leaders do it. Remember Francis P. Blair Jr.'s remarks in Wheeling the May before? That Virginia possessed the old Republican attitude that she was the mother of statesmen. So was Virginia finally standing up to do what only she could do. As plans took shape, it was to be a grand and impressive peace conference. More than a hundred delegates from all the states would assemble at the Willard Hotel in Washington in February. Presiding over the gathered lawmakers and dignitaries would be a distinguished elder statesman, former President John Tyler. Now seventy and a private citizen, would Tyler lead the conference to a successful resolution, creating peace in our time? Or would it be another ineffective exercise of rhetoric and ruin? As january eighteen sixty one came to a close, Major Anderson's first messenger returned from Washington with directions from Secretary of War Holt. Anderson braced himself. What would be his orders? Was he to evacuate? Would he be reinforced? If the Southern guns opened fire again, would he be ordered to stay silent or to blast away? Holt first gave him a hearty affirmation and approved his conduct by withholding fire during the Star of the West incident. He acted wisely in not bringing on a general engagement. While Doubleday may have disagreed, he had to respect Anderson's resolve. Then came Holt's orders. Continue to notify Washington of developments and let them know if supplies or reinforcements were necessary for the fort's safety. I'm sure that is a clear answer. I'm not sure it helped. Anderson and Doubleday could see slaves working on fortifications at Fort Moultrie to the north and Cummings Point on Morris Island to the south. The Southerners were also building a floating battery on a giant platform. With each passing day, more and more guns were pointing at them. And now the leader of Fort Sumter had no clearer picture of what he was supposed to do if the status quo suddenly shifted into a higher gear. On February 1st, Anderson arranged with Governor Pickens that all the wives and children of the Sumter garrison be picked up by steamer and taken to New York. Now they had to keep waiting and keep Washington informed. And Anderson would have to wonder whatever happened to his second messenger. Historian Arthur T. Downey in his book Civil War Lawyers poses an interesting question that bears considering. In fact, I'm sure there were many Americans, both North and South, who may have been wondering the same thing. Why not just let the seceded states go? A lame duck Congress might have recognized the seceding states and negotiated the handover of federal sites. Holt would then have ordered Anderson to withdraw, and there would have been no attack on Fort Sumter. Maybe then, after a cooling off period, the Deep South would rejoin the Union. Perhaps there were many men getting ready to travel to Washington for the Peace Conference who wanted to see just that. But there are two problems with that approach. Number one, it would do nothing to address the issue of slavery. How would the ex-states come back into the Union? What legislation would have to take place in order to accomplish that? How long would the cooling off period be if it were to cool off at all? And number two, the lame duck Congress was too busy trying to be heroic, while Southern members continued to leave the Capitol. After the Crittenden Compromise failure, a House Committee of 33 would try yet again to hammer out some sort of solution. And on January 21st, Mississippi Senator Jefferson Davis stood in the U.S. Senate chamber twelve days after his home state seceded from the Union. A graduate of West Point, he had served in Congress, fought in the war with Mexico, was Secretary of War, and had been a senator two separate times. And now he came to give his leave. Quote I rise, mister President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory evidence that the state of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people, in convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course, my functions terminate here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my associates, and I will say but very little more. It is known to senators who have served with me here that I have for many years advocated as an essential attribute of state sovereignty the right of a state to secede from the Union. Having made the announcement which the occasion seemed to me to require, it remains only for me to bid you a final adieu. One by one, Southern senators and representatives were leaving Washington to return to their homes in the South. The United States was no longer home. When we learn from history, the lessons can come from direct truths we can understand. They can also come from undeniable facts that are proven time and time again. And they can come in the form of questions questions that cause us to ponder and consider that make us ruminate upon our own intellect and feelings. This whole question of home provides us plenty of meat to chew on. Consider these six questions. One, how do I understand home for myself? Is it a place or is it an idea or is it both? Two, does home pull together my beliefs about God, about philosophy, about ideology? In what ways? Three, is home worth fighting for? It would seem it should be. If it isn't, then maybe I don't know what home really is. Four, what happens when home changes? What would precipitate that change? What does changing home mean for me? Five, how do I navigate when someone else affects changes to my home? It may be easier when it's a casual acquaintance, but what about when it's someone I care about or even love? And six, am I open to the fact that home for me includes blind spots I may not be aware of, things that I should address? Now all those statements could have been asked of all the people we've met in this episode. And I wonder what they would have said as they thought about what home meant, what home was, where it was. Was it changing? Was their home their state? Was it their country? Was it their section? Was it a flag? Was it an ideal? Was it a way of life? And as it was changing, was somebody taking something away from them? Did they fear something? Did they need to protect something? Did they need to die on a hill? All great questions for them and all great questions for us. In terms of what not to do lessons, what can we take away from James Buchanan? How was he patient? How was he passive? I think it's important to again resist the presentist urge to completely dismiss him. I'm not suggesting he move from the bottom of pretty much every presidential ranking list there is, but let's not ignore the very real times when patience is a virtue. Hindsight makes it easy to criticize a Neville Chamberlain for thinking patience and diplomacy would end a crisis. The same goes for Buchanan. There are definitely times when the wise choice is to let parties cool down, but to avoid dealing with a problem altogether is not a good plan. And Buchanan's complete abdication of responsibility in the final days of his presidency should convict any of us, myself included, who haven't finished a task well. It's fair enough to ask, how do we continue to grow in knowing when patience is the way to handle a situation or when action is vital and necessary? It may not be as easy to know as we might wish. In our next episode, actions will take place and reactions will spin out of control. Events will continue to barrel down several tracks. How would the government respond to Governor Pickens' demand to surrender Fort Sumter? What would happen at the Great Peace Conference about to get underway in Washington? What would the seven seceded states of the Deep South do now? Would they cooperate? Or would they find a reason to begin disagreeing and fighting and bickering among themselves? And what of all the rumors and threats swirling about Washington? Would secessionists take control of the city? Would telegraph lines be cut to isolate the government? Would the Electoral College count be tampered with or even prevented? Would treason and violence result in a coup taking place in the Capitol? And would Abraham Lincoln even arrive safely to take the oath of office on time?com. I'm Scott Holmgren, your host. Thank you for listening. And if you're not learning, you're not living.