;...,%'»•'* v<^-»,.V-'' v^*^-•.,.%'-* v<....,.V 
 
 
 ,^^ °- 
 
 .N^ 
 
 ,^;A^ ^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 %,^^ 
 
 1 z 
 
 Ni5 0„ 
 
 ""^^0^ 
 
 
 o5 o^ 
 
 "1 ^ 
 
 * ^ ' " / •%> V 9. ^ * " / ^ V ,. ^ - /^ •%, v ,^ ^ * » / ^ 
 
\ ^^ J. ■ay ^ -' ^i 
 
 \V' ^O, -^ o , X "* \V 9?^ -^ , n ■* 1 
 
 ^ V ^ ^ ' ^ ^ V ^ ^ • ^ -^ " ' ^ \ 
 
 %,^^ 
 
 
 ^'mf^^ ", -■ay <?" ^^ -^^-^ ^ rv 
 
 V 
 
EAST TENNESSEE 
 AND THE CIVIL WAR 
 
 BY 
 
 OLIVER P. TEMPLE 
 
 Formerly an Equity Judge of Tennessee, and Author 
 of "The Covenanter, the Cavalier, and the Puritan" 
 
 With Po7'traits and Map 
 
 e^e^ 
 
 The Robert Clarke Company, Publishers 
 Cincinnati : : : ; 1899 
 
^^hi- 
 
 ■Jry yf • 
 
 SECOfj;: GOPY, 
 
 44368 
 
 Copyright, 1899, 
 By Oliver P. Temple. 
 
 TWO COPIES RECEIVED. 
 
Respectfully Dedicated 
 
 To THE People of East Tennessbe, 
 
 IN GRATEFUL REMEMBRANCE 
 
 OF THEIR KINDNESS TO ME 
 
 IN THE PAST. 
 
EAST TENNESSEE 
 AND THE CIVIL WAR 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The object of the author in preparing this work was 
 twofold : First, to rescue from oblivion certain important 
 historical facts, fast fading from the memory of men, con- 
 nected with the struggle in East Tennessee from 1861 to 
 1865 ; secondly, to vindicate the course of the Union peo- 
 ple of East Tennessee in separating from their friends and 
 kindred in the South, and in adhering to the National 
 Government. Their constancy and fortitude, their trials 
 and sufferings lor what they deemed right, have no paral- 
 lel in the history of this country. To present these in 
 connected and permanent form it is believed will add a 
 new and missing chapter to the history of the great drama 
 known as the Civil "War. 
 
 The aim and desire of the author have been to discuss 
 and present the facts of the struggle in East Tennessee 
 with candor and truthfulness, and yet without offensive- 
 ness. The author was Southern by birth, education and 
 residence, and bound to the South by the ties of interest, 
 association and many long friendships. On the other 
 hand, he was drawn toward the North by a strong love of 
 the Union, and an ardent desire for its preservation. He 
 was a slaveholder, and in sympathy with the peculiar in- 
 stitutions of the South. Besides, time has softened his 
 feelings, and to a certain extent modified his views regard- 
 ing some of the questions formerly dividing the two sec- 
 tions. These facts, as he conceives, fit him for setting 
 
 (vii) 
 
viii Introduction. 
 
 forth dispassionately not only the apparent, but the inner 
 motives that influenced the Southern people in their move- 
 ment for independence in 1861. In addition, the circum- 
 stance that he was an eye-witness of many of the occur- 
 rences he describes, and an active participant in them, 
 gives him peculiar qualifications for this work. 
 
 The author wishes to return his grateful acknowledg- 
 ments to Prof. Edward S. . nes, LL.D,, of South Caro- 
 lina College, and to R. R. Sutherland, D.D., of Knoxville, 
 Tennessee, for assistance and suggestions kindly given in 
 the preparation of this work. He also extends his thanks 
 to General Marcus J. "Wright, of the War Records Ofl5ce, 
 Washington, D. C, for important documents. He espe- 
 cially expresses his most earnest appreciation of the kind- 
 ness of Colonel John B. Brownlow in furnishing him with 
 much valuable information, for many suggestions and nu- 
 merous documents, and for the use of files of the Knoxville 
 Whig, edited by his distinguished father. 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 Knoxville, Tenn., September 9, 1899. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE WATAUGA ASSOCIATION. 
 
 The first settlement in Tennessee— James Robertson and John Sevier 
 defend Fort Watauga — " The W;?^'Uuga Association " — A majority 
 of settlers Covenanters — Revolulxonary War — Settlers ask North 
 Carolina to be allowed to share in it and contribute their part of 
 expense, 1 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 BATTLE OF KING's MOUNTAIN. 
 
 Perilous condition of the patriot cause in North and South Carolina 
 in 1780 — Cornwallis overruns the country — Insolent message of 
 Colonel Ferguson — Sevier and Shelby agree to march across the 
 mountains — Call on Colonel Campbell to join them — Sycamore 
 Shoals— The long march — Campbell selected to command — Find 
 Ferguson on King's Mountain — The battle — Effect of victory — 
 Eulogy on Sevier, Shelby, William and Arthur Campbell, James 
 Robertson and John Tipton — Influence of their descendants, . . 18 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE EARLY INHABITANTS OF EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 Early inhabitants — Establishment of colleges and grammar schools — 
 Cession of territory by North Carolina — " Territory south-west of 
 River Ohio" — Constitutional Convention of 1796 — Bill of rights — 
 Waste of public lands on railroad corporations — Folly of congress 
 as to universal education — Land-owners the main stay of the Re- 
 public — The women — Spinning and weaving — The Sabbath in early 
 times — Political discussions — Religious controvei-sies, . . .41 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THK PRESENT INHABITANTS OF EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 East Tennessee described — Mental and moral condition of the valley 
 people — They turn to religion — The Sabbath and Sunday Schools- 
 People vindicated against misrepresentations — The great moun- 
 tain region lying beyond the valley, 62 
 
 (ix) 
 
X Contents. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 SLAVERY IN EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 Slaves and the slave trade — Men indifferent at first about the moral 
 question involved — Emancipation societies appear in East Tennes- 
 see — Names of originators— John Rankin — Dr. David Nelson — 
 The first emancipation paper in the United States edited by 
 Elihu Embree, at Jonesborough, Tennessee — Benjamin Lundy's 
 "Genius" published at Greeneville — Methodist Church strongly 
 anti-slavery — Action of general conference in silencing Francis A. 
 Harding and Bishop Andrew because slaveholders — The church 
 separates — Important influence of separation of churches in bring- 
 ing on secession in the South, 83 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 SLAVERY IN THE STATE OP TENNESSEE. 
 
 Early Presbyterians were slaveholders — Commence emancipating their 
 slaves — Legislature forbids emancipation — Introduction of slaves 
 into the state for sale forbidden — Effort in Constitutional Conven- 
 tion of 1834 to abolish slavery — Constitution closes the door to 
 general emancipation — Slavery protected by Constitution of the 
 United States and that of the state — No man bold enough to ques- 
 tion slavery, 106 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 POLITICAL CANVASS OP 1860. 
 
 Excitement in political parties in 1860— Old parties disintegrating — 
 Whig National Convention — Nominates John Bell — Democratic 
 National Convention — Splits on the platform — Reassembles — One 
 wing nominates Douglas, the other John C. Breckenridge — Re- 
 publican party nominates Abraham Lincoln — Man of destiny — 
 Presidential canvass in Tennessee — State votes for Bell — Mr. Lin- 
 coln elected — Three members of Buchanan's cabinet active Seces- 
 sionists — Major Anderson placed in command at Charleston — South 
 Carolina secedes — Mr. Buchanan's vacillation— Fort Sumter — Holt, 
 Stanton and Black in the cabinet — " Star of the West " — The " Har- 
 riet Lane " — " No power to coerce a sovereign state," . . . 121 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE FIRST GREAT POLITICAL FIGHT. 
 
 Feeling of apprehension among the people— Friends of disunion demon- 
 strative—Public meeting in Knoxville— Adjourned meeting — 
 
Contents. 
 
 XI 
 
 People of the country — Resolutions tending toward disunion of- 
 fered — Discussed by both sides — Persons taking part— Union 
 resolutions — Far reaching consequences — Other Union meetings 
 follow — Distinguished character of men who participated, . . 147 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 CAMPAIGN OF FEBRUAKY, 1861. 
 
 Governor Harris calls an extra session of the legislature — His mes- 
 sage — Question of convention or no convention submitted — Candi- 
 dates nominated on the Union ticket — Canvass described — People 
 of Sevier county — Result in Knox county — In Sevier — In Roane — 
 In East Tennessee — In the state — Convention defeated — Union 
 majority in the election, 167 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 SECOND CANVASS OP 1861. 
 
 A second effort to detach Tennessee from the Union — Emissaries of 
 secession active — Union leaders alert — Local leaders alone won 
 the victory of February — Johnson, Maynard and Nelson— Grand 
 Union meeting in Knoxville — Addressed by Baxter, Maynard, 
 Nelson, Trigg and Temple — Meeting of April 27th — Splendid can- 
 vass — Johnson's and Nelson's joint canvass — Vast crowds — Work 
 of the other leaders — Great Union meeting at Strawberry Plains — 
 Last speech of the author at Concord — Declares for the Union in 
 preference to slavery — Johnson and Nelson at Kingston — Vote in 
 East Tennessee— Causes of success of Union leaders, . . . 179 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 TENNESSEE ORDINANCE OF SECESSION. 
 
 Governor Harris recommends a Declaration of the Independence of 
 Tennessee and an Ordinance of Secession — Disregard of constitu- 
 tion of state — An army of 55,000 — Military league with Confeder- 
 ate States — Revolution — Andrew Jackson, Sam. Houston, John 
 Bell, Andrew Johnson and other great men — Address of Union 
 leaders of Middle Tennessee — Vote in senate and house on Ordi- 
 dinance of Secession — Names given, 205 
 
 CHAPTER XIL 
 
 GUBERNATORIAL CONVENTION OF 1861. 
 
 Delegates start to gubernatorial convention — Colonel Turney's regi- 
 ment of Confederate soldiers — The first in the state — Union con- 
 
xii Contents . 
 
 vention— Ex-governor "W. B. Campbell nominated — Declined — W. 
 H. Polk substituted— Wild excitement in Middle Tennessee — 
 Ex-governor Brown and Judge Brien — The old Whig and Dem- 
 ocratic leaders of Middle Tennessee — Some one accountable for 
 carrying Tennessee into the vortex of revolution — Chiefest among 
 them was Governor Harris — Whig leaders described — Mr. Bell sent 
 to Knoxville — His speech — Interview with old friends, . . . 224 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ABOLITIONISM. 
 
 Abolition party — Free-soil party — Republican party — "Garrisonian 
 Abolitionists"— Abolitionists and Secessionists working toward the 
 same end— Attempt to rescue Anthony Burns — Public meetings in 
 Boston advocating violence — Addressed by Wendell Phillips and 
 others — " The Boston Anti-man Hunting Society " — Jefferson Ran- 
 dolph proposes emancipation in Virginia — Revulsion of feeling in 
 slave states — Garrison's " Liberator " — New England Anti-slavery 
 Society — George Ticknor Curtis — Luxurious life of slaveholders — 
 Difficulties in the way of emancipation — Senator Hammond — Fail- 
 ure to execute the fugitive slave law — The " higher law " doc- 
 trine — John Brown — Mr. Webster on the non-execution of the fu- 
 gitive slave law — Alexander Stephens to Mr. Lincoln — A portion 
 of the people of both sections blamable for the civil war, . . 245 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 SECESSION. 
 
 The right of secession denied — Robert E. Lee's opinion — Mr. Jeffer- 
 son's resolution of '98 — Nullification the parent of secession — Con- 
 troversy between the two sections reviewed — Annexation of Texas 
 — Acquisition of territory by the Mexican War — Compromise meas- 
 ures of 1850 — Repeal of Missouri Compromise — Extension of 
 slavery — Slavery defeated in Kansas — Was there a sufficient jus- 
 tification of secession — Legislation of government all favorable to 
 slavery — New guaranties offered — Amendment to constitution — 
 Unpopularity of Abolitionists in 1861, 275 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 THE CAUSES OF SBCESSION. 
 
 Causes of secession — Antagonistic opinions between the North and 
 the South — Diverse interests — Mutual reproaches — Two adverse 
 
Contents. xiii 
 
 systems of civilization — Mr. Iverson's speech — Loss of political 
 power by the South — Incompatibility of the two people — Slavery 
 to be the corner-stone of a new government — Slavery in no danger in 
 1861 — Mr. Lincoln's assurances — Independence out of the Union — 
 The blow is stricken — Wisdom of Mr. Lincoln — Does not muster 
 a man — Confederacy probably would have succeeded but for the 
 firing on Sumter — Certain free states violated the constitution — 
 Mr. Stephens denies that these were sufficient alone to justify se- 
 cession — People of the North ready for any concession — Character 
 of Southern men — Tribute to Southern women, .... 307 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THE KNOXVILLE-GREENEVILLK CONVENTION OF 1861. 
 
 Call for a convention of Union men — Meets in Knoxville — Speeches of 
 Johnson, Nelson and Arnold — Adjourns to meet again — Meets in 
 Greeneville — " Declaration of Grievances " — A majority favors ex- 
 treme measures — Published history of convention — Original min- 
 utes — Mr. Nelson's resolutions — A substitute offered— Both re- 
 ferred back to committee — Substitute adopted — Its purport — Com- 
 missioners named to memorialize the legislature — Mr. Nether- 
 land's speech — Mr. Nelson — Design and effect of "substitute" — 
 Memorial to legislature — Remarkable nature of this conven- 
 tion 341 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 BURNING THE BRIDGES. 
 
 Unpleasant condition of Union people of East Tennessee — Commenced 
 going North — W. B. Carter proposes to burn railroad bridges — Re- 
 lief of Union people promised — General Robert Anderson as- 
 signed to this work. Succeeded by General Sherman — Expedi- 
 tion under General Thomas — Carter selects his assistants — The 
 bridges burned — Persons engaged — Strawberry Plains bridge — 
 Gathering at Watauga and in Sevier county — Folly of burning 
 these bridges, 366 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 EXECUTIONS AND IMPRISONMENTS. 
 
 Alarm caused by burning the bridges — A general uprising expected — 
 Confederate troops sent to East Tennessee — Union men arrested — 
 Benjamin's order — Five bridge burners hanged — Court-martial 
 
xiv Contents . 
 
 organized — Condemnation of Harrison Self — His daughter appeals 
 to ]Mr. Davis — Union men sent to prison at Tuscaloosa — Noble con- 
 duct of Confederate officers, 388 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 THE FLIGHT. 
 
 Bitterness in 1861 against Union men — Mr. Davis' desire to be just — 
 Extracts from letters of Confederate officers — Unionists arrested 
 for political opinions — Protests of distinguished Confederate citi- 
 zens — Arrests instigated by local leaders — Seizing arms of Union 
 men — Enforcing conscript law — Flight of Union men — Notice of 
 pilots, 412 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 WAITING OVER THE BORDER. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln's desire to relieve East Tennessee — General Buell suc- 
 ceeds Sherman — Views of Sherman — Mr. Lincoln and General 
 McClellan urge Buell to advance — General Thomas — General Zol- 
 licofFer — Battle of Fishing Creek — Way open to East Tennessee — 
 General Grant takes Fort Henry — Surrender of Fort Donelson — 
 Battle of Shiloh — Confederate lines forced Southward — Way again 
 open to East Tennessee — Importance to the Confederacy of hold- 
 ing East Tennessee, 432 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 THE RETURN. 
 
 Exiles in Kentucky — East Tennessee Union soldiers at Cumberland 
 Gap — General E. Kirby Smith and General Bragg start to Ken- 
 tucky — Buell follows — Gap abandoned — Long retreat — Suffering 
 of army — Battle of Perryville — East Tennessee soldiers in battle 
 of Stone River — With Thomas at Chickamauga — General Burnside 
 leads an army to East Tennessee — Knoxville evacuated — Almost 
 despair of people — Colonel John W. Foster dashes into the town — 
 General Eurnside's army enters — Tumultuous rejoicing — The old 
 flag hoisted — Description of scones by Colonel Foster — Further 
 wanderings of the exiles — Four hundred on board the " Sultana " — 
 Vessel blows up — Most of them are lost — Annual re-union of the 
 survivors, 464 
 
Contents. xv 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 THE SIEGE OP KNOXVILLE. 
 
 General Burnside ordered to Chattanooga — Fails to go — Cumberland 
 Gap Surrenders — General Longstreet sent to capture Knoxville — 
 Burnside falls back — Fight at Campbell Station — Siege of Knox- 
 ville — Sherman sent by Grant to the relief of Burnside — Assault 
 on Fort Sanders — Longstreet repulsed — Mr. Lincoln proclaims a 
 general thanksgiving for that event — Longstreet retires— Scarcity 
 of provisions — Thanksgiving dinners — Loyal people of the French 
 Broad saved Knoxville — Colonel Doughty — Thrilling incidents 
 connected with the assassination of Mr. Lincoln — Sad fate of Col- 
 onel Eathbone and Clara W. Harris, 486 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 THE SIEGE OP KNOXVILLE — CONTINUED. 
 
 Knoxville never completely invested — Longstreet misled by inaccurate 
 maps — The reason Fort Sanders was selected for the assault — Sher- 
 man returns — Gordon Granger's corps remains — Longstreet halts 
 east of Knoxville — Remains until spring — People driven to Knox- 
 ville to avoid starvation— General Grant visits Knoxville — Cam- 
 paign contemplated up the French Broad or the Valley of East 
 Tennessee — Interesting incidents connected with siege of Knox- 
 ville — Mary Love and John T. Brown, 505 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 THE RETUKNED UNION SOLDIERS. 
 
 Good effects of the civil war — A practical education — The soldiers 
 learned obedience, subordination, faithfulness — East Tennessee 
 soldiers returned home better men — Soon filling all the important 
 county offices — Union and Confederate soldiers live together in 
 peace — Soldiers of East Tennessee described — Honesty of motives 
 of Union men in joining Federal Army — No exiles or refugees in 
 the North, 525 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 ANTECEDENTS OP UNION PARTY IN EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 Were supporters of General Jackson — White's supporters become 
 Whigs — Names of distinguished Whig leaders in East Tennessee — 
 Names of Democratic leaders — The Whig party one of wealth and 
 education — What Mrs. Jefferson Davis said of Mississippi — Changes 
 
xvi Contents. 
 
 in the two political parties— A majority of Whigs were Union 
 men— Three-fifths of Democrats vote for the Union— Overwhelm- 
 ing weight of talent on the Union side— Two parties finally about 
 equal, 535 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 WHY WERE THB PEOPLE OP EAST TENNESSEE LOYAL IN 1861 ? 
 
 Under certain conditions, better for the people of East Tennessee to 
 have gone with the South — The reasons for their course — Princi- 
 ples involved — No sufficient cause for secession — Views of Whig 
 party — Easy to be a Union man in the North — Danger and odium 
 in the South — People opposed to secession — Love of country — 
 Hated changes — Drew their inspiration from Clay and Jackson — 
 Influence of local leaders— Common people loyal, .... 544 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Declaration of grievances adopted at the Greeneville Convention, . 565 
 List of delegates to Greeneville Convention, 572 
 
EAST TENNESSEE AND THE CIVIL WAR. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE WATAUGA ASSOCIATION. 
 
 The first settlement of Tennessee — James Eobertson and John Sevier — They 
 defend the Watauga Fort against attack of Indians — Uncertainty as to 
 state lines — No state protection for first settlers — They protect them- 
 selves — They form a government, "The "Watauga Association " — Names 
 of first rulers — Order is preserved, persons and property protected — A 
 majority of settlers Covenanters — Their character and habits — Their 
 education and intelligence — Revolutionary War — Settlers ask North 
 Carolina to be allowed to share in it, and contribute their part of the 
 expense — Their record in fighting for independence. 
 
 In the wonderful group of lofty mountains — fifty or sixty 
 in number and all five or six thousand feet in height — in 
 Western North Carolina and Eastern Tennessee, which 
 render that region one of the most picturesque on the con- 
 tinent, near the Tennessee line, stands Grandfather Mount- 
 ain, in lofty grandeur and venerable majesty. Just south 
 of it, and by its side, in graceful modesty rises Grand- 
 mother Mountain, its queenly consort. At the base of the 
 former, on an elevated plateau, within a radius of less than 
 a quarter of a mile in diameter, three streams of water 
 burst from the ground, all fresh and sparkling : the first, 
 the Linnville, the source of the Catawba River, flowing 
 southwardly into the Atlantic ; the second the source of 
 the New River, flowing northwardly into the Ohio ; and 
 the third the source of the Watauga, flowing westwardly 
 into the Holston and the Tennessee. Certainly few spots 
 combine so much matter of interest to the student of 
 nature.^ 
 
 ^ In 1892 the author visited this spot, and drank out of one or more of 
 these springs. (1) 
 
2 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 The Watauga has become historic, because on its green 
 banks the first settlement in Tennessee was planted. As 
 the river emerges from the mountains, in a clear, spark- 
 ling, silvery current, flowing over beds of white shell, 
 sand, and pebbles, and rapidly gliding onward through a 
 charming valley, no more beautiful stream can be found 
 in the land. In 1770, the first pioneers began to gather on 
 its banks at the point where it debouches from the moun- 
 tains. The spot is enchantingly lovely. There must have 
 been poetic eyes among the stern, brave settlers, which led 
 them to select for their homes such a bewitching scene of 
 beauty and grandeur. On this stream was the cradle of 
 Western civilization. 
 
 The valley for some miles swells out into a magnificent, 
 gently undulating plain, of surpassing fertility. Off south- 
 wardly, five or six miles, though seemingly within two or 
 three miles, so transparent is the pure atmosphere, rise up 
 and spread out in graceful outlines the great blue moun- 
 tains, solemn and still in their loneliness, forming as lovely 
 and as restful a sight as the eye ever looked upon. Surely 
 human vision never beheld a more beautiful spot. Into 
 this romantic region, in 1760, came the renowned Daniel 
 Boone to hunt.^ 
 
 Soon there came to the settlement two men who were 
 destined to play leading parts in the history of Tennessee. 
 They were just the men who were needed. These were 
 James Robertson, who came from North Carolina, and 
 John Sevier, who came from Virginia. Robertson was a 
 Covenanter in blood, while Sevier was a Huguenot. Rob- 
 ertson was a plain, strong man, wise in council, far-seeing 
 
 ^ On a beech tree in "Washington County, not many miles west of the 
 Watauga, Boone carved the following words : 
 
 D. Boon 
 
 CillED A. BAR On 
 
 T.ree 
 in J hB 
 
 2/EAR 
 
 1760 
 
The Watauga Association. 3 
 
 in wisdom, powerful in action, and skillful in execution. 
 He contributed by his good judgment and happy discre- 
 tion largely to the safety and the success of the early set- 
 tlements in East Tennessee. He finally became the founder 
 and the leader of the settlements of Middle Tennessee. In 
 this capacity he manifested a high order of statesmanship 
 and patriotism. His memory is justly cherished with 
 pride by every Tennessean, as one of its distinguished 
 founders. 
 
 Sevier had been a captain in the army of the royal gov- 
 ernor, Dunmore, of Virginia, and jDerhaps a courtier in 
 his palace. He was a favorite of that functionary and en- 
 joyed his smiles.^ In some respects he was the very oppo- 
 site of Robertson. He was tall, graceful, athletic, and 
 handsome. French sprightliness, vivacity, and kindliness 
 bubbled up in him like a mountain spring. Men at once 
 recognized in him a friend and a leader. In sagacity and 
 ability he was no ordinary man. No inferior or common 
 man could have run such an unbroken career of success, 
 in high and honorable positions in perilous times, for 
 forty-three years, with such distinguished enemies ar- 
 rayed against him a part of the time as Andrew Jackson, 
 Governor Archibald Roane, John Tipton, and others, with- 
 out being overthrown and destroyed. And yet, to the last, 
 he was the undoubted leader and favorite of the people. 
 In a large measure, the remarkable ascendency which 
 Sevier held over the minds of the early inhabitants of 
 Tennessee was due to his natural genius for war, and his 
 willingness to fight. But there was more in him than 
 these elements of strength. He possessed as well the 
 talent for governing — high administrative ability. Above 
 all, he had a heart in sympathy with universal humanity. 
 
 It was well that two such men as Robertson and Sevier 
 came early to the Watauga settlement. Soon the coolness 
 and the judgment of the former, and the daring and military 
 
 ^ Address of Hon. "W. A. Henderson, on John Sevier. 
 
4 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ability of the latter, were needed. The great tribe of 
 Cherokee Indians, whose home was but a hundred miles 
 Southward, had from the first fixed their eyes, glaring 
 with rage and murder, on the infant settlement. It was 
 marked for destruction. When the Revolution burst uj^on 
 the country, urged on by British agents, and stimulated 
 by British gold, the moment for putting into execution 
 their long-concealed purpose of destroying the settlements 
 on the Watauga, the Holston, and the Nolichucky, had 
 come. Seven hundred warriors, as silently and as stealth- 
 ily as a panther, crept through the dark forest on their mur- 
 derous mission toward the settlements. Fortunately the 
 good Indian woman, Nancy Ward, then and ever afterward 
 the friend of the whites, had notified the settlers of the 
 approaching danger. Being thus warned and prepared, 
 wherever the Indians appeared they were defeated. A 
 part of their warriors, under Old Abraham, one of their 
 wisest and most cunning chiefs, led their force against the 
 little rude fort on the Watauga, where the settlers, men, 
 women and children, to the number of two hundred, had 
 taken refuge. For six days the fort was besieged. Most 
 fortunately Captain James Robertson and Lieutenant John 
 Sevier were in command, and successfully defeated every 
 effort of the wily enemy for the destruction of the settlers. 
 After six days, the savages, having been defeated every- 
 where else, silently and sullenly withdrew, after losing a 
 number of their warriors. This was but the beginning of 
 the war with the Cherokees, which continued for nearly 
 twenty years, in which also the powerful Creek nation, the 
 fiercest of all the Southern tribes, sometimes took a part. 
 
 Before proceeding in chronological order I return to a 
 period anterior to the attack on the fort at Watauga. The 
 early settlers, both on the Watauga and on the Holston, 
 supposed they were within the limits of Virginia. But 
 when the line between the two colonies of Carolina and 
 Virginia was run, it was discovered that those on both 
 sides of the Holston were under the jurisdiction of North 
 
The Watauga Association. 5 
 
 Carolina. A purchase from the Indians, for the benefit of 
 Virginia, of the territory where the settlements existed, 
 still further complicated matters, and left the question an 
 unsettled one as to -which state the settlers owed allegi- 
 ance. No one could tell of which state he was a citizen. 
 Neither state gave the settlers protection against the In- 
 dians, nor the benefit of its laws and civil jurisdiction. 
 No courts were established for the security of their lives 
 and property, or for the peace and repose of society. 
 
 North Carolina was reluctant and indeed unwilling to 
 extend its laws over a distant people, surrounded by In- 
 dians, with whom conflicts were almost certain, and 
 where the expense of maintaining an army and a civil 
 government would outweigh every advantage that could 
 accrue to her. On the other hand, Virginia was perhaps 
 not certain of the validity of her title to the territory. So 
 the settlers received no protection from either colony. 
 
 In this emergency the Anglo-Saxon instinct for self- 
 government, perhaps I should say, rather, Covenanter 
 love of liberty, order, law and independence, solved the 
 difficulty. A majority of the settlers, who were at this 
 time south of the Holston, were the Covenanters who 
 had lately fled from persecutions in North Carolina. They 
 were naturally unwilling to fall again under the jurisdic- 
 tion of that colony. It is easy to believe that they readily 
 acquiesced in the claims of Virginia, on whose soil they at 
 first thought they had settled. 
 
 But whatever may have been their opinions, or their 
 wishes, it was a "condition" and not a "theory" that con- 
 fronted them. They were without law, without govern- 
 ment. The settlers of the Holston, the Watauga and of 
 Carter's Valley, therefore, in 1772, assembled at Watauga, 
 and deliberately proceeded to frame and organize a gov- 
 ernment for themselves. They entered into a written 
 agreement, known since as the "Watauga Association." 
 A written constitution was formed and adopted, which un- 
 fortunately has been lost. A committee of thirteen was 
 
6 Eas^^ennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 elected as a general legislative body. Out of these five 
 commissioners were selected by the thirteen, in whom was 
 lodged the executive and judicial power. These, in turn, 
 elected one of their body as chairman, who presided in 
 their courts. They had a clerk, a sheriff and an attorney. 
 Courts were held at stated periods. The laws of Virginia 
 were adopted for their guidance as far as they were ap- 
 plicable. John Carter was selected as chairman and John 
 Sevier as clerk of the court. 
 
 The names of the thirteen who composed the legislative 
 body are worthy of being preserved. They were : John 
 Carter, Charles Robertson, James Robertson, Jack Isbel, 
 John Sevier, James Smith, Jacob Brown, William Bean, 
 John Jones, George Russell, Jacob Warnack, Robert Lucas 
 and William Tatham. Of these John Carter, Charles 
 Robertson, John Sevier, James Robertson and Jack Isbel 
 were selected to administer the laws and manage the 
 affairs of the settlements. Their decisions were final. 
 No appeal lay to any other tribunal. The decisions were 
 made with promptitude and executed with vigor. These 
 men must have been inspired with a high sense of justice, 
 for no account, no tradition even, has come down to later 
 generations of any injustice or oppression on the part of 
 these executive — judicial — officers. The high and exalted 
 reputation which at least three of them, John Carter, 
 John Sevier and James Robertson, bore for uprightness 
 and justice throughout their long lives, in honorable and 
 responsible positions, seems to forbid any suspicion of 
 official injustice on their part. Indeed, we may assume 
 that the remarkable success of this unique little republic 
 was due largely to the wisdom and justice of its executive 
 officers. 
 
 Here was an anomaly : a government under the direction 
 of five men, exercising for six years all the rights of sov- 
 ereignty, such as making treaties, purchasing lands from 
 the Indians, confiscating property, and inflicting capital 
 punishment for crimes, existing on the very outer frontier 
 
The Watauga Associati^m 7 
 
 of civilization, where there naturally came, as is always 
 the case, many desperate, lawless characters ready to defy 
 all authority, and yet, so wise and strong was the execu- 
 tive administration, that order was preserved, property 
 protected, life made secure, and not a complaint of an in- 
 justice done to any one. But let it be borne in mind that 
 the ruling class, the back-bone of these little self-governing 
 communities, were strong, earnest, educated, law-loving 
 men, mostly of the Covenanter race, who had not braved 
 the dangers and the hardships of the wilderness in a spirit 
 of reckless adventure, but had come to build up for them- 
 selves and their posterity a free state and a Christian 
 civilization. These austere, determined men would tolerate 
 no lawlessness in their midst. They were an intelligent, a 
 law-abiding and a God-fearing people. This was the 
 power back of the executive administration which gave it 
 force, steadiness, and success. 
 
 Roosevelt says of these pioneers: "They formed a 
 written constitution, the first ever adopted west of the 
 mountains, or by a community composed of American-born 
 freemen.''^ ^ Again he says : " They were the first men of 
 American birth to establish a free and independent com- 
 munity on the Continent."^ 
 
 Ramsey says that this was * ' the first written compact 
 for civil government anywhere west of the Alleghanies."^ 
 It was not, as is sometimes assumed, the first written con- 
 stitution in the colonies. As early as 1637, the three 
 towns of Hartford, Windsor and Wethersford, in Connecti- 
 cut, formed a written compact and constitution, republican 
 in form, under which that colony and state lived for nearly 
 two centuries. " This was the first written constitution in 
 America, if not in the world." * 
 
 ^ Roosevelt's " Winning of the "West," Vol. I, pp. 163, 164, and notes on 
 pp. 162 and 163. 
 
 * Id., p. 183. 
 
 ' Ramsey's "Annals of Tennessee," p. 107. 
 
 * Bryant's " Popular History of the United States," Vol. II, p. 21. 
 
8 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 At first only the three original settlements lived under 
 the articles of the Watauga Association. But, in 1775, 
 the Nolichucky settlement joined it, and became identified 
 with it. 
 
 It is sometimes supposed, and even asserted, that these 
 early settlers on the Holston, the Watauga, and the Noli- 
 chucky were a rough, uneducated set of men. Nothing 
 could be further from the truth. For the most part, they 
 belonged to the Covenanter race, commonly called the 
 Scotch-Irish. The Covenanters were the best educated 
 people in the colonies, possibly excepting the early Puri- 
 tans, and it is by no means clear that this exception ought 
 to be made. Douglas Campbell says of the Covenanters 
 who settled in the colonies before the Revolution : 
 
 *' In the first place, it should be noticed that they were 
 not socially poor peasants, such as Ireland has contributed 
 to America in later days. Among them were wealthy yeo- 
 men, and in their ranks were the most intelligent of Irish 
 manufacturers. Nor were they children of ignorance. 
 Although their schools had been closed by law (in Ire- 
 land) , they had all found means of private instruction 
 in the common branches ; while those desirous of a higher 
 education — and they were numerous — had made their way 
 to the Presbyterian Universities of Edinburgh and Glas- 
 gow. When they came to America, these Scotch-Irishmen 
 were not only among the most industrious and virtuous, 
 but they were, like the early settlers of New England 
 the best educated, of the English speaking race."^ 
 
 Again the same author says that ' ' for nearly a century- 
 before the Revolution, they" (the Scotch-Irish or the 
 Covenanters) "conducted most of the classical schools 
 south of the province of New York."^ 
 
 Theodore Roosevelt says of these early settlers : "As in 
 Western Virginia, the first settlers came, for the most part, 
 
 ^ " The Puritan in Holland, England and America," Vol. II, p. 479. 
 ^ Id., p. 486. 
 
The Watauga Association. 9 
 
 from Pennsylvania ; so, in turn, in what was then Western 
 North Carolina and is now Eastern Tennessee, the first 
 settlers came mainly from Virginia, and, indeed, in great 
 part, from this same Pennsylvania stock. . . . They 
 were a sturdy race, enterprising and intelligent." ^ Again 
 he says : ' ' But the bulk of the settlers were men of ster- 
 ling worth, fit to be the pioneer fathers of a mighty and 
 a beautiful state." ^ 
 
 The pioneers above spoken of, as being of "the same 
 Pennsylvania stock," that had settled in Virginia, were a 
 part of that great Covenanter race which had emigrated 
 from Ireland in such numbers between the years 1728 and 
 1775, and had landed in Philadelphia. Many of them 
 passed over into Virginia, and found homes in the beau- 
 tiful valley of Virginia, or the Shenandoah. Finally, many 
 of them crossed the Blue Ridge and the Alleghanies, and 
 settled on the Holston and the Watauga. These formed 
 a part, possibly the larger part, of the first settlers of 
 Tennessee. 
 
 Fortunately we are not left in doubt either as to who 
 they were, or as to their moral standing and intellectual 
 attainments. Roosevelt has resurrected a manuscript left 
 by the Hon, David Campbell, a son of one of the Holston 
 pioneers, giving an account of the early settlers on the 
 Holston, in South-west Virginia. The settlers on the 
 Lower Holston, in Tennessee, were but an overflow of the 
 same race of men from the Upper Holston, only a few 
 miles away. Campbell in his manuscript says : 
 
 "The first settlers on the Holston river were a remarka- 
 ble race of men for their intelligence, enterprise and hardy 
 adventure. The greater portion of them had emigrated 
 from the counties of Botetourt, Augusta and Frederick and 
 others (counties) along the same valley, and from the 
 upper counties of Maryland and Pennsylvania ; were 
 
 1 " The Winning of the West," Vol. I, p. 162. 
 
 * Id., p. 173. Quoted from a MSS. left by David Campbell, a son of one 
 of the early settlers on the Holston in Virginia. 
 
10 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 mostly descendants of Irish stock (Scotch-Irish), and 
 generally where they had religious opinions were Presby- 
 terians. A very large proportion were religious, and many 
 were members of the church."^ 
 
 Among these early Covenanter settlers, in South-west 
 Virginia, on the very borders of Tennessee, were the Pres- 
 tons, the Campbells, the McDowells, the Robertsons and 
 other historic families, who became distinguished in the his- 
 tory of that state and of the nation. The same race of men 
 followed the Holston a few miles lower down, and came 
 into Tennessee. They were all of the same type. 
 
 "The first settlers on the Watauga," says Roosevelt, 
 "included both Virginians and Carolinians. But many 
 of these Carolina hill people were, like Boone and James 
 Robertson, members of families who had drifted down 
 from the North. The position of the Presbyterian churches 
 in all the western hill country shows the origin of that por- 
 tion of the people who gave the tone to the resf.''^ ^ 
 
 This statement is not as definite as it should be. At the 
 same time that the Covenanters, many of whom finally 
 reached the Holston and the Watauga country, were passing 
 over from Pennsylvania into Virginia, and passing westward 
 up the valleys of that state, many others of the same race 
 were passing on through Virginia into North and South Car- 
 olina, and settling on the upper waters of the Catawba, the 
 Broad, the Yadkin, the Saluda and other streams, which 
 rise on the eastern side of the Blue Ridge. In the mean- 
 time, other Covenanters from Ireland and Scotland were 
 landing in Charleston and Wilmington, and were moving 
 westward and northward (the coast region being occupied 
 by older settlers, mostly English) into the interior, and 
 finding homes on the waters of those same upper streams. 
 And thus the mountain country, or, as Mr. Roosevelt calls 
 it, "the hill country," of North and South Carolina, was 
 
 1 "Winning of the West," Vol. I, p. 167. 
 =* Id., Vol. I, p. 163, note 1. 
 
The Watauga Association. 11 
 
 filled with a brave, adventurous Covenanter population, 
 who were all Presbyterians in religion, and all lovers of 
 liberty. Some, perhaps, of these liberty-loving people had 
 rebelled, in 1771, against the royal authority in North 
 Carolina, and, after their defeat in the battle of the Great 
 Alamance, fled to the Watauga settlement. 
 
 Some of these men who had taken part in this rebel- 
 lion — possibly a good many — according to Mr. Bancroft, 
 crossed the mountains, and made their homes on the Wa- 
 tauga, where the long arm of oppression could not reach 
 them. These were among the first settlers. And from 
 time to time larger numbers continued to come, as the fame 
 of the beauty of the newly-discovered country west of the 
 great mountains was carried back to their kindred in North 
 Carolina. So, it is true, that the first settlers in Tennessee 
 were, in a sense, "both Virginians and Carolinians." But 
 with rare exceptions they were not of the English race 
 which first mainly settled Virginia and Carolina, but 
 largely, and indeed nearly exclusively, of the Covenanter 
 stock, with one or more families of Huguenots and Welsh- 
 men. The same race of men also first settled Kentucky 
 and Middle Tennessee. In Kentucky they came from the 
 Covenanter settlements of West and South-west Virginia, 
 and from the great hive of Covenanters in Western Penn- 
 sylvania. 
 
 A braver, purer or better class of men than those early 
 settlers in Kentucky and Tennessee never founded a state. 
 No state in the Union was settled by men superior to them. 
 Nearly all those of the Covenanter stock (and we have 
 seen that most of them were of this stock) were well edu- 
 cated, and some of them highly so.^ 
 
 On this point, evidence of the most emphatic character 
 is furnished by Mr. Roosevelt. He says : 
 
 "In examining numerous original drafts of petitions 
 
 ^ As to the characteristics of these people, refer to " The Covenanter, 
 the Cavalier and the Puritan," by the author, p. 150. 
 
12 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and the like, signed by hundreds of the original settlers 
 of Tennessee and Kentucky, I have been struck by the 
 small proportion — not much over three or four per cent 
 at the outside — of men who made their mark instead of 
 signing."^ 
 
 This statement is partially confirmed by the petition of 
 the commissioners, or officers, and of a part of the citizens 
 of the Watauga Association, sent in 1776 to the legislature 
 of North Carolina. Out of one hundred and four persons, 
 all but two seem to have signed their own names, leaving 
 a fraction less than two per cent who made their mark. 
 Additional confirmation of the fact that the Covenanters 
 who settled the colonies were an educated people may be 
 found in the Historical Society of New Hampshire. A 
 petition to the governor, by certain Covenanters who 
 wished permission to settle on certain lands, is preserved 
 in said society, which was signed by three hundred 
 and nineteen persons, and all but thirteen signed the 
 document in their own proper hand. Here again there 
 was only four per cent of the persons who made their 
 mark.^ 
 
 The government of the Watauga Association was re- 
 markable in several respects. The deep-rooted conviction 
 in the minds of the pioneers, at so early a day after their 
 arrival in the wilderness, of the necessity of law, order and 
 of government, clearly shows not only a keen moral sense, 
 but the high and refined state of their civilization. Had 
 their state of social, moral and mental development, 
 bordered on, or been but slightly above, half savagery, or 
 even the condition of an ignorant and a rude people, they 
 would have preferred to let society run riot in its wanton- 
 ness and disorder. On the contrary, they cheerfully, and 
 by the free consent of every member of the community, 
 imposed restraints upon themselves, and limitations on 
 
 1 " Winning of the West," Vol. I, p. 180, note. 
 
 ' Address of A. L. Perry, before Scotch-Irish Congress, " Proceedings," 
 etc., Vol. II, p. 187. 
 
The Watauga Association. 13 
 
 their own conduct, and agreed to yield to those they chose 
 as the representatives of the authority of the community, 
 the obedience due to the majesty of law. 
 
 But to my mind the most remarkable thing about this 
 little republic was its comparatively long existence in 
 peace and tranquillity, and its freedom from discontent, 
 disorder or rebellion. The government was in the hands 
 of strong and pure men. But that was not sufficient. Its 
 strength and its success lay in the intelligence and in the 
 high moral and religious sense and conviction of that 
 stern, brave, determined race who constituted a majority 
 of the first population. Here was the source of their 
 security and of their peace, and of that obedience and 
 tranquillity which prevailed throughout the settlements. 
 
 It is sometimes said that lawless, desperate characters 
 constituted a large part of the early population. This is 
 a great mistake. Desperate men, such as horse-thieves, 
 and sometimes murderers, did come to the settlements ; 
 and after the commencement of the Revolution, tories 
 also, who had fled from Virginia or the Carolinas, some- 
 times sought refuge in these remote regions ; but in every 
 such case, the strong, firm arm of authority reduced 
 such persons to speedy obedience, or drove them from the 
 community. 
 
 These pioneers were not hunters. More than two 
 centuries before they had passed the hunter stage in de- 
 velopment. They were husbandmen, artisans, teachers, 
 preachers, earnest, serious, brave men, for whom life had 
 an awful significance and mission. Solemn and great 
 duties were to be done. They were to plant the church, 
 build school-houses, fell the forest, and spread the blessings 
 of a benign civilization around them, for themselves and for 
 their children. These sturdy^ austere men had neither the 
 time nor the inclination to indulge in the light-hearted 
 amusements, sports and festivities then so universal among 
 the gay and frolicsome Cavaliers of Old Virginia. No, life 
 was too serious, too full of dangers, hardships and solemn 
 
14 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 duties for fiddling and dancing, for feasting and visiting, 
 or for following a pack of hounds in the wild chase over 
 the hills and the plains. With them 
 
 " Life was real, life was earnest." 
 
 It may be well to add a few more words as to who these 
 people were. Of what race and of what religion were 
 they? I have assumed that a majority of them were of 
 the Covenanter race and religion. This, I believe, is the 
 opinion expressed by all writers who have given the ques- 
 tion any investigation, such as Roosevelt, David Campbell 
 and Douglas Campbell. But I wish to test this question 
 in a different way. If they were not Covenanters and Pres- 
 byterians , who were they ? They were certainly not Puritans 
 nor the Dutch of New York, nor Swedes. They were not 
 Quakers nor Germans, though there may have been present 
 a few of these, but we have no account of such a fact. 
 Aside from two noted families — the Seviers and the 
 Shelbys — we have no record of any Huguenots nor Welsh- 
 men among the early settlers. Carter was the name of an 
 old Virginia family, and very likely was of Cavalier origin. 
 But excepting this family there is no reason for supposing 
 that there was another Cavalier in the settlements. There 
 may have been a few persons of English blood from Vir- 
 ginia, but they were not Cavaliers. The Cavaliers were 
 quite satisfied with their paradise in the old colony, and 
 had no motive to leave it. They were generally attached 
 to the established Church, and yet there was not a con- 
 gregation of that faith established in all Upper East 
 Tennessee for more than sixty years after these early 
 settlements. 
 
 There were possibly a few Baptists among the settlers, 
 but if so, they were obscure and few in number. It is 
 barely possible that in the early days of the Watauga As- 
 sociation there may have been a Methodist here and there 
 among the settlers, but this is not at all probable, since at as 
 late a period as 1784, there were only seventy of that de- 
 nomination in all the region including Upper East Tennessee 
 
The Watauga Association. 15 
 
 and South--western Virginia.^ So, it is clear that the early 
 settlers were not Quakers, were not Episcopalians, not 
 Baptists, nor Methodists, nor of any of the other then exist- 
 ing denominations. A majority was unquestionably of the 
 Covenanter race and of the Presbyterian religion. Previous 
 to that time, or at a period not greatly anterior to it, the 
 terms "Covenanter" and "Presbyterian" were identical in 
 meaning. But about the time indicated, when the Pres- 
 byterians began to intermarry with other sects, the term 
 "Covenanter" ceased to indicate certainly, a sect, and 
 gradually came to signify only a race. That is its mean- 
 ing to-day, and in this sense I use the word.^ 
 
 There is another point in connection with the govern- 
 ment of the Watauga Association worthy of observation. 
 It was absolutely free, or democratic, both in theory and 
 in practice. There existed no caste, no conventional dis- 
 tinctions. All citizens were equal before the law. Un- 
 like Massachusetts and Virginia, there were no religious 
 tests. No man was forced under heavy penalties to pay 
 for the support of a church whose doctrines and polity he 
 did not approve. No preference was given to one church 
 over another. No one was compelled to attend church under 
 the penalty of banishment. In a word, there was a free 
 state, a free religion, and perfect freedom of conscience. 
 
 ^ Dr. J. B. McFerrin's " History of Methodism in Tennessee," Vol. 1. 
 
 * I use the term "Covenanter" instead of "Scotch-Irish," because it is 
 more comprehensive as well as more definite in its signification. By it I 
 mean that great body of Scottish people, who in the sixteenth century, 
 signed or approved the Great Covenant of religious liberty, and all their 
 descendants wherever found, especially those in this country. For a long 
 time the term was merely synonymous with that of Presbyterian, since the 
 early Covenanters were of that faith. But in the course of time, by 
 changes in faith, and by intermarriages with other races and sects, it 
 ceased to indicate with certainty a sect, and came to mean a race or a 
 people. In this sense I use the word Covenanter. It is used as a racial 
 or generic term, and is intended to include all persons of Scotch Covenanter 
 blood, whether pure or mixed, and whatever the form of faith they may 
 have adopted. I thus avoid the solecism of using the words Scotch-Irish, 
 which mean Scotch-Scotch, or Irish-Irish, as men prefer to interpret them. 
 See " The Covenanter, the Cavalier and the Puritan," pp. 230, 231. 
 
16 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 And thus these Covenanters, with the aid of the Hu- 
 guenot Sevier, set the example of erecting a republican 
 government, where all men and all religions were on a 
 perfect equality before the law. 
 
 There is another singular fact connected with the history 
 of this little republic. It will be remembered that some 
 of the first settlers were the hero patriots who had resisted 
 royal authority at the battle of the Great Alamance, in 
 1771, and who, being persecuted and outlawed after their 
 defeat, fled to the wilderness beyond the mountains and 
 settled on the Watauga. These men came to the wilder- 
 ness bringing with them no tender affection for the old 
 mother colony, but bearing in their hearts the memory of 
 many bitter wrongs. Besides, North Carolina had treated 
 the Watauga people with the coldest neglect. They were 
 literally cast off into the wilderness. They had no law, no 
 protection, no government of any kind, except that created 
 by their own courage and their own remarkable capacity 
 for self-preservation and government. It need excite no 
 surprise, then, that these men had no love for their un- 
 natural mother, and preferred living in Virginia. 
 
 When the Revolutionary War came on, these settlers 
 were remote from danger, except from the Indians. No 
 hostile army probably would ever invade their secluded 
 retreats. And yet these patriotic men, with a nobility and 
 loftiness of spirit rarely found among any people, hastened 
 to tender their assistance and their means to the parent 
 state in behalf of the common cause. 
 
 In a memorial addressed "To the Honorable, the Pro- 
 vincial Council of North Carolina," in 1776, signed by all 
 the members of the legislative and executive committee of 
 the Watauga Association, and by about ninety-one other 
 settlers, they say among other things: "This committee 
 (willing to become a party in the present unhappy con- 
 test) resolved (which is now on our records) to adhere 
 strictly to the rules and orders of the Continental Congress, 
 and in open committee acknowledged themselves indebted 
 
The Watauga Association. 17 
 
 to the united colonies, their full 'proportion of the continental ex- 
 pense.'''' 
 
 In the conclusion of this remarkable document, these men 
 say: . . . "We pray jour mature and deliberate con- 
 sideration in our behalf, that you may annex us to your 
 province (whether as county, district or other division) in 
 such manner as to enable us to share in the glorious cause of 
 liberty . . . and that nothing will be lacking or any 
 thing neglected that may add weight (in the civil and 
 military establishments) to the glorious cause in which we 
 are now struggling." . . . Noble words ! 
 
 When all the circumstances surrounding these Watauga 
 people are considered, it may be safely affirmed that, in all 
 the records of the Revolution, no higher example of pure, 
 unselfish patriotism can be found than that manifested by 
 by these noble pioneers of Tennessee. They had been 
 neglected and cast off by their mother, but when dangers 
 threatened and encompassed her like filial children they 
 hastened to her defense. They begged to be reannexed to 
 the mother state in order that they might "share in the 
 glorious cause of liberty." The part they bore in the 
 Revolution was too important to be overlooked. Passing 
 over the heroic part they took in the decisive victory of 
 Musgrove Mill, their capture of a strongly fortified fort on 
 the Pacelot River, and their share in the splendid battle of 
 Guilford Court House, in all of which these men took a 
 leading part, under either Colonel John Sevier, or Colonel 
 Isaac Shelby, or Major Charles Robertson, their share in 
 the brilliant victory in the battle of Kings Mountain, from 
 its importance and decisive character, demands a fuller 
 notice, and will be reserved for another chapter. 
 
18 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 BATTLE OF KING's MOUNTAIN. 
 
 Perilous condition of the patriot cause in North and South Carolina in 
 1780— Corn wallis overrunning the country— Insolent message of Colo- 
 nel Ferguson to the " over-mountain men " — Sevier and Shelby meet 
 to consult — Agree to march with their militia across the mountain to 
 destroy Ferguson— The call on Colonel Campbell to join them — He does 
 so — Sycamore Shoals the rendezvous— Little army assembles there — 
 Incidents before the march— Army sets out on the expedition across the 
 mountains — The long march — Joined on the way by other commands 
 under McDowell, Cleveland, Williams, and others— Campbell selected 
 to command under direction of other officers— Twelve days on the 
 march — Distance marched two hundred and twenty miles— Find Fer- 
 guson posted on King's Mountain— Arrangements for attack — The 
 battle described — Ferguson killed — His army destroyed — Effect of the 
 victory on the patriot cause — Character of men engaged in the expedi- 
 tion — Eulogy on Sevier, Shelby, William and Arthur Campbell, James 
 Robertson and John Tipton — Influence of their descendants — The true 
 name of John Tipton. 
 
 But little lias been known until recent years of the bat- 
 tle of King's Mountain outside of the region which fur- 
 nished the brave men who participated in it. Historians 
 have passed it over with a few brief words, as if it were 
 too insignificant for the pages of dignified history. And 
 yet it was one of the most important as well as one of the 
 most thrilling and heroic deeds of the Revolution, 
 
 In discussing this battle it must be kept in mind that 
 the number of persons capable of bearing arms, in all of 
 the settlements west of the North Carolina mountains, in 
 1780, was less than one thousand men. Colonel John 
 Sevier at that time commanded the militia of Washington 
 county, and Colonel Isaac Shelby that of Sullivan county. 
 Both were brave and determined men, and both had had some 
 experience in war previous to the Revolution. Shelby had 
 been with his father, Captain Evan Shelby, in the hard- 
 
Battle of King^s Mountain. 19 
 
 fought battle of Point Pleasant, or the Kenhawa, and aft- 
 erward had been with Boone in Kentucky. Sevier had 
 been inured to arms from the days of his young manhood, 
 when he was a captain in the royal army in Virginia. He 
 had had much experience on the frontier in fighting the 
 Indians, from the day he and Robertson defended the fort at 
 Watauga against the attack of the wily old Indian chief, 
 Abraham, As we shall see, Sevier afterward became the 
 first Governor of Tennessee, as Shelby became the first of 
 Kentucky. 
 
 The expedition to King's Mountain was unlike any other 
 important military movement of the Revolution. It had 
 its origin and its execution entirely with volunteers. It was 
 ordered by no state or continental authority. It grew out 
 of the voluntary uprising of a patriotic people in defense 
 of their liberties. Toward the autumn of 1780, all of 
 South Carolina and Georgia, and a part of North Carolina, 
 lay prostrate at the feet of the British army. Cornwallis 
 was on his triumphant march through the latter state 
 towards Virginia, in eager expectation of soon reducing 
 that state to submission. In all these three Southern 
 states, there was not, at any one point, a patriot force sufii- 
 cient to withstand the veterans of Cornwallis for one hour. 
 Colonel Tarlton and Colonel Ferguson, the most daring and 
 skillful partisan ofiicers of the British army, at the head 
 of their justly dreaded commands, were ranging the 
 country on either flank of the main army, arousing and 
 enrolling the tories, and overawing the patriots. The lit- 
 tle bands of patriot soldiers which still held together were 
 fleeing for safety to the recesses of the western mountains, 
 and in one or two instances beyond them. In his victorious 
 career Colonel Ferguson had advanced westwardly into the 
 very border of the great mountain range which separated 
 the older settlements from the new on the distant "Watauga. 
 It was indeed a dark hour for the patriot cause. The 
 Southern States seemed to be irretrievably lost. 
 
 Early in September, remembering how the mountain 
 
20 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 men under Shelby, Sevier and Major Robertson had 
 snatched victory from the British army on several occasions 
 during the last previous months, Colonel Ferguson re- 
 leased a prisoner, named Samuel Phillips, and in his 
 haughty arrogance, sent him with a verbal message to 
 the officers commanding beyond the mountains, saying : 
 "that if they did not desist from their opposition to the 
 British army, he would march his army over the moun- 
 tains, hang their leaders, and lay their country waste with 
 fire and sword. "^ 
 
 The brave, proud spirited men on the Holston, the 
 "Watauga and the Nolichucky, to whom this insolent mes- 
 sage was sent, were quick to resent the insult, and accept 
 the haughty challenge it contained. Colonel Isaac Shelby, 
 to whom the message was delivered, road at once forty 
 miles to consult Colonel Sevier, and to concert measures 
 for their protection. After many long hours — some au- 
 thorities say two days — of anxious consultation, they de- 
 cided on the bold and daring plan of summoning their fol- 
 lowers, marching at once across the mountains, and sur- 
 prising and destroying their haughty enemy. When all 
 the facts are taken into account, perhaps no bolder or more 
 audacious enterprise was ever conceived or undertaken. 
 But it was in perfect harmony with the nature and spirit 
 of these daring men. It was agreed that Colonel William 
 Campbell, commanding in Washington county, Virginia, 
 adjoining Sullivan county, should be invited to join the 
 expedition with his force. He at first declined to do so, 
 because he thought he could do more efi'ective service on 
 the southern border of his own state in resisting the ad- 
 vance of Cornwallis. But on a second request from 
 Colonel Shelby he changed his mind. He accordingly 
 called out two hundred men, and promptly marched to the 
 place of rendezvous, at Sycamore Shoals, on the Watauga. 
 Colonels Shelby and Sevier each called out two hundred 
 
 ' " King's Mountain and its Heroes," by Lyman Draper, p. 169. 
 
SAMUEL DOAK, D.D. 
 
 Founder and Firi^t P resident of Waaliiiujton College, 17 SO, 
 
Battle of King'' s Mountain. 21 
 
 and forty men from their respective commands. Not 
 another man could be spared. They were needed at home 
 to defend the settlements against the hostile Cherokees, 
 who were ever ready to fall upon them. The money neces- 
 sary for the expedition was raised on the personal credit 
 of Shelby and Sevier. It was borrowed from John Adair, 
 the entry taker of North Carolina, for Sullivan county. 
 Said he when approached on the subject : "The money is 
 not mine. I have no right to touch one cent of it. But 
 if our cause is lost, it will do the state no good. If by its 
 use, we can save our liberties, surely I can trust that 
 country to justify and vindicate my conduct. Take it." A 
 reply worthy to be engraved on marble,^ 
 
 On the ever memorable 25th of September, 1780, there 
 was witnessed on the banks of the Watauga a scene which 
 will go down in history as one of the striking events of the 
 Revolution. Here was assembled nearly every human 
 being belonging to the settlements of the Holston, the 
 Watauga and the Nolichucky, as well as many from South- 
 west Virginia. Here was the soldierly Colonel Campbell — 
 ruddy and fair, like his kinsmen the renowned Argyles of 
 Scotland — with two hundred devoted followers from over 
 the border. Here was Colonel Isaac Shelby, stern and 
 stalwart, almost a youth, and yet a veteran in service, 
 with two hundred and forty men from the sparse settle- 
 ments on the Holston. And here was Colonel John 
 Sevier, sprightly, alert and fascinating, with two hundred 
 and forty men gathered from the settlements of the 
 Watauga and the Nolichucky. All these were virtually 
 volunteers. They had mustered on their own volition. 
 They had come together from a common impulse of 
 patriotism. Here also was the scholarly young pioneer 
 minister, the celebrated Samuel Doak, who had come from 
 his infant church and classical school at Salem, nearly 
 
 ^ John Adair afterward settled in Knox county, where he died in 1827, 
 aged ninety -five years. He was a member of the first Constitutional Con- 
 vention of Tennessee, in 1796. 
 
22 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 thirty miles away, to lend by his presence his influence to 
 the great occasion. And here were the aged fathers and 
 mothers, the wives and the sisters of the patriots, come to say 
 good-bye, and to bid them God-speed in their perilous ex- 
 pedition. All was bustle and excitement as the hasty 
 preparations went forward. 
 
 Anxiety with deep determination sat on each brow. 
 Nearly every man present wished to go. But that was 
 impossible. Some must remain behind to guard against 
 an Indian outbreak. "Here," exclaimed "Bonnie Kate," 
 the young second wife of Colonel Sevier, pointing to a lad 
 of sixteen, "here, Mr. Sevier, is another of your boys who 
 wants to go with you and his brothers to the war, but, 
 poor fellow, we have no horse for him, and it is too great 
 a distance for him to walk." But either with or without 
 a horse, we do not know which, brave James Sevier 
 did go.^ 
 
 While preparations went forward the patriots were 
 thrown into a tumult of rejoicing by the unexpected arrival 
 of Colonel Arthur Campbell, the cousin and brother-in-law 
 of Colonel William Campbell, with two hundred more gal- 
 lant men from Virginia. After the departure of Colonel 
 William Campbell with two hundred men. Colonel Arthur 
 Campbell became anxious about the fate of the brave men 
 who were about to undertake this long and perilous expedi- 
 tion. So he raised two hundred more men in South-west 
 Virginia and hastily marched at their head to the Watauga. 
 He arrived in time for them to join the main force, then 
 on the point of marching. Among the many examples of 
 noble and sublime patriotism, so conspicuously shown on 
 this occasion by both leaders and soldiers, none surpass, 
 in heroic devotion to the great cause of American liberty, 
 that of this eminent man. By reason of this splendid con- 
 tribution to the signal success of the expedition, he is 
 
 1 Draper's "King's Mountain," p. 179. 
 
Battle of King^s Mountain. 23 
 
 justly entitled to be ranked as one of its heroes.^ Having 
 delivered his men to Colonel "William Campbell he hastened 
 back home, says Draper, " to anxiously watch the frontiers 
 of the Holston, now so largely stripped of their natural 
 defenders.^ 
 
 Never was there gathered together a more determined 
 nor a more patriotic body of men than that day assembled 
 on the banks of the beautiful Watauga. They were for 
 the most part the pious, austere descendants of the brave 
 old Covenanters of Scotland who more than two hundred 
 years before at Gray Friars Church had signed (some with 
 their own blood we are told) the great Covenant and 
 League, and with hands uplifted to heaven had sworn to 
 defend their religion and their liberties "all the days of 
 their lives." And most nobly had they and their de- 
 scendants kept the great Covenant through trial, persecu- 
 tion and battle in Scotland, in Ireland and in the colonies 
 from that day till the gathering at Sycamore Shoals, 
 September 25, 1780. 
 
 All things being ready for the march, early on the 
 morning of the 26th, the men were drawn up to receive a 
 benediction. The Rev. Samuel Doak invoked the divine 
 blessing on the little army, and set each pious Covenanter 
 heart on fire by a reference to the slaughter of the Midi- 
 anites by Gideon under the guidance of the Lord. He 
 gave them, in conclusion, as a battle cry, as of old : "The 
 sword of the Lord and of Gideon." ^ 
 
 Assuredly great captains would be needed to lead this 
 
 ^ Colonel Arthur Campbell was the grandfather of the eminent Governor 
 William B. Campbell of Tennessee, more fully noticed elsewhere, so dis- 
 tinguished fifty years ago as a jurist, a gallant officer in the Mexican War, 
 and for his many virtues. 
 
 ^ Draper's " King's Mountain," p. 175. 
 
 2 There is a tradition that it was either the Rev. Charles Cummins, of 
 Virginia, or the Rev. Samuel Doak who officiated that day. The venerable 
 Dr. J. G. M. Ramsey, the historian of Tennessee, told the author a few 
 months before his death that his best opinion was that it was Doak. He 
 said he preached from the Scripture quoted. 
 
24 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 little army. They were to penetrate a country two hun- 
 dred miles wide held by a large victorious army, and were 
 to encounter the daring Ferguson, with Tarlton near at 
 hand, each having a larger command than the attacking 
 force. The region they were to enter was swarming with 
 tories, stirred into unwonted zeal and activity by the 
 presence of royal armies. These tories, it was known, 
 would constantly annoy and impede the advance of the 
 little patriot force, and furnish their friends with news of 
 its every movement. They would hang on its flanks and 
 in its rear, thus greatly enhancing its danger and retarding 
 its retreat in case of disaster. On every side there was 
 extreme peril. According to all military probability, as 
 we know the facts now, the patriot force could hardly 
 escape. 
 
 Early on the morning of the 26th of September the 
 bugle sounded the signal, and the little army on the banks 
 of the Watauga took up its march. Soon it was lost in 
 the depths of the mountains. Its way lay for nearly a 
 hundred miles through the great ranges and lofty peaks 
 of the Apalachies. A constant succession of stupendous 
 mountains impeded their progress. The country was liter- 
 ally a wilderness. Not an open road, not a habitation, 
 not a sign of human life was to be seen in these vast 
 mountain solitudes until Burke county was reached. There 
 were only bridle paths to guide the march. 
 
 On reaching the settlements in Burke and Rutherford 
 counties the over-mountain men were, from time to time, 
 joined by small forces under Colonel Charles McDowell, 
 Colonel Cleveland, Major Winston, Colonel Hambright, 
 Major Graham and Major Chronicle, of North Carolina, 
 and by Colonels Lacy, Hill, and Williams, of South Caro- 
 lina. The entire army when united numbered about 
 eighteen hundred men. 
 
 In the commencement of the march from the Watauga, 
 the officers agreed to meet each night, and determine the 
 plan of operations for the next day. No one was in chief 
 
Battle of King's Mountain. 25 
 
 command, and no one claimed this right The senior 
 officer, whoever he was (probably Colonel Shelby) , intent 
 only on the success of the great cause of human liberty, 
 entirely ignored himself and his own claims and thought 
 only of his country. Now, however, as there were several 
 more officers present, as they were in the enemy's coun- 
 try, and were approaching the object of the expedition and 
 a final conflict with a daring enemy, a more ^^ efficient organ- 
 ization^'' was needed. Accordingly, Colonel Shelby, who in 
 all things seemed animated alone by a supreme love of the 
 cause of independence, magnanimously proposed that 
 Colonel Campbell, who had marched the greatest distance 
 and commanded the largest number of men, should be 
 placed in chief command, until they could send to General 
 Gates for General Morgan or some other ranking officer. 
 This proposition was generously acceded to by the other 
 officers, and thus Colonel Campbell became the commander 
 of the expedition. Campbell, in a noble spirit, urged that 
 Shelby should accept the command for himself. But the lat- 
 ter firmly refused, saying that the officers — all of whom were 
 older than himself — would not willingly serve under one 
 so much younger than they. Colonel Charles McDowell, 
 a good patriot and a competent officer, was in fact en- 
 titled to the command, but it was thought by Shelby that 
 he was not sufficiently active and alert for the great enter- 
 prise they were then pushing forward. McDowell grace- 
 fully yielded to the decision of his companions, and by re- 
 quest set out for the headquarters of General Gates to ask 
 that a high officer be sent forward. Major Joseph McDow- 
 ell then took charge of his brother's troops, and with them, 
 rendered faithful service in the impending battle.^ 
 
 "Campbell," says Draper, "now assumed the chief com- 
 mand, in which, however, ho was to be directed and regu- 
 lated by the determination of the colonels, who were to 
 meet every day for consultation." ^ Colonel Hill said that 
 
 ^ Draper's " King's Mountain," pp. 186-190. " Id., p. 190. 
 
26 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 he was made commander " in courtesy to him and his reg- 
 iment, who had marched the greatest distance." ^ Colonel 
 Campbell thus became the executive officer to carry out the 
 orders agreed upon by the general council. 
 
 Ferguson on the first appearance of the patriots south of 
 the mountains retreated. When he reached King's Moun- 
 tain, confident of his own skill and the strength of his po- 
 sition, and perhaps despising the men from the "Back 
 Water country," as he called the patriots, he halted to ac- 
 cept battle. But it must be remembered that several days 
 before this he had sent dispatches to Cornwallis, at Char- 
 lotte, thirty miles away, gently hinting that he needed 
 help, and that he finally asked that Tarlton might be 
 sent. Fortunately for our little band of heroes the first 
 couriers were captured, or so delayed on the way by the 
 many little bands of patriots then in motion, that the re- 
 quest for help did not reach Cornwallis until the day of 
 battle. He also sent to Colonel Cruger, at Ninety-six, 
 for reinforcements. Except for these failures, the patriot 
 army, in all probability, would have encountered Tarlton 
 as well as Ferguson. The latter remained in his fancied 
 strong position in the expectation every hour of receiving 
 reinforcements. He impiously declared "that God Al- 
 mighty could not drive him from it." He was too proud 
 spirited to retreat in the face of his previous boasts. But 
 there can scarcely be a doubt that he would have done so 
 if he had not been confident of help. It thus appears how 
 narrowly the patriot army escaped the hazard of a doubt- 
 ful contest with a greatly superior force. It must be kept 
 in mind that these patriots went, not on a modern "raid" 
 to destroy property, but to fight. Their purpose was to 
 destroy the man who had sent them the insolent message 
 a few weeks before. They would have fought just as 
 readily, if he had had twice or thrice the force he actu- 
 
 ^ Draper's " King's Mountain," p. 226. 
 
Battle of King^s Mountain. 27 
 
 ally had. They knew no fear, and were determined to 
 conquer. 
 
 The last two days of the march were occupied by a 
 hurried pursuit of Ferguson. The patriots feared he 
 might escape by falling back on Cornwallis. So they de- 
 termined to rid themselves of every incumbrance, and to 
 make a forced march to overtake him. They therefore 
 selected the best horses and men in order to move with the 
 greatest celerity. These amounted to nine hundred and 
 ten. Thus, from Campbell's men, two hundred were 
 taken ; from Shelby's one hundred and twenty ; Sevier's 
 one hundred and twenty ; Cleveland's one hundred and 
 ten ; McDowell's ninety ; Winston's sixty ; Lacy's one 
 hundred ; "Williams' sixty, and Graham and Hambright's 
 fifty. The Georgians were united with Williams' little 
 force, while Chronicle's men united with Graham's.^ Be- 
 sides the horsemen thus selected, there seems to have been 
 a few men following on foot, who failed to reach the battle- 
 field. 
 
 Thus reorganized, the patriots pushed on all night, 
 through a drizzling rain, which was excessively hard a part of 
 the time. The night was very dark. At sunrise they forded 
 the Broad River, the stream being deep and, as its name 
 indicates, broad. They had now been in the saddle, with 
 only a short rest, about twenty-four hours. They were 
 still fifteen miles from King's Mountain. The rain con- 
 tinued to fall so heavily during the stormy forenoon that 
 it was proposed by some of the officers to halt and rest. 
 But the stern and determined Shelby, eager and impatient 
 for the battle, positively refused to stop a minute. They 
 therefore hurried forward with all the speed they could 
 put into their horses. About noon the rain ceased, the 
 clouds passed away, and the sun came out — a happy 
 presage of victory. 
 
 A brief council of war was held while the army was 
 
 ^ Draper's " King's Mountain," p. 227. 
 
28 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 still in motion. The patriot force was arranged in four 
 columns, led respectively by Campbell and Sevier on the 
 right and Shelby and Cleveland on the left. Ferguson 
 was posted on an oblong mountain, in South Carolina, a 
 short distance beyond tlie North Carolina line, some six 
 hundred yards long, and on the top from sixty to one hun- 
 dred and twenty wide. The plan of battle was to surround 
 the mountain, and simultaneously attack Ferguson from 
 the four sides. When positively assured that the enemy 
 remained on the mountain, the patriots broke into a 
 gallop, and dashed forward until they were within a mile 
 of the object of their long pursuit. They had now 
 marched, according to the daily record made at the time, 
 two hundred and ten or perhaps two hundred and twenty- 
 five miles. Here they dismounted, quickly tied their 
 horses, reprimed their guns, and made hasty arrangements 
 for the battle. A second opportunity was given to any of 
 the men who might desire to retire, to do so, but to the 
 honor of this immortal Spartan band, there was not a 
 coward among them. 
 
 At three o'clock, or a little later, October 7, 1780, the 
 several columns rapidly moved out to their respective posi- 
 tions. Soon the sharp crack of the celebrated Deckard 
 rifle rang out on the clear mountain air.^ Then the yell of 
 the patriots, as they dashed up the rocky sides of the 
 mountain, was heard, announcing that the battle had be- 
 gun. As they reached the top, the shrill silver whistle of 
 Ferguson was heard above the din and noise of battle, 
 sounding the signal for a bayonet charge. The trained 
 veterans, with dreadful momentum and celerity, rushed 
 forward with their death-dealing bayonets, driving the 
 
 ^ The patriots were largely, if not almost entirely, armed with this cele- 
 brated gun, manufactured at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, by a man named 
 Deckard. It carried a ball running from thirty to seventy bullets to the 
 pound. The gun was remarkable for its precision and long range. My 
 grandfather, Major Temple, carried in this battle one of these guns of 
 twenty-five balls to the pound, and it was afterwards called " Old King's 
 Mountain." 
 
Battle of King'' 8 Mountain. 29 
 
 patriots down the mountain. Now the silver whistle was 
 again heard, recalling the pursuers. While the patriots 
 on one side of the mountain were recoiling from the deadly 
 bayonets of Ferguson's serried phalanx, other patriot col- 
 umns had appeared on the summit, and were pouring their 
 fatal shot into the rear of the enemy. High above all this 
 noise the silver whistle was again heard, ordering a charge 
 on the other side of the mountain. Again the mountain 
 men fell back before the terrible bayonets, and again the 
 pursuers were recalled to meet new enemies, who con- 
 stantly appeared on the mountain crest. Three times 
 Shelby's and Campbell's men were driven down the moun- 
 tain — the last time the retreat becoming almost a rout — 
 and three times they were rallied and led back to the fight 
 by their brave leaders. The mountain smoked like a vol- 
 cano. A flame of fire encircled it and flashed from every 
 side. Closer and closer the cordon of fire was drawn 
 around the doomed army of Ferguson. "Wherever the 
 danger was thickest, there was Ferguson, urging on his 
 veteran soldiers. Wherever the battle raged the fiercest, 
 there was ever heard the shrill sound of the whistle of this 
 dauntless officer. With sword in hand, he was every- 
 where seen encouraging his men. Twice flags were run 
 up by his men, in token of surrender, and twice Ferguson 
 indignantly struck them down. He was urged by Major 
 De Peyster, his second in command, to surrender. He 
 swore he would "never yield to such a d — d banditti." 
 
 The British had been pressed into a narrow space on the 
 mountain-top by the impetuous mountain men, who were 
 pouring deadly volleys into the huddled mass from every 
 quarter. Ferguson, seeing that all was lost, determined to 
 cut his way out. With a few followers, and with desper- 
 ate courage, he spurred forward into the midst of his ene- 
 mies, cutting and slashing with his sword until it was 
 broken. But keen eyes were fastened on him. Soon he 
 fell in death, pierced by half a dozen bullets. White hand- 
 kerchiefs were now hoisted on ramrods as signals of sur- 
 
30 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 render. But more or less firing still continued on the part 
 of the hot-headed young men, who remembered the savage 
 treatment Tarlton had given Colonel Buford on a previous 
 occasion. "Quarter! Quarter!" imploringly shouted the 
 British, as the firing still went on. The intrepid Shelby, 
 seeing that they still retained their arms in their hands, 
 rushed forward on horseback and shouted, in his extraor- 
 dinary voice: "D — n you, if you want quarter, throw 
 down your arms !" Quickly this was done, and the firing 
 ceased. 
 
 The battle lasted just one hour and five minutes. In 
 this dreadful time, short as it was, two hundred and twenty 
 men on the enemy's side had perished, and one hundred 
 and eighty were wounded. Four hundred out of eleven 
 hundred — a frightful havoc ! Either six or seven hundred 
 (the authorities differ as to the exact number) were taken 
 prisoners. General Greene gave the number of prisoners 
 taken as "upward of six hundred." This is probably as 
 near the truth as the discrepancies will allow. Of those 
 present in the fight, not one escaped. On the side of the 
 patriots, twenty-eight were killed and sixty-one wounded. 
 Among the former were the brave Colonel Williams, of 
 South Carolina, Major Chronicle, of North Carolina, and 
 Captain Robert Sevier, from the Nolichucky, mortally 
 wounded, besides a number of other officers. 
 
 No enterprise of the Revolution was more daring in 
 conception or more skillful in execution than this. The 
 expedition to Canada and the attempt on Quebec, in 1777, 
 under General Arnold, were perhaps as daring and as dan- 
 gerous, but they failed of success. The dash of Colonel 
 Ethan Allen on Ticonderoga was certainly one of great 
 boldness. But it sinks far below King's Mountain, whether 
 considered in reference to the numbers engaged, or the im- 
 portance of the success to the general cause of independ- 
 ence. The capture of Stony Point by General "Wayne, in 
 1779, was a brilliant affair and, from a military point of 
 view, of the greatest importance to the patriot cause. But 
 
Battle of King'' s Mountain. 31 
 
 "Wayne had four regiments of men at his command, was 
 backed by all the resources of the main army under Wash- 
 ington ; the garrison to be attacked was feeble in numbers, 
 and the distance to be marched only a few miles. 
 
 In boldness of conception and in marvelous success in 
 execution, the expedition of General George Rogers Clarke 
 into Illinois, in 1780, is the only one during the Revolu- 
 tion that will bear a successful comparison with that of 
 King's Mountain. In its immediate consequences, in its 
 influence on the great contest then going on in the colo- 
 nies for independence and freedom, the conquest of Clarke, 
 brilliant as it certainly was, had but little potency. 
 
 There seems to have been but little of ordinary military 
 discipline and military forms in this expedition and in 
 this battle. Shelby said to the army: "When you en- 
 counter the enemy, don't wait for the command. Let 
 each one of you be your own officer. . . . If in tho 
 woods, shelter yourselves and give them Indian play ; ad- 
 vance from tree to tree. Never shoot till you see the 
 enemy, and never shoot without bringing down your 
 man." 
 
 There was indeed but little regular training and disci- 
 pline among the common soldiers of this expedition. They 
 were not of the material of which armies are usually com- 
 posed. They needed but little training. They were al- 
 most entirely the intelligent, independent proprietors of 
 their own little farms from the Upper Holston, in Virginia ; 
 from the Watauga, the Nolichucky and the Lower Holston, 
 in what is now East Tennessee ; from the Yadkin and the 
 Broad River region of North Carolina, and from York and 
 Chester counties, in South Carolina. Many of the latter, 
 from South Carolina, had seen service under Sumter. But. 
 it would be a great mistake to suppose that this little army 
 was made up of raw recruits wholly unused to war. While 
 they were not trained veterans, there was scarcely a man 
 among them who had not before seen active service in one 
 or more short campaigns against either the British or the In- 
 
32 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 dians. Many of them had been inured to irregular war- 
 fare from their boyhood. From their frontier life they 
 had been accustomed to danger in all its forms. Many of 
 them had just served in the short but successful campaign 
 in South Carolina, under Shelby and Robertson. They 
 had been with these brave officers at Musgrove Mill, at 
 Cedar Spring and Thickety Fort. Many others had seen 
 much hard service of a more regular character, under Mc- 
 Dowell, Cleveland, Winston, Hambright, Lacy, Graham 
 and Williams. And others still had gained hard experi- 
 ence in short campaigns, under Colonels William and Ar- 
 thur Campbell, in Virginia, or Colonel Sevier in Indian 
 fights in Tennessee. And the roll shows that a number of 
 tried men at King's Mountain had served with Colonel 
 Evan Shelby in the memorable battle of Point Pleasant, in 
 1774. While, perhaps, all these men had seen some serv- 
 ice in the field, they by no means constituted a trained 
 army. 
 
 Worthless characters, such as often hang on the outskirts 
 of society, not identified in interest and sympathy with 
 the community, had from the first been speedily disposed 
 of in a- summary manner by Sevier and Robertson, in the 
 Watauga settlements, and by the Campbells in Virginia. 
 Never were communities more exacting in the selection of 
 their members. None but persons above all reproach, 
 none but those who came to identify themselves with a 
 noble movement to build up a pure civilization, based on 
 the principles of freedom and Christianity, were permitted 
 to remain. 
 
 Draper says of these men : 
 
 "Those from the Holston, under Campbell, were a peculiar 
 people — somewhat of the character of Cromwell's soldiery. 
 They were almost to a man Presbyterians. In their homes, 
 in the Holston Valley, they were settled in pretty compact 
 congregations, quite tenacious of their religious and civil 
 liberties, as handed down from father to son from their 
 Scotch-Irish ancestors. Their preacher. Rev. Charles 
 
Battle of King^s ^fountain. 33 
 
 Cummins, was well fitted for the times ; a man of piety 
 and sterling patriotism, who constantly exerted himself to 
 encourage his people to make every needed sacrifice and 
 put forth every exertion in defense of the liberties of their 
 country. They were a remarkable body of men, both 
 physically and mentally. Inured to frontier life, raised 
 mostly in Augusta and Rockbridge counties, Virginia, a 
 frontier region in the French and Indian War, they early 
 settled on the Holston, and were accustomed from their 
 childhood to border life and hardship ; ever ready at the 
 tap of the drum to turn out on military service ; if, in the 
 busiest crop season, their wives, sisters and daughters 
 could, in their absence, plant and sow and harvest. They 
 were better educated than most of the frontier settlers, and 
 had a more thorough understanding of the questions at 
 issue between the colonies and their mother country. 
 These men went forth to strike their country's foes as did 
 the patriarchs of old, feeling assured that the God of 
 battles was with them, and that He would surely crown 
 their efforts with success. They had no doubts, no fears. 
 They trusted in God — and kept their powder dry. Such a 
 thing as a coward was not known among them. 
 
 "Lacy's men, mostly from York and Chester counties. 
 South Carolina, and some of those under Shelby, Sevier, 
 Cleveland, "Williams, Winston and McDowell were of the 
 same character — Scotch-Irish Presbyterians ; but many of 
 them, especially those from the Nolichucky, Watauga and 
 Lower Holston, who had not been very long settled on the 
 frontiers, were more of a mixed race, somewhat rough, but 
 brave, fearless and full of adventure. They were not a 
 whit less patriotic than the Virginians, and were ever 
 ready to hug a bear, scalp an Indian, or beard the fiercest 
 tories wherever they could be found." ^ 
 
 The distinction drawn in the foregoing extracts between 
 the people of Washington county, Virginia, and those 
 
 1 Draper's " King's Mountain," p. 242. 
 
 3 
 
34 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 dwelling across the state line, in Tennessee, on the Lower 
 Holston, on the Watauga and on the Nolichucky, is not 
 well founded. All these settlements were formed of people 
 of substantially the same race and the same origin. 
 
 A large majority of these early settlers, both in South- 
 west Virginia and in East Tennessee, as I attempted to 
 show in the preceding chapter, were of Covenanter, or 
 Scotch-Irish, blood, of the same characteristics, the same 
 intellectual advancement and the same religion. Of the 
 former the Rev. Charles Cummins and the Campbells 
 were representative types, and of the latter the Rev. 
 Samuel Doak and James Robertson. 
 
 It is therefore evident that the people on the Tennessee 
 side of the line, in 1780, were in nowise inferior to those 
 on the Virginia side. Mr. Draper has cited no authority 
 in support of his statements in this regard, and it is be- 
 lieved he had none. He has drawn a disparaging distinc- 
 tion between two people, when in fact no material differ- 
 ence existed. Both Douglas Campbell and Theodore 
 Roosevelt, as we have seen, sustain this view, of Mr. 
 Draper's error/ 
 
 The three leading men of this expedition, and the three 
 who became most eminent by their achievements, were 
 Colonel "William Campbell, Colonel Isaac Shelby and 
 Colonel John Sevier. 
 
 On the occasion of the seizure of the arsenal and arms 
 of the Colony of Virginia by the royal governor, Dunmore, 
 Colonel Campbell had raised a company, and had marched 
 from the extreme south-western part of the state to Will- 
 iamsburgh — a distance of probably four hundred miles — 
 to aid in defense of the state. From that time until 
 1780 he had been active in the service of the colonies, a 
 part of the time serving in the field. He was a brave 
 and skillful officer. As early as January 27, 1775, he and 
 Colonel Arthur Campbell and other prominent citizens of 
 
 1 Roosevelt's " Winning of the West," Vol. I, p. 180, note. 
 
Battle of King's Mountain. 35 
 
 Fincastle county, from their little settlement on the remote 
 Holston, had sent an address to the Continental Congress, 
 declaring their determination to "live as freemen," or to 
 die in the defense of "liberty and loyalty." ^ 
 
 Colonel Shelby, as we have seen, when a mere youth, 
 had served as a lieutenant under his father, Captain (aft- 
 erward General) Evan Shelby in the great and desperate 
 Indian battle of Point Pleasant.^ In the summer of 1780, 
 he served in the South with distinguished honor as colonel 
 in the engagements at Thickety Fort, Cedar Springs, and 
 Musgrove's Mill. In each he displayed dauntless courage 
 and high military capacity. He was, in fact, a natural 
 commander of men. 
 
 It is difficult to read Draper's elaborate history of this 
 expedition without being forced to the conclusion that the 
 master spirit of it was Shelby, though he was evidently 
 not the hero of the author. Aside from Shelby's agency in 
 originating (inconjunction with Sevier) this enterprise, and 
 successfully putting it on foot, in every step subsequently 
 taken his paramount influence was manifest. It was he 
 who successfully settled the question of command, which, 
 if not settled, might and doubtless would have weakened, 
 delayed and finally defeated the object of the expedi- 
 tion. One little incident related by Draper reveals the kind 
 of man Shelby was in war. On the morning of the day 
 of the battle, after having traveled hard through the rain 
 since the evening before, many of the horses having given 
 out, and the men being hungry and exhausted, Campbell, 
 Sevier and Cleveland, concluded that it was best to make 
 a halt and refresh the men and horses. So they rode up 
 to Shelby and informed him of their determination. He 
 replied roughly, with an oath: "I will not stop until 
 night, if I follow Ferguson into Cornwallis' lines." With- 
 
 * Campbell's " Puritan in Holland, England, and America," Vol. II, pp. 
 479, 486. 
 ' Draper's " King's Mountain," p. 381. 
 
36 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 out a word of reply the other officers returned to their sev- 
 eral commands.^ Shelby was in stature of great size ; his 
 aspect was grave, dignified and stern ; his eyes bright and 
 penetrating ; his voice stentorian, and his countenance 
 lighted with intellectual activity. A glance at him showed 
 the observer that he was no ordinary man. In courage 
 and determination he was equal to the demands of the 
 most exacting situation. He pursued his object with un- 
 faltering energy. His subsequent career was full of un- 
 usual honors and patriotic services. Having moved to 
 Kentucky, he was chosen the first governor of the state, 
 and served in that honorable position for two years. When 
 the country was shrouded in the deep gloom of the War of 
 1812, his fellow-citizens again turned to him for wisdom and 
 guidance, by electing him for the second time chief execu- 
 tive of the commonwealth. In 1813, he led the Ken- 
 tucky troops in the Canadian Campaign, which resulted 
 in the glorious victory of the Thames. In 1817, he was 
 appointed Secretary of War by President Monroe, which 
 high office he was compelled to decline on account of ad- 
 vancing age. In 1818, he was appointed by President 
 Monroe, together with Andrew Jackson, to negotiate a 
 treaty with the Chickasaw Indians, by which the title to 
 all the land west of the Tennessee River, in Tennessee and 
 Kentucky, passed to the United States. 
 
 The third of these three remarkable men, Colonel John 
 Sevier, was not less worthy or distinguished than the other 
 two. He had been a soldier from the time he held a com- 
 mission as captain in the royal army in Virginia, under 
 Governor Dunmore. He had been in many fights with 
 the fierce Cherokees, and was the recognized defender of 
 the settlements. It was he who was the author of the re- 
 markable address from the Independent Watauga Associa- 
 tion to the Provincial Council of North Carolina, in 1776, 
 in which, as we have seen, that body asked to be allowed 
 
 1 Draper's " King's Mountain," p. 227. 
 
Battle of King's Mountain. 37 
 
 to contribute their part of the expenses of the Revolution, 
 and to "share in the glorious cause of liberty." The uni- 
 form leadership accorded to Colonel Sevier, the high hon- 
 ors achieved by him, and his almost unexampled influence 
 from his first advent in the settlements of East Tennessee, 
 in 1770 or 1771, down to his death, in 1816, conclusively 
 prove the remarkable strength and integrity of his charac- 
 ter. A man who was able to defy and successfully with- 
 stand the opposition of General Jackson, as he did, was 
 surely no ordinary person. In person, he was tall, grace- 
 ful and handsome ; in manners, vivacious and knightly. 
 He was born to be the idol of men, and, therefore, their 
 leader. For nearly forty years, his sway over the hearts 
 and minds of the people among whom he dwelt was un- 
 broken, and as absolute as that of a Scottish chief over 
 his clan in the sixteenth century. His genius for com- 
 mand in battle, especially such as the "hurly-burly" of 
 King's Mountain, was proven in more than thirty success- 
 ful Indian battles. His rules of war were : rapidity of 
 movement, a surprise, an impetuous charge. The whole 
 campaign of King's Mountain was in perfect accord with 
 his practice in war. Honors crowned his whole civil life, 
 until its close, in 1815. Honored by an election as the 
 first chief magistrate of the state, as his intimate friend 
 and associate in war had been in Kentucky, he was subse- 
 quently five times re-elected to the same high office. He 
 was, at intervals, three times elected a member of con- 
 gress, and, finally, while absent on an important mission 
 in the Creek nation, under an appointment of President 
 Madison, was again elected, without opposition, for the 
 fourth time by his devoted constituents. But he never 
 returned to fill this position. 
 
 The honors won by these men in the brilliant victory of 
 King's Mountain were about equal. Where each had an 
 honorable position, and an independent command assigned 
 to him, and each did his full duty in action, it would be 
 unjust to claim any higher honors for one than for the 
 
38 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 others. The same is true of Colonel Cleveland also — the 
 fourth division commander. But this brave officer had 
 no share in the honor of the early part of this glorious 
 expedition. 
 
 Before closing this chapter, I may appropriately refer to 
 the great influence that has been exerted upon society 
 during the last hundred years by the Shelbys, the Camp- 
 bells, the Seviers, and the Robertsons, and their collaterals 
 in blood. To these I may properly add the name of 
 Major John Tipton, since he was the second in command 
 in Sevier's regiment at King's Mountain, at Guilford 
 Court-house, and on other fields of valor during the Revo- 
 lution. He was unquestionably one of the bravest and 
 best patriots of the Revolution. The great and widely- 
 extended influence that has been exercised by the families 
 bearing these honored names, and by those of their blood, 
 but not of the family name, show how strongly our people 
 cling to the glory of noble deeds and illustrious names. In 
 each of tliese families there has descended to their pos- 
 terity, not only exalted names, but many of the lofty 
 virtues, and much of the nobility of soul, which distin- 
 guished their ancestors. There have appeared in each gen- 
 eration, in the ever- widening circle in descent, much of 
 that genuine robustness, that strength of character which 
 belonged to their distinguished ancestors. Marked traits 
 of character, such as courage, determination, eloquence, 
 honor, stateliness and majesty of person, marvelous will- 
 power, and the faculty to fascinate and lead — these, or 
 some of these, are constantly appearing in the descendants 
 of these old families. 
 
 These numerous descendants, multiplied by five or six 
 generations, have swollen into almost tens of thousands. 
 They are to be found in almost every Southern and in 
 many of the North-western states. They have furnished 
 honored, and in some cases, brilliant and distinguished 
 representatives, to the National Senate and House of 
 
Battle of King'' s Mountain. 39 
 
 Representatives, governors of states, judges and members 
 of the bar, legislators of the states, high officers in 
 war, in the pulpit, and in all the walks of private life. 
 They have given at least four United States senators to the 
 nation, six governors of states, a number of generals and 
 representatives in congress, and many legislators and 
 judges and other high functionaries. 
 
 So distinguished were the founders of these families, 
 that, in an earlier age and in a royal government, titles of 
 nobility would have rewarded their services, and descended 
 to their posterity, It would be difficult to name in the 
 Southern States five families that have exercised such wide 
 influence, and combined on the whole so many high and 
 noble qualities.^ 
 
 As we recede from the revolution, I fear that its great 
 events become less and less sacred and inspiring. In the 
 
 * It is singular how writers and even relatives, have become confounded 
 as to the Christian name of John Tipton. In Lyman Draper's exhaustive 
 history of " King's Mountain and its Heroes," — the only full history of that 
 battle ever written — the major who was second in command under Sevier, 
 in that and in other battles is called Jonathan Tipton. Draper says that 
 Jonathan Tipton died in Overton county, Tennessee, in 1832, aged eighty- 
 three. Haywood and Phelan, both historians of Tennessee, call the offi- 
 cer who was major under Sevier, John Tipton. Ramsey, another historian, 
 while generally calling him John, in two or three places speaks of Major 
 Tipton as Jonathan Tipton. 
 
 Seeing this discrepancy, and knowing the general accuracy and high 
 character of Draper as a historian, I was naturally led to an investigation 
 of the question : Which is the correct name ? For this purpose I set on 
 foot an extensive inquiry. This, for a while, resulted in worse confusion. 
 One direct descendant, who had traced out the history of Tipton with great 
 care, said that John and Jonathan were the same persons, known by both 
 these names. Another person, who professed to know all about the 
 Tiptons, and who had studied the early history of Upper East Tennessee 
 more minutely than any one within my knowledge, said very positively 
 that the true name was Jonathan Tipton, and that he died while a mem- 
 ber of the legislature in Nashville, in 1836, and was buried there, receiving 
 the honor of a public funeral on the part of the state. A number of 
 relatives and intelligent gentlemen, to whom I applied, were unable to 
 give any information. 
 
 Finally, I was indebted to Dr. A. Jobe, of Elk Park, North Carolina, a 
 great grandson of John Tipton — a gentleman of education and intelli- 
 
40 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 rush of passing events, we are forgetting the sacrifices, 
 the toils and the heroic deeds of our patriot forefathers. 
 Would that we could have one spark of the fire of seventy- 
 six to warm our hearts with a patriotic glow. For one, I 
 would uncover my head, at the name and in the presence 
 of the majestic men of the Revolution. 
 
 gence — for a solution of this question. He says the name was John and 
 not Jonathan Tipton. He does not say in so many words that John Tipton 
 was never called Jonathan until recently, but it is clear from his statement 
 that he was not. Instead of dying in Overton county, in 1832, or in Nash- 
 ville, in 1836, and being buried in one of these places, or in both, ac- 
 cording to the different accounts, he died and was buried on his farm in 
 Washington county, Tennessee, one and one-half miles south of Johnson 
 City, where he lived at the time of his battle with John Sevier. He had nine 
 sons. Two of these were Jonathan and John. The first settled in Blount 
 county, Tennessee, and represented that county in the legislature again and 
 again. According to the account I have, he was no doubt mistaken by some 
 persons for his father and confounded with him. It is probable he was buried 
 at the public expense when he died as a member of the legislature. John 
 Tipton, the youngest son, remained in Carter county and became some- 
 what distinguished. He served on the staff of General Jackson at New 
 Orleans, and was complimented by the old hero for his daring and courage. 
 It is a reproach to the state, or to the people of the state, or to his numer- 
 ous friends and relatives, that " no rock shows the last resting place "of 
 one of the bravest heroes and best patriots of the Eevolution. 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 41 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE EARLY INHABITANTS OP EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 Early inhabitants Covenanters — Establishment of colleges and grammar 
 schools — Cestion of territory by North Carolina — "Territory South- 
 west of the River Ohio " established — Constitutional Convention of 
 1796 — Bill of Rights — Safeguards of liberty— Error in not providing for 
 universal education — Error of states in reference to same — Wisdom of 
 congress — Older states received no benefit from act of 1785 — Universi- 
 ties and colleges — Waste of public lands on railroad corporations — 
 Folly of congress as to universal education — Land-owners the conserva- 
 tive force and the main-stay of the Republic — Character of early settlers 
 of East Tennessee — All were toilers — The women — Spinning and weav- 
 ing — The Sabbath in early times — Attending church — political discus- 
 sions — Religious controversies — People well informed on these sub- 
 jects — Leisure of the people. 
 
 In my last chapter I briefly referred to the coming of the 
 Covenanters into East Tennessee, and the part they took 
 in the Revolutionary War. They had borne a great and 
 honorable part in achieving our independence. The war was 
 now over. Henceforth they were to tread the quiet paths 
 of peace. Yet their history was to be no less honorable 
 in peace than it had been in war. Wherever they had 
 been, they had been the friends of education. In every 
 place where they had settled, they had at once provided the 
 means for the higher education of their people. As far as 
 possible they established schools for every congregation. 
 Colleges and grammar schools were provided for larger 
 districts, as recommended at an early day by the Synod of 
 North Carolina. The preacher, in those days, and even 
 down to a much latter day, was a teacher also. These 
 schools were generally theological as well as classical. The 
 ministers were educated in all the learning of the day. 
 While they still resided in Ireland, they received their 
 training in the great universities of Scotland, at Glasgow 
 
42 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and Edinburgh. When they came to the colonies, these 
 same men opened classical schools in the wilderness for the 
 higher education of young men. They brought to the 
 New World the learning of the Old, and by means of 
 their numerous grammar schools and colleges, it was trans- 
 mitted to their successors. But there could not be, ex- 
 cept by the state, and there was not, free and universal 
 education. Before the close of the century these educated 
 ministers had established and put into successful opera- 
 tion, in East Tennessee, three institutions of learning : 
 Washington College, Greeneville College and Blount Col- 
 lege, the first in 1780. These all became great centers of 
 learning, and all survive to this day. Washington Col- 
 lege was the first educational institution in the Mississippi 
 Yalley.' 
 
 The legislature of North Carolina, in 1789, ceded her 
 western territory, now known as Tennessee, to the Govern- 
 ment of the United States. Congress having accepted 
 the deed of cession, passed an act for the establishment 
 and the government of this territory, under the name of 
 the "Territory South-west of the River Ohio." Why it 
 should have been spoken of as the " Territory South-west 
 of the River Ohio," is certainly singular, when it is re- 
 membered that this territory nowhere touched the Ohio 
 River, the State of Kentucky intervening between Ten- 
 nessee and that river. 
 
 In 1796, the people of Tennessee, through their chosen 
 delegates, assembled in convention at Knoxville, to frame 
 their state constitution. Their work is a monument of 
 
 ^ It is a singular fact that precisely the same claim is made in Ken- 
 tucky, for Transylvania Seminary, at Lexington. The facts on which this 
 claim is based are these: In 1780, the legislature of Virginia chartered 
 Transylvania Seminary as an educational institution. But it seems that it 
 was not ready to receive students until 1788. Eight years after Samuel 
 Doak opened his school at Salem, and five years after it was incorporated 
 as Martin Academy. It thus appears that Washington College is the old- 
 est educational institution put into operation in the Mississippi Valley. — 
 €arl Schurz' " Life of Henry Clay." 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 43 
 
 their foresight and intelligence. If they had not been 
 taught by recent sad experience, and by volumes of tradi- 
 tion full of warning, many of the safeguards to be found in 
 that constitution would not have been put there. Every 
 declaration in the "Bill of Rights" has an historic cause, full 
 of warning and significant import. No people ever had 
 greater reason for exercising wisdom and caution than these 
 Covenanters. Of the thirty-two articles composing the 
 "Declartionof Rights," all but three were intended toclose 
 the door forever against the exercise of arbitrary power on 
 the part of all persons in authority. Nearly every one of 
 them was the sequence of some great wrong which they or 
 their ancestors had suffered, a repetition of which was thus 
 to be prevented. How full of meaning to the descendants 
 of the old Covenanters were the following articles : 
 
 "II. That government being instituted for the common 
 benefit, the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary 
 power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive to 
 the good and happiness of mankind. 
 
 "III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible 
 right to worship the Almighty God according to the dic- 
 tates of their own consciences ; that no man can, of right, 
 be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of wor- 
 ship or to maintain any ministry against his consent ; that 
 no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or 
 interfere with the rights of conscience ; that no preference 
 shall ever be given by law to any religious establishment 
 or mode of worship. 
 
 "IV. That no religious test shall ever be required as a 
 qualification to any office or public trust in this state." 
 
 It would seem that the convention might have been sat- 
 isfied with these safeguards for the security of their reli- 
 gion ; but it was not. It closed the door by the following 
 article against the very men who had been the most active 
 in the colonies in preaching and teaching armed resistance 
 to the British crown : 
 
 "VIII. Whereas, ministers of the gospel are, by their 
 
44 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 i:)rofession, dedicated to God and the care of souls, and 
 ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their 
 functions ; therefore, no minister of the gospel, or priest of 
 any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to a seat in 
 either house of the legislature." 
 
 There seems to have been a little undercurrent of irony 
 in this article, when the exclusion of ministers from legis- 
 lative honors and duties is placed on the ground that "they 
 ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their 
 functions." It may be noted that there was at least one 
 minister who was a member of the convention, namely, 
 Stephens Brooks, a prominent Methodist in his day, and a 
 good man, and that he voted to retain this clause. 
 
 There was still one more clause necessary, in the opinion 
 of the convention, for the complete security and perpetuity 
 of religion, and that was this : 
 
 "No person who denies the being of God or a future 
 state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in 
 the civil department of the state." 
 
 Our fathers builded wisely and solidly. If their work 
 should perish and pass away, it will be no fault of theirs. 
 Everything was done that human wisdom could do to se- 
 cure for themselves and their posterity the blessings of 
 freedom and religion. 
 
 The only great error of this convention was in not pro- 
 viding in some way for the universal education of the 
 people. Had that been done, it is highly probable that our 
 wealth to-day would be nearly double what it is, and our 
 population much larger. 
 
 The people of New England were in no sense superior 
 to the men who settled in the southern colonies. The 
 one, at an early day, established universal education ; the 
 other did not. The one has grown rich and prosperous, 
 and has extended her empire of mind to some extent all 
 over the west ; the other has grown, it is true, but not 
 with that marvelous rapidity which her boundless re- 
 sources justified. An educated people, unless enfeebled 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 45 
 
 by slavery, is always an active, industrious, pushing 
 people. They conceive and project great enterprises. No 
 intelligent people is, or can be, a lazy people. Ignorance 
 is weakness, dependence, inferiority. 
 
 It presents a curious question for speculation why the 
 three southern colonies, North Carolina, South Carolina 
 and Georgia, did not do as the New England colonies did 
 in reference to education. It is easy to see v/hy Virginia 
 did not. That state was more or less under the influence 
 of an aristocracy. The southern colonies were not. The 
 Covenanters largely controlled North Carolina. They and 
 the Huguenots were in the ascendency in South Carolina, 
 and were largely so in Georgia. These people, and cer- 
 tainly it is true of the Covenanters, were in intelligence 
 and culture quite equal to the New England colonists. 
 They had been accustomed to education before they came 
 to America. As early as 1692, "The Estates" in Scotland 
 passed a law requiring every parish to provide for a school 
 house and for the pay of a schoolmaster. Under the in- 
 fluence of this law the Scotch became the most intelligent 
 people in Europe. The Scotch colonists in Ireland also 
 were superior in intelligence to the English who were 
 planted by their side. But universal education could only 
 be established by the state and not by congregations. 
 
 If the New England and the New York colonists had the 
 example of the people of Holland before them in providing 
 for common schools, so likewise the Covenanters had the 
 example of Scotland, as well as that well-defined influence 
 always exerted by the Presbyterian Church in that direc- 
 tion. Why, then, I repeat, did they not, wherever they 
 were in the majority and controlled the state, provide for 
 universal education. 
 
 Looking back to the early days of our Republic another 
 fact seems remarkable. At the close of the Revolutionary 
 War the states in their sovereign capacity were the owners 
 of all the public lands within their respective boundaries. 
 New York owned a large territory west of her present 
 
46 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "western boundary, Virginia not only owned the State of 
 Kentucky, but also a vast territory north of the Ohio and 
 east of the Mississippi Rivers, by virtue of its conquest by 
 General George Rodgers Clarke. North Carolina owned 
 the territory comprising the present State of Tennessee. 
 And Georgia owned the territory comprising the present 
 States of Alabama and Mississippi. All this vast territory 
 was at different dates generously and magnanimously 
 ceded by the several states owning it to the old Con- 
 federation, or to the United States, to help to pay the 
 national debt incurred in achieving our independence, 
 amounting to seventy-five millions of dollars. 
 
 In 1789, as we have seen, the State of North Carolina 
 ceded the territory west of the Alleghany Mountains, now 
 composing the State of Tennessee, to the United States. 
 A striking fact about the cession of the territory now form- 
 ing the State of Tennessee is that there is no reservation 
 of any portion of this land for educational purposes. Here, 
 as it seems at this day, was a singular want of fore- 
 thought. 
 
 I can recall no single act in the history of our country 
 so wise, so beneficent, so far reaching in its results, as that 
 of the congress of 1785, in setting apart from our public 
 lands every sixteenth section in each township for school 
 purposes. In 1858 an additional section in each to-^nship 
 was granted by congress for this purpose. The old states, 
 of course, can receive no benefit from this last act, 
 for in them all the public land of any value is entered 
 or sold. Indeed, many of the old states never received 
 any benefit from the grant made by the act of 1785. 
 Tennessee, although not admitted into the Union until 
 eleven years afterward, was only partially benefited by 
 that grant, because previous to that time all of the best 
 land, both in East and Middle Tennessee, had been en- 
 tered, or covered by military land warrants or certificates 
 issued by North Carolina. So East Tennessee derived 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 47 
 
 but little benefit from this beneficent policy of the Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Grants of land to the states under acts of Congress for 
 educational purposes amount at this time to 78,000,000 
 acres, a larger area, if in one body, than Great Britain and 
 Ireland combined.^ The expenditures for common schools 
 in the United States, in 1888 and 1889, amounted to 
 $130,000,000, besides about $40,000,000 for high schools.^ 
 In addition to what the national government has done for 
 common schools by the foregoing acts, may be mentioned 
 the splendid grants of land, under the Morrill and Hatch 
 Acts, in aid of agriculture and the sciences. 
 
 Suppose Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia, when 
 they ceded their public lands to the United States for 
 the common benefit of all, had reserved, as it was per- 
 fectly competent for them to do, one-fifth, or even one- 
 tenth of their lands, for the benefit of common schools. 
 Who can estimate the consequences that would have fol- 
 lowed such an act? Few will doubt that the result in 
 Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama and Mississippi would 
 have been most momentous. It would have changed and 
 modified the destiny of those states in a degree hardly ap- 
 preciable to-day. 
 
 Our fathers seemed to think that the way to educate a 
 people was to begin at the top. They chartered and estab- 
 lished colleges without stint, but with no endowments. 
 They failed, at least in the Southern States, to begin at 
 the bottom and work upward, through a thorough system 
 of free common schools. Had this been done, colleges 
 would soon have followed. Even congress, when feebly 
 providing for two colleges and for county academies in 
 Tennessee, out of her public lands, when the state was 
 formed into a territory, seemed to act as if that were all 
 that was necessary for the education of the people. Mr. 
 
 ^ " The Puritan in Holland, England and America, by Douglas Camp- 
 bell, Vol. I, p. 31. 
 » Id.i p. 37. 
 
48 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Jefferson worked forty years in trying to build up a great 
 state university in Virginia, as well as common schools 
 and academies. He finally succeeded as to the university. 
 But does that university, great as it is, meet the pressing 
 wants of the people? Not at all. Only a fraction of her 
 population can ever at one time be directly benefited by it. 
 But leaven the mass below and it will soon leaven the 
 superincumbent mass above. Educate the great body of 
 the people, and the demand for higher and still higher op- 
 portunities will surely follow. Colleges and universities 
 would appear, as naturally as the fruit follows the flower. 
 They would take care of themselves at the proper time. 
 But both the college and the common school could have 
 been secured, as in Texas, if the proper use had been made 
 of the public lands. 
 
 Virginia neglected to some extent her great opportunity. 
 At the close of the Revolution, she was the leading state in 
 the federation, both in population and in the ability of her 
 statesmen. Her climate, soil, resources and geographical 
 position were all that could have been desired. But she 
 neglected to foster common education, as she should have 
 done, and trusted too much in her great names. She 
 rested too confidently in the influence of her flrst families 
 and in her university, and from that day her greatness 
 began to wane. 
 
 Some of these days, and the time may not be distant, 
 this generation, as well as the preceding one also, will be 
 challenged before the tribunal of history for the unparal- 
 leled waste of our public lands. Already we hear the 
 mutterings of the coming storm. At the close of the 
 Revolution in 1783, there were probably not twenty-five 
 thousand English speaking inhabitants west of the Stale of 
 New York and the Alleghanies, in all that vast region be- 
 longing to us or afterward acquired. All that immense 
 territory, sufiicient for a great empire, was practically un- 
 occupied by the white race, except by a few inconsiderable 
 settlements. Thus we had a vast region open for settle- 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 49 
 
 ment with its lands at the disposal of the national govern- 
 ment. The folly of the states that ceded these lands to 
 the government, without reserving any interest in them 
 for educational purposes, has already been hinted at. 
 
 But the stupendous folly of congress in not providing 
 for a system of universal education, for all the states, out 
 of these lands, and those that might be subsequently ac- 
 quired, is equally as great. Suppose one-fifth of the pub- 
 lic lands had been devoted to this object, what wonderful 
 results might have followed, nay, rather, would have fol- 
 lowed. Our people to-day would be in all the branches of 
 learning, except perhaps in music, the fine arts, and in 
 the classics, very far ahead of any nation in the world. 
 The waste of the public domain, by the extravagant 
 grants of land to railroad corporations and for canals and 
 wagon-roads, is still more apparent and criminal. Under 
 extreme circumstances, such as aiding in building one or 
 even two or three lines to the Pacific, as a means of na- 
 tional security, reasonable appropriations of land might 
 have been justified, especially in time of great public peril. 
 But, conceding this, the grants that have been made have 
 been extravagant and reckless. If, however, the grants 
 had been confined to two or three great highways, con- 
 necting our remote possessions, there would be a plausible, 
 if not a real, justification of them. This, unfortunately, 
 is not the case. Grant after grant, in countless numbers, 
 have been made in all the north-western and in all the 
 new states. Indeed, they have been made wherever we 
 had public lands. Many of them were for objects purely 
 local, and in no sense national. This was unjust to posterity 
 and grossly unjust to the older states. Florida, Louisiana, 
 New Mexico, Arizona, California and other states were pur- 
 chased with the common treasure of the nation. And yet 
 the older states have received no part of the proceeds of 
 the public lands (except a small sum distributed among 
 them, perhaps, in 1835) , either for the purpose of building 
 4 
 
50 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 railroads, or for educational purposes, until recently, un- 
 der the three bills known as the Morrill and the Hatch 
 Acts. And these were intended to promote higher educa- 
 tion. The people of these older states have been left to 
 build railroads as best they could, with their own means, 
 while a large part of the public land has been given away 
 to railroad corporations with a prodigality unparalleled in 
 the history of legislation. 
 
 Tennessee and Kentucky, or, probably, I should say, 
 North Carolina and Virginia, did more toward the "Win- 
 ning of the West," and in securing the Mississippi instead 
 of the AUeghanies as our western boundary line in 1783, 
 than any, or, indeed, all, of the other states, and yet, if 
 those states have ever received the benefit of an acre of 
 public land for railroads, or wagon-roads, or canals, I am 
 not aware of the fact. 
 
 Our legislators have acted as if they thought our public 
 domain would last forever. Vain delusion ! In a few 
 more brief years, the honest settler will hunt in vain for 
 his free homestead. Our magnificent domain has been 
 wasted on grasping, gigantic corporations. And the older 
 states have stood by, consenting to the monstrous spolia- 
 tion, until, in a short time, their sons w^ill not be able to 
 find a homestead in all our national territory. 
 
 The early inhabitants of East Tennessee were genuine 
 patriots. With them, liberty was not a meaningless word. 
 They knew its price. They had suffered and fought for 
 it. Within its wide import was gathered the memory of 
 three centuries of trial, endurance, suffering and battle for 
 its sake. If ever a people knew the cost of liberty, it was 
 they. For three hundred years their ancestors had strug- 
 gled for it. For it, they had bled on the Pentland Hills 
 and at Both well Bridge. For it, they had wandered 
 as fugitives and outcasts on the snow-clad mountains of 
 Scotland to escape their pursuers. For it, they had hidden 
 in caves, had been pinched with hunger, or shivered on 
 the barren heath. For it, they had wandered for years in 
 
WILLIAM BLOUNT. 
 
 Territorial Goreraor cntd FirM U. S. Senator 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 51 
 
 the hills, followed by baying dogs and the bloody dragoons 
 of the cruel Claverhouse. For it, also, they had resisted 
 for years the heavy hand of prelacy in their new home in 
 Ireland. For its sake, they had quitted their homes in 
 Ireland, to escape the exactions and the despotism of the 
 British government. They left with no love for England 
 in their hearts, and longed for the day of relief, if not of 
 vengeance. England had unwittingly prepared a whole 
 people for revolt. They were a brave, self reliant race of 
 men. The timid and the worthless did not seek the dan- 
 gers of the wilderness. It required true manhood to en- 
 counter its perils and endure its privations. These men 
 were, as a whole, the best citizens this state has ever had, 
 not alone in virtue, piety and true manhood, but also in 
 intelligence. In proof of this, I refer to the first constitu- 
 tion of Tennessee, which Mr. Jefferson pronounced "the 
 most republican of all the constitutions adopted by the 
 states." This was the work of such historic men as Jack- 
 son, Robertson, Tipton, Anderson, Rhea, Roane, Cocke, 
 Outlaw, Blount and McMinn. 
 
 Wherever these Covenanters settled in East Tennessee, 
 they got possession of the best lands, laid out the towns, 
 framed and administered the laws, filled the public offices 
 and gradually gathered into their hands the larger part of 
 the wealth of the country. So far as I can ascertain the 
 first territorial legislature and the "Legislative Council" 
 were composed entirely of Covenanters, except John 
 Sevier, who was a Huguenot by descent. Judging in the 
 same way, at least thirty, and perhaps a much larger num- 
 ber, of the fifty-six men who formed our first constitution, 
 were of this same race.^ 
 
 These brave men were everywhere tenacious and jealous 
 of their rights. Their most marked trait was their zeal 
 for and their earnest devotion to their religion. With 
 
 ^ For a more detailed history of the Covenanters, I refer the reader to 
 "The Covenanter, the Cavalier and the Puritan." 
 
52 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 this was combined an unquenchable love of freedom. 
 Their fathers had fought and won the great battle of 
 religious liberty in Scotland against the combined power 
 of the Anglican Church and the English Crown. They 
 left the liberty thus won, through a century of trial 
 and suffering, as a rich legacy to mankind. Under the 
 providence of God, the world to-day owes its civil and 
 religious liberty more to the austere Covenanter of Scot- 
 land and to the despised psalm-singing Puritan of England 
 than to all other agencies and influences, and quite as 
 much to the former as to the latter. And as these Scotch- 
 Irish claimed and demanded, and would have freedom of 
 conscience for themselves, so, contrary to the spirit and 
 practice of the age, they conceded these rights to all others. 
 The long centuries of fiery persecutions which they had 
 endured, as well as the solemn teachings and doctrines of 
 Calvin and Knox, had given to their minds an austere 
 bent and a gloomy coloring. With them life was an 
 awful reality. It had great duties to be performed. A 
 solemn sense of religious obligation was the mainspring 
 of every act. Religion with them was the chief end of 
 man. It was not a mere form and ceremony. It was an 
 eternal reality. Though their religion was somewhat 
 gloomy and awful, as viewed from our softer age, it gave 
 the sweet hope and peaceful assurance of endless bliss 
 iereafter, and thus offered compensation for present trials 
 and sufferings. So, these men, when wrapt in the con- 
 templation of the awful mysteries of their religion, felt 
 within their souls the presence of a great spiritual light, 
 cheering and making strong their faith in the final reign 
 of righteousness. 
 
 These early inhabitants were farmers, merchants, teach- 
 ers and preachers. They were too earnest for a life of 
 idleness. Love of country, love of freedom, love of home, 
 love of religion, and the desire to build up a pure civiliza- 
 tion in their new homes in the forest, all spurred them to 
 work. The descendants of the men who had scaled the 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 53 
 
 Alleghanies and the Blue Ridge, and hidden themselves in 
 the depths of the forests of the Holston, the Watauga and 
 the Nolichucky, all for the sake of religious and civil free- 
 dom, were not the kind of men to turn back into a state of 
 semi-barbarism . 
 
 Nor were they men of such wealth that they could live 
 a life of idleness. The most favored were only in moderate 
 circumstances. To work in some form was a necessity. 
 On the eastern shore of Virginia, as we are told by a recent 
 writer,^ the early planters spent their time in hunting, 
 fishing and visiting, and in feasting and frolicking. Those 
 on the coast were in the habit of running up a flag 
 when a sheepshead was caught.^ This was a signal for all 
 those who saw it to come the next day and dine. The 
 great heads of families had retinues of slaves, blooded 
 horses and packs of hounds. These were the sons of the 
 younger English nobility or gentry. To work was in their 
 estimation degrading to a free citizen. All labor was done 
 by slaves. Their houses were at all times open to a gener- 
 ous hospitality. The sound of mirth and revelry was con- 
 stantly heard. Even the grave and thoughtful Jefferson 
 when a young man, like a strolling musician, always car- 
 ried with him his violin when visiting or traveling.^ 
 
 How different the life led by the first settlers of Tennes- 
 see. They lived in plain log houses with puncheon floors. 
 Their fare was of the simplest kind. There were no 
 "Sheephead" dinings. The women carded and spun the 
 wool, and wove the web of linsey and jeans, out of which the 
 bed-clothing, and the garments for both males and females 
 were made. From Monday morning until Saturday after- 
 noon, in spring and summer, busy toil and industry filled 
 the fleeting hours. But from such nurseries came heroes 
 and patriots. Finally, when these people had passed the 
 stage of actual want and had reached that of abundance, 
 
 ^ " Memoirs of a Southern Planter," by Susan Dabney Smedes. 
 
 ^ A delicious fish. ^ " Parton's Life of Jefierson.' 
 
54 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 there remained no longer any high incentive for great ex- 
 ertion, for there was no accessible market for their surplus 
 products. Had they looked out on the ocean, or possessed 
 a good all-the-year-around navigable river or a railroad, 
 the development now taking place in East Tennessee would 
 have been commenced nearly a century ago. 
 
 The planters of Virginia were mostly Cavaliers. They 
 were the firm supporters of royalty, of titles and distinc- 
 tions, and of an established church. From their lofty ele- 
 vation they looked down on the poor plebeians, and upon 
 all dissenters, with severe contempt. But while they frol- 
 icked and feasted, and drank bumpers and made merry, 
 there was silently creeping up the great valleys, overleap- 
 ing the mountains, and spreading over the western part of 
 the state, that stern, determined, unconquerable and mas- 
 terful people who were to overthrow royalty and titles, and 
 tithes and an established church, and give liberty and 
 equality to all the people of the state. That race was the 
 Covenanters, who finally settled East Tennessee. These 
 were the people from the "Upper Counties," referred to by 
 Mr. Jefferson, when speaking of the influence of Patrick 
 Henry, during the struggle for independence, when he said 
 his "boldness and their votes overawed and controlled the 
 more timid aristocratic gentlemen of the lower part of the 
 state." ^ 
 
 All the household goods of the first settlers were brought 
 across the mountains on pack-horses. There were no roads 
 then; only trails or "bridle-paths." These articles were 
 few and simple. The household affairs of our grand- 
 mothers, and even those of the next generation, were ex- 
 ceedingly simple. Cooking-stoves, furnaces, pianos, sofas, 
 divans, and many of the luxuries, and even the conven- 
 iences of modern households, were absolutely unknown. 
 She was a proud woman whose simple but clean cupboard 
 was graced by rows of bright, shining pewter plates and 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Scotch-Irish Society for 1889, p. 118. 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 55 
 
 spoons. Cards for carding wool and flax, a little and a big 
 spinning-wheel, and a loom, were as much a necessary part 
 of the outfit of every well-to-do housewife as a looking- 
 glass and a brush and comb are now. The hackle for 
 working flax was also in every house, and the flax-brake 
 on every farm. With rare exceptions, everybody — both 
 men and women, rich and poor — wore homespun goods. 
 Even General Washington was inaugurated as first Presi- 
 dent of the United States in a suit of brown homespun goods. 
 
 All the year around the women were as busy as bees ; 
 yes, more so, for the bees rest at "dewy eve," but these 
 women did not cease their toil till the midnight hours. 
 They were cooking and sewing, carding and spinning, and 
 weaving flax and wool for the use of the family, and in 
 some cases a surplus for sale. The carpets, blankets, 
 sheets, towels, tablecloths and goods for personal attire 
 were all, or nearly all, made by the women. And beauti- 
 ful, too, were the colors which they wove into their dresses 
 and carpets. Emulation and pride made many of them 
 experts in dyeing, spinning, and weaving. Each mother 
 strove to dress her daughter in a more beautiful garment 
 than that of her neighbors' daughters. And the belles of 
 those days moved as proudly, and looked as beautifully ar- 
 rayed, in the handiwork of their mothers, as do their 
 granddaughters now in their silks, satins, and velvets. 
 The hickory, the walnut, the sumach, under the intelligent 
 touch of the good matron, yielded up their delicate dyes, 
 and the indigo and Turkish red lent their brilliant tints. 
 Though our grandmothers often had their hands and arms 
 blue or brown with dye, in their efforts to make their 
 homes beautiful, and to adorn their daughters and hus- 
 bands in fine and elegant garments, they were a refined 
 and a grand race of women, well worthy of their noble de- 
 scendants. Sweet and fragrant and tender forever be their 
 memory 1 
 
 Let not the proud dames of this generation shake their 
 heads at these statements ; for there is scarcely a descend- 
 
66 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ant of the first settlers in East Tennessee to-day, nor in the 
 state, whose grandmother or great-grandmother did not 
 card and spin, and probably weave also, and dip her 
 hands and arms in the dye-pot, in those early days. It 
 was both a necessity and the fashion of the times. And 
 they not only spun and wove, but also sewed and made 
 garments for their husbands and daughters, and sometimes 
 for their sweethearts also.^ Every young lady was expected 
 to be able to spin and weave. If not regarded as accom- 
 plishments, these were at least indispensable in the domestic 
 economy. The spinning-jenny — that great labor-saving 
 machine — had not yet been invented, or come into general 
 use. Young ladies often vied with each other in friendly 
 
 ^ I find this interesting incident, related by the Eev. A. T. Rankin, a Presby- 
 terian minister of Greensburg, Indiana, at the dedication of a bronze bust 
 and a granite monument to the memory of his father, the Rev. John Rankin, 
 at Ripley, Ohio, May 5, 1892, contained in a pamphlet giving an account of 
 the ceremonies on that occasion. John Rankin married Jean Lowry, a 
 daughter of Adam Lowry, of Salem, Washington county. East Tennessee. 
 She was the granddaughter of the pioneer preacher and teacher, Samuel 
 Doak, the celebrated founder of Washington College, by whom she and 
 her husband were both educated. John Rankin was born in Jefferson 
 county, East Tennessee, and became a celebrated Abolitionist. More will 
 be said of him hereafter. 
 
 Mr. A. T. Rankin said of his mother: "My mother made the coat in 
 which my father was married, also the one in which he celebrated the 
 golden wedding, and the same busy fingers made the entire outfit in which 
 I delivered the valedictory of my class in college. . . . the same hand 
 fashioned the clothes in which I did the honors at Lane Seminary, and 
 then buttoned up for my own wedding. Though she had nine boys to sew 
 for, none went in rags." 
 
 Another son, the Rev. S. G. Rankin, said of the same noble Scotch-Irish 
 mother, that " such was her devotion and patriotism for the country's salva- 
 tion during the late civil war, that she said to me, as I was on my way down 
 to the Cumberland : ' Samuel, you will see Arthur on your way ? ' ' Yes,' I 
 replied, 'have you any message for him?' 'Yes, tell him he is the only 
 one left, and I only hold him as a reserve. As soon as he hears of a break 
 in the lines, tell him to step into the gap. God be with him, and I will 
 take care of his children.' " Never Spartan mother spoke nobler words I 
 
 While this noble woman was sending eight sons and one grandson to the 
 front, holding one as a reserve, her kinsman, Robert H. McEwen, and his 
 wife, kept the national flag floating over their house in Nashville during 
 the entire war. If pulled down, they put it up again. 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 57 
 
 rivalry, as to which should spin the greatest number of 
 "cuts" in a day. Round and round went the whizzing, 
 singing wheel from early morn until late at night. With 
 lithe and graceful forms, with elastic steps, and with glow- 
 ing cheeks and flashing eyes, they sped back and forth 
 drawing out the long attenuated thread, while the swift, 
 whirling wheel made music for the household. Thus many 
 a belle of matchless form and beauty, all radiant with the 
 fresh bloom of young womanhood, beguiled the long, 
 weary winter hours in healthful toil. 
 
 Those were hard days for women, yet they were not un- 
 happy. From Monday morning until Saturday night, 
 busy toil and industry kept step with the passing hours. 
 
 When Sunday morning came, a solemn stillness ushered 
 it in and marked the day. Each Covenanter house became 
 a miniature Sabbath school. Bible reading, studying the 
 catechism, singing psalms, and attending divine service by 
 the whole family, however remote the place of worship, 
 occupied the day. All secular pursuits were interdicted 
 and ceased. Everywhere a solemn sanctity and religious 
 awe attached to the Sabbath. It can not be denied that 
 the austere manners of these people gave a severe and 
 gloomy tinge to their mental and moral nature. But these 
 homes were the nurseries of noble men and lovely women. 
 In many a house in East Tennessee the touching scenes of 
 Burns' "Cotter's Saturday Night" were repeated in those 
 days, when "the saint, the father and the husband" in- 
 voked the Divine blessing on the family. 
 
 The Sabbath still holds its place among them as a holy 
 day, notwithstanding the tendency of the times to weaken 
 its hold on the hearts and minds of men. It is unneces- 
 sary to say that these people have always been brave and 
 daring. History attests this fact, from King's Mountain 
 down to the late civil war. Every war, and nearly every 
 battle-field, have witnessed their valor. Patriotism is more 
 than a sentiment ; it is a part of their being. They love 
 their country — their own locality — because it is their home 
 
58 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and their possession. Each man feels that the country is 
 in part his own. 
 
 These people became exceedingly fond of political dis- 
 cussions. In proof of this, I copy the following from the 
 Atlantic Monthly, edited by James Russell Lowell; for Au- 
 gust, 1870, taken from the journal or diary of Lucian 
 Minor, a Virginian. It was written from Rogersville, 
 Tennessee, November 29, 1823. After telling about stop- 
 ping at a little inn in that town, kej^t by ex-Governor Mc- 
 Minn, and how he went "bustling about the tavern, at 
 once as landlord, barkeeper and head waiter, administer- 
 ing entertainment to guests of every degree," Mr. Minor 
 said of the people of East Tennessee : 
 
 "This is indeed a country where the democratic spirit of 
 liberty and equality prevails to the utmost extent. I 
 already see, or think I see, a bolder, loftier carriage in ordi- 
 dinary men. Everyone seems to feel himself an eflficient 
 member of the body politic. No free male citizen being 
 excluded from a vote in the choice of law-givers and gov- 
 ernors, everyone takes an interest in the acts of those pub- 
 lic servants, and you hear proceedings of the legislature 
 and other political matters canvassed by men whose ap- 
 pearance would, amongst us, bespeak them both unknow- 
 ing and careless of the most important public concerns. 
 It would surprise you to see the warm and active feelings 
 of these people in regard to the presidential election. Of 
 the Louisa (his home in Virginia) people, I believe not a 
 tenth part, even of the freeholders, have yet bestowed a 
 thought or expressed a wish on the subject. In Tennessee 
 every heart is roused, every tongue is busy ; old and 
 young, male and female, all look anxiously forward to the 
 result ; all wish, and would fight for (if need be) , the suc- 
 cess of Jackson. Never, surely, were a people so nearly 
 unanimous. The citizens of Sevier county met the other 
 day to express their sentiments and adopt resolutions in 
 favor of their hero, when there were for Clay 3, for Craw- 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 59 
 
 ford 2, for Adams 1, for Calhoun none, for Jackson be- 
 tween 600 and 700." 
 
 And yet so independent were these people of Sevier 
 county, that, in 1840, when their favorite of 1823, Gen- 
 eral Jackson, tried to force Van Buren on them for Presi- 
 dent, that they indignantly repudiated him, and voted 
 nearly unanimously for General Harrison. They admired 
 Jackson because many of them had fought under him in 
 1812-1814, but they firmly refused to yield to his dictation. 
 In fact, great independence of thought has always char- 
 acterized the people of East Tennessee. "When they have 
 once informed themselves in reference to either political 
 or religious questions, and become satisfied as to the right 
 or wrong involved, no power on earth can move them from 
 their mature convictions. No higher illustration of the 
 firmness of these people can be found in the political annals 
 of any people than the tenacity with which they clung to the 
 Union through all the dark days of the late Civil War,^ 
 though deserted by the rest of the state, and by many of 
 their leaders. They stood almost as a compact body, los- 
 ing only a few from their ranks. 
 
 More than once in the course of this narrative I have 
 said that the early inhabitants of East Tennessee were a 
 religious people. The nest generation inherited from them 
 this trait of character This feeling was manifest in their 
 fondness for religious controversy. The day of actual re- 
 ligious warfare had gone. The day of peaceable contro- 
 versy had come. The conscience was no longer to be con- 
 vinced by the sword, the rack, or the thumb-screw, but by 
 the force of argument. Persecution had gone forever. In 
 its stead came gentle toleration. But men might still 
 war in words, over creeds, dogmas, and forms of worship. 
 Down to within the last forty years the churches of the 
 
 ^ In February, 1861, in the election ordered by the legislature, when the 
 question was, not in words, but in substance, secession or no secession, these 
 people of Sevier county voted unanimously against secession. Perhaps no 
 county in the Union has such a record as that. 
 
60 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 country rang with the clangor of hostile controversy, and 
 the religious press teemed with bitter sectarian literature. 
 This was perhaps especially so in this region. Sabbath 
 after Sabbath the Methodists poured forth denunciations 
 of "election and predestination," Week after week, from 
 Presbyterian pulpits, the doctrines of the Methodists were 
 hammered, ridiculed and laid bare to public inspection. 
 From the press came forth cart-loads of pamphlets and 
 books on the respective sides. Now and then a Baptist 
 champion would stand forth, and challenge the world to 
 a discussion of the doctrines of immersion and adult bap- 
 tism. The sermons in those days were long and dry, and 
 generally of a doctrinal character. The people were 
 fond of these discussions. Nothing pleased them so much 
 as to hear their ministers launch their thunder-bolts of 
 argument, sarcasm, and ridicule, and even hate, against 
 other sects. 
 
 But I am not sure that these controversies, after all, 
 bitter as they sometimes were, did much harm. They 
 quickened the public mind. They set it to thinking and 
 reading. Anything is better than mental or spiritual stag- 
 nation. Under a quickening influence of these contro- 
 versies, and the vast amount of information given to the 
 public by them, the people of East Tennessee became bet- 
 ter posted as to theological doctrines and religious history 
 than any other people of similar development. A fact, 
 not sufficiently noticed, heretofore, contributed to this pro- 
 ficiency in and fondness for religious, as well as political, 
 discussions. This was the leisure of the people. Previous 
 to the time of the entrance of railroads, about 1851, there 
 was but little commerce or trade with the outside world. 
 There were virtually no manufactures. There was no 
 bustle, no rush, no excitement in business. Men had 
 leisure for thought and contemplation. Attending church 
 and camp-meetings was a pleasant pastime as well as a sol- 
 emn religious duty. "With a commercial, or manufactur- 
 ing, or a busy people, such things are impossible, except 
 
The Early Inhabitants of East Tennessee. 61 
 
 on the Sabbath. For the same reason, attending political 
 discussions and talking politics were always common. The 
 people were not pressed for time ; they had ample leisure 
 and came to delight in political meetings. General Jack- 
 son early became a candidate for the Presidency. He was 
 hot-headed, and made the state a boiling cauldron of po- 
 litical excitement. Politicians and people alike were 
 stirred by this imperial, tempestuous man. All turned to 
 talking politics. And so it has ever continued to be. 
 Wherefore it came about, that the people of East Ten- 
 nessee were in political and religious intelligence far above 
 what might have been expected from the general condition 
 of education in the state. 
 
62 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE PRESENT INHABITANTS OF EAST TENNESSEE— THE MOUN- 
 TAIN AND THE VALLEY PEOPLE. 
 
 East Tennessee described— A long valley surrounded by mountains— Valley 
 three-fourths of area— Mental and moral condition of the valley peo- 
 ple — Colleges and academies — Churches— People turn to religion— The 
 Sabbath and Sunday schools— People of the valley — Vindicated against 
 misrepresentations— An excellent population — Superior to many of 
 their neighbors in culture— The great mountain region lying beyond 
 the valley — Testimony as to the character of the people. 
 
 The people of East Tennessee ^ are usually spoken of by 
 writers as a "mountain people," The designation, as 
 generally applied and understood, is misleading. It is 
 true that a part of them are a mountain people, but the 
 larger part, strictly speaking, are not. To understand this 
 statement, I must explain. 
 
 East Tennessee is a valley about three hundred miles in 
 length, with an average width of fifty or sixty miles, lying 
 between two high mountain ranges. It is separated from 
 Georgia and North Carolina by the Alleghanies, sometimes 
 called the "Blue Ridge," and from Virginia and Kentucky 
 by the Cumberland Range. Inside of the state line, on 
 the northern and the southern borders, with considerable 
 exceptions, there is a rim or border of mountains, varying 
 in width from three to fifteen miles. On the western side, 
 the Cumberland, which separates East from Middle Ten- 
 nessee, swells out into a large plateau, forty or fifty miles 
 wide On the south, these mountains are exceedingly 
 high, varying from three to six thousand feet. On the 
 
 ^ The terms " East Tennessee," " Middle Tennessee " and " West Tennes- 
 see " are recognized by the constitution and the laws of the state, as con- 
 stituting grand divisions thereof, with well defined natural boundaries. 
 East Tennessee is separated from Middle Tennessee by the Cumberland 
 Mountains, and the latter from West Tennessee by the Tennessee River. 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc, 63 
 
 north, they are from three to four thousand feet high. 
 For the most part, this border or rim is separated from the 
 lowlands by steep mountains, and, in some cases, by pre- 
 cipitous walls. 
 
 The region lying beyond these mountain walls, but in- 
 side of the state lines, is clearly a mountain country. But 
 this region constitutes only a small part of East Tennessee. 
 A gentleman of intelligence,^ who visits every county once 
 a year, estimates that this mountain rim, including the 
 Cumberland Plateau in East Tennessee, is about equal to 
 one-fourth the area of the whole region of East Tennessee, 
 and at most not equal to one-third. Another gentleman,^ 
 .who had occasion to investigate this very question some 
 years ago, estimates that this mountain region is about 
 one-fifth of the territory of East Tennessee. 
 
 The people dwelling in the territory above the valley are 
 a genuine mountain race. But one, going among them, 
 expecting to see wild, uncivilized savages, would surely be 
 disappointed. He would not find much education, it is 
 true, nor many material comforts. He would discover a 
 low state of general intelligence, and, in some localities, a 
 deplorable state of morals. But this is not the general, 
 and certainly not the universal, condition. On the con- 
 trary, a majority of the people have due respect for the 
 Sabbath, love the Bible, regularly attend church and the 
 Sunday school, and outwardly observe in their humble 
 walks the common decencies and proprieties of civilized 
 life. Among the better classes, baseness and immorality 
 are condemned and discountenanced. With a large ma- 
 jority, marriage vows and contracts are regarded as sacred. 
 There are but few divorce suits in the courts, perhaps 
 fewer than in the towns and cities in more advanced so- 
 ciety. Honesty, in a partial sense, is not only inculcated 
 and revered, but, in many cases, the higher and more 
 delicate rules that bind society together by the ties of honor 
 
 ^ Eev. Isaac Emory, * Rev. John F. Spence, D.D, 
 
64 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 are likewise observed. This is gradually lifting the people 
 up to a condition where noble sentiment takes the place of 
 ignorant force. Indictments for theft, robbery, arson and 
 burglary are rare, and, even for lewdness and adultery, far 
 from common. Murder, however, is very frequent. 
 
 It is not surprising that there is much ignorance and 
 considerable immorality in these mountain districts. The 
 state has done but little to aid the people in educational 
 facilities. Until within the last thirty years it gave them 
 but little assistance. And even now the sum devoted to 
 this purpose, arising from state and county appropriations, 
 amounts to very little in sparsely-settled communities. 
 Often in such communities the school-house is so distant 
 from many of the families that their children almost inevi- 
 tably grow up in ignorance. Even where the population 
 is more dense the school fund is not sufficient to keep the 
 public schools open, upon an average, more than from three 
 to four months in the year. Limited as are the advantages 
 afforded by these schools for acquiring a good education, 
 they are nevertheless doing great good. They are lights 
 set on a hill. This generation is being educated far be- 
 yond those of the past. In these schools many a bright 
 boy or girl is catching the spirit of education, and will be 
 impelled by it to seek elsewhere for higher advantages. 
 And thus education and knowledge are growing and 
 spreading from year to year through the mountain re- 
 gions. 
 
 But these people need help in the way of better educa- 
 tional facilities. They need a college on the Cumberland 
 Mountains, in Scott or Morgan county, for the benefit of 
 the boys and girls of that partially destitute region. An 
 industrial school, similar to the one so successfully con- 
 ducted at or near Asheville, is sorely needed for the girls 
 of that mountain region. 
 
 For at least a small part of each year many of the 
 bright mountain boys and girls are now engaged in learn- 
 ing the rudiments of a common English education. In 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 65 
 
 1891, in passing from Cranberry to Linville, in western 
 North Carolina, through the highest range of mountains, 
 I was astonished at suddenly coming upon a fair sized 
 two-story brick college building, handsomely painted, 
 with comfortable new houses surrounding it, and at seeing 
 about one hundred or more young ladies and gentlemen, 
 pupils in' this college, fair, ruddy and bright looking, as well 
 dressed as village people generally are, engaged in playing 
 games on the lawn, it being recess hour. And such sights 
 as this can be seen at other places in these mountains. 
 Indeed, only a few miles from this place, in Carter county, 
 the extreme eastern part of Tennessee, in a spot of marvelous 
 beauty, is situated Milligan College. The site of this insti- 
 tution has an altitude of about four thousand feet. A more 
 enchanting spot can not be found in all this wonderful 
 region of beauty and sublimity. The college has from 
 seven to nine professors and instructors, with an attend- 
 ance of about two hundred students, girls and boys. 
 
 And in the same mountain country, about twenty miles 
 distant, at a place called Butler, there is another flourish- 
 ing institution of learning, called Holly Spring's College, 
 situated on the banks of the beautiful Watauga River. 
 This college has an enrollment of two hundred young men 
 and women. Thus, in the midst of this great mountain 
 region, the wildest in Tennessee, or western North Caro- 
 lina, within a radius of twenty-five or thirty miles, are 
 situated three chartered colleges, one in North Carolina 
 and two in Tennessee, with an aggregate enrollment of 
 from five to six hundred scholars. 
 
 Nor is this all. In the next county, north (Sullivan), 
 at Bristol, King's College is situated, an institution of de- 
 served popularity, with an enrollment of about two hun- 
 dred scholars. About forty miles south-west from Bristol 
 and Holly Springs is situated Washington College. Then 
 fifteen miles further west, in Greene county, is Greene- 
 ville-Tusculum College. The two latter are both very 
 5 
 
66 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 flourishing schools and the oldest institutions of learning 
 in the state. 
 
 It thus appears that there are six prosperous colleges in 
 this small section of country, three of them literally in the 
 mountains, and the other three near them and almost un- 
 der their shadow, and all but one in the eastern half of 
 the First Congressional District. I take no note of the 
 academies to be found in every county and in nearly every 
 town. These remarkable facts show that this whole moun- 
 tain region is keenly alive to the great question of education. 
 
 Before the school house had appeared in these mountains, 
 the modest church edifice had arisen in nearly every thickly 
 settled neighborhood. At regular periods the faithful 
 Methodist circuit rider comes along to look after his little 
 flock. On an eminence overlooking a rapidly flowing 
 mountain stream there stands also the plain edifice, in 
 which the Baptists weekly worship. The good man who 
 ministers here week after week, labors to build up his con- 
 gregation in the faith of his sect. Occasionally, too a 
 Presbyterian evangelist or missionary comes along, and 
 presents the gospel to such persons as can be gathered to- 
 gether on short notice. And sometimes too, though infre- 
 quently, the way is opened for a Presbyterian Church, 
 and one is seen to arise in the solitude of these mountains. 
 
 And thus all over these highlands. Sabbath after Sabbath, 
 the voices of sincere praise, supplication and thanksgiving 
 ascend as grateful incense to heaven. No great, costly organs 
 send forth their deep-toned notes, rising and swelling on 
 the mountain stillness, and then sinking into a whisper. 
 But from these lofty places of worship, the voices of 
 humble worshipers are heard, in praise and thanksgiving, 
 breathing the very spirit of devotion. These children of 
 the mountain sing as the birds sing — they sing from the 
 heart. It is nature's outburst of joy, ecstasy and triumph. 
 No cold formality restrains these humble worshipers. 
 
 And since distilleries have in a large measure disap- 
 peared ; since quiltings, log rollings, musters, shooting 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 67 
 
 matches, dances and frolics are becoming rarer and rarer 
 in these mountains, more sober and weightier matters now 
 occupy the minds of the people. Men must have some- 
 thing on which to expend the vast and ever-accumulating 
 reserve of energy and life wrapped up within them. If 
 these find vent in innocent amusements and sports, it is 
 well. But far better, if in a simple primitive and emo- 
 tional religion is found the satisfaction demanded by the 
 bounding force of nature. In this very mode, because 
 no other alluring object stands in the way, because no 
 tempting, fleeting pleasure attracts them aside, a whole 
 people may turn to religion, and find in it a peace and a 
 satisfaction suitable to their mental condition. Such cer- 
 tainly is the tendency of these mountain people. Every- 
 thing around them leads to reverence and worship. The 
 simplest savage perceives in the rushing river, in the dark, 
 gathering tempest, the flashing lightning, the thunder of 
 the clouds, and in the great mountains uplifted to the 
 skies, the evidence of almighty power. In nature's 
 sublime presence, he is filled with fear and awe. Much 
 more would a people of traditional piety, such as these are, 
 be filled with the spirit of reverence amid such awe-inspir- 
 ing scenes. I know not accurately how far history bears 
 testimony to the truth of this theory, but logically, all 
 high mountain peoples ought to be more spiritually in- 
 clined than those dwelling in the plains. The elastic 
 buoyancy of the atmosphere, as well as the grandeur of 
 the scenery, tend to a high moral and mental exaltation. 
 Solitude also tends to elevate the mind. In the absence of 
 the entertainments and the amusements common in cities 
 and towns, men naturally turn to the Church, to the Sunday 
 school, to the Bible, or inwardly to their own minds for en- 
 tertainment. In these mountains the theater and the 
 lecture-room, card parties and recex3tions, dinings and 
 germans, clubs and Christian associations, libraries and read- 
 ing-rooms, and many kinds of charitable entertainments, 
 
68 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 do not absorb the time and keep the people in a rush all 
 the year around. 
 
 In the absence of most of the popular amusements of 
 cities, it would be strange if religion were not the highest 
 and the first concern of the better class of such a people. 
 So, it certainly is. And since religion and education are 
 fast gaining ground with these people, it may be safely 
 affirmed that civilization has firmly planted its feet on our 
 mountain tops, and that henceforth it will march apace 
 with its advancing development in other quarters. 
 
 Descending from this high mountain region, we enter a 
 country totally unlike that I have been describing. This 
 is the valley of East Tennessee. Through this valley flow 
 the many beautiful rivers with their crystal waters which 
 debouch from the mountains of North Carolina and Vir- 
 ginia, and flowing westwardly unite in this state, forming 
 the graceful Tennessee. The people dwelling in this val- 
 ley constitute about five-sixths of the population of East 
 Tennessee ; in other words, the mountain population is 
 about one out of every five or six of the entire population. 
 
 This valley region is no more like the region I have just 
 described, or that of Northern Georgia, or Western North 
 Carolina, or South-eastern Kentucky, and a large part of 
 South-west Virginia, than it is like Colorado. The utmost 
 that can be said is, that it is a hill or an upland country. 
 Its physical aspects (shutting our eyes against the great 
 mountains which wall in this enchanting valley) are very 
 similar to large districts of country to be found in Penn- 
 sylvania, New York, Virginia, and Missouri. To the 
 grand mountain scenery, everywhere meeting the eyes of 
 the tourist passing through this lovely valley, is to be 
 added the charm of the clear, sparkling, rushing streams, 
 as they flow down through the green hills, and waving 
 fields, and verdant pastures. At every turn of his course, 
 he will see scenes of quiet beauty, or of startling grandeur, 
 such as fill the mind with dreamy reveries, or fire it with 
 lofty thoughts. 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 69 
 
 The inhabitants of this region lying in between these 
 great mountains should appropriately be called the valley 
 people or the people of the plain. The whole valley, how- 
 ever, is greatly elevated above the sea level. From the 
 point where the Tennessee River passes out of the state 
 into Alabama to the extreme eastern point on the White 
 Mountain, there is a constant ascent. Shellmound, near 
 where the river passes out of the state, is 636 feet above 
 the sea ; Chattanooga, 670 feet ; Knoxville, nearly 1,000 
 feet; Greeneville, 1,585 feet; Bristol, 1,780 feet; and 
 Mountain City, nearly 3,000 feet. High as this is, it is 
 perhaps fifteen hundred or two thousand feet below the 
 average of the mountains which encircle the valley. Nor 
 is it nearly so elevated nor half so wild as "Western North 
 Carolina and parts of South-west Virginia. 
 
 In one sense the people dwelling in this region are 
 mountain people ; that is, they live in constant sight of 
 these great mountains. From the cradle to the grave they 
 breathe the pure air wafted down from their summits, 
 they feel the inspiration caused by their ever majestic 
 stillness and awful presence, and they imbibe the spirit of 
 the wonderful scenes surrounding them. So they become 
 thereby larger, better, braver men and women. The 
 farmer as he sits on his piazza, in the cool of the summer's 
 evening smoking his pipe, sees away off in the distance the 
 form of these blue mountains lifted up in mighty outline 
 against the sky. He sees the dark clouds swelling up the 
 mountain sides and gathering into a storm as they sweep 
 along the summit. At night he gazes upon the lightning 
 as it leaps and plays on these lofty heights. From every 
 high eminence, in East Tennessee, these mountains loom 
 up into view. The farmer, as he plows in his field, or 
 rides into the nearest village, or drives to church on the 
 Sabbath, looking up, beholds in the distance these same 
 great peaks which he gazed upon in his boyhood, now as 
 then, so still, so lonely, so solemn. Such are the sur- 
 roundings of the people of East Tennessee. 
 
70 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Now, as to the mental and moral peculiarities of the 
 people themselves. Writers in the North and the South, 
 losing sight of the difference I have pointed out between 
 the valley of East Tennessee and the great mountain 
 region surrounding it, often represent the people of this 
 region as being ignorant, immoral, intemperate, and law- 
 less. They are frequently spoken of as "the poor whites 
 of the South;" sometimes as "the mountain whites of 
 the South." 
 
 So far as these names and descriptions apply to the 
 people of East Tennessee dwelling in the valley, they are 
 largely baseless, the result of the grossest ignorance, or of 
 deliberate intention at misrepresentation. People who 
 thus write draw no distinction between those dwelling 
 in this valley and those beyond it. The difference is 
 marked and manifest. The people of this valley are not, 
 and never have been, as they are sometimes represented 
 to be. 
 
 It is so easy and perhaps so natural for sensational 
 writers to take exceptional or rare characters and clothe 
 them with fictitious and exaggerated qualities, and then 
 present them to the public as representatives of whole 
 communities or districts of country, that we should not be 
 surprised at such things. Such representations are taken 
 to be true by those who never saw the originals, and yet 
 they are often gross caricatures. The more extreme and 
 grotesque these representations, the more sensational 
 they are. No better illustration of the truth of all this 
 can be found than in the accounts usually published con- 
 cerning the " mountain whites of the South." No such 
 people, as a community or as a whole, anywhere exists in 
 this vast region. There are exceptional characters and 
 cases, and there are exceptional neighborhoods, to which 
 these descriptions may in a qualified sense apply, but 
 when applied to the people of the whole section, or to the 
 people as a whole, they are gross exaggerations and mis- 
 representations. They are especially false when applied 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc, 71 
 
 to the people of the valley of East Tennessee. As a rule, 
 these people of the valley are equal, in most of the leading 
 qualities that constitute a good population, to the average 
 citizens of any section. In virtue, integrity and religion, 
 they can safely challenge a comparison with the citizens of 
 the most advanced states. There are some exceptional 
 ueishborhoods in certain counties of which this is not true. 
 But the general rule is as I state it. 
 
 I appeal to facts. Let it be kept in mind that the first 
 settlers of East Tennessee were an educated people and 
 the friends of education. Several years before the close 
 of the eighteenth century, as previously shown, they had 
 put three colleges into successful operation. Since that 
 time colleges and universities have gone on increasing 
 until there are now fifteen or sixteen within our limits. 
 Besides these there are many academies and high schools. 
 In common schools, in colleges, in Sunday schools, in 
 temperance reforms, in church work, in agricultural and 
 manufacturing development, the valley of East Tennessee, 
 as statistics show, is quite abreast of the other divisions 
 of the state. 
 
 The people living in the valley are superior, very much 
 superior, in intelligence, civilization, wealth and general 
 advancement to the inhabitants living in the high moun- 
 tain regions of Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia and 
 Kentucky. This great mountain uplift, as I have shown, 
 lies for the most part beyond and outside of East Tennes- 
 see. Here is the great distinction that is constantly over- 
 looked by those writing about this region. No distinction 
 is ever drawn between the inhabitants of the picturesque, 
 fertile and beautiful valley of East Tennessee and those of 
 the wild mountain region encircling it. And this wild 
 mountain region is the one that tourists delight to describe. 
 The scenery is nearly as grand and picturesque as that of 
 Colorado. This whole region, including the valley, is full 
 of thrilling historical incidents of the Revolution, of King's 
 Mountain, of Daniel Boone, John Sevier, James Robertson, 
 
72 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Isaac Shelby, William Campbell, John Tipton and of 
 Andrew Jackson. Here are the historic streams — the 
 Watauga, the Holston and the Nolichucky — on whose 
 banks western civilization was first planted. Here was 
 the cradle of the state. And here was enacted at an early 
 day its most thrilling history. It is full of Indian legends 
 and traditions. These give ample scope and material for 
 the fertile imagination of tourists and letter writers, for 
 northern newspapers and illustrated periodicals. Writers 
 of romance, with genius and fervid imagination, like 
 Charles Egbert Craddock, find in this region a people 
 scarcely known to those of us familiar with it from our 
 infancy. Writers, too, like the author of the pamphlet 
 entitled "The Mountain Whites of the South," whose 
 motive was good, portray the inhabitants in such colors as 
 to amount almost to a slander. 
 
 In answer to such representations, as are often made by 
 writers for Northern papers, the Rev. D. Atkins, of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, South, published a letter in 
 the "Christian Union," of December 31, 1892, from which 
 I make some extracts. Mr. Atkins stands deservedly 
 high where he is known. I copy from the "Baltimore 
 Sun": 
 
 . . . "As a Methodist minister," he says, "I have 
 gone into the most out of the way places, and mingled 
 freely with all sorts of people in twenty counties of North 
 Carolina and Virginia and in nearly all the worst parts of 
 East Tennessee. I have visited these people at their 
 homes, have eaten with them, slept in their houses and 
 seen them in every condition." Yet Mr. Atkins never be- 
 held the slum scenes Mrs. Paddock described in a recent 
 number of the "Christian Union." "Your correspond- 
 ent," he said, "must have found some secluded spot I 
 never saw ; for in all my travels I never saw the things 
 she writes of, and it seems strange that I should not even 
 have heard of such things in all these years. There is 
 poverty here and ignorance too, but neither is in that 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 73 
 
 prevalent form you would suppose from the article of Mrs. 
 Paddock." . . . 
 
 The following is an extract from a letter written by Mr. 
 M. L., for the "Washington Star," of November 17, 1893 : 
 
 [Written for "The Evening Star: "] 
 
 "An interesting article appears in the 'Star' of the 
 7th inst., purporting to give results of observations by Dr. 
 J. H, Porter, while prosecuting scientific researches among 
 the Southern AUeghanies. Some popular fallacies are ex- 
 posed, while others more hurtful are reiterated. I was 
 born and reared among these same mountains, and as 
 school teacher, timber agent, special deputy collector, and 
 special examiner for the bureau of pensions, have had 
 ample opportunity to study the natives, and know fairly 
 well their peculiarities of belief, vernacular and habits. 
 There is scarcely a section, however remote, in western 
 North Carolina, East Tennessee, South-western Virginia 
 and South-eastern Kentucky with which I am not familiar 
 with every cross-roads and by paths. 
 
 . . . "The men of the mountains do use whiskey — 
 that is, some of them — but a careful comparison justifies 
 the statement that a vastly smaller proportion are addicted 
 to its use, or abuse, than in the cities of the South else- 
 where. . . . Habitual drunkenness is looked upon by 
 the mountain people as a great disgrace, and the use of 
 whiskey for other than medicinal purposes is regarded as 
 ground sufficient for the expulsion of the offender from 
 almost any church." 
 
 "The popular belief on this point" (education) "is quite 
 misleading. Among the older people signing by mark 
 is too common. They had little opportunity to acquire 
 education. They, or their fathers, were pioneers of the 
 mountains. They cleared the forests, built roads, erected 
 rude structures for worship, and were kept hard at work 
 to keep the wolf from the door. . . . There are few 
 of the younger generation who can not read and write, 
 
74 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and 'cipher, too.' There are few young men, especially in 
 the mountains of East Tennessee, who have not mastered 
 the rudiments of English grammar and the common-school 
 arithmetic. For the latter they seem to have particular 
 aptitude. A large percentage of them have a fair knowl- 
 edge of algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and some of them 
 would give Yale and Harvard graduates points on integral 
 and differential calculus and idiomatic Latin and Greek. 
 In one of the wildest sections of that whole mountain re- 
 gion, of my personal knowledge, nine young men have taken 
 classical courses — three of them at Yale. They did not 
 belong to families above the average, and literally worked 
 their way through college. Some of them took high rank 
 in their classes ; none of them were below the average." ^ 
 Fortunately, there is much evidence from the most reli- 
 able sources on these points. The latest is that of Dr. "W. 
 C. Gray, the able editor of that widely-circulated religious 
 paper, "The Interior," of Chicago. He has recently (Octo- 
 ber and November, 1897,) been traveling through parts of 
 the mountain regions of Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee and 
 North Carolina, studying with care the habits, language 
 and condition of the native population. In his paper of 
 October 28th, there is a letter of his from Cumberland 
 Gap, from which I make some extracts. The Rev. A. A. 
 Myers, referred to in this letter, has been a missionary for 
 thirty-three years in the mountain region of Kentucky, 
 Tennessee and Virginia, and during that time he and his 
 faithful wife have erected forty-four public buildings for 
 educational or religious purposes. He is now president of 
 "Harrow School," at Cumberland Gap. Dr. Gray studied 
 these mountain people by going among them, visiting them 
 in their little homes, and by talking to them on every-day 
 topics. I gladly avail myself of his evidence, as it con- 
 firms my statements, and also one of my theories : 
 
 ^ As to education, I think the statements of this writer are a little too 
 strong and general. 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee , etc. 75 
 
 "I was expecting an interesting philological study of the 
 mountain dialect attributed to this people by Miss Mur- 
 frees (Charles Egbert Craddock) and by her imitator, the 
 Rev. Dr. William Barton, of Boston ; but I could not 
 catch a word of it in the cabins nor on the mountain trails. 
 Their speech is the only true English there is in that of 
 the middle belt which extends between New England and 
 the South, and which is occupied by New Jersey, Pennsyl- 
 vania, Ohio, the Middle West, old North-west, and on to 
 the Pacific. A Britisher can not speak English, nor a 
 Yankee, nor a Southerner. I never heard English, the 
 genuine article, spoken by any man who was not a Scotch- 
 Irishman, or some one to whom he had taught the lan- 
 guage. ... I talked also with a mountaineer, who was 
 all patches and tags, and was surprised by his shrewdness. 
 'One good judge,' he said, 'can make more Christians than 
 a heap of preachers.' 'Good citizens, you mean,' I an- 
 swered ; 'you do not mean that the enforcement of good 
 laws will make good Christians.' 'Well,' he said, 'I 
 didn't say good Christians ; I said Christians. Christians 
 are as different as persimmons. Some are sweet and mel- 
 ler, and some are hard and puckery, and it 'pears like 
 they stay so. I'll tell you how it goes among our people. 
 Get a judge that '11 jerk 'em, and they '11 quit shootin' and 
 bummin' ; and then, because they have nowhere else to go, 
 they '11 go into the churches. They 've got to go some- 
 where, and when they kayn't get "moonshine" they '11 get 
 religion.' There is sense in that remark ! 
 
 "... On our return home at supper, I said to Dr. 
 Myers that I was disappointed in not hearing the moun- 
 tain dialect. 'There is no such thing,' he said with some 
 warmth. 'Why, Miss Murfrees and her imitator. Dr. Bar- 
 ton, have made their fortune out of it. It must be some- 
 where,' I answered. 'It is nowhere,' said Mr. Myers. 'I 
 am familiar with every nook of these ranges, three hun- 
 dred miles north and south, and I never heard it, and no 
 one ever did. What they have done is to pick up odd and 
 
76 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ignorant characters and set them up as types of our peo- 
 ple. It has done us a great deal of harm among Northern 
 people.' " 
 
 In a subsequent letter, written in North Carolina, Dr. 
 Gray gives some of the distinguishing characteristics of the 
 mountain people, as follows : 
 
 "Now, a word about these mountaineers in general. 
 They are not the 'poor whites' of the South — the waste of 
 the white population of the slave states. They are as un- 
 like them as distinct races. They have the usual charac- 
 teristics of mountaineers — independent, passionately de- 
 voted to liberty, hardy, brave, and so attached to their 
 mountains that they would rather live in poverty there 
 than in wealth in the cities, or even in the plains. . . . 
 
 "And yet the women of this class are passionately de- 
 sirous for the education of their children, and, through 
 education, for the betterment of their condition, which is 
 simply one of arrested progress. . . . The old long- 
 ing for education bursts into a flame when schools are 
 reachable ; and, as I have said, the family Bible and the 
 pastor's prayer are cherished as they are not among us. 
 The men are slender, wiry and usually tall. The women 
 are good looking, some of them beautiful." . 
 
 Hon. Eben Alexander, late minister to Greece, formerly 
 professor of Greek in the University of Tennessee, now 
 filling the same chair in the University of North Carolina, 
 a good many years ago, wrote a communication for one of 
 the New York papers, in which he discussed the dialect 
 given to the mountain people of Tennessee by Miss Mur- 
 frees. He declared that he had never heard such a dialect 
 spoken. Prof. Alexander, for a number of years, was in 
 the habit of spending a part of each vacation in traveling 
 and fishing in the Smoky Mountains, where Miss Mur- 
 frees found the peculiar language she puts into the mouth 
 of her characters. 
 
 In a late number of the "Knoxville Journal," edited by 
 Captain William Rule, commenting on a communication 
 
Tlie Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 77 
 
 recently published, as reported in the "New York Inde- 
 pendent," that paper said : 
 
 "The 'Journal' took occasion to observe, yesterday morn- 
 ing, that, in the wide range of subjects discussed in the 
 press in these latter days, more ignorance is manifested by 
 the average man or woman who pretends to write either 
 fact or fiction about the mountain people of this section, 
 than upon almost any other subject imaginable. The 
 country has a goodly number of penny-a-liners who make 
 pin money by grossly exaggerating the weaknesses of these 
 mountain people, or by inventing lies about them and get- 
 ting them printed wherever they can get pay for their mis- 
 erable stuff. The writer of the paragraphs above quoted 
 is either an ignoramus or an unmitigated falsifier. 
 
 "The statement that there are 400,000 children of south- 
 ern highlanders who have no chance to acquire an educa- 
 tion is unqualifiedly false, as the writer might have seen 
 had he taken time to consult the census reports before he 
 wrote his slanderous article. It is a fact that there is 
 more ignorance, infinitely more vice, more degradation, 
 more people who never saw a Bible, more of everything 
 that is loathsome in men and women and children, in 
 sight of the Trinity Church spire in the great city of New 
 York, than there are in all the mountain counties of East 
 Tennessee, Western North Carolina, Virginia and Kentucky 
 combined." . . . 
 
 So far as the people of the mountains of East Tennessee 
 are concerned, there is no question as to the fact that letter 
 writers and tourists have greatly misrepresented and slan- 
 dered them. From my earliest recollection, I have known 
 and seen much of these people. I have traveled among 
 them, have practiced law and held courts in a number of 
 the so-called mountain counties ; I have slept in their 
 houses and eaten at their tables more or less for over fifty 
 years, and I think, from unusual opportunities of seeing 
 these people, that I know a good deal about them, about 
 their condition, about their state of morals, intelligence 
 
78 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and general civilization. From my own observation and 
 knowledge, I do not hesitate to bear unequivocal testimony 
 as to the general truthfulness of the statements contained in 
 the foregoing extracts. There is considerable vice, drunk- 
 enness and illiteracy ; but these are fast disappearing. To 
 say that these are universal, is unjust as well as untrue. 
 In point of morals, religion and the observance of the laws 
 of the land, it is really surprising how advanced they are, 
 when we consider their remoteness from the civilizing and 
 refining influences that lift up and educate a people. I 
 can only account for the qualified moral tone existing 
 among them, their general observance of the Sabbath, their 
 regard for chastity and honesty, and their respectable 
 sense of good faith and fair dealing, by remembering that 
 they are the descendants of the educated and the severely 
 moral and religious Covenanters who first settled East 
 Tennessee, the seeds of whose teachings and the example 
 of whose lives even a century of isolation, poverty and 
 neglect have not entirely destroyed. 
 
 Another reason why these mountain people of East Ten- 
 nessee are in advance of their neighbors, dwelling in sim- 
 ilar regions in adjoining states in all the ways and arts of 
 civilization, may be found in the fact that they live so near 
 their neighbors in the valley below. The intercourse be- 
 tween them is so constant and easy that the inhabitants 
 above are gradually growing into the habits and ideas of 
 those below. So, with the wonderful progress they have 
 made in the last thirty years in education and civilization, 
 these mountaineers are rapidly approximating the condi- 
 tion of the valley people. 
 
 Keeping in mind the difference I have pointed out be- 
 tween the mountain rim on the outer edge of East Ten- 
 nessee and the great valley lying below, I can safely assert 
 that the great body of the people dwelling in this valley 
 are reasonably intelligent for a laboring class. Many of 
 them are well educated, having had the advantages of 
 training in colleges and academies. A still larger number 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 79 
 
 have a tolerably fair education, and most of them have 
 enough for the ordinary business transactions of life. Not 
 many of them are entirely without education. The last 
 are mostly old men -who were reared before the recent 
 means of mental improvement existed. The spirit of 
 mental improvement is abroad among these people. They 
 know enough to see, and do see, the immense advantage 
 an educated boy or girl has over an uneducated one. The 
 less education the father has, the more he is impressed 
 with the necessity of providing for the education of his 
 children. Hence he sacrifices everything for this end. 
 Property for his children, in the estimation of such a man, 
 is nothing in comparison with a good education. It is sur- 
 prising how largely this feeling has prevailed among un- 
 educated men since the war. 
 
 The people dwelling in this valley are generally indus- 
 trious, moral and well-to-do in the world. A majority of 
 them own their own farms ; some of these indeed are small 
 and poor. But they are sufficient to secure an independ- 
 ent living. Many of these farms are large, rich and pro- 
 ductive. The owners of such lands are independent, not 
 to say wealthy. They gather around them fine stock, and 
 the latest and most approved means of farming. They 
 improve their houses, have their family carriages, their 
 parlors, their pianos or organs, their books and news- 
 papers. They send their sons and daughters to school. 
 Such homes and families can be found in every neighbor- 
 hood, and often many of them. 
 
 The people living in the rich valleys, and a majority of 
 those in the hills also, are either independent or comfort- 
 able livers. The soil and climate permit the growth of 
 nearly every article of food necessary for the sustenance of 
 man and beast. This is in fact a land of fatness and 
 abundance. The people have long been celebrated for 
 their hospitality and good living. Hospitality, generous 
 and sincere, is the law of each household. 
 
 I repeat, great changes have taken place, and are still 
 
80 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 going on, in all this great mountain-encircled valley. 
 The people as a general rule are wide awake, and pressing 
 to the front. Old things have already become new. The 
 old East Tennessee of forty years ago no longer exists. 
 
 The native East Tennessean, especially the native 
 mountaineer, is a proud spirited man. He will neither 
 submit to wrong nor brook an insult. The man who insults 
 or wrongs him must expect to answer for his offense. 
 
 Many of these men know nothing of lineage, and care 
 nothing about it. They have inherited in some way a 
 brave, proud spirit that feels no inferiority even in the 
 very highest presence. Breathing from infancy the subtle 
 ether of his mountain elevation, he feels within himself 
 an irrepressible spirit of individualism that forgets and 
 ignores all social distinctions. 
 
 Speaking on this very point, "In the Tennessee Moun- 
 tains," Charles Egbert Craddock, who has so admirably 
 portrayed the character in many respects of these people, 
 but not their language, says: "The pride of the South- 
 ern mountaineers is so intense that it recognizes no 
 superior, so inordinate, that one is tempted to cry out : 
 'Here are the Republicans,' or indeed, 'Here are the only 
 aristocrats.' " 
 
 Slavery was never so universal or so powerful as to be- 
 come all controlling in East Tennessee. With it, there 
 never arose in this region, great lordly proprietors, whose 
 influence over those below them was irresistible. There 
 was no headship, no clanship. All were equals. In the 
 dense, slave-holding communities of the South, this head- 
 ship or leadership of the powerful was everywhere domi- 
 nant. The poor whites became their willing followers. 
 With base subserviency, they yielded a blind allegiance to 
 the wealthy slave-holding lords. 
 
 Here, on the contrary, both the mountaineer and the 
 valley men, have been singularly free from leadership or 
 headship domination. Such a thing is absolutely un- 
 known, except in so small a degree as to be of no import- 
 
The Present Inhabitants of East Tennessee, etc. 81 
 
 ance. Personal influence and popularity have their place, 
 and justly, too, but there is no abject subserviency, no sur- 
 render of noble manhood, to the exacting demands of 
 arrogant headship, or personal imperialism. 
 
 Strangers have remarked that the rural population of 
 East Tennessee, especially those of the mountain regions, 
 are a sad, silent, almost a sorrowful looking people. 
 There is unquestionably some truth in the observation. 
 They are certainly not gay and vivacious like the French, 
 nor sociable like the Germans. Their hearts are but 
 moderately set on sports and amusements. Solitude and 
 silence are often preferred to the noise and frivolity of 
 fashionable society. The causes for this mental and moral 
 development are obvious and numerous. 
 
 For many generations the ancestors of a majority of 
 these people had endured sufferings, trials, and persecu- 
 tions such as rarely fall to the lot of men. Care and 
 anxious solicitude were ever present with them. Their 
 bitter struggles with their enemies, with the hardships of 
 the wilderness, with fierce savages, and often with want, 
 stamped their countenances with an austerity and a gravity 
 amounting almost to sadness. Then the Revolution came 
 on, with its long years of suffering, of anxiety, hopes, and 
 fears, and by the subtle laws of heredity these outward ex- 
 pressions, in the course of time, became fixed and were 
 transmitted to their descendants. 
 
 If, during these long years, the impress and the shadow 
 of sorrow have settled on their brows and all cheerfulness 
 has fled from their hearts, it need not be surprising. 
 Nature would have been false to her teachings if these 
 conditions, existing for hundreds of years, had not pro- 
 duced a grave, a stern, and a sad, a severe-looking race of 
 men. This was the eternal la,w of heredity. 
 
 There is another reason why these people, in their 
 
 habits and appearance, seem to incline toward the grave 
 
 and the sad side of life. The religion of the early settlers 
 
 was gloomy and austere, and full of awful mysteries, as 
 
 6 
 
82 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 well as startling certainties. It would have been strange 
 indeed if an impressible, deeply religious people, who had 
 heard sermons all their lives like those of Jonathan Ed- 
 wards, and at a later day like those of Francis Asbury, 
 had not been grave and serious. Unquestionably the deep 
 solemnity of their religion, and the profound reverence 
 observed by its practice in life, were well calculated to pro- 
 duce among its followers a race of stern and almost sorrow- 
 ful people. They endured the hardships of life with heroic 
 fortitude and with unfaltering faith. Silently, uncom- 
 plainingly, and with devout submission to a higher will, 
 they went forward, fulfilling their appointed mission. 
 They bowed with meek submission to the eternal decrees 
 by which they were guided. 
 
 In East Tennessee, the stillness and the solitude of the 
 wilderness were first broken by the sturdy pioneers on the 
 banks of the Watauga. Here the first self-imposed civil 
 government west of the Alleghanies, the "Watauga Asso- 
 ciation,' ' under which the pioneers governed themselves and 
 preserved order for many years, was established. Here 
 the countless battles with hostile Indians took place, and 
 from it many expeditions into the Cherokee and the Creek 
 country were led by Evan Shelby, John Sevier, and James 
 Robertson. Here originated and was planned by John 
 Sevier and Isaac Shelby the most glorious event in our 
 history — the expedition to King's Mountain. Here arose 
 and existed for a number of years the historic State of 
 Franklin — that ill-fated and perhaps ill-advised, self-inde- 
 pendent, revolutionary state, so full of stirring incidents. 
 Here the territorial government was organized, the first 
 territorial legislature convened, and here was the seat of 
 government for many years. Here the first Constitutional 
 Convention assembled, and here the State of Tennessee 
 was launched on its high destiny. From this section came 
 our first governors and our first senators. And later, in 
 common with Middle Tennessee, East Tennessee shared in 
 the great victories of General Jackson over the Creek In- 
 dians and in the undying glories of New Orleans. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 83 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 SLAVERY IN EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 Slaves and the slave trade— Not many slaves in East Tennessee — Men in- 
 different at first about the moral question involved — Emancipation 
 societies at last appear — Early societies in East Tennessee — Names of 
 originators — John Rankin the Abolitionist — His labors — Dr. David 
 Nelson — The first emancipation paper in the United States edited by 
 Elihu Embree, at Jonesborough, Tennessee — The predecessor of Ben- 
 jamin Lundy — Lundy's " Genius " published at Greeneville — History of 
 two papers— Methodist Church in East Tennessee strongly anti- 
 slavery — Records of as to — Action of General Conference in 1844 in 
 silencing Francis A. Harding and Bishop Andrew because slave- 
 holders aroused intense bitterness in that church in the South — Great 
 change of sentiment — The church separates — The Southern branch 
 becomes almost solidly pro-slavery — Important influence of separation 
 of churches in bringing on secession in the South. 
 
 At the time of the formation of the constitution of Ten- 
 nessee, in 1796, the slaves in the state numbered ten 
 thousand six hundred and thirteen. The total population 
 as shown by the census then taken was seventy-seven 
 thousand two hundred and sixty-two. The slaves in East 
 Tennessee numbered eight thousand one hundred and 
 forty-nine, or in a total population of sixty-five thousand 
 three hundred and thirty-eight, about twelve and one-half 
 per cent. West of the mountains, the slaves numbered 
 two thousand four hundred and sixty-six, out of a popu- 
 lation of eleven thousand nine hundred and twenty-four, 
 or more than twenty per cent. 
 
 By this constitution "every freeman" of the proper age, 
 having had his residence as prescribed, "and possessing a 
 freehold in the county" was entitled to vote for members 
 of the general assembly. This provision gave to free 
 colored men "possessing a freehold" the elective franchise. 
 This -shows that the colored men were regarded by the 
 
84 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 whites in the early years of our state with more favor than 
 at a later day/ 
 
 Our forefathers, though generally in moderate circum- 
 stances, brought slaves with them to East Tennessee from 
 North Carolina and Virginia. This region was poorly 
 adapted to the culture of cotton, rice or indigo. Yet at 
 that day, and for many years afterward, every farmer had 
 his "cotton patch." This was for the purpose of raising 
 a supply for domestic use. While cotton could be raised 
 even in the eastern and more elevated counties, the region 
 could not be classed as a cotton country. 
 
 That, however, was not always, and perhaps not gen- 
 erally the question. Men who desired to possess slaves 
 did not stop to inquire into the question of profit or loss. 
 There was always connected with the ownership of slaves 
 a sense of pride and independence, a supposed badge of 
 superiority, that attracted men. Few in that day could 
 resist the temptation of having some one to do for them 
 the hard work of life, to relieve them of all drudgery, to 
 wait upon them obsequiously, and to be ever present to 
 do their will. It was flattering to human pride to be able 
 to say to men, "Go," and they went, and "Come," and 
 they dared not disobey. No doubt the fact that the wise 
 and good men who framed the constitution, in 1787, had 
 given twenty years longer to the planters in which to im- 
 port a full supply of slaves before shutting the doors 
 against them, had much to do in encouraging the purchase 
 of slaves. They were enabled to "stock" their planta- 
 tions with negroes, as if they were stocking them with 
 horses and cattle for future profit. These distinguished 
 men lent the moral sanction of their great names not only 
 to slavery, but also to man stealing for twenty years 
 
 ^ A tradition has come down to this generation, said the Hon. Horace 
 Maynard, in an address at Nashville, in 1863, that a proposition was made 
 in the convention to make Tennessee a free state, and that this was defeated 
 by only one vote. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 85 
 
 longer. That is what it all amounted to when reduced to 
 its simplest form. 
 
 Our forefathers, in East Tennessee, at an early day, so 
 far as we can ascertain by the lights before us, do not seem 
 to have cared very much about the moral aspect of slavery, 
 either one way or the other. Those who were able, and 
 felt so inclined, purchased and held slaves. But much 
 the larger number seemed not inclined to own them. 
 
 That there should have been during the closing years of 
 the last century, and the first years of this, an indifference 
 to the moral aspect of the question of slavery, a dullness, 
 an apathy of conscience, is not in the least surprising, 
 when it is kept in mind that the foreign slave trade, under 
 the sanction of the Convention of 1787, was then active and 
 in full operation, and that slavers laden with human 
 beings were entering every port. Slaves were lawful mer- 
 chandise, as much so as rum and broadcloth. As the 
 period of limitation was rapidly running out, there must 
 have been unusual activity in shipping in slaves, as there 
 sometimes is in importing certain articles of merchandise 
 just before higher duties are to be imposed under a new 
 tariff. The effect of all this was to create a speculative ex- 
 citement in the slave market, and make men forget the 
 moral questions lying beneath. 
 
 But as time wore on, thoughtful men began to reflect on 
 the question. Now and then the inherent wrong of 
 slavery forced consideration on their minds. New light 
 dawned on them. Then the question arose : What shall 
 be done to get rid of this evil ? Logically co-operation was 
 suggested and adopted. Emancipation societies began to 
 spring up. This was especially the case in Kentucky and 
 East Tennessee. So far as East Tennessee is concerned, 
 it appears that on the 25th of February, 1815, the "Ten- 
 nessee Manumission Society" was organized, at Lost 
 Creek Meeting House, in Jefferson county. 
 
 The originators of this movement were largely Quakers 
 and Covenanters. On the day named, eight persons or- 
 
8Q East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 gauized themselves into a society for the purpose of ' 'promot- 
 ing the manumission of slaves. ' ' These persons were Charles 
 Osborne, John Canady, John Swan, John Underwood, Jesse 
 Willis, David Maulsby, Elihu Swan and Thomas Morgan. 
 The first article of the constitution adopted was, "each 
 member is to have an advertisement in the most conspicu- 
 ous part of his house, in the following words, viz. ; 'Free- 
 dom is the natural right of all men. I therefore acknowl- 
 edge myself a member of the Tennessee Society for promoting 
 manumission of slaves.' " On the 21st of November, 1815, 
 the first general convention was held at "Lick Creek 
 Meeting House of Friends," in Greene county. The sec- 
 ond annual convention was held in Greeneville on the 19th 
 or 20th of November, 1816. Soon after the first society 
 was formed, in 1815, other societies were organized in 
 Greene, Washington, Sullivan, Cocke and Knox counties. 
 One society was formed in Knoxville,^ There were sixteen 
 branches or societies in East Tennessee, with 474 members. 
 No members or branches are mentioned from beyond the 
 Cumberland Mountains, and therefore the conclusion is 
 that the society was confined mainly to East Tennessee. 
 
 As it is interesting to know who were formally identi- 
 fied with the anti-slavery movement, I give the names of 
 those persons present at the annual convention in 1822. 
 From Greene county, Stephen Brooks, John Marshall, 
 Samuel McNees, David Stanfield, James Jones, James 
 Galbriath, Lawrence Earnest and Wesley Earnest and 
 probably Isaac Jones and Isaac Hammer. 
 
 Blount county branch : David Dalyel, Aaron Hackney, 
 Wm. Lee, John Coulson and Andrew Cowan. 
 
 Bethesda branch : Isaiah Harrison. 
 
 Washington county : Joseph Tucker. 
 
 Turkey Creek : William Milliken. 
 
 French Broad branch : Wm. S noddy and John McCroskey. 
 
 Holston branch : Jesse Lockheart and James McCamp- 
 bell. 
 
 Goodspeed's " History of Tennessee," title, Greene county, pp. 881-882. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 87 
 
 Jefferson county : John Caldwell, James Caldwell, Elisha 
 Hammer, John Swan and John Swain. 
 
 Middle Creek : John Kerr. 
 
 Knox county : Robert M. Anderson. 
 
 Besides the above, the names of Thomas Doan as clerk, 
 Asa Gray as treasurer, and that of Abraham Jones ap- 
 pear as members.^ 
 
 These names stand for the very best of the old East 
 Tennessee families. Nearly every one of them is well 
 known to-day through their descendants. I well recollect 
 at least four of these men, namely, that good and rather 
 strong man in his day, Rev. Stephen Brooks, a pioneer 
 Methodist preacher, who was a member of the Constitu- 
 tional Convention of 1796 ; that strong, brave, clear-headed 
 Covenanter Presbyterian, John Caldwell ; that pure, bright 
 and intelligent Quaker, "William Lee ;^ and that other 
 strikingly strong man, Robert M. Anderson. In June, 
 1861, in a conversation with the Hon. Horace Maynard 
 and myself, Mr. Caldwell referred with just pride and 
 satisfaction to the part he had taken away back in early 
 days in favoring emancipation, and, in part, in anticipat- 
 
 ^ Much of this information is obtained from Goodspeed's " History of 
 Tennessee," East Tennessee edition. 
 
 * This was unquestionably Ephraim Lee, the father of William. Ephraim 
 died at eighty-six in 1866. I am confirmed in this by a conversation with 
 T. R. Lee, a son of William Lee, and a grandson of Ephraim, a most 
 worthy gentleman residing at Friendsville, Blount county, the old home 
 of Ephraim. From him I learned the following anecdotes related of his 
 grandfather : He and the Rev. Dr. Isaac Anderson, referred to above, another 
 emancipationist, were talking of exchanging horses, but could not agree, 
 because each was afraid that he was getting the advantage of the other in 
 the trade. Ephraim was a strong Union man during the war, as the 
 Friends were nearly everywhere. He had all his horses taken from him 
 by Confederate soldiers, e?;cepting one. On one occasion, when these sol- 
 diers were around, he took the remaining horse to a cedar thicket near by, 
 and tied it out. On his return, he met some soldiers, who said to him : 
 "Old man, what did you do with that horse?" He answered: "He is 
 hitched up among those cedars." The horse was taken. When some of 
 his grandchildren said to him: " Grand-pa, why did you answer in that 
 way ?" he said : " I could not tell a story." 
 
88 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ing the troubles then looming up in the country on ac- 
 count of slavery. In 1861, he was still true to his orig- 
 inal convictions. He was most ardently devoted to the 
 Union, and remained so to the end of his life, which did 
 not close till he had seen every slave in the land set free 
 from bondage. John Caldwell was naturally a remark- 
 able man — robust, determined, conscientious ; a perfect 
 type of our old Scotch Covenanters. In the days of the 
 American Colonization Society, while Mr. Clay was its 
 president, he was one of its vice-presidents. 
 
 Robert M. Anderson became a distinguished circuit judge. 
 Of wonderful physical development and with magnificent 
 intellectual endowments, no one who ever saw him could 
 ever forget him. He was a keen wit, an inimitable hu- 
 morist, a profound judge, and a noble, high-toned gentle- 
 man. He was a brother of the estimable Judge Samuel 
 Anderson ; also a brother of the remarkably great lawyer, 
 William E, Anderson, as well as a brother of the great 
 theologian. Dr. Isaac Anderson, the founder of the South- 
 western Theological College at Maryville. Truly there 
 were giants in the land in those days. 
 
 It does not appear from any records available what be- 
 came of the Manumission Society of Tennessee after 1822. 
 Doubtless it continued to hold its meetings until the slavery 
 sentiment became so intolerant as to make it unsafe to do 
 so. To fix the date when this happened is impossible, 
 but probably it was sometime between 1825 and 1834. 
 That there was a strong anti-slavery feeling in East Ten- 
 nessee, about 1820, is proven by tradition as well as by 
 such historical facts as we have bearing on the question. 
 In 1826, there were 143 anti-slavery societies in the United 
 States, of which number 103 were in the South. ^ 
 
 Another East Tennessean, who was at an early day as- 
 sociated with the anti-slavery movement, and at a later 
 day with abolitionism, was the Rev. John Rankin. He 
 
 1 Wilson's " Rise and Fall of the Slave Power," Vol. I, p. 179. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 89 
 
 was a native of Jefferson county. Mr. Rankin was a 
 Prebyterian of Covenanter blood. He belonged to an old, 
 influential and very large family in East Tennessee, many 
 members of which have become Presbyterian ministers. 
 In 1814, says one of his sons, "he joined an abolition 
 society in Jefferson county." This was probably in 1815, 
 as the first anti-slavery society in that county was or- 
 ganized in that year. In 1817, he determined to leave 
 Tennessee and move to Ohio. He left on account of slavery, 
 being unwilling to raise a family in a state whose soil was 
 "polluted" by that institution. On his way to Ohio, he 
 was induced to stop at Paris, Kentucky, where he accepted 
 a "call" to a church and spent four years. At the end of 
 this time, he moved to Ripley, Ohio, where he was the 
 pastor of a church for forty-four consecutive years. During 
 all this time he was incessant in his work in favor of the 
 abolition of slavery. 
 
 In 1824, Mr. Rankin published a series of letters in 
 opposition to slavery. Two years later these were gathered 
 together and published in book form, and scattered widely 
 over the country. They are said to have produced a deep 
 impression on the public mind. While residing in Ken- 
 tucky, he had lectured and written much on this subject. 
 In 1836, he was employed by the Ohio State Abolition 
 Society to travel and lecture for one year. "While on 
 this lecturing tour," says his son, in a late letter to the 
 author, "he was mobbed perhaps a hundred or more times." 
 "Stones and fire brands and eggs were often thrown at 
 him, and windows smashed, though he was never hurt." ^ 
 
 Mr. Rankin seems to have been one of those brave, in- 
 tensely earnest men who could not be silent on the subject 
 
 ^ For these facts, and many others, I am indebted to Captain R. C. 
 Eankin, a son of John Rankin, by a letter of December 5, 1S92. I am also 
 indebted to Mr. J. C. Leggett for facts, appearing in an address delivered 
 by him at Ripley, Ohio, May 5, 1892, on the occasion of the " dedication of 
 a bronze bust and granite monument" to the memory of John Rankin, 
 which address with others has been published in a pamphlet. 
 
90 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 of slavery. He made no compromise with what he con- 
 sidered a great crime. Being one of the earliest, as well 
 as one of the bravest and ablest of the early Abolitionists, 
 his teachings had a wide influence. 
 
 Mr. Rankin once said that in his boyhood "a majority 
 of the people of East Tennessee were Abolitionists." ^ He 
 frequently remarked that in his youth "it was much safer 
 to make an anti-slavery speech in the South than it became 
 during his middle life to make the same speech in the North, 
 not that the people had changed so materially, but greed 
 had taken the place of justice."^ For many years he 
 favored some peaceful means of getting rid of slavery. 
 One of these was to pay for the slaves at certain fixed 
 prices, taking the states one at a time. 
 
 "But, for ten years before the late Civil War, he had lost 
 all hope of a peaceful solution of the question, and wished 
 that the conflict, which he said must come, might come as 
 speedily as possible. And, when it did come, he gave 
 eight sons and one grandson to the Union. He was a 
 genuine Abolitionist. He believed slavery was a great 
 crime, which must be destroyed, peaceably, if possible, 
 forcibly, if necessary. His house was for many years the 
 first station of one branch of the famous 'underground 
 railroad,' and always the 'refuge of the oppressed.' In 
 his house at Ripley, Ohio, was sheltered 'Eliza Harris,' of 
 Uncle Tom's Cabin, a young slave from Kentucky, who 
 fled from home with her child, to avoid separation by sale. 
 She crossed the Ohio by leaping, in her desperation, from 
 one mass of floating ice to another, sometimes in the water 
 to her waist, and finally, exhausted and nearly frozen, she 
 was pulled ashore by a man waiting on the Ohio side." ^ 
 
 Another native of East Tennessee, who early moved to 
 the West and became identified with the anti-slavery cause, 
 was the Rev. Dr. David Nelson, a Presbyterian minister, 
 
 1 AVilson's " Rise and Fall," etc., Vol. I, p. 178. 
 
 2 "Address of Leggett," etc. ^ " AVashington Post," of March 8, 1896. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 91 
 
 widely known as the author of the "Cause and Cure of 
 Infidelity," He was a native of Washington county, and, 
 like Mr, Rankin, was educated at Washington College, 
 under the venerable Dr. Samuel Doak. He was somewhat 
 advanced in years before he became a preacher. Not long 
 after this, he moved to Kentucky, and at a later day be- 
 came connected with Center College. No doubt can exist 
 as to the fact, that in the pulpit he was one of the most 
 wonderful men this country has ever produced. 
 
 In June, 1835, Dr. Nelson was driven out of Missouri by 
 an "infuriated blood-thirsty mob of pro-slavery men," of 
 Marion county. Taking refuge in the river bottom, just 
 west of Quincy, Illinois, and surrounded by the water of 
 "the raging, swollen Mississippi," a refugee and a wan- 
 derer here was suggested to him and composed that sad, 
 touching song found in all Presbyterian hymn books, com- 
 mencing with the line : 
 
 " My days are gliding swiftly by." 
 
 It is a fact not generally known, that the first out-and- 
 out emancipation paper in the United States was published 
 at Jonesborough, in the mountains of East Tennessee, the 
 oldest town in the state, and a place rendered immortal by 
 its connection with the memory of Governor John Sevier, 
 Andrew Jackson and William G. Brownlow. Neverthe- 
 less, this is a fact. Some time early in the year 1819, 
 Elihu Embree, a Quaker, commenced the publication of 
 an anti-slavery paper in that town, called the "Manumis- 
 sion Intelligence," a copy of which paper, dated July 19, 
 1819, I have seen.'^ It was printed by J. Howard for the 
 "Manumission Society." J. Howard was the father of 
 Mrs. Judge Samuel Milligan, Mrs. Prof. Safi'ord, and the 
 brilliant Major John K. Howard, who was killed in one of 
 the early battles of the late Civil War in Virginia. 
 
 ^ This paper is the property of Colonel Moses White, of Knoxville, to whom 
 I return my acknowledgment for its use. I hear of eight more numbers 
 in Washington county. 
 
92 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Elihu Embree was a brother of the most estimable 
 Elijah Embree, who built and for a long time operated 
 an extensive nail factory in Embreeville, Washington 
 county, East Tennessee. Elijah married a granddaughter 
 of Governor John Sevier. He was distinguished alike for 
 his splendid virtues and for his disinterested public spirit. 
 
 After publishing this paper for nearly two years, Mr. 
 Embree died, and here commences a part of history not 
 generally understood. On the death of Mr, Embree, the 
 subscription list and the good-will of this paper were sold, 
 and the work commenced by him was continued at Mt. 
 Pleasant, Ohio, by the celebrated Benjamin Lundy, under 
 the name of the ' ' Genius of Universal Emancipation . ' ' The 
 first number was dated July, 1821. Nine months later, in 
 March, 1822, Lundy moved with his paper to Greeneville, 
 Tennessee, where he continued to publish his monthly 
 paper until July, 1823. He may have published it some- 
 what longer. It will be remembered that he moved with 
 his paper to Baltimore, in 1824. At that place, his paper 
 appears as No. 1, Vol. 4.^ 
 
 As far as I can see. East Tennessee was regarded at that 
 time as a more favorable field for anti-slavery work than 
 Ohio. The anti-slavery sentiment at this time was stronger 
 in the South, and particularly so in Tennessee and Ken- 
 tucky, than it was in New England.'^ This statement is 
 corroborated by the fact that at the convention to promote 
 the abolition of slavery, held in Baltimore, in 1826, which 
 Lundy attended, of the eighty-one societies represented 
 there, seventy-three were from the South. ^ 
 
 The history of the two papers, Embree's and Lundy's, 
 is then briefly as follows : In 1816 or 1817, one Charles 
 Osborne started a paper at Mt. Pleasant, Ohio, called the 
 "Philanthrophist." No one asserts that this was an open, 
 unequivocal emancipation paper. Osborne after a while 
 
 ^ Autobiography of Benjamin Lundy. 
 
 « Wilson's " Kise and Fall," etc., Vol. I, p. 170. » Id., p. 170. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 93 
 
 invited Lundy to join him in this enterprise. Lundy 
 agreed to do so, but before he could execute his promise, 
 he had to go with some saddlery to St. Louis. He re- 
 mained in St. Louis until 1820 or 1821, when he went to 
 Mount Pleasant, Ohio. In the meantime, Osborne had 
 failed, and his paper had been sold to Elihu Embree, and 
 was being published in Jonesborough, East Tennessee, 
 under the name of the "Manumission Intelligencer." In 
 1820, or the early part of 1821, Embree died, and his paper 
 was purchased by Lundy, at least the latter commenced in 
 July, 1821, publishing the "Genius." In other words the 
 "Genius" was the successor of the "Emancipator" or 
 "Manumission Intelligencer." In 1821, after publishing 
 nine numbers of the "Genius" in Ohio, Lundy left that 
 state, and in July of that year, issued in Greeneville, Ten- 
 nessee, No. 10, Vol. 1, of his paper. 
 
 From the foregoing facts, gathered largely from Lundy 's 
 autobiography, and also from "Wilson's "Rise and Fall," 
 etc., Greeley's "Civil Conflict," and the "American Cyclo- 
 paedia, it appears : 
 
 First. That Lundy as is generally asserted, even by men 
 of the intelligence of those above named, did not publish 
 the "first distinctively and exclusively anti-slavery paper" 
 in the United States, but that this honor belongs to Elihu 
 Embree. 
 
 Second. It is incontestably clear that this paper was 
 published at Jonesborough, East Tennessee. 
 
 Third. That Lundy's paper, as is often asserted, was 
 not published at Jonesborough, but at Greeneville, Ten- 
 nessee. 
 
 It is most probable that Lundy only secured the good 
 will and the subscription list of the "Emancipator," when 
 he commenced the publication of the "Genius" in Ohio, 
 for it appears that at first it was published twenty miles 
 away. When he came to Tennessee, in 1822, it appears 
 that he published his paper from the material of the 
 
94 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "Emancipator."^ At the same time he published a weekly 
 paper and a monthly agricultural journa]. 
 
 Mr. Lundy's statement in his life is as follows (page 
 19) : "Before I left St. Louis, I heard that, as I had 
 stayed from home so much longer than had been antici- 
 pated, Charles Osborne had become quite tired of the employ- 
 ment of editor, and had sold out his printing establishment 
 to Elisha Bates, and also that Elihu Embree had com- 
 menced the publication of an anti-slavery paper, called the 
 'Emancipator,' in Jonesborough, Tennessee. I therefore 
 made up my mind to settle with my family in Illinois. 
 But on my way home I was informed of the death of Em- 
 bree. ... I determined immediately to establish a 
 periodical of my own. I therefore removed to Mount 
 Pleasant, and commenced the publication of the 'Genius 
 of Universal Emancipation,' in January, 1821. . . ." 
 
 "When the friends of the deceased Elihu Embree heard 
 of my paper, they urged me to remove to Tennessee, and 
 use the press on which his had been printed ; I assented, 
 and after having issued eight monthly numbers of the 
 'Genius' in Ohio, I started for Tennessee. I traveled 
 eight hundred miles, in going there, one-half on foot, the 
 rest by water." 
 
 As before stated, in 1824, Mr. Lundy decided to move 
 his paper to Baltimore. He accordingly did so in that 
 year. In 1829, "William Lloyd Garrison was prevailed on 
 to join him in this enterprise. They found Baltimore a 
 hot place for the publication of Abolition sentiments. Mr. 
 Garrison was indicted, and on trial convicted for the pub- 
 lication of a criminal libel on a slave trader, and was cast 
 into prison. Mr. Lundy was assaulted on the street for 
 something he had written in reference to a slave trader. 
 His assailant was indicted for the act, found guilty, and 
 fined lightly, while Mr. Lundy had the satisfaction of being 
 assured by the learned jurist presiding on the trial that he 
 
 1 Greeley's " Civil Conflict," Vol. I, p. 113. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 95 
 
 had only received in the assault on him what he deserved. 
 That must have been very soothing to his wounded feel- 
 ings ! After their experience in Baltimore, no wonder 
 Lundy and Garrison determined to transfer their paper to 
 Washington City. 
 
 Both Horace Greely and Henry Wilson, in their respect- 
 ive works, give the pre-eminence to Mr. Lundy over John 
 Rankin as an early anti-slavery advocate. They rank the 
 former as the leading man among the early workers in this 
 cause. I doubt if this estimate is correct. The greatest 
 part of the reputation of Mr. Lundy has arisen out of the 
 belief that he published the first anti-slavery paper in the 
 United States. This, as I have shown, is an error. This 
 distinction belongs to Elihu Embree. Lundy and Rankin 
 commenced their labors about the same time, namely, in 
 1816 or 1817, and both of them, by lectures and writings, 
 devoted their lives to the work. But Lundy died compara- 
 tively young, while Rankin lived to see the yearnings of 
 his heart satisfied at the close of the war, after nearly 
 fifty years of unceasing labor. Rankin was a better scholar 
 than Lundy, with as much or more ability, and very much 
 more force of character. He was equally as earnest and 
 as brave. He was decidedly aggressive, while Lundy was 
 cautious, if not somewhat timid. 
 
 The Methodist Church in East Tennessee, as well as in 
 Middle Tennessee, at an early day, was strongly and 
 almost unitedly opposed to slavery. Between 1818 and 
 1822, the Quarterly and Annual Conferences were con- 
 stantly troubled with this vexed question. Session after 
 session, they promulgated rules on the subject, and as 
 frequently altered or modified them, but always in opposi- 
 tion to or in retraint of slaveholding and the buying and 
 selling of slaves. This spirit was very manifest about 
 1822. Thus John B. McFerrin, D.D., in his history of 
 Methodism in Tennessee, Vol. 2, p. 243, speaking of the 
 Rev. Wm. Garrett, says : 
 
 "In 1822, at the age of forty-eight, he was licensed to 
 
96 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 preach. In this work he was hindered for two or three 
 years on account of his connection with slavery. James 
 Axley, as presiding elder, and Enoch Moore, as circuit 
 preacher, were anti-slavery in the administration of dis- 
 cipline, "and not only refused to license slaveholders to 
 preach, but actually denied them the privilege of exhort- 
 ing, or even leading in prayer-meeting, and going so far as 
 to denounce slaveholders as no better than thieves and 
 robbers." 
 
 From the same work, page 494, 1 quote a part of a letter 
 from Rev. Wm. Garrett, of April, 1869 : 
 
 "Wesley Harrison, another layman, emigrated to Ohio, 
 in 1817, under the influence of the anti-slavery feeling 
 which began to spread about this time. Indeed, there 
 was a large emigration of Methodists from East Tennessee 
 to the North-west in those years, and until 1822, on ac- 
 count of slavery. James Axley traveled and preached in 
 that section extensively, and took decided ground against 
 the slaveholders having anything to do in managing the 
 affairs of the Church, and especially preaching. Much 
 irritation of feeling was produced, and what with the emi- 
 gration of a great many to a 'free state,' in the style of 
 those days, and the unfriendly administration of dis- 
 cipline upon the slavery cause, the Church came to a 
 standstill, and was in a measure paralyzed and powerless 
 for good. As a means of averting greater evils and 
 saving the Church, if possible, colonization and emancipa- 
 tion societies were formed, and it was believed by many 
 that such organizations did a great deal to prevent a seri- 
 ous rupture in the Church till the storm passed over. 
 The anti-slavery feeling culminated in 1820 (and was 
 strengthened, doubtless, by the agitation of the question 
 in congress in connection with the admission of Missouri) 
 under the administration of James Axley as presiding 
 elder, and Enoch Moore, preacher in charge. So far did 
 they go in proscription that a man who owned slaves was 
 not allowed even to lead a public prayer meeting, and 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 97 
 
 thus many good men, who were in a condition to be use- 
 ful, were held back from exercising their gifts until this 
 regime passed away." 
 
 At the Annual Conference held at Liberty Hill, on 
 October 7, 1808, the following rules were adopted : 
 
 Western Annual Conference. 
 
 "Question. What method shall be taken with those 
 members of our Society that shall enter into the slave- 
 trade? 
 
 Answer. Every preacher who has charge of a circuit 
 shall upon information secured cite every such member 
 or members so buying or selling a slave or slaves to ap- 
 pear at the ensuing Quarterly Meeting Conference, and 
 there to submit his or her case to the judgment of said 
 Quarterly Conference, who shall proceed to determine 
 whether the person or persons have purchased or sold said 
 slave or slaves from speculative motives or from motives of 
 justice and mercy; and if a majority of said Conference 
 shall judge that he, she or they have bought or sold such 
 slave or slaves from speculative motives, they shall expel 
 such person or persons from their societies. 
 
 (Signed,) Francis Asbury. 
 
 William McKendree. 
 
 Test : William Burk, Secretary. 
 
 Tennessee, Liberty Hill, October 7, 1808."^ 
 
 At another conference held at Bethlehem Meeting 
 House, October 28, 1816, a committee reported rules for 
 the government of the Church, as follows : first declaring 
 that "we sincerely believe and declare it as our opinion 
 that slavery is a moral evil," also that slavery is a "curse" 
 to the Church of God. 
 
 ^ I am indebted to the late lamented Rev. W. C. Graves for this docu- 
 ment, copied from the records of the early Tennessee Conferences in his 
 possession. 
 
 7 
 
98 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "1. If any member of our Society shall buy or sell 
 a slave or slaves in order to make gain, or shall sell to 
 any person who buys to sell again for that purpose, such 
 member shall be called to an account as the discipline 
 directs, and expelled from our Church ; nevertheless, the 
 above rule does not affect any person in our Society, if he 
 or she make it appear that they have bought or sold to 
 keep man and wife, parents and children together." 
 
 "2. No preacher, traveling or local, shall be eligible to 
 the office of deacon in our Church, unless he assures us 
 sentimentally, in person or by letter, that he disapproves 
 of slavery, and declares his willingness to execute, 
 wherever it is practicable, a legal emancipation of such 
 slave or slaves conformably to the laws of the state in 
 which he lives." 
 
 Perhaps I may be going back a few years, as I find it 
 impossible to get dates from the book I am quoting, but I 
 give the following as the action taken by the "Tennessee 
 Conference" held at "Fountain Head" about 1815, in ref- 
 erence to a member who owned slaves : 
 
 "Leven Edney, recommended from Nashville Circuit; 
 his character examined and approved. Learner Blackman 
 being security that he '11 set his slaves free, when prac- 
 ticable." 
 
 "When practicable," exclaims the author, Dr. McFer- 
 rin, "so many promised and gave 'security,' but in few 
 instances was it found to be practicable." ^ It would seem 
 from this that the spirit of greed and the lust of power 
 were stealing into the Methodist Church in spite of the 
 discipline and the rules adopted by its conferences. 
 
 At an Annual Conference held at Franklin, Tennessee, in 
 1817, the subject of slaveholding again came up for con- 
 sideration, and the following rules were adopted, namely : 
 
 "First. That if any local elder, deacon or preacher, 
 should purchase a slave, the Quarterly Conference should 
 
 1 " Methodism in Tennessee," Vol. II, p. 161. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 99 
 
 say how long the slave should serve as a remuneration for 
 the purchase money, and that the purchaser should enter 
 into a written obligation to emancipate such slave at the 
 expiration of the term of servitude, provided emancipation 
 were permissible under the laws of the state, but that if the 
 laws of the state should continue to oppose emancipation, 
 then the next Quarterly Conference held after the expira- 
 tion of the term of servitude, should determine the future 
 status oj the slave. 
 
 "Second, The same rule applied to private members, ex- 
 cept that their cases were to be managed by a committee 
 appointed by the preacher in charge, and in all cases of 
 preachers, deacons, elders or private members, the children 
 of slaves purchased, born during bondage, or term of serv- 
 itude, were to be manumitted upon arrival at the age of 
 twenty-five, provided the law should then admit of eman- 
 cipation, but if the law did not, the cases of all such chil- 
 dren were to be submitted to the Quarterly Conference or 
 the committee, as the case might be." 
 
 The rule in reference to the selling of slaves by a preacher 
 or member is very curious. It required the preacher to 
 submit his case to the Quarterly Conference, and a lay 
 member to the committee, which conference or committee, 
 as the case might be, should determine for what term of 
 years the slave should be sold, and it required the seller 
 to record in the county court the emancipation of the 
 slave at the expiration of said term.^ 
 
 At the conference held in Nashville, October, 1819, Peter 
 Buram and Gilbert D. Taylor were recommended to be ad- 
 mitted on trial, ^ and both were rejected because they were 
 slaveholders. A number of persons who were applicants for 
 deacons' orders, were likewise rejected for the same cause. 
 Some of the members at the conference protested against 
 this action. An appeal was taken, but no decisive action 
 was taken on the appeal. 
 
 1 Goodspeed's " History of Tennessee," p. 668. ' Id., p. 670. 
 
100 East Tennessee and the Civil Vy^ar. 
 
 In the conference held at Columbia, Tennessee, in 1824, 
 in reply to an address from the "Moral Religious Manu- 
 mission Society of West Tennessee," the following resolu- 
 tion was adopted : 
 
 "Resolved, That the address from the Moral Religious 
 Manumission Society be returned to committee accompa- 
 nied with a note stating that so far as the address involves 
 the subject of slavery we concur in the sentiments that 
 slavery is an evil to be deplored, and that it should be 
 counteracted by every judicious and religious exertion." ^ 
 
 Up to this date (1824) the sentiment seemed to be well 
 nigh universal in the Tennessee Conference that slavery 
 was a great moral evil, a curse to the Church, and slave- 
 holding a sin, not to be tolerated by the Church after the 
 time should come, which seemed to be anticipated, when 
 the laws of the state would permit emancipation. 
 
 As late as 1835, the Church still held to its former de- 
 cisions on the subject of slavery, as appears by the follow- 
 ing extract from a letter to the author from the late 
 lamented Rev. W. C. Graves, of Morristown, Tennessee, 
 dated February 16, 1893, in which he says : 
 
 "In 1835, Conference (Holston) was held in Abingdon, 
 Va. Thos. Stringfield was charged with having sold a 
 slave. The punishment inflicted was the withdrawal from 
 him for twelve months of the parchment by which he held 
 the office of an elder. It was the year to elect delegates 
 to the General Conference. Some votes were cast for 
 Stringfield. He requested those who voted for him to 
 cease voting for him. He did not wish to go to the 
 General Conference in his crippled condition. But in 
 that crippled condition, the General Conference elected 
 him editor of the 'South-western Christian Advocate,' a 
 new Church paper to be published in Nashville, Tenn." 
 
 Little did those pious men anticipate that the Church 
 would be rent in twain, in 1844, on the subject of slavery, 
 
 ^ Goodspeed's " History of Tennessee," p. 670. 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 101 
 
 and that the Southern branch would range itself, and 
 rightfully too, under the circumstances, distinctly on the 
 extreme Southern side of the issues immediately involved 
 in the separation. Much less could these good men, who 
 looked at slavery "as an evil to be deplored," pierce the 
 future and behold the whole Methodist Church, South, in 
 1861, except a "remnant" in East Tennessee, ranging it- 
 self on the side of slavery, and for its sake striving to 
 destroy the government. The issue came in 1844. The 
 General Conference met in New York in that year. This 
 was a memorable meeting. The ever-present subject of 
 slavery came up to mar and destroy the harmony of that 
 great representative body of Christians. Two cases came 
 before that body involving the moral right to hold persons 
 in bondage. The first was that of Francis A. Harding, 
 who had been suspended by the Baltimore Conference 
 from the office of minister for refusing to manumit five 
 slaves belonging to his wife at the time of their marriage, 
 and which by the laws of Maryland remained the property 
 of the wife after marriage. The Baltimore Conference 
 adopted the following preamble and resolution : 
 
 "Whereas, the Baltimore Conference can not and will 
 not tolerate slavery in any of its members." . 
 
 "Resolved, that Brother Harding be suspended until the 
 next annual Conference, or until he assures the Episcopacy 
 that he has taken the necessary steps to secure the free- 
 dom of his slaves." 
 
 The fact that the slaves were still the property of the 
 wife and, therefore, not subject to the disposition of the 
 husband ought to have been a sufficient answer to this 
 charge. But it was not. On appeal to the General Con- 
 ference, the action of the Baltimore Conference in sus- 
 pending Mr. Harding from the ministry was affirmed by a 
 vote of 117 to 56. 
 
 A still more noted case came up for consideration in this 
 Conference : it was that of Bishop James 0, Andrew, of 
 Georgia. He had become, contrary to his will, the owner 
 
102 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 of two slaves. In addition to these, on a second marriage, 
 he found himself interested in some slaves belonging to 
 his wife. Unwilling to occupy this position, he had the 
 slaves secured to his wife by a trust deed, divesting him- 
 self of all interest in them. But he was still the owner of 
 two others, one received by will, and the other inherited 
 from his first wife. Whether he made any effort to manu- 
 mit the last one does not appear. He did make an efifort 
 to send the first to Africa, but the slave refused to go. As 
 to that one, he was clearly not guilty of any ofi'ense, pro- 
 vided the laws of the State of Georgia, like the laws of 
 nearly all of the slaveholding states, forbid the emancipa- 
 tion of the slaves, except upon the condition that they 
 were sent out of the state, which it is assumed was the 
 case. Under these circumstances the following preamble 
 and resolution were passed by an affirmative vote of 111, 
 and a negative vote of 69 : 
 
 "Whereas, the 'Discipline' of our Church forbids the do- 
 ing of anything calculated to destroy our itinerant General 
 Superintendence ; and, whereas, Bishop Andrew has be- 
 come connected with slavery, by marriage and otherwise, 
 and this act having drawn after it circumstances which, in 
 the estimation of this General Conference, will greatly em- 
 barass the exercise of his office as an itinerant General 
 Superintendent, if not, in some places, entirely prevent it, 
 therefore, 
 
 "Resolved, That it is the sense of this General Confer- 
 ence that he desist from the exercise of the office so long as 
 this impediment remains." 
 
 The clause in the Discipline on which this action was 
 based was as follows : 
 
 "We declare that we are as much as ever convinced of 
 the great evil of slavery, therefore, no slaveholder shall 
 be eligible to any official station in our Church hereafter 
 where the laws of the state in which he lives will admit of 
 emancipation, and permit the liberated slave to enjoy free- 
 dom. When any traveling preacher becomes the owner of 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 103 
 
 a slave or slaves by any means, he shall forfeit his minis- 
 terial character, unless he execute, if it be practicable, a 
 legal emancipation of such slaves conformably to the laws 
 of the state in which he lives," 
 
 The delegates from the Tennessee Conferences, and in- 
 deed all the members from the slaveholding states, except 
 four from the Baltimore Conference, and one from Texas, 
 voted against the action of the majority. Those repre- 
 senting the Holston Conference were E. F. Sevier, S. Pat- 
 ton and Thomas Stringfield. The first of these was a 
 slave owner, the grandson of Governor John Sevier. The 
 last was the same person who had been suspended in 1835, 
 for selling a slave. 
 
 The action of the General Conference, as to Mr. Hard- 
 ing, according to the Constitution of the Church, was 
 clearly illegal. It is not so easy to determine in the case 
 of Bishop Andrew, for all the facts necessary for a correct 
 judicial opinion, do not seem to have been before the con- 
 ference when he was on trial. 
 
 Be that as it may the decision was a most unfortunate 
 one. It immediately led to a division of the Church into 
 two bodies, separated by a geographical line, and holding 
 widely antagonistic views on the great and all-absorbing 
 question of slavery. Up to this time no religious denomi- 
 nation, having a sure foothold in the South, except the 
 Quakers, had perhaps been so stedfastly opposed to 
 slavery as the Methodist. As a general rule it had been 
 conscientiously opposed to that institution. Now the 
 whole matter was changed. With one voice that denomi- 
 nation condemned the action of the conference in suspend- 
 ing Bishop Andrew from office. Almost at once the minds of 
 Southern members, under the influence of this wrong as they 
 esteemed it, changed from a state of opposition to slavery, 
 or of mild indifference, to its open advocacy. From this 
 time, this active, earnest Church in the South became pro- 
 slavery in almost every fiber. And when Civil War came 
 on in 1861, no Church was more united in the Southern 
 
104 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 cause, except in East Tennessee, than the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church South. 
 
 Waiving any consideration of the legal question in- 
 volved in the case of Bishop Andrew, under the Constitu- 
 tion and the law of the Methodist Church, I do not hesitate 
 to say that here was a great blunder on the part of a ma- 
 jority of the General Conference, not to say a wrong or a 
 crime. It aroused a bitter spirit of indignation as well as 
 alarm in the Methodist Church throughout the entire 
 South. Bishop Andrew was a great and a good man. He 
 was justly very popular. A keen sympathy was awak- 
 ened in his behalf. But this was not all. By this decision 
 of the General Conference, every Methodist slave owner 
 felt that the same intolerant spirit of the majority in the 
 North which had stricken down the great Bishop Andrew 
 might soon be directed against him and his property also. 
 The result was a universal cry for separation. Thus one 
 bond which held the Union together was rudely snapped 
 asunder. This was to the Southern people what the repeal 
 of the Missouri Compromise was to the Northern people ten 
 years later. Then, a few years later, followed the split in 
 the Presbyterian and in the Baptist Churches on the same 
 subject, and their division into separate bodies according to 
 geographical lines. And thus other bonds were severed, 
 and the minds of men became prepared for the secession of 
 the Southern States. 
 
 The important influence exerted by the division of the 
 three great churches, caused directly by the question of 
 slavery, in preparing the minds of the Southern people for 
 a separation from the general government, cannot be over- 
 estimated. It has heretofore received too little considera- 
 tion in tracing out the causes which led to and culminated 
 in the great conflict of arms in 1861. Leaving out of con- 
 sideration the mad passions engendered by this division, 
 the feeling of hate and distrust it aroused, and the sever- 
 ing of the strongest ties which bind men together in sym- 
 pathy — church relations — the evil extended far beyond 
 
Slavery in East Tennessee. 105 
 
 these. It everywhere relaxed the bonds of the Union. 
 The reasoning in favor of a separation of the states, how- 
 ever incorrect and fallacious, became plausible and obvious 
 to the dullest intellect. If the church could divide and 
 separate and prosper, why not the states likewise? If a 
 geographical line, dividing the slave from the free states, 
 were proper in reference to religion — the most sacred and 
 universal of all institutions, which draws men together in 
 bonds of unity and love as nothing else can do — how much 
 more natural and proper such a line as the means of sepa- 
 rating diverse interests and antagonistic institutions, be- 
 tween which there was an irrepressible and an enduring 
 conflict. Thus men in the South unconsciously looked at 
 and reasoned about this question. And though the orig- 
 inal cause which divided the churches has long since 
 ceased to exist, the sej^aration still continues, with a 
 Chinese wall between the two Christian communities hold- 
 ing the same faith and preaching the same doctrines. 
 
106 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 SLAVERY IN THE STATE OF TENNESSEE. 
 
 Early Presbyterians were slaveholders — Become aroused to the sin of 
 slavery — Commence emancipating their slaves — Legislature forbids 
 emancipation — The freedmen must be sent to Africa — Free colored 
 men might sell themselves into slavery — One case of this kind — Intro- 
 duction of slaves into the state for sale forbidden — Strong sentiment 
 against slavery — Effort in constitutional convention of 1834 to abolish 
 slavery — Friends of slavery apologize for opposing emancipation — A 
 long controversy over the subject — An effort to strip slavery of some 
 of its prestige fails — Constitution closes the door to general emancipa- 
 tion — Slavery protected by constitution of the United States and that 
 of the state — Folly of the men who, in 1861, threw away their safe- 
 guards — All opposition to slavery hushed under the omnipotent des- 
 potism of public opinion — No man bold enough to question slavery. 
 
 I have thus dwelt at length on the relation the Meth- 
 odist Church in Tennessee sustained toward the subject of 
 slavery, partly because of the number and great influence 
 of that denomination, and partly because of the abundance 
 of historical material to be found on that subject. But 
 when we come to the Presbyterian Church, which at an 
 early day was far more numerous and powerful than the 
 Methodist in East Tennessee, we find less material relating 
 to that subject out of which to construct a satisfactory nar- 
 rative. There can be no doubt of the fact that in the early 
 settlement of this section of the state the Presbyterians 
 were largely slaveholders — in fact, owned most of the 
 slaves. There is much evidence tending to show that when 
 the anti-slavery societies began to spring up, about 1815, 
 and the subject of emancipation began to occupy the 
 thoughts of men, the Presbyterians became greatly aroused 
 on the subject, and took a prominent, if not the leading, 
 part in the movement in favor of emancipation. Many of 
 the members of these early anti-slavery societies are known 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. 107 
 
 to have been Presbyterians, So strong was this feelino- 
 among them that they began voluntarily to emancipate their 
 own slaves, and to send them to Liberia, Among those 
 who thus set their slaves free were the Rev. Dr. Frederick 
 A. Ross, Samuel Rhea, Hon. Seth J. W, Lucky, Ebenezer 
 Mathes, and Valentine Sevier, all Presbyterians. These 
 five persons together liberated perhaps fifty or more slaves. 
 
 So strong was the disposition among the people to eman- 
 cipate their slaves, and so numerous were the free colored 
 people becoming, that the legislature of 1831 passed an 
 act forbidding emancipation, except upon the condition that 
 those emancipated should be immediately removed from 
 the state. Bond was to be given to that effect before the 
 county court could give its assent to emancipation. Two 
 reasons perhaps influenced the legislature to pass this act. 
 Both were in the interest of slavery. One was to throw 
 obstacles in the way of emancipation, which was becoming 
 too common. The other was to obviate the evil influence 
 on the slaves, caused by presence of free negroes in slave- 
 holding communities. When the slaves saw numerous free 
 persons of their own race and color, who were spending 
 most of their time in idleness, it tended to make them rest- 
 less and discontented. Besides, there was danger of hav- 
 ing the slaves tampered with by the free colored people. 
 It mattered not that the latter did not live or dress as well 
 as the slaves. This was as nothing in comparison to the 
 sweet boon of working only when and for whom they 
 pleased. 
 
 Thus the slave owners, in order to make secure their 
 property, were constantly compelled to hedge it around 
 with new and more stringent safeguards, ever increas- 
 ing in severity. Nearly every Southern state, perhaps 
 every one, passed laws similar to the one referred to 
 above. In the meantime some of the Northern states 
 were closing their doors against the admission of free col- 
 ored people. Finally the legislature of Tennessee, in 1854, 
 passed an act requiring all persons of color who might 
 
108 EaBt Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 thereafter be emancipated, either by contract or will, to i)e 
 transported to the western coast of Africa, unless unable 
 by reason of age or disease to go. If no fund existed for 
 paying the expenses of transportation, the slave was to be 
 hired out until a sufficient sum for that purpose should be 
 raised. 
 
 By an act passed in 1858 or 1859, it was provided that 
 any free person of color, at the age of eighteen years, 
 might choose a master and sell himself into slavery, by 
 filing a petition for that purpose in the chancery court of 
 the county in which he resided, setting forth his desire to 
 go into slavery, giving the name of the proposed owner, 
 and making publication for one month, giving due notice 
 of the filing of the petition, and having notice served on 
 the petitioner and the proposed purchaser to appear before 
 the court at its next term. It was the duty of the judge 
 to examine these persons separately, and any other persons 
 he saw fit, to ascertain whether there was any fraud or im- 
 position in the case, and also to appoint persons to report 
 on the reasonableness of the price offered. If the judge 
 was satisfied on all these points, the proposed sale was to 
 be approved, and the petitioner was to go into slavery. 
 One peculiar fact about this abnormal proceeding was 
 that the money offered as the price of the person so sold 
 was to be paid into the county treasury, for the use of the 
 county schools. 
 
 One case of sale and voluntary enslavement under this 
 law occurred in Hawkins county, East Tennessee, in 1858. 
 The following is a part of the record in the case : 
 
 "Petition for Voluntary Enslavement. 
 
 In Chancery at Rogersvllle, Tennessee. 
 
 Ben, a man of color, and William Miller, Esq. 
 
 Notice is hereby given that Ben, a man of color, has 
 this day filed his petition in our said court, asking to be- 
 come the slave of said Miller, under an act of the General 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. 109 
 
 Assembly of said state, passed the 8th day of March, 
 1858. R. C. Fain, Clerk and Master.^ 
 
 May 29, 1858." 
 
 The legislative records of the state, including the Con- 
 stitutional Convention of 1834, furnish a good index of 
 the state of public sentiment, and the changes taking 
 place in reference to slavery, down to a comparatively re- 
 cent period. Thus, the act of the legislature of 1801, 
 which conferred on the county courts of the state the au- 
 thority to emancipate slaves, which authority had been 
 exercised by the legislature previous to that time, contains 
 this significant preamble, showing the pressure for emanci- 
 pation which then existed : 
 
 "Whereas, the number of petitions presented to this 
 legislature praying the emancipation of slaves not only 
 tends to involve the state in great evils, but are also pro- 
 ductive of great expense," etc. 
 
 In 1790, there were less than four thousand slaves in 
 the state. By 1810, the number had increased to upward 
 of forty-four thousand. This rapid increase, as it at that 
 time seemed, induced the legislature, in 1812, to prohibit 
 the introduction of slaves into the state for sale. This 
 fact furnishes very strong incidental proof of the weak 
 hold slavery had at that time on the hearts of the people. 
 In a previous chapter, the rise and growth of the many 
 manumission societies, which sprang up in East Tennessee 
 about 1815, were traced out : also the position of the 
 Methodist Church on the subject of slavery. There are 
 still other evidences of an almost general concurrence of 
 sentiment at that time in condemnation of slavery. One 
 of these is "An Address delivered by a Member of the 
 
 ^ The late chancellor, Seth J. W. Lucky, my friend and afterward my 
 associate as one of the chancellors of the state, so justly distinguished for 
 his learning and goodness, who had liberated his own slaves thirty years 
 before, determined this case, but, as his worthy son informs me, not until 
 he had examined privately the petitioner as to the reasons for his singular 
 action. 
 
110 East Tennessee and the Civil War. . 
 
 Manumission Society of Knoxville, Tennessee, on the 17th 
 of August, 1816, by order of the Society." The name of 
 the author does not appear.^ One object of the address, 
 as it announced, was to show "that the principles of slav- 
 ery are [were] inconsistent with the laws of nature and 
 revelation." It proceeds to arraign slavery, at great 
 length and with striking force, for its cruelty and its inhu- 
 manity. The author argued that in no part of the world 
 was slavery so inhuman as in the United States. This 
 address was not the mere individual opinion of its author, 
 as appears by the following note that was appended to it : 
 
 "The foregoing has been examined by the inspecting 
 committee and approved. 
 
 Attest : James Jones, President. 
 
 Nov. 20, 1896." 
 
 I might quote at length from this address, but I have 
 sufficiently indicated its spirit. 
 
 In 1821, a petition was presented to the legislature, 
 praying for the passage of a law making the terms on 
 which emancipation would be permitted in the state easier 
 on the owners of slaves ; also praying for the emancipation 
 of slaves on their reaching thereafter a certain age, and 
 for a law to prevent the separation of husband and wife, 
 parent and child. This petition was referred to a commit- 
 tee, of which Jacob Peck, afterward one of the supreme 
 judges of the state, was chairman. This committee con- 
 curred in all the propositions presented in the petitions, 
 and denounced the policy of forcing men by unjust restric- 
 tions to hold slaves in bondage, contrary to the dictates of 
 conscience and humanity. The committee proposed a law 
 preventing the separation of husband and wife. They 
 also say : 
 
 ' I am indebted for these facts and others to the address of the Hon. 
 Horace Maynard, delivered at Nashville, July 4, 1863, kindly furnished to 
 me by Colonel John B. Brownlow. 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. Ill 
 
 "Your committee are of the opinion that it is worthy 
 the consideration of the legislature to examine into the 
 policy of providing for the emancipation of those yet un- 
 born. [Signed] J. Peck, Chairman. 
 
 5> 1 
 
 This is only one more proof of the strong anti-slavery 
 feeling prevailing in the state from 1815 to 1824. There 
 is no evidence that this feeling died out for many years 
 after this time. Between that time and 1834, we have not 
 so much historical evidence in the way of public or private 
 documents to prove the existence of this sentiment. But 
 we are not wholly without proof. It is within the mem- 
 ory, no doubt, of old citizens that some time between those 
 dates a public meeting was held in Knoxville by its lead- 
 ing citizens in favor of emancipation. While the names 
 of these citizens can not be given in full, some of them can 
 be recalled, and among them Samuel R. Rodgers and Dr. 
 "W. J. Baker, both Presbyterians, and both then or after- 
 ward slave-owners. Baker, when the civil war came on, 
 espoused the Confederate cause, while Rodgers adhered 
 unflinchingly to the Union. 
 
 But the journal of the Constitutional Convention of 
 Tennessee, which convened in 1834 to amend the constitu- 
 tion, furnishes full and plenary proof of the strength of 
 the anti-slavery feeling, particularly in East Tennessee, 
 even at that late day, when the two antagonistic forces in 
 reference to slavery were becoming fiercely arrayed against 
 each other on the floor of the lower house of congress. 
 Between 1796, the date of the first constitution, and 1834, 
 the date of the constitution under consideration, slavery 
 had become an important interest in the state. The num- 
 ber of slaves had grown from 10,613 to 150,000, as esti- 
 mated by the convention. During this time the rich cot- 
 ton lands of Middle and "West Tennessee had been opened 
 up and largely brought into cultivation. 
 
 ' Judge Peck was a citizen of Jefferson county, East Tennessee, and 
 lived until 1870, being then aged about ninety years. 
 
112 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 During the first week of the session of the convention, 
 Mr. Terry H. Cahal presented the petition of "sundry cit- 
 izens of Maury county" (one of the rich cotton counties 
 of the state, and at that time the home of James K. Polk), 
 "on the subject of emancipation," Other similar petitions 
 were afterward presented from the counties of Robertson, 
 Lincoln, Bedford, Overton, Roane, Rhea, Knox, Monroe, 
 McMinn, Blount, Sevier, Cocke, Jefiferson, Greene, and 
 Washington, praying "that all the slaves shall [should] 
 be made free against the year 1866." The signers num- 
 bered upward of 1,800, of whom more than one hundred 
 were slaveholders.^ 
 
 During the second week of the convention, Mathew 
 Stephenson, a farmer of Washington county, Tennessee, 
 introduced this resolution : 
 
 "That a committee of thirteen, one from each congres- 
 sional district, be appointed to take into consideration the 
 propriety of designating some period from which slavery 
 shall not be tolerated in this state, and that all memorials 
 on that subject that have or may be presented to the con- 
 vention be referred to said committee, to consider and re- 
 port thereon." (Journal, p. 53.) 
 
 A few days later, this resolution was taken up, on mo- 
 tion of Mr. John McGaughey, of Greene, when Mr. Adam 
 Huntsman moved to lay it on the table until the first day 
 of the ensuing January, which motion prevailed by a vote 
 of 38 yeas to 20 nays. As the day named was beyond the 
 time that the convention would be in session, it was in 
 effect an adverse decision on the proposition. The nays 
 were Messrs. W. B. Carter, of Carter, president of the 
 convention; Hugh C. Armstrong, of Overton; Richard 
 Bradshaw, of Jefferson ; Willie Blount (formerly governor 
 of the state) , of Montgomery ; Robert L. Cobb, of Maury ; 
 James Gillespie, of Blount ; James L. Greene, of Roane ; 
 Isaac Hill, of Warren ; John Kelley, of Marion ; Bradley 
 
 ^ Address of Mr. Maynard, before referred to, page 110. 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. 113 
 
 Kimbrough, of Monroe ; Robert J. McKinney, of Greene ; 
 Joseph A. Mabry, of Knox ; John McGaughey, of Greene ; 
 John Neal, of McMinn ; William C. Roadman, of Cocke; 
 Mathew Stephenson, of Washington ; William T. Senter, 
 of Rhea; William C. Smart, of Warren; Henry Sharp, of 
 Lawrence ; and Isaac Walton, of Sumner. 
 
 It is remarkable that the several members whose nativity 
 had been in some of the free states all voted, says Mr. Maynard 
 in his address, in favor of laying the resolution on the table. 
 This was in keeping with what was largely the case during 
 the late civil war, in East Tennessee, at least, namely, a 
 large part, possibly a majority of Northern born citizens 
 became ultra-friends and advocates of secession, and often 
 the most bitter ones. 
 
 It will be observed that thirteen of these twenty mem- 
 bers who were prima facie in favor of emancipation were 
 from East Tennessee. It will be observed further that of 
 the sixteen counties from which petitions were sent to the 
 convention, praying for the emancipation of slaves, eleven 
 were in East Tennessee, a proportion greatly larger than 
 that of the counties of Middle and West Tennessee praying 
 for the same thing. 
 
 The champion of this cause in the convention was 
 Mathew Stephenson, of Washington county, a most worthy 
 man, who the next year was the unsuccessful opponent of 
 Andrew Johnson in his first race for a seat in the legisla- 
 ture for Greene and Washington counties. Mr. Stephen- 
 son was ably seconded in his efiForts by Robert J. McKin- 
 ney, a rising young Scotch-Irish lawyer from Greene 
 county, who afterward achieved great eminence as a 
 lawyer, and won high distinction as a profound and 
 learned jurist on the bench of the supreme court of the 
 state at the time of its greatest renown. He was also 
 warmly aided by John McGaughey, of Greene county, and 
 by Joseph A. Mabry, a large slaveholder from Knox county. 
 Of all these men, many of whom I knew, only two were 
 8 
 
114 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 alive when the civil war came on in 1861, namely, John 
 McGaughey and Judge McKinney. Both survived the 
 war for several years. Both were good men and good 
 citizens — far beyond most men. The former remained 
 true to the Union, while the latter cast his lot with the 
 secessionists. 
 
 The most significant fact connected with this question in 
 the convention is, that the majority felt called on to ex- 
 plain their action to the public. Surely we of this day, 
 who were familiar with the arrogance of the slave power 
 in the latter days of its dominance, can scarcely realize 
 that, in 1834, it should have humbled itself by stooping to 
 explain why it voted against prospective emancipation. 
 There must have been behind these twenty men a much 
 stronger anti-slavery sentiment in the state than we can 
 possibly realize to-day. Feeble minorities, standing al- 
 most alone, often explain their votes ; great majorities, 
 backed by overwhelming odds, seldom or never do. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Allen, of Smith, the following resolu- 
 tion was adopted : 
 
 "Resolved, That a committee of three (one from each di- 
 vision of the state) be appointed to draft the reasons that 
 governed this convention, in declining to act upon the 
 memorials on the subject of slavery." 
 
 Messrs. John A. McKinney, Godfrey M. Fogg and Adam 
 Huntsman, the two former being the most eminent lawyers 
 in the state, were appointed as this committee. Huntsman 
 was also a good lawyer, and afterward won great notoriety 
 in the state as a successful candidate for congress against 
 the celebrated and lamented David Crockett. 
 
 Mr. McKinney, as chairman, submitted afterwards a 
 very able and ingenious report. The deplorable condition 
 of the free persons of color in the state was alleged as the 
 main basis of the opposition to emancipation. On this 
 point, the report said among other things : 
 
 "The condition of a free man of color, surrounded by 
 persons of a different caste and complexion, is the most 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. 115 
 
 forlorn and wretched that can be imagined. He is a 
 stranger in the land of his nativity ; he is an outcast in 
 the place of his residence — he has scarcely a motive to 
 prompt him to virtuous action, or to stimulate him to hon- 
 orable exertion. At every turn and corner of the walks of 
 life, he is beset with temptations strong — nay, almost irre- 
 sistible — to the force of which in most cases he may be ex- 
 pected to yield, the consequence of which must be that he 
 will be degraded, despised and trampled upon by the rest 
 of the community. When the free man of color is op- 
 pressed by the proud, or circumvented by the cunning, or 
 betrayed by those in whom he reposed confidence, do the 
 laws of the land afford him more than a nominal protec- 
 tion? Denied his oath in a court of justice, unable to call 
 any of his own color to be witnesses, if the injury he com- 
 plains of has been committed by a white man, how many 
 of his wrongs must remain unredressed — how many of his 
 rights be violated with impunity — how poor a boon does 
 he receive when receiving freedom, if what he receives can 
 be called by that name? Unenviable as is the condition 
 of the slave, unlovely as slavery is in all its aspects, bitter 
 as the draught that the slave is doomed to drink, never- 
 theless his condition is better than that of a free man of 
 color in the midst of a community of white men, with 
 whom he has no common interest, no fellow feeling, no 
 equality. If the slave is sick, he has a master or mistress 
 whose own interest will prompt to furnish him with food 
 and medicine, and attendance suited to his situation ; but 
 when the free man of color is laid upon a bed of sickness, 
 who cares for him, what hand supplies his wants, who will 
 step to his humble bed of straw and feel his pulse, or in- 
 quire into the symptoms of his disease, or even hand him 
 a cup of cold water to allay his thirst? . . . The slave 
 is almost always exempt from care. When his day's 
 work is done, he lies down and sleeps soundly ; if the crops 
 are destroyed by mildew or blasting, his peace of mind is 
 not disturbed thereby ; and when old age overtakes him. 
 
116 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and liis limbs require rest, and his hands can work no 
 longer in his master's house, the law has provided him 
 with a home and secured him a maintenance. He knows 
 not at any time what it is to have his children ask for 
 bread when he has none to give them ; they, too, are pro- 
 vided for. But who supplies the wants of the free man of 
 color when old age overtakes him and he is unable to pro- 
 vide for himself? He has to contend with all the ills of 
 poverty, aggravated by a sense of his own degraded situa- 
 tion, compared with those around him." 
 
 Then the explanation insists that the proposed emanci- 
 pation would result in the expatriation of the slaves ; that 
 they would be transported for sale, or for use, to the 
 Southern States of Mississippi, Louisiana or Arkansas, to 
 be held as slaves. It also argues that the slaves in Ten- 
 nessee were kindly treated, not overworked, and that the 
 system of slavery here was as mild as in any part of the 
 world. 
 
 This was indeed a gloomy, but a truthful picture of the 
 condition of the free colored people of that day, much of 
 which is true of them at this day, notwithstanding the 
 glories of the latter half of this century. But it is 
 worthy of remark, that while the main objection urged 
 against emancipation was the degraded condition of the 
 colored people already free, this convention degraded them 
 still lower, by taking from them the only insignia of 
 honorable citizenship, conferred on them by the fathers of 
 the state, in the constitution of 1796 — the qualified right 
 to vote. 
 
 I quote a few more sentences, not in their order, to show 
 what were the sentiments of slaveholders, and men speak- 
 ing for slaveholders, in Tennessee, in 1834 : 
 
 "But the friends of humanity need not despair; the 
 memorialists need not dread that slavery will be perpetual 
 in our highly favored country. Providence has already 
 opened a door of hope, which is every day opening wider 
 and wider. . . . The ministers of our holy religion 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. 117 
 
 will knock at the doors of the hearts of the owners of 
 slaves, telling every one to let his bondsman and his bonds- 
 woman go free, and to send them back to the land of their 
 forefathers, and the voice of the holy men will be heard 
 and obeyed. ... In this way, under the approving 
 smile of Heaven, and the fostering care of Providence, 
 slavery will yet be extinguished in a way that will work 
 no evil to the white man, while it produces the happiest 
 effects on the whole American race. The last thirty years 
 have produced a great change in public sentiment on this 
 subject, and it can not be doubted that the next thirty 
 years will produce a still greater one. . . . So a pre- 
 mature attempt on the part of the benevolent to get rid of 
 the evils of slavery would certainly have the efifect of post- 
 poning to a far distant day the accomplishment of an event 
 devoutly and ardently desired by the wise and the good in 
 every part of our beloved country."^ 
 
 And now followed a prolonged controversy, most unusual 
 and most remarkable, between the friends of emancipation 
 and the apologists. The lengthy and able apology pre- 
 sented by Mr. McKinney speaking as chairman for the 
 majority of the convention, called forth an earnest and 
 able protest from Mathew Stephenson and Messrs. Mc- 
 Gaughey, Bradshaw and Gillespie. Against the specious 
 defense of slavery they appealed to the principles of Chris- 
 tianity and common humanity. Then followed another pro- 
 test of marked ability from Dr. Joseph Kincaid, of Bedford 
 county. This paper answers with great force and clear- 
 ness the argument made by the majority, that a state of 
 slavery was better than the "forlorn and wretched" con- 
 dition of the free man of color in the state. 
 
 Then followed a supplemental report from the committee, 
 fortifying and defending the positions assumed in the first 
 report. This called forth a second protest from brave 
 Mathew Stephenson and his associates. All these papers 
 
 ^ " Journal," pp. 92, 93. 
 
118 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 were placed on the journal, as if both sides were appealing 
 to posterity. We can scarcely realize that this calm and 
 dispassionate discussion of the evils of slavery (for both 
 sides admitted this) took place in a Southern state at as 
 late a date as 1834, when we remember how sensitive the 
 South became a few years later on this subject. 
 
 In justice to the memory of Mr. John A. McKinney, the 
 able author of the apologies, it should be stated that he 
 was a pure and an upright man, a native of the North 
 of Ireland, a Covenanter Presbyterian, who by his indus- 
 try and great ability as a lawyer left a large fortune, and 
 the heritage of a good name to his children. 
 
 Having failed in their efforts to secure prospective eman- 
 cipation, the friends of the measure tried to strip slavery of 
 some of its prestige and power. Mr. Mabry, of Knox, in- 
 troduced the following proposition : 
 
 "Resolved, That the present Constitution of the State of 
 Tennessee be so amended as to prevent and prohibit the 
 sale of slaves or people of color by virtue of executions founded 
 on all contracts made and entered into after the first day of 
 January, 1835." 
 
 This proposition failed. The obvious effect of its adop- 
 tion would have been to diminish the value and desirability 
 of slaves, and greatly to lessen the transfers of this kind 
 of property. 
 
 Mathew Stephenson offered a proviso "that no free man 
 who is now a resident of this state, and who has hereto- 
 fore exercised the right of voting, shall be debarred from 
 that privilege." Voted down 35 to 22. 
 
 The convention instead of seeking to ameliorate the "for- 
 lorn" condition of free persons of color, as portrayed in 
 the apology, by conferring on them the right to hold office, 
 to sit on juries, and to testify in courts of justice, took 
 away from such as were then freeholders the right to vote 
 conferred on them by the constitution of 1796, and limited 
 
Slavery in the State of Tennessee. 119 
 
 suffrage to "free white men." ^ And to effectually close 
 the door against emancipation, and to provide a further 
 safeguard for slavery, the following clause was put into the 
 constitution : 
 
 "The general assembly shall have no power to pass laws 
 for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of their 
 owner or owners." 
 
 Thus the delusive hope and promise held out by the 
 committee, speaking for the majority of the convention, 
 that slavery would not be "perpetual," was falsified, and 
 the door to emancipation closed and barred apparently for- 
 ever. Slavery was already protected by the Constitution 
 of the United States, and now it was securely enthroned 
 in that of Tennessee, from which it could only be dislodged 
 by the slaveholders themselves. But in the course of time 
 infatuated men arose who cast away the first safeguard, 
 and thereby lost the second. The slaveholders, in an evil 
 hour, challenged to battle a people as brave as they, of 
 infinitely larger resources, and of nearly three times their 
 numbers. With incredible folly, they threw away all the 
 sacred guarantees which slavery possessed, and in the 
 deadly conflict which followed, as many wise men had 
 foreseen and predicted, slavery perished. 
 
 Soon after the events I have been relating, the anti- 
 slavery current, which had been running so strongly for 
 the past twenty years in favor of emancipation, in parts 
 of the South, turned back in its course, and was lost in 
 the maelstrom of slavery propagandism. Men who had 
 once clamored for emancipation were either hushed into 
 silence, or eagerly followed the swelling current of South- 
 ern thought. Many men who had denounced slavery, away 
 back in emancipation days, now hastened to set themselves 
 
 ^ Journal, p. 76. Those who voted against restricting the right to vote to 
 white men were : Messrs. Allen, Armstrong, Gillespie, Gray, Hill, Kincannon, 
 Kincaid, Kelley, Robert J. McKinney, Mabry, McGaughey, Montgomery, 
 Neil, Roadman, Richardson, Robertson, Stephenson, Smith, Smart, Scott, 
 Walton, White, and Webster. 
 
120 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 right with their neighbors by purchasing slaves. Every 
 voice, every whisper of opposition to slavery, was silenced. 
 Universal acquiescence, if not universal approval and advo- 
 cacy, succeeded. If a few doubted, if a few still had con- 
 scientious scruples as to the system, they were hushed into 
 silence in the dread of an overpowering public opinion. No 
 man in the South was bold enough to open his lips in op- 
 position to slavery. No man dared to suggest any longer 
 either its amelioration, much less its extinction. To be 
 suspected of abolition sentiments, was to bring on one's 
 self the curse of social outlawry ; to become as a loathsome 
 leper shunned by every one. The boldest men who had 
 had scruples on the moral side of the question stood petri- 
 fied and confounded in the presence of this omnipotent des- 
 potism of public opinion. By it, all resistance was crushed 
 out. Only one parallel to this can be found in all history. 
 In the dark ages, the thunders of the Vatican often caused 
 the proudest princes and potentates to shake and tremble, 
 and to bow in humble and abject submission. So, the 
 anathemas of this imperial power. Slavery, like the terri- 
 ble curse of the Church of Rome, made the boldest men 
 stand aghast, breathless and trembling, in apprehension of 
 some awful evil. 
 
 " Then wakes the power which in the age of iron 
 Burst forth to curb the great and raise the low ; 
 Mark where she stands! — around her form I draw 
 The awful circle of our solemn Church ! 
 Set but a foot within the holy ground, 
 And on thy head — yea, though it wore a crown — 
 I launch the curse of Rome." ^ 
 
 ^ The supersensitiveness of slaveholders as to slavery was not unnatural. 
 They had to guard it against attack, whether from without or within, with 
 the utmost vigilance. They could, therefore, tolerate no discussion of its 
 moral aspects, much less opposition to it, without danger of the most se- 
 rious consequences. These things may and do prove the inherent weak- 
 ness of the institution. Nevertheless, it would have continued to exist 
 for generations longer but for the mighty convulsions of the war. Through 
 them was fulfilled God's purpose. 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 121 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 POLITICAL CANVASS IN 1860. 
 
 Excitement in political parties in 1860— Old parties disintegrating — Whig 
 National Convention assembles — Nominates John Bell for president — 
 Declares for the preservation of the Union — John Bell — Democratic 
 National Convention — Splits on the platform — Stephen A. Douglas- 
 Reassembles in Baltimore - One wing nominates Douglas, the other 
 John C. Breckenridge— Republican party nominates Abraham Lin- 
 coln — Mr. Seward — Mr. Lincoln's Springfield speech — Man of destiny — 
 Slavery in the territories — Presidential canvass in Tennessee — Three 
 tickets in the field — James D. Thomas — State votes for Mr. Bell — 
 Mr. Lincoln elected president — Gloomy forebodings in the public 
 mind — South Carolina prepares to leave the Union— Uncertainty in 
 the public mind following election of Mr. Lincoln — Active work 
 done in Washington in favor of secession — Three members of Bu- 
 chanan's cabinet active secessionists— General Scott ignored — Failure 
 to strengthen forts in Charleston Harbor — Major Anderson placed in 
 command there — Asks for re-enforcements — None sent — South Carolina 
 secedes — Great joy in Charleston — Commissioners sent to Washington 
 to adjust differences — Mr. Buchanan's embarrassment and vacilla- 
 tion — Major Anderson occupies Fort Sumter — Storm of indignation 
 in Charleston created by it — Haughty conduct of commissioners — 
 Holt, Stanton and Black in the cabinet — " Star of the West " sent to 
 Charleston with troops and provisions — Driven off — The Harriet Lane 
 with provisions fails to land — Mr. Buchanan's message to congress — 
 " No power to coerce a sovereign state." 
 
 In the spring and early summer of 1860 all thoughtful 
 and intelligent men felt that great events were approach- 
 ing. The people of the Northern states were excited as 
 never before. The repeal of the Missouri Compromise 
 and the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill had mad- 
 dened them into a phrenzy. This feeling had been in- 
 tensified by the attempt made immediately afterwards by 
 the slaveholders of the South to introduce slavery into 
 Kansas. The excitement in the South, especially in the 
 cotton states, was not less intense than it was in the 
 North. The ultra slaveholders were disappointed, and 
 
122 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 became desperate at their signal failure to secure Kansas. 
 Besides this, they saw that their control of the national 
 government, which they had held much the larger part of 
 the time since its establishment, was sli^Dping away from 
 them. This still further inflamed their discontent. 
 
 In the meantime old political parties were disintegrat- 
 ing and new alliances were being formed. Old party lines 
 were melting away. The Whig party had lost strength 
 both in the North and in the South. It was too conserva- 
 tive and staid for those stirring times. The Democratic 
 party was divided, hopelessly it proved to be, into two 
 factions, one led by Stephen A. Douglas, and the other by 
 such ultra Southern men as Davis, Toombs and Benjamin. 
 The Republican party, young, vigorous and hopeful, led 
 by Seward, Greeley and other great men, was making itself 
 felt in every Northern state. It was attracting recruits 
 from both the old parties, and especially from the Whig 
 party, from which it had already drawn many of its 
 greatest leaders. In fact, the gathering tide of Repub- 
 licanism was sweeping over the whole North and West. 
 
 Under these circumstances the last Whig National Con- 
 vention assembled in Baltimore, May 9, 1860, to nominate 
 candidates for president and vice-president. The conven- 
 tion was respectable in size and ability. All the Northern 
 states were represented, though not so numerously as in 
 later days, while several of the Southern states had only 
 small delegations. Tennessee had a large and distinguished 
 delegation. Such men as Balie Peyton, Ex-Governor Neill 
 S. Brown, Jordan Stokes, Judge John S. Brien, W. G. 
 Brownlow, Henry Cooper, afterward the successful com- 
 petitor of Andrew Johnson for the United States Senate, 
 Gustavus A. Henry, afterward a senator in the Confederate 
 Congress, John M. Fleming and many others were present. 
 They were there in the interest of their distinguished 
 fellow-citizen, John Bell for the nomination for the 
 presidency. 
 
 The convention seemed to be deeply impressed with the 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 123 
 
 solemnity and the peril of the crisis which threatened the 
 government. In the presence, therefor, of such alarming 
 dangers, ignoring all ordinary questions of mere policy, 
 and looking alone to the great problem of saving the 
 Union, the convention unanimously adopted a platform 
 embracing that idea only, in these words: "The Union, 
 the constitution, and the enforcement of the laws." This 
 was adopted in the midst of the wildest enthusiasm. Then 
 followed the nominations. Mr. Bell was nominated for 
 the presidency without much difficulty, and Edward Ever- 
 ett for the vice-presidency with even less difficulty. This 
 was followed by the usual speechmaking. As Mr. Bell 
 was from Tennessee, it was expected, and naturally too, 
 that her delegates should be heard from. Mr. Gustavus 
 A. Henry went forward to speak for the state. He was a 
 handsome, magnificent man physically, His voice was 
 musical and sonorous ; his manner that of a finished orator. 
 He was eloquent, fascinating, charming. For such an 
 occasion, no man in all the land was his superior. From 
 the beginning, he electrified the convention. Finally, in a 
 grand climax of dramatic oratory, he declared his willing- 
 ness to die for the Union. He said, with marvelous eff'ect, 
 that for this purpose he would ascend the scaffold with as 
 joyous a heart and as light a step as a bridegroom ascend- 
 ing to his bridal chamber. The convention became wild 
 with enthusiasm. And yet, eighteen months after that 
 time, Henry took his seat as a senator from Tennessee in 
 the Confederate Congress ! And in twelve months, John 
 Bell, who had just been nominated as the distinctively 
 Union candidate for the presidency, made a speech declar- 
 ing his adhesion to the Confederate cause ! 
 
 After Henry had concluded and silence was restored, 
 Mr. Hillard, of Boston, came forward to answer for Mr. 
 Everett and Massachusetts. His speech, while not so 
 florid as Henry's, was chaste, scholarly, and surpassingly 
 beautiful. Seldom has a more elegant and perfect im- 
 promptu address ever been made. It, too, aroused great 
 
124 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 enthusiasm. Thus the work of the convention was fin- 
 ished. 
 
 With the exception of Jno. J. Crittenden, of Kentucky, 
 Governor Hunt, James A. Brooks, and Henry J. Raymond, 
 from New York, Mr. Hilliard, of Massachusetts, A. H. H. 
 Stuart and Robert Ridgeway, from Virginia, Jesse Clem- 
 ents, from Alabama, Judge Sharkey, of Mississippi, and 
 Balie Peyton, Governor Brown, and Mr. Henry, from Ten- 
 nessee, and Mr. Doolittle, from "Wisconsin, but few of the 
 great leaders of the old Whig party were present. In the 
 North and West, most of them had already joined or were 
 preparing to join the Republican party. In the Southern 
 States, many of them were disheartened by recent defeats, 
 or hesitated as to their duty, or were preparing to change 
 party alliances. So, the Baltimore Convention, while 
 quite respectable in numbers and ability, was not of that 
 imposing character calculated to insj)ire confidence and 
 enthusiasm in the country. It is doubtful whether a 
 single well-informed delegate had a settled belief in the 
 success of the ticket just nominated. Of course, in the 
 then chaotic state of the public mind, no one could tell 
 what might happen. There was a hope that the clear and 
 distinct Union platform adopted by the convention might 
 so strike the patriotic feeling of the country, so appeal to 
 the sober judgments of good citizens, as to secure the elec- 
 tion of the candidates nominated. But this proved to be 
 a vain hope. Madness and passion, and not pure patriot- 
 ism, ruled the hour. Mr. Bell only carried four states, 
 namely, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, and Maryland. 
 
 Judging by subsequent events, it is doubtful whether 
 Mr. Bell would have been the right man for the times, if 
 he had been elected. His honesty, his great ability and 
 his statesmanship were unquestioned. But there was in 
 him a want of that decision, that force of character, that 
 moral courage, necessary for a leader and ruler in perilous 
 times. No prompt and decisive action could have been 
 expected of him in a great emergency. He, in all proba- 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 125 
 
 bilitj, would have hesitated at the critical moment. His 
 Southern home and associations would have fettered and 
 paralyzed him. He would not, however, have been false 
 to the country. Whether the Southern States would 
 have attempted to secede immediately if he had been 
 elected, can not be told ; but almost certainly they would 
 not. That the Southern leaders intended to do so at the 
 first favorable opportunity admits of no doubt whatever. 
 They simply awaited such a pretext as the election of a 
 sectional president, like Mr. Lincoln, when they could 
 plausibly appeal to the people of the South to arise in de- 
 fense of their rights and institutions. His election, there- 
 fore, produced a most profound impression throughout the 
 South. Although it was anticipated, and the course to be 
 pursued in that event had been predetermined and was 
 generally well understood by the original leaders in the 
 Southern movement, yet when brought face to face with 
 the great question of destroying the old government, even 
 the boldest of its advocates, we may believe, hesitated a 
 little before taking the first fatal step in that direction. 
 Those not in the plot, both North and South, were ap- 
 palled, and turned pale with fear at the dark and gloomy 
 prospect. And we can readily believe from his utterances, 
 that no man in all the land realized more sensibly than 
 Mr. Lincoln himself the awful gravity of the great crisis 
 and the extreme peril of the country. 
 
 That the Southern leaders intended to be satisfied with 
 nothing less than the indorsement of their extreme views 
 by the National Democratic Convention, which assembled 
 in Charleston on the 23d of April, 1860, was manifest from 
 the opening of that body. The friends of Mr. Douglas 
 were in the majority. By the adoption of a moderate 
 platform on the subject of slavery, there was a fair chance 
 of electing him as president. His friends were willing to 
 adopt a simple declaration in their platform that "the 
 Democratic party will abide by the decisions of the Su- 
 preme Court of the United States upon questions of con- 
 
126 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 stitutional law." The Dred Scott decision had already 
 been made by the court, and it conceded everything to the 
 South, though that decision was everywhere assailed in 
 the North. The anti-Douglas delegation demanded a dec- 
 laration of the "rights of citizens to settle in the territo- 
 ries with their slaves — a right not to be destroyed or im- 
 paired by congressional or territorial legislation." They 
 demanded a further declaration that it is the "duty of the 
 federal government, when necessary, to protect slavery in 
 the territories." These positions were in direct antag- 
 onism to Mr. Douglas's famous "squatter sovereignty" 
 doctrine, that the people residing in any of the territories 
 of the United States have the right, not merely when 
 forming a state constitution, but at any time, to establish 
 or prohibit slavery, as they might choose. The Southern 
 leaders would not yield. Mr, Douglas's friends could not 
 without destroying the last hope of carrying any Northern 
 State for him. So, the convention divided, a minority of 
 the members, the ultra wing, finally withdrawing. On 
 the 3d of May the convention adjourned over until the 
 18th of June, to reconvene in Baltimore. On reassem- 
 bling in that city, finding the differences in the party to be 
 irreconcilable, the delegates again divided. The Southern 
 wing, with the delegates of California and Oregon and a 
 few scattering votes from the North, including Benjamin 
 F. Butler and Caleb B. Gushing, nominated John C. Breck- 
 inridge for president, and Joseph Lane, of Oregon, for 
 vice-president. The delegates from the Northern States 
 nominated Stephen A. Douglas, and Herschel V. Johnson, 
 of Georgia. 
 
 It was manifest to all well-informed minds that, with 
 two Democratic candidates in the field, there could be but 
 little hope of the election of either. Douglas must draw 
 his entire strength from the North, and Breckinridge 
 nearly or quite all of his from the South. That which 
 could be obtained by either would not be sufficient for an 
 election. 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 127 
 
 Before the reassembling of the Democratic party in 
 Baltimore, the Republican party had met in convention in 
 Chicago. It drew together a vast throng of excited and 
 determined men. Among these were many distinguished 
 names, who had separated themselves from the two old 
 political parties. This was particularly so in reference to 
 the Whig party. The two most prominent candidates be- 
 fore the convention were William H. Seward and Abraham 
 Lincoln. Both were formerly honored leaders of the Whig 
 party. Indeed, Mr. Lincoln had only recently attached 
 himself to the Republican party. His fame rested almost 
 entirely on his celebrated debates with Mr. Douglas. In 
 these debates he had suddenly sprung to the front as a 
 great speaker, skillful and resourceful, a profound thinker 
 and a courageous man. 
 
 It was generally expected that Mr. Seward would re- 
 ceive the nomination. He had been a noted leader and al- 
 most the founder of his party. He was a man of acknowl- 
 edged ability and of ripe experience. But he had uttered 
 sentiments, such as that of an irrepressible conflict between 
 freedom and slavery, that were in advance of the times. 
 More recently in his great speech at Springfield, Illinois, 
 June 17, 1858, Mr. Lincoln had proclaimed doctrines just 
 as extreme, if not more so. He had said "that a house 
 divided against itself can not stand ;"^ "that the gov- 
 ernment can not endure permanently half slave, half 
 free. ... It will become all one thing, or all the 
 other." "He did not expect the Union to be dissolved," 
 he said, but he left his hearers to determine whether it 
 would be all free, or all slave. This speech struck an 
 electrical chord in the North and made him president. 
 
 The impossibility of slavery ever being introduced 
 into the Northern States was too plain to be doubted by 
 any one familiar with the sentiment of that section. There- 
 fore, the other alternative presented was inevitable ; that 
 
 1 Herndon's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. II, p. 396. 
 
128 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the country must become all free. Yet Mr. Lincoln was 
 never classed as an Abolitionist, and in fact was not one. 
 On the first ballot Mr. Seward received ITSi votes, Mr. 
 Lincoln 102, and 190 votes were scattered between Bates, 
 Chase, Cameron, Dayton, McLean and Collamer. On the 
 the second ballot Mr, Seward had 184i votes, and Mr. 
 Lincoln 181. On the third ballot Mr. Lincoln was 
 unanimously nominated. Thus was this singular man of 
 destiny placed at the head of a great party at the most 
 critical time in the history of the country. And thus was 
 made probable the fulfillment of the boastful prophecy of 
 Mary Todd, made years before, while Mr. Lincoln was an 
 obscure village lawyer, that she, as the president's wife, 
 would some day occupy the White House. And thus, Mr, 
 Lincoln was about to become the instrument in the hands 
 of Providence of the fulfillment of his own memorable 
 prophecy, that the "government can not endure per- 
 manently half free, half slave — it will become all one 
 thing, or all the other." 
 
 There were now four candidates in the field for the presi- 
 dency, Mr. Lincoln, Mr. Bell, Mr. Douglas and Mr. Breck- 
 enridge. Mr. Bell was the only one who was nominated 
 by a convention composed of delegates from all the states. 
 He was emphatically the only national candidate. All 
 the others were either exclusively sectional in their nomi- 
 nation, or in the support they received. Mr, Lincoln was 
 clearly a sectional candidate, though he received, remark- 
 able to say, several thousand votes at the polls in some of 
 the border slave states. Mr, Breckenridge represented a 
 sectional idea, and received but little support outside of his 
 section. And while Mr, Douglas stood on a national 
 platform, he was nominated by and received nearly all of 
 his support from one section alone. 
 
 The settlement of the slavery controversy in Kansas, 
 settled the question for all practical purposes as to all the ter- 
 ritories, unless there should be new acquisitions thereafter. 
 There was no more territory where slavery would have 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 129 
 
 gone, even if unopposed, because slave labor would not 
 have been profitable. Climate, a higher law than congres- 
 sional enactments, as Mr. Webster had pointed out in 1850, 
 in reference to New Mexico, in his famous 7th of March 
 speech, had interdicted it by eternal decrees in all the re- 
 maining territories of the United States. So, all the 
 quarrel over slavery in the territories had become a mere 
 political abstraction. It was so in 1860, and the leaders 
 of all parties knew it. 
 
 In Tennessee, three electoral tickets were put in the field ; 
 one for Bell, one for Mr. Breckenridge and one for Mr. 
 Douglas. The contest was, however, between Mr. Bell and 
 Mr. Breckenridge. Mr. Douglas had a few friends, who 
 supported him because they were alarmed at the menacing 
 attitude of the Breckenridge Democracy, and yet who, from 
 old partisan feelings, were unwilling to support Mr. Bell. 
 Therefore, they made a feeble effort for Mr. Douglas, and 
 threw away, as they knew they were doing, their votes 
 on him. The Bell electoral ticket was headed by the veteran 
 "Whig, Balie Peyton, who had made a national reputation as 
 early as 1837-'8 as the associate and friend of S. S. Pren- 
 tiss and Henry A. Wise in their daring assaults on the ad- 
 ministration of Mr. Van Buren. Peyton was a noble 
 chevalier of the olden times — brilliant, brave, honorable. 
 On the ticket for the state at large with him was Nathaniel 
 G. Taylor, who, on great occasions and when aroused, was 
 a very eloquent speaker. 
 
 The contest in Tennessee was heated and excited. The 
 Breckenridge Democrats everywhere charged that the in- 
 stitution of slavery would be endangered by the election of 
 Mr. Lincoln, and that it would be in but little less danger 
 by the election of Mr. Bell or Mr. Douglas. They assailed 
 Mr. Bell as an enemy of the South. They charged and 
 dwelt on the fact that the "Black Republican Party," as 
 they called it, was a purely sectional party, organized 
 solely on the idea of opposition to slavery. Strange in- 
 9 
 
130 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 consistency, when their own party was purely sectional in 
 its principles, and had received nearly all its support in the 
 nominating convention, and was then receiving before the 
 people its support from one section alone. In the cotton 
 states it was openly proclaimed that the election of Mr. 
 Lincoln would be a sufficient cause and should be the sig- 
 nal for withdrawing from the Union. In Tennessee, the 
 leaders were more guarded in their declarations on this 
 point. But the thin gauze which covered their real views 
 was too transparent to hide them. In the second district, 
 contrary to my wishes, I was chosen as the candidate for 
 elector on the Bell-Everett ticket. I had been a delegate 
 to the Baltimore Convention, and had done all I could to 
 secure the nomination of this ticket. I was a personal 
 friend of Mr. Bell, and bound to him by strong obliga- 
 tions. Therefore, while reluctant to give up for the time 
 being my business as a lawyer, I could not decline to 
 serve. Besides this, I had become seriously impressed, 
 beyond most men, with a sense of the danger to the Union, 
 arising from the designs of Southern leaders, and felt it to 
 be my duty to sound the alarm as far as I could in my 
 humble sphere. 
 
 The Breckenridge elector in the district was James D. 
 Thomas, who was also a lawyer. He had been a delegate 
 to the Baltimore Convention, which had nominated Mr. 
 Breckenridge. He came back in full sympathy and 
 thoroughly saturated with the views and feelings of the 
 Southern wing of the Democratic party. Mr. Thomas was 
 a college graduate and had been a teacher in an academy. 
 He had also been a successful lawyer. His voice was deep 
 and clear, and his manner rather animated, though never 
 too hurried. His intellect was clear, strong and penetrat- 
 ing. He was wary, shrewd and logical. Withal, he was 
 cunning and artful. He possessed talents, both as a poli- 
 tician and as a lawyer, that ought to have given him high 
 rank in life. He was a competitor of no mean powers. 
 To meet him required constant watchfulness and the fullest 
 
Political Canvass of 1860. 131 
 
 information. After an exciting canvass, a majority of the 
 people of Tennessee cast their votes for Mr. Bell. 
 
 The electors assembled in Nashville, December 5th, at the 
 time fixed by law, and organized the electoral college by 
 the selection of the venerable Balie Peyton as president. 
 The vote of the state was then duly cast for John Bell as 
 president and Edward Everett for vice-president, and im- 
 mediately forwarded to Washington. This was a time of 
 great gloom. No man could tell what was to happen. 
 All felt the near presence of danger and disaster. At a 
 conference held by the electors, it was proposed that they 
 should issue an address to the people of the state, warn- 
 ing them of the approaching danger, and urging them to 
 stand firm against all the designs of the enemies of the 
 Union. John F. House opposed the suggestion, and Hon. 
 Henry S. Foote, who happened to be present, favored it. 
 The suggestion met with little favor, so the matter was 
 dropped. 
 
 At this meeting, for the first time, I began to apprehend 
 the danger there was that the large slaveholding interests 
 of Middle and West Tennessee might exert a baneful influ- 
 ence on public sentiment, and on the minds of the Union 
 leaders in those sections. This came to pass as I feared, 
 and became most disastrous a few months later. It was 
 already evident that the election of Mr. Lincoln, and 
 probably still more so, the threatening action of South 
 Carolina, had made them wary and cautious as to any 
 immediate committals in reference to the future. This 
 was a surprise to me, for I had come to regard the dissolu- 
 tion of the Union as a calamity far greater than any other 
 which could possibly happen. I was therefore astonished 
 to find that others were unwilling to avow this high view 
 of devotion to the country. 
 
 The echoes of the great battle of 1860 had not died away 
 before it became evident that a still fiercer conflict was im- 
 pending. The lull which usually follows a presidential 
 election was soon rudely broken by the action of South 
 
132 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Carolina. The legislature of that state assembled early 
 in November to choose presidential electors, that right 
 never having been confided to the people. It at once pro- 
 vided for the election of delegates to a convention to be 
 assembled.on the 17th of December, to consider the ques- 
 tion of secession. Everybody knew about as well in 
 November as after the act was accomplished that South 
 Carolina would attempt to secede from the Union in De- 
 cember. Nearly all of her leading men were pledged to 
 do so. The public mind was in a state of deep suspense. 
 A restless uneasiness- prevailed among the people. No 
 one knew certainly what calamity was to follow. The Re- 
 publican party of the North had been so constantly and so 
 bitterly denounced by Democratic orators and by some 
 Whigs as Abolitionists and enemies of the country, that 
 many of the conservative men who had voted for Mr. Bell 
 were more or less alarmed. 
 
 In this state of public sentiment, while attending court 
 in Sevier county, in the third week of November, by re- 
 quest probably, I addressed a large assemblage of the 
 people of that county on the condition of the country. It 
 was well known that South Carolina would withdraw from 
 the Union in a few days. In my speech I reviewed the 
 questions affecting the South, and warned the people that 
 they might expect an attempt to destroy the government. 
 I denounced secession as being wholly causeless and un- 
 justifiable — as no remedy for any existing evil — and 
 urged them to stand firm in their loyalty to the govern- 
 ment. This was the first Union speech made in the state 
 after the election of Mr, Lincoln. On the conclusion of 
 my speech, a vote of thanks was given to me, and a com- 
 mittee appointed to request a copy for publication. This 
 was not given until the 1st of January, 1861, when it was 
 published in Brownlow's "Whig," in the form of a letter 
 to the committee appointed by the citizens' meeting. It 
 contained the substance only of my remarks, with some 
 new material added. Events were developing so rapidly 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 133 
 
 that much that was pertinent in November had lost its im- 
 portance in January. Something new startled the country 
 every day. I here give a few extracts from my letter : 
 
 "A month has worked a mighty change. What was 
 then pertinent might now be considered obsolete, so 
 rapidly are we shifting, changing and moving forward. 
 Many things then uttered as prophecies are to-day history. 
 Events as they pass appear as a dream or a phantom, yet 
 they are solemn realities. It is hard for the honest masses, 
 far removed from the scenes of active strife, and quietly 
 enjoying the fruits of peace and security in their rural 
 abodes, ... to believe that any respectable portion 
 of our people can desire to destroy the freest and best 
 government ever instituted by man. It is difficult for 
 them to realize that they are oppressed, insulted and en- 
 slaved, as they are told, and that this Union of ours is a 
 failure ! It is hard to convince them that demagogues 
 and disappointed or ambitious men can become so phren- 
 sied as to deliberately set to work to overthrow the gov- 
 ernment. Let me warn them to be undeceived. . . . 
 
 "South Carolina is already out of the Union. Some, if 
 not all, of the other cotton states will soon follow. They 
 are attempting likewise to drag Tennessee along with them. 
 Will the sovereign people permit it?" 
 
 In reference to Mr. Lincoln, I said : 
 
 "From Mr. Lincoln himself much harm need not be ap- 
 prehended. His opinions on the whole subject of slavery 
 are nearly identical with those entertained and often ex- 
 pressed by Mr. Clay to the day of his death. He expressly 
 denies the power, the right, or any intention to interfere 
 with it in the states. . . . Then why fret ourselves 
 with alarms, when it is evident Mr. Lincoln has neither 
 the power nor the inclination to interfere with slavery?" 
 
 After discussing and showing the utter fallacy and hol- 
 lowness of the pretended ground for secession, that slavery 
 was not protected, or was excluded from the territories of 
 the United States, I said : 
 
134 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "And this leads directly up to one of the real causes of 
 disunion. Its advocates know that there is no more good 
 slave territory belonging to the Union. They therefore de- 
 sire a further acquisition of territory, and the extension of 
 slavery into Mexico, and ultimately into Central America. 
 With these, and as a part of their scheme, they desire the 
 revival of the African slave trade. They know that these 
 things can never be accomplished in the present Union, 
 and hence those who desire them are for breaking up the 
 government. Mr. Rhett, in a late speech in Charleston, 
 openly avowed the determination of carrying the slave em- 
 pire of the South 'over Mexico, Central America, the isles 
 of the sea, and the far-off tropics.' Are we prepared to 
 break up the government for such a purpose? For one, I 
 answer, no, never ! 
 
 "A third real cause, with the leaders in South Carolina 
 particularly, is a deep and settled discontent with our form 
 of government. While professing to be democrats, they 
 are most undemocratic in all their opinions. The mass of 
 the people in that state have but little to do with the ad- 
 ministration of public affairs. The government is practi- 
 cally an oligarchy. Mr. Rhett, the oldest and most promi- 
 nent of the South Carolina disunionists, said in a late 
 speech that the new government must be a 'slaveholding 
 confederacy,' and that universal suffrage must not be tol- 
 erated ; in other words, that none but slaveholders must 
 have a voice in the government. If they did, he said, it 
 would result in a 'dire conflict between want and affluence, 
 population and capital.' . . ." 
 
 I quote one more extract from my letter : 
 
 "Disunion is a remedy for no existing evil. By it, our 
 slaves will be rendered less secure. The fugitive slave 
 law, and all our constitutional guaranties, will be lost. 
 The North and the South will become alien governments, 
 embittered against each other by many reproaches and the 
 memory of many real or supposed wrongs. Constant feuds, 
 conflicts, forays, and border wars will desolate and harass 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 135 
 
 Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri. In a few 
 years, these states, wasted and worn, will either abolish 
 slavery from a sense of its insecurity, or it will silently dis- 
 appear. When this happens, these states will most prob- 
 ably wheel into line with the North. Thus, in a short 
 time, Tennessee may become a border state, and then will 
 come the time of her trials. The only safety for slavery is in 
 the Union under the constitution.'''' 
 
 It could scarcely be expected that, at that early date, in 
 the conflict of opinion, a Southern slaveholder, as I was, 
 born and educated in the South, with many of the preju- 
 dices and partialities of the people of that section, should 
 have so far forgotten and risen above the prevailing opin- 
 ions of his time and section as to speak out the whole truth 
 as we were ready to do at a later period. I could not and 
 did not. Many of the best men in the North even did not, 
 much less the Union men of the South. Men everywhere, 
 even the wisest, saw only dimly, if at all, the vast conse- 
 quences of the great conflict just beginning. None were 
 sufficiently gifted with prescience as to foretell the end, 
 the final result. In the South the bravest Union men did 
 not dare to utter things which they said boldly only a few 
 months later. Public opinion, intrenched behind educa- 
 tion and old prejudices, so terrorized the minds of men 
 that they could not rise to the acceptance and utterance of 
 many things which became easy at a later day. In De- 
 cember, 1860, the question was whether there was a suffi- 
 cient cause for dissolving the Union. In February follow- 
 ing, the question was, shall Tennessee secede? In May, 
 it was, what shall I, as an individual, do? Shall I go 
 with my state into secession, or shall I remain true to the 
 old government? So, with each stage of the development 
 of the great revolution, new questions arose for the solu- 
 tion of each individual. And, as these new questions 
 arose, new ideas came to those who stood firm, and also 
 fresh courage to proclaim these new ideas. From the fore- 
 going, it is plain to see why so many, not only in Tennes- 
 
136 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 see, but in nearly all the Southern States, who were Union 
 men in December, 1860, were for the South in the spring 
 of 1861. 
 
 In deciding the question of adhesion to the old govern- 
 ment, or joining the Confederacy of the Southern States, 
 men had to take the questions as an entirety. If they 
 chose to stand by the North, they must take it with its 
 Personal Liberty Bills, its Abolitionists, its Free-soilers, 
 its free territories ; with the peculiar thoughts, prejudices, 
 ways and isms of its people, and with their deadly hatred 
 of slavery. If they preferred to go with the South, they 
 must take it with slavery as the cornerstone of the Con- 
 federacy, with the doctrine of the acquisition of new ter- 
 ritory in Cuba and Mexico, and probably ultimately in 
 Central America to make room for its expansion, with a 
 chance of the revival of the African slave trade. They 
 must take it with the doctrine of the right of secession 
 planted in the Constitution of the Confederacy, and ren- 
 dered sacred and fundamental by recent experience ; they 
 must take the doctrine of states rights and of free trade ; 
 they must accept a despotic public opinion on the subject 
 of the righteousness and the economic benefits of slavery, 
 which would permit no one to question it or discuss it ; 
 with the degradation of free white labor, and a marked 
 line of distinction drawn between the two classes, the 
 slaveholders and non-slaveholders. Each man had to de- 
 cide these questions for himself, and determine which gov- 
 ernment as a whole he preferred. Besides all these ques- 
 tions, men had to decide whether they were willing to 
 take the chances and hazards of a great civil war, with all 
 its dire consequences, in order to establish a Southern 
 Confederacy. They also had to take the chances, even the 
 probabilities, of the destruction of slavery in the great 
 conflict of arms, and give up the guaranties of the consti- 
 tution for its protection. With all these great problems 
 staring men in the face, and the absolute certainty as to 
 the theory and general policy of the proposed new govern- 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 137 
 
 ment, it seems almost incredible that the great majority of 
 the Southern people should have become so infatuated and 
 phrensied by passion as to rush recklessly into the execu- 
 tion of this scheme set on foot by hot-headed and ambi- 
 tious leaders. Nevertheless, such was the amazing and 
 fatal fact. It can only be accounted for on the ground 
 that the Southern people believed the North would let the 
 "wayward sisters depart in peace," or that its people 
 would not, or could not, fight. Surely, if they had fore- 
 seen, even partially, the tremendous consequences of their 
 acts, it would have "given them pause." 
 
 Poor South Carolina was the first and greatest sufferer, 
 caused by her own precipitate action in bringing on the 
 war. Her flourishing city, Charleston, her pride, the 
 queen of the Atlantic, was left in a state of semi-desola- 
 tion, her glory gone, her commerce destroyed, her mer- 
 chant princes ruined, her refined, brave, hospitable people 
 scattered abroad. The state was desolated by war, and 
 her beautiful capital laid in ruins by a consuming fire. 
 And nearly as bad as all these, now appears another 
 Nemesis, in the person of one Benjamin Tillman, who 
 makes war on the old aristocratic institutions of the state, 
 arouses the people to a state of madness, and is triumph- 
 antly elected governor and senator. He deliberately 
 plucked down and ground to dust the venerable monu- 
 ments erected by the grand old aristocracy. Even her 
 gallant and noble general. Wade Hampton, because he 
 refused to humiliate himself before the rising autocrat, is 
 summarily dismissed from an office apparently his for life. 
 The sores of the state were scraped, like Job's, as if with 
 a potsherd, and her whole system made to quiver in 
 agony. The bitterest enemy of South Carolina could not 
 have wished to see fall on her such multiplied woes. 
 
 The presidential election in 1860 took place on the 6th 
 of November. On the morning of the 7th it was known in 
 Charleston that Mr. Lincoln was elected. The news was 
 received by the citizens with demonstrations of joy, thus 
 
138 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 proving, what had been charged during the canvass, that 
 the secession leaders desired his election. As far back as 
 the spring of 1858, Henry A. Wise, then governor of 
 Virginia, had written to a friend that the cotton states in- 
 tended nominating an extremist for president, in 1860, on 
 an extreme platform, with the express purpose of having 
 him defeated.^ On the 5th of October, Wm. H. Gist, 
 governor of South Carolina, wrote letters to the governors 
 of the several cotton states, dispatched by a confidential 
 agent, inviting a correspondence with them as to the 
 proper action to be taken in the event of the election of 
 Mr. Lincoln, which he regarded as almost certain. He 
 expressed the opinion that his state would secede alone 
 if she had the assurance that she would soon be followed 
 by another or other states ; otherwise it was doubtful. On 
 the 5th of November, the legislature of that state was con- 
 vened by the governor, and in his message to that body, 
 in undisguised terms, he recommended secession, and the 
 raising and equipping of ten thousand militia. The legis- 
 lature proceeded to call a convention, to be convened early 
 in December, and at the same time placed in the hands of 
 the governor one hundred thousand dollars to be used in 
 arming and equipping the militia. 
 
 While these things were taking place in South Carolina, 
 
 * Extract from letter of Henry A. Wise to Wm. Sergeant. 
 " Richmond, Va., May 28, 1858. . . . The truth is that there is in the 
 South an organized, active and dangerous faction, embracing most of the 
 federal politicians, who are bent upon bringing about causes of dissolution 
 of the Union. They desire a united South, but not a united country. 
 Their hope of embodying a sectional antagonism is to secure a sectional 
 defeat. At heart, they do not wish the Democracy to be any longer 
 national, united or successful. In the name of Democracy they propose 
 to make a nomination for 1860, at Charleston, but an ultra nomination of 
 an extremist on the slavery issue alone, to unite the South on that one 
 idea, and on that to have it defeated by a line of sectionalism, which will 
 inevitably draw swords between fanatics on one side and fire eaters on the 
 other. Bear it in mind, then, that they desire to control a nomination for 
 no other purpose than to have it defeated by a line of sections. They de- 
 sire defeat for no other end than to make a pretext for the clamor of dis- 
 solution."— Nicolay & Hay's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. II, p. 302. 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 139 
 
 still more effective work for secession was being done in 
 Washington, under the very eyes and with the knowledge 
 of President Buchanan. In his cabinet were three of the 
 most active secessionists in the land, Howell Cobb, secre- 
 tary of the treasury, Jacob Thompson, secretary of the in- 
 terior, and John B. Floyd, secretary of war. These men 
 were in daily and nightly consultation with the leaders of 
 secession. Two of them, Cobb and Thompson, were open 
 and undisguised in their sympathy for that cause. They 
 so expressed themselves to the president, and in the cabinet 
 meetings. Floyd was as decided in that way as they, but 
 from some cause more reserved. They had an active ally 
 in William H. Trescott, assistant secretary of state. Thus 
 in the very precincts of the White House disloyalty was 
 fostered as much as in Columbia or Charleston. On the 
 8th of December a committee of South Carolina congress- 
 men called on the president to protest against his sending 
 any re-enforcements to the forts in Charleston harbor. 
 They told him that if he did do so, the people of Charles- 
 ton should be informed of the fact, for said they "we have 
 sources of information in Washington, so that no orders 
 for troops can be issued without our getting the infor- 
 mation." 
 
 Orders for the army in reference to secession movements 
 in Charleston, instead of being issued by or passing 
 through the hands of General Scott, the commander-in- 
 chief, as custom and courtesy demanded, were issued ver- 
 bally or in writing by Mr. Floyd himself, or by Samuel 
 Cooper, the adjutant-general, who was also a secessionist. 
 For months General Scott was ignored by Mr. Floyd, and 
 kept in profound ignorance of the orders issued in refer- 
 ence to the forts and public property in Charleston. 
 
 There were three forts in the harbor of Charleston, 
 Moultrie, Sumter and Castle Pinckney, all belonging to 
 the United States. The two former were in a state badly 
 needing repairs. Only one of them, Moultrie, had a gar- 
 rison in it, and that consisted of sixty men. The other 
 
140 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 two had only an unarmed ordinance sergeant in each. As 
 early as October, General Scott, in his patriotic zeal, 
 warned Mr. Buchanan of the danger to these forts from a 
 secession attack, and urged that they should be re-enforced 
 and put in a state of repair. No attention was paid to his 
 recommendations. Then followed a similar request from 
 Colonel Gardner, the commandant at Charleston. The 
 only result of this was his removal. Then Major Fitz- 
 John Porter, who was sent to inspect the forts, advised 
 that they should be repaired and re-enforced. Following 
 this, Captain John G. Foster, the engineer in charge of the 
 repairs, previously ordered by Congress, asked for forty 
 muskets with which to arm his workmen for the defense 
 of the work. In the meantime, on the removal of Colonel 
 Gardner from command, Major Robert Anderson was ap- 
 pointed to succeed him. 
 
 On the arrival of Major Anderson, he made an inspec- 
 tion of the forts, and at once made an elaborate report to 
 the war department. He pointed out the hopelessness of 
 holding these forts if vigorously attacked, as they were 
 liable to be at any time, by the troops of South Carolina, 
 then drilling in the streets of Charleston. He earnestly 
 urged that all three of the forts should be occupied, 
 strengthened and re-enforced. Fort Moultrie was alone 
 garrisoned at that time. He said: "Fort Sumter and 
 Castle Pinckney must be garrisoned immediately if the 
 government determines to keep command of this harbor, 
 
 I do then," said he, "most earnestly entreat 
 that a reinforcement be immediately sent to this garrison 
 (Moultrie) , and that at least two companies be sent at the 
 same time to Fort Sumter and Castle Pinckney." Again 
 and again he urged the necessity of these things on the at- 
 tention of the secretary of war. But all in vain. Neither 
 the recommendations of General Scott, nor those of Colonel 
 Gardner, nor of Major Porter, nor of Captain Foster, nor 
 the repeated entreaties of Major Anderson, were heeded by 
 the secretary of war, nor by the president, until it was too 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 141 
 
 late. The subject was frequently discussed in cabinet 
 meetings, but the president was so dominated by Cobb, 
 Thompson and Floyd, and the secession leaders — was so 
 paralyzed by fear of the South, so unnerved and vacillat- 
 ing — that he would do nothing. Seldom, if ever, was the 
 preservation of a great government in the custody of such 
 unsteady hands. Mr. Buchanan was not false to his coun- 
 try, but he did not have courage to do his duty. 
 
 Fort Sumter and Moultrie completely commanded the 
 harbor of Charleston, and Castle Pinckney the city itself. 
 If these forts had been properly garrisoned and equipped, 
 it was the opinion of competent military men, like General 
 Scott, that no Confederate force which could be brought 
 against them could take them. Their strength and the 
 difficulty of taking them will appear when it is remem- 
 bered that, with all the power of the government, the war 
 was well advanced towards a close before they were taken 
 by the government after their capture in 1861. 
 
 The Convention of South Carolina was to assemble on 
 the 17th of December. No one had any doubt that it 
 would pass an ordinance of secession. In anticipation of 
 that event. Governor Gist had sent, early in November, an 
 agent to "Washington, to negotiate with Secretary Floyd 
 for muskets for the state. The negotiation was successful, 
 and Floyd, in violation of the obligations of honor and 
 duty, sold to the State of South Carolina, through G. B. 
 Lamar, arms to be used in an attempt to overthrow the 
 authority of the government. Seldom has history recorded 
 such an act. 
 
 Things now moved rapidly. On the 20th day of Decem- 
 ber, the Convention of South Carolina, with great pomp 
 and ceremony, passed an Ordinance of Secession, declar- 
 ing the state sovereign and independent. The news was 
 received by the people of the city with great demonstra- 
 tions of joy. In the new condition of affairs, Francis M. 
 Pickens was elected governor. He immediately dispatched 
 three commissioners, Messrs. Barnwell, Adams, and Orr, 
 
142 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 to Washington, to settle the terms of an adjustment of all 
 questions of difference existing between the United States 
 and the Commonwealth of South Carolina, including a 
 settlement of the public debt and a division of public 
 property. The theory held by the people of South Caro- 
 lina was that this state was sovereign and. independent, 
 and had a right to withdraw whenever the compact of 
 union was broken or violated, and they insisted that that 
 condition existed at that time. The conduct of these com- 
 missioners must be viewed, in justice to them, from this 
 point of view. Mr. Buchanan received them politely, and 
 informed them that he could only receive them as private 
 gentlemen of the highest distinction, and that congress 
 would have to determine the questions they had come to 
 have settled. While these formal courtesies were taking 
 place between the president and these commissioners, 
 startling news for them reached Washington. Major An- 
 derson, early after dark on the 26th of December, quietly 
 abandoned Fort Moultrie, after having spiked its guns and 
 set fire to the gun carriages, and moved to and occupied 
 Fort Sumter, a more defensible and stronger place. The 
 city of Charleston was thrown into the highest excitement ; 
 the military companies were put under arms. Forces 
 were dispatched as soon as possible to seize Castle Pinck- 
 ney and Fort Moultrie. The arsenal, the custom-house, 
 and the post-office were seized. As each of these was held 
 alone by an unarmed ordinance sergeant, South Carolina 
 achieved an easy victory. 
 
 In Washington, the news of the occupation of Sumter 
 was received by the high commissioners of South Carolina 
 and by their Southern allies with the bitterest indignation. 
 Mr. Floyd stormed in his rage. The president was dazed and 
 bewildered. On Friday, the 28th, the commissioners and 
 the president held their first formal conference. The presi- 
 dent, while declaring that he had no authority to meet 
 them, expressed his willingness to become the medium of 
 communicating to congress any proposition they had to 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 143 
 
 make. The commissioners, instead of meeting him in the 
 same spirit he had manifested, proceeded in an angry tone to 
 reproach the honor of the government, and to ask an expla- 
 nation of Anderson's conduct in occupying Fort Sumter. 
 
 This was accompanied with the threat to suspend nego- 
 tiations. They demanded, in conclusion, "the withdrawal 
 of the troops, ' ' not only from Fort Sumter, but from the har- 
 bor of Charleston also, adding that "under present circum- 
 stances they are a standing menace which renders nego- 
 tiation impossible." Perhaps in the history of civilized 
 nations there was never manifested such proud confidence 
 on the one side and such timidity on the other. 
 
 The demands of these commissioners, that Anderson's 
 conduct should be disavowed, and all troops withdrawn 
 from the harbor of Charleston, were the subject of three 
 angry cabinet meetings.' Finally, Mr. Floyd having be- 
 come disgraced by a damaging allegation of complicity 
 with the loss of a million of dollars of Indian trust funds, 
 was forced to resign. 
 
 Mr. Jeremiah Black, now secretary of state, viewing the 
 situation from a higher plane than that of a mere politician 
 with Southern sympathies, suddenly became broad and 
 patriotic in mind and action. With determined will and 
 resolution, he and Mr. Holt and Mr. Stanton were able ta 
 exercise some restraining influence on the wavering mind 
 of the president. They succeeded in arresting his first 
 draft of an answer to the demands of the commissioners. 
 
 * At one of these cabinet meetings, before Floyd had resigned, Mr. Stan- 
 ton said, as he afterward related : " No administration has ever suffered 
 the loss of public confidence and support as this has done. Only the other 
 day, it was announced that a million of dollars had been stolen from Mr. 
 Thompson's department. The bonds were found to have been taken from 
 the vault where they should have been kept, and the notes of Mr. Floyd 
 were substituted for them. Now it is proposed to give up Sumter. All I 
 have to say is, that no administration, much less this one, can afford ta 
 lose a million of money and a fort the same week." Floyd remained si- 
 lent and did not reappear in that chamber again. — Nicolay & Hay, Vol. III> 
 p. 74. 
 
144 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 The answer finally given by the president was half apolo- 
 getic. He regretted that the commissioners deemed nego- 
 tiations impossible. But he declined with all possible po- 
 liteness to withdraw the troops from the harbor of Charles- 
 ton. This reply called forth an angry and bitter rejoinder 
 from the commissioners, in which they charged the presi- 
 dent with duplicity, double-dealing and vacillation. 
 
 Previous to the events just narrated, on the 17th of De- 
 cember, Captain Foster obtained, on a previous order 
 issued to the military storekeeper in Charleston, forty 
 muskets with which to arm his workmen for the defense 
 of the public property, and also for the use of the two or- 
 dinance sergeants who were in charge respectively of 
 Forts Sumter and Castle Pinckney. This trivial transac- 
 tion created the greatest excitement. An immediate as- 
 sault on the forts by a Charleston mob was threatened. 
 
 The matter was referred to Washington, and Mr. Floyd 
 at once telegraphed to Captain Foster: "If you have re- 
 moved any arms, return them instantly." Foster of 
 course obeyed the order. This was not cowardice on 
 Floyd's part. 
 
 While the secession movement was in hot blast, Jacob 
 Thompson, secretary of the interior in Mr. Buchanan's 
 cabinet, was appointed an agent by the Mississippi legis- 
 lature to proceed to Raleigh, North Carolina, to induce 
 that state to secede from the Union. He accordingly 
 went, was publicly received by the legislature, and used 
 all his influence to accomplish the object of his mis- 
 sion.^ After exhausting his influence in vain in Raleigh, 
 he returned to Washington and resumed his seat in 
 Buchanan ' s" cabinet. 
 
 Early in January, 1861, Mr. Floyd having reluctantly 
 resigned and Joseph Holt having succeeded him, it was 
 determined by the cabinet and General Scott to send re- 
 enforcements and supplies to Major Anderson. On Jan- 
 
 ^ Nicolay & Hay's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. Ill, p. 99 
 
Political Canvass in 1860. 145 
 
 uary the 5th, the "Star of the "West" sailed from New 
 York with two hundred well instructed recruits, and with 
 arms, ammunition and subsistence for three months. In 
 his position as a cabinet officer, Jacob Thompson had 
 learned the secret of the intention of the government to 
 provision and re-enforce Fort Sumter. On the 8th of Jan- 
 uary, he had telegraphed this fact to the authorities in 
 Charleston.^ On the morning of the 9th, the vessel en- 
 tered the harbor of Charleston, and, crossing the bar, 
 steamed cautiously toward Fort Sumter. Suddenly a 
 masked and unknown battery, on Morris' Island, opened 
 fire on it. Fort Moultrie, lately seized by the South Caro- 
 lina troops, was likely to open fire also at any moment, 
 as the course of the vessel lay in the direction of that fort. 
 A new danger now appeared. An armed revenue cutter, 
 recently seized by the troops of South Carolina, towed by 
 two boats, was seen approaching. Thus beset by dangers 
 the officers of the "Star of the "West" turned about, passed 
 out of the harbor, and sailed back to New York. Thus 
 Jacob Thompson, though a cabinet officer under Mr. 
 Buchanan, in his zeal for the Southern cause, furnished 
 the information which caused the first shot of the late 
 Civil "War to be fired upon the National flag. 
 
 The "Harriet Lane" was afterward sent by Mr. Lin- 
 coln with provisions alone for the relief of the brave gar- 
 rison shut up in the fort, but arriving during the bom- 
 bardment, and finding it impossible to land, it had to re- 
 turn without accomplishing its mission. 
 
 The annual message of Mr. Buchanan submitted to 
 congress in December, 1860, in reference to the attitude of 
 the Southern States, was a remarkable document. In it 
 occurs the doctrine that there is no power under the con- 
 stitution to "coerce a state" which is attempting to with- 
 draw, or has actually withdrawn from the Union, into sub- 
 mission to the national authority. This was a mere beg- 
 
 ^ Nicolay & Hay's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. Ill, p. 128. 
 10 
 
146 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ging of the question. No one asserted such a power in 
 the form in which he put it. He might, with as much 
 truth, have asserted that no state could be indicted for 
 treason or insurrection. The real question was, can the 
 individuals composing the entity, or body politic called a 
 state, be coerced into submission to the laws and rightful 
 authority of the United States when resisting them. Mr. 
 Buchanan did not dare to state the question in this form, 
 for his knowledge of the history of his own state, in the 
 case of the Whisky Insurrection in 1794, would have 
 overthrown his position. There, President Washington 
 called out a part of the militia of three states, put Gen- 
 eral Henry Lee at the head of the expedition, and quelled 
 the insurrection by the display of force. Laws are directed 
 against and are operative upon individuals, and not 
 against communities or aggregations of persons. Mr. 
 Buchanan, in his account of his own administration, 
 recognizes this distinction himself, when he says, "our 
 Civil War was undertaken and prosecuted in self-defense, 
 not to coerce a state, but to enforce the execution of the 
 laws within the states against individuals." . . . Mr. 
 Buchanan's opinion, expressed in his message, became the 
 shibboleth of noisy Secessionists throughout the Southern 
 States during the next few months, and no doubt added 
 some weight to the Revolutionary movement. 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 147 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE FIRST GREAT POLITICAL FIGHT. 
 
 Feeling of uncertainty and apprehension among the people in November 
 and December, 1860 — Friends of disunion demonstrative— Public meet- 
 ing in Knoxville, November 26th — Resolutions offered and discussed — 
 Adjourned over to December 8th — People of the country invited to 
 attend — A vast crowd present — Resolutions tending toward disunion 
 offered — Discussed by both sides for several hours — Persons taking 
 part named — Voted down three to one — Union resolutions offered and 
 adopted by a great majority — Far-reaching consequences of this action 
 — Meeting the turning-point in history of Unionism in East Tennessee 
 — Other Union meetings follow — Distinguished character of men who 
 participated in these meetings — Anomalous character of these meet- 
 ings. 
 
 The only apology I can offer for using the first person 
 and for referring to myself as I shall do in this chapter, 
 and perhaps in subsequent ones also, is the fact that I was 
 an active participant in the transactions about to be re- 
 lated, which form an important part of the history of the 
 movement in favor of secession in East Tennessee, the 
 omission of which would leave the narrative incomplete. 
 Some of these facts are known only to Mr. John M. Flem- 
 ing and myself, some only to myself, and some were never 
 known to any other persons. Mr. Fleming is now, and 
 has been for a long time, a hopeless invalid, and is there- 
 fore incapable of narrating this untold history. All other 
 persons who were once familiar with a part of these facts 
 are now dead. Some of these facts were so important in 
 their immediate results, and still more so in their remote 
 consequences, that to omit them would leave the history of 
 secession in East Tennessee incomplete and not altogether 
 satisfactory or truthful. 
 
 On my return from court at Sevierville, on Sunday, No- 
 vember 25, 1860, to which reference was made in the pre- 
 
148 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ceding chapter, I found the public mind in a feverish state 
 of excitement. Secession was rapidly hastening to a cul- 
 mination in South Carolina. Its friends were actively at 
 work in Knoxville, preparing the way for a similar act in 
 Tennessee. Everything seemed to run smoothly in that 
 direction. There were no influences at work to counteract 
 this movement. The Union sentiment of the country had 
 not yet been awakened. The wild rush of disloyalty 
 seemed to be sweeping everything before it. Not a voice 
 had been heard in the state, in reference to the condition 
 of national affairs, except mine the week before, in an out- 
 of-the-way town. Federal court, presided over by West 
 H. Humphreys, an open Secessionist — the same person who 
 was afterward impeached and convicted of disloyalty by 
 the United States Senate — was in session at Knoxville. 
 The jurors, summoned by a Southern-sympathizing mar- 
 shal, were nearly all open in their demonstrations of dis- 
 loyalty. Some of them appeared defiantly in court and in 
 the jury box, wearing secession badges and emblems, with- 
 out any rebuke from a judge presiding over a United States 
 court. The judge, the district attorney, the marshal, the 
 clerk, most of the jurors, and many of the witnesses and 
 parties litigant, were outspoken for disunion. It looked as 
 if all were lost. 
 
 A prominent and able "Whig leader, Mr. John Baxter, 
 had just written and published a communication in 
 "Brownlow's Whig," urging the assembling of a conven- 
 tion of delegates from the slave states for consultation and 
 action. Even the brave and secession-hating Brownlow 
 had been induced, by his great confidence in and friend- 
 ship for the writer, to indorse this scheme in an editorial 
 in his paper, possibly written by Mr. Baxter, in which he 
 said, in substance (no doubt hoping, and possibly believ- 
 ing, that such a conference would be able to unite on some 
 measure that would preserve this Union) , that the policy 
 suggested by that body might prove to be the best and 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 149 
 
 such as we could all follow, although denying the right of 
 secession.^ 
 
 About the middle of November, there appeared a call in 
 the Knoxville newspapers, for a public meeting to take 
 place on the night of the 26th of the month, to take into 
 consideration the general state of affairs in the country. 
 This meeting was called by the friends of secession, though 
 not so announced. It was intended to get the people to- 
 gether, under the plea of consultation in reference to the 
 public welfare, and then after the usual professions of love 
 for the Union, to introduce and pass resolutions, covertly 
 in the interest of secession. Apparently, the meeting was 
 to be a very fair and patriotic one. The movers in it ex- 
 pected to commit the people of Knoxville to the scheme of 
 secession before the full purpose and effect of the move- 
 ment should be understood. 
 
 The situation was extremely alarming. As soon as I 
 saw the notice of this proposed meeting, and the propo- 
 sition for a convention of Southern delegates, I at once 
 realized the danger there was in them. They seemed to 
 threaten, if unopposed, the most fatal consequences to the 
 Union cause. I at once, Sunday as it was, sent for Mr. 
 John M. Fleming, a cool, clear-headed young lawyer who 
 had just returned with me from Sevierville. I explained to 
 him my apprehensions, in which he fully concurred, and 
 we then held a long and anxious consultation. 
 
 On that Sunday afternoon was organized at my house 
 the plan of opposition to the movements of the secession- 
 ists, which was afterwards so successfully carried out in two 
 public meetings, and which resulted in such signal benefits 
 to the Union cause. We knew that the daring aggressive- 
 ness of the secession leaders could only be counteracted by 
 meeting them at the very inception of their schemes. The 
 spirit of secession was abroad. It was in the very air. It 
 
 * Brownlow's " Knoxville Whig," weekly, November 24, 1861. In the 
 same number, however, there are four or five editorials denouncing seces- 
 sion with all the force and bitterness of this Union-loving patriot. 
 
150 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 was as contagious as a fatal epidemic. We know also that 
 if opposition to the schemes contemplated for the meeting 
 on the night of the following day was to be made, it had 
 to be made by us. There were no other public men to do 
 it. Baxter and Brownlow were committed to another 
 policy ; Trigg was absent. Mr. Maynard, if at home (and 
 I think he was not) , was no leader for such an occasion. 
 Mr. W. H. Sneed, Mr. James W. Humes and Mr. "W. B. 
 Reese, had joined the Southern movement. Mr. John J, 
 Reese was neither a public speaker nor a leader. Samuel 
 R. Rodgers alone remained to help in the fight, and he was 
 at that time in no sense a public leader nor speaker. This 
 was the situation on the 25th of November, 1860. The 
 first point was to defeat the evident purpose and object of 
 the proposed public meeting. This, it was believed, could 
 be done best by attending and taking part in it, and voting 
 down, if possible, any secession propositions which might 
 be offered. This was the course agreed upon. The next 
 point was to try to change the attitude of Mr. Brownlow 
 in reference to the proposed conference of delegates from 
 the Southern States. We knew he was honest and that he 
 would abandon in a moment, and unreservedly, the hasty 
 indorsement of that scheme, if convinced that duty to his 
 country demanded it. The dominant sentiment of his 
 being was love of the Union and hatred of secession. We 
 also knew that he was proud-spirited, and would submit 
 to nothing like dictation. It was agreed that we should 
 call on him the next morning and discuss the matter with 
 him in the kindest spirit. Accordingly, at the appointed 
 hour, we went to his office. On the way we met Mr. 
 Samuel R. Rodgers, who, at our request, joined us. 
 
 We had a frank conference with Mr. Brownlow, pointing 
 out to him that if a conference of delegates from the 
 Southern States were held, it would inevitably fall under 
 the control of the most ultra men, not only from the Cotton 
 States, but likewise from the border states ; that the seces- 
 sionists were everywhere active, aggressive and domineer- 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 151 
 
 ing, while the Union men were timid and yielding ; that 
 such a convention would surely indorse secession, and thus 
 consolidate public sentiment in its favor ; that in that 
 event, the Union feeling in the South, by reason of the im- 
 posing character of such a meeting would be smothered, 
 silenced and destroyed, and that we, of the middle and 
 border slave states, having voluntarily gone into the con- 
 vention, would be bound in honor by its recommendations 
 and have to yield to the secession movement. 
 
 These and other arguments were used with the utmost 
 kindness and deference. But a mere suggestion was all 
 that was needed. Mr. Brownlow, with his keen instinct 
 of patriotism, and his clear, honest judgment, only needed 
 a hint as to his duty, and that he was ready to follow even 
 to death. He yielded a cordial assent to the reasons of- 
 fered, and never afterward wrote another word in behalf 
 of a Southern Convention. Indeed, when he unguard- 
 edly, through the influence of a trusted friend, was led 
 into that false position, it was under the belief that the 
 step recommended was the best one to save the Union. 
 No power on earth could have induced him knowingly to 
 raise a hand against the government. He was impulsive, 
 and sometimes, under the advice of trusted friends, hasty, 
 but he was essentially honest, and never persisted in an 
 error when his clear judgment was convinced that it was 
 such. His mind was always open to reason. 
 
 During that day (Monday) , every effort was made to 
 prepare for the public meeting. But the time was so short 
 that but few persons could be found who would attend it. 
 Union men had not yet seen the danger ahead of them. 
 They were to some extent indiflferent to the great peril 
 which threatened the country. But above this, they had 
 not yet broken the shackles of prejudice which bound in 
 its iron grasp the minds of all Southern people, and made 
 of them cowards, and to a large extent blinded them in ref- 
 erence to all questions affecting slavery. They were timid, 
 half paralyzed by the noisy secessionists on the streets, in 
 
152 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the hotels, and in the federal court. A wild stampede to- 
 ward secession was dangerously imminent. In fact, it 
 had already commenced. At no time after the election of 
 Mr. Lincoln until the close of the war did it require so 
 much courage to be for the Union as at this time. Timid 
 men were skulking ; nothing but a sense of patriotic duty 
 gave men the courage to brave the danger. 
 
 It was well known that this call for a public meeting 
 originated with the friends of disunion, and that the meet- 
 ing was designed to promote that cause. There had been 
 no test of public sentiment in the community since the 
 presidential election. The friends of disunion were noisy 
 and clamorous here, as elsewhere, and seemed to be sweep- 
 ing everything before them. Notwithstanding the adverse 
 appearance of things, we were determined to do all that 
 could be done to stay this mad current of disloyalty, and, 
 if possible, check it and turn it back. 
 
 When the meeting assembled, it was at once evident, as 
 it was feared would be the case, that the secession element 
 was decidedly in the ascendant. Federal court was still in 
 session, and the demonstratively disloyal jurors and other 
 attendants on the court were present, ready to shout, to 
 applaud and make a noise. The Union men did not know 
 their strength, and were held back by the fear of the slave 
 power. In fact, many men under the changed and chang- 
 ing aspect of public affairs had not yet made up their 
 minds where they would go. They were bewildered, and 
 groped uncertainly, hunting the light. 
 
 The crowd that attended the meeting was respectable in 
 point of numbers. One Joseph H. Walker, a secessionist 
 sympathizer, was made chairman. A committee was ap- 
 pointed to report resolutions, of which Mr. John Baxter 
 was either chairman or a member. This committee re- 
 ported a set of resolutions for the consideration of the 
 meeting. It is impossible to give these as reported, for no 
 record exists of them, so far as can be ascertained. But, 
 in the main, they were regarded by all the Union leaders, 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 153 
 
 except Mr. Baxter and Mr. John J. Reese, as tending to- 
 ward disloyalty. They recommended in particular the 
 convening of the legislature, and the appointment by it 
 of delegates to a conference or convention of all the South- 
 ern States. 
 
 To a casual listener, there does not seem to be much 
 harm in these resolutions. But we knew the men who 
 were pushing their adoption. We had seen these men ap- 
 plaud with wildest demonstrations the secession utterances 
 of Wm. L. Yancy in this city but a few weeks before. 
 We did not look at the mere words of the resolution, but 
 behind them — to their hidden meaning — to the ultimate 
 purpose. Behind them, simple as they seemed, some of 
 us saw the form of secession, as clear and distinct in out- 
 line as if painted on canvas or molded in bronze. A sword 
 is none the less a sword, though wreathed from hilt to 
 point in harmless flowers. We did not at that time fully 
 realize the fierce and ceaseless aggressiveness of the spirit 
 of secession, but we knew that it was easier to fight it in 
 its weakness than in its well-developed strength. We felt 
 that Hercules must be strangled in his infancy, before he 
 became strong enough to destroy us. 
 
 Mr. Baxter, as we have already seen, was at that time 
 in favor of a Southern conference or convention, and the 
 main resolution was to that efi'ect. Mr. Fleming, Mr. S. 
 R. Rodgers, and myself regarded this resolution as the en- 
 tering wedge to ultimate disunion. 
 
 In the meeting, there was much speaking on both sides 
 and considerable noise and excitement. The discussion 
 opened up the whole question of union or disunion. 
 Broadly and clearly in favor of secession were Mr. William 
 H. Sneed, Mr. John H. Crozier, and Mr. W. B. Reese, Jr. 
 Mr. John J. Reese was in favor of a Southern conference, 
 though at that time a warm Union man. The speakers on 
 the Union side were Mr. Fleming and myself. Mr. Baxter 
 advocated his own scheme. He did not fully agree with 
 either side, but was earnestly in favor of saving the Union. 
 
154 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 He differed from his Union friends simply as to the best 
 mode of doing this. 
 
 As the debate progressed, it became only too evident to 
 the friends of the Union that if the vote were taken that 
 evening the secessionists would achieve a decided triumph. 
 Then a game of tactics was commenced to defeat a direct 
 vote, and secure an adjournment until a future day. Mr. 
 Fleming, who was a skillful parliamentarian, by some art- 
 ful motions, the effect of which was not clearly understood 
 by the chairman, finally secured an adjournment until the 
 8th day of December, in the daytime. We had gained a 
 great deal, indeed everything, by securing this delay. 
 
 The next trial of strength and test of public sentiment 
 were to be made in the daytime. That gave us an oppor- 
 tunity to rally the people from the country, whom we knew 
 to be as yet untainted with disloyalty. During the even- 
 ing's debate, one of our speakers, believing that the seces- 
 sionists would pass their resolutions, had said that if they 
 did so the friends of the Union would appeal to the coun- 
 try. So, the next morning, this appeal was taken up by 
 our friends as a rallying cry. Messages were sent all over 
 the county, and to some extent to the neighboring counties, 
 that we had appealed to the people to aid us against the 
 schemes of the enemies of the Union. The effect was 
 electrical. The country people became aroused, even mad- 
 dened, at the news. On the day appointed for the final 
 meeting, early in the morning, they poured into town, 
 until the streets were full of excited countrymen. In one 
 case, a considerable procession of men on horseback, from 
 a distant part of the county, on the borders of Union, 
 headed by a venerable old man, Isaac Bayless, marched 
 down Gay street, with dark and ominous determination 
 depicted on their countenances. Men were here also from 
 adjoining counties. The news had gone to the country 
 that the secessionists of the town were plotting to over- 
 throw the government, and they were asked to come and 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 155 
 
 help to save it. Most gladly they responded to the sum- 
 mons. 
 
 At an early hour the meeting reconvened. The crowd 
 was so great that only a portion of it could get into the 
 court-house, where the meeting was to be held. Those 
 who could not enter hung around the doors and windows 
 and crowded the passage-ways, eager to catch a word or 
 get news of what was going on within. The most intense 
 interest and anxiety filled the minds and hearts of those 
 present. All seemed to be unconsciously impressed with 
 the conviction that they were in the presence, in the very 
 shadow, of some great event. This feeling gave a pro- 
 found earnestness to their minds. 
 
 At 11 o'clock the meeting was called to order by the 
 former chairman. Fortunately we have a tolerably full 
 account of this meeting, as reported and published in 
 *'Brownlow's Whig," of December 15, 1860. 
 
 The resolutions presented to the meeting were sub- 
 stantially the same which had been before it on the pre- 
 vious occasion. 
 
 Mr. Baxter, as chairman, reported for the consideration 
 of the meeting, in lieu of the former resolutions, the fol- 
 lowing which had been adopted by a citizen's meeting in 
 Nashville : 
 
 "Resolved, as the sense of this meeting, in view of the 
 dangerous crisis in our affairs, the governor of the state 
 be and he is hereby requested to call together the legisla- 
 ture forthwith, that they may provide for a state conven- 
 tion, to be elected by the people, the object of which shall 
 be to bring about a conference of Southern States, to con- 
 sider existing troubles, and, if possible, compose our sec- 
 tional strife." 
 
 After considerable skirmishing, Mr. "W. B. Reese moved 
 the adoption of this resolution, which being seconded, the 
 debate was opened regularly. Mr. Baxter had already de- 
 clared himself in favor of its adoption, and had made a 
 speech to that effect. The parties who now ranged them- 
 
156 East Tennessee and the Civil TFar, 
 
 selves on the different sides and made speeches during the 
 day were William H. Sneed, John H. Crozier, W. B. Reese, 
 W. W. Wallace and James W. Humes in favor of this 
 resolution. Mr. Baxter, as already stated, favored the 
 resolution, but was not a secessionist. So also John J. 
 Reese favored the resolution, but he was a decided Union 
 man. 
 
 On the other hand, those who took part in the debate, 
 in opposition to the resolution, were Mr. Samuel R. 
 Rodgers and myself : Mr. Fleming not appearing on the 
 stand until a later stage of the proceedings. 
 
 The word "secession" was not named as an end in the 
 speeches advocating the resolution. That was kept in the 
 background. "All we wanted," as was argued, "was to 
 secure our rights by united council and harmonious action. 
 Whatever was done should be done and approved by all. 
 There could be no harm in consulting together and secur- 
 ing unanimity of sentiment and harmony of action among 
 all the Southern people." 
 
 The speech of Mr. Rodgers was very brief, not exceed- 
 ing eight or ten minutes. It was so unique that the con- 
 densed account of it as reported is here reproduced : 
 
 "Colonel S. R. Rodgers was then called up and spoke 
 amid repeated applause in favor of the Union. He was 
 opposed to convening the legislature — opposed to a South- 
 ern Conference — opposed to passing any resolution in 
 this meeting — opposed to the meeting itself. He was for 
 staying where we are, in the Union, and in favor of 
 doing nothing, but 'holding plum still.' " 
 
 On the Union side the resolutions were opposed out and 
 out, as containing in them the seeds of disunion. It was 
 argued that the plan proposed, if carried out, would end 
 in committing us all irretrievably to that fatal doctrine, 
 and to an acquiescence in it with all its evil consequences. 
 Secession was denounced as the scheme of ambitious men, 
 without justification in any existing evil, and as a remedy 
 for no wrong, either real or imaginary. It was insisted 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 157 
 
 that if such a conference or convention, as the one pro- 
 posed, were held, it would be dominated by the spirit of 
 the extreme men in the South, and controlled by them ; 
 that it would declare for secession, and that the Union 
 men would be committed in its favor, and dragged into a 
 cause they disliked, and one which they believed to be 
 causeless and wicked. All persons present were urged to 
 resist all open or insidious approaches of secession, come 
 from what quarter they might, and in whatever pleasing 
 form or shape, and to stand by the government of their 
 fathers. 
 
 After the closing speech on the Union side, about three 
 p. M., the secession leaders continued for half an hour to 
 appeal to the people to sustain and vote for the resolution. 
 After a second speech on my part, the resolution offered 
 by the committee was put on its passage. The report 
 says: "It was responded to by vehement and prolonged 
 shouts of 'Aye' and 'No' alternately. Division was then 
 had, when about three-fourths of the meeting voted down 
 the resolution." 
 
 Mr. W. B. Reese, Jr., now indignantly said : "You have 
 said by your vote that you are afraid to trust yourselves. 
 You don't seem to understand the purpose of the vote you 
 have given." (Loud cries of "We do," "Not so," and 
 much disorder.) Mr. Reese attempted to proceed, but 
 could not be heard. This disorder was caused by the lan- 
 guage used by Mr. Reese. 
 
 Mr. Fleming then appeared on the stand, but yielded to 
 Mr. W. B. Reese, Jr., who again protested, amid great 
 confusion, against the action of the meeting. By permis- 
 sion of Mr. Fleming, Mr. Crozier took the stand. He 
 spoke at considerable length, deploring the action of the 
 meeting, and urging that ^vq should go with the cotton 
 states in this controversy. 
 
 Mr. Fleming then resumed the stand, and offered a pre- 
 amble and resolutions which had recently been adopted 
 by a meeting in Frankfort, Kentucky. The preamble and 
 
158 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 first two resolutions denounced secession as illegal, uncon- 
 stitutional and unjustifiable. Another resolution declared 
 for the preservation of the Union, and a devoted attach- 
 ment and loyalty to it. Another declared that Mr, Lincoln 
 had been legally and constitutionally elected president of 
 the United States, and that we ought, as good citizens, to 
 submit to his election and give him a fair trial as president. 
 
 The last resolution was as follows : 
 
 "Resolved, '6th. That Tennessee is now, as she has 
 always been, true, loyal and devoted to the union of these 
 states ; that she recognizes no constitutional right in any 
 state, or combination of states, to force her into an attitude 
 of hostility to the Union.'" 
 
 The reading of these resolutions called forth repeated 
 applause. Mr. James W. Humes and Mr. Wallace made 
 speeches in opposition to their adoption, the latter declar- 
 ing that "it looked like a party move," and that he 
 thought "the meeting a packed jury." One of the speak- 
 ers replied to him with some spirit and a little sharpness, 
 which was always regretted by him, as Mr. Wallace was 
 an honorable gentleman. 
 
 The report goes on: "The vote was taken upon Mr. 
 Fleming's resolutions, which resulted in their adoption 
 by an overwhelming majority — there being but few dis- 
 senting voices." 
 
 Mr. John J. Reese now mounted the stand, and pro- 
 posed three cheers for the Union, which were given amid 
 the wildest scenes of excitement and enthusiasm. The 
 pent-up feelings of the people, kept in check to this hour 
 by the solemnity of the occasion and the gravity of the 
 great question in issue, now burst forth in unrestrained 
 demonstrations of patriotic rejoicing. They were almost 
 wild and frenzied. Never did the walls of the old court- 
 house witness such a scene. 
 
 At this point, Mr. W. G. Brownlow, who had been pres- 
 ent all day taking notes for his paper, was called for by 
 the meeting. In response to this call, he made a five min- 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 159 
 
 utes' speech, such as he alone could make. He denounced 
 all who favored secession as traitors, who ought to be 
 hung. By this time the excitement of the Union men 
 knew no limit. They saw their way clearly once more, 
 and were strengthened and confirmed in their ancient 
 faith. 
 
 Long before the close of the meeting, the advocates of 
 secession had, one by one, been quietly leaving the house, 
 so that at the close there was not one left. The meeting, 
 therefore, adjourned, having lasted from 11 a. m. to about 
 4 p. M. 
 
 It will be observed that there had been two questions be- 
 fore the meeting : 1st. That raised by the resolution re- 
 ported by Mr. Baxter, recommending the convening of the 
 legislature, the call of a state convention, and a conference 
 of the slaveholding states. 2d. The resolutions presented 
 by Mr. Fleming, which, in brief, condemned secession as 
 a heresy, and declared our unalterable attachment and de- 
 termined adherence to the Union. The main fight was 
 over the first resolution. But it must not be overlooked, 
 that in the discussion of this, both sides looked beyond the 
 mere words and had secession in their minds. So it be- 
 came almost the sole topic of controversy. In the view of 
 those who opposed Mr. Baxter's resolution, its adoption 
 would have led straight along the highway of disunion. 
 The adoption of declarations of devotion and adhesion to 
 the Union, such as it contained, were mere vain and idle 
 words. The position taken by Mr. Baxter and Mr. John 
 J. Reese on the first question neutralized their influence 
 as to the great question lying behind it. In fact, when re- 
 duced to exactness, there was but one question before the 
 meeting, that of union or disunion. 
 
 This was by far the most important political meeting 
 ever held in the state. It was somewhat remarkable on 
 account of the number of persons taking part in it, who 
 had been previously conspicuous in public life or who 
 
160 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 afterward became so.^ But its highest importance arose 
 from its far-reaching consequences. It had no influence 
 whatever, as it turned out, in preventing the convening of 
 the legislature afterward, nor in checking the determina- 
 tion of the secessionists at Nashville to hurry the state out 
 of the Union. But, in determining and fixing the status 
 of East Tennessee, its influence was incalculable. It must 
 be borne in mind that these meetings, as far as I know, 
 were the first held in the state after South Carolina had in 
 many ways unmistakably manifested her purpose to secede 
 from the Union. Certainly this was true of the first meet- 
 ing. Four or five other states were as clearly preparing 
 to follow her example. There was, therefore, universal 
 alarm and uncertainty among the people. They were in a 
 fearful state of apprehension in reference to something 
 they did not understand. Lincoln and his followers had 
 been denounced everywhere in the South as Black Repub- 
 licans, Abolitionists, enemies of their country, worthy to 
 be hung. Few public speakers or newspapers, even 
 among the friends of Mr. Bell, dared to say a word in vin- 
 dication of Mr. Lincoln, or of his party, for fear of the 
 injurious effect it might have here at home. This great 
 meeting was held at the time of this uncertainty and con- 
 fusion in the public mind. 
 
 It must be kept in view, also, that Knox was the 
 largest county, and Knoxville the most important town in 
 East Tennessee. It was situated geographically in its very 
 center, and had always been the commercial emporium as 
 
 ^ It will be noticed that the names of neither Connally F. Trigg nor 
 that of the Hon. Horace Maynard appear in this meeting. Mr. Trigg was 
 absent at one of his courts. He had not yet taken any active part in the 
 politics of this state, having moved here in 1855 from Virginia. Mr. May- 
 nard was then in Washington, in attendance as a member of congress. A 
 week before the meeting, I went to him and urged him to stay and take 
 part in it. I pointed out the great importance of fixing in advance a sound 
 Union sentiment among our people while their minds were yet open to 
 conviction. I urged that no great harm could result from his absence from 
 congress for a few days, as no speaker was to be elected, etc. But he left 
 for Washington that night, greatly to my disappointment. 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 161 
 
 well as the political headquarters of this section. Here re- 
 sided an unusual number of able leaders of the old Whig 
 party, men not inferior in ability to those residing in Nash- 
 ville. Here, too, the leading newspapers of the section 
 were published, which were sent out into every county. 
 In a majority of the other counties there were no news- 
 papers published, and the people were therefore in the 
 habit of looking to Knoxville not only for news, but also for 
 the policy to be adopted in political emergencies. It can 
 easily be imagined therefore with what eagerness and in- 
 tense interest, in this hour of doubt and gloom, the 
 proceedings of a very large meeting of both parties, 
 lasting nearly all day, in which the leading men of the 
 county participated, would be scanned by the people at a 
 distance. 
 
 The news of this great uprising of the people, of the pro- 
 nounced and almost unanimous determination unmistak- 
 ably manifested of standing by the Union, the unequivocal 
 condemnation of secession, and the announced purpose of 
 giving to Mr. Lincoln, as president, a fair trial — was 
 speedily carried to all the adjoining counties. The news- 
 papers proclaimed it through their columns. Brownlow 
 thundered forth this victory in triumphant tones. In a 
 few days the fact of the great Union meeting was known 
 to every intelligent man in East Tennessee. "Where all 
 had been gloom and uncertainty before, there followed 
 hope, confidence and determination. The meeting, there- 
 fore, became the turning point in the history of Unionism 
 and nationality in all East Tennessee. The development and 
 growth of secession feeling and manifestation were at once 
 arrested. From this hour secession became cautious and 
 timid ; loyalty became bold, outspoken and defiant. Dis- 
 loyalty never recovered from the staggering blow it this 
 day received. If it had succeeded, if it had triumphed in 
 this meeting, the Union cause could never have withstood 
 the tide of secession which in the next few months flowed 
 11 
 
162 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 in on our people like a flood. The people — a large part of 
 them at least — would almost certainly have given way to 
 the spirit of alarm and terrorism which swept into the 
 stream of secession the people of the other divisions of the 
 state, who blindly followed panic stricken and nerveless 
 leaders. 
 
 The transcendant influence of this meeting became mani- 
 fest soon after it was held. Encouraged and emboldened 
 by the loyal stand taken by Knox county, the diff'erent 
 counties in East Tennessee soon began to hold Union meet- 
 ings. In the course of the next few weeks nearly every 
 county in East Tennessee declared through its citizens in 
 no uncertain words in favor of the Union. The moral 
 force and power of these public declarations were not 
 weakened in their eff"ect by any sickly twaddle about 
 the "neutrality" of the state in the event of a conflict 
 of arms. That dogma, except to a limited extent, never 
 found a secure foothold among our people. Nor was the 
 adherence of the people to the government a conditional 
 and qualified one, depending upon getting certain rights 
 alleged to be withheld from them. They went far beyond 
 this. They lifted themselves up to the broad consideration 
 of the single, the momentous question of the preservation 
 of the government on the one side, or of its destruction on 
 the other. 
 
 Another important efl'ect of this meeting was, that it 
 encouraged and emboldened those to whom the people 
 were accustomed to look for advice and leadership. Had 
 the people given way at this dark crisis, the leaders one by 
 one would have done the same thing. Discouraged in an 
 attempt to stem the current, already running strongly in 
 favor of disunion, now accelerated and swollen by this new 
 impulse, the leaders would have yielded to it, or sullenly 
 and silently given up in despair, and retreated to their 
 offices or places of business. 
 
 On the other side, had the leaders, those in whom the 
 people placed confidence, by reason of their fidelity and 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 163 
 
 superior means of information, faltered and given way at 
 the first approach of danger, as they did in Middle Ten- 
 nessee at a later day, the mass of the people, though in 
 heart devoted to the Union, fearing some unknown, vague 
 evil to be impending, would have wavered likewise and 
 finally given way. This was more or less true of the 
 common people of every seceding state, and especially so 
 in Georgia and Virginia, In each of these states a large 
 majority of the people remained steadfast to the Union 
 until they were deserted and forsaken by their trusted 
 leaders. 
 
 Nor must the remote consequences flowing from this 
 meeting be overlooked. The unyielding loyalty of East 
 Tennessee, throughout the long civil war that followed, 
 was unparalleled in the United States. The fact of the 
 existence of a large territory almost in the heart of the 
 Southern States, containing a population of over three 
 hundred thousand souls, more than two-thirds of which 
 were fiercely devoted to the Union, must have exerted a 
 great moral influence on true men everywhere. It must 
 have given some comfort and support to the president in 
 his darkest days of gloom and anxiety. It gave hope and 
 courage to Andrew Johnson, Thos. A. R. Nelson, Horace 
 Maynard and Reese B. Brabson, during the winter of 
 1860-61, in their congressional labors. And who shall 
 say how much this meeting of the 8th of December helped 
 to give inspiration, form and point to the speech of Mr, 
 Johnson, delivered in the senate on the 18th and 19th of 
 that month, in which he for the first time declared for the 
 Union. 
 
 A strange spectacle was witnessed that day — that of the 
 opposing leaders coming together, in a good spirit, in the 
 presence of the people, and dispassionately discussing for 
 most of one entire day, and then quietly voting on the most 
 momentous question that ever engaged the minds of free- 
 men — the question of dissolving the bonds of the Union. 
 No such spectacle was anywhere else witnessed in the 
 
164 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 South. Perhaps no such thing was ever seen in the history 
 of the world. It was in part the supreme importance of 
 the question at issue, and the august solemnity of the great 
 occasion, as well as the calm and dispassionate discussion 
 by the leaders of both sides, that gave to the decision 
 rendered that day its immediate, its wide-spread and far- 
 reaching influence. It forever fixed the minds of the 
 people of East Tennessee in a loyalty to the government 
 so unalterable that nothing could ever shake or change 
 it. Only one or two angry words were spoken that day. 
 The occasion was too solemn in its awful consequences for 
 hot words. 
 
 There was doubtless much suppressed feeling, but the 
 open manifestation of bitterness was avoided by all the 
 speakers. Both sides were somewhat timid. Each was 
 cautiously feeling the pulse of the people. The bold atti- 
 tude afterwards assumed by these speakers was not in the 
 least manifest. Those on the Union side were still to 
 some extent held in thraldom by the fear of pro-slavery 
 public opinion. None but those who once resided in the 
 South can realize the crushing force of this feeling. The 
 secession leaders were cautious because they were not as- 
 sured of the sympathy of the people. Public sentiment in 
 East Tennessee, in reference to secession, had not yet crys- 
 tallized into any very definite form. The people were at 
 heart unquestionably attached to the Union, but they had 
 recently heard so much about the evil designs of the Abo- 
 litionists and the "Black Republicans," that they became 
 alarmed. They wanted information as to their duty. 
 Those present that day, so demonstrative toward the close 
 of the meeting, were at first quiet, anxious listeners. Mr. 
 Brownlow was the only speaker who used bitter terms, and 
 his were general in their application. 
 
 The rather remarkable character of the men who were 
 the leaders in the proceedings of this great day is worthy 
 of notice. Mr. John H. Crozier was a lawyer, a fluent 
 speaker, a man of learning, of large and varied intelli- 
 
The First Great Political Fight. 165 
 
 gence, and of fine standing. He had been twice a promi- 
 nent Whig member of congress. William H. Sneed was a 
 lawyer of the very highest rank, of great personal worth, 
 and of superior talents. He had once been a worthy Whig 
 member of congress, Mr. W. W. Wallace was a man of 
 high character and intelligence and of respectable powers. 
 He had been twice a candidate of the Democratic party for 
 congress. John Baxter was a man of notable force, and 
 perhaps the ablest lawyer in the state. He was afterwards 
 appointed by Mr. Hayes United States circuit court judge, 
 and served as such until his death. William G. Brownlow 
 was an editor of national reputation and a man of remark- 
 able ability. He was afterwards twice elected governor of 
 Tennessee, and served one term in the United State senate. 
 Samuel R. Rodgers was a good lawyer and a man of fair 
 capacity. He became speaker of the senate of Tennessee in 
 1865, and this was followed by his appointment as chan- 
 cellor of the second chancery division of the state. John 
 M. Fleming had been a member of the state legislature two 
 or three terms. He served one term as state superin- 
 tendent of public instruction. He was an astute and able 
 lawyer. But his highest distinction was won as one of the 
 brightest and most accomplished editors in the state. In 
 this field he was conspicuous, having few superiors any- 
 where, 
 
 John J. Reese was an educated gentleman, a son of Wm. 
 B. Reese, the late learned jurist of the supreme court of 
 the state. He became a lieutenant-colonel in the Confed- 
 erate army. William B. Reese, Jr., his brother, was a 
 lawyer of a very active and discriminating mind. After 
 the war, he became a learned professor in the law depart- 
 ment of Vanderbilt University. James W. Humes was a 
 man of noted capability. He became a colonel in the Con- 
 federate army. After the war, he made great reputation 
 in the State of Virginia by the brilliancy of his political 
 speeches. He was on the point of being nominated (and 
 no doubt elected) governor of that commonwealth when he 
 
166 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 died, while yet a young man. All of these men, except 
 Mr. Wallace, had been Whigs in politics. 
 
 All who took part in the proceedings of that great day of 
 the triumph of loyalty in East Tennessee, except Mr. Flem- 
 ing and the author, are now dead. 
 
 In conclusion, I do not hesitate to express the decided 
 opinion that, if the meeting of that day had declared in 
 favor of disunion, East Tennessee would have gone with 
 the South. Many persons would not have done so, but the 
 majority would. That meeting fixed unchangeably its po- 
 litical character. An overwhelming majority of its people 
 have never swerved in their undying devotion to the Na- 
 tional Union. During the war, they were a political 
 anomaly in the South. Their record is unlike that of any 
 other people in the United States, not only that they were 
 loyal when the life of the nation was imperiled, but they 
 maintained their fidelity to the Union under circumstances 
 that were exceptionally trying, and were able to render 
 services that were made doubly valuable by their geo- 
 graphical position and the marked ability of the leaders. 
 
Campaign of February, 1861. 167 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 CAMPAIGN OF FEBRUARY 1861. 
 
 Governor Harris calls an extra session of the legislature— Message to the 
 legislature — Question of convention or no convention submitted to the 
 people at the ballot box — East Tennessee prepares for the conflict — 
 Nominates the ablest men as candidates for the convention on the 
 Union ticket — Candidates in Knox, Sevier and Roane counties — The 
 canvass described — Boldness of candidates — People of Sevier county — 
 Result in Knox county — In Sevier— In Roane — In East Tennessee — 
 In the state — Convention defeated — Union majority in the election of 
 candidates — On the call of a convention. 
 
 In December, 1860, Isham G, Harris, governor of Ten- 
 nessee, issued his proclamation convening the general 
 assembly in Nashville, in extraordinary session, on the 
 7th day of January next following. Governor Harris had 
 been a Breckenridge Democrat, holding extreme Southern 
 views. He was a man of remarkable energy and deter- 
 mination ; ambitious, able and daring. In him the South- 
 ern leaders had an ally as bold as Yancy or Toombs, less 
 brilliant, but with more prudence and discretion. When 
 the legislature assembled he laid before it his message, 
 explaining his reasons for calling it together in extra 
 session. The message was a long and disingenuous ar- 
 raignment of the people of the Northern States for their 
 ''actual and threatened aggressions upon the well-defined 
 rights" of the Southern States. A long list of grievances 
 which the South had endured was set forth in burning 
 language. The first complaint was that the Abolitionists 
 had gained control of the House of Representatives, and 
 had elected one of its leaders to the presidency. Now, 
 all intelligent men knew that this was a mistake. Mr. 
 Lincoln never had belonged to the Abolition party. Over 
 and over again he had declared that there was no power 
 
168 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 in the constitution to interfere with slavery in the states 
 where it already existed, and he was unalterably opposed 
 to any such interference. Indeed, he had only recently 
 joined the Republican or Free-soil party. The utmost 
 extent to which he had ever gone was in declaring that 
 congress had the power to exclude slavery from the ter- 
 ritories, and to abolish it in such places as belonged ex- 
 clusively to the government. In all his speeches and 
 letters he had acknowledged the constitutional obligation 
 on the states to return fugitive slaves to their owners. 
 Nor was it correct that it was the Abolition party ex- 
 clusively which had triumphed, as a party, in the late 
 presidential election, by the election of Mr. Lincoln and a 
 majority of the members of the House of Representatives. 
 It was the "Free-soil," or as they termed themselves "the 
 Republican Party," which had thus triumphed. It is 
 true that the Abolition party voted with the Republican 
 party in that election, but this party was then, as it 
 always had been, insignificantly small in all the Northern 
 States. There were but few of this party in either House 
 of Congress at that time, and these were utterly powerless 
 by themselves to enact any hostile legislation. Mr. Lin- 
 coln was elected by a large majority of the popular vote of 
 the North. 
 
 Another complaint of Governor Harris against the North 
 was in these words : 
 
 "It demanded, and from our love of peace and devotion 
 to the Union, unfortunately extorted in 1819-20, a con- 
 cession which excluded the South from about one-half of 
 the territory acquired from France." 
 
 This refers to the "Missouri Compromise." It may 
 sometimes do for mere politicians on the stump to talk 
 loosely about political questions, but a grave state paper 
 ought to be exact in all its statements. As to the Missouri 
 Compromise line, which excluded slavery north of the par- 
 allel of 36 degrees, 30 minutes, the South accepted, if it 
 did not demand that line in congress, and it was estab- 
 
Campaign of February, 1861. 169 
 
 lished largely by the votes of its members. It had already 
 gotten Louisiana and Arkansas as slave states out of the 
 Louisiana purchase, and now, by this compromise it se- 
 cured Missouri also. These three states included, after 
 the sale of Texas to Spain, all the Louisiana purchase that 
 was supposed to be suitable for slavery. At that time the 
 South regarded the compromise line as a great triumph for 
 slavery. 
 
 The next complaint contained in the message was in 
 these words : 
 
 "It" (the Abolition party) "has through the instru- 
 mentality of emigrant aid societies, under state patronage, 
 flooded the territories with its minions, armed with Sharp's 
 rifles and bowie knives, seeking thus to accomplish by in- 
 timidation, violence and murder, what it could not do by 
 constitutional legislation." 
 
 The charge that the emigrant aid societies acted "under 
 state patronage" is believed to be a mistake. They orig- 
 inated in the feeling of indignation aroused by the efforts 
 of the slaveholding people of Missouri and other Southern 
 states to force slavery on the people of Kansas against 
 what was alleged to be the will of a majority of the peo- 
 ple of that territory. It was the emphatic protest of 
 the North against the efi'orts of pro-slavery men in the 
 border counties of Missouri, styled in that day "border 
 rufiians," to control all elections in the Territory of Kan- 
 sas by unfair methods. It was overwhelmingly established 
 by proofs before the Congressional Investigation Com- 
 mittee that in the March election of 1855, for members of 
 a territorial legislature, these "border ruffians" cast 
 4,908 illegal votes. During this long and protracted strug- 
 gle for the control of Kansas, both parties were finally 
 guilty of violence, outrages and bloodshed. It is unde- 
 niable that many and terrible outrages were committed in 
 Kansas by the Free-soil men of the North, as well as by 
 Southern men. 
 
 Governor Harris enumerated twenty-three grounds of 
 
170 East Tennessee and the Civil War, 
 
 complaint against the people of the Northern States. He 
 pointed out five amendments to the Constitution of the 
 United States which he thought, if adopted, would satisfy 
 the South, not one of which had the slightest chance of 
 ever being ratified by the North. In the course of his mes- 
 sage, he said: "Whatever line of policy may be adopted 
 by the people of Tennessee with regard to the present fed- 
 eral relations of the state, I am sure that the swords of 
 her brave and gallant sons will never be drawn for the 
 purpose of coercing, subjugating or holding as a conquered 
 province any one of her sister states, whose people may de- 
 clare their independence of the Federal Government, for the 
 purpose of being relieved from a 'long train of abuses and 
 usurpations.' " 
 
 East Tennessee at once took up the challenge which 
 Governor Harris had so boldly given to the friends 
 of the Union, and girded itself for the coming con- 
 flict. The Union men knew that it would be a desperate 
 struggle. They realized that his message was a hot blast 
 intended to blow the smothered fires of secession into a 
 burning flame and a mighty conflagration. So they at 
 once prepared to meet it, w^hatever might be their fate. 
 Promptly the legislature, under the influences of the hour, 
 and breathing the hot atmosphere of Nashville and Mid- 
 dle Tennessee, passed an act, appointing the 9th day of 
 February for an election of delegates to a convention to 
 be held February 25th, "to consider the then existing re- 
 lations between the Government of the United States and 
 the government and the people of the State of Tennessee, 
 and to adopt such measures for vindicating the- sovereignty 
 of the state and the protection of its institutions as shall 
 appear to them to be demanded." The act provided that 
 the people, while voting for delegates to the convention, 
 should also vote on the question of "Convention" or "No 
 Convention." It also provided that no ordinance or reso- 
 lution of secession which might be adopted should "be of 
 any binding force or effect until it is submitted to and rati- 
 
Campaign of February, 1861. 171 
 
 fied and adopted by a majority of the qualified voters in 
 the state." 
 
 Not being in the least daunted or intimidated by the in- 
 flammatory appeal of the governor, the loyal people of East 
 Tennessee at once organized for the approaching contest. 
 The ablest and strongest men were selected in every 
 county as candidates for the convention. Nathaniel G. 
 Taylor was nominated in Carter county, James W. Dead- 
 rick in Washington, R. A. Crawford in Greene, John 
 Netherland and W. C. Kyle in Hawkins, R. M. Barton in 
 Jefferson, John F. Henry in Blount, John Baxter, Con- 
 nally F. Trigg and myself in Knox, and a like class of men 
 in the other counties of East Tennessee. 
 
 During these exciting days, Mr, Brownlow, through his 
 *'Whig," was writing in favor of the Union in his bravest 
 words. Thus, in his paper of the 26th of January, he 
 said, among other things : 
 
 "Now let our Union people bring out able and true men, 
 irrespective of old party associations. We have no 
 parties but Union men and Disunionists. Let the good 
 people of East Tennessee see to it that not a single Dis- 
 unionist shall go to this convention. There is no dodging 
 the issue. Hold them to it and require every candidate to 
 speak out. We must face the real issue. . . ." 
 
 On the 26th of January, the people of Knox county as- 
 sembled in Knoxville for the purpose of nominating candi- 
 dates for the convention. I will quote from the "Whig" 
 an account of the meeting : 
 
 "The meeting of Saturday last was an unusually large 
 meeting of the kind. The wind and snow utterly failed to 
 Intimidate the Union men of the county, or to dampen 
 their ardor in the glorious cause of our country. We have 
 never witnessed greater enthusiasm on any similar occasion 
 in Tennessee. The meeting was a complete success, one 
 spirit, one mind, one sentiment pervading the glorious 
 Union crowd. 
 
 "It will be seen from the proceedings that John Baxter, 
 
172 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Oliver P. Temple and Connally F. Trigg were nominated 
 as candidates for the state convention. After the nomina- 
 tions, which were made with great unanimity, and amidst 
 deafening applause, the candidates addressed the crowd, 
 accepting the positions assigned them, avowing their senti- 
 ments and their determination to let their right arms fall 
 from their sockets before they would sign an ordinance of 
 secession. The enthusiasm with which these speeches^ 
 were received was never excelled in any meeting we have 
 ever held here." 
 
 Again he said : 
 
 "The enthusiasm with which the nominations of John 
 Baxter, 0. P. Temple and C. F. Trigg was received on 
 Saturday — the unanimity and good feeling with which 
 these nominations were agreed upon — and the loud, hearty 
 and prolonged cheers with which their speeches, avowing 
 their principles and their acceptance of the nominations, 
 were received, clearly indicated the heavy vote and the 
 overpowering majorities they are to receive on the 9th of 
 February. Knox, Roane and Sevier may well be proud of 
 such men in the approaching convention. . . . They 
 are able and experienced men, good debaters, bold and 
 firm, and withal, they are as sound Union men as ever 
 took seats in a convention. . . ." 
 
 Baxter was nominated for Knox county. His competitor 
 was William H. Sneed, of whom I have already spoken in 
 complimentary terms. Trigg was nominated for Knox 
 and Roane counties, and his competitor was Wilburn W. 
 Walker, a wholesale merchant of Knoxville and a worthy 
 gentleman. I was nominated for Knox and Sevier coun- 
 ties, and my competitor was Dr. James Paxton, an old 
 citizen of the highest worth and standing. Of Baxter I 
 have already spoken, and I shall have occasion to speak of 
 him again hereafter. Trigg was a lawyer, and just the kind 
 of a man for those stirring times. He was bold, daring, im- 
 passioned, possessing a clear and vigorous intellect, with 
 intense convictions of duty. 
 
Campaign of February, 1861. 173 
 
 The several candidates at once entered the canvass. 
 The first appointment was a joint one, at French's meet- 
 ing house in Knox county. Brownlow, who was present, 
 spoke as follows of that meeting in his paper : 
 
 ' ' Temple led off with a speech of an hour and a half ; 
 Trigg followed in a speech of an hour and thirteen min- 
 utes, and Baxter followed in a speech of one hour. Suf- 
 fice it to say that these gentlemen sustained their reputa- 
 tions as public speakers, and upheld the Union cause to 
 the entire satisfaction of their hearers. . . . We have 
 never witnessed such feeling, or such a determined spirit 
 to resist secession, let it come in whatever shape it may." 
 
 The candidates now separated, Trigg going to fill ap- 
 pointments in Roane county, and Baxter and I filling ap- 
 pointments in Knox for three days. Then, leaving Bax- 
 ter at work in Knox, I went to Sevier to fill my appoint- 
 ments there. I first spoke to a large crowd in Sevierville. 
 The next day I went to Fair Garden, in the eastern end 
 of the county, not far from the lines of Cocke and Jefifer- 
 son. Here I was honored by the presence of an immense 
 crowd, numbering from one thousand to twelve hundred 
 persons, gathered from a rather sparsely-settled country, 
 but from all the surrounding region, far and near, and 
 even from the coves of the mountains. This was the first 
 speech the people had heard in that quarter since secession 
 came so suddenly and threateningly before the country, 
 and with many it was the last. A number of the moun- 
 tain men had their guns with them, significant of the use 
 they were to make of them in the near future. I spoke 
 outdoors, with all the earnestness of my nature, for be- 
 tween two and three hours. As I unfolded to the people 
 the secession plot to break up the government of their 
 fathers, indignation and determination settled on their 
 brows. A grave and terrible calamity presented itself, 
 which could only be averted by a united people at the bal- 
 lot-box. And never was there a more determined crowd 
 than this one. There was not a disloyal man in it. A 
 
174 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 few, a very few, of those who were then present may have 
 become Confederates afterwards ; but they were all true 
 on that day, and true at the election five days later. 
 
 Many were there from the coves which nestled in among 
 the mountains near by. Some were there who dwelt on 
 the sides of the Great Smoky Mountain, forming the boun- 
 dary between Tennessee and North Carolina. These were 
 not learned men ; but they had a simple, pure, unwavering 
 love of country. They had learned by tradition, handed 
 down from father to son, of the great Revolutionary strug- 
 gle for independence, of Washington and his unclothed 
 army at Valley Forge, of Yorktown and the surrender of 
 Lord Cornwallis, of Colonels Sevier and Shelby at King's 
 Mountain. Their forefathers had shared in the glory of 
 these achievements. The republic was therefore as dear 
 to them as was the sacred Ark of the Covenant to the 
 Israelites. 
 
 The next day the speaking was at Wayland's, in the 
 western part of the county, not far from the lines of Knox 
 and Blount, between twenty and twenty-five miles from 
 Fair Garden. The crowd there was scarcely less than the 
 one of the day before. It was a raw, chilly day in Febru- 
 ary. The large academy building would not hold a third 
 of the persons present, so the speaking again had to be 
 done out-doors. Notwithstanding the chilly weather, the 
 people stood listening for two hours in breathless atten- 
 tion. This crowd was apparently as unanimous in its loy- 
 alty as the one of the day before ; but there were several 
 considerable slaveholders present, who stood off on the 
 outskirts of the crowd. I had my apprehensions aroused 
 as to them. However, they all either voted the Union 
 ticket three days afterwards, or they abstained from voting, 
 for no secession votes were cast in that region. A number 
 of these slaveholders, however, later on, deserted the Union 
 cause. 
 
 From Sevier county, I at once returned home, and filled 
 in the time till election day in Knox county. In the 
 
JOHN sevip:k. 
 
 Culoinl at Kilty'. •< Mountain aiid First (iuvcritur nf Tcnnt'ssec. 
 
Campaign of February^ 1861. 175 
 
 meantime, Baxter and Trigg were speaking at their re- 
 spective appointments in Knox and Roane. It would be 
 feeble praise to say that they did splendid work. They 
 were both able, fearless, and intensely in earnest, and they 
 convinced and aroused wherever they spoke. In all the 
 Union speeches made in this canvass there was an utter 
 absence of all timidity, ambiguity, or apologizing for the 
 advocacy of the National Government, at least this was so 
 as far as I heard them. They were aggressive in the ex- 
 treme against secession. The declarations of the speakers 
 were accompanied with no conditions. There was a broad, 
 universal, unqualified loyalty in every sentence. The 
 speakers were sustained and encouraged by a patriotic 
 public sentiment that was almost unanimous. They felt 
 strong in this powerful support. The memory and the 
 words of Jackson and Clay were invoked in behalf of the 
 imperiled Union. Finally, the zeal and indignation of the 
 people outran that of the speakers, and they became ready 
 to take up arms. This feeling never abated. It grew 
 stronger and more bitter until after the June election, 
 when irresistible force compelled prudent silence. The 
 canvas was wound up the night before the election by 
 speaking and a torchlight procession in East Knoxville, at 
 which Fleming and I made speeches. It had been con- 
 ducted in all the other counties of East Tennessee with 
 energy, boldness and determination. The names of those 
 taking part in it will be given hereafter, as far as they can 
 be ascertained. 
 
 That the Union party would gain a decided victory at 
 the polls in East Tennessee on the 9th of February was a 
 foregone conclusion, and yet none expected it to be as over- 
 whelming as it proved to be. The majority for Union 
 delegates was twenty-five thousand, five hundred and 
 thirty-two in twenty-nine counties. In the entire state it 
 was sixty-four thousand, nine hundred and fourteen. 
 
 It is diflficult, indeed it seems impossible, to give with 
 absolute certainty the vote in February on one branch of 
 
176 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the proposition submitted to the people, namely, whether 
 or not there should be a convention. In the "Manual of 
 Tennessee," prepared by Charles A. Miller, perhaps while 
 he had access to the official returns as secretary of state, 
 the vote is given on this question thus : for convention, 
 57,789 ; no convention, 69,675 ; majority against a con- 
 vention, 11,877. These figures are adopted by Nicolay 
 and Hay in their life of Lincoln, and yet they seem to 
 doubt their correctness.^ In the real test in that election — 
 in the selection of delegates to the proposed convention — 
 according to all accounts, the Union majority in the state 
 was 64,114. 
 
 The result in Sevier county has no parallel in this state, 
 and it is doubted whether there was another county in the 
 
 ^ In a note, Nicolay and Hay say : " We have taken these figures as we 
 find them in the newspapers of that period and as they are copied into the 
 'Annual Cyclopsedia' for that year." They then proceed to question their 
 accuracy, and to suggest that they have been " tampered with in the coun- 
 ties, or erroneously announced at Nashville." They further say : " In a 
 recent work by ex-Confederate writers (' Military Annals of Tennessee — 
 Confederate,' published in 1886, p. 60), it is stated that * the majority 
 against calling a convention was nearly or quite sixty thousand.' So, also, 
 Mr. N. A. Goodspeed, of Chicago, writing to the editors of * The Century,' 
 under date of May 2, 1888, says: 'In the preparation of our history 
 ("History of Tennessee," 1887), we found it impossible to ascertain the 
 exact majority, but we did ascertain to a certainty that it was not far from 
 sixty thousand.' " Nicolay and Hay, Vol. IV, p. 250. 
 
 The discrepancy between the majority for Union delegates (64,114) and 
 that against the calling of a convention (11,877) is so great as to excite re- 
 mark. While it is contrary to my vague recollection, and is in conflict 
 with the authorities just quoted, I am confident that it is nearly correct. 
 I can see no reason for believing that the returns were tampered with or 
 erroneously announced in Nashville. I can see no reason why the returns 
 should have been correctly announced as to the majority for the Union 
 delegates and erroneously as to the convention. While the Union leaders 
 generally took decided ground against a convention, some Union men, and 
 possibly a great many, voted for a convention. The true test of Union 
 sentiment in that election undoubtedly was expressed in the election of 
 delegates. I am not absolutely certain that the majority given by me 
 against a convention is correct, but it seems to be sustained by the weight 
 of authority. The returns in the oflice of the secretary of state are : 
 
 For a convention, 56,232 
 
 Against a convention, .... 69,389 
 
Campaign of February, 1861. 177 
 
 United States where the Union would have been sustained 
 as it was there/ The vote stood : 
 
 For Crawford, Union, . . . 1,302 
 For Temple, Union, . . .1,301 
 
 For Paxton, Secession, . . 1 
 
 Total vote, . . . . 1,302 
 
 The vote against me was on personal grounds, for which 
 I could not complain." 
 
 Thus, the people of East Tennessee had gloriously stood 
 by the Union. And yet it was a fearful thing, in 1860-61, 
 to encounter the prejudices of the Southern people against 
 those who allied themselves with the Republican and Abo- 
 lition parties, even for the purpose of saving the Union. 
 That was what the Union party apparently had to do. It 
 required more than mere courage to do this ; with this 
 there had to be the most intense conviction of j)atriotic 
 duty. It was easy to go with the South — to go with one's 
 section, friends and kindred. It was hard, very hard, to 
 turn away from these. And yet, in the face of obloquy, 
 reproaches and hatred, these Union men stood unflinch- 
 ingly for the government. It thus came to pass, as often 
 happens in the affairs of nations, that two parties, both 
 influenced by a sincere desire for the good of their coun- 
 try, but differing as to their views of duty, separated along 
 divergent lines of action.^ 
 
 ^ Sevier was the banner county of the state in 1840. It got the silk ban- 
 ner presented by the Whig ladies of Nashville for the largest Whig major- 
 ity in the state in proportion to population. 
 
 * Some time before this in the trial of a cause I had criticized severely the 
 evidence of the man who cast this vote, and he took this occasion to pay 
 me back. 
 
 ' In Knox county, where the great fight was made for the Union, the 
 vote was : 
 
 ForBaxtar, 3,252 
 
 ForSneed 237 
 
 Baxter's majority, , . . 3,015 
 
 12 
 
178 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 For Trigg, 3,268 
 
 For Walker, 266 
 
 Trigg'e majority, .... 3,002 
 
 For Temple, 3,281 
 
 For Paxton, 226 
 
 Temple's majority, . . . 3,055 
 
 The vote in Knoxville was : 
 
 Baxter, 834 
 
 Sneed, Ill 
 
 Trigg, 836 
 
 Walker, 130 
 
 Temple, 842 
 
 Paxton, . . . . . . . „ 113 
 
 The vote in Roane county was nearly as strong for the Union as it was 
 in Knox. 
 
 The " Nashville Union and American," of February, 1861, on file in the 
 state library, at Nashville, which I recently examined, gives the following 
 as the vote of East Tennessee, and is believed to be nearly correct : 
 
 For the Union (as expressed in the election of delegates), . 33,299 
 For Secession, 7,767 
 
 Majority, 25,532 
 
 In Brownlow's " Knoxville Whig" it was stated after the election, with- 
 out giving the vote in detail, that each of the congressional districts in 
 East Tennessee had voted for the Union by 10,000 majority, making a total 
 majority of 30,000. This is believed to be an error. The vote taken from 
 the " Union and American," in favor of virtual secession, is smaller by 
 several thousand than it was in the June following. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 179 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 SECOND CANVASS OP 1861. 
 
 A second effort made by Governor Harris in April, 1861, to detach Ten- 
 nessee from the Union — Reconvenes the legislature — Emissaries of 
 secession active — Leaders in Knoxville at work— Union leaders active 
 and alert — Local leaders alone won the victory of February — Brave and 
 able men — Johnson, Maynard and Nelson now join them — Grand 
 Union meeting in Knoxville — Addressed by Baxter, Maynard, Nelson, 
 Trigg and Temple — Character of officers and speakers — Johnson and 
 Nelson address an immense assemblage April 27th — Threatening inci- 
 dent while Johnson is speaking — Desperate efforts to frighten and 
 draw the people into secession — Splendid canvass made by Union 
 leaders — Secession orators brought from a distance to convert the 
 people — Johnson and Nelson make a joint canvass — Vast crowds greet 
 them — Work of the other leaders — Great Union meeting at Strawberry 
 Plains— Stirring incident there — Last speech of the author at Concord — 
 Declares for the Union in preference to slavery — Johnson and Nelson 
 close at Kingston — Eulogy on Union leaders— Vote in East Tennessee — 
 Glorious victory — Causes of success of Union leaders — Anomalous 
 character of Unionism in East Tennessee — No analogy to it anywhere — 
 Its far-reaching consequences. 
 
 Before the 1st of April it had become quite evident that 
 another terrible contest, perilous to the integrity of the 
 government was at hand. Afifairs were rapidly approach- 
 ing a crisis in Charleston Harbor. In a few days the 
 country was to be startled by the most thrilling event 
 which had occurred in its entire history. The bold and 
 restless governor of Tennessee was as active as before his 
 crushing defeat in February. He was preparing for 
 another effort to detach the state from the Union, through 
 the legislature and the forms of a popular election, or, 
 failing in this, to cut it loose perhaps in a summary way. 
 He had already convened the legislature to meet a second 
 time in extraordinary session on the 25th of April, and in 
 a few days thereafter the state was to be severed from its 
 federal relations, by the unconstitutional Military League 
 
180 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 with the Confederacy. Nashville had become a hot-bed of 
 secession. To it flocked the emissaries of the Confederacy 
 from the seceded states, to make inflammatory speeches, 
 and urge on the work of disrupting the government. 
 Memphis, too, was perhaps even more thoroughly alive 
 with a disloyal feeling and purpose than Nashville. The 
 leaders in Knoxville, though only able to cast 130 votes for 
 secession in February were unsubdued by their late humili- 
 ating defeat. They were again active in their efforts to 
 reverse the popular verdict. Every senator or representa- 
 tive in congress, returning from Washington, who could 
 be prevailed upon to stop for the purpose, was arrested on 
 his journey and put forward to address our citizens in 
 favor of disunion. The leaders in Knoxville were bold, 
 able, unyielding. They were William H. Sneed, a former 
 member of congress ; John H. Crozier, also an ex-member 
 of congress ; William G. Swan, a former attorney-general 
 of the state ; William M. Church well, a former member 
 of congress ; Thomas C. Lyon, one of the ablest lawyers in 
 the state ; Campbell Wallace, president of the East Ten- 
 nessee and Georgia Railroad; Dr. J. G, M. Ramsey, the 
 historian of the state, and a number of others of less 
 prominence and ability. These were men not to be 
 silenced by one defeat. They were already at work pre- 
 paring for another struggle. 
 
 But on the other side, the Union leaders were equally 
 active and alert. Never was there a braver or more de- 
 termined set of men. All through the months of February 
 and March, Brownlow had made the columns of his widely 
 circulated paper red-hot with arguments and facts in favor 
 of the Union, and with the most terrible denunciations of 
 secession. The other leaders, all through East Tennessee, 
 were busy making speeches, as occasion occurred, confirm- 
 ing and encouraging the timid or wavering, and breathing 
 their own dauntless spirit into the minds of the people. 
 Hitherto the battle had been fought, and the unparalleled 
 victory of February won, by the local volunteer leaders 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 181 
 
 alone. Johnson, Nelson and Maynard were then in con- 
 gress and their voices had not been heard. Their influence 
 was not felt directly. Indeed, the first canvass was near 
 its close before their position on the great question was 
 generally and positively known. Many of the voters of 
 East Tennessee did not know certainly their views until 
 after their return from Washington in April. Johnson's 
 position was best known, for he was the earliest in declar- 
 ing his views after secession was inaugurated. Those of 
 Nelson and Maynard might have been easily anticipated, 
 especially those of the former, from their well known ante- 
 cedents, but these were times of changes, and men of a 
 life-long adherence to certain views, in the new aspect of 
 public affairs, had to define their positions anew. So, 
 nearly all the honor of the great victory of February be- 
 longs to the patriotic people and to the local leaders in the 
 party. And it must be confessed that these leaders had 
 conducted a canvass with but little, if any, less ability, 
 and with no less courage, than that possessed by the 
 eminent men then absent on public duty. 
 
 Now, however, those who had been absent had returned 
 to their homes, and were ready to throw the weight of 
 their great talents and influence into the scale in behalf 
 of the Union. Nelson opened the canvass in his district 
 in March. It is not known positively when Maynard first 
 began making speeches, but it is certain that he spoke at 
 a mass meeting in Knoxville on April 22d. Johnson, for 
 some cause, lingered in Washington for several weeks after 
 the adjournment of congress, and it was some time in 
 April before he took the stump. In the meantime, on 
 every suitable occasion, Baxter, Fleming, Trigg and others 
 were making speeches. 
 
 On the 22d of April, according to previous announce- 
 ment, there was a large mass meeting held in Knoxville. 
 The crowd in attendance was an immense one, filling 
 Main street from the court-house to the Franklin House, 
 and as far on the right and left as people could hear. The 
 
182 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 speaking took place from the platform of the old court- 
 house. As this was a representative meeting, and the 
 formal opening of the second canvass in East Tennessee, I 
 copy the account given of it in Brownlow's "Knoxville 
 Whig" nearly entire, as it may prove of interest to those 
 who come hereafter to know how Union men felt and 
 talked in April, 1861, after the great Civil War had 
 opened : 
 
 "Meeting of the People. 
 
 "Pursuant to public notice, the real people of the ancient 
 and loyal county of Knox met here in large numbers. A 
 procession extending almost the length of the business 
 portion of Gay street marched with the stars and stripes 
 to receive the Hon. T. A. R. Nelson at the depot, and 
 conducted him to the city. On the platform, in front of 
 the court-house, the meeting was called to order by ap- 
 pointing the following gentlemen to act as officers : 
 
 John Baxter, President. 
 
 F. S. Heiskell, 
 
 John Williams, 
 
 James S. Boyd, 
 
 R. H. Armstrong, 
 
 Caleb H. Baker, 
 
 William G. Brownlow, Secretary. 
 "Colonel Baxter addressed the meeting at considerable 
 length, and was unusually clear and forcible — taking bold 
 ground against the heresy of secession, and exposing, 
 with a master hand, the Southern leaders in the move- 
 ment and those who brought our country to the verge of 
 ruin. His speech was well received by an immense and 
 enthusiastic crowd of as good Union men as live. 
 
 "Colonel Temple, who is always right in his positions, 
 and who is equally fearless and bold in avowing his sen- 
 timents, entertained the large and attentive audience with 
 a telling speech ... in opposition to secession. He 
 was most enthusiastically cheered, showing that the hearts 
 of the people were with him. . . . 
 
 >- Vice-Presidents. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 183 
 
 "Hon. Thos. A. R. Nelson was then introduced, and for 
 an hour and a half riveted the attention of all parties, 
 making a speech which, for eloquence, candor, patriotism 
 and popular effect, excelled any effort we have ever heard 
 him make. He declared his unalterable attachment to 
 the Union — denied the right of secession — exposed the 
 whole plot of the secessionists on the part of the Cotton 
 States — repudiated the slavery agitation of the North — 
 and boldly asserted that while he regretted the war now 
 raging, he maintained that Lincoln's call for volunteers 
 was lawful and constitutional, and that under the circum- 
 stances, with his oath of office resting on him, he could 
 not have done less than call out the militia. He was no 
 Lincoln man — adhorred the doctrines of the sectional party 
 he was at the head of — did not approve his policy — but be- 
 lieved that a purpose existed on the part of the Southern 
 disunionists to march upon the capitol, and that it was 
 the sworn duty of the president to meet the issue as he 
 was doing. 
 
 "The Hon. H. Maynard next addressed the crowd in a 
 speech of one hour and a quarter. He spoke with more 
 ability and force than we have ever heard him. He denied 
 the right of secession — exposed the duplicity and tyranny 
 of the disunionists, the complicity of Floyd in the work of 
 breaking up the government, the neglect of duty by 
 Buchanan — declared his unalterable attachment to the 
 Union. 
 
 "Colonel Trigg concluded the speaking in one of those 
 bold, manly and straight-out speeches for the Union, and 
 in opposition to the whole scheme of disunion, which he is 
 accustomed to make on all occasions. 
 
 ". . . This meeting was a decided success, and made 
 a deep, lasting and profound impression. The meeting 
 adjourned to meet again on Saturday of this week, when 
 the meeting will be addressed by Governor Johnson and 
 Mr. Nelson." 
 
184 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 As this was one of the largest and one of the most fairly- 
 representative meetings of the canvass, some reference to 
 the men who took part in it may be appropriate. 
 
 They were men of the first standing and prominence, 
 socially, morally and pecuniarily in East Tennessee or in 
 the state. It is a significant fact that the president, all 
 of the vice-presidents and all of the speakers were slave- 
 holders, two of them being among the largest in the 
 county. 
 
 On the 27th of April, Senator Johnson and Mr. Nelson 
 addressed a very large meeting in this same city. In con- 
 sideration of the distinguished character of these persons, 
 I here copy nearly in full the report of the meeting from 
 "Brownlow's Whig" : 
 
 "Two Noble Speeches. 
 
 "We had two noble — and we are not mistaken when we 
 say telling — speeches here, on Saturday, from Governor 
 Johnson and Hon. T. A. R. Nelson. . . . 
 
 "There was an immense crowd in town and many per- 
 sons were present from other counties. At ten o'clock the 
 meeting was called to order by Colonel Baxter, and Gov- 
 ernor Johnson was introduced to the audience from a 
 stand erected on Gay street, in front of Morrow's bank, 
 and spoke for more than two hours with great efi'ect. He 
 came out manfully on the side of his country — in favor of 
 the enforcement of the laws, and the preservation of the 
 Union, at whatever cost. He held up the movers and 
 originators of secession to merited scorn and contempt. 
 He traced their treason back to the days of South Carolina 
 Nullification — quoted from General Jackson on them — 
 argued the question of secession — and in a word, de- 
 livered arguments at once unanswerable and convincing 
 on the part of the people. His speech was received with 
 great applause and highly commended by men of talent, 
 who have never heretofore agreed with the governor in 
 sentiment. ... In a spirit of fraternal feeling, he re- 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 185 
 
 ferred to the past political conflicts that had engendered 
 heartburns and acrimonious feelings, during which Demo- 
 crats had said things hateful to the Whigs, and Whigs had 
 alike wounded the feelings of Democrats ; but now that 
 our beloved country was imperiled, he counseled the ex- 
 ercise of a forgiving spirit — the blotting out of all past 
 differences. Turning to Mr. Nelson, who had arrived 
 after he commenced speaking on the down train, he passed 
 a just and handsome compliment upon him, and stated 
 that while they battled against each other for years, in a 
 courteous and honorable warfare, they were now shoulder 
 to shoulder in battling for our common country. 
 
 "Mr. Nelson followed in a speech not half so long, as he 
 had spoken at length the Monday before, but in one of 
 marked ability, patriotic and eloquent, and it was received 
 with frequent bursts of applause. . . ." 
 
 While Mr. Johnson was in the midst of his speech an 
 incident happened, which for a while threatened to become 
 a very serious and bloody one. A brass band, which had 
 come up with two companies of Confederate soldiers from 
 Monroe county, began to play upon Gay street on which 
 the platform was erected, at just such a distance as to in- 
 terrupt the speaker and the crowd. Soon thereafter the 
 two military companies, with drums and secession flags 
 flying, started toward the Union meeting. A bloody col- 
 lision seemed inevitable, for many of both parties were 
 armed. The speaking ceased for the time, and the Union 
 mass stood in expectation of a deadly conflict. It was 
 cool and determined. Johnson was always so in the midst 
 of danger. It was evident that the purpose was to break 
 up the meeting, and probably wreak vengeance on Johnson 
 and others. The Union men were determined that these 
 things should not take place. When the Confederate pro- 
 cession, which was plainly visible to the meeting, had 
 arrived within perhaps one hundred yards of the stand, and 
 was still marching forward, two Confederate gentlemen, 
 Colonel David H. Cummings and Mr. Joseph A. Mabry, 
 
186 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 seeing the consequences, and disapproving of such conduct, 
 interfered, silenced the band, and by their timely and de- 
 termined exertions and influence kept the procession 
 from marching any further. Thus a conflict, which would 
 certainly have resulted in the death and wounding of 
 many persons on both sides, was averted, for the Union 
 men were determined not to yield. Too much praise can 
 not be given to Colonel Cummings, who was a brave 
 and manly soldier, and to Mr. Mabry, who was a man of 
 high courage, for their honorable and noble conduct on 
 this perilous occasion. 
 
 The speaking went on after the danger was passed. To 
 those of us who were present it looked at one time as if a 
 conflict could not be avoided. 
 
 From this time the canvass in East Tennessee went on 
 vigorously and incessantly. Indeed, for some time pre- 
 viously, it had been actively prosecuted in Knox county, 
 and to some extent in adjoining counties, by the home 
 leaders. They entered the field flushed with the splendid 
 victory of February, cheered and encouraged by the en- 
 thusiastic and invincible spirit manifested by the Union 
 party. They knew the people of East Tennessee were 
 with them, and they were determined to hold this section 
 firm and steadfast, whatever might be the result in other 
 parts of the state. Secession had once more, under the 
 impulse imparted to it by the firing on Fort Sumter, and 
 other rapidly succeeding events, become bold, arrogant 
 and aggressive. These things did not in the least daunt 
 nor arrest this brave, patriotic people. They became even 
 bolder and more embittered than they had been in Janu- 
 ary and February. Many of them began to arm them- 
 selves as best they could. In some counties, notably in 
 Roane and Blount, companies of "home guards" were 
 organized and drilled. In Knox it was hard to restrain 
 the infuriated Union men from acts of violence against the 
 disunionists. More than once the leaders had to restrain 
 them from marching into Knoxville in a body, and as they 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 187 
 
 called it, "clearing out the secessionists in the town." 
 Of course, the leaders could give no countenance to vio- 
 lence. All through the month of May and up to the 8th 
 of June, Johnson and Nelson went through East Tennessee 
 filling joint appointments and speaking to vast crowds of 
 people with wonderful power and effect. While this was 
 going on, Maynard, Trigg, Baxter, Fleming and Temple 
 were equally as busy in Knox and in the adjoining coun- 
 ties. Many other persons, in their respective counties, 
 were also at this time, by speeches and otherwise, engaged 
 in rallying and holding the people firm in their faith. 
 
 It would be a great mistake to imagine that the Union 
 leaders had an easy time in keeping the people firm. 
 Desperate efforts were made to frighten them from their 
 devoted allegiance to the government of their fathers. Ap- 
 peals were made to them to stand by their Southern friends 
 in defense of their liberties. Every base epithet that could 
 be thought of was applied to the Northern people. The 
 newspapers teemed with telegrams, sometimes false, and 
 nearly always exaggerated, intended to fire the Southern 
 heart. The East Tennessee Railroad, from Georgia to 
 Virginia, running through our principal towns, became al- 
 most a continuous flame of secession fire. On these trains 
 were always to be found the noisy leaders, who, forsaking 
 all business, went from town to town stirring up the peo- 
 ple. The arrival of a train in a village, or town generally 
 containing Confederate soldiers, was the signal for the out- 
 pouring of all the disloyal people shouting and cheering 
 for Jefferson Davis and for the Confederacy, and for groans 
 and hisses for Lincoln and his " hirelings." The harangues 
 made on such occasions were wild and extravagant in the 
 extreme, always predicting a grand triumph of Confeder- 
 ate arms, and sometimes telling how Confederate soldiers 
 would soon quaff champagne in the guilded halls of New 
 York. The result of all this was that the towns all along 
 the railway line, except Knoxville, became disloyal in 
 sentiment. Union men soon learned to stay away from 
 
188 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the stations. To a casual observer it seemed as if all the 
 people had forsaken the Union. 
 
 To increase the zeal of the Confederates and swell their 
 ranks, the women soon began to appear as a powerful 
 factor in this contest. With the first sight of a uniformed 
 soldier, and the sound of the first tap of the drum, or note of 
 the fife, they enthusiastically espoused the Southern cause. 
 The young ladies were first in manifesting this feeling ; 
 then followed the mothers, then the brothers and lovers, 
 and finally the father had to yield. Thus was many a 
 head of a family and devoted friend of the Union led to 
 join the Southern cause. The father was generally the 
 last to yield. The zeal and the enthusiasm of these ladies 
 were intense. Base and craven, indeed, was the young man, 
 in their estimation, often expressed in words, who did not 
 promptly enlist in the army and prepare for battle. With 
 the all-powerful influence of the women on the side of se- 
 cession, few were the young men in our towns who did 
 not take up arms in its behalf. 
 
 Realizing the necessity of converting the Union men of 
 East Tennessee, the leaders in the other divisions of the 
 state sent eminent orators to East Tennessee to make 
 speeches. Gustavus A. Henry, who had always been a 
 favorite, came for this purpose. He had been the Whig 
 candidate for governor in 1853, against Andrew Johnson. 
 He was a genial, noble fellow, of most pleasing address 
 and splendid person, with a glowing, thrilling eloquence 
 that always delighted his hearers. 
 
 Ex-Governor Henry S. Foote also came, and canvassed 
 East Tennessee. He made very mild and gentlemanly 
 speeches, but they had no effect whatever. John F. House 
 also came over. He had been on the Bell-Everett ticket as 
 elector the year before, and was distinguished as a strong 
 debater. Since the war he has served several terms in 
 congress, and made a high reputation as a man of talents. 
 
 Colonel Moses White, a former citizen of Knoxville, and 
 a representative in the legislature for two sessions from 
 
Seco7id Canvass of 1861. 189 
 
 Knox county, came from Memphis to try his influence on 
 his old friends. He was a man of honor and standing, 
 and regarded as one of ability and great promise. A. W. 
 Sales was also sent from Memphis. 
 
 None of these men produced the slightest effect on the 
 minds of the Union men, and they soon returned to their 
 homes, no doubt mortified and chagrined at the utter bar- 
 renness of their work. Greater men than they dwelt 
 among us, and had before their coming aroused the people 
 to the danger which threatened their country. 
 
 There was not at that time a county in East Tennessee, 
 perhaps, in which there was not made daily one or more 
 Union speeches. Profoundly impressed with the magni- 
 tude and peril of the crisis, men who never had spoken 
 before, unable to keep silent, took the stump, and pleaded 
 earnestly and feelingly for the Union. Men almost uni- 
 versally forsook their business to attend political meetings. 
 Passion ran high. On both sides there was ill-humor. 
 An accident might have produced a serious conflict at any 
 time. It must be confessed that the speeches made by the 
 Union orators were not calculated to allay this feeling. 
 They were bold, bitter, and denunciatory in the extreme. 
 The speakers sincerely counseled peace on all occasions, 
 and yet their speeches were calculated to lead to conflicts. 
 Indeed, they often had to use all their influence to keep 
 down violence. They were perfectly sincere in desiring to 
 preserve peace, for they had sense enough to know that no 
 one could see where this terrible contest was to end. 
 
 In the month of May, Johnson and Nelson, who had 
 been speaking separately, commenced a joint canvass in 
 East Tennessee. Vast crowds attended their appointments. 
 Aside from the reputation of the speakers, the people 
 everywhere were wild with excitement and anxiety. Many 
 had never heard either of them speak, and all were eager 
 to hear them in this grave crisis. And never before did 
 these distinguished men display such power on the stump. 
 Great occasions call forth the exercise of great powers. 
 
190 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Here, in our own midst, was a life-and-death struggle tak- 
 ing place, with strong and undaunted men engaged in it, 
 striving to save the state and preserve the government. 
 The issue was a mighty one. These men felt the solemnity 
 and the importance of the contest. They put forth powers 
 equal to the great occasion. I doubt if, at that time, in 
 all the states, such speeches from day to day were any- 
 where heard. Johnson's speeches were the more argu- 
 mentative and convincing ; Nelson's more eloquent and 
 stirring. Both were bitter, daring and denunciatory. No 
 danger could appall these men. Often they were threat- 
 ened and in real danger. In such emergencies their cour- 
 age and coolness only became the more conspicuous. In 
 Sullivan county, an old democratic county, one of the few 
 secession strongholds in East Tennessee, the danger of a 
 conflict was so great that their friends petitioned them not 
 to attend their appointment. They yielded to this request, 
 when threats would have been in vain. At Concord, John- 
 son was notified by the secessionists not to attend in peril 
 of his life. When Mr. Nelson spoke there, after the 
 speaking an attempt was made to intimidate him, but he 
 turned on his assailants in such a storm of haughty defi- 
 ance that they fled from his terrible presence.^ 
 
 "While Johnson and Nelson were thus engaged, the other 
 leaders all over East Tennessee were actively at work. I 
 take the following from the "Knoxville Whig" of May 25, 
 1861, as a specimen of the activity which prevailed in 
 Union circles : 
 
 "Last Saturday's Work. 
 "Saturday last was a great day in portions of East Ten- 
 nessee. Baxter and Johnson addressed a mass meeting in 
 Greeneville of between four and five thousand — the pro- 
 cession extending three-fourths of a mile, four deep. The 
 
 ^ The late lamented John F. Pate, a decided Southern man, was my au- 
 thority for this statement. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861, 191 
 
 right spirit prevailed and the cause of secession is losing 
 ground in Greene. 
 
 "On the same day, Col. Temple addressed an enthusi- 
 astic crowd of fifteen hundred persons at Thorn Grove, in 
 the corners of Knox, Sevier and Jefferson counties. He 
 spoke two hours, and some who had acted with the seces- 
 sionists in February were in the procession. 
 
 "On the same day, Mr. Maynard spoke to a glorious 
 crowd of five to seven hundred, for two hours and a half, 
 at EUejoy, Blount county. The right spirit prevailed there, 
 and curses loud and bitter were heaped upon the unconsti- 
 tutional and corrupt acts of the legislature. 
 
 "On the same day, Col. Trigg spoke three hours to an 
 enthusiastic crowd at "Whortleberry Camp Ground, where; 
 the people too are incensed at the action of a corrupt legis- 
 lature. 
 
 "On the same day, Mr. Fleming spoke to a crowd of 
 
 true men at Ball Camp, in this county, and it told on the 
 
 tyrannical conduct of Harris and his Rump legislature. 
 
 East Tennessee is good for a majority of twenty 
 
 thousand against the heresy of secession." 
 
 On the 28th of April, the following dispatch was sent to 
 the representatives of Knox county in the legislature : 
 
 "Knoxville, April 28, 1861. 
 To Messrs. J. S. Boyd, John Williams and R. H. Arm- 
 strong : 
 By firmness and deliberation the state may be saved. 
 With reasonable time for a canvass. East Tennessee will 
 give twenty thousand majority against secession. 
 
 (Signed,) Andrew Johnson, 
 T. A. R. Nelson, 
 Horace Maynard, 
 C. F. Trigg, 
 0. P. Temple." ^ 
 
 * The majority was 19,151. The result I give makes a larger majority 
 than the oflBcial figures, or at least than the figures usually show. But in 
 
192 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 On the 5th of May, a mass meeting was called to be 
 held at Strawberry Plains, in Jefferson county, near the 
 corner of Knox, Sevier, and Jefiferson, fifteen miles east of 
 Knoxville. A large crowd of several thousand persons at- 
 tended. A horseback procession of from 800 to 1,200 men, 
 four deep, marched from the depot, with banners flying, to 
 a grove a quarter of a mile away, where the speaking took 
 place. At the station there was a train of cars standing, 
 having on board some Alabama Confederate soldiers. The 
 train remained there about three hours. I quote here from 
 the "Knoxville Whig" an account of what occurred : 
 
 "After our procession had passed into the gap of Mr. 
 Meek' 8 inclosure, leading into his grove, where the stand 
 and seats were erected, and where a much larger assem- 
 blage, among whom were several hundred ladies and chil- 
 dren, were seated, awaiting the arrival of the procession, 
 at the head of which were Messrs. Maynard, Temple and 
 Fleming, who were to address the meeting, the train 
 started towards us at a very slow rate. Speaking had not 
 yet commenced, though Col. Thornburgh was up making 
 some preliminary remarks, as the remnant of the vast 
 crowd was coming in and crowding around the stand. At 
 the suggestion of Mr. Meek, an old man, who had served 
 in the War of 1812, and who owned the premises, the few 
 scattering persons still at the (fence) gap were urged to 
 come in, and did so, quietly, disturbing no one. But here 
 we will let Mr. Meek tell the tale just as it occurred : 
 
 "Statement. 
 
 "At the request of Mr. Brownlow and other gentlemen, 
 I walked from the stand down to the railroad, to hurry up 
 our Union men, and to urge them not to say or do any- 
 
 them the vote of Union county is omitted, which was 1,100 for the Union 
 and 92 for secession, making the majority as I state it. Another account 
 makes the majority 19,251. These are the official figures. The majority is 
 less by 815 votes than it appeared to be by the returns as published in 
 some of the public prints at the time. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 193 
 
 thing to the train then slowly coming by. Our men came 
 within the inclosure quietly and I was about twenty feet 
 from the fence, inside of my field, the railroad and wagon 
 road passing along close to the fence. There were two 
 men in uniform on top of one of the cars, each had a revolver 
 in his hand, and one of them had a stone which he thre\y at 
 me with great force and precision, and I barely dodged it. 
 This was followed by one of them deliberately firing at me. 
 One of them knew me, for he had previously come to my 
 house, and asked for water to fill his canteen, which I as- 
 sisted him in filling, treating him as politely as I knew 
 how. This was the commencement of the firing and it 
 was without any provocation whatever. 
 
 [Signed.] A. K. Meek, Sr. 
 
 "The correctness of this statement was attested by four- 
 teen other reputable gentlemen who were present at the 
 commencement of the difficulty." 
 
 No sooner were the first shots fired, than they became 
 the signal for the opening of a general fire from both 
 sides. Bullets whistled around the stand in considerable 
 numbers, near which I was at the time, fired by both 
 those in and on the train. Such of the Union men as had 
 pistols, and the few who happened to have guns, returned 
 the fire The train consisted of box cars, and there- 
 fore the great body of soldiers was not exposed. The 
 Union men continued to fire until the train was away be- 
 yond reach of small arms. The soldiers also contin- 
 ued their fire on the assemblage until they passed out of 
 range. 
 
 The "Whig" further states : 
 
 "The bullets actually whistled over the heads of our 
 crowd around the stand, cutting off leaves and sprigs, to 
 the consternation of the ladies and men. 
 
 "But a wild and terrific scene occurred instantly by the 
 rush of one thousand men, insulted and infuriated, upon 
 the track, with threats to tear up the track and to burn the 
 13 
 
194 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 bridge over the Holston. Colonel Thornburgh, Temple and 
 Dr. Mynatt, Mr. Meek himself and the editor of this 
 paper, all repaired to the track, made short appeals to the 
 crowd, and implored them not to disturb the road. With 
 difficulty they were quieted." 
 
 The following resolution was offered by Mr. Mont- 
 gomery Thornburgh and adopted by the meeting : 
 
 "We, a large portion of the people of the counties of 
 Jefferson, Knox and Sevier (men, women and children) , 
 who have assembled to-day at Strawberry Plains, to the 
 number of from 3000 to 5000, to consult together for our 
 common good, having been wantonly and without provo- 
 cation, assaulted during our peaceful deliberations, by a 
 missile thrown and shots fired from the train of cars in 
 very slow motion, by certain troops in the service of the 
 so-called Confederate States, do hereby unanimously declare 
 to the world, that while we ever have been and still are 
 ready to comply with every constitutional obligation of the 
 citizen, we can never be driven or coerced, into abject or un- 
 manly submission, and we hereby pledge to each other 
 our lives, our property and our sacred honor, in the 
 common defense of ourselves, our firesides, our wives and 
 children from any assault, no matter from what quarter it 
 may come." 
 
 One of the strange things about this collision between 
 soldiers and citizens was, that no one was injured, so far as I 
 could ever ascertain. The bullets from the train seemed to 
 range over the heads of the crowd. There must have been 
 two or three thousand persons present, for the most part 
 gathered in a mass, ready for the speaking. The distance 
 to the railway did not exceed one hundred yards, and 
 possibly not more than seventy-five. Many shots were un- 
 questionably fired on both sides, and yet not one of that 
 great crowd was hit. It was reported at the time and 
 afterwards, too, that one or more soldiers were wounded or 
 killed, but there never was any confirmation of the report. 
 Whether the soldiers were fully armed or not, is not known. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 195 
 
 Probably not, for if they had been, they would have 
 stopped the train, and dispersed our crowd, as they could 
 have done easily. A number of them were unquestionably 
 armed, for they fired quite a little volley, and kept it up 
 until the train passed out of range. 
 
 The coolness and courage displayed by the Union men, 
 when fired upon, showed the spirit which animated them, 
 and that they stood ready to fight for their country. It 
 also gave evidence of that dauntless spirit which enabled 
 them to endure, steadfastly and heroically, the trials and 
 hardships which were soon to follow. Neither then, nor 
 at any subsequent time, did they turn back in the day of 
 battle. 
 
 Mr. A. K. Meek, who made the statement as to the 
 origin of the difiiculty, was an old man of high character 
 and standing. He had Revolutionary blood in his veins, 
 and was a slaveholder and a man of property. He lived 
 until August, 1890, being then ninety-two years of age, 
 leaving a good record behind him. 
 
 It need hardly be said that the speeches made on that 
 occasion were pitched on a pretty high key of defiance. 
 
 My last speech during this ever-to-be-remembered cam- 
 paign was made at Concord, fourteen miles west of Knox- 
 ville, on the East Tennessee Railroad, on the day before 
 the election. This was in the best and wealthiest part of 
 the county. The lands in that neighborhood and for miles 
 away were rich and productive. There were many con- 
 siderable slaveholders and independent gentlemen in that 
 neighborhood. Nearly every one of them had espoused 
 the Southern cause after the firing on Fort Sumter. Still, 
 the majority of the people had not gone with them. I had 
 many warm friends among the slaveholders, and possibly 
 this was the reason I was sent there. I felt that it was a 
 dangerous place at which to make a Union speech at that 
 late day, for it was at this place that Mr. Nelson came 
 near being mobbed a short time before. I believed, how- 
 ever, that I had friends among the leading secessionists 
 
196 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 whom I knew to be honorable men, and who would protect 
 me from harm if it should become necessary. At one time 
 it seemed that I was to have trouble. There was a very vio- 
 lent and dangerous man in the crowd who had killed his 
 man. He was a rabid secessionist. He took his seat not 
 far from me. I think some one whispered to me to keep 
 my eyes on him. As I progressed in my speech and pre- 
 sented fact after fact bearing hard on the secession cause, 
 he became restless and interrupted me. It was expected 
 in the crowd that he would draw a pistol and begin shoot- 
 ing. But a very powerful and active blacksmith, who was 
 a Union man and a friend of mine, anticipating that this 
 man would create a difficulty, had quietly gotten near him, 
 a little in his front, and sat there watching him with eagle 
 eyes, ready to spring on him at the first demonstration. I 
 felt perfectly safe as soon as I saw my powerful black- 
 smith ready for action. So it fell out that nothing hap- 
 pened. 
 
 My speech on this occasion was unusually calm and con- 
 siderate. I was speaking to my old personal and political 
 friends. It was not the time nor the place for the indul- 
 gence of rhetoric or hard words, but for argument and 
 facts. I took the ground that there was no adequate or 
 justifiable cause for secession. Then I argued that seces- 
 sion would fail, and showed by facts and figures that the 
 government had the ability to put down secession, and the 
 will to do so, and that it would be done. I told the crowd 
 in plain terms that the seceding states "would be whipped 
 back into the Union." Then I discussed the slavery ques- 
 tion. I argued that it was then in no possible danger ; 
 that, with the guaranties of the constitution, it was abso- 
 lutely safe ; that its highest safety was in the Union under 
 the constitution, and that, whenever slaveholders aban- 
 doned that stronghold, the institution would be destroyed. 
 I insisted that, as a Union man, I was a better friend of 
 slavery than the secessionists. But I also said that, if we 
 had to choose between the government on the one side with- 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 197 
 
 out slavery, and a broken dissevered government with 
 slavery, I would say, unhesitatingly, "Let slavery perish 
 and the Union survive." 
 
 The crowd seemed almost startled at these bold words, 
 but preserved its composure. No such words had ever 
 perhaps been heard there before, and, indeed, publicly 
 anywhere in the South. If I had not been known to be a 
 slaveholder myself, a native Tennessean, and had not been 
 among friends, I might have been in danger. 
 
 Thus, I had made my last speech, had entered my last 
 protest against the folly of secession. My last was the 
 calmest, the most dispassionate, and at the same time, 
 the boldest of all I had made. I had now been in the 
 field, speaking on this great issue. Union or disunion, al- 
 most constantly since early in August the year before — a 
 period of eight months. Having been the elector in this 
 district in the canvass of 1860, I naturally had to bear the 
 brunt of that battle. And so it came about, a month 
 after it closed, that when the new campaign opened up, 
 with increased passion and excitement, I was again, by 
 reason of recent leadership, as well as by other circum- 
 stances, forced to assume a prominent part in the new 
 struggle, which began then and lasted till June 8th. Feel- 
 ing in my heart the solemnity of the crisis, as I think 
 few felt it, I labored with an earnestness such as I had 
 never experienced before. 
 
 On the same day that I made my closing speech, John- 
 son and Nelson spoke at Kingston, forty miles west of 
 Knoxville. They had been all through the mountain coun- 
 ties east of Cumberland. The night of the day they 
 closed their brilliant canvass. Senator Johnson came in a 
 buggy with John B. Brownlow, son of W. G. Brownlow, 
 to Knoxville, traveling by night. ^ The next day he left in 
 
 ^ Mr. Brownlow heard in some way that there was a plot on foot to have 
 a regiment of Confederate soldiers on the train which Mr. Johnson would 
 take at Loudon, on his way home from Kingston, and that he was to be 
 assassinated by them. He and Johnson had not then spoken for nearly 
 
198 East Tennessee arid the Civil War. 
 
 a private conveyance for his home in Greene ville, crossing 
 the river at this point, and going through Sevier and 
 Cocke counties, to avoid all danger of being intercepted 
 and killed on the way. It would have been dangerous in 
 the extreme for him to travel on the train at that time. 
 By what way Mr. Nelson returned to his home in Jones- 
 borough I know not. But he was not in the same danger 
 as Mr. Johnson. 
 
 Thus closed the most remarkable canvass that ever oc- 
 curred in the United States. The fame and great ability of 
 a part of the speakers and actors, and the but little less abil- 
 ity of several others, unknown to fame, would of themselves 
 under any ordinary circumstances, have marked this can- 
 vass as one of great interest. But when we add to this 
 the momentous and overshadowing issue involved, noth- 
 ing less than the integrity and perpetuity of the Union, 
 and consider that all the mad passions of civil war had 
 broken loose — brother against brother and neighbor against 
 neighbor — swaying men as the tempest sways the forest, 
 we ca-n imagine how these facts would call into action the 
 highest faculties of the speakers, and make them give forth 
 utterances equal to those of any age or country. The very 
 dangers, both personal and political, which encompassed 
 them, heightened and intensified the exaltation and power 
 of their minds. No wonder, then, that the sturdy Union 
 patriots of East Tennessee were stirred as the sea is stirred 
 by the storm. No wonder that with such a fiery baptism 
 of patriotism, no power could ever move them from their 
 enthusiastic and steadfast love of the old flag. 
 
 twenty years. He accordingly, when he heard the news, sent his son in 
 a buggy forty miles to Kingston, to bring Mr. Johnson to Knoxville, over 
 the old stage road, instead of the railroad. Johnson protested, saying that 
 he was a stockholder in the railroad, and that all the Confederates in the 
 South should not prevent him from traveling along the common highway, 
 which in part belonged to him. However, after being reasoned with against 
 the folly of his course, he was induced to come to Knoxville in the buggy. 
 They traveled all night. I doubt whether there was any deliberate purpose 
 of the kind, though Mr. Brownlow believed there was. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 199 
 
 On the morrow after the close of the canvass, thirty-four 
 thousand and twenty-three of the Union men of East Ten- 
 nessee, with no fear, no hesitation, went to the polls and 
 cast their ballots in favor of the government of their 
 fathers. Fourteen thousand eight hundred and seventy-two 
 men, equally as sincere and earnest, voted for a new flag 
 and a new government. Thus East Tennessee, a second 
 time, vindicated her claim to the gratitude of all lovers 
 of the Union. Knox county led with the largest Union 
 majority, Scott with the smallest vote (19) in proportion 
 to population for secession, beating Sevier, the Union ban- 
 ner county in February, 1861, by a mere fraction.^ 
 
 ' The detailed vote of the several counties was as follows : 
 
 No Separation. Separation. 
 
 Anderson, 1,278 97 
 
 Bledsoe, 500 197 
 
 Blount, 1,766 414 
 
 Bradley, 1,382 507 
 
 Campbell, 1,094 60 
 
 Carter, 1,343 86 — -^ 
 
 Cocke, 1,185 518 
 
 Claiborne, 1,243 250 
 
 Grainger, 1,756 495 
 
 Greene, 2,691 . . _ . . 744 
 
 Hamilton, 1,260 854 
 
 Hawkins, 1,260 845 
 
 Hancock, 630 279 
 
 Johnson, 788 Ill 
 
 Jefferson, 1,987 603 
 
 Knox, 3,196 752 
 
 Monroe, 774 1,096 
 
 Morgan, 630 38 
 
 Marion, 600 414 
 
 McMinn, 1,148 904 
 
 Meigs, 267 481 
 
 Polk, 317 738 
 
 Rhea, 202 360 
 
 Roane, 1,568 454 
 
 Scott, 521 19 
 
 Sequatchie, 100 153 
 
 Sevier, 1,528 60 
 
 Sullivan, 627 . • . . . 1,586 
 
 Washington, 1,445 1,022 
 
 Union, 1,100 92 
 
200 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 The majority in the state in favor of separation was 
 57,675. In February, the same people had voted against 
 secession by about 64,000 majority. Thus the revolution 
 had swept forward in its course. 
 
 The remarkable success of the Union leaders in East 
 Tennessee, in the canvasses of 1860 and 1861, was mainly 
 due to two causes : First, the}'" entered the field in oppo- 
 sition to secession on the first manifestation of that move- 
 ment, and never retired as long as there was a ray of hope. 
 They took the start of their enemies in appealing to the 
 popular mind. Second, they "fired the hearts" of the 
 people in favor of the Union, as Mr. Yancy had urged 
 should be done with the Southern people in favor of se- 
 cession. 
 
 From December till the 9th of June, there was little 
 cessation in the active and earnest work done in trying to 
 preserve the government. During this time, there were 
 either five or six great Union meetings held in Knoxville, 
 the central point in East Tennessee. In consequence 
 thereof, the Union men held that town firmly, and its in- 
 fluence was all the time kept in the right direction. But 
 the reliance of the leaders from the beginning was on the 
 country and the country people. Every effort was made 
 by speaking and otherwise to hold these people firm and 
 united. They were kept at a fever heat of enthusiasm. 
 Secession was denounced most unsparingly. Speakers 
 went into nearly every neighborhood to arouse and con- 
 solidate the people. Outside of the towns and railroad 
 lines, with the exception of two or three counties, the 
 country became almost a unit, a solid compact body, in 
 favor of the Union. A public sentiment was molded and 
 shaped in behalf of the Union, which ultimately became 
 as overpowering and as terrible to the disunionists as was 
 the sentiment further South in an opposite direction. 
 
 At last the country people became so enraged that it 
 was dangerous for secessionists to attempt to make 
 speeches, except in the towns and in two or three counties. 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 201 
 
 Nearly everywhere the latter apprehended danger, and 
 would in fact have been in danger of personal violence in 
 many places if they had dared to attempt to advocate a 
 dissolution of the Union. Secessionists often complained 
 that the inflammatory addresses of the Union orators were 
 calculated to endanger their personal safety. But the 
 Union leaders believed then, and knew afterwards, that 
 their own safety and the safety of their party and princi- 
 ples depended upon a bold and aggressive canvass. They 
 saw, if they yielded to timidity, or to any sickly sentiment 
 of generosity, that they, in turn, would be overwhelmed 
 and probably driven out of the country. So it was in fact 
 a life or death struggle in which they were engaged. 
 Each side was striving for supremacy. Each where it had 
 the ascendancy was arrogant. Later on, in the canvass, 
 Mr. Johnson was notified from three points, Blountville, 
 Rogersville and Concord, that it would not be safe for him 
 to speak at these places. 
 
 The history of Unionism in East Tennessee is altogether 
 marvelous. It has no analogy anywhere in the country. 
 The States of Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri furnish 
 no parallel. None of those states actually seceded from 
 the Union. All would have done so, possibly excepting 
 Kentucky, but for the restraining influence of the presence 
 of federal armies. It is questionable whether Maryland 
 and Missouri were ever loyal to the Union. A majority 
 of the people of Kentucky were loyal in 1861, but every- 
 thing since that time indicates that a great change in that 
 respect took place as the war progressed. The intense 
 spirit of chivalry existing among her people naturally and 
 irresistibly drew a large part of them, and especially the 
 wealthy young men, toward the South. The example of 
 John C. Breckenridge, George B. Crittenden, John Morgan 
 and General Simon B. Buckner, all of whom were them- 
 selves comparatively young, aroused the wildest enthu- 
 siasm among these young men in favor of the South. 
 They fled South in vast numbers to join the Confederate 
 
^02 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 army. Kentucky became a vast recruiting ground for the 
 armies of the South, and, like Missouri and Maryland, 
 was only kept in the Union by the presence of Union 
 armies. 
 
 West Virginia seems at first to furnish nearly a parallel 
 to East Tennessee. But closer scrutiny reveals marked 
 differences. From the beginning of the war, her loyal 
 people were protected and encouraged in their devotion to 
 the Union by the presence of federal soldiers. Northern 
 people may not be able to realize the full import of this 
 fact, but the Union people of East Tennessee, who dwelt 
 for nearly thirty months, and some of them for nearly 
 four years, under the Southern Confederacy, can under- 
 stand its significance. How loyal and true to the Union a 
 majority of the people of West Virginia were during the 
 war can perhaps never be fully known, since there was 
 during all that time a federal force there sufficient to 
 suppress any uprising in favor of the South, if any such 
 disposition in that direction had existed. 
 
 Look at the contrast : East Tennessee was situated al- 
 most in the heart of the South. It was surrounded on all 
 sides, except by Kentucky on the north, by secession 
 states. It was practically cut off from Kentucky by a 
 wide mountain wilderness. The people of East Tennessee 
 therefore had but little sympathy from their neighbors in 
 their brave and noble struggle for the Union. After 
 April, 1861, the loyal element in adjoining states, except 
 as above indicated, seemed to disappear. There was no 
 moral support left for our struggling people. They were 
 left alone to fight their own great battle. If they had 
 imitated the example of their neighbors, they would have 
 yielded. But they did no such thing. In this dark hour, 
 encompassed with appalling dangers, threatened, denounced 
 and watched, neither the leaders nor the masses of the 
 people faltered in their high purpose. After Tennessee 
 voted for separation, in June, they remained for months 
 as defiant and as unsubmissive, though quiet, as before the 
 
Second Canvass of 1861. 203 
 
 election. And here is the striking contrast. In Mary- 
 land, Kentucky and Missouri, which states enjoy the 
 honor of not having seceded from the Union, it required 
 the constant presence of federal armies to restrain the dis- 
 loyal people from rising in behalf of the Southern Con- 
 federacy. On the contrary, in East Tennessee, a Con- 
 federate army was necessary to keep the Union men from 
 rising in behalf of the national government. Even after 
 all open opposition had been crushed out, and everything 
 had become as still as the chamber of death, the dread of 
 that great, determined Union element, which had been 
 so sublimely evoked by danger and by revolution, still 
 haunted the minds of the Confederate leaders. This fact 
 induced them to retain Confederate soldiers all over East 
 Tennessee, to keep in subjection the few unarmed Union 
 men who had not fled to the Union army in Kentucky. 
 No parallel, no analogy even to this can be found any- 
 where in our history. 
 
 Now consider the consequences following this unexam- 
 pled display of constancy and patriotism. It put thirty- 
 five thousand Union soldiers from East Tennessee into the 
 federal army.^ In battle, these thirty-five thousand were 
 equal to the same number of Confederate soldiers. Sup- 
 pose these men had gone into the Confederate army ; then 
 it would have made a difference in favor of the Confeder- 
 acy of seventy thousand men. But this is not all. It 
 took from five to ten thousand Confederate soldiers to 
 watch and keep the Union men of East Tennessee quiet. 
 
 ^ Thirty-one thousand is the number that entered East Tennessee regi- 
 ments. But there were a great many who joined commands from other 
 states. They joined the first command they came to in their flight. Mr. 
 William R. Carter, who served with the First Tennessee Cavalry (Col. 
 James P. Brownlow), and who is the historian of his regiment, estimates 
 the number of those who thus joined other commands at four thousand, 
 thus giving thirty-five thousand as the correct number which should go to 
 the credit of " East Tennessee." Brevet Brigadier-General James P. 
 Brownlow estimates the number at seven thousand. 
 
 Whether the regiments of Colonel W. B. Stokes, Colonel Isaac Hawkins 
 and Colonel Fielding Hurst are included in this estimate, or are inde- 
 pendent of it, I am unable to say ; but I presume they are included. 
 
204 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 This force would have swelled the number above given to 
 seventy-five thousand or more in favor of the Confederacy- 
 had East Tennessee joined the South. The direct and 
 positive influence of these thirty-five thousand men in de- 
 ciding battles may not be accurately estimated. But it is 
 morally certain that it was important. How many skir- 
 mishes, how many battles and enterprises, were decided 
 by the presence of these soldiers, no one can tell. But as 
 one element in all battles and campaigns is the weight of 
 the columns engaged, it follows that the soldiers from East 
 Tennessee counted as much in all these enterprises as any 
 other like number of men. In valor they were certainly 
 equal to any other soldiers on the field, either from the 
 North or the South. 
 
 The moral consequences flowing from the stand taken 
 by the Union men of East Tennessee were scarcely less 
 important than the material advantages. Moral support, 
 more than physical, was needed by Union men in the 
 North in 1861. Who can ever know or estimate how much 
 the heavy heart of Mr. Lincoln was cheered, amid his 
 many discouragements in those days of gloom, by the 
 knowledge that away down in the South there were thirty- 
 five thousand men, in one compact body, who defiantly re- 
 fused to join the Confederacy. The courage and fidelity 
 displayed by these people also served to revive and 
 strengthen the national heart, and to give hope to the 
 friends of national unity. It touched men's hearts with a 
 higher and purer love of country, with a keener sense of 
 patriotism. All over the North, it was encouraging to 
 those who were faithfully struggling to save the Union to 
 know that they had in the South brave and determined 
 friends, who were engaged in the same patriotic work with 
 themselves. Men to fill the armies were abundant in the 
 North, but a brave, high, national spirit, sufficiently strong 
 to paralyze opposition at home, was everywhere needed. 
 This the brave Union men of East Tennessee gave by a 
 heroic constancy and a sublime fortitude seldom surpassed 
 in the history of patriotic achievement. 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 205 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 TENNESSEE ORDINANCE OF SECESSION. 
 
 Governor Harris, in message to the legislature, recommends a formal 
 declaration of the independence of Tennessee and passage of an ordi- 
 nance of secession — Disregard of constitution of state — Passage of 
 ordinance — An army of 55,000 provided for — Military league with Con- 
 federate States — Army and military resources turned over to the Con- 
 federacy — Competency of legislature to pass these acts denied — Revo- 
 lution, and not peaceable constitutional secession — Did the Union men 
 commit an error in February in voting against a convention ? — Gov- 
 ernor Harris — Andrew Jackson, Sam Houston, John Bell, Andrew 
 Johnson, and other great men — Address of Union leaders of Middle 
 Tennessee, April 18, 1861, a surrender — Union masses follow their 
 leaders into secession — Vote in senate and house on ordinance of seces- 
 sion — Names given. 
 
 Notwithstanding the crushing condemnation of disunion 
 by the people of the state, in the February election, Gov- 
 ernor Harris was not discouraged. He determined to make 
 another eifort to ally the state to the fortunes of the Con- 
 federate government. Accordingly, in April, as we have 
 seen, he issued another proclamation, convening the legis- 
 lature the second time in extra session, on the 25th of 
 April, 1861., His message submitted to the legislature on 
 that day breathed the same fiery spirit which pervaded the 
 first one. He now took bold ground in favor of the adop- 
 tion of an ordinance "formally declaring the independence 
 of the State of Tennessee of the Federal Union, renounc- 
 ing its authority, and reassuming each and every function 
 belonging to a separate sovereignty," the ordinance to be 
 submitted to the people at the ballot box, to be by them 
 adopted or rejected. He also recommended that an ordi- 
 nance be also passed having in view the admission of the 
 state as a member of the Southern Confederacy, and that 
 this ordinance also should be submitted to a vote of the 
 
206 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 people for their adoption or rejection. At the first extra 
 session the governor had recommended that the question 
 as to the secession of the state should be referred to a con- 
 vention of delegates to be elected by the people. The peo- 
 ple were to vote on the question of "Convention" or "No 
 Convention," at the same time that they elected delegates. 
 Now he proposed a shorter course. He asked a legisla- 
 ture, the members of which were elected nearly two years 
 previously, before the question of secession had come be- 
 fore the people, and who were clothed with no authority 
 to alter or amend the constitution, except the right to pro- 
 pose amendments as therein provided, to proceed at once 
 to exercise an act of the highest sovereignty, overthrowing, 
 so far as Tennessee was concerned, the Constitution of the 
 United States. This was revolution. The fact that its 
 action might be, or was afterwards, ratified by the people 
 at the ballot box, gave no sanctity, no validity, to this ac- 
 tion of the legislature. Nothing but a convention, called 
 in a constitutional way, could alter or amend the constitu- 
 tion in this short way, much less dissolve the relation of 
 the state to the United States, No convention, however 
 called or inaugurated, had the power, according to the 
 theory of Union men, to do the last act. But the time had 
 arrived when no questionable constitutional provisions 
 were to stand in the way of the revolutionary schemes of 
 Governor Harris, And yet, in the very act of advising 
 the overthrow of our state and federal constitutions, he 
 coolly urged the legislature "to forget past differences and 
 whatever may tend in the least to distract your counsel in 
 the present momentous crisis, in which we have been in- 
 volved by the unprovoked and tyrannical usurpation of a 
 people who, forgetting the lessons of their fathers, have 
 overthrown the finest government upon earth, in the mere 
 wantonness of an unnatural sectional prejudice amounting 
 to sectional hate, and a disregard of those great principles 
 of justice and equality upon which the federal union was 
 based." 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 207" 
 
 The legislature proved to be ready to carry out the views 
 of the ■ governor, except a small minority of brave men, 
 mostly from East Tennessee. The ordinance of secession 
 proposed provided for an election on the 8th of June, at 
 which time "the declaration of independence" and the 
 ordinance "dissolving the relations between the state and 
 the United States," were to be submitted to the people for 
 approval or rejection. At the same time they were to vote 
 on another ordinance, adopting and ratifying the constitu- 
 tion of the provisional government of the Confederate 
 States of America. 
 
 Governor Harris scarcely attempted to conceal his 
 disregard of the constitution of the state. He openly 
 advised such a course. Hear him in his message to the 
 legislature : 
 
 "Under existing circumstances I can see no propriety 
 for incumbering the people of the state with the election 
 of delegates (to a convention) to do that which it is in my 
 power to en-able them to do directly for themselves." In 
 another place he said that the passage of an ordinance of 
 secession could not be "regarded other than as a question 
 of detail, inasmuch as a very large majority of the people 
 regard themselves as being forever absolved from all al- 
 legiance" to the old government. 
 
 Here was a proposition to change the constitution of 
 Tennessee in reference to a matter of the highest impor- 
 tance that could possibly engage the attention of the 
 people ; that is, dissolving their relations with the federal 
 government. It was the exercise of an act of supreme 
 sovereignty as far as that lay in the hands of the people. 
 It is universally admitted that no mere legislative act can 
 change the constitution. This can be done in Tennessee, 
 in only two ways : one is by passing an act submitting the 
 question to the voters of the state whether or not they will 
 have a convention to change the constitution, as was done 
 in February, 1861. The other is, by one legislature pro- 
 posing certain specific amendments, which must be adopted 
 
208 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 by two-thirds of the members of the next succeeding legis- 
 lature, and approved by a majority of the voters of the 
 state in the next regular election. If thus adopted, the 
 proposed amendments become a part of the constitution. 
 
 It will be seen that Governor Harris and the legislature 
 were hedged in by two diflEiculties. It would take nearly 
 three years to secure a change of the constitution by pro- 
 posing amendments through the legislature. So, they 
 could not wait for that slow process. The other mode, 
 that of calling a convention, had been tried and rejected 
 by the people, and it was unsafe to appeal to them another 
 time. Besides, that plan involved delay also. "Why 
 wait?" said these men. "Why run any risk of a second 
 defeat?" "It is a mere question of detail," "a mere form 
 anyway." Thereupon, they proceeded to pass an Ordi- 
 nance of Secession and a Declaration of Independence. 
 This was accomplished on the 6th of May, 1861. In order 
 that coming generations may know who the men were who 
 thus carried the state into secession, I give the vote in the 
 senate and in the house in a foot-note at the end of this 
 chapter. Both those who voted for and those who voted 
 against secession are doubtless proud of their record. 
 
 In order to secure the adoption of the Ordinance of Se- 
 cession at the ballot-box, the legislature proceeded to dis- 
 regard another provision of the constitution of the state. 
 That instrument required as a qualification for voting that 
 the voter should have been a resident of the county in 
 which he offers to vote six months before the day of elec- 
 tion. In other words, no man could vote out of his own 
 county. And yet, an act was passed authorizing the 
 soldiers of the state "to vote in all cases where, if in the 
 state, they would be entitled to vote," that is, soldiers 
 on duty in Virginia, or elsewhere, could vote and did vote 
 as if at home in their own county. Twenty-seven hundred 
 and forty-one soldiers in different places thus voted under this 
 act, twenty-four hundred and fifty-six out of the state, and 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 209 
 
 every one for separation/ It has been published that a 
 majority of the soldiers in the field, who voted in the June 
 election, voted "against separation." This, as will be 
 seen, is a mistake. 
 
 It is not forgotten that in the elections in some of the 
 Northern States, perhaps in all, at a subsequent period, 
 federal soldiers voted out of their states. If this were 
 done contrary to the constitutions or laws of those states, 
 it only proves how ready both sides were to disregard con- 
 stitutional obligations during the Civil War. 
 
 "But," says some one, "the people ratified the action of 
 the legislature afterwards in the election in June, and thus 
 cured the constitutional defect." As we have seen, this 
 was the idea of Governor Harris. This position admits 
 the unconstitutionality of the act of secession. If it were 
 unconstitutional, it remained so until ratified by the peo- 
 ple. Tennessee still remained a member of the Federal 
 Union until the act of ratification. By what right, then, 
 did the state enter into a military league with the South- 
 ern Confederacy, and turn over to it "its whole military 
 force and military operations," and transfer the allegiance 
 of its people to a foreign government before the ratifica- 
 tion? By what right did it raise, equip, arm and put into 
 the field an army, with the openly-avowed purpose of mak- 
 ing war on the United States, sending its soldiers to the 
 field to fight for this foreign government? By what right 
 did it displace the national flag on the capitol of the state 
 and hoist in its place a foreign flag? All these things were 
 done early in May, one month before the ratification of the 
 act of secession on the 8th of June. 
 
 But it is denied that any act of ratification can make 
 
 ^ Through the kindness of Hon. W. S. Morgan, the polite secretary of 
 state at Nashville, I have been furnished with the returns of the vote of 
 the Tennessee soldiers in this election, at the several camps where they 
 were stationed. These returns are on file in the secretary's ofl&ce. I am. 
 also indebted to him for other kind courtesies. 
 14 
 
210 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 valid an unconstitutional act. No breach of the constitu- 
 tion can be mended this way. The passage of the ordi- 
 nance of secession, in 1861, was an act of the highest sov- 
 ereignty, beyond the jurisdiction of any legislature, and 
 only within the power of a convention, through delegates 
 duly elected by the people, even according to the theories 
 of secession. It is believed that no lawyer will risk his 
 reputation by denying these propositions. I need hardly 
 add, that, from a Union point of view, even a constitu- 
 tional convention of delegates, chosen in the most regular 
 form, had no power to dissolve the bonds binding the state 
 to the Union. 
 
 The legislature, on the same day. May 6th, proceeded to 
 provide an army of fifty-five thousand men, twenty-five 
 thousand to be called into immediate service, and thirty 
 thousand to be held as a reserve "ready to march at short 
 notice." The act also provided for the issuance and sale 
 of five millions of the bonds of the state, bearing eight 
 per cent interest, to meet the expenses of the army. It 
 also provided for raising by the county courts of the state 
 "a home guard of minute men, consisting of companies 
 of not less than ten for each civil district, whose duty it 
 should be to ' procure a warrant from some justice of the 
 peace, and arrest all suspected persons, and bring them 
 before the civil authorities for trial, to prevent the assem- 
 blage of slaves in unusual numbers,' " etc. By another 
 act, the governor "was authorized and requested to place 
 at the disposal of the Confederate States the volunteer 
 forces of the State of Tennessee, the same to be mustered 
 into the service of said states." 
 
 But the crowning act was a joint resolution passed May 
 1st — six days before the ordinance of secession was passed — 
 authorizing the governor to appoint "three commissioners 
 on the part of Tennessee, to enter into a military league 
 with the authorities of the Confederate States." Accord- 
 ingly, the governor appointed Gustavus A. Henry, O. "W. 
 0. Totten and Washington Barrow such commissioners. 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 211 
 
 On the 7th day of May, these high functionaries, clothed 
 with authority by a mere legislative act to transfer a sov- 
 ereignty, entered into a "temporary convention, agreement 
 and military league" with Henry W. Hilliard, the duly 
 authorized commissioner of the Confederate States. It 
 was agreed by and between the high contracting parties 
 that, until "the said state" (Tennessee) "shall become a 
 member of said Confederacy according to the constitution 
 of both powers, the whole military force and military op- 
 erations, offensive and defensive, of said state, in the im- 
 pending conflict with the United States, shall be under the 
 chief control and direction of the president of the Confed- 
 erate States." 
 
 Totten, Henry and Barrow were lawyers. Totten had once 
 acted for a number of years as one of the supreme judges of 
 the state. It certainly would have been difficult for them 
 to find in the constitution of Tennessee any provision au- 
 thorizing the state to become a member of the Confederacy 
 "according to the constitution of both powers." And yet 
 that is what is provided for in this remarkable league. 
 
 It will be observed that the ordinance of secession was 
 passed on the 6th of May. And yet, on the 1st of May, 
 while the state was still a member of the Union, according 
 to the theory of both sides, the legislature authorized the 
 governor to appoint these commissioners on the part of 
 Tennessee to enter into this league. On the 7th, the said 
 league, as we have seen, was consummated, and the 
 "whole military force, and military operations, offensive 
 and defensive, of said state, were turned over to the Con- 
 federate States. And long before the 8th of June, the 
 time for the election, the national flag, by resolution of the 
 legislature, had been hauled down from the capitol, and 
 the flag of the Confederacy floated over it, almost in sight 
 of the grave of Andrew Jackson, who had crushed nulli- 
 fication in South Carolina. 
 
 Here was a mere legislative body, elected twenty-one 
 months before that time, in the face of a popular majority 
 
212 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 of sixty-four thousand votes, given in the previous Febru- 
 ary against secession, disrupting the ties of government, 
 passing an ordinance of secession, transferring the alle- 
 giance of the people, and turning over all the freemen of 
 the state liable to bear arms, and all its military resources, 
 to a foreign power, then waging war on the United States. 
 All this was done in the name of the constitution, and all 
 before there was any pretended ratification of these acts 
 by the people at the ballot-box ! The claim of justification 
 for these acts would sink to the level of the ludicrous, if 
 it were not for the fact that, by and through them, the 
 people of the state tasted the desolation of civil war for 
 four years. 
 
 One provision of the Constitution of the United States 
 is this : "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or 
 confederation." And yet these men, while the state was 
 still a member of the Union, entered into an "alliance or 
 treaty" with the Confederate States, a foreign power, ac- 
 cording to their own theory and admission. If they had 
 done these things under the open avowal of revolutionary 
 measures ; if they had boldly overthrown the old govern- 
 ment and inaugurated in its place "a provisional govern- 
 ment," their action would not appear so inconsistent. 
 These things they had the right to do, according to the Bill 
 of Rights, whenever the government became oppressive. 
 But they claimed to act all the time under the forms of the 
 constitution and not by way of revolution. Intelligent 
 men could not have been deceived by these professions, 
 yet, such was the excitement of the hour, that these acts 
 met the hearty approval of the followers of secession. 
 The withdrawal of Tennessee from the Union, in 1861, 
 was, in fact, the wildest of revolutions, under the guise of 
 peaceable, legal, constitutional secession. Even admitting 
 the right of the state to withdraw, the act in this case 
 lacked the dignity and authority of a convention of the 
 people to give it validity. 
 
 Suppose a majority of the people of the state, in the 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 213 
 
 election in June, had voted against the ordinance of seces- 
 sion, would Governor Harris and his followers have ac- 
 quiesced in the result? Of course, it is impossible to say 
 certainly what they would have done, but, judging by 
 their previous and subsequent acts, it can scarcely be 
 doubted what their course would have been. They would 
 have taken no backward steps. They could have taken 
 none. The destiny of the state was already linked to the 
 Southern Confederacy by means of the military league. 
 Its army and all the able-bodied men of the state had been 
 transferred to that power. The allegiance of the people, 
 so far as could be, had been changed from the old to the 
 new government. Armies, commanded by Confederate 
 officers, were within the state, ready to do the will of the 
 new government. The money, the arms and the authority 
 of the state were all in the hands of men who had haz- 
 arded their all on the success of the Southern cause. All 
 had been hazarded on the success of separation, and he 
 could not turn back. The army of the state had been 
 transferred to the Confederacy, and there was no retreat 
 left open. And what could that majority have done? 
 Nothing, absolutely nothing. It must have bowed its 
 neck to meek submission. 
 
 In the ordinance of secession the legislature intimates 
 that its action was based on the right of revolution, and not 
 on the right of constitutional secession. It said: "We, 
 the people of the State of Tennessee, waiving any opinion 
 as to the abstract doctrine of secession, but asserting the 
 right, as a free and independent people, to alter, reform or 
 abolish our form of government, in such manner as we 
 think proper, do ordain," etc. The ordinance then de- 
 clares "that all the laws and ordinances by which the 
 State of Tennessee became a member of the Federal Union 
 of the United States of America, are hereby abrogated and 
 annulled, and that all obligations on our part be withdrawn 
 therefrom," etc. The absurdity of a mere legislative body 
 passing a legal and constitutional ordinance of secession 
 
214 East Tennessee and the Civil War, 
 
 was too transparent for this intelligent body of men, in- 
 flamed even as they were by the fury of the storm then 
 sweeping over the South. So, they fell back on the right 
 of "revolutionary secession." 
 
 Who gave this mere legislative body, elected in August, 
 1859, the authority to revolutionize the state, or to declare 
 its secession from the Federal Union? Who gave it the au- 
 thority "to alter, reform or abolish" the state government 
 in such manner as it thought proper? 
 
 It is submitted that the only power on earth capable of 
 these acts was the sovereign people, through a convention 
 of delegates chosen for that purpose. Such an assembly 
 alone would have been clothed with the sovereignty of the 
 people, and have been capable of altering, reforming or 
 abolishing the state government. And then it would have 
 been, according to the Union theories, a revolution, and 
 not constitutional secession. 
 
 However artfully the legislature may have expressed 
 itself in the ordinance of secession, it was universally un- 
 derstood, and proclaimed at the time, that this was peace- 
 able, legal and constitutional secession, binding on all the 
 people of the state. If it had been proclaimed as a revo- 
 lution, thousands who yielded to it, because it was believed to 
 be a constitutional measure, would have resisted it if placed 
 on the ground of a revolution. If secession were legal, 
 and legally accomplished, then such an act bound every 
 citizen of the state. If secession was merely revolution, 
 it left every man free to join it or resist it as he might 
 choose. The leaders understood the difference, and there- 
 fore they kept the idea of a revolution in the background, 
 and openly talked of peaceable and constitutional secession. 
 
 But whether this act were secession, peaceable and con- 
 stitutional, or revolutionary secession, or whether it were 
 pure revolution, it was equally beyond all legislative au- 
 thority. 
 
 Tennessee stands preeminent in her disregard of forms 
 in her secession or revolutionary work. All the other se- 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 215 
 
 ceding states observed certain forms, and preserved an au- 
 gust dignity in the solemn crisis of revolution, by ap- 
 parently, at least, evoking the sanction of the people in de- 
 stroying and building up governments. They at least 
 acted through and by conventions representing the sov- 
 ereignty of the people. But Tennessee, in the face of the 
 sixty-four thousand majority in opposition, assumed to ex- 
 ercise an act of sovereignty unknown in constitutional 
 governments. It overrode all constitutional principles and 
 precedents, and substituted the will of a mere legislative 
 body for that of the people, expressed in the most solemn 
 form through a convention of delegates duly chosen by 
 them. 
 
 Now, these were not bad men who did these things. 
 Some of them were exceptionally good. They were the 
 peers of the very best of the land. From their point of view, 
 they were animated by the purest patriotism. They loved 
 their state with intensest devotion. They were simply 
 seized with the mania of the hour. The spirit of a great 
 revolution was around them. They saw, as it appeared, 
 the old government dissolving and melting away. They 
 believed the Union was gone. The Constitution of the 
 United States, as they believed, had been violated and set 
 at naught by the Abolitionists. The compact of union 
 had been broken. Therefore they felt absolved from its 
 obligations. Each state was at liberty to form its own 
 future alliances. The revolution had shattered the old 
 Union into fragments. The people could form a new one 
 as they chose. Thus reasoned these men. But they over- 
 looked the great fact that in war — in revolutions — force is 
 the ultimate arbiter. Theories must always yield to superior 
 power. And it was most fortunate that in this case su- 
 perior power and the public good were on the same side. 
 However honest these men may have been, however patri- 
 otic as they saw matters, the folly of their acts and the de- 
 plorable consequences resulting, will forever remain the 
 same. 
 
216 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 It has been questioned whether the Union men in Febru- 
 ary, 1861, did not commit an error in opposing and voting 
 against a convention. Possibly they did, but it is by 
 no means certain. To prove that the Union party was 
 wrong in its policy the fact is pointed to, that nearly all 
 the members elected to the proposed convention were open 
 and avowed Union men, while a large majority of the 
 members of the legislature which was convened by Gov- 
 ernor Harris after the people voted down the proposition 
 for a convention, and which passed the ordinance of se- 
 cession, were disloyal. Some of these members of the 
 legislature, in voting for the ordinance, unquestionably 
 misrepresented their constituents. The question is, would 
 the members of the convention, or a majority have re- 
 mained faithful to their pledges to the people. If that 
 body had completed its work, and had adjourned before 
 the 12th of April, the day of the firing on Sumter, it is al- 
 most certain that no ordinance of secession could have 
 been adopted. The jDroposed convention was to meet on 
 the 25th of February. That would have given six weeks 
 for its work — ample time for discussing and deciding the 
 question. If, however, the convention had remained in 
 session beyond that time, in the wild and insane stampede 
 that followed the firing on Sumter, no one can tell what it 
 would have done. Judging by the example of Virginia, 
 North Carolina and Arkansas, under very similar circum- 
 stances, the convention, in all probability, would have 
 yielded to the panic — to the wild delirium of the hour — 
 and passed an ordinance of secession. We know that 
 many of the men who were elected as delegates, notably 
 such men as James E. Bailey and John F. House, after 
 that event, rushed wildly and enthusiastically into the 
 support of secession. So a convention might have done 
 just what the legislature did. 
 
 If, however, the convention had remained firm and re- 
 fused to bow to the storm, can any one doubt that Gov- 
 ernor Harris would have called the legislature together 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 217 
 
 again, and secured the passage of an ordinance separating 
 the state from the National Union? That bold, ambitious 
 man had his whole mind and heart set on this project, and 
 no means for its accomplishment within his power would 
 have been left untried. His previous earnestness showed 
 the length he was prepared to go. It is therefore manifest 
 that after the violent revolution following the firing on 
 Sumter, there remained little hope of saving the state. In 
 the hurtling clamor that followed, reason was silenced. 
 Only wild uproar and unreasoning passion were heard. 
 In East Tennessee only was the voice of protest lifted 
 against this supreme folly. 
 
 It is sometimes said that great as was the influence of 
 Governor Harris in causing the secession of Tennessee, he 
 could not have accomplished this act alone ; that it was 
 the great events rapidly following each other in the spring 
 of 1861 that caused the withdrawal of the state, and that 
 if he had opposed secession to his uttermost, the state 
 still would have seceded. It is probably true that he 
 alone could not have carried the state out of the Union. 
 But that he exercised in this direction a more potent influ- 
 ence than any other man admits of little doubt. His 
 position as governor, to say nothing of his ability, daring 
 and exceeding aggressiveness, gave him immense power. 
 With him alone was lodged the right and the discretion of 
 convening the legislature, which right he exercised twice, 
 by means of which the state was finally withdrawn from 
 the Union. Suppose he had persistently refused to 
 convene the legislature, how could secession have been 
 accomplished? The friends of that measure would have 
 been powerless, except by an open revolution, until a new 
 legislature was elected in August, and had convened in Oc- 
 tober. And before that body could have passed all neces- 
 sary measures to carry the state out, and an election of the 
 people could have been held, a federal army might have 
 been in the state and arrested the whole movement, for it 
 will be remembered that Fort Donelson fell February 16th, 
 
218 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and that Buell's army entered Nashville February 25th, 
 1862. There can scarcely be a doubt of the fact that 
 a federal army would have been pushed forward much 
 earlier, if the position of the state had depended on it. 
 
 On the other hand, suppose there had been a determined 
 Union man in the office of governor, does any one believe 
 he would have convened the legislature twice in extra 
 session, to consider our relations with the National Gov- 
 ernment? And can we believe he would have convened it a 
 second time, after secession had been condemned by such 
 an overwhelming majority as was given against it in the 
 February election? 
 
 The love of the Union on the part of the people of Ten- 
 nessee was perhaps deeper than it was in any other state 
 or section. Jackson's example and patriotic teachings 
 were deeply implanted in the minds and hearts of the peo- 
 ple. Conspicuous as he was for his many striking and 
 grand qualities, in none was he so conspicuous as in his 
 pure, intense and undying love of the Union. The people 
 of Tennessee had caught his spirit. Another hero, Sam 
 Houston, in many respects greatly resembling him, was 
 beloved of Tennessee, almost as the old hero of the Her- 
 mitage had been. He was at that time struggling in Texas 
 with all his power to save the Union, and the example of 
 that great patriot helped to inspire in Tennessee a deeper 
 attachment for the government of our fathers.^ Two other 
 persons, though always political enemies, and altogether un- 
 like, had respectively great influence in the state — greater 
 than any other two men. Each had his friends, who would 
 follow their leader wherever he might go. These were John 
 
 ^ In the History Building of the Tennessee Exposition, in 1897, there was 
 on exhibition an engraving of Sam Houston, " Presented by General An- 
 drew Jackson to Major Andrew Jackson Donelson." 
 
 Underneath the facsimile of Houston's signature is this utterance of 
 the Tennessee-Texas hero and patriot : 
 
 " I wish no epitaph to be written to tell that I survived the ruin of this 
 glorious Union." 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 219 
 
 Bell and Andrew Johnson. Until the 18th of April, 1861, 
 both were known to be ardent Union men. Each had 
 more devoted friends and a larger following than Governor 
 Harris. 
 
 Besides the influence of the four great names I have 
 given in favor of the Union, there were a number of other 
 distinguished men, in Middle Tennessee, who were at first 
 opposed to secession. Among these I mention Balie Pey- 
 ton, Meredith P. Gentry, Neill S. Brown, Gustavus A. 
 Henry, Felix K. ZoUicoffer, Edwin H. Ewing, Ex-Gov- 
 ernor William B. Campbell, Jordan Stokes, W. B. Stokes, 
 John S. Brien, R. J. Meigs, John P. House, A. S. Colyar, 
 Samuel M. Arnell, John Trimble, Russell Houston, Robert 
 Hatton, and James E. Bailey, all Whigs ; and the follow- 
 ing distinguished Democrats, namely: Henry S. Foote, 
 Justice John Catron, Andrew Ewing, Hon. George W. 
 Jones, W. H. Polk, and Cave Johnston. 
 
 These, together with Mr. Bell, by long odds constituted 
 the best talents and the greatest influence then existing in 
 Middle Tennessee. The preponderance in these respects 
 over the leaders in favor of secession was indeed over- 
 whelming. It left no conspicuous names in favor of seces- 
 sion except A. 0. P. Nicholson, then a senator in congress, 
 and Governor Harris ; and the former, though intellectually 
 the superior of the latter, was almost powerless in a revolu- 
 tion.^ As we have seen, in the February election, Middle 
 Tennessee, in common with the other divisions of the state, 
 voted by a decided majority for the Union. And I insist, as 
 I have done elsewhere, that if these great Union leaders had 
 
 ' A. 0. P. Nicholson was intellectually one of Tennessee's greatest sons. 
 His career was crowned with honors. Several times a member of the leg- 
 islature, once a chancellor, then the able editor at Washington of the organ 
 of his party, twice a senator in congress, twice offered distinguished posi- 
 tions of trust and honor by presidents, one in the cabinet and one abroad ; 
 finally becoming chief justice of the supreme court of the state, in which 
 position he achieved for himself a fame that places him in the same rank 
 with the great jurists who had preceded him. Certainly he was a very 
 noteworthy man. 
 
220 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 done in April and May what the Union leaders did in East 
 Tennessee ; if they had shown a bold, determined front, and 
 had not only appealed to the people, but had led the peo- 
 ple, as became brave men, the probabilities are very strong 
 that the state would not have seceded. We can not sup- 
 pose that the love for the Union was originally much 
 stronger in East Tennessee than in Middle Tennessee. 
 The effect of the firing on Sumter was felt in one section 
 as well as in the other. Men were amazed, staggered and 
 bewildered by it in one place as well as in the other. The 
 difference was this : The leaders in East Tennessee de- 
 nounced that act, and told the people that it constituted 
 another and higher reason for standing by the government. 
 In marked contrast to the course pursued in East Ten- 
 nessee, certain leaders of Middle Tennessee, on the 18th of 
 April, 1861, issued an address to "the people of Tennes- 
 see," in which they commended the action of the governor 
 in refusing to furnish troops in response to the call of Mr. 
 Lincoln. They "unqualifiedly disapprove," they say, "of 
 secession, both as a constitutional right and as a remedy for 
 existing evils ;" they condemned "the policy of coercion," 
 and did not think it the duty of the state "to take sides 
 against the government;" they did not think "she ought 
 to join either party," but maintain "her grand mission as 
 a peacemaker." "Her mission should be to maintain the 
 sanctity of her soil from the hostile tread of any party." 
 "But should a purpose be developed by the government of 
 over-running and subjugating our brethren of the seceded 
 states, we say unequivocally that it will be the duty of the 
 state to resist at all hazards, at any cost, and by arms, any 
 such purpose or attempt." "And to meet any and all 
 emergencies it should he fully armed.'' ^ 
 
 This address was signed by Neill S. Brown (ex-governor) , 
 Russell Houston, E. H. Ewing (ex-member of congress), 
 Cave Johnston (ex-postmaster general under Polk) , John 
 Bell, R. J. Meigs, S. D. Morgan, John S. Brien (ex- 
 chancellor), Andrew Ewing (ex-member of congress), J. 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 221 
 
 H. Callender, M. D., and Balie Peyton. Notwithstand- 
 ing their declaration of unqualified disapproval of seces- 
 sion, "both as a constitutional right and as a remedy for 
 existing evils," this paper was regarded at the time as a 
 surrender to secession. Balie Peyton and John S, Brien, 
 it is believed, never became secessionists at heart, but 
 their voices became silent. Return J. Meigs remained 
 loyal to the Union as long as he lived. Soon after this 
 he left the state, settled in Washington, and never re- 
 turned to Tennessee. All the other signers at once united 
 their destinies with the Southern Confederacy. From that 
 time their influence was all on that side. 
 
 About this time, Henry, Foote, Jones, Gentry, House, 
 Zollicoffer, and most of the other Union leaders, also gave up 
 the Union and sustained secession. The only men of 
 prominence who remained true and faithful were Meigs, 
 Catron, Trimble, Dr. W. P. Jones, W. H. Polk and Ex- 
 Governor Campbell. These were utterly powerless to 
 stem the tide now running with irresistible force in favor 
 of separation. "When the Union masses saw their trusted 
 leaders, such as Bell, Henry, Peyton and Brown — the men 
 they looked to for guidance in this dark, trying hour — for- 
 sake the Union, they naturally concluded that all was lost. 
 They, too, surrendered to what seemed inevitable. The 
 fight was over. Everything in the wild sweep of passion 
 and madness tended in the direction of secession and war. 
 Long before the election in June, Middle and West Tennes- 
 see became a vast military camp of Confederate soldiers. 
 And thus by the active aid of these once honored Union 
 leaders, Isham G. Harris was enabled to carry the state of 
 Jackson out of the Union and into the Southern Con- 
 federacy — a thing believed to have been impossible with- 
 out their aid. Tens of thousands of Tennesseans who 
 thus joined the secession movement, like the illustrious 
 Meredith P. Gentry, did so not because they believed in 
 the right of secession, nor that it was a remedy for exist- 
 ing evil, but because their neighbors, their friends, their 
 
222 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 kindred were going that way. They went with their 
 people, their state, their section, still believing that seces- 
 sion was wrong in principle, and an act of stupendous folly. 
 And now that secession was accomplished, every man in 
 favor of it was expected to enter the army, and nearly all 
 did enter the army to fight for it. And never did soldiers 
 behave more gallantly, more heroically than these Tennes- 
 seans on the field of battle. I need only mention the fact 
 that nearly half of Johnston's army, in the great campaign 
 from Dalton to Atlanta, was composed of these men. In 
 the fight of Peach Tree, near Atlanta, it was a Tennessee 
 — an East Tennessee — regiment, the 19th Confederate, com- 
 manded by Colonel Frank Walker, that came out of the 
 charge nearly annihilated. 
 
 Conspicuous for their courage as generals on every battle- 
 field where they fought were William B. Bate, Benjamin 
 H. Cheatham, Napoleon B. Forrest, Felix K. ZoUicoffer, 
 Leonidas Polk, James D. Porter and others. The private 
 soldiers were no less so. And thus through the secession 
 of the state, Tennessee put one hundred and twenty thou- 
 sand brave soldiers into the Confederate army, and thirty- 
 five thousand equally brave soldiers into the Federal army. 
 
 Note. — Vote in the Senate on the Question of Secession. 
 
 Senators voting in the affirmative were : R. W. Bumpass, of Madison, 
 Haywood, Lauderdale and Tipton ; Reese T. Hildreth, of Overton, Fen- 
 tress, Morgan and Scott; Judson Horn, of Stewart, Robertson and Mont- 
 gomery; R. W. Hunter, of Giles, Wayna and Lawrence; James M. John- 
 son, of Marshall and Bedford ; Jas. T. Lane, of McMinn, Meigs, Polk and 
 Monroe; James E. Mickley, of Benton, Humphreys, Perry, Decatur and 
 Henderson; Jno. A. Minnis, of Rhea, Bledsoe, Bradley, Hamilton and 
 Marion ; Geo. R. McClellan, of Johnson, Carter, Washington and Siillivan ; 
 Thomas McNeilly, of Maury, Lewis, Hickman and Dickson ; Taz. W. New- 
 man, of Franklin and Lincoln ; Robert G. Payne, of Shelby and Fayette ; 
 George B. Peters, of Hardiman, McNairy and Hardin ; S. S. Stanton, of 
 Jackson, White and Macon ; Jas. E. Thompson, of Smith and Sumner ; Ed. 
 J. Wood, of Coffee, Grundy, Van Buren, Cannon and Warren ; B. L. 
 Stovall, of Henry, Weakley and Obion, elected speaker vice Taz. W. New- 
 man, resigned to enter the Confederate service. 
 
 Those voting in the negative were : V. S. Allen, of Gibson, Carroll and 
 Dyer; James S. Boyd, of Knox and Roane ; Wm. M. Bradford, of Hawkins, 
 
Tennessee Ordinance of Secession. 223 
 
 Hancock and Jefferson ; M. V. Nash, of Claiborne, Grainger, Anderson 
 and Campbell; John W. Richardson, of Rutherford and Williamson; 
 Jordan Stokes, of Wilson and De Kalb ; and D. V. Stokeley, of Greene^ 
 Cocke, Sevier and Blount. 
 
 In the house of representatives, those voting in the affirmative were: 
 Messrs. W, N. Baker, of Perry and Decatur ; Sam'l Baker, of Weakley ; 
 Wm. H. Barksdale, of Smith, Sumner and Macon; Wm. M. Bayless, of 
 Washington; S. T. Bicknell, of Blount; R. H. Bledsoe, of Scott, Morgan 
 and Fentress; R. B. Cheatham, of Cheatham, Davidson, Montgomery and 
 Robertson ; H. N. Cowden, of Marshall ; Phillip Critz, of Hawkins ; J. W. 
 Davidson, of Benton and Humphreys ; John R. Davis, of Wilson ; N. B. 
 Dudley, of Montgomery; William Ewing, of Williamson; W. T. Farley, of 
 Shelby ; John Pat. Farrelly, of Shelby ; J. J. Ford, of De Kalb ; C. Frazier, 
 of Henry ; George Gantt, of Maury ; W. W. Grey, of Hardeman ; Richard 
 R. Harris, of Bradley; George V. Hebb, of Lincoln; R. W. Ingram, of 
 Fayette; W. E. B. Jones, of Overton; W. R. Kenner, of Jackson; T. J, 
 Kennedy, of Lincoln, Marshall and Giles; B. J. Lea, of Haywood; H. C. 
 Lockhart, of Stewart; Wm. L. Martin, of Wilson; J. G. McCabe, of Can- 
 non ; J. S. Morphis, of McNairy ; Robert C. Nail, of Obion ; Joseph G. 
 Pickett, of Smith; J. D. Porter, Jr., of Carroll, Gibson, Madison and 
 Henry; Stith Richardson, of Dyer and Lauderdale; D. A. Roberts, of 
 Hardin; J. M. Shield, of Grundy, Coffee and Van Buren; John Smith, of 
 Warren; Jas. M. Sowell, of Lawrence; J. F. Trevitt, of Sullivan; A. J. 
 Vaughn, of Monroe; C. H. Whitmore, of Fayette, Tipton and Shelby; 
 Madison Williams, of Franklin; John J, Williams, of Hickman; John 
 Woods, of Rutherford ; and Mr. Speaker W. C. Whitthorne, of Williamson, 
 Maury and Lewis — 46. 
 
 Those voting in the negative were: R. H. Armstrong, of Knox and 
 Sevier; William Brazelton, Jr., of Jefferson; James Britton, of Greene; R. 
 R. Butler, of Carter and Johnson; A. Caldwell, of McMinn; James W. 
 Gillespie, of Rhea, Bledsoe and Hamilton; T. S. Gorman, of Cocke; A. L. 
 Greene, of Roane; James S. Havron, of Marion; Robert Johnson, of 
 Greene, Hawkins, Hancock and Jefferson ; A. Kincaid, of Anderson and 
 Campbell; John W. Kincaid, of Claiborne; P. B. Mayfield, of Polk, 
 McMinn and Meigs ; J. Morris, of Wayne ; John Norman, of Carroll ; W. 
 M. Russell, of White; D, W. C. Senter, of Grainger; A. G. Shrewsbury, of 
 Henderson; J. B. White, of Davidson; John Williams, of Knox; and 
 John Woodard, of Robertson — 21. 
 
 Mr. W. H. Wisener, of Bedford, a Union man, was paired with Mr. 
 William R. Doak, of Bedford and Rutherford. 
 
224 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 GUBERNATORIAL CONVENTION IN 1861. 
 
 Delegates start to Gubernatorial Convention in May, 1861— Incidents on 
 the way — Meet Colonel Turney's regiment of Confederate soldiers— 
 The first regiment in the state — Its departure from home — Union con- 
 vention — Appearance of a mob — Ex-Governor W. B. Campbell nom- 
 inated as Union candidate— Convention hurriedly adjourned— Camp- 
 bell declines — W. H. Polk substituted — Wild excitement in Middle 
 Tennessee in favor of secession — A conversation with Ex-Governor 
 Brown and Judge Brien — Both professed devotion to the Union — Both 
 under the prevailing influences — Brown soon yields to the secession 
 clamor — A good man — The old Whig and Democratic leaders of Middle 
 Tennessee who at first opposed secession discussed — Some one account- 
 able for carrying Tennessee into the vortex of revolution — Chiefest 
 among them was Governor Harris — The Whig leaders a splendid set of 
 men — John Bell, Balie Peyton, Meredith P. Gentry, Neill S. Brown, E. 
 H. Ewing, G. A. Henry, W. B. Campbell, John S. Brien, John Trimble, 
 John F. House — Mr. Bell sent to Knoxville — His speech— Interview 
 with old friends — Democratic leaders of Middle Tennessee — State 
 might have been saved. 
 
 The Union men of Tennessee were determined, in the 
 spring of 1861, not to yield the state to the enemies of 
 the government without using every effort in their power 
 to save it. They wished not only to defeat the attempt at 
 secession, but to elect a loyal governor and legislature. 
 Accordingly a convention was called to meet in Nashville 
 on the second day of May for the purpose of nominating 
 a candidate for governor. On the 1st of that month, 
 therefore, Messrs. Maynard, Baxter, Trigg, Fleming and 
 the author, and possibly John Williams, left home to at- 
 tend the convention. Everything was encouraging at 
 that time for the Union cause in East Tennessee. We felt 
 hopeful, and left in high spirits. All seemed to be well 
 until we reached Stevenson, Alabama, on the Chatta- 
 nooga Railroad. There we met Colonel Peter Turney, 
 
\ 
 
 Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 225 
 
 with his regiment of Tennessee soldiers, on their way to 
 join the Confederate army in Virginia. His was the first 
 Tennessee Confederate regiment. The soldiers were shout- 
 ing and hurrahing with intense enthusiasm. Fortunately, 
 as was thought by us, it was ten o'clock at night when 
 the two trains met. They stood alongside of each other 
 an uncomfortably long time for our party. We greatly 
 preferred to be on our way. 
 
 When Sumter was fired upon, Colonel Turney at once 
 went to work in the mountain counties of Middle Ten- 
 nessee to raise a regiment of men for the Confederate 
 army, and in fifteen days he was on his way to Richmond. 
 He remained in the army four years, and won distinction 
 by his bravery. In 1870, he was elected a member of the 
 Supreme Court of Tennessee, and remained on the bench 
 until 1892, when he was elected governor, which office he 
 held for two terms. 
 
 These soldiers were in all the freshness and glow of 
 their first day's travel toward the seat of war. That 
 afternoon they had left their rendezvous, forty or fifty 
 miles away, and boarded the train for Virginia. Speeches 
 were made and a banner presented. Their friends, their 
 wives, their parents, and their sisters and sweethearts had 
 assembled to see them off. Mothers here and there had 
 slipped Bibles into the pockets of their sons. Amid shouts 
 and God speeds, blessings and tears, and the waving of 
 banners and the kissing of hands, the train had slowly 
 pulled out. And now handkerchiefs were waved as tokens 
 of love, last messages were shouted back from the cars, 
 and all eyes eagerly watched as the train turned a curve 
 and passed out of sight. The crowd still stood in silence 
 weeping. It was the first departing train of soldiers seen 
 in Tennessee. These good people will yet see many more 
 trains leaving for the war, but they will never see this 
 proud, splendid regiment return as it was then. No 
 wonder they weep. Some of these brave boys, now so 
 15 
 
226 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 happy, -will return, but how changed ! They will come 
 back one or two at a time, or in small squads, broken in 
 health, maimed in battle, or perchance with still festering 
 wounds. They will return with no stirring martial music, 
 with no waving banners. All silent and in tatters these 
 now exulting boys will come, the few that come at all, 
 having had enough of war. Weep, mothers, for many of 
 you will never see these brave sons of yours again, except 
 in sweet dreams. 
 
 Ah, war is a hard, hard life ! But for the excitements 
 of danger and adventure, and the pleasure of merry com- 
 panionship, it would be unendurable. The first day's 
 march, or movement of troops toward the seat of war, is 
 always the happiest. The next will be less so, and those 
 that follow less and less so, as the long days and months 
 and years go by, until the final discharge. By that time 
 music and banners and jests have ceased to lighten the 
 heart and stir the spirit, and the mind dwells only on 
 the distant home and the loved ones there. 
 
 The soldiers in this train were shouting themselves 
 hoarse for "Jeff Davis and the Southern Confederacy." 
 Then, that annoyed me ; now I can appreciate their spirit 
 and their feelings. They believed they were right, and 
 honesty condones an error, if not a crime. These ex- 
 ultant soldiers were going to fight, as they believed, in a 
 righteous cause, and most valiantly they did their duty. 
 
 After considerable delay, our party again found itself 
 under way — soon passing out of Alabama and back into 
 Tennessee. As soon as we passed over the mountain, into 
 Middle Tennessee, we had evidence that secession had 
 swept over that country like a cyclone, prostrating every 
 object before its resistless force. All who entered the 
 train during the remainder of the way to Nashville were 
 loud, noisy and demonstrative in its favor. They were, 
 in fact, wild with excitement. 
 
 Our party arrived in Nashville late in the night. The 
 next morning a preliminary meeting was held, privately, 
 
Guhernational Convention in 1861. 227 
 
 to arrange the program of the convention. To our sur- 
 prise we found but a few delegates present. This was 
 significant of the state of affairs in the other divisions of 
 the state. At the hour appointed, the delegates repaired 
 to a large room in the court-house. According to the ar- 
 rangement agreed upon, the Hon, William H. Polk, the 
 brother of Ex-President James K, Polk, was made chair- 
 man. On taking the chair he made no speech. Resolu- 
 tions were then introduced setting forth the virtues and 
 qualifications of Ex-Governor "W. B. Campbell, for gov- 
 ernor, and naming him for that office. Not a word was 
 said in the resolutions in favor of the Union. 
 
 Soon after the delegates entered the hall, to their sur- 
 prise, a large crowd of people began to pour into it. They 
 at first thought these were Union men who were coming in 
 to witness the proceedings. But they continued to come 
 until the hall was nearly full. A glance at them showed 
 that they were not mere friendly spectators. They 
 looked fierce and rough, and had a dark, ominous, 
 threatening aspect. It soon flashed on the minds of the 
 delegates that this was probably a mob assembling to 
 break up the convention. There they stood, scowling 
 with desperate determination, waiting perhaps for a signal 
 to commence their work. They spoke not a word. Deep 
 and determined purpose was depicted on their brows. 
 
 Polk quickly saw what was impending. Not a speech 
 was made. As soon as the resolutions were read and a 
 motion to adopt was made, Polk put the question, and 
 before the "ayes" were all well said, he declared them 
 adopted. Then a motion to adjourn quickly followed. 
 This was instantly put, and without waiting to hear the 
 result, the chairman declared the convention adjourned, 
 and speedily stepped down from the stand. Immediately 
 the delegates passed out and went to their hotels. All 
 this was done so quickly that the supx^osed mob stood con- 
 founded when it found the delegates gone. 
 
 No committee was appointed to notify Governor Camp- 
 
228 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 bell of his nomination, nor was any executive committee 
 selected to aid in the campaign. Campbell subsequently 
 declined the nomination, and William H. Polk was, per- 
 haps by common consent, put forward in his jolace as the 
 Union candidate, and voted for by the Union men. This 
 convention was held a little more than a month before the 
 time when the question of separation or no separation was 
 to be submitted to the people at the ballot box. When 
 the result of that election became known, there no longer 
 existed any hope, not even the slightest, of the success of 
 a Union candidate. From the day of that election, there- 
 fore the Union party of the state began to lose its confi- 
 dence and to some extent its compactness. In East Ten- 
 nessee, where the Union men did not fear mobs, the organi- 
 zation was kept compact and solid until after the Greene- 
 ville Convention, indeed until after the disastrous battle 
 of Bull Run. That battle was a blow of such stunning 
 force, a disappointment so deep and crushing, that the 
 Union people never entirely recovered from it until after 
 General Burnside entered Knoxville with his army in Sep- 
 tember, 1863. 
 
 While I was in Nashville I called on my former friends, 
 Ex-Governor Neill S. Brown and Ex- Judge John S. Brien. 
 I had known them well and intimately. In 1847, Gov- 
 €rnor Brown had honored me by making me a member of 
 his military staff. We were always intimate afterwards. 
 I had traveled and canvassed with both of these gentlemen 
 in 1856, in Know Nothing days, and had often spoken 
 with them on the same stump. They had been Whig 
 leaders of high and distinguished rank. Brown had been 
 governor of the state, speaker of the house of representa- 
 tives, and minister to St. Petersburg under Mr. Fillmore. 
 Brien had been an able chancellor, a leading lawyer and a 
 successful popular speaker. 
 
 While I was with them on the occasion referred to. Dr. 
 John H. Callender, another prominent Whig, and possibly 
 others, came in. Of course, the political outlook was the 
 
. Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 229 
 
 subject of conversation. I soon found that these gentle- 
 men were all more or less under the chilling shadow of se- 
 cession. They seemed to be paralyzed. They had not yet 
 joined the enemy, and they declared they never would ; 
 yet they were evidently under the influence of the prevail- 
 ing feeling in Middle Tennessee. They were timid, cau- 
 tious, hesitating. 
 
 Becoming almost vexed at the faint-hearted utterances 
 and the want of courage in men who had been state 
 leaders, I expressed myself strongly and warmly, some- 
 what in reproof of their conduct. I blamed them and the 
 other Union men for not arresting and resisting the growth 
 of secession in their midst, as had been done in East Ten- 
 nessee. Brown arose, and putting one hand behind him, 
 and striding back and forth across the room, he poured 
 forth an eloquent denunciation of secession, declaring in 
 the most earnest terms his determination to stand by the 
 Union. Dr. Callender, with evident mental reservation, 
 and with signs of a first love for secession, also declared 
 his unalterable love of the Union and his purpose to abide 
 by it. Brien was not so brave and so profuse in his words 
 as the other two, but his love of the Union, in the end, 
 proved to be more enduring. 
 
 A few days after my return home from Nashville, I read 
 an account in the papers (or heard) that Governor Brown, 
 soon after my departure, had marched through the streets 
 of Nashville at the head of a vast crowd which was shout- 
 ing frantically "for Jeff Davis." This, then, was the end 
 of his boasted devotion to the Union. Yet Governor 
 Brown was a good, a noble, and I venture to say a patri- 
 otic man. This act was not the act of his head or mind, 
 as I believe, but the result of the terrorism of the hour. 
 Let no man say until he has been proven by trial that he 
 would have acted differently. As for Dr. Callender, the 
 first love of secession which I had that day seen softly 
 nestling in his bosom soon grew into a burning flame of 
 the greatest intensity. Judge Brien quietly remained true 
 
230 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 until the McClellan canvass, in 1864, when, holding that 
 the "war was a failure," though nearly at an end, he was 
 lost in the motley party then opposing its further prosecu- 
 tion. Politically, he was never seen or heard of after- 
 wards. He was a brilliant man, with many good qualities. 
 
 The old Whig leaders, and the several able Democrats 
 of Middle Tennessee who at first opposed secession, de- 
 serve more than a passing notice. Their eminent ability, 
 their large influence, and their virtues as private citizens, 
 all demand some notice. Somebody must bear with pos- 
 terity the responsibility of carrying the State of Tennessee 
 into the vortex of an unwise revolution, of bankrupting 
 the people, the banks and the state ; of sending tens of 
 thousands of her noble sons to untimely graves. "Who 
 shall thus be held responsible? 
 
 The Whig leaders of Middle Tennessee of 1860-61 were 
 splendid men. None of them, possibly excepting Mr. 
 John Bell and Balie Peyton, had passed the meridian of 
 their greatest power and influence. The most prominent 
 of these were John Bell, Balie Peyton, Meredith P. Gentry, 
 Governor N. S. Brown, Edwin H. Ewing, Gustavus A. 
 Henry, Governor W. B. Campbell, Judge John S. Brien, 
 Jordan Stokes, Pobert Hatton, John Trimble, Charles 
 Ready, A. S. Colyar, James E. Bailey, John F. House, 
 and E. H. East. There were many others of less note. 
 The most distinguished among these unquestionably was 
 John Bell. When quite a young man, he was elected to 
 congress several times in the Nashville district, over the 
 influence and bitter opposition of General Jackson. These 
 were remarkable triumphs. In congress he was elected 
 speaker in the days of our greatest men. In 1841 he was 
 selected as secretary of war by General Harrison. In 
 1847 he was elected United States senator, and served two 
 terms in that high office. In 1860 he was nominated for 
 the presidency of the United States by the Whig or Na- 
 tional Union party. 
 
 Mr. Bell was always recognized as a man of great ability. 
 
Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 231 
 
 He stood in the second rank of statesmen, just below Clay, 
 Webster and Calhoun, His mind was subtle, astute, 
 philosophical, profound and far seeing. He was very slow 
 and deliberate in reaching conclusions. His culture was 
 broad and liberal and his information general. As a 
 speaker, in his later years, he was too dignified and pro- 
 found for popular assemblies. It is said he was different 
 in his younger days. He was not in an ordinary sense a 
 popular leader, and yet he led his party in Tennessee for 
 thirty years. This was due to his sagacity and the force 
 of his intellect. He did the thinking, while more brilliant 
 speakers fought the battles. There were two great defects 
 in his mental character. These were : slowness in form- 
 ing his opinions and excessive caution. On all new ques- 
 tions he reached his conclusions after extreme deliberation. 
 He would brood over them until nearly all the world was 
 aligned on one side or the other. He did not define his 
 position on Mr. Clay's compromise measures in 1850, 
 until the debate was nearly over. Even then, there was a 
 want of that direct, that bold avowal of opinions which so 
 greatly distinguished the great man who was the author 
 of those measures. So, at a later period, he was the only 
 senator from the South to oppose the repeal of the Mis- 
 souri Compromise line, yet it was so late before he defined 
 his position that it had but little effect. 
 
 Mr. Bell was no leader in a great crisis. He was not 
 only slow and indecisive, but was more or less timid at 
 such times. Physically, he was regarded as a man of 
 courage, but he seemed to be powerless to resist a counter 
 current of public opinion in times of high excitement. 
 Had one insulted or wronged him, he would have been 
 promj)t to resent or punish the outrage. But, let the 
 public opinion of a section be turned against him, or let a 
 howling crowd call him an Abolitionist or a traitor to the 
 South, and it affected him as the rage of an armed enemy 
 could not. 
 
 So, when the crowd waited on him, after the firing on 
 
232 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Fort Sumter, with music and shouting and hurrahs, and 
 called him out for a speech, he knew it was a summons to 
 surrender. No doubt, it was an hour of terrible mental 
 agony. His mind, I venture to say, never assented to the 
 position he assumed that night. His heart revolted at the 
 alliance he there made with his old enemies, but a fierce, 
 an omnipotent, an overpowering Southern sentiment was 
 around him and he yielded. In a speech made in Knox- 
 ville, after this, on June 6, 1861, he was reported as 
 saying : 
 
 "I have already told you that I have ever opposed se- 
 cession as a heresy — I have opposed the separation of the 
 state from the Federal Union — I have opposed the South- 
 ern Confederacy, and I see no necessity now for assuming 
 a new position. But, by what I have said, you will see 
 that I have placed my neck in the halter. I am a rebel." ' 
 
 With Mr. Bell's life-long views, he could not fail to re- 
 alize the incongruity of his new position. He denied the 
 right of secession. His position was in marked contrast 
 with that of those who thought secession was a legal and 
 a constitutional act. These believed they had the right to 
 secede, and, therefore, that secession was no offense under 
 the law. Mr. Bell thought otherwise. He had no heart 
 for the cause he had just espoused. He yielded to the 
 terrible pressure around him. He had too long fought 
 nullification and secession to fall in love with them in his 
 mature old age. His prejudices were strong and invet- 
 erate, and, being a mild man, he was little inclined to 
 change opinions. He was firm and immutable in his con- 
 victions. He had also been too long the target for the 
 poisoned arrows of the very men he had just joined, to 
 either love or sympathize with them in their ambitious 
 projects. Their success would be the downfall of all his 
 long -cherished dreams. In fact, the hour that he surren- 
 dered to the Southern Confederacy was the mournful end 
 
 ^ Possibly this was his Nashville speech. 
 
Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 233 
 
 of all his hopes, either in the North or the South. He 
 fell, never to rise again. 
 
 Suppose Mr. Bell, instead of yielding to the clamor of a 
 crowd of excited men and to the demands of a despotic 
 public opinion, had remained firm and submitted to be 
 driven out of his city and state, as a fugitive and an ex- 
 ile, by the power of public opinion, as Justice John Catron 
 and Return J. Meigs did, how different his fate might have 
 been ! How grandly he would have appeared in history ! 
 He would have been the most eminent citizen of the South 
 who had remained true to the Union. His recent prestige 
 as the candidate of the Constitutional Union party for the 
 presidency, would have received additional luster from his 
 patriotic sacrifice. He would have become the most popu- 
 lar as well as most conspicuous statesman in the country, 
 next after Mr. Lincoln. Honors would have fallen on him 
 without stint. In 1864, he would almost certainly have 
 been placed on the presidential ticket with Mr. Lincoln, 
 and on the assassination of the latter, would have become 
 president — the dream of his life. He had no secret seces- 
 sion sympathies to tempt him when he had gained the object 
 of his ambition. Every fiber of his heart was true to the 
 Union. Thus it might have come to pass that the great 
 object of Mr. Bell's life, by agencies more potent than 
 man's designing, and altogether beyond his ken or control, 
 would have been attained. He was in many respects in 
 full accord with the Republican party, which had just ob- 
 tained control of the government. He had supported the 
 compromise measures of 1850, had opposed the repeal of 
 the Missouri Compromise, and had opposed the Kansas- 
 Nebraska Bill. He was conservative in sentiment and 
 broad and national in view. The old Whig party, which 
 constituted the larger part of the Republican party, would 
 have supported him in preference to a Southern Democrat, 
 who had been so recently allied with the Breckenridge Dis- 
 union party. 
 
 In the early days of June, 1861, Mr. Bell was sent to 
 
234 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Knoxville to gain over the Union men to the cause of se- 
 cession. I say "sent," because I am morally certain that 
 he would not have gone on such a mission, to his old 
 and intimate friends, of his own volition. Secession was 
 exacting in its demands. It expected the most perfect 
 obedience. To hesitate was to be doubted. Mr. Bell had 
 no heart for this work anywhere, but to go to Knoxville, 
 in his new role as a secession speaker, and meet Brownlow, 
 his most devoted, his life-long friend, and other friends — 
 this was gall and worm-wood to his proud spirit. Yet he 
 was bidden to go and he had to obey. An appointment 
 was made for him to speak in the court-house on the 6th 
 of June. His audience was small and composed almost 
 exclusively of secessionists. The Union men would not at- 
 tend. Not a single Union leader was present.^ 
 
 After he had finished his speech, which was said to have 
 been cold and less than half-hearted, he walked across the 
 street to my office, about one hundred yards away. It so 
 happened that Brownlow and two or three others, old 
 friends of Mr. Bell, were with me. I think it was prear- 
 ranged that Mr. Bell and Mr. Brownlow should meet there. 
 Among those present, as I recollect, were Perez Dickinson, 
 John "Williams, John Fleming, possibly C. F. Trigg and 
 Wm. Rule, then a young man, a part of the time. The 
 meeting was embarrassing all around. I am ashamed to 
 say that not one present had called on him. After the 
 usual formal remarks, Mr. Bell said, in a half-sad and 
 half-complaining tone : "I see that none of my old friends 
 were over to hear me speak." "No," said Mr. Brownlow, 
 "we were not present, and did not intend being. We did 
 
 ^ During this trip Mr. Bell spoke also at Athens. In his speech he de- 
 plored the division of opinion and alienation of feeling which had crept 
 in among his old friends. Turning to the venerable John McGaughey, 
 he said: " There is my friend, Mr. McGaughey, between whom and myself 
 there used to be no difference in our views. I know not how he stands in 
 reference to these new questions." " I am still," said Mr. McGaughey, in 
 his gentle, earnest voice, " for the Union, the constitution and the enforce- 
 ment of the laws." 
 
Gubernatorial Convention of 1861. 235 
 
 not wish to witness the spectacle of your being surrounded 
 by your enemies, who a few months ago were denouncing 
 you as a traitor. We did not wish to hear these men 
 shouting for you and see you in such a position." Mr. 
 Brownlow then poured forth a torrent of abuse and denun- 
 ciation of secession. Mr. Bell made no attempt to defend 
 them, nor indeed to defend his own course. He listened 
 politely, and acted as if he felt his awkward position. But 
 no one uttered a word of censure or an unkind remark 
 about him personally. All present had too much respect 
 for his dignity, his exalted worth and his greatness, to 
 wound him. He seemed sad and dejected. Both he and 
 those present were under unusual restraint and embarrass- 
 ment. 
 
 Finally, to relieve the situation, I invited them all to 
 walk to my house, nearby, and take a glass of wine. Ac- 
 cordingly, we went there. Under the stimulating influ- 
 ence of the new surroundings, the conversation soon be- 
 came free, frank and cordial. While there some one said : 
 "Mr. Bell, if you and the other Union leaders in Middle 
 Tennessee could have foreseen what might be done, and 
 had stood firm and taken the stump for the Union, and 
 boldly rallied the people, as was done in East Tennessee, 
 the state might have been saved." He answered sub- 
 stantially as follows : "Yes, I see how it might possibly 
 have been, but it is now too late." This was said with 
 deep and pathetic sadness. Other remarks were made by 
 him during the hour passed in my parlor indicating, but 
 not expressing, his embarrassment in his present position. 
 But he expressed no regret, made no apology for his 
 course. At the end of an hour or more, we all parted in 
 sadness, but with unabated kindness. I never saw Mr. 
 Bell after this memorable day. He adhered to the new 
 position he had assumed. On the evacuation of Nash- 
 ville, the place of his residence, by the Confederate army, 
 strange to say, he left with it, to follow its changing and 
 eventful fortunes. He wandered from point to point 
 
236 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 through tho South, a disappointed, sorrowing old man, 
 with no home, and worse than all, with no country he 
 could call his own, uncertain, no doubt, whether the defeat 
 or the triumph of his cause would be the greater calamity 
 to him. When the war closed so suddenly in one general 
 crash in the spring of 1865, he finally ventured to return 
 to his former home, broken in health and in fortune, to 
 find and receive at the hands of his old friend, Brownlow, 
 who was then governor, that kind reception and consid- 
 eration so soothing to him in that dark hour. It must 
 have been to the magnanimous mind of Brownlow a source 
 of infinite satisfaction to be in a position to assist and 
 protect Mr. Bell in the time of his greatest need and 
 gloom. 
 
 Mr. Bell was not, in my opinion, a willing secessionist. 
 It was the panic of the hour that made him renounce the 
 Union. There was not a drop of disloyal blood in his 
 veins. Yet he must be held responsible at the bar of pub- 
 lic opinion for his acts. The plea that he yielded to over- 
 powering necessity will scarcely avail. Mr. Bell was the 
 leader of the Union party, not only in this state, but 
 throughout the whole country. His position as such de- 
 manded constancy and courage. When, therefore, he 
 abandoned his standard, to say the least of it, he was guilty 
 of a great error. Most gladly would I offer a justification, 
 if I could. He was my friend. When I was quite a 
 young man, he had rendered me a political favor of inesti- 
 mable value. I never ceased to be grateful to him. From 
 time to time, ever afterwards, as before, I rendered him 
 such returns and services as I could. I at all times gave 
 him a true, a sincere and a hearty allegiance. I served 
 him with grateful fidelity. I had done my share in secur- 
 ing his nomination, and in carrying Tennessee for him in 
 the presidential election the year before. At this late day, 
 after the lapse of more than a third of a century, with sad- 
 ness and sincerest affection, I recall the many virtues of 
 that pure, great and unfortunate man. 
 
Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 237 
 
 There never was any serious question, after the death of 
 Hugh Lawson White, in 1840, as to the preeminence of 
 Mr. Bell over the other great Whig leaders of the state. 
 The only one among them who was his equal in ability 
 was Spencer Jarnagin of East Tennessee. He was, per- 
 haps, in mere intellectual power, quite the equal, if not 
 the superior, of Mr. Bell, or any other man ever born in 
 the state, but in all things else, greatly his inferior. 
 Ephraim H. Foster was eloquent and magnificent, but in 
 breadth and profound thought he was no equal to Mr. 
 Bell. James C. Jones, while a peerless popular speaker 
 and leader, was not distinguished for grasp and force of 
 intellect. As to the other Middle Tennessee leaders, still 
 alive in 1860, excepting Mr. Gentry, there could be no 
 doubt as to their inferiority to Mr. Bell. 
 
 Meredith P. Gentry was unquestionably a notable man. 
 In many respects he was the superior of Mr. Bell. As a 
 speaker he was greatly above him. Indeed, in this re- 
 spect, no man in the state, since the death of Felix 
 Grundy, equaled him, except the lamented and brilliant 
 William T. Haskell. The latter surpassed all of his con- 
 temporaries, either in or out of the state, in dazzling bril- 
 liancy. Mr. Gentry was a strong, bold thinker, as well as 
 a most powerful and fascinating speaker. His voice was 
 something phenomenal. He was lofty in manner, daring 
 in thought, sublime in bearing. Rarely had there been 
 born a more exalted nature. Yet he lacked that steady, 
 deep gaze, that broad comprehensive and philosophical in- 
 sight which Mr. Bell possessed. 
 
 Balie Peyton had been a prominent character in this 
 state, as well as in the nation, as far back as 1835. He 
 had been a bright, indeed rather a brilliant man. But he 
 was now in his decadence, and was far from being the 
 strong man he had been twenty-five years before. As he 
 grew old, he lost that boldness and fiery energy which he 
 once possessed. 
 
 Ex-Governor Neill S. Brown was a man of excellent 
 
238 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ability and a fine speaker. He had great influence, and 
 commanded the respect and confidence of his party in a 
 high degree. But in times of trial and danger he was 
 wanting in the boldness necessary for a leader. He lacked 
 that unfaltering courage which distinguished Gentry and 
 Peyton. Altogether he was a most worthy and valuable 
 citizen. 
 
 Edwin H. Ewing had been more distinguished of late 
 years as a very fine lawyer and well-informed gentleman 
 than as a politician. A number of years before he had 
 been a member of congress. He always took a deep 
 interest in politics, and was regarded as a very able 
 man. As a high-toned, pure gentleman, none stood 
 better. 
 
 Gustavus A. Henry was one of the most elegant gentle- 
 men and delightful, graceful and eloquent orators we ever 
 had in the state. But he was never distinguished for 
 great power of intellect. He too, like Governor Brown, 
 lacked that firmness and courage necessary in leaders in 
 perilous times. 
 
 Governor W. B. Campbell, who was nominated as the 
 Union candidate for governor, was a brave soldier, a spot- 
 less gentleman, and a true and noble patriot. His ability 
 was very fair, but he possessed none of that contageous 
 enthusiasm essential to great leaders in times of revolu- 
 tion. As a popular leader, he could not draw men to him- 
 self as if by a magnet. As a soldier, men would have fol- 
 lowed him to the cannon's mouth. During the Mexican 
 "War he commanded a regiment of Tennessee troops, and 
 in the battle of Monterey he won imperishable laurels by 
 his bravery. His regiment was the first to storm and 
 carry the strong fortress, though this honor has been 
 claimed for Colonel Jefi'erson Davis' regiment also. He 
 was a relative of Colonel William Campbell of King's 
 Mountain fame, and a grandson of Colonel Arther CamjD- 
 bell, of whom I have spoken elsewhere. In courage he 
 was the equal of his distinguished kinsmen. At one time 
 
Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 239 
 
 he filled with great acceptability the ofiice of circuit court 
 judge. He served with credit as a member of congress. 
 In 1851, the Whig party nominated him for governor, to 
 which office he was elected over that spotless soldier, 
 Governor Trousdale, a veteran of the War of 1812 and of 
 the Floridas under General Jackson. Governor Campbell 
 was honorable and exalted in all the relations of life. 
 When the war of 1861 came on, he espoused the cause of 
 the Union, and remained till his death — after its close — it& 
 devoted friend. All men had confidence in him. Presi- 
 dent Lincoln made him a brigadier-general in the Union 
 army early in the war. He accepted the commission and 
 took the oath required, but failing health forced him to 
 resign. If the people of the state had been called upon to 
 name the citizen most eminent for virtue, honor, and all 
 the qualities that go to make the highest specimen of noble 
 manhood, probably a majority would have pointed to Gov- 
 ernor W. B. Campbell. 
 
 John Trimble was as true and as spotless in integrity as 
 any man in the state. He belonged to a class of men of 
 which but few are seen in these latter days — honest, inde- 
 pendent, outspoken and fearless for truth and right. He 
 was scholarly, reflective and retiring. His intellect was 
 bright and original. These qualities kept him from be- 
 coming an idol of the people. Indeed he was too proud 
 spirited, too independent, too self-sustained to seek popular 
 applause. Yet few men enjoyed so large a share of the 
 confidence of the people. During the war he was an un- 
 flinching, outspoken Union ihan, and never changed, and 
 never hesitated to avow his sentiments openly even in the- 
 midst of the war. In 1867 he served one term in congress, 
 representing the Nashville district. 
 
 John F. House was and still is (for he and E. H, East 
 and A. S. Colyar alone of all I have named are now liv- 
 ing) a man of more than ordinary ability. As a thinker 
 and reasoner, he is clear and logical, as a speaker, ani- 
 mated, pleasing and strong. In 1860 he was on the Bell- 
 
240 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Everett electoral ticket, and as such added to his already 
 good reputation as an able man. Early after the presi- 
 dential election in 1860, he began to waiver and hesitate 
 as to his duty in the changed condition of the country. 
 However he remained a Union man until the spring of 
 1861. He finally espoused the Southern cause. After the 
 war he was elected for several successive terms to congress, 
 where he made a national reputation as a debater and a 
 democratic leader. 
 
 Judge John S. Brien was by nature a very strong man. 
 He was an able lawyer and a powerful popular speaker. 
 He, too, like Bell, Brown and Henry, was wanting in that 
 defiant disregard of public opinion and threatened danger 
 which must always characterize a great and a successful 
 leader. But, after all, he adhered to the Union long after 
 all the others I have named, except Peyton and Trimble, 
 had gone over to the enemy. 
 
 Charles Ready was a learned lawyer and an upright 
 citizen, commanding the esteem and sincere respect of a 
 large circle of friends. Before the war he served several 
 terms in congress with credit to himself, shedding honor 
 on his intelligent constituency. 
 
 Robert Hatton at an unusually early age became suffi- 
 ciently prominent to be nominated in 1857 by the Whig 
 party for governor, against Isham G. Harris, one of the 
 ablest and most successful men ever in the state. After 
 the firing on Fort Sumter, Mr. Hatton espoused the cause 
 of the South, raised a regiment of men, went with it to 
 Virginia, where he early fell in battle while still a young 
 man, bravely fighting for Southern independence. Had 
 he survived the war, the chances are that his career 
 would have been as bright as the promise of his early 
 years led his friends to hope. 
 
 Jordan Stokes, who was descended from the best North 
 Carolina blood, was an eminent and most successful law- 
 yer. He was never a politician in the ordinary sense of 
 the term, though he served once or oftener in the legisla- 
 
Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 241 
 
 ture. His intellect was bright, clear and penetrating. 
 He was a beautiful and accomplished orator. In his pri- 
 vate life he was indeed an ideal citizen. In person he was 
 tall, graceful and handsome, a model of manly elegance 
 and stately dignity. His heart was genuine and true. 
 Like refined gold, there was no dross in it. In politics 
 he was an old-line Whig. When the war came on, true to 
 his Whig training and convictions, he was an ardent Union 
 man ; and though he quietly acquiesced in the act of se- 
 cession, he never lost his love of the Union. Like Peyton, 
 Polk, Campbell, Brien, Dr. Jones, Trimble, Meigs, and 
 Justice Catron, he never gave up his first love. In his 
 later years, after the war, for reasons easily understood 
 and possibly justifiable under the circumstances, he co-op- 
 erated generally with the Democratic party, like many 
 others in Tennessee, yet he was never thoroughly in sym- 
 pathy with that party. He still remained an old-line 
 Whig. But few men have lived in Tennessee more wor- 
 thy to be held up to young men as a model for their imita- 
 tion than Jordan Stokes. 
 
 A. S. Colyar was also a lawyer and an old-line Whig. 
 In the early development of the secession movement he 
 was earnest in his opposition to it, and active in his exer- 
 tions to defeat it. In the spring of 1861 he abandoned 
 the Union cause, and gave the weight of his excellent tal- 
 ents and his influence to the cause of the South. After 
 the secession of Tennessee he was elected and served for 
 one term as a member of the Confederate congress. Since 
 the war Mr. Colyar, while always independent and often 
 liberal and broad-minded in his views, has co-operated 
 with the Democratic party. As a citizen he has con- 
 stantly been progressive and public-spirited, at all times 
 striving to promote the welfare of the state. In these re- 
 spects no man deserves higher recognition. He is a man 
 of decided versatility of talents ; an able lawyer, an ear- 
 nest politician, a vigorous writer and editor, an advanced 
 thinker, and the advocate of intellectual progress and moral 
 16 
 
242 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and material development. Though an old man, his men- 
 tal activity is still unabated. 
 
 Another prominent Whig was James E. Bailey. He 
 was a man of more than ordinary worth and talents. In 
 1861, he adhered to the Union until the state seceded. 
 During the war, he rose to the rank of colonel in the Con- 
 federate army. After the war, he won high rank at the 
 bar as a learned and able lawyer. In 1877, he succeeded 
 to the seat of Andrew Johnson, by regular election, in the 
 United States senate, and served in that body with ability 
 and dignity, winning considerable reputation. 
 
 E. H. East was a young man in 1861, but then gave 
 promise of the distinction he has since won as an eminent 
 lawyer, a jurist, an ui)right citizen. The state has no 
 more worthy son, and but few of superior powers. He 
 was a warm Union man during the war, and while very 
 conservative and non-partisan in feeling and action, he 
 still entertains his old national sentiments. 
 
 The men I have named constituted an unusually strong 
 and powerful body of leaders. Besides these, there were 
 five Democrats of great influence who were true to the 
 Union, namely. Cave Johnson, W. H. Polk, Andrew 
 Ewing, Ex-Senator Henry S. Foote, and Hon. George W. 
 Jones. Both Foote and Jones finally joined the secession 
 party, and both served in the lower house of the Confed- 
 erate congress. Together these Whig and Democratic 
 statesmen possessed, as an aggregate, every essential ele- 
 ment of successful leadership : the public confidence, the 
 mind to think and direct, the eloquence to arouse and per- 
 suade, the logic to convince, the courage to dare and exe- 
 cute. On the side of secession, there was no such array 
 of ability in Middle Tennessee nor in the state. Governor 
 Harris and A. O. P. Nicholson were the only men of equal 
 ability. If these Union men had stood together from the 
 first active development of secession in South Carolina, in 
 December, 1860, and had from that time onward boldly 
 kept the stump ; had spoken, written, worked for the 
 
Gubernatorial Convention in 1861. 243 
 
 Union, and waved the old flag ; if they had denounced and 
 defied secession, as was done in East Tennessee, Middle 
 Tennessee in all probability might have been held firm 
 to the Union. This is a bold assertion ; but look at the 
 facts. 
 
 In February, Davidson county, in which Nashville is 
 situated, gave a majority of 2,548 for the Union, In June, 
 the same county gave 5,635 votes for separation and 402 
 against it, or 6,233 majority in favor of that measure. 
 The vote of Shelby county (Memphis) is even more aston- 
 ishing. In February, that county gave 5,689 for the 
 Union and 197 for secession. In June, the majority for 
 secession was 7,132, only five men voting the Union ticket. 
 These were the two largest counties in the state, and are 
 taken as fairly representative of the change in many of the 
 counties in Middle and West Tennessee. 
 
 Again, in February, the state went for the Union in 
 round numbers by sixty-four thousand majority. In June, 
 the majority had changed to the other side, and was fifty- 
 seven thousand for separation. Thus there was a change 
 of over sixty-four thousand votes. Now, take Knox, the 
 third largest county in the state : in February, the Union 
 majority, as indicated by the election of delegates to the 
 convention, was 3,055 ; and in June it was 1,975, or a fall- 
 ing off of only 1,080 in the majority, or a change of only 
 about 540 votes. The differing results are easily accounted 
 for. In Knox, indeed in all East Tennessee, the Union 
 leaders took the stump in January and kept it until the 
 close of the second canvass in June. They raised the old 
 flag and called on the people to rally around it. They did 
 not sit timorously waiting until secession had overborne 
 all resistance and stifled all free speech ; but they took the 
 start, kept the start, and held secession in check, so that it 
 never gained any ascendency. The same thing might 
 have been done in the other divisions of the state, it is be- 
 lieved, but not with such marked success, if there had 
 been bold leaders there. A large majority of the people 
 
244 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 were loyal, as the February election unquestionably demon- 
 strated. But when the people found themselves deserted 
 by those they were accustomed to follow, they naturally 
 lost heart and courage, and in the mad excitement and ter- 
 ror of the hour, they followed their panic-stricken leaders 
 over into the camp of secession. 
 
Abolitionism. 245 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ABOLITIONISM. 
 
 Preparations for war in 1861 — The Abolition party — The Free-soil party — 
 Difference between the two — The two merged into the Republican 
 party — Abolitionists narrow and bitter — Made war on the constitu- 
 tion — Objects and motives of " Garrisonian Abolitionists " described by 
 Henry Wilson — Only a limited number of these — Abolitionists and 
 Secessionists working toward the same end, the destruction of the gov- 
 ernment — Attempt to rescue Anthony Burns in Boston — Violence and 
 bloodshed — Public meetings in Boston advocating violence — Addressed 
 by Wendell Phillips and others — "The Boston Anti-Man Hunting 
 Society " — Anti-slavery sentiment in the South in early days — Jeffer- 
 son Randolph proposes emancipation in legislature of Virginia — Aboli- 
 tion agitation causes a revulsion of feeling in slave states — Garrison's 
 "Liberator" — New England Anti-slavery Society — National Society de- 
 clares for a dissolution of the Union — George Tickner Curtis on eman- 
 cipation — Independence and luxurious life of slaveholders — Slow to 
 abandon slavery — Capital invested in it — Profits of — Difficulties in the 
 way of emancipation — Mutual reproaches — Senator Hammond — Failure 
 to execute the Fugitive Slave law by certain states — The " Higher Law " 
 doctrine considered — John Brown a violator of law — Effect of his death 
 — Mr. Webster on the non-execution of Fugitive slave law — Declares 
 forcible resistance to it " treasonable " — Wendell Phillips and Theodore 
 Parker proclaim a "higher law" — Alexander Stephens to Mr. Lin- 
 coln — Persecution of Mr. Webster — Whittier on Mr. Webster — Crime 
 of the Abolitionists — This no justification of secession — A portion of 
 the people of both sections blamable for the Civil War — Honesty of 
 Garrison and associates not questioned. 
 
 We have brought our narrative down to June, 1861. 
 Fort Sumter had now been fired on and reduced. The 
 noise of the first fatal shot had sounded all over the land. 
 Suddenly a nation of warriors sprang to its feet. From 
 Maine to Mexico the sound of fife and drum and bugle was 
 heard calling the people to arms. Men were everywhere 
 rushing to the tented field. In the din and tumult of 
 preparation business was suspended. The plow was left 
 standing in its furrow, the fire still blazing in the shop and 
 
246 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 furnace. Mad passions had seized the minds of men. 
 Dark columns of angry, determined men were seen moving 
 into position. Squadrons of horsemen with flying ban- 
 ners were pressing to the front. All over the land, both 
 North and South, there were hurry and bustle, martial 
 music and mustering hosts, and preparations for coming bat- 
 tle and blood. And these were brethren thus going to war ! 
 What meant all this? What meant that martial music, 
 those dark columns, those hurrying horsemen, those hostile 
 armies, those flaunting banners bearing difi'erent devices? 
 AVhat caused this mighty uprising of the nation? 
 
 In this chapter and in the succeeding two, I shall attempt 
 to point out some of the causes which culminated in the 
 alarming condition of afi'airs that existed in June, 1861. 
 In doing this perhaps it may appear that neither side was 
 wholly to blame and neither wholly blameless. I shall 
 begin with the movement known as Abolitionism. 
 
 The anti-slavery men of the North were divided into two 
 classes : The first was composed of out and out Abolition- 
 ists, such as William Lloyd Garrison, who demanded the 
 immediate and unconditional emancipation of slaves every- 
 where. This party was always small, but it became much 
 larger after the rej^eal of the Missouri Compromise. After 
 that action by congress, it was merged and lost in the 
 larger organization known as the Free-soil party, which 
 finally assumed the name of the Republican party. The 
 Republican party did not demand emancipation, but in- 
 sisted that slavery should be restricted, and everywhere 
 and forever excluded from the territories of the United 
 States and from all new states. 
 
 The Abolition party was narrow, bitter and extreme in 
 its opinions and demands. It conceived a morbid, a 
 sickly sympathy for an abstract slave, and to liberate him 
 from bondage became its life-long object. If it were neces- 
 sary, the Abolitionist would tear up and destroy the very 
 foundations of the government in order to accomplish this 
 object. He at once saw that the constitution stood in his 
 
Abolitionism. 247 
 
 way, and therefore he denounced it "as a covenant with 
 hell." He saw that the national government, through and 
 by its constitution, was sacredly pledged to the protection 
 of slavery, wherever it existed in the states, and therefore 
 he demanded and worked for the destruction and the 
 overthrow of that constitution. The object and the 
 motives of the "Garrisonian Abolitionists" are thus de- 
 scribed by Henry Wilson, late Vice-President of the United 
 States :* 
 
 "Having adopted the doctrine of 'no union with slave- 
 holders' as the fundamental idea, the corner-stone of their 
 policy and plans, the Garrisonians of that period di- 
 rected their teachings, their arguments and appeals to the 
 establishment of the necessity and the inculcation of the 
 duty of disunion. Believing, in the language of Edmund 
 Quincy, the Union to be a 'confederacy of crime,' that the 
 'experiment of a great nation with popular institutions 
 had signally failed,' that the Eepublic was 'not a model, 
 but a warning to the nations,' that 'the hopes of the yearn- 
 ing ages had been mournfully defeated' through 'the dis- 
 turbing elements of slavery ;' believing, too, that such had 
 become the ascendency of the system that it compelled 
 'the entire people to be slaveholders or slaves ;' believing, 
 also, that the 'only exodus for the slave from his bondage, 
 the only redemption of ourselves from our guilty partici- 
 pation in it, lies over the ruin of the American state and 
 the American church' — they proclaimed it to be their un- 
 alterable purpose and determination to live and labor for 
 a dissolution of the present Union by all lawful and just, 
 though bloodless and pacific means, and for the formation 
 of a new Republic that shall be such not only in name, but 
 in full, living reality and truth." 
 
 The Abolitionists, then, aimed at four things : 1st, to 
 overthrow the Union and the constitution ; 2d, to destroy 
 the "American church;" 3d, to abolish slavery; 4th, to 
 
 ^ " Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America," by Henry Wilson, Vol. 
 II, p. 107. 
 
248 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 establish a new Republic. If we were not solemnly as- 
 sured of these facts, in an elaborate history of those times, 
 by an accredited leader of the anti-slavery party, who be- 
 came eminent by holding high trusts in the council of the 
 nation, it would be hard to believe that a respectable number 
 of men could have been found capable of such supreme folly 
 and of such boundless wickedness. Consider this matter 
 a moment. The Southern states proposed, in 1861, simply 
 to secede from the Union, leaving the constitution and the 
 old government just as they were. They made no war 
 upon "the American church." But here all were to be 
 pulled down, "through bloodless and pacific means," they 
 say. How absurd ! The scheme meant, or involved in its 
 results, revolution, if it meant anything. It meant blood- 
 shed and anarchy. It meant an intestine and internecine 
 war, horrible to think of. 
 
 It should be a source of extreme gratification to the 
 people of this generation to know that the number of per- 
 sons who entertained these revolutionary sentiments and 
 purposes was very small, confined exclusively to the 
 Abolitionists, and perhaps not embracing many of them. 
 
 But it can not escape observation how the two antag- 
 onistic sectional elements, the "Higher Law," party and 
 the "Secession party," constituting at that time a great 
 minority of the people in each section, were working 
 toward the same end — the destruction of the government — 
 the one because slavery was protected by the constitution 
 and the legislation under it, and the other in part because 
 slavery was not sufficiently protected. With widely differ- 
 ent motives, they moved along converging lines toward the 
 accomplishment of the same great purpose — the perpetra- 
 tion of the greatest folly of the ages. 
 
 The teachings of the Abolitionists naturally and logically 
 led to a disregard of the constitution. Therefore, we are 
 not surprised that in May, 1854, there was an open at- 
 tempt made in Boston to rescue a fugitive slave named 
 Anthony Burns from the hands of the United States 
 
Abolitionism. 249 
 
 marshal. Violence was used by an Abolition mob by 
 breaking down the doors of the court-house where the 
 slave was guarded, and one man, a deputy marshal, was 
 killed and others injured. Resistance to the execution of 
 the fugitive slave law and the rescue of the slave were 
 defiantly advocated in two public meetings by Wendell 
 Phillips, Theodore Parker, T. W. Higginson, Dr. S. G. 
 Howe and many other prominent men.^ But the frantic 
 effort of these men to overthrow the law and trample upon 
 the constitution utterly failed. 
 
 Here was the case of a fugitive slave who had been 
 arrested by a United States marshal, under a warrant 
 issued by a United States commissioner, appointed under 
 an act of congress, which act was passed to carry into exe- 
 cution a provision of the constitution. This constitution 
 had been approved, accepted and ratified by the people of 
 Massachusetts. And here was presented the spectacle of 
 two public meetings, in the enlightened city of Boston, 
 avowedly for the purpose of defeating this law, by the 
 rescue of a fugitive, and the open attempt to execute this 
 purpose by an assault on Charles Devens, the marshal, 
 and his deputies.^ And to give full significance to these 
 extraordinary proceedings, it must be kept in mind that 
 these things were not done by the "toughs" from the 
 slums of the city, but by its foremost citizens in culture, 
 character and social position — lawyers, preachers, mer- 
 chants and physicians, and among them, we are told, a 
 "thoughtful student of Plato" from Concord. And quite 
 as noticeable, there was not a protest in either of the meet- 
 ings against these violent proceedings, not a voice raised 
 in favor of the observance of the law and the preservation 
 of the constitution — not one. And Mr. Henry "Wilson, 
 
 1 Wilson's " Rise and Fall," etc., Vol. II, pp. 436-441. 
 
 ^ It may be of interest to know that Charles Devens was afterwards the 
 able attorney-general of President Hayes. When the Civil War broke out, 
 he entered the army, lost a leg in the battles of the Army of the Potomac, 
 and by merit and gallantry rose to the rank of general. 
 
250 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 from whom the foregoing account is taken, who was for 
 many years a senator in congress from Massachusetts, and 
 for two years vice-president of the United States, narrates 
 these things with the utmost coolness, without one word of 
 dissent or disapproval and apparently with pride. 
 
 And thus Massachusetts was manufacturing the ammu- 
 nition for future use in secession guns which were finally 
 aimed at the Union. And when seven years later, in the 
 city of Charleston, Edmund Ruffin fired the first gun in the 
 nation's terrible drama of blood, charged with this ammu- 
 nition, Massachusetts helped to aim that gun and to fire that 
 dreadful shot. 
 
 Soon after these reprehensible meetings, there was or- 
 ganized in Boston a secret society, called the "Boston Anti- 
 man-hunting League," with its grips and passwords, the 
 purpose of which was "to protect and rescue fugitive 
 slaves." It consisted, says Mr. Henry Wilson, of more 
 than a hundred men, composed of lawyers, physicians, 
 clergymen, literary men, merchants, men of ability, char- 
 acter, social position and influence. 
 
 When the legislatures of certain Northern States passed 
 laws designed to obstruct the free execution of the Fugi- 
 tive Slave Law, they were defeating a law of congress 
 and defying the constitution. Perhaps they did not say in 
 words, as South Carolina had done in 1832, in the case 
 of nullification, the law is "null, void and no law, not 
 binding upon this state, its officers and citizens," but they 
 did just what South Carolina attempted to do ; they nul- 
 lified the law, and did all they could to defeat its opera- 
 tion. This was nullification pure and simple. Every 
 member of the legislatures of those states, and every 
 judge, and every state officer, had sworn to support the 
 Constitution of the United States and the laws made in 
 pursuance thereof, which were (with the treaties) declared 
 to be "the supreme law of the land, anything in the con- 
 stitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstand- 
 
Abolitionism. 251 
 
 ing." This is too explicit for any doubt or misunder- 
 standing. 
 
 In colonial days, and in the earlier years of the Repub- 
 lic, there was no serious difference in opinion between the 
 people of the North and those of the South as to the in- 
 stitution of slavery. Maryland, Virginia, North and 
 South Carolina, had all protested against the introduction 
 of so many slaves into their dominions. It is well known 
 that the leading statesmen of Virginia, such as Washing- 
 ton, Jefferson, Mason, Pendleton and Wythe, and some 
 eminent men in North Carolina, wished to get rid of slavery. 
 In the convention that framed the federal constitution, 
 Virginia and the Middle States opposed the clause ex- 
 tending the time to 1808 when the slave trade should 
 cease, while most of the New England States united with 
 the Carolinas and Georgia in adopting it. For forty years 
 after the adoption of the constitution there was a stronger 
 anti-slavery sentiment in Virginia, Tennessee and Ken- 
 tucky, than there was in the free states. Even the im- 
 mense stimulus given to the culture and production of 
 cotton by Eli Whitney's great invention, the cotton-gin, 
 did not arrest the emancipation movement in these states 
 until after 1834. Slavery was regarded in the early days 
 of the Republic as both a moral and an economic evil, 
 which ought to be removed as speedily as possible. In 
 Tennessee, as is elsewhere more fully shown, there were 
 many emancipation societies as early as 1815 and 1816. 
 There were similar societies in Kentucky, Virginia and 
 North Carolina. In the winter of 1831-'32, Jefferson Ran- 
 dolph, a grandson of Thomas Jefferson, introduced a 
 proposition into the legislature of Virginia, to inquire into 
 the expediency of gradual emancipation in that state. This 
 proposition was never pressed to a vote. The fact that 
 it was dropped, is ascribed by George Ticknor Curtis to 
 the Abolitionists.^ Mr. Curtis says : 
 
 ^ Quoted by Charles M. Harvey in a letter to the St. Louis " Globe Dem- 
 ocrat." 
 
252 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "In the midst of this state of things, and before the next 
 meeting of the legislature, intelligence came from the 
 North of the formation of anti-slavery societies, their aim, 
 spirit and temper. The aspect in which their proceedings 
 presented themselves to the people of the South was most 
 alarming. Strangers coming together in the free states to 
 assail all slaveholders as sinners, and to demand instant 
 abolition, aroused fears of the most dangerous conse- 
 quences to the safety of Southern homes, and an intense 
 indignation against such external interference with the 
 domestic condition of the Southern States. A sudden revul- 
 sion of public sentiment in Virginia was followed by a 
 similar revulsion everywhere in the South, where an 
 amelioration of the condition of the colored race was in 
 consideration. This change of feeling led Southern states- 
 men to seek new devices for strengthening the political 
 power of their section in the Union." ^ 
 
 The insurrection of Nat Turner in that state, soon after 
 this time, no doubt helped greatly to increase this revulsion, 
 and to add to the general alarm. 
 
 This sudden outburst of Abolition feeling and excite- 
 ment was perhaps largely due to the appearance in Boston 
 of the "Liberator," on January 1, 1831, edited by William 
 Lloyd Garrison. In the first number, he said: "I shall 
 strenuously contend for the immediate enfranchisement of 
 our slave population. I will be as harsh as truth, as un- 
 compromising as justice. ... I am in earnest ! I 
 will not equivocate ! I will not excuse ! I will not re- 
 treat a single inch, and I will be heard. ' ' Soon afterwards, 
 he said, in his paper: "I take it for granted that slavery 
 is a crime, a damning crime ; therefore, my efforts shall 
 be directed to the exposure of those who practice it." 
 
 Garrison, however, it is but just to say, did not advo- 
 cate the insurrection of the slaves, though his teachings 
 naturally tended to this result. His labors, with other 
 
 ^ Curtis' " Constitutional History of the United States," Vol. II., p. 254. 
 
Abolitionism. 253 
 
 causes, resulted in the formation, in 1831, of the New 
 England Anti-Slavery Society, and the New York and the 
 American Anti-Slavery societies in 1833. During the next 
 few years, local auxiliary societies sprang up in most of 
 the Northern States. 
 
 At a meeting of the National Society, held in New York 
 in 1844, a resolution was adopted, declaring that, as the 
 constitution sanctioned the rendition of the fugitive slave 
 to his master, therefore, fidelity to freedom's cause required 
 the dissolution of the Union, and Abolitionists were for- 
 bidden to hold office under the constitution. What super- 
 lative madness and folly ! It is no wonder that the good 
 men in the South who had been laboring to bring about 
 gradual emancipation, ceased their work when they saw 
 the bitterness and the purpose of the Abolitionists. Nor 
 is it surprising that a revulsion not only in feeling, but in 
 opinion, in reference to the morality of the institution of 
 slavery, rapidly followed. Not to have resented this at- 
 tempt to interfere with a domestic institution would have 
 been more than human. By a natural law, a similar bit- 
 terness was engendered in the South. And thus, for 
 twenty years, the extremists of each section multiplied 
 and grew and strengthened, each by the nourishment af- 
 forded by the other. If either could have been kept silent 
 for four years, the other would have died of inanition. 
 Mr. Benton once said that "the Abolitionists and the South- 
 ern extremists were as necessary to each other as were 
 the two blades of a scissors the one to the other." 
 
 The extreme utterances of the Abolitionists were circu- 
 lated in the South, while those of extreme men in the South 
 were circulated in the North — all to inflame the minds of 
 the people. 
 
 George Ticknor Curtis, a great lawyer and an acute 
 thinker, expressed the opinion, in his "Constitutional His- 
 tory of the United States," that there were causes at work 
 when the agitation of slavery commenced, which, in all 
 probability, would have brought African slavery to an end, 
 
254 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 without any political or social convulsion, if it liad been 
 left to the ox)eration of these causes, which tended to its 
 peaceful removal. He thinks it could not have lasted un- 
 changed so long as 1865, even if there had been no civil 
 war, and no forcible emancipation. 
 
 With one who has lived all his life in the midst of 
 slavery, who knew something of Southern thought and 
 feeling, and who was himself a slave owner, it is difficult 
 to concur in this opinion. It is easy to believe that, under 
 the influence of the moral causes that were at work in the 
 South, especially in Virginia, Tennessee and Kentucky, 
 during the first thirty years of this century, and if there 
 had been no irritating anti-slavery movement in the free 
 states, the gradual emancipation of slaves might have gone 
 on from generation to generation, until slavery would have 
 finally disappeared. But it is visionary to suppose that 
 this could have occurred by the year 1865. It might have 
 taken one hundred years, but, most probably, a much 
 longer period. For a moment, consider the facts. Slaves 
 were a luxury, or were supposed to be, to those who owned 
 them, with which they were slow to part. Their owner- 
 ship constituted a badge of honor and was a passport to 
 society. The man or the woman who owned a hundred 
 slaves was everywhere an honored person. The owners of 
 great plantations, stocked with slaves, were the most in- 
 fluential men in the state. They everywhere received 
 homage. They were untitled nobility. The merchant 
 might be as wealthy, but he ranked below the "great 
 planter." The former must toil for his money, the planter 
 "toiled not." Others toiled for him. From the shade of 
 his cool, broad veranda, he could look out upon perhaps a 
 hundred slaves and a hundred mules, toiling in his ex- 
 tended fields in the hot summer sun. And, when the time 
 for the in-gathering and the disposition of the crop came, 
 each hand and mule yielded a large and certain sum in 
 cash, leaving a heavy profit after paying all expenses. 
 And, as the lordly planter gazed on his baronial posses- 
 
Abolitionism. 255 
 
 sions, liis heart kindled with pride. A call, or a whistle, 
 from him, and a troop of servants appeared quick to do 
 his will. Horses and carriages, and guns and hounds 
 awaited his command. What ! give up this ease, luxury, 
 affluence and social position in deference to the moral sen- 
 timent of the North? The human heart said no. Philan- 
 thropists may rail against the sinfulness and the horrors 
 of slavery as they will, but, barring the cruelties and in- 
 justice of the institution, life, as a whole, on these great 
 plantations where there was refinement, was an ideal one 
 that sinful man delighted in. Men were most slow to give 
 up an institution that ministered so largely and constantly 
 to their comfort and their pleasure, and which at the same 
 time gave them position and importance. No occupation in 
 all the land so certainly led to wealth as that of planting with 
 slave labor. But this was not all. Fully half of the cap- 
 ital of the South, perhaps a much larger part, was invested 
 in slaves. At the opening of the late Civil War, this 
 property was estimated at two thousand millions of dol- 
 lars. Emancipation would have wiped that vast sum out 
 of existence. In this way the source of nearly half the 
 taxes of the states would have been taken away. Both 
 the states and the slave owners would have been impov- 
 erished. 
 
 "With the labor of the slaves," says Mr. Blaine, "they 
 could produce three hundred millions a year in excess of 
 the food required for the population. Three hundred 
 million a year represented a rumunerative interest on a 
 capital of five thousand millions of dollars." ^ 
 
 "To abandon the institution was to sacrifice four thou- 
 sand millions of property, specially protected by law. It 
 was for the existing generations of the governing class in 
 the South to vote themselves into bankruptcy and penury. 
 Far beyond this, it was in their judgment to blight their 
 
 1 " Twenty Years of Congress," Vol. I, p. 174. 
 
256 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 land with ignorance and indolence, to be followed by crime 
 and anarchy." ^ 
 
 With such serious results following emancipation, es- 
 pecially universal and immediate, slaveholders would have 
 been very slow to yield their assent to it. Universal 
 emancipation would not have taken place, indeed could 
 not have taken place, without wide-spread ruin. In 1834, 
 in the Constitutional Convention of Tennessee, the moral 
 argument against slavery, urged so earnestly by good men 
 of the state even at that late day, was pressed with great 
 force in favor of gradual emancipation, to be completed in 
 the year 1865. But the slaveholders, frankly admitting, in 
 an explanation and an apology for their course, written 
 with great ability, that slavery was a deplorable evil to 
 be gotten rid of as soon as possible, were unable to see 
 their way to emancipation at that time, and therefore it 
 was postponed. But the proposition notwithstanding this 
 received twenty votes out of thirty-eight. In truth, it 
 could scarcely be expected that the people of a state 
 would reduce themselves, by an act of noble sacrifice, 
 from a condition of independence and afl3uence, to one 
 of absolute poverty, at the same time making the state 
 bankrupt. 
 
 There was still another difficulty in the way of eman- 
 cipation. In some of the slave states the slaves were 
 more numerous than the whites, and in all of them, ex- 
 cepting Delaware, they formed a large element in the 
 population. What was to be done with these slaves when 
 emancipated? Were they to be turned loose among the 
 white population, ignorant, property-less and thriftless? 
 To do this, it was believed, would expose society to the 
 danger of the greatest social evils. No community would 
 willingly incur such a dangerous risk. To send the slaves 
 to Liberia was beyond the ability of the state and that of 
 their late owners. Many of the free states while clamor- 
 
 ^ "Twenty Years, of Congress," Vol. T, p. 121. 
 
Abolitionism. 257 
 
 ing for emancipation and the equality of men before the 
 law had closed their doors against the' entrance of free 
 negroes. Everywhere, both in the free and in the slave 
 states, at that day, as in this, there was a deep-seated 
 prejudice against them. Slave owners regarded them with 
 suspicion. They were supposed to tamper with and cor- 
 rupt the slaves. They were at all times an evil example, 
 leading lives of idleness and generally of dishonesty. 
 Finally many of the states forbade the emancipation of 
 slaves, except uxDon the condition that their masters should 
 provide the means of sending them to Liberia, or beyond 
 the limits of the state where they were emancipated. 
 Here was an almost insuperable obstacle in the way of 
 emancipation. 
 
 These were some of the difficulties in the way of the 
 consummation of an object very near the heart of many 
 slave owners at an early day, when they were left free, 
 without any outside interference, to consider this question 
 as one alone rightfully concerning themselves. But at a 
 later day when the Abolitionists began to denounce slavery 
 as a "damning crime," and slaveholders as sinners above 
 all men, when they began to preach a crusade of imme- 
 diate emancipation, an absolute revulsion of feeling took 
 place. After that time no man dared to hazard his repu- 
 tation, or his life, by the advocacy of a measure which a 
 few years previously had received the approval of the best 
 men in the South. The door to discussion even was closed. 
 To be suspected of abolition views fastened a mark of in- 
 famy on a man, as indelible as the famous "Scarlet Let- 
 ter." Tens of thousands of persons who had favored 
 emancipation at an early day, became extreme pro-slavery 
 advocates.^ 
 
 * Frederick A. Ross, doctor of divinity, of Kingsport, East Tennessee, 
 was a striking illustration of the truth of this statement. He was a Presby- 
 terian minister of great brilliancy and learning. He owned a good many 
 slaves, and back about 1830, under the then prevailing feeling in East Ten- 
 
 17 
 
258 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 So, in view of all these facts, it is impossible to see how 
 the peaceful end of slavery could have come, in 1865 or at 
 any early period, even if the Abolitionists had not by their 
 violence turned backward the current in its favor. This 
 is especially true as to what are termed the Cotton States ; 
 but not so clearly so as to the border slave states. It is 
 reasonably clear to my mind that but for the amazing 
 madness and folly of secession, nothing but some great 
 convulsion, such as that of the late civil war, could have 
 put an end to it short of one or two hundred years. 
 
 But what man seemed unable to do was quickly done 
 by Providence, through the agency of the folly and the 
 blindness of violent men, both North and South. But 
 for the marvelous and unexpected manner in which slavery 
 was finally destroyed, I see no reason why it might not 
 have existed in the South for hundreds of years. All will 
 agree that immediate voluntary emancipation was impos- 
 sible. Such a thing had nowhere taken place in any of 
 our states. It is believed that gradual emancipation had 
 always resulted in the shifting in advance of many, per- 
 haps of most, of the slaves to other states, where no such 
 movement was in contemplation, and that only a compara- 
 tively few slaves acquired their freedom in that way. 
 With a vast expanse of new slave territory, like Mexico, 
 into which large numbers of slaves might have been 
 drawn, the border slave states might ultimately have emp- 
 tied their slaves, under the operation and the expectation 
 of gradual emancipation. 
 
 The bitter condemnation of slavery in the North pro- 
 duced its natural effect in the South. When the Southern 
 people found themselves pilloried before the world for the 
 crime of slavery, they naturally began to defend that insti- 
 
 nessee, especially among the Covenanter Presbyterians, in favor of eman- 
 cipation, he set these all free. Time wore on, the abolition crusade was 
 commenced, and he changed his views. He became a secessionist, and 
 in his later days wrote a book maintaining that slavery was of divine 
 origin. 
 
Abolitionism. 259 
 
 tution. That which they once regarded as a moral evil, 
 inherited from their ancestors, and from which they saw 
 no means of escape without wide-spread ruin and bank- 
 ruptcy, soon appeared to them as a scriptural institution, 
 sanctioned by the practice of all ages, and notably so in 
 Apostolic times. Thus assailed, they turned upon the 
 Abolitionists and retorted : "What right have you to lect- 
 ure us for the sin of slavery? Did not your fathers follow 
 this practice for one hundred and fifty years, and give it 
 up only when it became plainly manifest that it was not 
 profitable? Did they not reduce to slavery and sell into 
 bondage even the poor Indians ? ^ Were not some of the 
 fortunes of yourselves, and many more of your ancestors', 
 made in the slave trade, or by the manufacture of rum to 
 be used in that trade? And when you determined to 
 emancipate your slaves, did you not sell many of them to 
 the South, and thus continue in bondage the poor beings 
 who were promised freedom?" 
 
 These and similar accusations were constantly hurled 
 back at the North. Congress became the high arena for 
 the utterance of bitter reproaches and denunciations, and 
 for the manufacture of sectional strife and animosity. 
 The two sections became as a seething, boiling, overflow- 
 ing caldron. In a speech delivered in the senate, March 
 4, 1858, Senator James H. Hammond, of South Carolina, 
 thus reproached the North : 
 
 "In all social systems there must be a class to do the 
 menial duties, to perform the drudgery of life. 
 It constitutes the very mudsill of society and of political 
 government, and you might as well attempt to build a 
 house in the air as to build either the one or the other ex- 
 cept on this mudsill. Fortunately for the South, she 
 found a race adapted to that purpose to her hand. . . . 
 We use them for our purpose and call them slaves. . . . 
 
 * Some one has said that when the Puritans landed in Massachusetts, 
 "they first fell on their knees, then they fell on the aborigines." 
 
260 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "The Senator from New York said yesterday that the 
 whole world had abolished slavery. Aye, the name, but 
 not the thing ; all the powers of the earth can not abolish 
 that. God only can do it when he repeals the fiat, 'the 
 poor ye always have with you;' for the man who lives 
 by daily labor, and scarcely lives at that, and who has to 
 put out his labor in the market and take the best he can 
 get for it — in short, your whole class of manual laborers 
 and 'operatives,' as you call them, are essentially slaves. 
 The difference between us is, that our slaves are hired for 
 life and well compensated ; there is no starvation, no beg- 
 ging, no want of employment among our people, and not 
 too much employment, either. Yours are hired by the 
 day, not cared for, and scantily compensated. . . ." 
 
 Mr. Calhoun, in one of his published letters, uttered 
 opinions somewhat similar to those expressed by Senator 
 Hammond. 
 
 It must be candidly confessed that the people of the 
 South, while far from being free from blame themselves, 
 had great causes of complaint against a part of the people 
 of the North prior to 1861. The fugitive slave law was 
 not executed in the free states with that fidelity which 
 should have marked the course of the people of sister 
 states. Ten states, namely, Massachusetts, Vermont, Con- 
 necticut, Rhode Island, Maine, Pennsylvania, Michigan, 
 Ohio, Wisconsin and Kansas, had passed laws obstructing 
 the operation of that law and designed to nullify it. A 
 portion of the Northern people, perhaps only a small por- 
 tion, were at all times ready, by force and violence, to re- 
 sist its execution. How far they were excusable in a court 
 of conscience, if at all, for failing or refusing their aid in 
 enforcing the law when demanded, on account of tender 
 scruples, is left for hair-splitting casuists to determine. 
 But when a sovereignty speaks through its constitution 
 and law-making power, declaring "thus saith the law," it 
 addresses and commands the obedience of every human 
 being within its dominions. In governmental affairs, the 
 
Abolitionism. 261 
 
 doctrine of a law higher than the constitution is simply- 
 treasonable. Those who resisted the execution of the fugi- 
 tive slave law on the plea of a "higher law" were guilty 
 of the highest crime known to our laws. That law was 
 framed under an express provision of the constitution, and 
 was binding on every citizen of the Republic. When men, 
 therefore, as individuals, or as legislators, or in mobs, re- 
 sisted its enforcement, they resisted the government. The 
 acts of the legislature, in so far as they resisted or impeded 
 the execution of that law, were acts of nullification. 
 Every attempt on the part of Northern men, by incendiary 
 speeches or publications, to excite the slaves of the South 
 to run away, or to insurrection, was an act, however in- 
 tended, in defiance of the constitution. The right of free 
 speech in the discussion of slavery, the right of earnest 
 opposition to it, even the right to demand that it be peace- 
 fully extinguished, is not denied. Argument and reason 
 are vital forces in a free government. But the matters to 
 which I refer went far beyond the use of reason and argu- 
 ment. 
 
 John Brown, when he attacked Harper's Ferry, became 
 a daring violator of law, and deserved the fate he invoked 
 on himself. Perhaps his execution was a mistake. If he 
 had been incarcerated for life as a demented fanatic, or 
 confined as a lunatic, the sympathy of the world would 
 not have been awakened in his behalf as it was. He 
 would have become no martyr, but would have been con- 
 sidered simply as an infatuated, foolish man. As it was, 
 his death contributed in a marvelous manner, and in a way 
 he dreamed not of, to accomplish the result his morbid 
 mind had been brooding over for many years. His death 
 was worth to his cause thousands of lives like his own. 
 "When his bold and startling deed was first announced to 
 the world, the news sent a shudder of horror through the 
 minds of a majority of the people of the North. They 
 saw in it the fearful foreboding of coming evil. But his 
 undaunted courage, his splendid heroism during his trial, 
 
262 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 his fortitude under his sufferings, his transcendent air of 
 consciousness that he was right, his scornful refusal to 
 plead mental aberration or supplicate for mercy, coupled 
 with the wide-spread excitement in the public mind, made 
 his tragic death thrillingly sublime. The whole land 
 quivered with gravest apprehension. The indignation ex- 
 cited at first by his act of daring lawlessness, that had 
 prompted him to give his life for a race not his own, was 
 turned into sympathy. His name was at once enrolled 
 (by those who believed as he did) among the canonized 
 martyrs. It became the theme of patriotic songs and the 
 inspiration of armies going into battle. His deeds were 
 chanted by millions of tongues. Thus, though dead, "his 
 soul went marching on." His conduct was not an erratic 
 display of chivalry, not wild romance, not vain ambition 
 to win the world's applause. It was an impelling sense, 
 an earnest, though misguided, conviction of duty — the 
 true martyr-spirit. 
 
 But no man had either the moral or the legal right to 
 take from another his slaves, any more than his horses 
 or his mules, much less stir them up to insurrection. 
 Both acts were violations of law. By the supreme law of 
 the land, slaves were property, and it was a crime to de- 
 prive the owner of this property. Abolitionists had no 
 greater right to take slaves from a Southern owner, than 
 the latter had to seize the arms, and forts and ships of the 
 government. Neither the government, by the exercise of 
 legislative authority, nor the executive thereof, nor the 
 people as individuals, or in communities, or societies, nor 
 any power on earth, had the right, in time of peace, to in- 
 terfere with or take away the slaves of the South against 
 the consent of the owners. The ancestors of the Northern 
 people had in many cases sold their slaves in the South. 
 By a solemn compact in the constitution, they had guaran- 
 teed peaceable possession and ownership of them. Any 
 attempt, therefore, in time of peace, to interfere with this 
 property where it rightfully existed, except by the lawful 
 
Abolitionism. 263 
 
 use of argument and persuasion, was a crime against the 
 law of the land, and an attempt to overthrow the constitu- 
 tion, deserving of prompt punishment. 
 
 Errors and falsehoods are often employed in the cause 
 of humanity, as well as in defense of evil and oppression. 
 Many a man has served the cause of the evil one when he 
 thought he was serving God. Good motives will not 
 sanctify crime. Doubtless John Brown had an approving 
 conscience when he carried fire and sword into the state 
 of Virginia. If the people of France or England had at 
 any time forcibly and violently attempted to interfere with 
 or to destroy the institution of slavery in Virginia, there 
 was scarcely an Abolitionist in the North who would not 
 have resented the interference, and been ready to take up 
 arms in resistance. And yet these were foreigners, and 
 were under no obligation to abstain from such an act, ex- 
 cept comity and the law of nations. No such solemn obli- 
 gation of obedience to law and the constitution rested on 
 them as bound the people of the free states. Every citizen 
 of the United States was under an implied oath to support 
 the constitution of the country, and the laws made in pur- 
 suance thereof. The constitution recognized the legality 
 of slavery in certain states of the Union, and every citizen 
 was under the same oath to do likewise. It was therefore a 
 much higher crime in one of our own citizens forcibly and il- 
 legally to attempt to destroy slavery than it would have 
 been for the citizens of England or France. Every citizen 
 undeniably had the right to argue against that institution, 
 to condemn it as a wrong, to protest against its extension, 
 and to insist that it should cease. But the moment he 
 went beyond argument and an appeal to conscience and 
 reason, and advocated or resorted to force for its extinction, 
 he committed a crime against the constitution and the 
 laws of the land, no matter what his motive may have 
 been. No moral considerations could absolve him from 
 his solemn obligations to the constitution. If it was his 
 duty to aid in returning slaves to their owners, certainly 
 
264 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 he had no right to aid in nullifying the law and defeating 
 its execution. This is the law, as well as the ethics of this 
 whole question. To satisfy the consciences of men, 
 casuists could gloss over their conduct by specious argu- 
 ments ; and by denouncing "the constitution as a league 
 with hell and an agreement with death," they might ap- 
 pease them ; but this very line of argument only proved 
 those who used it to be incendiaries and entirely outside 
 of the law. 
 
 Surely there was the same moral, as well as legal 
 obligation binding alike on the Abolitionist, the nullifier 
 and the secessionist, to obey the constitution and the law. 
 If not, then indeed, was our government a rope of sand. 
 In illustration of this point, I quote from an opinion of the 
 Supreme Court of the United States. The opinion was 
 in reference to the duties of citizens toward foreign 
 nations, but certainly no one will contend that they are 
 under less solemn obligations to their fellow-citizens of the 
 other states, to observe the laws made for the protection of 
 their property. This is especially true as to their supreme 
 obligation to obey and defend the constitution of the United 
 States : 
 
 "He is bound to be at war," says the court, "with the 
 nation against which the war-making power has declared 
 war, and equally bound to commit no act of hostility 
 against a nation with which the government is in amity 
 and friendship. 
 
 " The principle is universally acknowledged by the laws 
 of nations. It lies at the foundation of all governments, 
 as else there could be no social order or peaceful relations 
 between the citizens of the United States. For, as the 
 sovereignty resides in the people, every citizen is a portion 
 of it, and is, himself, personally bound by the laws which 
 the representatives of the sovereignty may pass, or the 
 treaties into which they may enter within the scope of 
 their delegated authority. And, when that authority has 
 plighted its faith to another nation, that there shall be 
 
Abolitionism. 265 
 
 peace and friendship between the citizens of the two coun- 
 tries, every citizen of the United States is equally and per- 
 sonally pledged. The compact is made by the department 
 of the government upon which he, himself, has agreed to 
 confer the power. It is his own personal compact as a 
 portion of the sovereignty in whose behalf it is made." 
 
 In further elucidation of these points, I quote somewhat 
 at length from one of the speeches of Mr. Webster, bear- 
 ing directly on them. After he had voted as senator for 
 the Fugitive Slave Law and for the other compromise 
 measures of 1850, he was abused with a fury and hounded 
 with a ferocity by the Abolitionists of the North, and es- 
 pecially by those of his own Massachusetts, such as seldom 
 falls to the lot of a public man. In a speech delivered in 
 Albany, New York, May 28, 1851, he discussed the Fugi- 
 tive Slave Law in full, without any reference to himself. 
 Among other things, he said : 
 
 "There had been an ancient practice" (among the colo- 
 nies), "a practice a century old, for aught I know, accord- 
 ing to which fugitives from service, whether apprentices 
 of the North or slaves of the South, should be restored. 
 Massachusetts had restored fugitive slaves to Virginia long 
 before the adoption of the constitution, and it is well 
 known that in other states in which slavery did or did not 
 exist they were restored, also, on proper application. And 
 it was held that any man could pursue his slave and take 
 him wherever he could find him. Under this state of 
 things, it was expressly stipulated, in the plainest lan- 
 guage, and there it stands — sophistry can not gloss it, it 
 can not be erased from the page of the constitution, there 
 it stands — that persons held to service or labor in one state, 
 under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall not, 
 in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be dis- 
 charged from service and labor, but shall be delivered up 
 upon claim of the party to whom such service or labor 
 shall be due. This was adopted without dissent ; it was 
 nowhere objected to, North or South, but considered as a 
 
266 East Tennessee and the Civil War, 
 
 matter of absolute right and justice to the Southern States, 
 and concurred in everywhere by every state that adopted 
 the constitution ; and we look in vain for any opposition 
 to it from Massachusetts to Georgia. 
 
 "Such a law" (a fugitive slave law in accordance with 
 the constitution) "was prepared and passed in General 
 Washington's time ; ... w^as passed without a di- 
 vision in the senate, and with but seven votes against it 
 in the house. It went into operation, and for a time it 
 satisfied the just rights and expectations of everybody. 
 That law provided that its enactments should be carried 
 into effect mainly by state magistrates, justices of the 
 peace, judges of state courts, sheriffs and other organs of 
 state authority. So things went on without any loud com- 
 plaint from any quarter, until some fifteen years ago, when 
 some of the states, the free states, thought it proper to 
 pass laws prohibiting their own magistrates and officers 
 from executing this law of congress, under heavy penal- 
 ties, and refusing to the United States authorities the use 
 of their prisons for the detention of persons arrested as 
 fugitive slaves. That is to say, these states passed acts 
 defeating the law of congress, as far as it was in their 
 power to defeat it. Those of them to which I refer, not 
 all, nullified the law of 1793 entirely. They said, in ef- 
 fect : 'We will not execute it. No runaway slave shall 
 be restored.' Thus the law became a dead letter, an en- 
 tire dead letter. But here was the constitutional compact, 
 nevertheless, still binding ; here was the stipulation, as 
 solemn as words could form it, and which every member 
 of congress, every officer of the general government, every 
 officer of the state governments, from governor down to 
 constables, is sworn to support. Well, under this state of 
 things, in 1850, I was of the opinion that common justice 
 and good faith called upon us to make a law — fair, reason- 
 able, equitable and just — that should be calculated to 
 carry this constitutional provision into effect, and give the 
 Southern States what they were entitled to, and what was 
 
Abolitionism. 267 
 
 intended originally they should receive ; that is, fair, right 
 and reasonable means to recover their fugitives from serv- 
 ice, from the states into which they fled. . . . 
 
 "Now, let me say that this law" (that of 1850) "has 
 been discussed, considered and adjudged in a great many of 
 the tribunals of the country. It has been the subject of 
 discussion before the judges of the Supreme Court of the 
 United Statec ; the subject of discussion before courts the 
 most respectable in the states. Everywhere, on all occa- 
 sions, and by all judges, it has been held to be, and pro- 
 nounced to be, a constitutional law. . . . All ju- 
 dicial opinions are in favor of the law. . . . You 
 cannot find a man in the profession, in New York, whose 
 income reaches thirty pounds a year, who will stake his 
 professional reputation in an opinion against it. If he 
 does, his reputation is not worth the thirty pounds. And 
 yet this law is opposed, violently opposed, not by bringing 
 this question into court ; those lovers of human liberty, 
 these friends of the slave, the fugitive slave, do not put 
 their hands in their pockets and draw funds to conduct 
 lawsuits and try the question ; they are not much in that 
 habit. That is not the way they show their devotion to 
 liberty of any kind ; they resolve that the law is oppressive, 
 unjust and should not be executed at any rate or under 
 any circumstances. It has been said in the states of New 
 York, Massachusetts and Ohio, over and over again, that 
 the law shall not be executed. That was the language of 
 conventions in Worcester, Massachusetts ; in Syracuse, 
 New York, and elsewhere. And for this they pledged 
 their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. Now, 
 gentlemen, these proceedings, I say it upon my profes- 
 sional reputation, are distinctly treasonable. Resolutions 
 passed in Ohio, certain resolutions in New York and in con- 
 ventions held in Boston, are distinctly treasonable. And 
 the act of taking away Shadrack from the public author- 
 ities in Boston, and sending him off, was an act of clear 
 treason. I speak this in the hearing of men who are law- 
 
268 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 yers ; I speak it out to the country ; I say it everywhere 
 on my professional reputation. It was treason and noth- 
 ing less ; that is to say, if men get together and combine, 
 and resolve that they will oppose a law of the govern- 
 ment, not in any one case, but in all cases ; if they resolve 
 to resist the law, whoever may be attempted to be made 
 the subject of it, and carry that purpose into effect, by re- 
 sisting the application of the law in any one case, either 
 by force of arms, or force of numbers, that, sir, is treason." 
 
 Mr. Webster then went on to compare the Abolitionists 
 of his day to the "race of saints," who called themselves 
 "Fifth Monarchy Men" in Cromwell's time, of whom he 
 said: "A happy, self-pleased, glorious people they were, 
 for they had practiced so many virtues, they were so en- 
 lightened, so perfect, that they got to be in the language 
 of that day 'above ordinances.' That is the 'higher 
 law' of this day exactly. They were above ordinances, 
 walked about prim and spruce, self-satisfied, thankful to 
 God that they were not as other men, but had attained so 
 far to salvation as to be above all necessity of restraint 
 /and control, civil or religious."^ 
 
 Grim old Cromwell said these men deserved the atten- 
 tion of the magistrates. 
 
 In another speech (one at Buffalo) , Mr. Webster, re- 
 ferring to resolutions of Abolition conventions, said, with 
 terrible sarcasm: "Their sacred honor! They pledge 
 their sacred honor to violate the constitution ! They 
 pledge their sacred honor to commit treason against the 
 laws of the country ! ' ' 
 
 Thus spoke this Northern man ; this great, this wonder- 
 ful man, this Massachusetts man, of the fanatical Aboli- 
 tionists of his day. 
 
 I give two extracts from speeches of leading Abolition- 
 ists boldly proclaiming the doctrine of a law higher than 
 
 1 " Works of Daniel Webster," Vol. II, p. 574. 
 
Abolitionism. 269 
 
 the constitution. Wendell Phillips, said, in 1846, in a 
 speech in Boston : 
 
 "Law or no law, constitution or no constitution, hu- 
 manity shall be paramount. I would send out a voice from 
 Faneuil Hall that shall reach each hovel in South Carolina, 
 and say to the slaves : Come here, and find an asylum of 
 freedom here, where no talon of the national eagle shall 
 ever snatch you away." * 
 
 Theodore Parker said : "When the laws of Massachu- 
 setts, or the laws of the Union, conflict with the laws of 
 God, I would keep God's law in preference, though the 
 heavens should fall." 
 
 Now, it was the constant agitation of the slavery ques- 
 tion by a part of the Northern people — the unceasing de- 
 nunciation of an institution exclusively belonging to sister 
 states, and in no sense their own — and the proclamation 
 of the "Higher Law," much more than the nullification of 
 the Fugitive Slave Law, that aroused such intense bitter- 
 ness in the South. Mr. Stephens, who was perhaps one of 
 the greatest and at the same time the most erratic of recent 
 Southern statesmen, in his letter to Mr. Lincoln of Decem- 
 ber 30, 1860, based his complaint against the North almost 
 entirely on this point. He said : 
 
 "I will also add that in my judgment the people of the 
 South do not entertain any fears that a Republican ad- 
 ministration, or at least the one about to be inaugurated, 
 would attempt to interfere directly or immediately with 
 slavery in the states. Their apprehension and disquietude 
 do not spring from that source. They do not rise from 
 the known anti-slavery sentiments of the president-elect. 
 Washington, Jefferson and other presidents are generally 
 admitted to have been anti-slavery in sentiment. But in 
 those days anti-slavery did not enter as an element into 
 party organizations. But now the subject which is con- 
 fessedly on all sides outside of the constitutional action of 
 
 ^ Wilson's " Rise," etc., Vol. II, p. 56. 
 
270 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the goyernment, so far as the states are concerned, is made 
 the central idea in the platform of principles announced 
 by the triumphant party. The leading object seems to be 
 simply, and wantonly, if you please, to put the institutions 
 of nearly half the states under the ban of public opinion 
 and national condemnation. This, upon general principles 
 is quite enough of itself to arouse a spirit not only of gen- 
 eral indignation, but of revolt on the part of the proscribed. 
 We, of the South, do think that African slavery as it ex- 
 ists with us, is both morally and politically right. This 
 opinion is founded on the inferiority of the black race : 
 you, however, and perhaps a majority of the North, think 
 it wrong. Admit the difference of opinion. The same 
 difference of opinion existed to a more general extent 
 amongst those who formed the constitution when it was 
 made and adopted. The changes were mainly on our side. 
 As parties were not formed on this difference of opinion, 
 then, why should they be now? . . , "When parties or 
 combinations of men, therefore, so form themselves, must 
 it not be assumed, to arise not from reason or any sense of 
 justice, but from fanaticism? The motive can spring from 
 no other source, and when men come under the influence 
 of fanaticism, there is no telling where their impulses and 
 passions may drive them. That is what creates our dis- 
 content and apprehension. . . ," 
 
 The true danger of the slaveholding states was perhaps 
 never so truly and clearly stated as in these few sentences. 
 Slavery was being undermined by the "ban of public 
 opinion and national condemnation," and not by unfriendly 
 legislation. That was what threatened its extinction, and 
 so exasperated the slaveholders and justly too. Slavery 
 was protected by the constitution in certain states. Neither 
 Congress, nor any other power, except the people of those 
 states, had the right, and the wildest fanatic did not claim 
 such right, to interfere with it where it existed. And yet 
 these Abolitionists went on, year after year, by the most 
 violent utterances, inflaming the public mind against an 
 
Abolitionism. 271 
 
 institution of sister states, and preaching a wild crusade of 
 abolition. They could only have expected and designed to 
 incite a general insurrection among the slaves, or an armed 
 uprising of the people of the free states for its destruction, 
 or to so weaken it as to render it useless. In any case 
 their conduct was highly culpable and often criminal. 
 
 The spirit of the Abolitionists was strikingly manifested 
 by their treatment of the venerable Daniel Webster in his 
 old age. In order to save the Union and avert civil war, 
 in 1850, as we have just seen, he patriotically voted for the 
 Fugitive Slave Law and all the other compromise meas- 
 ures of that period. For these he was persecuted to 
 his grave. Neither his great services, nor his marvelous 
 ability, nor the splendid luster he had shed on Massachu- 
 setts, were sufficient to shield him from the storm of 
 obloquy heaped upon him by these "insane men," as he 
 styled them in one of his speeches. Even the gentle 
 Quaker poet, Whittier, made him the subject of a malig- 
 nant satire.^ 
 
 ^ The poem is entitled " Ichabod." I quote some stanzas to show its 
 spirit: 
 
 So fallen ! So lost ! the light withdrawn 
 
 Which once he wore ! 
 The glory from his gray hairs gone 
 Forevermore ! 
 
 Scorn ! would the angels laugh to mark 
 
 A bright soul driven, 
 Fiend-goaded, down the endless dark, 
 
 From hope and heaven ? 
 
 Let not the land, once proud of him, 
 
 Insult him now ; 
 Nor brand with deeper shame his dim, 
 
 Dishonored brow. 
 
 All else is gone ; from those great eyes 
 
 The soul has fled, 
 When faith is lost, when honor dies, 
 
 The man is dead ! 
 
272 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 What must Iiave been the spirit of these Abolitionists, 
 when it could fill the heart of so kind, so loving a man as 
 Whittier with such rancor? 
 
 Those men in the North who denounced the constitution 
 were guilty of a crime, no matter what their motives may- 
 have been. In so doing, they were severing the bonds of 
 the Union and undermining its very foundations. They 
 were helping to destroy all reverence for the sacred instru- 
 ment on which the compact of union depended. When 
 the active agitation for the abolition of slavery was com- 
 menced, there was comparative peace in all sections of the 
 country. At that very time good men, both North and 
 South, but especially in the slave states, were engaged in a 
 combined movement to get rid of slavery in a constitutional 
 way. This peaceful movement was arrested by the Aboli- 
 tion agitation. 
 
 As the agitation went on and increased, the excitement 
 in both sections rose higher and higher and became more 
 and more intemperate. It continued to grow in intensity 
 until the whole country felt it in every fiber. 
 
 But I protest that this agitation of slavery, criminal as 
 it was in many of its phases, constituted no justification, 
 though it was in part the cause of secession. This was no 
 remedy, as some of us insisted at the time, and as the re- 
 sult proved, for the wrongs complained of by the South. 
 This was especially true in view of the fact that the secur- 
 ity of slavery where it then existed was in no danger in 
 1861. The triumphant party which had succeeded to the 
 control of the government was proposing, in the most sol- 
 
 Then pay the reverence of old days 
 
 To his dead fame ; 
 Walk backward, with averted gaze, 
 
 And hide the shame ! 
 
 Elizabeth Stuart Phelps is authority for the statement that Whittier, dur- 
 ing the last years of his life, " lamented, if he did not repent, that poem." 
 " I am afraid, I was too severe," he would say (to her); " Do thee think I 
 was?"— "McClure's Magazine" for July, 1896, p. 118. 
 
Abolitionism. 273 
 
 emn form, at the time secession was taking place, to guar- 
 antee by a new article in the constitution its perpetual ex- 
 istence. But the dominating ambition of a few men in the 
 seceding states for a separate government, resting on slav- 
 ery, and their intense dislike of the people of the North, 
 would, in their haughty confidence of success, listen to no 
 terms and to no reason. 
 
 So, in considering the causes that led up to the war, a 
 portion of the people of both sections, according to my 
 view, were to blame. But small as the Abolition party 
 was, its utterances were so violent and so exasperating that 
 they kept the South in a constant ferment of excitement, 
 and finally furnished the excuse and the rallying cry for the 
 fatal movement for a separate government. 
 
 Is it not time that the people of the North, as well as the 
 people of the South, were learning to look calmly and dis- 
 passionately at some of the old war questions? We are 
 getting far enough away from the excitement caused by 
 those great events to begin to be honest in their considera- 
 tion. We cannot deceive posterity, nor the keen eyes of 
 impartial history. Almost certainly, posterity, on a calm 
 review of these questions, may be as much amazed at the 
 narrow prejudice and blind fury of the Abolitionists proper, 
 in reference to the destruction of an institution which did 
 not directly affect their own consciences, however much 
 their ancestors may have been involved in fastening it upon 
 the country, as they may be at the madness and stupendous 
 folly of Southern men in trying to destroy the old govern- 
 ment and establish a new one, the "corner-stone of which 
 was to be slavery." The North may apotheosize those 
 who fell in this cause as martyrs, and the South may con- 
 secrate the memory of its heroes in poetry and song, but 
 perchance posterity, with cold and stern impartiality, may 
 reverse the judgment of this generation as to both. 
 
 I most cheerfully bear testimony to the worth and purity 
 of life of such leaders as William Lloyd Garrison, John G. 
 Whittier, Gerrit Smith, John Rankin and Benjamin Lundy, 
 18 
 
274 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 and other Abolitionists. They were potent agents in the 
 work of destroying slavery in the South. Indeed, but for 
 them, it would probably have continued on indefinitely 
 longer. But they just as certainly helped to bring on the 
 great Civil War of 1861. How far they are, in part, 
 guilty of the blood of the more than a half-million of men 
 who fell in that great conflict, or whether entirely guiltless, 
 can be known only by the Almighty. As time separates us 
 further and further from the excitements and bitter pas- 
 sions of that eventful period, and when calmness and a 
 just equipoise of mind shall once more be restored (if they 
 are not now) , I believe that these Abolitionists will rightly 
 be held responsible for helping to produce a state of bitter 
 antagonism between the two sections, which finally plunged 
 the country into civil war. 
 
 The result — the end sought and gained — must not be 
 allowed to blind our judgment. Neither side saw, nor 
 could see that, even if it could justify the means. Men 
 are to be judged by the motives and events present to 
 them, and not by the course of subsequent history. Only 
 in this way can credit or censure be given to those who 
 shaped our history in critical times. 
 
Secession. 275 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 SECESSION, 
 
 The right of revolution admitted — The right of secession by the states de- 
 nied by a majority of best statesmen — Robert E. Lee's opinion — Nulli- 
 fication in resolutions of 1798 — Mr. Jefferson the author — Nullification 
 in South Carolina — Was the parent of secession — Attributes of sover- 
 eignty enumerated— Controversy between the two sections as to 
 slavery reviewed at length — Abolition petitions — Annexation of Texas 
 — Acquisition of territory by the Mexican War — Compromise measures 
 of 1850 — Repeal of Missouri Compromise — It arouses the North — Ob- 
 ject and hope of Southern statesmen — Extension of slavery into Kan- 
 sas, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona — Fight in Kansas — 
 Slavery defeated — Secession follows— Was there a suflficient justifica- 
 tion of secession considered in full — Legislation of government all 
 favorable to slavery — No more inviting slave territory — Controversy 
 finally became one of opinions — Non-execution of fugitive slave law — 
 Alone not a sufficient justification of secession — New pledges and 
 guaranties ofiered in 1861 — Amendment to constitution proposed pro- 
 tecting slavery — Reflux in opinion in the North — Unpopularity of 
 Abolitionists — Despair of Union men — Haughty bearing of Southern 
 senators and representatives — No concessions would satisfy the South — 
 Summary of facts— Slavery would exist to-day but for the repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise. 
 
 The right of revolution on the part of the people when 
 oppressed by intolerable wrongs is not denied by any one 
 at this day. This right was exercised by our ancestors 
 in the days of the American Revolution, as it had been 
 previously by their ancestors both in England and in 
 Scotland. At a later day, our kinsmen in Texas threw off 
 the yoke of Mexican tyranny, and by arms achieved their 
 independence. In Tennessee, the wise men who framed 
 the constitution of 1796, with the recollection of the long 
 trials of their ancestors still fresh in their minds, asserted 
 this principle as one of the inalienable rights of freemen, 
 too sacred to be touched or impaired by the legislature, in 
 the following words : 
 
276 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "That government being instituted for the common 
 benefit, the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary 
 power and oppression is absurd, slavish and destructive of 
 the good and happiness of mankind." 
 
 In popular revolutions, each individual must judge for 
 himself whether or not he will throw off his allegiance to 
 the existing government. Certainly this is true as long as 
 that government affords him protection. The theory of 
 secession was, that when a state, by its people, went 
 through the regular forms of withdrawing from the Union, 
 this was the exercise of an act of sovereignty on the part 
 of the people, which carried with it the allegiance of every 
 individual in the state. If it is conceded that secession is 
 a constitutional right on the part of the states, there can 
 be no denial of the truth of this proposition. 
 
 But the right of the states to secede from the Union, 
 either peaceably or by force, has at all times been denied 
 by a majority of the greatest statesmen and the best intel- 
 lects of the land. Of those holding this opinion, I need 
 only mention the names of Hamilton, Marshall, Henry, 
 Lee, the father of Robert E. Lee, Clay, Webster, Calhoun, 
 Jackson, Lincoln and Douglas, Mr, Calhoun, though he 
 believed in the doctrine of nullification on the part of a 
 state, and induced the people of South Carolina to under- 
 take to exercise this right, denied the right of a state to 
 secede from the Union. He held that secession was revo- 
 lution.^ In General Long's "Life of General Robert E. 
 Lee," there is a letter from the latter to his son, written 
 from Texas, dated January, 1861, in which he said : 
 
 "Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of 
 our constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom 
 and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with 
 so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be 
 broken up by every member of the Confederacy at will. 
 It is intended for 'perpetual Union,' so expressed in the 
 
 1 Greeley's " Civil Conflict," Vol. I, p. 357. 
 
Secession. 277 
 
 preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not 
 a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or 
 the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It 
 is idle to talk of secession." 
 
 And yet it is easy to see that General Lee, while holding 
 these views, might go into secession on the ground that 
 his state had done so, believing, according to the theory 
 of strict states' rights, that his first allegiance and duty 
 were due to his state. Such was, I believe, his own justi- 
 fication of his course in 1861. 
 
 It is manifest from the preamble of the constitution of 
 the United States that its framers contemplated a per- 
 petual union, since they declared one of their objects to 
 be "to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our 
 posterity." Nullification had its origin in American poli- 
 tics in certain resolutions introduced in the legislature of 
 Kentucky, in 1798, known as the "Resolutions of '98," 
 written by Mr. Jefferson. One of these declared that 
 when the general government assumed powers not dele- 
 gated by the states, "a nullification of the act was the 
 rightful remedy."^ They declared, however, that the act 
 nullified must be "so palpably against the constitution as 
 to manifest an undisguised declaration ; that the compact 
 between the states was no longer to be regarded." The 
 separate states were to be the judges whether such a con- 
 dition had arisen as justified nullification, each state judg- 
 ing for itself. 
 
 It is difficult to conceive that the great intellect of one 
 of the founders of the government, and a sincere lover of 
 the Union, could have become so clouded by party spirit 
 as to induce him thus to set aside the supreme court, the 
 tribunal especially created by the constitution for the de- 
 termination of such questions, and to substitute for it 
 mere political bodies — the legislatures of the states. Thus 
 
 ' Parton's " Life of Jackson," Vol. Ill, p. 433. 
 
278 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 were sown the seeds of dissolution only nine years after 
 the constitution went into effect. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun, when he induced the legislature of South 
 Carolina, in 1832, to nullify an act of congress, was only 
 carrying into practical effect the doctrine of Mr. Jefferson. 
 The first clause of the South Carolina Ordinance of Nulli- 
 fication declared : 
 
 "That the tariff law of 1828, and the amendment to the 
 same of 1832, were null, void and no law, nor binding upon 
 this state, its officers or citizens." 
 
 To cut off any attempt to have the constitutionality of 
 the nullifying act tested in the Supreme Court of the 
 United States, it was provided that no appeal should be 
 granted in any case involving its validity, that no copy of 
 the proceedings in such case should be allowed, and any 
 attempt to appeal should be dealt with as a contempt of 
 court. This was done on the ground that the state was 
 the sole judge of the grievance complained of. 
 
 Finally, it was provided, that if the government of the 
 United States should attempt to enforce its tariff laws in 
 that state, then South Carolina would no longer consider 
 herself a member of the Federal Union, and would forth- 
 with proceed to organize a separate government. 
 
 President Jackson at once took steps to enforce the tariff 
 laws in South Carolina, by sending General Winfield Scott, 
 with an army and navy, to the harbor of Charleston, and 
 soon nullification was at an end. 
 
 Nullification was the parent of secession. The theory 
 on which the right of secession was founded was that the 
 constitution was a mere compact between the states, and 
 that they still remained sovereignties, with the right to 
 withdraw from that compact at their will. It may be well 
 to inquire what are the essential attributes of a sovereign 
 state? Among these are the right to make war, conclude 
 treatise of peace, form alliances, grant letters of marque 
 and reprisal, raise and support armies, provide and main- 
 tain a navy, lay and collect duties, imposts, excises and 
 
Secession. 279 
 
 export duties, regulate commerce and trade with foreign 
 nations, define and punish piracies and felonies committed 
 on the high seas and offenses against the laws of nations, 
 coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign 
 coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures, emit 
 bills of credit, establish post offices and post roads, and 
 provide for copyrights. There are other attributes belong- 
 ing to a sovereignty, but these are the leading ones, without 
 which no state can be called sovereign, except in a qualified 
 sense. 
 
 Now, by the very terms of the constitution, every one of 
 these rights was conferred on the national government by 
 the states and denied to themselves. Thus : 
 
 No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or con- 
 federation, grant letters of marque or reprisal, coin money, 
 emit bills of credit, make anything but gold and silver 
 coin a legal tender in payment of debts, pass any bill of 
 attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation 
 of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. No state shall, 
 without the consent of congress, lay any duties on imports 
 or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for 
 executing its inspection laws. No state shall, without the 
 consent of congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep armies 
 or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement 
 or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or 
 engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such im- 
 minent danger as will admit of no delay. 
 
 Finally it was provided that the constitution, and the 
 laws of the United States, made in pursuance thereof, and 
 such treaties as might be made, should be "the supreme 
 law of the land, and the judges of every state shall be 
 bound thereby, anything in the constitution and laws of 
 any state to the contrary notwithstanding." In the man- 
 agement of their own local affairs the states still remained 
 sovereign. 
 
 It is often argued that the government of the United 
 States is only the agent of the states, with certain limited 
 
280 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 powers, and certain prescribed duties to be performed by 
 them. And yet here is the decLaration in the constitution 
 itself that it is the supreme Law of the land, and that the 
 judges of the states shall be bound by it notwithstanding 
 the state laws may conflict with it. Where there is a con- 
 flict this constitution overrides all state laws and con- 
 stitutions. 
 
 In considering the question whether the South was 
 justified in 1861 in its attempt to overthrow the Union, 
 by the great revolution then inaugurated, it is necessary 
 to review the controversy between the two sections in 
 reference to slavery. From the beginning there was more 
 or less antagonism between them on this subject. But 
 after the year 1834, important events rapidly followed each 
 other, revealing and developing the deep-seated diversity 
 of opinion and interest existing between the two great 
 sections of the country. 
 
 The refusal to receive and consider Abolition petitions 
 by the house of representatives, in 1838, gave a real 
 potentiality to the Abolition and the Anti-slavery party. 
 In 1844, the scheme for annexing Texas to the United 
 States was presented to the country by the Democratic 
 party, with an almost open avowal that it was with the 
 purpose of strengthening slavery. A portion of the North- 
 ern people now, for the first time, took alarm at the de- 
 signs of the slave party. The annexation of Texas was 
 consummated in 1845. This, however, did not satisfy the 
 South. Still more slave territory was wanted. In May, 
 1846, the country was startled by the announcement that 
 "war existed" between the United States and Mexico. 
 Mexico was overrun by the armies of the United States, 
 and its capitol captured. A treaty followed resulting in 
 the acquisition of vast additional territory. The South 
 hoped to profit by this acquisition, by securing California 
 as a slave state. The contest over the admission of that 
 state, over the organization of the new territories, and the 
 passage of a new fugitive slave law, was long and bitter. 
 
Secession. 281 
 
 Certain of the Southern States, notably South Carolina and 
 Mississippi, were warmly in favor of seceding from the 
 Union at that time. But the patriotism and good sense of 
 the people overrode the ambition and the hot-headedness 
 of the politicians. Mr. Clay's compromise measures of 
 1850 all passed, not as a whole, but separately. For the 
 time being these gave peace to the country. The clouds 
 of secession were for a time blown away. 
 
 As was most natural, these several acts on the part of 
 slaveholders, and particularly their intemperate language 
 and haughty demeanor, in 1850, with their open threat of 
 dissolving the Union, produced a counter current of ex- 
 citement and ill-will in the North. The Abolition and 
 Free-soil parties were by these means greatly augmented. 
 If all parties had acted in good faith in maintaining these 
 compromises, it is probable, indeed, almost certain, that 
 the calamities of 1861-5 might have been averted, or, at 
 least, indefinitely postponed. In the party conventions of 
 1852, both of the political parties, the Whigs and the 
 Democrats, solemnly pledged themselves to abide by those 
 measures as a final settlement of the questions embraced 
 in them, and to resist all attempts to renew the agitation 
 of the slavery question in or out of congress. Every ques- 
 tion relating to the future status of slavery in the terri- 
 tories, as well as in Texas, had been settled by the Mis- 
 souri Compromise of 1820 or by that of 1850. 
 
 President Pierce, in his inaugural address, in 1853, 
 pledged himself to uphold these compromises. In his 
 message to congress he said those measures had "given 
 renewed vigor to our institutions and restored a sense of 
 repose and security to the public mind." All parties were 
 pledged to the support of the adjustment of 1850, except 
 the Abolitionists and the Free-soil party. In the presi- 
 dential election of 1852, the Free-soil party only cast in 
 all the North, for John P. Hale, its candidate for president, 
 155,825 votes. Agitation of the slavery question had 
 nearly ceased everywhere. Occasionally, but only rarely, 
 
282 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 were complaints heard in the North about the execution of 
 the new fugitive slave law, but even this was becoming 
 less and less. As remarked by Mr. Blaine, the "era of 
 good feeling of Mr. Monroe's time seemed to have re- 
 turned." 
 
 But, beneath all this calm and smoothness on the sur- 
 face, there was a hidden and a deep discontent on the part 
 of the strong pro-slavery leaders of the South. California, 
 which they had hoped to see a slave state, was already 
 lost. That destroyed the former equilibrium of the two 
 sections in the senate. But there was still to be settled 
 and formed into states a vast territory west of the Missouri 
 River. The people who were flocking into that region 
 were already asking for the organization of a territorial 
 government under the name of Nebraska. It was soon 
 learned that the soil of that region produced the same 
 products that were raised in Missouri, where slave labor 
 was supposed to be profitable. But the Missouri Com- 
 promise line prohibited slavery there. Then, why not re- 
 peal the law of 1820? The opportunity was a favorable 
 one. The President was known to be under the influence 
 of Southern men. A majority of both houses of congress 
 was believed to be under the same influence. 
 
 In one month after Mr. Pierce had said that the repose 
 of the country "should suffer no shock during his admin- 
 istration," that repose was rudely broken by Mr. Archi- 
 bald Dixon, of Kentucky, the successor of Mr. Clay, in the 
 senate, arising in his place and giving notice of his inten- 
 tion to move "that the Missouri Compromise be repealed, 
 and that the citizens of the several states shall" (should) 
 "be at liberty to take and hold their slaves within any of 
 the territories." Soon after this, Mr. Douglas reported a 
 bill in the senate to organize the territories of Kansas and 
 Nebraska, in which it was declared that the Missouri Com- 
 promise was inoperative and void, because "inconsistent 
 with the principle of non-intervention by congress with 
 slavery in the states and territories as recognized by the 
 
Secession. 283 
 
 compromise measures of 1850." Four months after this 
 time, this bill had received the approval of both houses of 
 congress and of the President, and the time-honored Mis- 
 souri Compromise, which had received the homage of the 
 people of both sections for thirty years, was no more. 
 
 Mr. Blaine says that if Mr. Douglas had "proposed to 
 abolish the constitution itself, the surprise could scarcely 
 have been greater. ' ' Forty Democratic representatives from 
 the North refused to follow Mr, Douglas and his allies. But 
 the measure received the support of every Whig senator 
 from the South, except that of John Bell, of Tennessee, 
 and of every Democratic member of the house from the 
 South, except Thomas H. Benton, of Missouri, and John 
 Millson, of Virginia. Sam Houston was the only Demo- 
 cratic senator from the South who voted against the meas- 
 ure. Of the "Whigs in the house from the South only 
 seven could be induced to withstand the pro-slavery pres- 
 sure. Of these, honorable mention may be made of Emer- 
 son Ethridge and William Cullom, of Tennessee, and of 
 Theodore G. Hunt, of Louisiana. Such tried Whigs in 
 the senate as John M. Clayton, George E. Badger, James 
 A. Pierce and James C. Jones, all united in destroying the 
 greatest monument erected by the genius and the patriot- 
 ism of Mr. Clay. 
 
 Never before in the history of the country, and never 
 but once since, has there been aroused such universal and 
 wide-spread excitement as this measure created in the 
 North. The angry winds of popular indignation swept 
 over the country with the violence of a tornado. The 
 clamor of the Abolitionists, which had died to a whisper 
 under the quieting effect of the peaceful measures of 1850, 
 once more burst forth with terrific madness. Rage and 
 fury took the place of moderation. Conservative Demo- 
 crats and conservative Whigs, Free-soilers and Abolition- 
 ists, and Anti-slavery men of every shade of opinion, coa- 
 lesced and came together with one mind and a common 
 purpose, under the new name of Republicans. The old 
 
284 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Whig party, which after so many years of honorable 
 achievement in statesmanship, and which constituted a 
 large and the better part of the Northern people, was 
 swept almost solidly into the new organization. In the 
 presidential election of 1856, the 155,825 votes cast for 
 Mr. Hale in 1852 were swollen to 1,341,264 for Mr. Fre- 
 mont, a gain of nearly twelve hundred thousand votes. 
 
 The repeal of the Missouri Compromise line was re- 
 garded by a majority of the people of the North, and by 
 many of the South, as a gross violation of good faith and 
 the wanton destruction of a sacred national compact. If 
 this could be destroyed for party or sectional purposes, 
 there was nothing so sacred, so consecrated by time, as to 
 be safe and beyond the ruthless hand of sectional ambition 
 and sectional necessity. It was well known that the object 
 was to open the territory north of 36° 30' for the entrance 
 of slavery, which, under the compact of 1820, had been 
 forever dedicated to freedom by Southern as well as North- 
 ern votes. This wrong naturally created a frenzy of rage 
 in the North, and resulted in the election of Mr. Lincoln 
 in 1860. Other causes legitimately growing out of this 
 repeal subsequently contributed to this result. But all 
 can be traced to the bad faith of 1854 in repealing the 
 Missouri Compromise, which had divided our territory 
 fairly, it was thought, between freedom and slavery. 
 
 At first view, it seems that the repeal of this line was an 
 act of supreme folly on the part of the slaveholders. 
 Perhaps it was not so from their point of view. They 
 were led by able, sagacious, far-seeing statesmen. They 
 needed and desired more slave territory and more slave 
 states, whether the South should remain in the Union or 
 go out of it. In the former case, the equilibrium in the 
 senate, lost on the admission of California as a free state, 
 must be restored at all hazards, or slavery would always 
 be at the mercy of the North. On the other hand, if the 
 South should separate from the North, it was imperative 
 for its safety and power that its territory should be as ex- 
 
Secession. 285 
 
 tended, and its resources as varied and as great as possible. 
 It was still possible in 1854, it was thought, to capture 
 Kansas (then including nearly all of Colorado) and Utah 
 (including all of Nevada) and New Mexico (then including 
 Arizona) , all stretching along substantially the same lati- 
 tude as that of Missouri, except New Mexico, which is 
 south of it. All of these lay north of the Missouri Com- 
 promise line, and slavery was therefore prohibited in them. 
 Thus, in order to enter that region with slaves, it was nec- 
 essary to remove that inhibition. If, by boldness and dar- 
 ing enterprise, Kansas could be won as a slave state, it 
 would probably control the destiny of Utah and New 
 Mexico, as Missouri was expected to control the status of 
 Kansas. 
 
 The conception of seizing and occupying this large terri- 
 tory in the interest of slavery was a daring and magnifi- 
 cent one. If successful, slavery would be secure for sev- 
 eral generations longer, and the slaveholding influence 
 would continue to dominate the councils of the nation. 
 On the other hand, if the Southern States should secede 
 from the Union, the territory thus secured would, with the 
 existing slave states, form a splendid Confederacy, able to 
 compete successfully with its Northern neighbor. The 
 scheme was a hazardous one, but the results magnificent, 
 if it should be successful. No time was to be lost. The 
 free states were year by year becoming stronger, while the 
 slave states were growing relatively weaker. Shortly be- 
 fore the death of Mr. Calhoun, in 1850, he wrote to a 
 friend in Alabama that it was the duty of the South to 
 force upon the North the issue of the preservation of slav- 
 ery in the Union. "We are now stronger," said he, "than 
 we shall hereafter be politically and morally. Unless we 
 bring on the issue, delay to us will be dangerous indeed." 
 If he had lived, the issue might have been forced in 1850. 
 
 As soon as the Kansas-Nebraska bill, repealing the Mis- 
 souri Compromise line was passed, thus opening all the 
 territory of the United States to the entrance of slavery, a 
 
286 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 rush was made by the South for Kansas, to secure that 
 territory. The North was equally alert, and poured in its 
 thousands to take part in the last peaceful contest over 
 slavery in the territories. After a long, exciting and bitter 
 contest, sometimes resulting in bloodshed, and narrowly 
 escaping civil war, Kansas came into the Union as a free 
 state. All hope of an equilibrium in the senate on the 
 part of the South, was now forever hopelessly gone. Then 
 followed the memorable presidential election of 1860, with 
 all its wild excitements and striking dramatic historical in- 
 cidents, resulting in the election of a sectional candidate 
 for president. Every one knew, as the result became 
 known, that great and stirring events were now impending. 
 In the contingency which had just happened, it was well 
 known that South Carolina stood ready to withdraw from 
 the Union. Scarcely had the exultant echoes of the elec- 
 tion died away on the air, before that state, through its 
 legislature, took measures in that direction — the first step 
 in the mighty drama which was speedily to follow. A 
 month later, and South Carolina no longer belonged to the 
 the splendid sisterhood of states in the Union. One bright 
 star had disappeared. Others soon followed, shooting 
 madly from their spheres. In three months a Southern 
 Confederacy was organized, with its president, its depart- 
 ment chiefs, and with an army in the field. The sound of 
 the preparation for war was heard in every seceding state. 
 While the North looked on in petrified stupor, war, open 
 and flagrant, was commenced by the seizure, by organized 
 armed men, of every assailable fort and arsenal belonging 
 to the government, within the seceding states. Finally, 
 on the ever memorable 12th of April, 1861, while the presi- 
 dent of the Republic and a majority of the people of the 
 North, stood still with outstretched arms, pleading for 
 peace, pleading with their erring sisters to return, a num- 
 ber of batteries erected for the purpose, simultaneously 
 opened fire on the national flag which still floated over 
 Fort Sumter. The great conflict which was to preserve or 
 
Secession. 287 
 
 to destroy the Union of our fathers, which was to estab- 
 lish the supremacy of slavery, or to destroy it, had com- 
 menced. 
 
 In the light of history, was there a sufficient justification 
 of the South in thus rushing into war? Let Mr. Alexander 
 H. Stephens, late vice-president of the Southern Confeder- 
 acy, answer: "The government of the United States," 
 said Mr. Stephens, before the Georgia legislature in 1860, 
 "is the best and freest government ; the most equal in its 
 measures, the most just in its decisions, and the most in- 
 spiring in its principles to elevate the race of men, that 
 the sun of Heaven ever shone upon. Now, for you to at- 
 tempt to overthrow such a government as this, under which 
 we have lived for more than three-quarters of a century, in 
 which we have gained our wealth, our standing as a nation, 
 our domestic safety, while the elements of peril are around, 
 with peace and tranquillity accompanied with unbounded 
 prosperity and rights unassailed — is the height of mad- 
 ness, folly and wickedness, to which I can neither lend my 
 sanction, nor my vote," 
 
 Every act of the government from its foundation so far 
 as we can recall, had been favorable to the slaveholders. 
 There was not, in its entire history, a single act of hostile 
 legislation. Even the Ordinance of 1787, for the govern- 
 ment of the territory north-west of the Ohio River, in ex- 
 cluding after its passage the introduction of slaves into 
 that territory, was not regarded at the time as hostile. It 
 was passed unanimously, excepting one vote from New 
 York. The Southern members all supported it.' 
 
 In the ordinance prepared by Mr. Jefferson in the Con- 
 gress of the Confederation in 1784, he proposed to "exclude 
 slavery after the year 1800, from all our territory already 
 ceded or to be ceded," north of the parallel of 31 degrees. 
 This would have excluded slavery from Kentucky, Ten- 
 
 ^ Roosevelt's " "Winning of the West," Vol. Ill, p. 257. 
 
288 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 nessee, Alabama and Mississippi, as well as from the 
 North-west Territory. 
 
 The fugitive slave law of 1793, which was passed under 
 our constitution, was enacted in the interest of slavery. 
 Mr. Webster, in at least two of his speeches, one at Buf- 
 falo and one at Albany, in 1851, declared that the law of 
 1793 was more unfavorable to the slave than that of 1850, 
 and therefore more favorable to the slave owner. ^ 
 
 In framing the Federal Constitution, the slaveholding 
 states obtained, as it seems at this day, two important and 
 remarkable concessions and advantages, aside from the 
 clause providing for the return of fugitives bound to serv- 
 ice. Considering the strong anti-slavery feeling then ex- 
 isting in the states, both North and South, the provision 
 sanctioning the African slave trade until the year 1808 is 
 extraordinary. But perhaps quite as noticeable is the pro- 
 vision for the apportionment of representatives and direct 
 taxes among the states, which were to be determined by 
 adding to the number of free persons, including those 
 bound to service for a term of years, three-fifths of the 
 slaves ; that is, the number of representatives in congress 
 and in the election of president and vice-president was to 
 be increased in the slave states three-fifths by reason of 
 the slaves. At the same time, when direct taxes were 
 to be laid by the government, a slave, though property, 
 was counted, not at his full value, but at three-fifths 
 thereof. Both these provisions were in the interest and 
 for the benefit of slavery. The convention had come to a 
 stand-still on the question of the further importation of 
 slaves, the ratio of representation, the right to regulate 
 commerce, and other questions, and there was danger that 
 it would break up without forming a constitution. North 
 Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia claimed the right 
 to import slaves, and threatened not to enter into the 
 Union unless the right was conceded. Finally, the New 
 
 1 " Webster's Works, Vol. II. 
 
Secession. 289 
 
 England States, in the interest of their own commerce, 
 and of Northern ship-owners, united with those states, 
 and adopted the clause allowing the slave trade to con- 
 tinue until the year 1808. The constitution was, as to 
 these questions, a compromise without which it never could 
 have been formed. 
 
 In the acquisition of the Territory of Louisiana, in 1803, 
 the slaveholding interest of the states was greatly bene- 
 fited, though this was not the object of Mr. Jefferson in 
 making the purchase. By reason of it, Louisiana came 
 into the Union a few years later as a slave state. After- 
 wards, Arkansas and Missouri, which formed a part of the 
 Louisiana purchase, were admitted also as slave states. 
 Again, in the purchase of Florida, in 1819, slavery was 
 strengthened and its area extended, that territory coming 
 into the Union as a slave state. In the controversy over the 
 admission of Missouri, in 1820, as we have seen, the South 
 accepted and secured the compromise line of the parallel 
 of 36 degrees, 30 minutes, south of which slavery might 
 be introduced, and north of which it was forever prohib- 
 ited. In this the South got all it asked. 
 
 When we come down to a later period, to the annexa- 
 tion of Texas, in 1845, the South gained another slave 
 state, seven times as large as Tennessee, with an agree- 
 ment forming a part of the fundamental contract, that four 
 states might be formed out of the territory, all of which 
 would, of course, have been slave states. Then followed 
 the Mexican War, inaugurated, as was charged and be- 
 lieved, by President Polk and other Southern men, for the 
 purpose of strengthening and extending slavery. The war 
 resulted, as was anticipated, in the acquisition of a large 
 addition to our territory. Out of this the South hoped 
 to gain more slave states. New Mexico and the southern 
 part of California lay south of the line of 36 degrees, 30 
 minutes, and it was supposed that slavery could go there. 
 The North, seeing the ambitious designs of the slavehold- 
 19 
 
290 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ers, had become greatly aroused, and many of its statesmen 
 determined that not a foot more of the common territory 
 of the United States should be "stained" with the crime 
 of slavery. The excitement became intense. Many of the 
 pro-slavery leaders in the South advocated as a remedy 
 the secession of the slave states from the Union. The at- 
 tempt would have been made in 1850, instead of 1861, but 
 it was found that the people were not yet ready for that 
 hazardous and startling movement. While the storm of 
 excitement was still raging in congress, and in the coun- 
 try, the people of California, in their sovereign capacity, 
 formed a constitution excluding slavery from that state. 
 The slavery propagandists were indignant at the loss of 
 California, but what could they do? The people had de- 
 cided the question for themselves. 
 
 In the compromise of 1850, California was admitted as 
 a free state ; New Mexico and Utah were organized as ter- 
 ritorial governments, leaving the question of slavery open 
 to be settled by the citizens thereof ; the slave trade was 
 abolished in the District of Columbia ; the Texas boundary 
 line was settled, and a more stringent fugitive slave law 
 passed. The law, for the more effectual rendition of 
 fugitive slaves to their owners, was framed to suit the 
 views of the slaveholders, and was mainly the work of 
 a Southern senator, Mr. James M. Mason, of Virginia. 
 While this law did not fully meet the approval of the ex- 
 treme men of the South, for a time at least, they accepted 
 it in good faith. On the other hand, a cry of indignant 
 rage on the part of the Abolitionists was at once heard all 
 over the North. 
 
 The excitement over the new fugitive slave law, how- 
 ever, had gradually died out in 1854, when the Kansas- 
 Nebraska bill was thrown as a fire-brand into the maga- 
 zine of passion and prejudice, only slumbering in the 
 North. It then burst into a devouring flame that never 
 afterwards subsided. The South expected to profit by this 
 measure, and supposed it was gaining large advantages. 
 
Secession. 291 
 
 But we have seen that these benefits were as illusory as 
 the fabled apples of the East, beautiful to look upon, but 
 turning to bitter ashes on the lips. The contest was 
 transferred from the arena of congress to the plains of 
 Kansas. Under the first trial of the South's new doctrine 
 of "non-intervention and popular sovereignty," Kansas 
 was lost, and thus the gateway to New Mexico and Utah 
 was closed and barred forever. 
 
 Then came a change of front on the part of the South. 
 The doctrine of non-intervention by congress as to slavery 
 in the territories, proclaimed in 1854, was abandoned, and 
 "intervention" for its protection was demanded. As ap- 
 plied to the remaining territories, this claim, if it had 
 been granted, was a mere airy abstraction, a mere theory 
 of no practical value whatever to slavery. It was an easy 
 matter to get slavery into the territories. The difficulty 
 was to keep it there. By the Kansas-Nebraska bill, as 
 well as by the Dred Scott decision, all territory belonging 
 to the United States was already open to the introduction 
 of slavery. The slave owner was at perfect liberty to take 
 his slaves to Utah or New Mexico if he was willing to take 
 the hazard of losing them afterwards. Both regions were 
 high and mountainous, and supposed to be unfavorable to 
 slavery. In these natural conditions, Mr. Webster said in 
 1850, in his celebrated 7th of March speech, he found a 
 stronger prohibition of slavery than in any possible ordi- 
 nance or enactment of congress. He would not, he said, 
 "re-enact the law of God." Under the favorite doctrine 
 of the South, adopted in 1854, leaving the people of the 
 territories "free to regulate their domestic institutions in 
 their own way," slavery could not exist long in any terri- 
 tory with a majority of the people thereof hostile to it. 
 
 In the great debates between Mr. Lincoln and Mr. 
 Douglas, in Illinois, in 1858, in reply to a searching ques- 
 tion by Mr. Lincoln, the latter said, with great shrewdness, 
 avoiding the force of the Dred Scott decision, "the people 
 of a territory have the lawful means to introduce or ex- 
 
292 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 elude slavery as they choose, for the reason that slavery 
 cannot exist unless supported by local police regula- 
 tions. ... If the people are opposed to slavery, they 
 will, by unfriendly legislation, efifectually prevent its in- 
 troduction." It was the final realization of this fact that 
 made the slaveholders in 1860 and 1861 demand that 
 "slave property should be securely protected (in the terri- 
 tories) until the period for the formation of a state govern- 
 ment should arrive." 
 
 After the admission of Kansas, the controversy became 
 one of opinions merely. There was nothing substantial in 
 it, except the complaint of the non-execution of the fugi- 
 tive slave law. The demand for the protection of slavery 
 in the territories was a delusive cry to hide defeat. There 
 was not a territory in the land where slavery would have gone 
 if all the nation's army had been present to protect it. 
 The South demanded protection, but there was nothing to 
 protect. The North demanded inhibition, but there was 
 nothing to inhibit. The South should have accepted its 
 defeat, invited by its own extreme aggressiveness. The 
 North should have been satisfied with its triumph, won 
 largely for it by its adversaries, and against its own will 
 and efforts. 
 
 The charge that the Southern States were deprived of 
 their true equality in the Union was without foundation. 
 In what respect? No man could point out wherein the 
 alleged inequality consisted. 
 
 The charge so often and so constantly made, that the 
 Southern States were deprived of their equal rights in the 
 territories, is believed to be unfounded. The foregoing re- 
 view conclusively shows the error of the charge. In fact, 
 the very last legislation by congress on the subject of slav- 
 ery in the territories was dictated by the friends of slavery 
 and supported by the South. From the beginning of the 
 government all the way down its history to 1854, whatever 
 the South demanded in the territories which could be the 
 subject of congressional action, was granted. 
 
Secession. 293 
 
 The most serious charge was the non-execution in good 
 faith in the North of the fugitive slave law. Unfortu- 
 nately for the people of this country, this was true in some 
 of tlie free states. Certain states, in their blindness and 
 madness, forgetting their duty to the constitution and their 
 duty to their sister states, passed laws designed to hinder 
 and obstruct the execution of that law. There was, and 
 there can be, no justification of the people of any state, 
 whether on the plea of material interests or conscientious 
 scruples, for nullifying, evading, or defeating a plain con- 
 stitutional law. The obstruction of the fugitive slave law 
 ought to have been dealt with in the United States courts 
 as treason or insurrection. Law, when upheld by strong 
 men, is more potent than armies. The misfortune was that 
 weak men then ruled in the national administration. 
 
 Conceding the fact that this law was not executed with 
 the faithfulness with which it should have been, this alone 
 constituted no sufficient justification for dissolving the 
 Union. Many of the free states did not aid in any way in 
 obstructing or defeating the execution of the law. The 
 loss of slaves, and especially the loss by reason of the non- 
 execution of this law, except possibly in Virginia, was too 
 small to justify the dissolution of a great government. 
 South Carolina, the earliest and the loudest in complaints, 
 and the first to secede, probably did not lose twenty-five 
 fugitive slaves a year. All of the states that seceded, ex- 
 cept Virginia and Texas, were protected on their exposed 
 border by slave states. It was the border states that did 
 not secede on which fell nearly all the loss of runaway 
 slaves, and this loss was comparatively insignificant in the 
 aggregate. 
 
 Now, when it is remembered that secession from the 
 Union destroyed the constitutional obligation to return 
 fugitives to their owners, and rendered null the law itself, 
 it can at once be seen how unjustifiable, in the forum of 
 reason and common sense, was secession for this cause. It 
 
294 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 was blindly throwing away one of the safeguards and se- 
 curities the slave owner had for this kind of property, with- 
 out getting anything in return. It cannot be easily be- 
 lieved that the people of the seceded states attached much 
 practical importance to this grievance in determining their 
 action in 1861, except as a matter of sacred principle. In 
 this regard, it is confessed, they had ground for serious 
 alarm and complaint, as they also had by reason of the 
 ceaseless agitation of the slavery question. 
 
 Nor did the election to the presidency of a sectional 
 candidate constitute any justifiable ground for secession. 
 
 I do not by any means overlook or underestimate the 
 great principle involved by the nullification by a part of 
 the Northern states of the fugitive slave law, and the con- 
 stant efi'orts of Abolitionists to destroy slavery. I con- 
 demn these things as earnestly as the most extreme seces- 
 sionist. If persisted in, after solemn remonstrance and 
 negotiation, the first might have constituted a sufiicient 
 cause of war, or at least of retaliation ; but, according to 
 the opinion of Mr. A. H. Stephens, as we shall see in the 
 next chapter, not until the last means of diplomacy were 
 exhausted. 
 
 Certainly the pretense that Mr. Lincoln was a sectional 
 candidate came with an exceedingly ill grace from the 
 men who nominated and supported Mr. Breckenridge. 
 He was nominated on sectional issues, and had no consid- 
 erable following, and received no electoral votes, except in 
 one section. Mr. Breckenridge and Mr. Lincoln were both 
 sectional candidates, and each received only sectional sup- 
 port. Mr. Bell was the only national candidate. His 
 election would have prevented secession. If the North 
 had been as anxious in 1860 to save the Union as it be- 
 came in 1861, it would have voted for Mr. Bell, and thus 
 saved itself from its deep humiliation in trying to concili- 
 ate the South afterwards. 
 
 If, however, Mr. Lincoln had been elected on a platform 
 which avowed the purpose of attacking and overthrowing 
 
Secession. 295 
 
 the institution of slavery, and if he had approved that 
 purpose, then the Southern people would have been un- 
 worthy of freedom and the respect of mankind, if they had 
 not prepared for resistance, and summoned every son of 
 theirs to the battle-field. But the very opposite was the 
 case. The Chicago Convention of 1860, which nominated 
 Mr, Lincoln, declared in its platform as follows : 
 
 "That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the 
 states and especially the right of each state, to order and 
 control its own domestic institutions according to its own 
 judgment, exclusively, is essential to that balance of pow- 
 ers on which the perpetuation and endurance of our po- 
 litical fabric depends, and we denounce the lawless in- 
 vasion by armed force of the soil of any state or territory, 
 no matter under what pretext, as among the gravest of 
 crimes." 
 
 This declaration was in strict accordance with the views 
 of Mr. Lincoln, avowed by him in the most explicit man- 
 ner in innumerable ways, from the time he first entered 
 public life down to the day he was inaugurated as president. 
 No man could have been more explicit on this question. 
 He not only declared the want of authority on his part 
 as i)resident to interfere with slavery, in the states where 
 it then existed, but he also in the most solemn manner 
 declared to the world that he had no desire, nor intention 
 of doing so. Nor had congress any such power. No in- 
 telligent man could have been found who would have 
 risked his reputation for common sense, by asserting such 
 power in that body. As far back as 1780, the first congress 
 under the constitution defined its position and its power 
 on this subject, in the following lucid words, from which 
 it never departed : 
 
 "Resolved, That congress have no authority to interfere 
 in the emancipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them 
 in any of the states, it remaining with the the several states 
 alone to provide rules and regulations therein, which hu- 
 manity and good policy require." 
 
296 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Mr. Alexander H. Stephens, in his great Union speech 
 before the legislature of Georgia, November 14, 1860, de- 
 clared that to secede in consequence of the election of Mr. 
 Lincoln would be to break the constitution. "We went 
 into the election with this people," he said, "the result 
 was different from what we wished, but the election was 
 constitutionally held." ^ And in his letter to Mr. Lincoln, 
 already quoted, he said that "the people of the South do 
 not entertain any fears that a Republican administration, 
 or at least the one about to be inaugurated, would attempt 
 to interfere directly and immediately with slavery in the 
 states." 
 
 But granting that there was just grounds for apprehen- 
 sion on the part of the people of the South, as to the fu- 
 ture security of slavery, the events that transpired subse- 
 quently to the election of Mr. Lincoln, and before the fir- 
 ing on Fort Sumter, were amply sufficient to remove every 
 such fear, and to afford the most convincing assurance of 
 its future safety ; indeed, that the slave states would there- 
 after enjoy their constitutional rights in the Union, with 
 higher and more solemn guaranties than they did in the 
 earlier days of the government. New pledges of good faith 
 were offered in the most generous terms, and in the most 
 fraternal spirit. Six weeks after the election of Mr. 
 Lincoln, the country was aroused, as if from a dream, by 
 the announcement that South Carolina claimed to be no 
 longer a member of the Union. A half dozen other slave 
 states were preparing to follow her fatal lead. The North was 
 startled, surprised and alarmed. The threats of secession 
 made before that time had been regarded by the North as 
 mere bluster and bravado. Now it was seen that they were 
 the expression of a mature and long-settled determination. 
 
 Congress was in session, and a committee of thirteen 
 members was appointed by the senate, and one of thirty- 
 one in the house, to consider matters of compromise and 
 
 » Nicolay & Hay's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. Ill, p. 267. 
 
Secession. 297 
 
 conciliation. The senate committee failed to agree on 
 anything. The house committee, of which Thomas Cor- 
 win was chairman, reported almost unanimously, only 
 three members voting against the recommendations, in 
 favor of the abolition of all the personal liberty laws of 
 the Northern States ; for the admission of New Mexico, 
 which then included Arizona, as a slave state ; for an 
 amendment of the fugitive slave law providing that the 
 question of the right to freedom of a fugitive should be 
 tried in the state from which he fled ; and for an amend- 
 ment to the constitution providing that no subsequent 
 amendment, having for its object any interference with 
 slavery shall originate with any state that does not recog- 
 nize that relation within its own limits, or shall be valid 
 without the assent of every one of the states composing 
 the Union. The last proposition came from Charles Fran- 
 cis Adams, a distinguished anti-slavery man from Massa- 
 chusetts, who had been the candidate of the Free-soil party 
 for the vice-presidency in 1848. 
 
 While the propositions were under consideration in the 
 house, Mr. Corwin, also a distinguished member of the 
 Free-soil party, offered the following as a substitute, to 
 become the thirteenth amendment to the constitution : 
 "No amendment shall be made to the constitution which 
 will authorize or give to congress the power to abolish or 
 interfere within any state with the domestic institutions 
 thereof, including that of persons held for labor or service 
 by the laws of said state." This proposed amendment 
 passed the house by a vote of 133 to 65, and the senate by 
 a vote of 24 to 12. In the house it received the votes of 
 the following distinguished members of the Republican 
 party : Mr. Sherman, Mr. Colfax, Mr. Charles F. Adams, 
 Mr. Howard, Mr. Windom, and Messrs. Moorehead and 
 McPherson. In the senate, of the Southern senators who 
 voted for it were Mr. Hunter, Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Sebastian 
 and Mr. Gwin. The following Republican senators voted 
 for it : Anthony, Baker, Dixon, Foster, Grimes, Harlan, 
 
298 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Morrill and Ten Eyck. Mr, Seward, Mr. Fessenden and 
 Mr. Collamer did not vote, and as pairs were not an- 
 nounced, Mr. Blaine says, "it may be presumed that they 
 consented to the passage of the amendment." 
 
 This proposed amendment tied the hands of congress 
 forever. No amendment looking to the abolition of 
 slavery could ever be passed by congress. So far as the 
 national government was concerned, it made slavery per- 
 petual, and firmly entrenched it in the constitution. Two 
 states, Ohio and Maryland, soon ratified the amendment. 
 The New England States rejected it. In many of the 
 states, by reason of the rapidity of passing events, and 
 the rage caused by the firing on Sumter, the amendment 
 was never considered. Had not the hope of peace been 
 rudely destroyed by the haste of the secession leaders, per- 
 haps in part to prevent this very thing, there is strong 
 reason to believe that it would have secured the approval 
 of enough states to have made it a part of the constitu- 
 tion, provided the Southern States had promptly ratified 
 it, instead of madly precipitating the country into war. 
 
 Security for slavery in the Union was not what the ex- 
 treme Southern leaders wanted. It was independence — 
 a new government, outside of the Union. Their acts tend 
 to the conclusion that no compromise, no concession, no 
 constitutional guaranties would have satisfied them. 
 
 In the senate, the committee of thirteen reported in 
 favor of immediately admitting New Mexico, including 
 Arizona, into the Union, with the slave code already ex- 
 isting there, thus making it a slave state. Another 
 strange anomaly followed. For twelve years the Free- 
 soil party had been earnestly insisting on the application 
 of the "Wilmot proviso" (prohibiting slavery) to every 
 territory that was about to be organized. It had been 
 successfully demanded in reference to Oregon, lying away 
 north of any slave state. It had been demanded also at 
 a later day as to Kansas. Indeed, the cardinal article in 
 the creed of the Republican party was opposition to the 
 
Secession. 299 
 
 extension of slavery into the new territories. On this 
 creed the victory of 1860 had been won. On this issue, 
 nominally at least, the North and South had joined battle 
 in that canvass. And yet, so great was the alarm in the 
 North, in the winter of 1860-1, that acts were passed, re- 
 ported by a Democratic senator, Mr. Greene of Missouri, 
 organizing the territories of Colorado, Dakota and Nevada, 
 all north of the parallel of 36 degrees 30 minutes, without 
 any slavery restriction, and the Republicans quietly al- 
 lowed these things to be done without a word of protest. 
 Mr. Sumner, Mr. Seward, Mr. Wade and Mr. Chandler, 
 and other stalwart Republicans, and Mr. Stevens, Mr. 
 Lovejoy, and others in the house sat still while the corner- 
 stone of their party edifice was thus openly taken away. 
 These men and their associates had, in 1850, denounced 
 Mr. "Webster as recreant and a traitor for doing, in the case 
 of New Mexico, what they were now doing themselves. 
 However much their conduct in this and in other cases, 
 during the winter of 1860-1, may expose them to the im- 
 peachment of insincerity in their previous professions — of 
 being guided by a regard for personal and party success 
 rather than by a solemn regard for principle — the charge 
 would only be partially true in this case. No doubt there 
 was some truth in it, for they were ambitious politicians 
 and political agitators. They had gone on agitating the 
 slavery question, sometimes in defense of the rights of the 
 North, and in the interest of good faith and solemn com- 
 pacts, as in 1854, and sometimes aggressively, if not 
 wantonly, assailing the rights of their brethren in the 
 South, until they had helped to set in motion currents of 
 angry passion that were now roaring around them moun- 
 tain high, before which they sat appalled and speechless, 
 In common with their co-agitators in the South, they had 
 raised a storm that threatened the destruction of the very 
 foundations of the government. The high tide of popular 
 excitement which had lifted the Republican party into 
 power was now rapidly ebbing and flowing outward. 
 
300 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 In view of the terrible dangers that were only too 
 visible in the South, threatening the integrity of the Union, 
 a reflux in feeling had set in in the North. Public meetings 
 were held all over the free states, imploring conciliation, 
 compromise, concession. A petition of the mayor and 
 aldermen with twenty-two thousand signatures came even 
 from Boston, praying for the adoption of the Crittenden 
 Compromise — a measure similar to the Corwin amendment. 
 "Wendell Phillips, after one of his eloquent and bitter 
 harangues in Boston, had to be escorted home by the 
 police to save him from violence ; George William Curtis 
 had to cancel one of his engagements to lecture in the 
 peaceful and staid city of Philadelphia, to avoid mob 
 violence. Horace Greeley would let the "wayward sisters 
 go in peace" rather than have bloodshed. Thus the 
 Abolitionists and the Anti-slavery men, when brought face 
 to face with the terrible reality of secession, were paral- 
 ized with the appalling danger. They were now willing to 
 make the most humiliating concessions for the sake of sav- 
 ing the Union. It was the knowledge of these facts, with 
 a sincere desire to save the Union, that largely influenced 
 their course in Washington, in 1861. 
 
 What a change since 1860 in the tone of the defiant Abo- 
 litionists. Then slavery must be abolished ; now they 
 were willing that it should be extended and protected. 
 Then the constitution was a league with hell, because it 
 recognized slavery ; now it should be amended so as to 
 lock and bar the door forever against its extinction. And 
 now for the first time, perhaps, they felt in their hearts the 
 warm glow of a love of country, instead of a love of a mere 
 section. Such revolutions in feeling and sentiment as took 
 place in the Northern mind in the winter of 1861, are no 
 uncommon things in the history of nations. Like the 
 waves of the sea, nothing is more unstable than the mind 
 of the people. 
 
 During the months of December, January and February, 
 great events followed one another with the rapidity of 
 
.TUSEril ANDERSON. 
 
 Tt'i-ritoriul Judye ami Eiglttan ]'rt/r.s C. S. SciuUoi' 
 
Secession. 301 
 
 shadows passing over the fields. Seven states had already 
 seceded. Others were preparing to follow. The South 
 had become a great military camp. The Southern people 
 were rushing to arms like the Crusaders under the preach- 
 ing of Peter the Hermit. Nearly all the Southern senators 
 and representatives had gradually gone home. The scene 
 in Washington during the months of January and Febru- 
 ary would have been supremely ludicrous, if it had not 
 been supremely perilous — so full was it of the dark 
 shadows of coming events. While Northern senators 
 and representatives, and the Peace Congress, and all the 
 great functionaries of government, and the press of the 
 North, were using every possible means of conciliation — 
 were, in fact, actually imploring their Southern brethren 
 not to leave — the latter were quietly and deliberately pack- 
 ing up their effects ready to depart when it should suit 
 them. The deliberation with which they made ready to 
 leave for their homes was in the highest degree im- 
 pressive. From time to time as their several states 
 seceded, in a highly picturesque manner, they formally de- 
 livered their farewell speeches. Their last words, in some 
 cases kind and regretful at parting, were in others full of 
 bitter reproaches for the men who had, in some cases, 
 bowed themselves to the very dust to placate them. When 
 from time to time they returned to their homes, they did 
 so in triumph. 
 
 Consternation and dark despair clouded every loyal face. 
 No one knew what to do. Indecision filled the high places 
 of the government. The president was irresolute in the 
 presence of the enemies of the Union. Some of the mem- 
 bers of his cabinet were plotting revolution. The only 
 persons with erect heads and unclouded brows were the 
 bold and daring Southern leaders, who with confident 
 bearing, bore themselves as if already conquerors. Almost 
 Stygian darkness seemed to be gatliering over the capitol. 
 The croaking raven, with sable wings, uttered its dismal 
 cry, ominous of coming disaster. Only one true man in 
 
302 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 all the North was calm, unmoved, undismayed by the 
 raging storm. That man was Abraham Lincoln. He 
 uttered no reproaches and no threats, but in the spirit of ex- 
 alted patriotism invoked the blessings of peace upon his 
 distracted country. In the Southern States, even then, 
 mad ambition had its feet in the stirrups and grasped the 
 reins, and waited only for the bugle call sounding the 
 charge. Such was the condition of the country when 
 Abraham Lincoln became president, March 4, 1861. 
 
 None of the proposed concessions — indeed, no possible 
 concessions, it is believed — would have satisfied these 
 Southern leaders. Attempted conciliation only served to 
 make them more confident and daring. It strengthened 
 their belief that secession would be accomplished peace- 
 fully — even without firing a gun. The conduct of the 
 North was taken as evidence of fear of the South. They 
 totally misunderstood, as they found out a few weeks later, 
 the motive and spirit of the North. 
 
 Senator Alfred Iverson, of Georgia, in withdrawing 
 from the Senate, said: "For myself, unless my opinions 
 greatly change, I shall never consent to the reconstruction 
 of the Federal Union. The Rubicon is passed, and with 
 my consent shall never be recrossed." 
 
 On the 10th day of April, 1861, in response to a sere- 
 nade in Charleston, Roger A. Pryor, lately a member of 
 congress from Virginia, said, among other things : 
 
 "Gentlemen, I thank you, especially that you have at 
 last annihilated this cursed Union, reeking with corrup- 
 tion, and insolent with excess of tyranny. Thank God, it 
 is at last blasted and riven by the lightning wrath of an 
 outraged and indignant people. Not only is it gone, but 
 gone forever. In the expressive language of Scripture, it 
 is water spilt on the ground and can not be gathered up. 
 Like Lucifer, son of the morning, it has fallen, never to 
 rise again. For my part, gentlemen, if Abraham Lincoln 
 and Hannibal Hamlin, to-morrow, were to abdicate their 
 office, and were to give me a blank sheet of paper to write 
 
Secession. 303 
 
 the conditions of re-annexation to the defunct Union, I 
 would scornfully spurn the overture. . . . I do in- 
 voke you, in your demonstrations of popular opinion, in 
 your exhibitions of official interest, to give no countenance 
 to the idea of reconstruction." 
 
 It thus appears that, from the adoption of the federal 
 constitution down to 1861, there had not been a single act 
 of national legislation, nor a single act on the part of the 
 national governmant designed to be hostile to slavery. 
 Some of these may, in their operation, have proved in- 
 jurious to the interests of slavery, notably the repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise line ; but they were passed to help 
 that interest and not to injure it. It is, therefore, evident 
 that there existed, in 1861, no substantial justification for 
 secession, or revolution under the name of secession. It 
 was absolutely without any justifiable cause, when viewed 
 in the light of facts and history, except as to the questions, 
 easy of adjustment, hereafter to be pointed out. 
 
 And when we recall the conduct of the Northern states- 
 men and the Northern people, in 1861 ; when we remember 
 that congress proposed to amend the organic law of the 
 land, in reference to slavery, engrafting that institution 
 upon the constitution as never before, in language so strong 
 as to defy evasion, and hedging slavery about with guards 
 and buttresses which practically made it national as well 
 as perpetual ; when we recall how the people of the North 
 almost abased themselves in manifestations of good will 
 toward their Southern brethren, it becomes plainly mani- 
 fest, in view of these facts, that this great and destructive 
 revolution should have been avoided ; that it was without 
 sufficient justification, judged in the light of all moral laws 
 relating to war. 
 
 In view of this long array of facts, showing that the 
 influence of the slavery interest had been dominant in the 
 national councils from 1787 down to 1860, does it not seem 
 that the states that had seceded, in the spring of 1861, should 
 have waited until it could be known certainly whether the 
 
304 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 proposed amendment to the constitution would be ratified 
 by a sufficient number of states, including the slave states, 
 to become operative, and whether the Northern States 
 would repeal their personal liberty acts ? Suppose the 
 Southern States, through their conventions or legislatures, 
 had solemnly, kindly and firmly said to their brethren of 
 the North, as Mr. Stephens suggested: "Our remaining 
 in the Union, or returning to it, depends solely upon your 
 giving us the new guaranty for the security of our slaves, 
 and upon your repealing such laws as obstruct the com- 
 plete execution of the fugitive slave laws." 
 
 No one can say positively what the Northern people 
 would have done in response to such a proposition, but 
 in view of the earnest, indeed almost universal desire at 
 that time in the North for the preservation of peace, and 
 in favor of concession and conciliation, the chances are 
 very great that the terms demanded would have been 
 granted. Public opinion, it is believed, would have been 
 so strongly in favor of such peace measures that it would 
 have overwhelmed the Abolitionists everywhere except in 
 New England. The difi'erences between the North and 
 the South should have been adjusted by generous con- 
 cessions. The people of the two sections were brethren, 
 and should have dwelt together in peace as they do now. 
 Surely conciliation and compromise were better than a 
 long and desolating war. The South was right as to the 
 non-execution of the fugitive slave law, but in error in 
 rushing into war without exhausting the last means of 
 diplomacy. 
 
 After the repeal immediately followed the last battle 
 between freedom and slavery on the plains of Kansas, re- 
 sulting in the defeat of the South. Henceforth there 
 could be no more new slave states, unless Texas were 
 divided as it was provided that it might be. But for the 
 outburst of indignation caused by the repeal of the Mis- 
 souri Compromise line, Kansas, under the decision in the 
 Dred Scott case, might have become a slave state. But for 
 
Secession. 305 
 
 that repeal New Mexico and Arizona might ultimately 
 have been added to the slave states, if slaveholders had 
 been bold enough to go there. But for that repeal, as I 
 firmly believe, there would have been no civil war in 1861. 
 It awoke and set aflame passions, prejudices and hatreds 
 that could be cooled only by blood. But for it, slavery 
 would almost certainly exist to-day in the Southern States 
 as it did in 1861, with Abolitionists and Abolition societies 
 still agitating. The South destroyed slavery when no 
 other power on earth could have done so. The North 
 opposed the great repeal, with an uprising against it like 
 the gathering of a nation for war, and yet under its opera- 
 tion it saw the South checked and driven back in its own 
 chosen field of trial. The South demanded the repeal, and 
 yet in a little while it saw, as the bitter fruit of that un- 
 wise act, slavery perish and disappear forever from the 
 land. 
 
 20 
 
306 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 THE CAUSES OP SECESSION. 
 
 The real causes of secession — Antagonistic opinions between the North 
 and the South— Diverse interests— Difference in ways, thoughts, social 
 tendencies, politics, religions, philosophy— The South conservative, the 
 North progressive— The South finally came to hate the North— Mutual 
 reproaches— Condition of the South described— Planters' contempt lor 
 Northern people — Two adverse systems of civilization — Mr. Iverson's 
 speech — Loss of political power by the South — Incompatibility be- 
 tween the two peoples assigned as a cause for separation — Secession 
 long meditated — The desire for a new government founded on South- 
 ern ideas the most powerful motive — Slavery to be the corner-stone — 
 More slaves necessary — Slavery in no danger in 1861 — Mr. Sherman's 
 resolution — Mr. Lincoln's solemn assurances in his inaugural address — 
 Independence out of the Union the object of Southern leaders — The 
 border states hesitate— Something must be done — The blow is struck — 
 Virginia and Tennessee wheel into line — Wisdom of Mr. Lincoln — 
 Places the Confederacy in the wrong — Does not muster a man — Con- 
 federacy probably would have succeeded but for the firing on Sumter 
 — Feeling in the North at that time — Democratic party of the North 
 in part responsible for the war — Abolition party responsible for a part 
 of the blood shed — Certain free states violated the constitution in 
 reference to the fugitive slave law — Passed nullifying laws — Mr. 
 Stephens denies that these were sufficient alone to justify secession 
 and war — People of the North ready for any concession — The contro- 
 versy could and ought to have been settled — A single issue by the 
 South — Too many issues — Exaggerations — The politician's war — Slave- 
 holders at first generally opposed to it — A few men started secession — 
 / Character of Southern men — brave and honest — Tribute to Southern 
 
 In the preceding chapter, I attempted to show that there 
 was no justifiable ground for the attempted secession of 
 the eleven Southern States in 1861, founded on any legis- 
 lation or action of the national government in reference to 
 the institution of slavery. It will be my purpose in this 
 chapter to point out what were the real causes that induced 
 a majority of the Southern people to embark in the scheme 
 of setting up a new empire in the South. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 307 
 
 For many years prior to 1861, the people of the North 
 and of the South had been drifting further and further 
 apart. This divergence related to nearly every question of 
 the age — political, social, economic, and religious. Massa- 
 chusetts was typical of the North and South Carolina of 
 the South. Both were extreme. The South, in the course 
 of time, came to dislike the Northern people — their ways, 
 their thoughts, their social tendencies, their political opin- 
 ions, their religions, their philosophy — with intense hatred. 
 It had seen Massachusetts pass from the austere and 
 gloomy faith of Jonathan Edwards, and sometimes, at an 
 early date, from the most cruel practices in the name of 
 religion, into the regions of speculation, sometimes border- 
 ing on the very confines of unbelief. A part of its people 
 had in two centuries passed from the most austere Calvin- 
 ism to tenets of doubtful orthodoxy, from extreme narrow- 
 ness to unrestrained liberality, from the simple philosophy 
 of the fathers to a mystical transcendentalism. Many of 
 its people, the descendants of slaveholders, had become 
 the most bitter and fanatical of Abolitionists. They had 
 abandoned many of the old land-marks which had made 
 the Puritan fathers famous throughout the world, and set 
 up new sign-posts. All this they called progress. The 
 South Carolina of 1861, on the other hand, with the ex- 
 ception of an evolution in political opinion, was the same 
 it had been at the time of the formation of the govern- 
 ment. In religion, the Presbyterianism of 1861 was the 
 same the Covenanter fathers had taught in the days of 
 colonial existence. The Methodists, the Baptists, and the 
 Episcopalians were just the same in faith and practice 
 that their fathers had been. This was called conservatism. 
 Wild theories in these respects had gained no foothold 
 there. The simple faith, practices and opinions of former 
 days still prevailed in reference to religious, social and 
 moral duties. 
 
 Massachusetts had imported and owned, and had bought 
 and sold slaves, and made great gain therein ; now slavery 
 
308 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 was accursed of heaven, and every vestige of it must be 
 removed from the land. South Carolina had remonstrated 
 against the introduction of so many slaves into the state 
 while it was a colony ; now her statesmen demanded a 
 larger number. 
 
 The people of Massachusetts were a commercial and a 
 manufacturing people. The inhabitants of the South 
 were, on the contrary, for the most part, planters. In 
 their estimation manual labor was more or less degrading. 
 Operatives in New England factories were, as they alleged, 
 the degraded serfs of the rich manufacturers — the mere 
 "mud-sills of society" — wanting in manhood and sunk be- 
 low the depth of Southern slaves. The upper class, the 
 wealthy and the refined, were low in courage, mean in 
 spirit, and altogether devoid of the high principle of a 
 noble manhood. On the other hand, Massachusetts, with 
 unctious satisfaction, looked upon the people of South 
 Carolina as being outside of the pale of her elegant 
 civilization and high advancement. And thus these two 
 extremes looked at one another, each with supreme self 
 satisfaction, mingled with more or less pity for the other. 
 Bitter reproaches and stinging ej)ithets were constantly 
 hurled at each other. And thus it came to pass, in the 
 course of time, that in the fierce struggles for personal and 
 political power and sectional ascendency, these extremes 
 began to hate each other as alien enemies. This feeling 
 of bitterness was year by year augmented in the South as 
 it saw the political power of the country slipping away 
 from its grasp and passing securely into the hands of the 
 North. The South, with marvelous natural advantages, 
 was constantly falling further and further behind in 
 wealth and population. Mr. Calhoun saw this in 1850, 
 when he said the "issue of slavery should be forced on the 
 North soon or it would be too late." 
 
 But, while the North was capturing and organizing new 
 states in the North-west, and extending its empire of 
 thought to the Pacific, the South was slowly moving on 
 
The Causes of Secession. 309 
 
 as it had done fifty years before. The negro and the mule 
 were the two great factors in its growth, and they 
 leisurely moved on in the old way. They tilled the fields 
 and raised the cotton, the sugar, the rice and the tobacco 
 on which all prosperity depended. Kentucky, Tennessee 
 and the West furnished the mule, the corn, the hay and 
 the bacon. Southern harbors were filled, for the most 
 part, only with coasting vessels. The harbors and the 
 great natural highways to a large extent remained unim- 
 proved, because of the supersensitive scruples of Southern 
 statesmen on constitutional questions. 
 
 Free, universal education was unknown. The great 
 body of the people were poorly educated, many not at all. 
 The result was, that they were generally thriftless, nerve- 
 less and non-progressive. As a rule, only the sons of 
 wealthy men were thoroughly educated. The most promis- 
 ing sons of the rich planters were sent to the University 
 of Virginia, or to Princeton, or Yale, or West Point, to be 
 educated for the bar or the army, with the hope of their 
 ultimately going to congress or becoming governors or 
 great generals, while some were educated for the ministry 
 or for the profession of medicine. The army or a political 
 life was thought to be the highway to honor. Many of the 
 young men on the great plantations grew up with no 
 definite aim, no high purpose. They frolicked, and played 
 cards, and followed the yelping hounds; they "sat down 
 to eat and drink, and rose up to play," 
 
 Manufacturing received but little encouragement. It 
 served to develop a spirit of independent thought among 
 the operatives, inconsistent with the safety of slavery. 
 Skilled laborers, especially of the higher grade, would 
 read and think and talk. Slavery was naturally repug- 
 nant to them, because it degraded them and their own 
 labor. It tended to lower all laborers to the level of slaves. 
 Trading was only tolerated as a necessity. Mining was 
 almost unknown. The mechanic arts were only practiced 
 in a small way. Planting and war were the only honor- 
 
310 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 able callings aside from the learned professions. Even the 
 learned professions were considered inferior in dignity to 
 the other two. The little land owners who cultivated their 
 fields with their own hands did not rise into the honorable 
 dignity of planters. They were farmers, laborers, "poor 
 whites." Only the man with his broad acres, his drove of 
 negroes, and his overseer was styled a planter. Without 
 the appendage of an overseer — the most cruel and de- 
 spicable of men — the position of no planter was high. The 
 great planter was a man of power. He was courted and 
 honored. The doors of society opened wide at his ap- 
 proach. No wonder he became arrogant and haughty. 
 Yet he possessed many noble qualities. He was brave, 
 generous, magnanimous, sincere and honorable. Certainly 
 in his day he had his good things — "was clothed in pur- 
 ple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day." 
 
 From the serene heights of his fancied exaltation, the 
 great planter looked down with cold contempt on the large 
 body of Northern men. He regarded them as little tillers 
 of the soil, petty traders, low shop-keepers, enslaved me- 
 chanics, howling fanatics and lovers of money. They 
 were mean in spirit, cowardly, narrow, selfish and abased. 
 Mammon was their God. If they gave to objects of 
 charity, it was on a cold calculation that they would get 
 back in some way two dollars for every one given. The 
 operatives in factories were the slaves of the lordly manu- 
 facturers, with fewer comforts than the bondsmen of the 
 South. 
 
 In thought, taste, feelings and habits there was a wide 
 antagonism between the people of North and those of the 
 cotton belt. This antagonism naturally grew out of two 
 adverse systems of labor, two adverse systems of educa- 
 tion, two adverse systems of civilization. There was, in 
 fact, as Mr. Seward said, an "irrepressible conflict between 
 opposing and enduring forces." 
 
 In the foregoing facts is found one of the potent causes 
 which induced the Southern States to raise the standard of 
 
The Causes of Secession. 311 
 
 secession. The leaders hated the Abolitionists and the 
 anti-slavery men with a feeling of the deepest intensity. 
 They hated Northern ways, habits, opinions and institu- 
 tions. From them they had long since wished to be 
 divorced. And little less in intensity was the feeling of 
 the Abolitionists toward Southern slaveholders. Mr. 
 Iverson, of Georgia, on leaving the senate in 1861, said : 
 
 "Besides, he claimed that there was an enmity between 
 the Northern and Southern people, that was deep and 
 enduring, and which could not be eradicated. We have 
 not lived in peace, we are not now living in peace. It is 
 not expected or hoped that we shall ever live in peace." 
 
 At the end of six decades, it became manifest to the 
 sagacious statesmen of the South that they could no longer 
 exercise a controlling influence in the councils of the na- 
 tion. They became desperate at the thought. The exer- 
 cise of power had been their birthright. A government 
 which they could not control became hateful to them. 
 They, therefore, sought for pretexts for its destruction. 
 In the presidential election of 1860, by dividing the party, 
 and thus securing the election of Mr. Lincoln, they made 
 and used the pretext they most desired. 
 
 The loss of political power on the part of the South was 
 one of the main impelling causes of secession. For three 
 quarters of the time since the organization of the govern- 
 ment, its control had been virtually in the hands of South- 
 ern men. Now, this control had fallen into other hands 
 and the chances were that it would never return. The 
 political ascendency of the South — that great, supreme 
 power which had dominated at will presidents, cabinets 
 and legislatures — had passed away forever. To become 
 subordinate in authority to men they despised as their in- 
 feriors, was more than these proud-spirited men could en- 
 dure. Some of them had long seen the end of their power 
 approaching. They had been preparing for secession. 
 Mr. Calhoun had advised it, Mr. Davis had urged it. Mr. 
 Yancey had suggested the organization of "committees of 
 
312 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 safety all over the cotton states," and in that way, said he, 
 "we shall fire the Southern heart, instruct the Southern 
 mind, give courage to each other, and at the proper mo- 
 ment, by one organized, concerted action, we can pre- 
 cipitate the cotton states into a revolution."^ This was in 
 June, 1858, more than two years before the election of Mr. 
 Lincoln. 
 
 In a tract. No. 3, published at Charleston, in 1860, ad- 
 dressed to "the people of the South," intended to aid the 
 cause of secession, the writer says : 
 
 "It is a great mistake to assign the election of Lincoln as 
 the CAUSE for a disruption of the Federal government. It 
 is but the occasion. The cause existed, perhaps at the for- 
 mation of the Confederacy. The cause consists in the in- 
 compatibility growing out of the two systems of labor, 
 crystallizing about them two forms of civilization — from 
 which has sprung, if not conflicting interests, antipathies 
 at least, instead of sympathies. In one sense the 'irre- 
 pressible conflict' is real. From time to time the pre-exist- 
 ing cause has presented occasions of strife. 
 
 "Since that time (the race of Fremont in 1856) the 
 Black Republicans have obtained possession of the house 
 of representatives, elected its speaker and appointed its 
 committees. And now, in 1860, they elect, as President of 
 the United States, a man who is at open war with the in- 
 stitutions of the South, and the chosen representative of 
 the principles, the doctrines and the feelings of the (New 
 York) 'Tribune!' These are all occasions forced on us by 
 the underlying cause of incompatibiliy." 
 
 Again, this same tract No. 3, dwelling on this same idea 
 of incompatibility, says : 
 
 "The colonial condition is, at best, one of pupilage, de- 
 pendence and inferiority, and is degrading to such a 
 people as that described by Senator Hammond. But when 
 the people who govern are hostile ; when the bond of 
 
 1 Letter to Jas. S. Slaughter. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 313 
 
 union of the dominant party, of the governing people, is 
 enmity and active antagonism to the mode of labor and 
 social organization of the people governed, then, foreign 
 rule assumes its most dangerous form. If, however, 
 political hostility has been intensified into religious hate, 
 and to enmity and antagonism are added scorn and con- 
 tempt ; if the dominant people have been taught to despise, 
 to deride and scoff the weakness of the governed, then 
 their cup of abjectness is full to the brim." 
 
 In the Convention of South Carolina, which passed the 
 Ordinance of Secession, Mr. Rhett said : "It (secession) 
 is nothing produced by Mr. Lincoln's election, or the non- 
 execution of the fugitive slave law. It is a matter that 
 has been gathering for thirty years." 
 
 Mr. Packer, of the same body, said : "It is no spasmodic 
 effort that has come suddenly on us, but it has been gradu- 
 ally culminating for a long series of years." 
 
 Mr. Ingles said: "Most of us have had this subject 
 under consideration for twenty years." 
 
 Mr. Keitt said : "I have been engaged in this movement 
 ever since I entered public life." 
 
 Senator Iverson, in withdrawing, as we have seen, said : 
 "For myself, unless my opinions greatly change, I shall 
 never consent to the reconstruction of the Federal Union. 
 . . . "We are about to sunder our relations with that section 
 (the North), and I trust forever." 
 
 One of the motives that influenced the leaders in the 
 great Southern revolution in 1861 was the desire to estab- 
 lish in the South a magnificent confederacy of slaveholding 
 states, constructed on their own views as to its powers and 
 duties, with a homogeneous people, that is to say, with 
 one class to rule and a subject class to labor. This was a 
 scheme of vaulting ambition, magnificent in conception 
 and dazzling in promise. It was to be an aristocratic gov- 
 ernment. We have seen that Mr. Stephens claimed that 
 slavery was the corner-stone of our institutions. Governor 
 McDufl5e declared on this point : 
 
314 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "Domestic slavery, instead of being an evil, is the cor- 
 ner-stone of our republican edifice, because it supersedes 
 the necessity of an order of nobility, and all the other ap- 
 pendages of a hereditary system of government."^ 
 
 Senator Hammond, of South Carolina, said in the senate 
 in 1858, as before shown : 
 
 "In all social systems, there must be a class to do the 
 menial duties, to perform the drudgery of life ; that is, a 
 class requiring a low order of intellect and but little skill. 
 Its requisites are vigor, docility, and fidelity. Such a 
 class you must have, or you would not have that other 
 class which leads to progress, civilization and refinement." 
 
 Further on in his speech Senator Hammond said that 
 the "South found a race adapted to that purpose to her 
 hand — the African slaves," 
 
 In a speech made in Charleston, November 12, 1860, Mr. 
 R. Barnwell Rhett said : 
 
 "The Southern Confederacy ought to be a slaveholding 
 Confederacy. It is no experiment that free governments 
 should exist in slaveholding countries. The republics of 
 Rome and Greece — still the light and glory of ancient 
 times — were built on domestic slavery. But it is an ex- 
 periment to maintain free government with universal suf- 
 frage, and the whole population to control the government. 
 Population increases faster than capital, and no prosperity 
 can long stave off the dire conflict which must arise be- 
 tween want and affluence, capital and jDopulation. When 
 the great majority of the population have no property, 
 which is the case in Europe, what shall protect property 
 under the control of this majority from partition or confis- 
 cation? Our Confederacy must be a slaveholding Confed- 
 eracy. We have had enough of a Confederacy with dis- 
 similar institutions." 
 
 Mr. Rhett was the great prophet of hope for the new 
 Confederacy. Gazing into the future, his fancy kindled 
 
 1 Bryant's " Pop. Hist. U. S.," Vol. TV, p. 323. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 315 
 
 and glowed with exultant pride as he beheld it expanding 
 and extending its conquests southward. In his fervor he 
 declared : 
 
 "With guarantees such as these, what shall prevent the 
 people of the South from being a great and free people? 
 We will expand, as our growth and civilization shall de- 
 mand, over Mexico, over the isles of the sea, over the far- 
 off Southern tropics, until we shall establish a great con- 
 federation of republics — the greatest, the freest, and most 
 powerful the world has ever seen," 
 
 Mr. Alexander Stephens, the calmest of all Southern 
 statesmen, spoke as follows on this subject, in a speech in 
 Savannah, in March, 1861, a few weeks after the inaugura- 
 tion of the Southern Confederacy : 
 
 "Our new government is founded upon exactly the op- 
 posite idea (i. e., to that held by Mr. Jefferson and most 
 of the leading statesmen of his day, that slavery was 
 wrong in principle) ; its foundations are laid, its corner- 
 stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal 
 to the white man ; that slavery — subordination to the su- 
 perior race — is his natural and normal condition. This 
 stone, which was rejected by the first builders, is become 
 the chief of the corner, the real corner-stone in our new 
 edifice." ^ 
 
 Along with the idea of a Southern Confederacy ran the 
 idea of repealing all laws prohibiting the African slave 
 trade. If a government was to be established, resting on 
 domestic slavery, then, manifestly, the more slaves, at 
 
 ^ Of this address, Prof. "W. P. Trent says : 
 
 " Mr. Stephens forgot to mention the trifling circumstance that the Bar- 
 bary States had long existed on the basis of a physical, philosophical and 
 moral truth, strikingly similar to the one enunciated by himself, and it 
 would have been perhaps a service to his auditors had he utilized, for the 
 purpose of clinching his proposition, the well-known lines of the poet 
 about — 
 
 ' The good old plan, 
 That they should take who have the power, 
 And they should keep who can.' " 
 
 —"Southern Statesmen," p. 287. 
 
316 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 least for a time, the better. Mr. Stephens did not openly 
 advocate a rejDeal of those laws, but he intimated such an 
 idea by saying that the South could not keep up the race 
 with the North in the occupation of new territory "unless 
 they could get more Africans."^ Mr. John Forsythe, of 
 Alabama, openly advocated the abrogation of the prohibi- 
 tion. Mr. W. L. Yancey demanded the repeal of these 
 laws. Governor Adams, of South Carolina, denounced 
 them as a fraud on slaveholders. In the Southern Com- 
 mercial Convention, at Knoxville, in 1857, Mr. L. W. 
 Spratt, of South Carolina, editor of the "Charleston 
 Courier" (I believe) said, in a carefully prepared address 
 on a proposition to reopen the African slave trade : 
 
 "Society in its movements has vindicated the truth that 
 more than equality is necessary to human progress. There 
 was the patrician and plebeian of old Rome, the peasant 
 and the peer of France, and the contact and the collision 
 between them made those countries great. England has 
 been made great from the same cause. And though among 
 equals, inequality is wrong ; though for the reason that 
 the peer was no better than the peasant, the peer has 
 fallen and the peasant has risen ; still society also teaches 
 the great truth that inequality is necessary to human 
 progress. That is a greater truth than was declared in 
 the Declaration of Independence. That instrument was 
 founded ujDon a misconception, and we now proclaim this 
 truth in opposition to pre-conception . " ^ 
 
 Mr. Womack, of Alabama, said he thought the "proposi- 
 tion a very reasonable one." He believed there was "noth- 
 ing more right in the economy of man" than slavery. Mr. 
 Goggerty (perhaps Goggin) , of Virginia, said, "the open- 
 ing of the African slave trade is required by the whole 
 world." Mr. Lochrane, of Georgia, said: "I believe the 
 re-opening of the African slave trade is proper, just, ex- 
 pedient and constitutional." 
 
 ' * Blaine's " Twenty Years of Congress," Vol. I, p. 175. 
 2 Official Report, pp. 90, 9' 
 
The Causes of Secession. 317 
 
 The foregoing utterances of Southern men disclose in 
 the most convincing manner the leading motives which in- 
 fluenced the Southern leaders in undertaking the estab- 
 lishment of a Southern Confederacy. Of these, the most 
 powerful, as it always has been, in revolutionary move- 
 ments, was personal ambition. There was something 
 peculiarly fascinating to bold, ambitious men in the 
 thought of forming a great slaveholding confederacy, em- 
 bracing fifteen states over which they would bear sway ; 
 with an aristocratic class to support their authority ; with 
 cotton, the greatest wealth-producing staple the world has 
 ever known, as the basis of unparalleled jprosperity, and 
 with an obedient, servile race to perform all labor, and 
 minister to the comfort and the wants of this superior 
 class as long as governments should last. Of course this 
 motive was concealed — was masked behind the most earn- 
 est protestations and profuse professions of patriotism. 
 Every conceivable excuse was given to justify this scheme 
 of vaulting ambition, every one of which was more or less 
 baseless, except one. 
 
 We have seen that secession was not the offspring of any 
 fear of the abolition of slavery by the national govern- 
 ment, nor from any apprehension of Mr. Lincoln, nor on 
 account of the non-execution of the fugitive slave law, nor 
 because of the personal liberty acts, nor because of the 
 alleged exclusion of slavery from the territories, nor be- 
 cause of any want of the equality of the Southern States 
 in the Union, nor indeed from any well-grounded appre- 
 hension of danger to the institution of slavery from any 
 quarter or from any source. 
 
 There was no danger of the abolition of slavery in 
 1860-1, and all intelligent men knew that fact. 
 
 On the 11th of February, 1861, on motion of Mr. John 
 Sherman, the leading Republican in the house, the follow- 
 ing resolution was unanimously adopted by that body — 
 yeas, 161 ; nays, none : 
 
 "Resolved, that neither congress, nor the people, nor the 
 
318 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 governments of the non-slaveholding states, have any con- 
 stitutional right to interfere with slavery in any of the 
 slaveholding states of the Union." 
 
 The doctrine contained in this resolution was in perfect 
 accord with the opinions of Mr. Lincoln, as they had been 
 declared by him on many occasions. In 1858, in his debate 
 with Mr. Douglas in reply to a question by the latter, he 
 declared that if the people of a territory were to do such 
 an amazing thing as to form a constitution favorable to 
 slavery, if elected senator, he would vote for the admission 
 of such state into the Union. 
 
 In addition to all these facts showing that secession was 
 not the result of any honest fear as to the security of 
 slavery, in the states where it then existed, the solemn 
 declaration of Mr. Lincoln in his inaugural address may be 
 quoted. He said, in reference to the proposed thirteenth 
 amendment to the constitution prohibiting congress from 
 interfering with slavery in the states, that holding such 
 proposition to be now implied in the constitution, he had 
 no objection to its being made express and irrevocable. 
 He recognized, as he had always done, the constitutional 
 obligation for the return of fugitive slaves. His whole 
 address was an earnest plea for the maintenance of the 
 constitution. 
 
 He said further, in his inaugural address: "I declare 
 that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere 
 with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. 
 I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no 
 inclination to do so." And, after quoting from the Chi- 
 cago platform words of a similar import, he said : "I only 
 press on the public attention the most conclusive evidence 
 of which the case is susceptible — that the property, peace 
 and security of no section are to be in any wise endan- 
 gered by the incoming administration . ' ' 
 
 "In your hands," said he, imploringly, "my dissatisfied 
 fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous 
 issue of civil war. The government will not assail you ; 
 
The Causes of Secession. 319 
 
 you can have no conflict without being yourselves the ag- 
 gressors." 
 
 In beautiful words and in kind afiFection, scarcely ever 
 surpassed, with one hand on the Bible and the other up- 
 lifted to heaven, he appealed for peace. "We are not en- 
 emies," said he, "but friends. Though passion may have 
 strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The 
 mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle 
 field and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearth- 
 stone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of 
 the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by 
 the better angels of our nature." 
 
 If further proof were needed to show that a sense of the 
 insecurity of slavery in the states where it then existed 
 could not have been paramount in the minds of the seces- 
 sion leaders, in 1860-61, the fact may be mentioned that, 
 in the speeches of senators and representatives withdraw- 
 ing from congress, none of them based their action dis- 
 tinctly on this ground. In all their boldness in the use of 
 high-sounding rhetoric at that time, none of them pre- 
 tended that the existence of slavery was seriously threat- 
 ened or endangered. Some complaint was made about the 
 personal liberty bills passed in the Northern States. Some 
 complaint was also made that slavery was excluded from 
 the territories by the people thereof, but this was well 
 known to the leaders and to every one else to be in accord- 
 ance with the doctrine they had formerly advocated in ref- 
 erence to the people of Kansas while that state was in a 
 territorial condition. It was the fruit of Mr. Douglas' 
 "Popular Sovereignty," which nearly every one of these 
 secession leaders had either voted for or advocated. 
 
 But the solemn assurances and tender appeals of the 
 president to his "dissatisfied fellow countrymen" had no 
 effect. Independence out of the Union was the object of 
 Southern ambition. A new Confederacy was the prede- 
 termined fact ; was then in existence, in reality, with South 
 
320 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louis- 
 iana, Arkansas and Texas as its members. But this was 
 not enough. It fell far short of the wide extended do- 
 minion originally contemplated. Virginia still held back, 
 North Carolina still hesitated, Tennessee rejected the al- 
 liance by an immense majority, Kentucky still clung to 
 the Union, and Missouri remained steadfast in its loyalty. 
 Something had to be done to move the people of these states 
 into line with their Southern sisters. Major Anderson 
 with a small garrison still held Fort Sumter. Along the 
 shores, on every available spot, batteries had been erected, 
 and bristling guns bore on the fort. An army was assem- 
 bled in Charleston under the command of General P. G. T. 
 Beauregard. 
 
 Early in April, Roger A. Pryor, a member of congress 
 from Virginia, and Edmund Rufl&n, of the same state, vis- 
 ited Charleston to aid in pushing forward the great work 
 of secession. On the evening of the 10th of April, Pryor 
 was serenaded, and made one of his fiery speeches, much 
 of which has been quoted already. He said : 
 
 "Do not distrust Virginia. As sure as to-morrow's sun 
 will rise upon us, just so sure will Virginia be a member 
 of the Southern Confederacy. And I will tell you, gentle- 
 men," said the speaker, with great vehemence, "what will 
 put her in the Southern Confederacy in less than an hour 
 by Shrewsbury's clock — strike a bloiv! The very moment 
 that blow is struck. Old Virginia will make common cause 
 with her sisters of the South. It is impossible she should 
 do otherwise." 
 
 Says Lossing, from whom the above is taken : "The cry 
 of Pryor for blood was sent to Montgomery by telegraph 
 the next morning, and Mr. Gilchrist, a member of the 
 Alabama legislature, said to Davis and a portion of his 
 "cabinet" (Walker, Benjamin and Menninger): "Gentle- 
 men, unless you sprinkle blood in the face of the people of 
 
The Causes of Secession. 321 
 
 Alabama, they will be back in the old Union in less than 
 ten days,"* 
 
 It is evident from the correspondence in existence that 
 Beauregard was ordered, from Montgomery, to demand 
 the immediate evacuation of Fort Sumter, for, on the 11th 
 day of April, he was telegraphed to, to send the reply of 
 Major Anderson. On the same day, Beauregard answered, 
 sending the reply to the demand, as follows : I 
 
 "To L. P. Walker: 
 
 "Major Anderson replies: 'I have the honor to ac- 
 knowledge the receipt of your communication demanding 
 the evacuation of this fort, and to say in reply thereto 
 that it is a demand with which I regret that my sense of 
 honor and of my obligation to my government prevents my 
 compliance.' He adds verbally: 'I will await the first 
 shot, and if you do not batter us to pieces we will be 
 starved out in a few days.' Answer. 
 
 (Signed,) P. G. T. Beauregard." 
 
 The garrison in Fort Sumter was then living on salt 
 pork and water. There was no concealment of the fact 
 anywhere that the garrison must surrender or evacuate soon, 
 unless supplies arrived. But the impatient public — the 
 impatient authorities of Montgomery — would not wait for 
 the slow work of starvation. "A blow" must be struck — 
 "blood" must be "sprinkled in the face of the people." 
 Accordingly, on the twelfth of April, a venerable old man, 
 Edmund Ruffin from Virginia, who had requested the 
 privilege, pulled the lanyard of the first gun fired in the 
 greatest civil war recorded in history, the mournful sound 
 of which went echoing over the sea and over the land, 
 breaking the peace of the world. 
 
 And thus were verified the kind words of Abraham 
 Lincoln, spoken with the oath of office still warm upon his 
 lips: "The government will not assail you. You can 
 
 * " Civil War in America," by Benson J. Lossing, Vol. I, p. 316. 
 21 
 
322 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors." 
 And he had kept his faith. Not a soldier had he mustered 
 during these more than five weeks of busy preparations 
 for war in the South. Not one drop of fraternal blood 
 should be shed by him, except in defense — in the defense 
 of the government. And not one drop of the rivers of 
 blood that were shed in the great civil war which followed 
 stained the garments of the great president. 
 
 On the 8th of April the governor of South Carolina re- 
 ceived a notification from Mr. Lincoln that an attempt 
 would be made to provision Fort Sumter, and on the 9th 
 the "Harriet Lane" sailed from New York for this pur- 
 pose.^ In his message to congress Mr. Lincoln thus com- 
 ments on the attack on Sumter : 
 
 "The assault upon and reduction of Fort Sumter was in 
 no sense a matter of self-defense on the part of the assail- 
 ants. They well knew that the garrison in the fort could 
 by no possibility commit aggression upon them. They 
 knew — they were expressly notified — that the giving of 
 bread to the few brave and hungry men of the garrison was 
 all which would on that occasion be attempted, unless them- 
 selves, by resisting so much, should provoke more. They 
 knew that this government desired to keep the garrison in 
 the fort not to assail them, but merely to maintain visible 
 possession and thus to preserve the Union from actual and 
 immediate dissolution — trusting, as hereinbefore stated, to 
 time, discussion and the ballot-box for final adjustment, 
 and they assailed and reduced the fort for precisely the 
 reverse object — to drive out the visible authority of the 
 Federal Union and thus drive it to immediate dissolu- 
 tion." ... 
 
 ^ Some time previously to this, Mr. Seward, assuming that he was the 
 head of the government, had said to the commissioners of South Carolina, 
 through an agent, that Sumter would be evacuated. There is no proof 
 that this partial promise was ever communicated to Mr. Lincoln. — Ida M. 
 Tarbell's " Life of Lincoln " in " McClure's Magazine," January 1899, 
 page 267. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 323 
 
 "With this avowed purpose on the part of Mr. Lincohi, 
 which he carefully pursued, it may afford a curious theme 
 for speculation as to what would have been the fate of the 
 Southern Confederacy if Sumter had not been assaulted, 
 or if some similar act of open war had not been resorted 
 to. Would it have gone on exercising the powers of gov- 
 ernment over the states which had seceded until its au- 
 thority had become securely cemented and established? 
 Would Virginia, Tennessee and North Carolina have 
 joined the seceded states? Sooner or later this is most 
 probable. Would the people of the North have acquiesced 
 in this dismemberment of the government? Yes, at that 
 time, in preference to civil war. In this very contingency 
 such men as Greeley, Seward, Thurlow Weed and Critten- 
 den, and thousands of others, if they did not all say, as 
 Mr. Greeley did, let the cotton states "go in peace," they 
 did all insist in spirit that there should be no coercion to 
 restrain them from going. Previous to this time. Ex- 
 president Pierce had written to Jefferson Davis, assuring 
 him that if there was to be fighting "it will not be along 
 Mason's and Dixon's line merely. It will be within our 
 own borders, in our own streets, between the two classes 
 of citizens to whom I have referred." "The Albany 
 Argus," a Democratic paper said: "The first gun fired 
 in the way of forcing a seceding state back into the 
 Union would probably prove the knell of its final dis- 
 memberment . ' ' 
 
 All over the North there was alarm and apprehension 
 after six states had seceded, Bitter indignation was 
 aroused against the anti-slavery agitators. The sentiment 
 against coercion and in favor of conciliation seemed to be 
 almost universal. Governor Horatio Seymour said : ' ' Shall 
 we have compromise after war, or compromise without war? 
 Let us also see if successful coercion by the North is less 
 revolutionary than successful revolution by the South." 
 James S. Thayer said amid cheers, in a public meeting in 
 Albany, that "the enforcement of the law in six states 
 
324 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 (the number that had then seceded), is war with fifteen. 
 Let one arrow, winged by the Federal bow, strike the 
 heart of an American citizen, and who can number the 
 avenging darts that will darken the heavens in the conflict 
 that will ensue." Fernando Wood, mayor of the City of 
 New York, suggested in a message to the common council, 
 that the municipality should be made a "free city." "It 
 was a proposition openly entertained and freely talked 
 about," says Mr. Henry Wilson, "should a separation 
 take place and a new confederation be formed, that not only 
 the city, but the State of New York, the other Middle States, 
 indeed all the Northern States, except New England 
 and some in the extreme North-west, would forsake the 
 old and go to the new." A Washington dispatch, pub- 
 lished in the New York papers, in December, said : "The 
 opinion seems to set strongly in favor of a reconstruction 
 of the Union, without the New England States."^ 
 
 Ex-Governor Price, of New Jersey, in a published letter, 
 urged that his state should "go with the South from every 
 wise, prudential and j)atriotic reason." So strong was the 
 feeling in the North in the winter of 1860-1861, in favor 
 of the South, and against any attempt at coercion, so bitter 
 were the people against the Abolitionists, that Mr. Wilson 
 does not hesitate to say that the North as well as the South 
 is responsible for secession ; and that if the latter "had not 
 found auxiliaries out of the North ready to lend their aid, 
 they would never have ventured in the rash experiment."^ 
 
 So high was the tide of public opinion running, at the 
 time of the inauguration of Mr. Lincoln, against the party 
 that had elevated him to power, especially against the Aboli- 
 tion part of it, that it is almost certain that any attempt at 
 coercion against the people of the seceding states, would 
 have been followed in the North by mobs, riots and civil 
 war. Mr. Lincoln saw and knew the hazardous condition of 
 affairs around him. He knew that a blow prematurely 
 
 1 Wilson's " Rise and Fall," etc., Vol. Ill, p. 67. ' Id. p. 70. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 325 
 
 struck at secession was more likely to produce a revolution 
 in the North than to end the existing one. In addition to 
 his earnest desire to avoid the shedding of blood, there was 
 necessary on his part the most cautious statesmanship. A 
 single false step would prove fatal to the Union. He must 
 so act as to put the South clearly in the wrong before the 
 world in the event of a conflict of arms. There must be 
 no divided North. He delayed, apparently hesitated, and 
 seemingly negotiated with the enemy. He refused to re- 
 enforce Sumter, and only attempted to send provisions to 
 the starving garrison. No trooj)S were mustered for the 
 national defense, not one ; no force was used ; no threats 
 were made. Never did Mr. Lincoln exliibit a more masterly 
 wisdom, or profounder sagacity than in this crisis. By his 
 discretion, secession came to a standstill. The North was 
 petrified with fear. A majority had turned with rage 
 against the triumphant party. In the South there was 
 danger, as Mr. Gilchrist said, that some of the states would 
 return to the old Union. 
 
 And now came the stupendous folly of firing on Sumter. 
 That single act, in "one hour by Shrewsbury's clock" 
 united the divided North. "Without that, or some equally 
 foolish deed, the North could never have been brought to 
 the point of resisting the South, and secession would have 
 triumphed. But when the nation's honor was assailed, 
 and the national flag brought low, sympathy was in a mo- 
 ment turned to wrath, and men everywhere rushed to 
 arms. That first shot, as it went sounding round the 
 world, announcing the commencement of the conflict, was 
 also sounding the death knell of the Southern Confederacy, 
 But for that shot, it might be in existence to-day as a gov- 
 ernment. But it accomplished its purpose in the direc- 
 tion intended. By it, Tennessee, Virginia and North 
 Carolina were induced, most unwisely but most naturally, 
 to rush to the help, not of the aggrieved party, but of the 
 aggressor. But it did more than this — something not an- 
 ticipated. It lost to the South, Delaware, Maryland, West 
 
326 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Virginica, East Tennessee, Kentucky and Missouri, And 
 still more ; by this needless act, the North was brought to- 
 gether in one hour as one man in the determination to 
 avenge the nation's insult, and to lift up and restore the 
 fallen and dishonored flag. Thus Mr. Davis by that shot 
 did what no other power on earth could have done — united 
 the divided North. 
 
 But Mr. Wilson is unquestionably correct when he said 
 that in "the day when inquisition for blood shall be 
 made," the North as well as the South will be found to 
 have had its share in the bringing on of the war of 1861. 
 The assurances given by such men as Pierce, Price, Wood 
 and Seymour, that there was a "Spartan band in every 
 Northern state," who would stand as a wall of fire for the 
 defense of the South against the madness of Northern Abo- 
 litionism, and that there were a million of Democrats there 
 who would aid the South in such a fight, had great influ- 
 ence in finally emboldening the leaders to go to war. Mr. 
 Wilson refers, of course, to the Democratic party of the 
 North. He is clearly correct. Up to a certain point, they 
 were as much responsible for the civil war as the Demo- 
 cratic party of the South. Perhaps they were more so, for 
 they had in their favor no palliating circumstances, such 
 as the South had. But there was, as previously stated, 
 another party that must be held responsible before the tri- 
 bunal of history for a share of the blood shed in the great 
 civil war. That was the Abolition party. For years they 
 had denounced the slaveholders with an acrimony seldom 
 equaled. They made war on the peculiar institution of 
 the South, and avowed a determination to overthrow and 
 destroy it. They nullified a law passed for its protection, 
 and appealed to a "higher law" for their justification. 
 In their insane opposition to slavery, they placed them- 
 selves outside of the law, and were, as Mr. Webster said, 
 guilty of "treasonable conduct." By their acts and their 
 words, they goaded to madness the Southern people, and 
 drove them in the direction of secession. Finally, a part 
 
The Causes of Secession. 327 
 
 of the Southern people came to hate their assailants in the 
 North with such a depth of intensity, and there came to 
 be such an antagonism in interests, opinions, institutions 
 and habits, that separation seemed to them the only rem- 
 edy left. In their madness and blindness, they rushed 
 into secession and into war, I draw a broad line of dis- 
 tinction between the Abolitionists, who wished to destroy 
 slavery in the South, and the Free-soilers, who wished 
 merely to restrict it to the states where it then existed. 
 But this distinction was not always, nor, indeed, generally, 
 drawn in the South, The extreme Abolitionists were 
 taken as the types of Northern sentiment, and the most 
 conservative Free-soilers were classed with them. 
 
 It really appears as if Providence intended that the 
 Southern people should be the instruments of the destruc- 
 tion of their own favorite institution. "' At a period when 
 there was, for the first time in twenty years, peace between 
 the two sections, they broke that peace by the repeal of 
 the Missouri Compromise, and thus turned loose the angry 
 winds of sectionalism. This in the end, through successive 
 steps, led to secession. And when war came, the convic- 
 tion gradually grew on the minds of men that that was the 
 opportunity offered by Heaven for destroying slavery. It 
 had caused one war, said they ; it should not cause another. 
 Let it perish — by the war. And thus the folly of men was 
 made to do the will of God. 
 
 I have said that secession and the civil war were without 
 justifiable cause, when viewed in the light of facts and 
 history, except in a qualified degree as to one or two ques- 
 tions. It is undeniably true — and it is time that history 
 should be candid on the subject — that previous to 1861 a 
 number of the free states had failed to perform their consti- 
 tutional obligations to the slave states in reference to the 
 return of fugitive slaves. Indeed, it is hard, if not impossi- 
 ble, to escape the conclusion that they had openly and de- 
 fiantly violated in this regard both the letter and the spirit 
 of the constitution. The rescue of the slave Shadrack by 
 
328 East Temiessee and the Civil War. 
 
 a mob in Boston was an open violation of the constitution, 
 and Mr. Webster declared it to be an act of "clear trea- 
 son." The attempt, in the same city, to rescue Anthony- 
 Burns, and the attack made on the United States marshal 
 by an armed mob in the attempt, were clearly of the same 
 character. If it should be said or thought that these were 
 the hasty acts of excited mobs, then what can be said in 
 defense of the legislature of Vermont — a deliberative 
 body — when it passed the following act : 
 
 "Every person who may have been held as a slave, who 
 shall come or may be brought into this state, with the 
 consent of his master or mistress, or who shall come or be 
 brought, or shall he in this state, shall he free. 
 
 "Every person who shall hold, or attempt to hold, in this 
 state, in slavery, as a slave, any free person, in any form, 
 or for any time, however short, under the pretense that 
 such person is or has heen a slave, shall, on conviction 
 thereof, be imprisoned in the state prison for a term of not 
 less than five years, nor more than twenty, and be fined 
 not less than one thousand dollars nor more than ten thou- 
 sand dollars." 
 
 What became, under this law, of the constitution of the 
 United States, and of the laws made in pursuance thereof, 
 requiring the rendition to their owners of slaves escaping 
 into other states? Unquestionably, they were nullified 
 and openly defied. Laws similar to this, as we have seen 
 in Chapter XII, were passed by a number of the Northern 
 States. 
 
 Now, were these laws, flagrant and unconstitutional as 
 they certainly were, sufficient to justify, without more, the 
 slave states in inaugurating war against the United States ? 
 I shall let Alexander H. Stephens, the ablest defender of 
 the Southern Confederacy, answer this question. In his 
 masterly Union speech before the legislature of Georgia, 
 on the 14th of November, 1861, speaking on this very 
 point, he said : ' 
 
 ^ " War Between the States." pp. 294-298. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 329 
 
 "Now, upon another point, and that the most difficult, 
 and deserving your most serious consideration, I will speak. 
 That is the course which this state should pursue toward 
 these Northern States which, by their legislative acts, have 
 attempted to nullify the Fugitive Slave Law. 
 
 "Northern States, on entering into the federal compact, 
 pledged themselves to surrender such fugitives ; and it is 
 in disregard of their constitutional obligations that they 
 have passed laws which even tend to hinder or inhibit the 
 fulfillment of that obligation. They have violated their 
 plighted faith. What ought we to do in view of this? 
 That is the question. "What is to be done? By the law of 
 nations, you would have the right to demand the carrying 
 out of this article of agreement, and I do not see that it 
 should be otherwise in respect to the states of the Union ; 
 and in case it be not done, we would, by these principles, 
 have the right to commit acts of reprisal on these faithless 
 governments, and seize upon their property, or that of 
 their citizens, wherever found. The states of this Union 
 stand upon the same footing with foreign nations in this 
 respect. 
 
 "Suppose it were Great Britain that had violated some 
 compact of agreement with the general government — what 
 would be first done? In that case, our ministers would 
 be directed, in the first instance, to bring the matter to the 
 attention of that government, or a commissioner be sent 
 to that country to open negotiations with her, ask for re- 
 dress, and it would be only after argument and reason had 
 been exhausted in vain, that we would take the last resort of 
 nations. That would be the course toward a foreign govern- 
 ment ; and toward a member of this Confederacy, I would 
 recommend the same course. Let us not, therefore, act 
 hastily or ill-temperedly in this matter. Let your commit- 
 tee on the state of the republic make out a bill of griev- 
 ances ; let it be sent by the governor to these faithless 
 states ; and, if reason and argument shall be tried in vain — 
 if all shall fail to induce them to return to their constitu- 
 
330 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 tional obligations, I would be for retaliatory measures, 
 such as the governor has suggested to you. This mode of 
 resistance in the Union is in our power. . . . 
 
 "As to the other matter, I think we have a right to pass 
 retaliatory measures, provided they be in accordance with 
 the constitution of the United States, and I think they can 
 be made so. But, whether it would be wise for this legis- 
 lature to do so now, is a question. To the convention, in 
 my judgment, this matter ought to be referred. Before 
 making reprisals, we should exhaust every means of bring- 
 ing about a peaceful settlement of the controversy. Thus 
 did General Jackson in the case of the French. . . . 
 
 "I do think, therefore, that it would be best, before 
 going to extreme measures with the Confederate States, to 
 make the presentation of our demands, to appeal to their 
 reason and judgment, to give us our rights. Then, if rea- 
 son should not triumph, it will be time enough to make re- 
 prisals, and we should be justified in the eyes of a civil- 
 ized world. At least, let these offending and derelict states 
 know what your grievances are, and if they refuse, as I 
 said, to give us our rights under the constitution, I should 
 be willing, as a last resort, to sever the ties of our Union 
 with them." 
 
 Mr. Stephens went on to say that his own opinion was 
 that if the course indicated by him were pursued, and the 
 North were informed of the consequence of refusal on their 
 part to do justice to the South, those states would recede, 
 would repeal their nullifying acts. ^ 
 
 So strong were the prejudices of men in the South in 
 in 1861, on both sides ; so blinding were the passions 
 aroused by the great controversy, that but few men were 
 able to calmly and dispassionately consider both sides of 
 the questions involved. In the whirl and violence of po- 
 litical opinions, men jumped to certain conclusions, and 
 never departed from them, however erroneous. Thus, for 
 
 » "War Between the States," Vol. II, pp. 294 et seq. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 331 
 
 illustration, the Union leaders were amazed at the many 
 errors which prevailed among Southern people, overlook- 
 ing the fact that they were themselves blind to certain as- 
 pects of the questions then dividing the country. It is cer- 
 tain that neither Mr. Johnson, nor Mr. Nelson, who were in 
 many respects the two most conspicuous Union orators in 
 the South, nor any other leader, ever dealt entirely frankly 
 with the two just grievances of slaveholders — that in ref- 
 erence to the nullification of the Fugitive Slave Law by 
 certain Northern States, and that of the forcible rescue of 
 slaves by combinations of anti-slavery men. 
 
 After a calm review of the whole controversy, and with 
 the moderating influence of thirty-eight years upon my 
 mind, candor compels me to say that the slaveholding 
 states had at least these two strong points in their favor in 
 1861, which if they had been earnestly presented to the 
 North by solemn remonstrance, as Mr. Stephens recom- 
 mended, if their remonstrance had been rejected, would 
 have constituted a just ground for reprisals, if not for war. 
 Without an honest effort, however, to obtain a redress of 
 grievances, through a distinguished embassy — without an 
 effort in the direction of compromise and conciliation — I 
 insist, as I have done throughout this book, that there was 
 no sufficient justification of the South in commencing hos- 
 tilities, especially against the Federal government, which 
 had not inflicted these wrongs. 
 
 The constitution of the United States provides no specific 
 remedy against states thus failing and refusing to perform 
 their solemn obligations to the citizens of other states, un- 
 less it is the right on the part of the government to enforce 
 obedience to law by the power of arms. That perhaps 
 would be the exercise of a doubtful power, and certainly a 
 dangerous one. It would be a hazardous remedy and 
 might result in the greatest of evils, which at all times 
 ought to be avoided, if possible, in a free country — civil 
 war. The Supreme Court had in more than one instance 
 performed its duty by declaring the Fugitive Slave Law 
 
332 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 constitutional, but it had no power to enforce its decision. 
 Diplomacy and negotiation, however, to say nothing of 
 conciliation, were still open to the Southern States when 
 war was inaugurated by them. At this very time, as is 
 shown in detail elsewhere, the people of the North were 
 ready to concede to the slave states nearly everything they 
 might demand, if they would forego their determination to 
 leave the Union. They could have had whatever they de- 
 manded. But no concessions, no guaranties, it is believed, 
 would have satisfied the ambitious leaders. They asked 
 for none ; they would have accepted none. They wanted 
 independence and that only. 
 
 The controversy — at least the essential part of it — could 
 have been adjusted. It ought to have been. A terrible 
 responsibility lies at the door of one section or the other 
 in that it was not settled. There was no necessity for war. 
 It could and should have been avoided.^ If the North had 
 stood out defiantly in the winter of 1860-1861 — if Mr. 
 Lincoln and congress had obstinately refused any conces- 
 sions, or had manifested no spirit of conciliation, no return 
 of brotherly love — they would have stood forever before 
 the world as haughty and implacable in their overwhelm- 
 ing strength. But they exhibited, in this hour, no implac- 
 able hatred, no haughty confidence born of conscious su- 
 periority of power. 
 
 If the Southern States had made the violation of the con- 
 stitution by certain states, in reference to the return of 
 fugitive slaves to their owners, their single issue, in 1861, 
 and had presented it in a sjDirit of moderation and firm- 
 ness, with that force and clearness which its justice war- 
 
 ^ " Put it in your book," said to the author, an intelligent and most 
 ■worthy gentleman from Alabama, an ex-Confederate surgeon, who served 
 in the army during the whole war, part of the time under Forrest — " put 
 it in your book, that there should have been no war, that the differences 
 should have been adjusted; that the people of the North and of the South 
 were of substantially the same blood and did not hate each other, and that 
 the war was the work of ambitious politicians and bad men on each side. 
 The great body of the people on both sides were opposed to the war." 
 
The Causes of Secession. 333 
 
 ranted, and if their demand for a redress of their wrongs 
 had been denied, every impartial mind would have been 
 forced to acknowledge the justice of their complaint. They 
 would have had the moral support of the world, in their 
 struggle to preserve the constitution. The issue would 
 have been so plain that all men could have seen it ; and all 
 except those fanatically blind would have conceded its 
 justice. Then, if war had to come, it would have been a 
 war in defense of rights as clearly declared by the consti- 
 tution, as the right to personal liberty itself. They would 
 have had a quarrel that appealed to the sense of justice 
 and commanded the approving conscience of the civilized 
 world. 
 
 But instead of this sharp, impregnable issue, the South- 
 ern leaders chose to make an issue out of nearly every act 
 of national legislation for the last forty years in reference 
 to slavery, nearly every one of which had been dictated by 
 the South, or decided by Southern votes in the interest or 
 the supposed interest of slavery, or according to principles 
 established for its benefit. Many of these issues, as pre- 
 sented, were fallacious and deceptive, some imaginary, 
 and some unfounded. Unquestionably, by presenting un- 
 founded, or untenable, or gravely disputed issues, those 
 wherein they were right were overshadowed and lost sight 
 of in the high conflict of words which followed. In this 
 way the South lost its great moral vantage ground, where 
 it might have securely intrenched itself behind a plain and 
 undisputed provision of the constitution. 
 
 South Carolina did make such a declaration, but its 
 effect on the public mind of the North was neutralized by 
 accompanying it with an act withdrawing from the Union, 
 and making preparations for war. 
 
 It would be surprising, if we could exactly ascertain, 
 how small the number of men in the South is who are 
 actually responsible for the inauguration of the war. Up 
 to the close of the presidential election in 1860, it is doubt- 
 ful whether as many as a thousand in all the Southern 
 
334 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 States were working for the distinct object of separation. 
 Previous to the time of firing on Sumter, it is doubtful 
 whether in a single state, aside from South Carolina and 
 Mississippi, a majority of the people were in their hearts 
 honestly for a separation from the Union. They professed 
 to be, it is true. But every one familiar with the fearful 
 despotism of public opinion, in the cotton states, on the 
 subject of slavery, will readily realize how impossible it 
 was to resist this public sentiment in the winter and 
 spring of 1861. In most of the states but few men were 
 found brave enough to do so, and in some of the states 
 secession swept over them with the suddenness and fury of 
 a tropical tornado. 
 
 The War of Secession is generally regarded as the 
 "Slaveholders' War." It would be more correct to call 
 it the "Politicians' War." In the beginning it was the 
 work alone of ambitious politicians. Gradually the circle 
 widened and other classes were drawn into it. Finally 
 whole sections were seized with the idea. Thus, from 
 a beginning started by a few men, the movement spread 
 over eight states. It is doubtful whether a majority of 
 the slaveholders of these states were in favor of secession 
 when it was first proposed. They were always conservative 
 in habits and thought. They had vast interests involved 
 in the issue. Nearly all they had was in slaves. They 
 were doing well, making large gains, and were happy and 
 contented. They wished to let well enough alone. Be- 
 sides this, outside of South Carolina, a majority perhaps 
 of the planters were Whigs. The Whig party was every- 
 where. North as well as South, opposed to secession. In 
 the seceding states they never yielded to this fatal de- 
 lusion, until they saw that further resistance to the storm 
 of madness would be in vain and would result in their 
 own ruin. At last, against their judgment, they were 
 swept like driftwood into the angry current rushing by 
 them, and carried along helplessly by the resistless 
 stream. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 335 
 
 On this point I give two or three extracts, written, says 
 the editor, by "one of the ablest of Virginians," and 
 published in 1883, in the "American Register." The 
 writer says : 
 
 "I state a fact which every intelligent Southerner will 
 confess to be a fact, that the great body of Southern slave- 
 holders were the Whigs and Unionists of the South in 
 1860-61, The Whigs were commonly denominated the 
 'Broad-cloth party' of the South. Every intelligent 
 slaveholder knew that his security as a slaveholder was 
 based upon the stability of the Union. He hated alike 
 the 'higher law' of Wendell Phillips and the lower one 
 of revolution. . . . The illiterate and passionate 
 largely outnumbered the 'broad cloth' or Whig party. 
 
 "Slaveholders were the educated, intelligent class of the 
 South, multitudes of them graduates of eastern univer- 
 sities. Their wealth made them most conservative; their 
 intelligence begat adhesion to the existing order of things. 
 Security for an institution which the world reviled they 
 knew consisted in the maintenance of the supremacy of the 
 Union. . . 
 
 "Slaveholders were not idiots, and were only rebels 
 when driven to a choice between war with the Union and 
 an internecine war." 
 
 Slavery was the remote, but not the immediate, cause 
 of the war. This institution was as secure in 1861 as it 
 was in 1820, and if the South had waited and willed it, it 
 could have been so hedged around by constitutional guar- 
 anties and safeguards as to place it forever beyond the power 
 of government to molest. Slavery was made the excuse, 
 the pretext for the war. It was the rallying cry of the 
 daring leaders when they would inflame the minds of the 
 Southern people with madness. 
 
 The Southern people were sadly mistaken. They ex- 
 pected a divided North. Such would have been the case if 
 the leaders had waited in patience for the fruit to ripen. 
 There can scarcely exist a doubt that a large majority of 
 
336 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the Northern people would have voted, in the spring of 
 1861, to let the seceding states go in preference to the 
 alternative of Civil War. So shocking, so dreadful was 
 the idea of such a war that men were ready to give up 
 everything rather than have such an affliction. But when 
 the nation's honor was insulted, the feeling of brotherhood 
 was turned into rage, that of peace into determined re- 
 lentless war. 
 
 To the last the South was mistaken. They believed the 
 Northern people would not fight. They expected easy vic- 
 tories. Washington, as they boasted, would soon be their 
 capitol. One enthusiastic orator — a senator in the Con- 
 federate congress — boasted that they would soon quaff wine 
 from golden goblets in the palaces of New York. Another 
 gentlemen boasted that he would call the roll of his slaves 
 at the foot of Bunker Hill Monument. The boast was uni- 
 versal, and perhaps the belief also, that one Southern man 
 could whip five Yankees. An Alabama gentleman reached 
 the climax when he declared in a public speech that they could 
 whip the North with pop-guns made out of elder stalks.^ 
 
 The doctrine of secession as a theory and its evils as a 
 fact should be abandoned by every lover of peace. 
 
 No government can stand long without sufficient power 
 in its head to restrain its members into obedience to its 
 laws. No government is worth preserving that is not 
 strong enough to do this. It should be strong to protect 
 and preserve, with no power to oppress. Every citizen 
 should be free and secure in all his rights, but subject to 
 law. He should be protected by law, made by himself, 
 and yet forced to obey the law This is all there is of a 
 well-regulated free government. It is all any man can ask. 
 Every man has a right to be heard in choosing rulers and 
 
 ^ When twitted with this boast after the war while making a public 
 speech, this gentleman admitted that he had made the boast, and that 
 what he said was true, but that the blasted Yankees would not fight with 
 pop-guns. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 337 
 
 in making laws, but when once heard, the voice of the 
 majority must prevail. The minority must yield. This is 
 self government. It is law and order. It is freedom. 
 
 The great Washington, with his usual clearness and wis- 
 dom, expressed the true idea of nationality in his letter to 
 Jay of August 1, 1786, when he said : 
 
 "I do not conceive we can exist long as a nation with- 
 out having lodged somewhere a power which will pervade 
 the whole Union in as energetic a manner as the authority 
 of the state government extends over the several states." 
 
 The Southern leaders, as a class, were honorable, truth- 
 ful men. If they believed all they said in their speeches 
 and writings, and they evidently did, they had great cause 
 for bitterness. Many misconceptions, however, as to the 
 purposes of the North, prevailed. On one point — the aim of 
 the Abolitionists — there was no misconception, and this 
 was sufficient to inflame the whole South. In this way 
 alone can we account for the deadly and intense spirit of 
 hate with which they regarded the people of the North. 
 They felt as if each individual had a great wrong to redress. 
 The leaders were not worse than a similar class of men in 
 the North, and in many respects they were better. Pos- 
 sibly they had a more vaulting ambition. In all the trans- 
 actions of life, they were the equals of any men on earth. 
 They had brooded and talked over their defeats and their 
 real or imaginary wrongs until they were seized with a de- 
 lusion. They thought honestly, I believe, that they had 
 lost their rights in the government. Their utterances 
 were violent and extreme. Yet they seemed perfectly sin- 
 cere and were so. The great body of the Southern people 
 who went into secession were undoubtedly honest in their 
 action. It is impossible to conceive of a whole people rush- 
 ing headlong into war — of such enthusiasm, such courage, 
 such amazing endurance, and such heroic sacrifices — on any 
 other hypothesis. They were a brave, manly, noble people, 
 with as much regard for truth as is possessed by any 
 other people. Indeed, their courage, independence and 
 22 
 
338 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 frankness tended to make them conspicuous for truth- 
 fulness. 
 
 I draw a broad line of distinction between the leaders, 
 the originators of the secession movement, and the soldiers 
 and the great body of the people. When the war came 
 on, the latter naturally sympathized with their section, 
 with their state, their friends, their kindred. Many of 
 them, perhaps a majority, thought that their first and 
 highest allegiance was due to their state, and that this was 
 paramount to that they owed to the United States. Their 
 states having seceded, they felt that they were absolved 
 from all obligations to the general government. Most of 
 them, too, by reason of exaggerations universally circu- 
 lated, believed that they were about to lose their liberties. 
 
 And what shall be said of the women of the South? It 
 must be recorded to their honor that never did women ex- 
 hibit a higher or more determined spirit. It was earnest 
 and enthusiastic. They infused their own lofty feelings 
 into the minds of brothers, husbands, lovers, and finally 
 into the soldiers in the field. With them, the cause of se- 
 cession was above every earthly thing. The nearer they 
 were touched by death in battle or hospital, the higher 
 rose their spirit and determination. Extreme as their 
 spirit may seem at this day, it was, under the dark shadow 
 of war, something terrible and sublime. They were capa- 
 ble, in their devotion to their cause, of the lofty patriotism 
 of the Grecian mother, who, when informed by a messen- 
 ger that her five sons had been killed in battle, scornfully 
 said : "I did not ask you as to my sons ; but tell me, how 
 fared my country?" There was no sacrifice these noble, 
 refined women were not willing to make for the Confeder- 
 ate cause. Jewelry, dress, food, home, luxury, ease, com- 
 fort—every material treasure, indeed — they were ready to 
 sacrifice for success. Soft, delicate hands, unused to toil, 
 labored with enthusiasm, as the mothers of the Revolution 
 did, to provide clothing for the naked soldiers away in the 
 army. 
 
The Causes of Secession. 339 
 
 They were bitter ; jes, surpassingly so. And they never 
 yielded ; were never conquered. When a town or. city was 
 captured by the Federals, secession flags were waved by 
 female hands or hung from their windows. Yet these 
 were not fierce viragoes, nor coarse, vulgar creatures from 
 the slums of cities. They were generally the cultured, 
 refined, beautiful daughters of the South, the very elite 
 and flower of the best families, unsurpassed in loveliness 
 and nobleness by the daughters of any age or clime. Bit- 
 ter as they were, I yet bow in admiration before their 
 matchless spirit and their unconquerable devotion to their 
 cause. Never did legend or the pages of romance paint 
 loftier or more heroic women. They were well worthy to 
 be the mothers, wives, daughters, sisters and sweethearts 
 of the brave chevaliers who for four years performed such 
 prodigies of valor on the battle-field. Their devotion to 
 their cause was heroic, sublime, worthy to be celebrated 
 through all time in story, legend and song. 
 
340 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THE KNOXVILLE-GREENEVILLE CONVENTION OF 1861. 
 
 Call for a convention of Union men — Meets in Knoxville— Speeches of 
 Johnson, Nelson and Arnold — Adjourns to meet again on the call of 
 the president — A call to meet in Greenville, June 17th. A large dele- 
 gation assembles — Fierce determination of delegates — Unwilling to sub- 
 mit to Confederacy — Speeches and resolutions consume two days — Mr. 
 Nelson's " Declaration of Grievances " and resolutions referred to busi- 
 ness committee — Character of this document — Great excitement among 
 delegates — A majority favors extreme measures — Published history of 
 convention not full — Original minutes — Embarrassing position of con- 
 vention — Mr, Nelson's resolutions quoted — Reported by committee to 
 convention for adoption — A substitute oflfered — Debate — Both re- 
 ferred back to committee — Substitute reported for favorable action — 
 Adopted— Their purport — Debate — Position of speakers— Conservative 
 members — Commissioners named to memoralize the legislature — Con- 
 vention closes in harmony — Mr. Netherland's speech — Narrowly escaped 
 civil war — Mr. Nelson — Design and effect of " Substitute " — Little hope 
 of a new state — Memorial to legislature — Mr. Maynard its author — 
 Prayer of denied — Notice of the splendid men composing the conven- 
 tion — Eulogy on Mr. Nelson — Secret executive committee appointed — 
 Remarkable nature of this convention — Appropriateness of Greenville 
 as its place of meeting. 
 
 In May, 1861, a few gentlemen were sitting in my office 
 on South Gay street, Knoxville, Tennessee, discussing the 
 political situation in East Tennessee, when it was suggested 
 by some one, in view of the prospect of the state voting at 
 the approaching election for "separation," that a call be 
 issued for a convention of Union men to meet at Knoxville 
 at an early day for consultation. John Williams, F. S. 
 Heiskell, S. R. Rodgers, C. F.Trigg and Dr. Wm. Rodgers 
 were present, and possibly others whose names appear ap- 
 pended to the call. Some one, probably C. F. Trigg, sat 
 down at a desk and wrote the call, which was then signed 
 by all present, other signatures being obtained afterward. 
 Little did the originators of this meeting, when they signed 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 341 
 
 the call for the assembling, imagine that it was to become 
 an important historic event. The call was then published 
 in Brownlow's "Whig." It was in the following words : 
 
 "East Tennessee Convention. 
 "The undersigned, a portion of the people of East Ten- 
 nessee, disapproving the hasty and inconsiderate action of 
 our general assembly, and sincerely desirous to do, in 
 the midst of the troubles which surround us, what will be 
 the best for our country, and for all classes of our citizens, 
 respectfully appoint a convention to be held in Knoxville 
 on Thursday the 30th of May inst. ; and we urge every 
 county in East Tennessee to send delegates to this conven- 
 tion, that the conservative element of our whole section 
 may be represented, and that wise, prudent and judicious 
 counsels may prevail looking to peace and harmony among 
 ourselves. 
 
 F. S. Heiskell, John Williams, 
 
 C. F. Baker, John J. Craig, 
 
 S. R. Rodgers, W. H. Rodgers, 
 
 Dr. W. Rodgers, 0. P. Temple, 
 
 John Baxter, John Tunnell, 
 
 C. F. Trigg, W. G. Brownlow, 
 
 David Burnett, and others." 
 
 On the day appointed for the meeting of the convention, 
 the town was full of excited delegates. The people had re- 
 sponded to the call with a sympathy scarcely anticipated. 
 The leading Union men from all parts of East Tennessee 
 were present, full of enthusiasm and determination. All 
 this showed that the depths of the hearts of the peo- 
 ple had been stirred by the great events then transpiring. 
 The venerable General Thomas D. Arnold, who had repre- 
 sented the Knoxville district in congress thirty-five years 
 before this time, was present, as full of courage and fire 
 as when opposing and boldly denouncing General Jackson 
 in his races for the presidency. 
 
342 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 The meeting assembled in a beautiful grove, in East 
 Knoxville, near the old Temperance Hall, now occupied 
 by comfortable residences. The Hon. Thomas A. R. Nel- 
 son was made permanent president and John M. Fleming, 
 secretary. A committee on business or resolutions was ap- 
 pointed, of which C. F. Trigg was chairman. 
 
 The three great events of the convention, which lasted 
 two days, were the speeches made by Mr. Nelson, General 
 Arnold and Senator Johnson. Before taking the chair 
 Mr. Nelson spoke for more than one hour, with his usual 
 earnestness and power. It was an able, fervid and splendid 
 effort. After him followed General Arnold in a speech of 
 nearly two hours duration. For nearly thirty years I had 
 often heard him at the bar and on the stump, and this was 
 by far the finest effort of his life. It was bold, earnest, 
 witty, pointed, and at times exceedingly eloquent. He 
 seemed to be inspired with the liveliest sense of the danger 
 which threatened the country. He was lifted up above 
 his common level. On the second day. Senator Johnson 
 spoke for three hours, with perhaps more than his usual 
 power. He was never in the habit of making failures on 
 the stump, but was always equal to the demands of the 
 occasion. On this day he seemed superior to himself. 
 His speech was a masterly arraignment and a withering 
 denunciation of the secession party, and an eloquent ap- 
 peal to the people to stand by the Union. 
 
 Strong and emphatic Union resolutions were submitted 
 by the committee, which on a motion to amend, says the 
 published report, "provoked a running debate, participated 
 in by Messrs. Baxter, Temple, Trigg, Fleming, Spears and 
 Wm. Heiskell." After amendment, the resolutions were 
 adopted. Finally the convention adjourned to meet again 
 on the call of the president, the time and place being left 
 to him to determine. The proposal to meet again was in 
 view of the fact that the people of the state were to vote 
 on the question of separation on the 8th of June. It was 
 deemed wise to adjourn over in order to meet the new 
 
J'he Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 343 
 
 exigencies which might soon arise by reason of that elec- 
 tion. In accordance, therefore, with the authority vested 
 in the president, as soon as he ascertained the result of the 
 election, he issued a call for the reassembling of the con- 
 vention in Greenville, on the 17th of June. 
 
 The Greeneville Convention. 
 
 This convention met under far different circumstances 
 from those existing at its first meeting in Knoxville. At 
 that time there was still a possibility that the people of the 
 state might vote down the proposition for the secession of 
 the state. Now, so far as the will of the majority could 
 give authority to what was believed to be an illegal and 
 unconstitutional measure, the act of secession was ac- 
 complished. No one doubted that Governor Harris and 
 the Confederate government would be quick to put the 
 state in line with the other seceding states, and attempt to 
 force its people into immediate submission to the new 
 authority. It was impossible for the great body of the 
 people of East Tennessee to realize their new condition — 
 that they were no longer under the protection of the gov- 
 ernment of their fathers and of their choice, but subject to 
 one hateful to them and alien to their love. 
 
 But there were among the delegates at Greenville those 
 who saw the full force of the recent act of the people of the 
 state. They saw that the Union men were no longer free, 
 as they recently were, to choose the government they 
 would sei-ve, but were in fact, or soon would be, subject to 
 military authority. They knew that the very weakest 
 revolutionary government could not afford to have its 
 authority defied by a weak minority within the limits 
 of its assumed jurisdiction. Much less would such strong 
 men as Mr. Davis and Governor Harris submit to a local 
 rebellion, or any independence of their authority. These 
 men also realized that what had been tolerated a few days 
 before would not be permitted thereafter ; that acts which 
 
344 East Tennessee and the Civil War, 
 
 were overlooked before "separation," would be treated as 
 treason or insurrection in the future. They felt, therefore, 
 that there was a grave and perplexing question to be con- 
 sidered by the convention. Indeed, all the delegates felt 
 that a great crisis in the history of the loyal people of 
 East Tennessee had arrived. But a large majority were 
 bold and defiant, and determined not to submit to a gov- 
 ernment they hated. 
 
 On the reassembling of the convention, the officers and 
 committees chosen at Knoxville were continued in office. 
 The most important of the committees was that on busi- 
 ness, to which all resolutions were referred without debate. 
 This consisted of the following persons : 
 
 C. F. Trigg, of Knox ; A. T. Smith, of Johnson ; W. B. 
 Carter, of Carter; J. W. Deadrick, of Washington; Jas. 
 P. McDowell, of Greene ; R. L. Stanford, of Sullivan ; 
 John Netherland, of Hawkins ; Jas. P. Swann, of Jeff'er- 
 son ; Samuel Pickens, of Sevier ; Charles L. Barton, of 
 Hancock; W. T. Dowell, of Blount; Wm. Heiskell, of 
 Monroe ; W. B. Staley, of Roane ; D. C. Trewhitt, of 
 Hamilton; R. M. Edwards, of Bradley; J. Stonecipher, 
 of Morgan; L. C. Houk, of Anderson; W. G. Brownlow, 
 of Marion (alternate) ; J. A. Cooper, of Campbell ; G. W. 
 Bridges, of McMinn ; T. J. Mathews, of Meigs ; R. K. 
 Byrd, of Cumberland (alternate) ; Wm. M. Biggs, of 
 Polk ; J. G. Spears, of Bledsoe ; E. E. Jones, of Clai- 
 bourne ; Isaac Bayless, of Union ; H. G. Lea, of Grainger ; 
 P. Easterly, of Cocke; S. C. Honeycutt, of Scott (alter- 
 nate) and E. S. Langley, of Fentress (alternate). 
 
 Soon after the election on the 8th of June, Senator 
 Johnson had left his home in Greenville, accompanied by 
 J. P. T. Carter, J. P. Holtsinger and W. D. McClelland, 
 and started north in a buggy, by way of Cumberland Gap, 
 since become so celebrated. He was therefore not present 
 at the Greeneville Convention. 
 
 The first two days were consumed largely in offering 
 resolutions and in making speeches. The resolutions em- 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 345 
 
 braced a great variety of projects, dependent on the views 
 of the persons offering them. Many of them were wild 
 and visionary, and nearly all revolutionary. No two dele- 
 gates agreed as to the policy to be adopted. The only 
 point of general concurrence was a determination on the 
 part of a large majority not to submit to the action of the 
 people of the state in the late election. But how to mani- 
 fest that determination, what action should be taken to 
 accomplish this end, was a problem no one had solved. 
 
 On the first day of the convention, the Hon. T. A. R. 
 Nelson submitted a long paper, appropriately entitled a 
 "Declaration of Grievances," followed by a number of 
 violent resolutions pointing out the policy to be pursued. 
 This paper was at once referred to the business committee 
 for consideration. The Declaration of Grievances was an 
 exceedingly able, bitter and daring arraignment of the se- 
 cession party in Tennessee. This paper, somewhat modi- 
 fied and softened down in tone by two committees through 
 whose hands it passed, was finally adopted without opposi- 
 tion, and appears in the published account of the proceed- 
 ings. It is a document of great ability, and will forever 
 lend honor to its distinguished author. This is perhaps 
 the first time that it has been made public that this paper 
 was the work of Mr. Nelson. This fact, though well 
 known to the members of the convention, does not appear 
 in the published proceedings. Whatever was reported for 
 adoption by the business committee, and approved by the 
 convention, appears as the work of the committee. 
 
 It was fortunate that Mr. Nelson's resolutions were re- 
 ferred, for if they had been acted on at once, they would 
 have been adopted by an overwhelming majority. The 
 committee did not get ready to report on the mass of mat- 
 ter submitted to it until the afternoon of the third day. 
 By that time, much of the heat and excitement at first ex- 
 isting among the delegates had spent its force in speeches 
 and resolutions. Their minds had somewhat sobered down 
 and reason had resumed its rightful supremacy. 
 
346 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 The pamphlet purporting to give an account of the pro- 
 ceedings of the convention, published by its order, does 
 not contain all that was done, much less all that was pro- 
 posed. A stranger, on reading the published account at 
 this day, would gain a very imperfect idea of what 
 really took place, and no knowledge whatever of the two 
 antagonistic policies which divided the convention until 
 near its close. It gives no insight into the history of the 
 convention. It contains no account of what was proposed 
 and failed. This was so for the most obvious reasons. It 
 was not safe, nor prudent at that time to publish all 
 that was proposed. Nor would it have been right or just 
 to expose to punishment or persecution the members who 
 in their excitement had proposed violent measures, not 
 adopted by the convention. 
 
 Those who have read the book entitled "The Loyal 
 Mountaineers of East Tennessee," by Rev. Thomas W. 
 Humes, D.D., have gained from its perusal not only an 
 imperfect, but a very inaccurate idea of what took place. 
 This is not surprising, however, for its author was not a 
 member of that body, nor was he present. In preparing 
 his book, he did not have access to the original minutes, 
 kept by Mr. John M. Fleming, the secretary, nor to the 
 original papers submitted to the convention ; nor did he, 
 as it would seem, consult those who knew the facts. 
 These minutes and original papers are now in my posses- 
 sion, and have been since 1861, except for a few months, 
 when they were in the hands of Mr. Fleming. The min- 
 utes are unbroken in their account, from day to day, ex- 
 cept as to the first part of the first day, which is unimpor- 
 tant. They are just as they were kept by the secretary as 
 the business transpired, and all in his well-known hand- 
 writing. Besides, I was a member of the convention, and 
 it having fallen to my lot to have a large agency in shap- 
 ing the policy finally adopted, I have, consequently, a 
 vivid recollection of the most important proceedings. 
 
 It is believed that this account of this celebrated con- 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 347 
 
 vention will prove of interest to those who may come here- 
 after. It is the only correct account ever published. No 
 account of it would give the slightest idea of the real 
 facts, without reference to the minutes or notes of the pro- 
 ceedings kept by the secretary. The published proceed- 
 ings only contain such facts as it was safe to print at that 
 time. 
 
 The members of the Greeneville Convention, on as- 
 sembling, found themselves in an embarrassing dilemma, 
 not realized by many of them at the time. "When the 
 Knoxville Convention adjourned, there was still some 
 hope that the state might be saved at the approaching 
 election. That hope was now gone. What was the con- 
 vention to do in the new circumstances which surrounded 
 it? Adjourn without doing anything? That would have 
 been humiliating. No one thought of that. It was im- 
 possible for the delegates to realize the change which had 
 taken place. In May, there was a strong Union senti- 
 ment, though suppressed, in the other two divisions of the 
 state; now, in June, East Tennessee stood alone. Were 
 her people able to resist all the rest of the state? Would 
 they alone take up arms? 
 
 Mr. Nelson's resolutions voiced the feeling of an over- 
 whelming majority of the convention, as well as that of a 
 large majority of the Union people. The delegates, like 
 the people, were absolutely defiant in tone. They breathed 
 the spirit of a free people whose independence was already 
 won rather than lost. The material resolutions of Mr. 
 Nelson are now in my possession, in his own handwriting. 
 
 The first declared that "we will not abide by the new 
 "Declaration of Independence" (adopted by the legisla- 
 ture) "or attach ourselves to the Confederate States." 
 
 The second declared that "the counties of East Tennes- 
 see and such of the adjacent counties in Middle Tennessee' 
 as choose to act with them will still legally and constitu- 
 tionally continue in the Union as the State of Tennessee, 
 
348 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 subject to its constitution and laws, as far as the same may 
 be applicable to our distracted and divided condition." 
 
 The third declared in substance that if no effort should 
 be made by the secessionists of Tennessee to coerce the 
 people of East Tennessee into submission, "we desire to 
 maintain a position of neutrality between them and the 
 federal government in the existing war," promising "not 
 to interfere with them if they do not interfere with us," 
 and "not to disturb the formation of disunion volunteer 
 companies, or interfere with the railroad or the transporta- 
 tion of troops," provided "we are not molested by either 
 actual violence or insult," or "an attempt (be made) to 
 enforce among us oppressive or unconstitutional laws, or 
 to collect unlawful taxes." 
 
 The fourth was that "if any attempt should be made to 
 station or quarter troops among us from either of the other 
 divisions of the state, or from the Confederate States, we 
 will instantly call upon tho government of the United 
 States for aid, and will use every means in our own power 
 for our common defense." 
 
 The fifth resolution was : "Resolved, that if any mem- 
 ber of this convention, or any other citizen of East Ten- 
 nessee, shall be killed in consequence of his Union senti- 
 ments, or shall be arrested under any pretended law of 
 treason, then we earnestly advise and recommend the most 
 prompt and decided acts of retaliation by our people, 
 leaving it to them to judge, in the circumstances by which 
 they may be surrounded, of the nature and extent of such 
 acts of retaliation." 
 
 The sixth resolution recommended "the formation of 
 military companies with proper officers in every county 
 and civil district" in East Tennessee, and "that such com- 
 panies shall hold themselves in readiness at a moment's 
 warning." 
 
 There were several other resolutions, but these are the 
 material ones. Most of the others were stricken out by 
 the business committee. The ones I have quoted were re- 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 349 
 
 ported by the committee to the convention for adoption. 
 This was on the afternoon of the third day. The report 
 of the committee at once came up for consideration. The 
 published account of the proceedings reads thus : 
 
 "Mr. Temple, of Knox, presented a series of resolutions, 
 and gave notice that he would ofifer them as a substitute 
 for part of the committee's report. 
 
 "After considerable debate, participated in by Messrs. 
 Baxter, Havis, Clift, Brown, Myers, Swann, Thornburgh, 
 Arnold, Carter, Temple and others, 
 
 "On motion, the substitute and fhQ first resolution of the 
 committee were referred back to the committee for a fur- 
 ther report to-morrow morning." 
 
 It is a mistake when the report speaks of the '■'■first 
 resolution of the committee." It was the first six resolu- 
 tions of the committee (being the first six of Mr. Nelson) , 
 with the substitute that were referred back. This will ap- 
 pear clearly by quoting from the minutes or notes of the 
 secretary, which say : 
 
 * 'Temple offered a substitute for all after the seventh Res." 
 This should be all "before" the seventh. It was the first 
 six that were objectionable. It will be observed that the 
 first six resolutions of Mr. Nelson, already quoted, errone- 
 ously called "the first resolution," and the series of resolu- 
 tions offered as a substitute, were the only matters referred 
 back to the committee for further consideration. 
 
 On the next morning, the fourth day of the convention, 
 the committee again re^Dorted its decision to the conven- 
 tion. The printed report says: "Mr. Trigg, from the 
 business committee, again submitted their report. After 
 much discussion, the declaration of grievances and resolu- 
 tions were finally adopted as follows, without division :" 
 
 The original minutes are fuller than the printed report. 
 They say: "Mr. Trigg, from the committee, reported as 
 follows : 
 
 "Recommending to strike out first resolution" (Mr. Nel- 
 son's six resolutions which had been recommended for 
 
350 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 adoption by the committee the day before) , "and substitute 
 as follows." This should read, as explained above, "all 
 before the seventh resolution," that is, to strike out the first 
 six resolutions of Mr. Nelson and adopt the substitute. 
 
 The resolutions substituted were those offered the pre- 
 vious day by me. They were the ones finally adopted and 
 published. 
 
 In the debate which followed, the position taken by the 
 several speakers is indicated by the notes of the secretary, 
 as follows : 
 "Mr. Baxter opposed original resolutions, i. e., Mr. Nelson's. 
 
 Mr. Havis favored " " " 
 
 Clift, of Hamilton, favored " " 
 
 Brown, of Washington, opposed " 
 
 Myers, of Claibourne, favored " 
 
 Swann, of Jefferson, " " 
 
 Thornburgh, of Jefferson, moved Temj)le's as a substitute. 
 
 Arnold, of Greene, favored the original resolutions. 
 
 W. B. Carter, of Carter, favored " " 
 
 Temple, of Knox, favored substitute. 
 
 Temple's referred back with original." 
 The resolutions ofifered as a substitute, which were sub- 
 mitted by the committee in lieu of Mr. Nelson's, and fi- 
 nally adopted, were, in substance, as follows : 
 
 1st. A declaration of an earnest desire that East Ten- 
 nessee should not become involved in civil war. 
 
 2d. That the action of the legislature in passing the so- 
 called "Declaration of Independence," in "forming the 
 Military League" with the Confederate States, and in 
 adopting other acts "looking to a separation of Tennessee 
 from the government of the United States, is unconstitu- 
 tional and illegal, and therefore not binding upon us as 
 loyal citizens." 
 
 3d. "That in order to avert a conflict with our brethren 
 of other parts of the state, and desiring that every consti- 
 tutional means shall be resorted to for the preservation 
 of the peace, we do, therefore, constitute and appoint 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 351 
 
 commissioners, 
 whose duty it shall be to prepare a memorial, and cause 
 the same to be presented to the general assembly of Ten- 
 nessee, now in session, asking its consent that the counties 
 composing East Tennessee, and such counties in Middle 
 Tennessee as desire to co-operate with them, may form and 
 erect a separate state." 
 
 4th. "But, claiming the right to determine our" (their) 
 "own destiny," the people were requested to hold an elec- 
 tion in all the counties of East Tennessee, and in such coun- 
 ties in Middle Tennessee, adjacent thereto, as may desire 
 to co-operate with them, for the choice of delegates to rep- 
 resent them in a general convention to be held in the town 
 of Kingston, at such time as the president of this conven- 
 tion, etc., might designate, etc. 
 
 The 5th and 6th resolutions provided the mode of hold- 
 ing the election, and fixed the ratio of representation in 
 the convention. 
 
 Immediately after the committee made its report in the 
 afternoon of the third day, and after the substitute for Mr. 
 Nelson's resolutions had been presented, a hot debate sprang 
 up in the convention, as indicated above, over the two sets 
 of resolutions. Mr. John Baxter, Mr. Montgomery Thorn- 
 burgh, Mr. A. J. Brown and myself, supported the substi- 
 tute, and opposed the more violent resolutions submitted 
 by the committee. Messrs. S. T. Havis, Wm. Clift, V. 
 Myers, J. P. Swann, Thos. D. Arnold and W. B. Carter 
 warmly advocated the adoption of the committee's first re- 
 port. It was intimated by some of them that those enter- 
 taining opposite views were actuated by fear. General 
 Arnold poured a perfect broadside of ridicule and sarcasm, 
 in his inimitable way, on the heads of the conservative 
 speakers. A great deal of fine talking took place about 
 the effective work which could be done with squirrel rifles 
 and shot guns in the hands of our mountain men, in the 
 event of a conflict with the Confederacy. These debates, 
 sometimes almost personal, and at all times excited, lasted 
 
352 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 all the afternoon. This was the first time the members 
 began to think seriously about the great questions under 
 consideration. It had become apparent, by the debate, 
 that there was a wide divergence of opinion in the conven- 
 tion. Hence, after the discussion, at a late hour, the reso- 
 lutions were recommitted with directions for another re- 
 port the next morning. 
 
 Mr. Nelson's resolutions, as at first reported for adoption 
 by the committee, reflected the views of those who favored 
 resistance to the authorities of the state. These consti- 
 tuted, at first, a very large majority. This majority was 
 decidedly in the ascendency, until the debate of that after- 
 noon, when for the first time, an opposite and a more 
 pacific policy was presented. There had been, however, 
 from the first, a number of thoughtful delegates, who saw 
 the perils of the situation, and were opposed to any extreme 
 action, and who wished to wait until relief should come 
 from the Federal government. They saw that the situa- 
 tion was a very grave one, demanding the utmost prudence 
 and discretion. These stood ready to oppose any extreme 
 or revolutionary measures. Among these were Maynard, 
 Baxter, Deadrick, "Wm. Heiskell, Thornburgh, Brown, 
 Butler, McDowell, Fleming and myself. On the other 
 side, were the great influence and name of Mr. Nelson, the 
 president, and Mr. Trigg, the chairman of the business 
 committee, and thirty members of his committee, with 
 General Arnold, W. B. Carter, Colonel Clift, and very- 
 many more influential men. 
 
 On the next morning, when the committee recommended 
 striking out the first six resolutions of Mr. Nelson, and the 
 adoption of the substitute, the fight commenced anew. 
 Mr. Robert Johnson, a son of Andrew Johnson, moved at 
 once to reinstate Mr. Nelson's resolutions, but finally with- 
 drew his motion. Then Mr. Nelson, leaving the chair, re- 
 newed the motion. But on a parliamentary point, raised 
 by Mr. R. R. Butler, his motion was also withdrawn. A 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 353 
 
 debate on the general merits followed. Neither the min- 
 utes nor the printed account show who took part in this 
 debate, except that the former show that "Baxter opposed 
 inaugurating revolution," and "McGaughey, of Greene, 
 favored committee's first resolution," (Mr. Nelson's) . At 
 some time either during that day, or on the previous after- 
 noon, Mr. Maynard made a very temperate speech in favor 
 of moderation and caution. This fact does not appear in 
 either of the accounts, but I remember it distinctly. The 
 published account says that "after much discussion, the 
 declaration of grievances, and resolutions" (the substitute) 
 "were finally adopted without a division." The minutes 
 say they were all adopted ^^ seriatim una voce/^ 
 
 The blank in the resolutions was filled by the conven- 
 tion or by the committee, by inserting the names of Oliver 
 P. Temple, John Netherland and James P. McDowell 
 as commissioners to memorialize the legislature in reference 
 to a new state. 
 
 After the adoption of the "Declaration of Grievances," 
 the minutes show that that document was referred to Mr. 
 Nelson, Mr. Maynard and myself, for final revision. Mr. 
 Nelson declined or failed to act, and Mr. Maynard and I 
 spent several hours in toning it down, and in eliminating 
 from it words and sentences which it was not deemed 
 prudent to publish at that time. Still, this splendid docu- 
 ment, as it now appears, though slightly modified from the 
 original, was the work of Mr. Nelson, and he alone is en- 
 titled to the credit of its authorship. We did not improve 
 it, nor hope to do so. We simply omitted such expressions 
 as it would have been dangerous to publish at that time. 
 
 Thus this memorable convention, which opened in a storm 
 of excitement and passion, closed in perfect harmony. 
 The dark clouds, i)ortending civil war, which hung over 
 East Tennessee for the previous three days, were blown 
 away by prudent counsels and the adoption of pacific 
 measures. The only exception to the harmony which pre- 
 vailed was on the part of Mr. John Blevins and Mr. W. 0. 
 23 
 
354 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Kyle, of Hawkins county. Near the close of the conven- 
 tion, they presented a paper protesting "against the action 
 of the convention," but in what respect, they did not say. 
 Why this protest was presented, has never been manifest. 
 To have done less and said less than was done and said by 
 the convention would have been cowardly, and degrading 
 to the high honor and courage of the Union men of East 
 Tennessee. Doubtless there were many delegates, perhaps 
 a majority, who were not quite satisfied with the action 
 taken. These evidently, however, saw no other safe 
 course open to them, for none of them voted against the 
 resolutions which were adopted, and all voted for them. 
 
 The convention acted with great deliberation. As will be 
 seen it lasted four days. A speech made by John Nether- 
 land on the first day of its meeting, no doubt helped to 
 prevent hasty action. This was the only speech preserved, 
 even in brief, by the secretary, and it deserves reproduc- 
 tion. He said : 
 
 "Our deliberations and acts will become historic. We 
 should act calmly. We are in a revolution and a fearful one. 
 As a Union man, I say for myself that we have acted right 
 in East Tennessee. But we must look at things practically. 
 In February, we triumphed in the state by 60,000 majority ; 
 that majority has melted away and now the majority against 
 us is 50,000. East Tennessee has stood firm. Now, before 
 taking steps, let us feel the ground firm under us. Do not 
 hurry through the convention." 
 
 Whatever difference of opinion might have existed in 
 June, 1861, as to the policy which was finally adopted by 
 the Greeneville convention, it is submitted that at this day 
 none can exist as to its wisdom ; or, to reverse the proposition, 
 no difference of opinion can exist as to the extreme inex- 
 pediency of passing Mr. Nelson's resolutions, which were at 
 first indorsed and recommended by the business committee. 
 Yet, no reflection is intended to be cast, either upon their dis- 
 tinguished author, nor upon the committee. The committee 
 was composed of thirty gentlemen, one from each county, 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 355 
 
 and they were supposed to be, and were in fact, among the 
 ablest and wisest men in the convention. Some of them 
 were extremely conservative in their views, and opposed to 
 any violent measures. This was especially the case with 
 Netherland, McDowell, Deadrick and Wm. Heiskell. And 
 yet it is worthy of remark that, when the violent resolu- 
 tions of Mr. Nelson were first reported for adoption, there 
 was no adverse report, and the action of the committee 
 seemed to be unanimous. This fact shows the intense ex- 
 citement of a majority of the delegates during the first 
 three days, which carried even the coolest minds beyond 
 the bounds of prudence. Besides, until the afternoon of 
 the third day, there had not yet been presented a single 
 alternative proposition, suitable to the grave emergency 
 then existing. 
 
 If Mr. Nelson's resolutions had been adopted, it would 
 have brought on the people of East Tennessee at once all 
 the horrors of civil war. These resolutions constituted a 
 bold defiance of the state and of the Confederate authorities, 
 such as no government could have tolerated. No doubt it 
 seemed entirely practicable, at that day, to those who were 
 carried away by their zeal and excitement, to maintain an 
 independent state, to keep up an army, to resist arrests and 
 the payment of taxes, and to inflict at will retaliatory meas- 
 ures, and, if necessary, to fight battles ; but those who 
 thus thought knew nothing of actual war, and were ap- 
 parently ignorant of the power and spirit of the great 
 revolution then surrounding them. A prevalent idea in 
 the convention was that the Federal Government would 
 protect the loyal people of East Tennessee. And yet, at 
 that time, there was not a federal soldier south of the 
 River Ohio, a distance of nearly three hundred miles. 
 It was more than two years after this time before a reliev- 
 ing army reached Knoxville. At the very time the conven- 
 tion was in session even the caiDitol of the nation was in 
 serious peril. However strongly Union men may have hoped 
 and believed that relief would soon come from that quar- 
 
356 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ter, we know now that federal aid was at that time utterly 
 hopeless and impossible. Mr, Lincoln, with his big heart, 
 constantly urged, entreated and commanded his generals 
 to relieve these peoj)le, and yet it took two years to accom- 
 plish this cherished object. 
 
 If a strong federal column had even penetrated to Knox- 
 ville in 1861 or 1862, previous to the fall of Nashville and 
 Memphis, it would have likely perished or have been driven 
 back in disaster. General Grant was right when, in 1864, 
 he ordered all the armies to move forward at one time. 
 The hazard, the folly, indeed, of throwing one army, ex- 
 cept the main one, into the heart of the enemy's country, 
 far ahead of other supporting columns, was too evident to 
 such strategists as General McClellan, General Buell and 
 General Sherman for them to attempt such a thing. For 
 this reason East Tennessee had to wait until the whole 
 line was pushed forward. 
 
 Suppose Mr. Nelson's resolutions had been adopted. 
 They constituted a bold declaration of independence. They 
 set East Tennessee in distinct array against the will of a 
 majority of the people of the state and its constituted au- 
 thorities. They placed us in hostility to the Confederate 
 Government. We became by that act in a state of re- 
 bellion. We would therefore have been treated as rebels. 
 Every prominent member of the convention probably 
 would have been arrested for treason. Then would have 
 commenced the work of retaliation, recommended by the 
 fifth resolution of Mr. Nelson. If it required, as it did, 
 all the restraining influence of the Union leaders to keep 
 our indignant people from commencing the extermination 
 of the Confederates before that time, what would have been 
 the result of the advice deliberately given by the assembled 
 leaders? The work of slaughter would have been com- 
 menced at once by them. Thereupon Confederate soldiers 
 would have been sent into every county to suppress the 
 uprising. Many of these would have been shot by Union 
 men in ambush. Wholesale arrests and shooting of Union 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 357 
 
 men would have followed. Soon these would have been 
 driven from their homes into the woods or mountains. 
 Guerilla warfare would have succeeded. Union men would 
 have perished in this unequal contest by the thousands. 
 The leaders would have been hung under sentence of 
 drum-head court-martials, or sent South to die in prisons. 
 The scenes of La Vendee during the French Revolution 
 would have been re-enacted in East Tennessee. Blood 
 would have flowed like water. There could have been but 
 one result to such a mad and unequal contest — the utter 
 destruction and overthrow of the Union people. They had 
 no arms, no ammunition, no military organization. In 
 vain they would have looked to the Federal Government for 
 help and protection. At that time it was as powerless to 
 help them as they would have been to protect themselves. 
 
 There were at that time not a half-dozen even partial 
 military companies in all East Tennessee. These were 
 without drill, and, worse still, without arms or ammuni- 
 tion. The Confederate Government could have thrown 
 five or ten thousand soldiers among us in two or three 
 days. Indeed, at that very time, there was a considerable 
 Confederate force at Knoxville and at other points. 
 Nearly every train that passed carried a regiment of sol- 
 diers from the states South and "West on their way to Vir- 
 ginia. While the convention was in session, more than 
 one regiment of Confederate troops passed every day 
 within sight of the place where the meetings were held. 
 Indeed, it has always been a source of surprise that the 
 delegates were not arrested while in session or the meeting 
 broken up. Its sessions were not secret, but open to all 
 who chose to witness them. There were spies present, 
 and that was well known to the members. The only way 
 that this immunity from arrest or molestation can be ac- 
 counted for is on the well-known fact that the secessionists 
 of East Tennessee were at that time in greater fear of the 
 Union men than the latter were of them. While the con- 
 vention was in session, the "Louisiana Tigers" stopped in 
 
358 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Greeneville, entered the town, cut down the national flag, 
 made threats, committed some minor outrages, and, after 
 a few hours, departed to Virginia. The delegates Avere on 
 the streets during all this time, acting discreetly, but de- 
 fiantly. They carefully avoided provoking a collision, but 
 stood ready to defend themselves as best they could should 
 they be assailed. They everywhere spoke their minds 
 freely and boldly. A few months later, w^hen arrests com- 
 menced being made, they were forced into discreet silence. 
 They had learned that, with all their courage, they were 
 powerless to resist. 
 
 It must be kept in mind, in order to realize the situation 
 at that time, that our people were absolutely without any 
 of the means of warfare, with no military leaders of ex- 
 perience, and that they were surrounded on every side but 
 one by a hostile territory, and eagerly watched by a hostile 
 army in their very midst. The idea of attempting resist- 
 ance to the whole Southern Confederacy would seem al- 
 most ludicrous at this day, were it not for the gravity and 
 the sincerity of the men who proposed it, and the supreme 
 imminence of the danger which was so narrowly escaped. 
 Even after the lapse of thirty-seven years, I tremble at the 
 thought of the countless horrors and calamities which 
 came so nigh befalling the Union people of East Tennessee 
 at that time. For a time, they seemed willing to face this 
 fate, inspired by their undying love of the Union, and 
 their unflinching determination never to submit to the 
 Southern Confederacy. 
 
 No one was hopeful that the legislature would consent 
 to the formation of East Tennessee into a new state. But 
 it was seen that this scheme presented a plausible plan, 
 and the only one, for turning the excited minds of a ma- 
 jority of the members away from the adoption of violent 
 and revolutionary measures to those of a pacific character. 
 
 When the substitute was offered, there was nothing 
 before the convention except Mr. Nelson's resolutions, 
 which in effect proposed to encourage the Union men to 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 359 
 
 take up arms, burn bridges and engage in a wholesale re- 
 taliation for any wrongs suffered by them. There was no 
 provision made for their protection in the future. There 
 was no future programme laid out. The substitute had a 
 double object. The first was, and this was the chief one, 
 to avert civil war, which was inevitable should Mr. Nel- 
 son's resolutions be adopted. The second object was to 
 provide for any future contingency which might arise, by 
 the election of delegates to a convention to meet on the 
 call of the president, thus keeping up an organization 
 with competent authority to act. It was barely possible, 
 though hardly hoped for by the most sanguine, that the 
 legislature might give its assent to the formation of a new 
 state. But it might be well for delegates to a convention 
 to be elected, and to meet some time in the future for 
 other purposes. The substitute provided for such a con- 
 tingency. 
 
 If the substitute resolutions did not accomplish all that 
 was hoped, they did secure the first and greatest object — 
 the preservation of peace. They prevented the greatest of 
 all calamities — a fraternal civil war, with all its attendant 
 horrors. 
 
 If a new state had been formed, it would, of course, 
 have asked congress for admission into the Union. It was 
 with that end in view, in part at least, that the consent of 
 the legislature was asked, in conformity with the constitu- 
 tion of the United States. In West Virginia, at a little later 
 date, this end was secured by calling together the members 
 of the legislature of the parent state who resided within the 
 limits of the proposed new state. This body, assuming to 
 be the legislature of the whole state, although notoriously 
 representing not more than one-third of it, gave its formal 
 assent to the formation of a new state. But both congress 
 and the President yielded to the view that this body was 
 competent to give the assent required only after long delay 
 and hesitation. It must be observed, however, that Mr. 
 Bates, Mr. Wells and Mr. Blair, members of the cabinet, 
 
360 East Tennessee and the Civil ]Var. 
 
 gave the President written opinions against the legality of 
 the proceedings, while Mr. Seward, Mr. Chase and Mr. 
 Stanton took the opposite view. In the vote ratifying the 
 new constitution of West Virginia, less than twenty thou- 
 sand votes were cast. This legislature had, however, in 
 1861, elected senators to congress who had been admitted 
 to their seats in the senate. This recognition of this body 
 as the legislature of the state no doubt had something to 
 do with the creation and admission of the new state. 
 
 Although the analogy between East Tennessee and "West 
 Virginia, in the early stages of the war, is very striking in 
 many respects, yet that analogy soon ceased. Had East 
 Tennessee been on the border of the free states from which 
 large armies could easily move, and into which they could 
 be quickly thrown, for the protection of conventions, legis- 
 latures and the loyal people, as West Virginia was, East 
 Tennessee would to-day no doubt be one of the states of 
 the Union. The loyal people of West Virginia were pro- 
 tected from the opening of the war by large Union armies, 
 which . gave freedom of thought and of action to the 
 people. 
 
 Soon after the adjournment of the Greeneville Conven- 
 tion, the commissioners appointed for this purpose drew 
 up a memorial and forwarded it to the legislature, asking 
 its consent to the formation of a new state . This memo- 
 rial was afterwards respectfully considered by that body, 
 and, as was expected, its prayer denied. This document, 
 as will be seen by reading it, was couched in terms of 
 moderation, but was frank and outspoken in the expression 
 of a desire on the part of the Union people of East Ten- 
 nessee to adhere to the government of their fathers. It is 
 chaste in style, courteous in tone, and exceedingly skillful 
 in expression. Indeed, it is a masterpiece of diplomatic 
 composition in asserting our rights w^ith plausible in- 
 genuity, and yet not offensive. For the first time, it is 
 publicly stated that it was the work of the Hon. Horace 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861 . 361 
 
 Maynard written after conferring with me. Still it was 
 the work of that scholarly man, written at my request. 
 
 More than a mere passing notice is due to the memory 
 of the men who composed this historic convention. The 
 best men in the Union party of East Tennessee were 
 present. It was truly representative in character. In 
 worth and standing, they were nearly equal to any body 
 of men ever assembled in the state. In ability, it con- 
 tained men of the first order. As lawyers. Nelson, May- 
 nard, Baxter and Trigg stood in the front rank, not only 
 in East Tennessee, but throughout the state. As popular 
 orators, Netherland, Nelson, Maynard, Arnold and Trigg 
 had but few equals in the state, and none in East Tennes- 
 see, except Andrew Johnson. In intellectual power, John- 
 son and Baxter had no equals in the state, excepting John 
 Bell. In courage and boldness, no men could anywhere 
 be found superior to Brownlow, Johnson, Trigg, Baxter, 
 Nelson and Arnold. In honor and lofty integrity, there 
 were men in this body who would have adorned the age 
 of chivalry. In bold and terrible energy in writing. Brown- 
 low had no peer in the state. As a graceful, elegant and 
 brilliant editor, Fleming, though but a young man, had 
 but few equals. 
 
 The number of men present who were then or after- 
 wards became prominent and even distinguished is note- 
 worthy. Counting the Knoxville and Greeneville Conven- 
 tion as the same, as they really were, one member became 
 president of the United States. Three, Johnson, Patter- 
 son and Brownlow, filled seats in the United States senate. 
 One, Mr. Maynard, served fourteen years in congress, and 
 then became minister to Turkey, and afterwards postmaster- 
 general. Baxter became a United States circuit judge, 
 while Trigg became a United States district judge. Two, 
 Brownlow and Senter, became governors of the state. 
 Nelson and Maynard were then members of congress. 
 Afterwards Houk, Crutchfield, Bridges and Butler also be- 
 came members of Congress, the first having been elected 
 
362 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 for seven terms. Arnold had twice been a member of 
 congress. Nelson and Deadrick became judges of the Su- 
 preme Court of Tennessee, and the latter its chief justice. 
 Trewhitt, Staley, H. C. Smith, John M. Smith and the 
 author became chancellors of the state. D. T. Patterson, 
 Butler, Brown, J. P. Swann, Bridges, Houk, Young, 
 Logan and N. A. Patterson had been or became circuit 
 judges. Joseph A. Cooper became a major-general and J. 
 G. Spears a brigadier-general in the Federal army, and 
 twenty- five of the delegates became colonels. Besides, 
 twenty-nine delegates or more, either had been, were then, or 
 afterward became senators or representatives in the legis- 
 ture. W. B, Carter, another delegate, never held office, 
 except in the constitutional convention of 1870, but in 
 scholarship, in astuteness of intellect, and in logical 
 analysis he had but few equals in the day of his full men- 
 tal power. He it was who originated and alone directed 
 the execution of burning simultaneously all the railroad 
 bridges on the great line of transportation of Confederate 
 troops between Bridgeport, Alabama, and Bristol, Tennes- 
 see, in November, 1861. Mr. Netherland was also a man 
 of marked ability. He was a peerless advocate and a 
 noted popular speaker. In 1859, he was the Whig candi- 
 date for governor against Isham G. Harris. 
 
 Before closing this chapter, a few words as to the Hon. 
 T. A. R. Nelson are necessary. A more honest man never 
 lived. Perfectly fearless himself, he had no sense of dan- 
 ger. More prudent men, possibly as brave as he, saw peril 
 where he saw only duty and honor. Hurried along by his 
 own knightly spirit and dauntless courage, without stop- 
 ping to count the odds, but looking alone to the right, he 
 would have had the brave people of East Tennessee imi- 
 tate the heroic example of the Swiss under Tell, or the 
 Scots under Bruce. Fortunately for the Union people of 
 East Tennessee, as was then thought by a few more pru- 
 dent men, and as all can now see, his daring policy, after 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 363 
 
 a full discussion of its merits, finally proved unacceptable 
 to a large majority of the convention. 
 
 It is not correct, as is stated in the book entitled "The 
 Loyal Mountaineers of East Tennessee," that it was through 
 the influence and exertions of Mr. Baxter, aided by Mr. 
 Deadrick and Mr. Maxwell, that the convention became 
 harmonious, and the peace of East Tennessee was pre- 
 served. Mr. Baxter, it is true, was opposed to the adop- 
 tion of violent measures, and made two strong speeches in 
 favor of the pacific measures contained in the substitute, 
 and in opposition to Mr. Nelson's plan. He did his full 
 share in preserving the peace, but others did the same. He 
 submitted no resolutions, was on no committee, and made 
 no motions. Neither is it correct that Mr. Deadrick and 
 Mr. Maxwell were specially influential in opposing Mr. 
 Nelson's resolutions. Neither the published nor the un- 
 published records show that these gentlemen opened their 
 lips in either of the debates, nor can I recall that they did. 
 I, however, know that Mr. Deadrick was very conservative 
 in his views. 
 
 Before the convention adjourned, the president was au- 
 thorized to appoint five persons as an executive committee, 
 with power to act until the next meeting in all matters of 
 emergency for the best interest of the Union party of East 
 Tennessee. This committee had large discretionary pow- 
 ers. No record was made of this action. It was intended 
 that this should be a secret executive committee. But few 
 persons, even among the members of the convention, knew 
 that there was such a committee. It was composed of C. 
 F. Trigg, John Williams, Abner G. Jackson, John M. 
 Fleming and myself — all of Knoxville. The committee 
 held two or three, or, possibly, more meetings, always in 
 secret. One of these was held in the country at the resi- 
 dence of Mr. Abner G. Jackson. If it had been known 
 that we belonged to such a committee and that we were 
 holding secret meetings, it certainly would have lead to 
 our arrest. All that the committee ever did, or attempted, 
 
364 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 was to meet and consult together, and exert their influence 
 with Union men for the preservation of peace and order. 
 
 The Greeneville Convention was one of the most notable 
 meetings ever held in the United States. Indeed, it is 
 without an analogy. The state had then, by a vote of 
 sixty-four thousand majority, assumed its place as a mem- 
 ber of the Southern Confederacy. War then existed be- 
 tween the parent government and its seceding members. 
 The Confederacy had armies in the field, able to enforce 
 obedience and submission to its laws everywhere within 
 its dominions. And yet, in the face of these facts, and in 
 the very presence of the armies of the revolutionary gov- 
 ernment, this convention assembled, and both the extrem- 
 ists and the conservatives proceeded solemnly to declare that 
 "the action of the state legislature in passing the so-called 
 'Declaration of Independence ;' in forming a 'Military 
 League' with the Confederate States, and in adopting other 
 acts looking to the separation of the State of Tennessee 
 from the government of the United States, is (was) un- 
 constitutional and illegal, and, therefore, not binding on us 
 (them) as loyal citizens." 
 
 The members of the convention then proceeded one step 
 further, and boldly claimed the right to determine their 
 own "destiny," in choosing the government to which they 
 would give their services and their allegiance. Accord- 
 ingly, they proceeded to take steps for the organization, 
 upon obtaining the consent of the legislature, of a new 
 state in the heart of the South, which state was to be in 
 harmony with that of the United States. That irresistible 
 force prevented the accomplishment of this daring pur- 
 pose, does not in the least lessen its surpassing boldness. 
 The spirit of these declarations was faithfully kept by 
 these brave, patriotic people. When it was found that a 
 loyal state could not be formed, true to the claim made by 
 them of "the right to determine their own destiny," more 
 than thirty thousand of them left their homes (as refu- 
 
The Knoxville-Greeneville Convention of 1861. 365 
 
 gees) and joined the federal army. Thus they kept the 
 pledge they made to their country. 
 
 Nearly three years after the adjournment of the Greene- 
 ville Convention, it was again called together in Knoxville, 
 in the spring of 1864. Of the proceedings of this conven- 
 tion I have given an account elsewhere. It is sufficient to 
 say that it was a divided body, and after a four days' 
 session, without doing anything, a motion to adjourn 
 sine die was carried.^ 
 
 There was something exceedingly appropriate in the 
 selection of Greeneville as the second place of meeting of 
 the patriots of East Tennessee. This was one of the oldest 
 towns of the state. The cradle of the state was in that 
 region. From that region had gone forth, in 1780, the 
 heroes of King's Mountain. Here had been, at one time, 
 the capitol of the once famous State of Franklin, Here 
 John Sevier, its governor, had tried to bring into form 
 and vigorous life the discordant elements of his revolu- 
 tionary state. In this region had settled that splendid 
 Covenanter race, whose virtues still adorn its population 
 even after the lapse of more than a hundred years. In 
 this place the glorious memories of the past crowded thick 
 and fast upon the mind. It was full of the inspiration of 
 patriotism. Everywhere could be seen the descendants of 
 revolutionary heroes. And only a few miles away to the 
 southward the Great Smoky Mountains rose up and 
 stretched away in matchless grandeur and sublimity, 
 immovable and unchangeable, typical of the stedfastness 
 of the brave Covenanter people who dwelt in the valleys 
 spreading out from their base. 
 
 ^ The " Declaration of Grievances " and the resolutions finally adopted 
 by the Greeneville Convention, together with the "Memorial" sent to the 
 legislature, and a list of the delegates present will be found in Appendix 
 A to this volume. 
 
366 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 BURNING THE BRIDGES. 
 
 Unpleasant condition of Union people of East Tennessee after the secession 
 of state— Commenced going North for safety— W. B. Carter proposes 
 to the President and General McClellan to burn all railroad bridges in 
 East Tennessee— Approved by them— Relief of Union people prom- 
 ised — General Robert Anderson appointed to command an expedition 
 for this purpose— Succeeded by General Sherman— Expedition under 
 General Thomas starts for East Tennessee — Is recalled — Carter author- 
 ized to burn bridges — Starts to Tennessee — Selects his assistants — 
 Night of 8th of November the time — Carter ignorant that Thomas had 
 been recalled — Plan executed in part — Chickamauga bridges, Hiwas- 
 see bridge, Lick Creek bridge, Watauga bridge all burned — Names in 
 part of persons engaged — Failure as to four bridges — Resistance and 
 fight at Strawberry Plains bridge — Gathering of citizens with arms 
 at Watauga — Gathering in Sevier county — Folly of burning these 
 bridges. 
 
 On the adjournment of the Greeneville Convention there 
 was a short lull in the stormy excitement among the 
 Union people of East Tennessee. The action of that body 
 in refusing to advise the organization and equipment of 
 the Union men for war had a soothing effect. They at 
 once began to resume their usual and peaceful avocations. 
 With one mind they were determined not to join the Con- 
 federate army, and this resolution was faithfully kept. It 
 is a remarkable attestation of their firmness and loyalty 
 that perhaps not five per cent of these men ever wavered 
 in their course or joined the Confederacy after the seces- 
 sion of the state in June, 1861. Many of them, on the 
 other hand, were reluctant to take up arms against their 
 neighbors and kinsmen in the Southern army. But there 
 was one point on which they all agreed, and that was in a 
 firm and immutable resolution never under any circum- 
 stances to fire a hostile shot at the flag of their country. 
 Many of them were willing, if permitted to do so, to remain 
 
Burning the Bridges, 367 
 
 at home in peace, quiet spectators of the great conflict in 
 which they could not follow their patriotic instincts. But 
 even this poor privilege was soon denied them. 
 
 The triumph of the secessionists in the June election, 
 and the presence of Southern troops at many important 
 points in East Tennessee, gave high confidence to their adher- 
 ents. These served to encourage many of them to extreme 
 arrogance in their demeanor toward the Union men. This 
 feeling was greatly intensified by the first victory at Bull 
 Run. This seemed not only to move their joy, but to stir 
 up within them all the ill-feeling which the war had en- 
 gendered. In country districts they became especially in- 
 sulting to the Union men. Now and then the best and 
 the most honorable Confederates did not consider it de- 
 grading to inform on their Union neighbors. Sometimes 
 the most sacred ties of friendship and even of kinship were 
 disregarded. Men hitherto of mildest disposition not un- 
 frequently seemed to become anxious for blood. This is one 
 of the phenomena of the war which I could never under- 
 stand. And only those who witnessed it, can ever realize 
 the intensity of this feeling. 
 
 Gradually the fact became apparent to the Union men 
 that they were under the dominion of a power hostile to 
 their opinions. They were denounced as "tories," as 
 "Lincolnites" and as cowards. Their situation was be- 
 coming unbearable. So, they began at last to cast their 
 eyes in the direction of Kentucky, as an asylum of safety. 
 Senator Johnson had left in June. Mr. Nelson made an 
 attempt to reach the North early in August, but had been 
 intercepted and arrested in South "West Virginia, and sent 
 to Richmond. Mr. Maynard had managed to be in Scott 
 county, bordering on Kentucky, on the day of the state 
 election for members of congress, on the first Thursday of 
 August. In the afternoon he quietly took his horse, and 
 the next morning was safely beyond the state border. 
 Mr. George W. Bridges was elected a member of congress 
 from the 3d district. He too started North after the elec- 
 
368 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 tion by nearly the same route taken by Mr. Maynard, but 
 he was enticed back to see a dying wife, as was pretended, 
 and was arrested. Andrew J. Clements was elected from 
 the 4th district and managed to get North. He took his 
 seat in the next congress. 
 
 All these had started North as members of congress, and 
 expected soon to return to their families. Mr. James P. 
 Carter had accompanied Mr. Johnson in his flight in June. 
 In the latter part of June, or early in July, Rev. "William 
 B. Carter also went North to try and procure some kind of 
 relief for the people of East Tennessee. 
 
 On the first Thursday of August, 1861, the real flight 
 of Union men from East Tennessee commenced. On that 
 day Felix A. Reeve, then a young man, started North, by 
 way of Nashville and Louisville, with the flxed purpose of 
 never returning if the Southern Confederacy should be 
 successful. A little more than two years after this, how- 
 ever, he did return at the head of the Eighth Regiment of 
 Tennessee Infantry. 
 
 The first refugee unquestionably was Fred. Heiskell, of 
 Knox county. The very day the firing on Sumter took 
 place he commenced preparing to go North. On the 18th 
 of April he was in Louisville . On the 20th or 21st he enlisted 
 in Colonel W. W. Woodruff's First Kentucky Regiment. 
 He served throughout the war, and was a brave and faith- 
 ful soldier. He is a brother of Hon. J. B. Heiskell, of 
 Memphis. 
 
 Very soon after the flight of Mr. Reeve, Robert K. Byrd, 
 and others from Roane county, also left their homes as ex- 
 iles. Gradually the disposition to leave spread through all 
 the counties of East Tennessee. So, there came to be a 
 constant stream of refugees silently working their way by 
 night, through the wide expanse of mountains separating 
 East Tennessee from the thickly settled parts of Kentucky. 
 Many of these left without any settled purpose as to what 
 they were to do when they reached their destination. They 
 fled from what they regarded as a present and terrible 
 
Burning the Bridges. 369 
 
 danger. Anything that could befall them was better than 
 their condition at home. In Kentucky there would be at 
 least freedom of opinion. At home, even the pure and ex- 
 hilarating air wafted from the very mountain tops, now 
 seemed tainted, and became hot and stifling to these sturdy 
 sons of freedom. Soon there were thousands of these 
 wanderers in Kentucky. Before autumn had passed away 
 the First Tennessee Infantry, with Robert K. Byrd as 
 Colonel, was organized and equipped. And then followed 
 in rapid succession, the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth and 
 Sixth Regiments, and still others from time to time till the 
 close of the war. 
 
 The condition of the Union men remaining in East Ten- 
 nessee was day by day becoming more disagreeable. Ar- 
 rests and imprisonments had commenced. Dr. John W. 
 Thornburgh and H. C. Jarvis, for no crime, except being 
 Union men, were arrested and carried to Nashville for 
 trial and imprisonment on a charge of treason, though 
 that place was outside of and quite remote from the 
 judicial district in which their alleged offenses were com- 
 mitted. Both were afterwards members of the Tennessee 
 legislature. 
 
 It was now becoming evident that a reign of terror if not 
 one of persecution had been inaugurated, and there was no 
 safety for loyal men living in the country, except in flight. 
 There were many good men in the secession party who did 
 all they could to prevent this state of things. Unfortu- 
 nately in civil revolutions the voice of justice and mercy 
 is low and feeble, while the cry for vengeance is uttered 
 in thunder tones. Those who would have protected the 
 Union men, and they were many, were powerless. Violent 
 men were in the ascendant. The wise and humane soon 
 lost all influence. 
 
 At an early day steps were taken to prevent the escape of 
 Union men. Every pass in the mountains, on the Ken- 
 tucky border, was occupied and guarded. Confederate 
 24 
 
370 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 soldiers constantly patrolled the foot of the mountains 
 from the base of the Blue Ridge, in Virginia, to the 
 western slope of the Cumberland, in Middle Tennessee. 
 But men fleeing for freedom were alert and lynx-eyed. 
 Darkness would creep over the mountains, and while the 
 Confederate soldiers slept, or dozed at their posts, cunning 
 guides, wide awake and soft of tread as panthers, were 
 leading the refugees in silence along some unexpected 
 way, or scaling beetling steeps, impassable except to men 
 whose lives depend on present strength, coolness and 
 daring. Thus Camp Dick Robinson, the place of rendez- 
 vous, in Kentucky, was constantly recruited by East Ten- 
 nessee exiles during the autumn of 1861. 
 
 But still more stirring events were in waiting. As be- 
 fore stated, William B, Carter, who had been an active 
 and an able Union leader, left East Tennessee about the 
 first of July, 1861, for the purpose of going North, to see 
 what could be done for the relief of East Tennessee. 
 
 Whatever may have been the scheme hidden away in 
 his own bosom at that time, if there was any such, it is 
 certain that before the months of autumn passed a daring 
 one was agitating his restless mind. In September he 
 went to Washington and was admitted to an interview 
 with Mr. Lincoln, Mr. Seward and General McClellan, 
 in reference to the relief of East Tennessee. He sug- 
 gested to them a plan by which this relief could come. 
 This was by the simultaneous destruction of all the 
 bridges on the East Tennessee and Georgia Railroad, and 
 on the East Tennessee and Virginia road, between Bridge- 
 port and Bristol, a distance of 270 miles, and also a long 
 bridge over the Tennessee at Bridgeport, Alabama, on the 
 Memphis and Charleston road. This was the main line 
 connecting Memphis and Nashville with Richmond, by 
 which the Confederate army in Virginia secured its sup- 
 plies and re-enforcements. This road, or the several roads 
 forming one main line, was deemed vital to the Southern 
 cause. Simultaneously with the destruction of the bridges 
 
Burning the Bridges. 371 
 
 on this important line, there was to be a military expedi- 
 tion sent into East Tennessee. An army was to be con- 
 centrated on the border of Tennessee, and was to move on 
 Knoxville as soon as the bridges were destroyed, or rather, 
 the two things were to be in process of execution at the 
 same time, the object being to seize the road and con- 
 trol it. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln at once entered warmly into the scheme. 
 Mr, Seward and General McClellan also approved it. The 
 secretary of state furnished Mr. Carter $2,600 with which 
 to secure the destruction of the bridges — certainly a very 
 small sum for such an enterprise. General McClellan 
 promised to aid in the movement by sending an army into 
 East Tennessee as soon as possible. He said he would 
 keep the Confederate army in Virginia so busy that it 
 could not send troops to East Tennessee to aid in defend- 
 ing its lines of communication.^ He also said that the 
 Federal army in Louisville would do the same in reference 
 to the Confederate army in Middle Tennessee. 
 
 An expedition into East Tennessee had early been a 
 favorite idea with Mr. Lincoln. He seemed to possess in- 
 tuitive military genius. Soon after the battle of Bull Run 
 he made his celebrated "memorandum" as to military 
 affairs, in which he suggested a military expedition from 
 Cincinnati into East Tennessee. 
 
 In the latter part of September, Mr. Lincoln went to the 
 War Department, and left another memorandum, which 
 was a quasi order, in which he said among other things : 
 
 "On or about the 5th of October (the exact date to be 
 determined hereafter) I wish a movement made to seize 
 and hold a point on the railroad connecting Virginia and 
 Tennessee, near the mountain pass called 'Cumberland 
 Gap.' "2 
 
 ' The above facts were communicated to me orally by Mr. Carter, Sep- 
 tember 8, 1891, and very soon afterwards reduced to writing by me. 
 
 * Cumberland Gap is distant at the nearest point, about forty miles from 
 the railroad which was to be seized, and sixty miles from Knoxville. 
 
372 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 In every possible way, Mr. Lincoln manifested his deep 
 sympathy with the loyal people of East Tennessee. As 
 early as August he selected General Robert Anderson, as 
 we have seen, of Fort Sumter fame, to take charge of this 
 enterprise. General Anderson was not only a brave and 
 an able soldier, but he had the advantage of being a native 
 of Kentucky, which seemed to give him peculiar fitness 
 for command in a state where great tact, discretion and 
 popularity were required at that time. Very soon also 
 Samuel P. Carter, a lieutenant in the navy, was made a 
 brigadier-general and sent to Kentucky. General Carter 
 was a brother of William B. Carter. The fact that he was 
 a native of East Tennessee no doubt had much to do with 
 his selection to aid in the contemplated expedition, for he 
 knew much of the people as well as the country. His 
 subsequent history during the war shows the wisdom of 
 his selection.^ 
 
 General Anderson retained his command only a short 
 time. The strain on his nervous system during the bom- 
 bardment of Sumter had been so great that he never re- 
 covered from it. He found himself totally unfit for a com- 
 mand beset with the perplexities and grave responsibili- 
 ties that he met in his native state. The Confederates 
 under General Leonidas Polk had seized Columbus ; Gen- 
 eral Buckner had just occupied Bowling Green, and Gen- 
 eral F. K, Zollicoffer was in possession of Cumberland 
 Gap, on the border of Tennessee and Kentucky. Thus 
 they held a line in the southern part of Kentucky from the 
 Mississippi to the Virginia border. General Anderson had 
 no army. There were a few raw Tennessee recruits at 
 Camp Dick Robinson, a few companies of home guards 
 here and there ; Colonel W. W. Woodruff had raised a 
 regiment of Kentuckians, and General L. H. Rousseau 
 had raised and organized his legion, consisting of two or 
 
 * He arose to the rank of major-general, and bore an honorable part 
 throughout the entire war. At its close he returned to the navy, where he 
 rose by successive grades to the rank of commodore. 
 
Burning the Bridges. 373 
 
 three regiments, at JefFersonville, in the State of Indiana. 
 There were probably other embryo regiments. With these 
 inadequate forces, probably in all not amounting to 20,000 
 men, he had to hold the country from the mouth of the 
 Sandy to Paducah. In bad health and probably in despair 
 at the disparity between the means at command and the 
 magnitude of the work to be done, on the 8th of October, 
 General Anderson relinquished his command, and turned 
 it over to General W. T. Sherman. 
 
 On the 5th of September, General Grant having discov- 
 ered by a reconnoissance that Columbus was lost, quietly 
 organized a force, and sailed up the Ohio River to the 
 mouth of the Tennessee, at Paducah, which place he seized 
 and fortified. The importance of this step may be seen 
 from the letter of General Buckner to the war department, 
 at Richmond, a few days later, in which he says: "Our 
 possession of Columbus is already neutralized by that of 
 Paducah." 
 
 By this time the loyal legislature of Kentucky, which 
 had been elected in August, indignant at the invasion of 
 her soil by armies claiming to act under the authority of a 
 foreign government, abandoned the delusion of neutrality, 
 and by unmistakable acts began to take sides with the 
 Union. It was widely circulated that, on the 20th of Sep- 
 tember, the state guards — the militia which General Buck- 
 ner had been organizing — would have a "camp drill" at 
 Lexington. It was believed that this was to be a signal 
 for a general rising of the Kentucky secessionists, who, 
 aided by Buckner and ZollicofFer's forces, were to seize 
 Lexington, Frankfort and Louisville, and overthrow the 
 legislature. The loyal members of that body, not trusting 
 Governor Beriah Magoffin, who was known to be a seces- 
 sionist, requested General Thomas, at Camp Dick Robin- 
 son, to send a regiment to Lexington, in advance of the 
 advertised camp drill "fully prepared for a fight." Gen- 
 
 » Nicolay & Hay's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. V, pp. 50, 51. 
 
374 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 eral Thomas sent Colonel Thomas E. Bramlette with his 
 regiment, which reached the Lexington Fair Ground on 
 the night of September 19th, the night before the proposed 
 "drill." John C. Breckenridge, Humphrey Marshall, and 
 other leaders, who were in Lexington to aid, no doubt, in 
 the contemplated rising, were surprised and startled by the 
 sudden appearance of Bramlette and his troops, and fled 
 precipitately for safety from arrest, A few days after this 
 affair, Breckenridge and William Preston made their ap- 
 pearance in Knoxville as refugees from their home in Ken- 
 tucky, having come through the mountains by way of 
 Cumberland Gap. Knoxville soon became a kind of ren- 
 dezvous for the young chivalry of the Blue Grass region. 
 Not many months after this, the noted John Morgan, with 
 his command, also made his appearance there. 
 
 The situation in Kentucky, in October, 1861, was ex- 
 tremely critical for the small Union forces in that state. 
 General Sherman says: "It was manifest that the young 
 men were generally inclined to the cause of the South, 
 while the older men of property wanted to be let alone — 
 i. e., to remain neutral." * 
 
 He further says he was "all the time expecting that 
 Sidney Johnston — who was a real general — would unite his 
 forces with Zollicofifer, and fall on Thomas at Dick Robin- 
 son, or McCook at Nolin. Had he done so in October, 1861, 
 he would have walked into Louisville, and a vital part of 
 the population would have hailed him as a deliverer. "Why 
 he did not, was to me a mystery then and is now ; for I 
 know he saw the move, and had his wagons loaded at one 
 time for a start toward Frankfort, passing between our 
 two camps . " ^ 
 
 Such was the condition of military affairs in Kentucky, 
 in November, 1861, when the plan of burning the bridges 
 in Tennessee was put in execution. 
 
 The general outlines of the attempt to burn the bridges 
 
 > "Memoirs," Vol. I, p. 199. * Id., p. 200. 
 
Burning the Bridges. 375 
 
 are briefly set forth in a report made to the house of repre- 
 sentatives, January 30, 1891, by the committee on invalid 
 pensions. That report says : 
 
 " Soon after General George H. Thomas took command 
 of the United States forces in South-eastern Kentucky in 
 September, 1861, he began preparations for a campaign, 
 with Knoxville, Tennessee, as its objective point, hoping 
 to be able to occupy and hold that city, thus cutting the 
 railroad communications between Richmond and the South- 
 west through East Tennessee. The importance of occupy- 
 ing this section at that stage of the war, in a military 
 point of view, was well understood, not only by General 
 Thomas, but also by the President and General McClellan, 
 then commanding the army. This subject formed the 
 basis of a conference in September, 1861, between General 
 Thomas, General S. P. Carter, Andrew Johnson and Hor- 
 ace Maynard, of Tennessee, when the feasibility of the 
 burning of the aforesaid railroad bridges was agreed 
 upon. 
 
 "The government had placed in the hands of Andrew 
 Johnson a considerable sum of money, to be used in the 
 defense of East Tennessee, and General Thomas expected 
 to obtain from the former a sufl&cient amount to carry out 
 the plan agreed upon. 
 
 "But in this he was disappointed ; and being unwilling 
 to abandon his campaign, dispatched one William B. 
 Carter, a prominent Union man of that section, to Wash- 
 ington, with a communication to General McClellan re- 
 garding this matter. The proposition received the favor- 
 able consideration of the latter, as well as Secretary 
 Seward and the President, and Mr. Carter returned to 
 General Thomas' headquarters at Camp Dick Robinson, 
 and soon received instructions to carry out the latter 's 
 plans, the details of which were left to Carter's judgment. 
 Mr. Carter, accompanied by two army officers detailed for 
 that purpose, entered upon his duties after a long and 
 perilous journey, by selecting from the known Union men 
 
376 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 of the section through which the railroad ran six assist- 
 ants, who in turn obtained a sufficient number of trusty- 
 persons to carry into execution the work before him. The 
 night of November 8th was selected as the time when the 
 destruction of the bridges should take place, and the pro- 
 gramme was carried out to perfection at the appointed 
 time." 
 
 In the conversation with Mr. W. B. Carter, previously- 
 referred to, he said that he was present at an interview 
 between Generals Sherman, Thomas and S. B. Carter, in 
 the fall of 1861, presumably at Camp Dick Robinson, in 
 which the question of an expedition into East Tennessee 
 in connection with the burning of bridges was fully dis- 
 cussed. General Sherman opposed the expedition and 
 gave his reasons for his opposition. When he concluded, 
 General Thomas presented his reasons for favoring the ex- 
 pedition, and answered the objections offered by General 
 Sherman. When he finished, Sherman, with manly hon- 
 esty, confessed that Thomas had converted him to his 
 views, and he accordingly ordered him (Thomas) "to push 
 on an expedition." 
 
 General Sherman, in a letter published in the congres- 
 sional report quoted above, dated February 21, 1890, ad- 
 dressed probably to Mr. Carter, but the report is silent on 
 this point, says : 
 
 " . . . The movement on Knoxville in 1861 was a di- 
 vergent one at first, and was by me afterwards changed to 
 one of concentration, when Thomas was recalled, after 
 having gone but a short distance." 
 
 Soon after this, as we shall see more fully hereafter. 
 General Sherman changed his mind as to the expediency 
 of this "divergent movement," as he called it. General 
 Thomas, from the first, was greatly, indeed earnestly, in 
 favor of it. On every suitable occasion, he urged the 
 matter on the attention of his superiors ; first on Ander- 
 son, while he was in command ; then on Sherman, his suc- 
 cessor. On October 4th, he asked General Anderson for 
 
Burning the Bridges. 377 
 
 "four good regiments, with transportation and ammuni- 
 tion." He said that, if he could get such a force, and be 
 ready to march in ten days from that time, he could seize 
 the railroad at Knoxville. 
 
 In somewhat curious contrast to the foregoing. Governor 
 Harris, of Tennessee, was calling at that very time on the 
 Confederate secretary of war for "twelve or fourteen thou- 
 sand men" for East Tennessee, to crush out the rebellion 
 there, which he thought "could be done, without firing 
 a gun, while a smaller force may involve us in scenes of 
 blood that will take long years to heal." 
 
 In a letter of Thomas to Sherman, dated November 
 6th, he once more asked for four regiments, with which to 
 invade East Tennessee. After the consultation between 
 these two Generals in October, which resulted in Sherman 
 directing Thomas to proceed with his expedition into East 
 Tennessee, the latter made preparations to carry out what 
 he so much desired. 
 
 At the time agreed upon, General Thomas was to be on 
 the border of Tennessee, perhaps at Cumberland Gap, or 
 south of it, with his army, and was, on the burning of the 
 bridges, to make a hurried march to Knoxville and seize 
 the railroads. On the 18th or 19th of October, Mr. Carter 
 left Camp Dick Robinson for East Tennessee, to execute his 
 part of the important movement. Thomas was to leave 
 his camp with his army about the 22d or 23d. In the 
 meantime General Zollicoffer made an advance with his 
 army in the direction of Wild Cat, about forty-five miles 
 south of Camp Dick Robinson. This advance of Zollicoffer 
 rendered it necessary for Thomas to set out three or four 
 days earlier than he expected.^ He met Zollicoffer at Wild 
 Cat, where a sharp little fight took place, in which Zolli- 
 coffer was repulsed and driven back. Thomas, with his 
 little army of only a few regiments, then moved on to 
 London, about fifty-five miles south of Dick Robinson, on 
 
 1 Manuscript letter of W. B. Carter, of September 15, 1891, to author. 
 
378 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 his way toward Knoxville. Here he was arrested in his 
 march by command of General Sherman, and ordered to 
 retrace his steps, which he most reluctantly did. 
 
 Thus the expedition into East Tennessee, for the relief 
 of the loyal people, was indefinitely postponed. General 
 Sherman, in the letter already quoted, speaks of the time 
 "when Thomas was recalled after having gone but a short 
 distance." Sherman was too brave and frank for any con- 
 cealment about his actions or opinions. He was at first 
 favorable to this enterprise. Then he changed his mind 
 and revoked his order to Thomas to advance. In fact, his 
 policy, as avowed by himself, was one of "concentration," 
 with the view of operating in the direction of Columbus 
 and Bowling Green, In a letter, dated February 3, 1862, 
 addressed to the Hon. John Sherman, published in the 
 "Century," for January, 1893, he says: "Until these 
 places (Bowling Green and Columbus) are reduced it will 
 not do to advance far into Tennessee, and I doubt if it will 
 be done. East Tennessee can not exercise much influence 
 on the final result. "West Tennessee is more important, as 
 without the navigation of the Mississippi all commercial 
 interests will lean to the Southern cause. . . ." 
 
 "When General Thomas was halted at London in his 
 movement toward Knoxville, Mr. W. B. Carter, as we have 
 seen, had been in East Tennessee several days. He was 
 too far off to receive news of the change of plans. Indeed, he 
 was at that very time engaged in making his final arrange- 
 ments for the destruction of the bridges. It was too late 
 to countermand his orders. His agents were already at 
 or near their respective points of duty, only waiting for the 
 appointed night to arrive. Even if a message could have 
 reached Mr. Carter, it was too late to arrest those selected 
 to burn the bridges. Carter was in fact profoundly igno- 
 rant of the change of plans, and knew nothing of this un- 
 til his return from Tennessee to Kentucky, several days 
 after the time fixed for their execution. 
 
 There were nine important bridges which were included 
 
Burning the Bridges. 379 
 
 in the plan of destruction. Two of these, the one over 
 the Tennessee at Loudon, and the other over the Ten- 
 nessee at Bridgeport, Alabama, on the Nashville and Chat- 
 tanooga and also on the Memphis and Charleston roads, 
 were very long and costly structures. The others were 
 not so valuable. Five of the nine were destroyed. These 
 were the bridges over the Holston, at Union Depot, that 
 over Lick Creek west of Greeneville, one over the Hiwassee 
 River at Charleston, Tennessee, and two over Chickamauga 
 Creek, not far from Chattanooga. 
 
 The entire execution of the plan for their destruction was 
 left to the discretion of Mr. Carter. As we have seen, two 
 officers of the army, namely, Captain "William Cross and 
 Captain David Fry, of Greene county, Tennessee, were de- 
 tailed to aid him. He selected in the neighborhood of each 
 of the bridges to be burned, a leader for the work to be 
 done in that neighborhood, and these leaders selected their 
 own assistants, generally five or six more persons. Mr. 
 Carter himself came to Emory River at the house of a Mr. 
 Crow, near Mr. De Armond's, two or three miles from 
 Kingston. He was the very man for such an enterprise — 
 cool, cunning, sagacious and brave. 
 
 But few of the persons connected with these daring en- 
 terprises were ever found out by the public. At the time, 
 and for nearly two years afterwards, the danger of punish- 
 ment by the Confederate authorities constituted a sufficient 
 reason for the concealment of their names. But that reason 
 long since ceased to have any force. And yet their names, 
 with few exceptions, are unknown to the public to-day. 
 Mr. Carter can not reveal them, being bound by honor 
 not to do so.^ But the others are not under the same bond 
 of secrecy. I have succeeded in getting most of the names, 
 with permission from those still living to publish them. 
 
 The destruction of the bridges in lower East Tennessee, 
 from the Hiwassee River to Bridgeport, was wisely left to 
 
 1 Manuscript letter of April 11, 1895. 
 
380 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the sole discretion of Mr. A. M. Gate, of Bradley county, 
 subsequently a state senator. He was a prudent, sagacious 
 man, and a citizen of high character and standing. His 
 four different enterprises were managed with such admira- 
 ble skill and secrecy that for thirty-five years no one ever 
 suspected him of any agency in them. Until quite re- 
 cently the matter was as great a mystery in that region as 
 it was the next morning after it occurred. 
 
 The great bridge over the Tennessee, at Bridgeport, was 
 to have been burned by R. B. Rogan and James D. 
 Keener. They went to the bridge, but, finding it heavily 
 guarded by Confederate soldiers, abandoned the attempt 
 and returned home. Mr. Keener still lives and resides 
 near Chattanooga. Mr. W. T. Cate, a brother of A. M. 
 Cate, and W. H. Crowder alone burned the two bridges 
 over Chickamauga Creek, which were very close together, 
 one on the East Tennessee and Georgia road, and the 
 other on the Western and Atlantic. The bridge over the 
 Hiwassee River was burned by A. M. Cate, the general 
 leader, by Adam Thomas, Jesse F. Cleveland and his son 
 Eli, and by Thomas L. Cate, a brother of A. M. Cate. 
 All these are dead, except Thomas L. Cate, who lives in 
 Cleveland, Tennessee, but is engaged in banking in Chat- 
 tanooga. He stands deservedly high every way, and be- 
 longs to one of the largest and most influential families in 
 East Tennessee. If there were any peculiar or exciting 
 incidents connected with the destruction of either of these 
 bridges, I have no information on the subject. As far as 
 I have gone, the facts given are absolutely authentic. No 
 one of these persons has ever been suspected even by 
 their best friends.^ There must have been admirable 
 sagacity and discretion in the execution of these hazardous 
 and daring enterprises. Mr. A. M. Cate displayed in them 
 qualities fitted for a successful general in the field. 
 
 After the most diligent inquiry, extending through two 
 
 ^ Quite recently a pamphlet has been published giving an account of the 
 burning of these bridges. 
 
Burning the Bridges. 381 
 
 or three years, I have not been able to obtain any reliable 
 information in reference to the long bridge over the Ten- 
 nessee at Loudon, No one in the vicinity seems to know 
 anything about any attempt having been made to burn 
 that structure. Mr. Carter knows, but declines to disclose 
 any names. That bridge was the second in importance 
 of all the nine doomed to destruction. It was included in 
 the plan, and persons were selected to destroy it, and no 
 doubt they made some kind of an attempt to carry out 
 their orders. But who were these persons? 
 
 From certain information I have obtained, I think it 
 probable that Captain William Cross, of Scott county, 
 was detailed to burn this bridge. If so, finding it 
 guarded, he probably made no efi'ort to do so. He died 
 several years ago. While alive he seems to have been 
 reticent about it, as A. M. Cate and his associates always 
 were. I cannot ascertain that he ever told anyone that he 
 was connected with an attempt to destroy this bridge, 
 though he did tell his family that he was connected with 
 bridge burning. 
 
 The next bridge on the line was the one on the Holston, 
 at Strawberry Plains, fifteen miles east of Knoxville. Will- 
 iam C. Pickens, of Sevier county, was the leader selected 
 to destroy this bridge. He was a bold, dashing, reckless, 
 good-natured fellow, who delighted in just such adventures 
 as this. His associates were Daniel M. Ray, James Mont- 
 gomery, Abe Smith, B. F. Franklin, White Underdown, 
 William Montgomery, Elijah Gamble, and a father and 
 a son — the son objecting to the mention of either his 
 father's or his own name. All these men were from 
 Sevier county. They made no careful examination of the 
 premises in advance, and seemed to have known but little 
 about it. If they had known the fact that a guard was 
 stationed at the eastern end of the bridge, doubtless the 
 attempt would have been made at the other end. 
 
 I have conversed with two of the men engaged in this 
 enterprise, and read the account given by a third, and they 
 
382 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 somewhat differ as to details, but agree as to the main 
 facts. 
 
 Having left their horses in charge of two of their num- 
 ber, they approached the bridge by going along the bank 
 of the river until they reached the abutment. There two 
 or more of the party scrambled up to the top of the 
 bridge, when Pickens struck a light. No sooner had he 
 done this than the sharp crack of a gun rang out on 
 the night air, and Pickens fell wounded in the thigh. 
 Thereupon, James Keelin, the guardsman, seized him, 
 and a desperate struggle ensued. One of the Montgomerys, 
 seeing this struggle, rushed to the assistance of his com- 
 panion with a huge home-made knife twelve or fifteen 
 inches long. In the darkness, the light having gone out, 
 mistaking Pickens for Keelin, he commenced cutting him 
 with blind fury. With one blow he nearly severed his 
 hand from his arm, and probably inflicted other wounds. 
 By this time others had gotten upon the bridge ; Keelin 
 was shot, or was supposed to be, and was either thrown 
 down the embankment or rolled down it, supposed by those 
 above to have been killed. This was a mistake, for no 
 sooner did he touch the earth below than he sprang to his 
 feet, and ran for safety as fast as he could, two of the 
 party who were still below firing their guns at him as he 
 ran. 
 
 Now the party was in possession of the bridge. But to 
 their consternation, when they sought for matches, not one 
 could be found. Pickens had the only matches brought 
 by the party, and when the gun was fired, or in the 
 subsequent struggle, the box containing them fell from his 
 hands and dropped below. So, no fire could be applied to 
 the bridge. It was proposed by some one to go to some of 
 the neighboring houses and procure fire, but it was plain 
 that this would be the means of advertising who they 
 were. All that remained for them to do was to abandon 
 the enterprise. This they reluctantly did at last. Though 
 Pickens was wounded in two or more places, he was too 
 
Burning the Bridges, 383 
 
 plucky to give up. He was mounted behind a companion 
 and the party rode off to Dan. Keener's, several miles 
 away, where they spent the next day, and where medical 
 assistance was procured. Here he was placed on a sled, 
 concealed with corn fodder, and hauled back into the moun- 
 tains, where he remained with occasional changes of place of 
 concealment, until the following January, when he and his 
 associates were piloted across the mountains into Ken- 
 tucky. Here he and others raised the Third Tennessee 
 Cavalry, and he became its first colonel. Dr. Jas. H. 
 Ellis, of Trundles' X Roads, a worthy gentleman and a 
 good physician, from whom I obtained a part of my infor- 
 mation, dressed the wounds of Pickens the next day after, 
 the attempt on the bridge, at the house of Keener, and 
 attended him afterwards. 
 
 There has been much sensational matter published in 
 reference to this attempt to burn the Strawberry Plains 
 bridge. Keelin became a great hero in the South for the 
 time being. It was represented that he alone had resisted 
 and driven ofif a whole company — an indefinite number of 
 men — and had nearly cut Pickens to pieces. There is no 
 question as to the heroic defense of the bridge made by 
 him, and in one sense he alone saved it. But notwith- 
 standing his bravery, the bridge would have been de- 
 stroyed in spite of him, but for the loss of the box of 
 matches. Keelin only recently died at Bristol, Tennes- 
 see. Colonel Pickens died a few years after the close of 
 the war. 
 
 Of the men engaged in the enterprise, two of them be- 
 came colonels in the' Federal army, D. M. Ray, of the Second 
 Tennessee Cavalry, and W. C. Pickens, of the Third; W. 
 W. Montgomery, J. A. Montgomery and one other became 
 captains ; White Underdown and Elijah Gamble became 
 lieutenants, and another became a sergeant. 
 
 The foregoing is a substantially correct account of this 
 aflfair as given by the survivors. 
 
 I copy from the statement of Colonel Ray an account 
 
384 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 of their treatment while in the mountains by the good 
 Union men : 
 
 "While in this mountain retreat they" (the party of 
 bridge burners) "were joined by Parson Brownlow and 
 Rev. James Cummings, who were compelled to flee from 
 their homes on account of their Union sentiments. Every 
 member of this little band of fugitives should ever re- 
 member with feelings of gratitude the loyal citizens of 
 Weir's Cove. Every man, woman and child there was 
 true to their country's flag, and during the dark hour of 
 danger when they were in hiding, carried provisions and 
 kept them supplied with everything they needed." 
 
 The next bridge marked for destruction was the one 
 over Lick Creek, in Greene county, fifteen miles west of 
 Greeneville. This stream is long and narrow, with broad, 
 flat, marshy meadow lands on either bank. Its water is 
 turbid and sluggish. It has become famous by reason 
 of the facts that connected with its name there were five 
 lamentable tragedies early in the Civil War which will 
 never be forgotten. 
 
 Captain David Fry, of the Second Tennessee Infantry, was 
 the leader of the party which burned this bridge. He was 
 a brave, daring man, just suited for such an undertaking. 
 It is very difiicult to ascertain certainly who his assistants 
 were, because all of them are dead, five of them having died 
 on the gallows soon afterwards. It is, however, almost cer- 
 tain that Jacob Harmon and his son, Thomas Harmon, Jacob 
 M. Hensie, Henry Fry, Hugh A. Self, A. C. Hawn and 
 Harrison Self were with Captain Fry at the burning of the 
 bridge. I have heard of no striking incident immediately 
 connected with its destruction. 
 
 There were two bridges on the extreme eastern end of 
 the railroad line that were selected for destruction. These 
 were, the one over the Holston at Union Depot, now called 
 Bluff City, within a few miles of the Virginia line at 
 Bristol ; the other the one over the Watauga at Carter's 
 Depot, in Carter county. The leader selected to destroy 
 
ISAAC S1IE1J5V. 
 
 Colonel al Klm/'s .]f(iuiitaiit and Fint Gorcrnur of Ki iilni:ky. 
 
Burning the Bridges. 385 
 
 these bridges was Daniel Stover, the son-in-law of Andrew 
 Johnson, afterwards Colonel of the Fourth Tennessee In- 
 fantry. I have the names of these men, but the list is long, 
 and I do not feel that I have sufficient authority to publish 
 them, though most of their names are already known in 
 that region of country. 
 
 Only one of these bridges, the one over the Holston, was 
 destroyed. The other was guarded by Captain David 
 McClelland 's company of Confederate Infantry, and the 
 attempt at its destruction was therefore abandoned. 
 There was a guard of two men at the Watauga bridge. 
 These were easily overpowered and captured. Their lives 
 were spared on the promise that they would not reveal 
 the names of the men who burned the bridge. Yet they 
 went away and disclosed the names of all whom they 
 recognized. 
 
 Soon the news spread that the men engaged in this en- 
 terprise had been identified under oath, and that they 
 were to be arrested and hung as bridge burners. These 
 brave men, the descendants of the men who planted the 
 banner of civilization on the "Watauga — on the very spot 
 where they then were — nearly one hundred years before, 
 were not such base and cowardly spirits as to quietly sub- 
 mit to such a thing. With the high metal of the Seviers, 
 the Tiptons, the Shelbys and the Robertsons, they deter- 
 mined once more to make the Watauga famous with heroic 
 deeds. By the next night, many men were under arms. 
 The next day, one thousand were assembled at the cele- 
 brated revolutionary rendezvous at the Sycamore Shoals. 
 Soon nearly all the available men in Carter county were 
 present, and a number of companies from Johnson had 
 arrived, all animated by the same spirit which brought to- 
 gether on that spot their fathers on the 25th of September, 
 1780. A partial organization was effected by the election 
 of L. Williams as colonel. In a day or two, however, a 
 new organization was effected by the election of J. S. R. 
 25 
 
386 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Boyd as colonel, and Daniel Stover as lieutenant-colonel. 
 While stationed at Sycamore Shoals, or Taylor's Ford, 
 pickets were sent out toward Carter's Depot, who encoun- 
 tered the advance of the enemy and fired on it. The latter 
 fled to the depot, and when they reported to Captain 
 McClellan, he retreated also. That night the Union men 
 were attacked by the enemy and the latter repulsed. 
 
 The next day, the Union forces, knowing that heavy 
 Confederate reinforcements were on their way and arriving, 
 retreated, by way of Big Spring, to Elizabethton. From 
 this point, the Union men went to Doe River Cove, six 
 miles south of Elizabethton, where they went into camp 
 and remained two weeks. Finally, the Confederate forces, 
 under General Leadbetter, broke up this camp, and the men 
 fled to the mountains. A few were captured, but most of 
 them hid in the mountains until they had a chance to fol- 
 low their own matchless pilot and leader, Daniel Ellis, to 
 Kentucky, where they could enter the Union army. Some 
 waited until the Federal army came in, and they were thus 
 set free from their mountain imprisonment.* 
 
 All this demonstration of a spirit of resistance on the 
 part of the people of Carter and Johnson counties, in a 
 military point of view, amounted to nothing. But as a 
 manifestation of the determination of the people never to 
 yield, nor submit to the rule of the Southern Confederacy, 
 it amounted to a great deal. In this respect it was equal 
 to a Union victory. It showed, too, what these brave 
 mountain men would become when trained, drilled and led 
 by such skillful leaders as Colonel John K. Miller, one of 
 their own people. 
 
 Very similar to the action of the Union men of Carter 
 and Johnson was that of the people of Sevier county. 
 
 Hearing of the burning of the bridges, and some of 
 them believing that this was the forerunner of the entrance 
 
 ^ For the foregoing facts, I am under obligations to Mr. C. P. Toncry ; 
 also to the letters of Captain Daniel Ellis, published in the " National 
 Tribune." 
 
Burning the Bridges. 387 
 
 of the Federal army, they too assembled to the number of 
 four hundred, armed as best they could, and marched 
 toward Strawberry Plains, They proceeded as far as 
 Underdown's Ferry, on the French Broad, where they re- 
 mained thirty-four hours or longer, skirmishing and keep- 
 ing at bay a Confederate force on the north bank of the 
 stream. Finally, they fell back and scattered to their 
 homes, some of them having been arrested in doing so. 
 These demonstrations on the part of the Union people of 
 these counties created the wildest alarm in Knoxville and 
 elsewhere among the Confederate authorities, as we shall 
 presently see. 
 
 The attempt to burn these bridges at this time, and its 
 partial success, was, in my opinion, from every point of 
 view, as I shall hereafter try to show, most unwise and 
 unfortunate. It did but little injury to the enemy, while 
 it brought untold calamities and sufferings on the Union 
 people. 
 
388 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 EXECUTIONS AND IMPRISONMENTS. 
 
 Alarm caused by burning the bridges — Telegraphic messages — A general 
 uprising expected — Confederate troops sent to East Tennessee — Union 
 men arrested — Benjamin's order — Five bridge burners hanged — Court- 
 martial organized — Judges Brown and Humphreys interpose — Con- 
 demnation of Harrison Self — His daughter appeals to Mr. Davis — Hu- 
 mane conduct of latter — Union men sent to prison at Tuscaloosa — 
 Noble conduct of Confederate oflScers — Bridge burning condemned — 
 Political arrests condemned. 
 
 The news of the burning of the bridges, in East Ten- 
 nessee, came upon the country on the morning of Novem- 
 ber 9, 1861, like the sound of a fire-bell at night, so sud- 
 den and unexpected was it. The Southern Confederacy- 
 was startled and stirred from end to end. Men awoke 
 frightened as if by a horrible dream. Universal consterna- 
 tion prevailed in East Tennessee. Other and greater ca- 
 lamities were expected to follow immediately. The mili- 
 tary authorities and railroad officials were thrown into a 
 wild and unreasonable panic. They hastened to and fro, 
 and stormed and issued orders, as if they had just lost a 
 decisive battle. Confederate citizens of Knoxville, as the 
 Rev. Colonel W. B. Wood, of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church South, informed General Samuel Cooper, com- 
 menced "finding places of safety for their families," and 
 in some cases for themselves also ! 
 
 John R. Branner, president of the East Tennessee and 
 Virginia Railroad, telegraphed to J. P. Benjamin that : 
 "Two large bridges on my road were burned last night 
 about 12 o'clock ; also one bridge on the East Tennessee 
 and Georgia Railroad (there were, in fact, two) . There 
 is great excitement along the whole line of road, and evi- 
 dence that the Union party are organizing to destroy or 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 389 
 
 take possession of the whole line from Bristol to Chatta- 
 nooga." 
 
 General A. S. Johnston telegraphed Governor Harris 
 from Bowling Green: "From our information, the de- 
 struction of the railroad and the telegraphs near Chatta- 
 nooga, Cleveland and Dalton can not be the work of the 
 enemy's troops, but of the disaffected in North Alabama 
 and East Tennessee." . . . 
 
 General Zollicoffer telegraphed to General Samuel 
 Cooper from Jacksborough : "Colonel Wood, of Knox- 
 ville, writes that last night Hiawassee bridge and two 
 other bridges near Chattanooga were burned." . 
 
 J. W. Lewis, "superintendent of the East Tennessee and 
 Virginia Railroad" (that must have been the "Western Au 
 lantic road) , telegraphed to Jefferson Davis from Cleve- 
 land, Tennessee: "Several bridges burned on East Ten- 
 nessee road. The country in great excitement and ter- 
 ror." . . . 
 
 The Rev. Colonel W. B. "Wood telegraphed on the 11th 
 to Adjutant-General Cooper from Knoxville : "Three 
 bridges burned between Bristol and Chattanooga, and two 
 on Georgia road. Five hundred Union men now threat- 
 ening Strawberry Plains ; fifteen hundred assembling in 
 Hamilton county, and a general uprising in all the coun- 
 ties." . . . 
 
 On the same day, Colonel "Wood wrote to General Cooper : 
 "The whole country is now in a state of rebellion. 
 A thousand men are within six miles of Strawberry Plains 
 bridge, and an attack is contemplated to-morrow. . . . 
 Five hundred Unionists left Hamilton to-day, we suppose, 
 to attack Loudon bridge (eighty miles distant) . An 
 attack was made yesterday on "Watauga. ... I need 
 not say that great alarm is felt by the few Southern men. 
 I have had all the arms in this city seized. ... I felt 
 it to be my duty to place this city under martial law, as 
 there was a large majority of the people sympathizing with 
 
390 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the enemy, and communicating with them by the unfre- 
 quented mountain paths," 
 
 On the 12th, Governor Harris wrote to Jefferson Davis 
 from Nashville as follows: "The burning of the railroad 
 bridges in East Tennessee shows a deep-seated spirit of 
 rebellion in that section. Union men are organizing. The 
 rebellion must be crushed out instantly, the leaders ar- 
 rested and summarily punished. I shall send immediately 
 about ten thousand men to that section. If you can pos- 
 sibly send from Western Virginia a number of Tennessee 
 regiments to East Tennessee, we can at once repair the 
 bridges and crush the rebellion," , . 
 
 General Zollicoffer, in a letter to Colonel "Wood, of 
 November 12th, from Jacksborough, said: "I will to- 
 morrow send dispatches to the forces near Jamestown, the 
 cavalry near Huntsville, that near Olivers, and start out 
 the cavalry here to commence simultaneously disarming 
 the Union inhabitants. You will please simultaneously 
 send orders to all detachments under your command to 
 inaugurate the same movement at the same time in their 
 various localities. The leaders should be seized and held 
 as prisoners. The leniency shown them has been unavail- 
 ing. They have acted with base duplicity and should no 
 longer be trusted," 
 
 J, P, Benjamin, under date of November 13th, tele- 
 graphed to John R, Branner : "Troops are now moving 
 to East Tennessee to crush the traitors. . . ." 
 
 General Zollicoffer on the 14th, telegraphed from Jacks- 
 borough to General Cooper: "I have ordered all posts 
 and detachments to disarm Union men and seize leaders. 
 Have made dispositions to cut off and crush tories of 
 Rhea, Hamilton and Sevier," 
 
 On November 25, J. P. Benjamin, secretary of war, 
 wrote the following instructions to Colonel W. B. Wood, at 
 Knoxville : 
 
 "Sir, your report of the 20th instant is received, and I 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 391 
 
 proceed to give you the desired instructions in relation to 
 the prisoners taken by you amongst the traitors in East 
 Tennessee. First, all such as can be identified as having 
 been engaged in bridge burning are to be tried summarily by 
 drum-head court-martial, and if found guilty, executed on 
 the spot by hanging. It would be well to leave their bodies 
 hanging in the vicinity of the burned bridges. Second, 
 all such as have not been so engaged are to be treated as 
 prisoners of war, and sent with an armed guard to Tusca- 
 loosa, Alabama, there to be kept imprisoned at the depot 
 selected by the government for prisoners of war. Wherever 
 you can discover that arms are concealed by these traitors, 
 you will send out detachments, search for and seize the 
 arms. In no case is one of the men known to have been 
 up in arms against the government to be released on 
 any pledge or oath of allegiance. The time for such 
 measures is past. They are all to be held as prisoners of 
 war and held in jail till the end of the war. Such as come 
 in voluntarily, take the oath of allegiance, and surrender 
 their arms, are alone to be treated with leniency. 
 
 Your vigilant execution of these orders is earnestly 
 urged by the government. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 J. P. Benjamin, Secretary of War. 
 
 p, s. — Judge (David T.) Patterson, Colonel (Samuel) 
 Pickens, and other ringleaders of the same class must be 
 sent at once to Tuscaloosa to jail as prisoners of war. 
 
 J. P. B." 
 
 In another book, not yet in press, I have spoken of the 
 honorable conduct of Mr. Benjamin in his treatment of 
 Mr. Brownlow in 1862. I regret that the spirit of this 
 letter does not merit similar commendation. 
 
 It will be observed that all such as could be identified 
 as having been "engaged in bridge burning" were to be 
 
392 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "tried summarily by drum-head court-martial, and if 
 found guilty were to be executed on the spot by hanging. 
 It would be well to leave their bodies hanging in the 
 vicinity of the burned bridges." In a letter of the same 
 date to J. C. Ramsey, Confederate States district attorney, 
 he said he hoped "to hear they have hung every bridge 
 burner at the end of the burned bridges." 
 
 As to the second class, Mr. Benjamin said: "All such 
 as have not been so engaged (that is, in bridge burning) 
 are to be treated as prisoners of war, and sent with an 
 armed guard to Tuscaloosa, Alabama, there to be kept as 
 prisoners of war." All such as had not been engaged in 
 bridge burning, whether guilty of any other offense or not, 
 by the words of this letter, were to be sent to Tuscaloosa, 
 and that, too, without trial or examination. It was not 
 sufficient that they had been suspected and arrested. 
 They must be hurried off to this prison of such ill-fame. 
 Perhaps Mr. Benjamin did not mean all he said. Per- 
 haps he meant all such "as have been guilty of taking up 
 arms are to be sent off as prisoners of war." 
 
 After the lapse of more than a third of a century, in the 
 light of published history, we can to-day understand what 
 was a mystery in 1861-62 to those of us who so frequently 
 saw or knew of long lines of wasted Union men, many of 
 them three score and ten years of age, and some only mere 
 boys, being driven through our streets on their way to the 
 cars which were to carry them to Tuscaloosa. It was in 
 obedience to this order of Mr. Benjamin that the prisons 
 of the South were filled with Union men. His agents, in 
 the form of military companies, were scattered over all 
 the counties of East Tennessee, gathering in these de- 
 tested "traitors" to be sent to the prison at Tuscaloosa. 
 
 At the very time Mr. Lincoln was being denounced as a 
 tyrant by Southern orators and papers, for proclaiming 
 martial law, and suspending the writ of habeas corpus in 
 certain places in the North, Mr. Benjamin was instructing 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 393 
 
 Colonel R. F. Looney, at Knoxville, Tennessee, November 
 30, 1861, as follows : 
 
 "Courts of justice have no power to take prisoners of 
 war out of the hands of the military, nor to interfere with 
 the disposal of such prisoners by the military. An an- 
 swer to a writ of habeas corpus that the prisoner was 
 captured in arms against the government, and is held as 
 a prisoner of war is a good and complete answer to the 
 writ. Send this dispatch to General Carroll, and let him 
 send at once all the prisoners to jail at Tuscaloosa as 
 prisoners of war, except those found guilty of bridge 
 burning and murdering the guards placed at the bridges. 
 Let not one of these treacherous murderers escape. 
 
 J. P. Benjamin, Secretary of TFar." 
 
 "Let him send at once," says he, "all the prisoners to 
 jail at Tuscaloosa as prisoners of war." Of course, there 
 was, and there could be, under this order, no examination, 
 no trial. The order was imperative. We now see why so 
 many were sent off. 
 
 The military courts were at once opened as he directed. 
 On the 30th of November, the following dispatch was sent 
 to Mr. Benjamin : 
 
 "Headquarters, Greeneville, 
 
 November 30, 1861. 
 "Two insurgents have to day been tried for bridge 
 burning, found guilty and hanged, 
 
 D. Leadbetter, Colonel/' 
 
 The men thus executed were Jacob M. Hensie and Henry 
 Fry. How they had eluded arrest for burning Lick Creek 
 bridge up to this time it is difficult to explain. It will be 
 observed that the trial and the execution both took place 
 on the same day. The truth is, after the mere form of a 
 trial, they were at once led out for execution. They were 
 swung from the projecting limb of a tree which stood 
 North of the railroad and the depot in Greeneville. This 
 
394 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 was in full sight of the railroad and of the trains as they 
 passed. The bodies of these poor fellows were left swing- 
 ing from the tree for about twenty-four hours before they 
 were taken down. The wish of Mr. Benjamin, expressed 
 in his letter to Mr. Ramsey, that they should be hung 
 at "the end of the burned bridge," could not be gratified 
 in this case, for the bridge was gone, and the place where 
 it had stood was fifteen miles away. 
 
 Colonel Leadbetter was a native of Maine, who had 
 been educated at West Point at the expense of the United 
 States, and had taken an oath to support the constitution. 
 It is said that he fell in love with a refined lady of the 
 South and married her. As he was a Northern man it 
 was necessary for him, in order to escape suspicion, to 
 manifest extra zeal in behalf of his newly-espoused cause. 
 
 On the 10th of December, a court-martial at Knoxville, 
 convicted A. C. Haun of bridge burning, and ordered him 
 to be hung. The sentence was approved by Wm. H. Car- 
 roll, "Brigadier-General Commanding," and the time 
 of execution fixed for 12 o'clock the same day. Again 
 Mr. Benjamin, on the same day, directs the commander 
 to "execute the sentence of your court-martial on the 
 bridge burners," Haun was accordingly executed at 
 Knoxville at the time fixed. 
 
 In the meantime there was a little friction in the move- 
 ments of the Confederate machinery, between the civil and 
 the military departments. George Brown, a state circuit 
 court judge of the Knoxville circuit, an able jurist, and 
 an ardent Southern man, having old fashioned notions of 
 law, would occasionally issue a writ of habeas corpus in 
 favor of Union men held in custody. Judge West H. 
 Humphreys also, of the Confederate States district court, 
 out of the goodness of his heart, sometimes went so far as 
 to hear these cases, and turn these men loose, on their 
 executing bond and taking an oath of good behavior. 
 
 This obstructive policy was very annoying to Generals 
 Carroll and Leadbetter. General Carroll, then in com- 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 395 
 
 mand of East Tennessee, said in a letter to Mr. Benjamin, 
 dated December 11, 1861 : 
 
 "I have been greatly annoyed by the interfer- 
 ence of the civil authorities with what I conceive the 
 proper and faithful discharge of the duties incumbent 
 upon me in my capacity of military commander of this 
 portion of East Tennessee." . . . He said several 
 attempts had been made to take offenders out of his 
 hands, by judicial process, etc. To avoid these little 
 annoyances, he informed Mr. Benjamin that he had placed 
 the city under martial law. In his order he said the time 
 had come for the adoption of the "sternest measures of 
 military policy," and therefore he suspends "for a time 
 the functions of the civil tribunals." In his letter to Mr. 
 Benjamin, he informs that officer that, in addition to the 
 cases already disposed of, he had still in confinement, 
 awaiting trial by military tribunals, about one hundred 
 and fifty more prisoners. He said that if after these are 
 tried "any should remain whose offenses come legitimately 
 under the jurisdiction of the civil courts he will turn them 
 over to the proper officers." 
 
 J. C. Ramsey, the Confederate States district attorney, 
 all alive to share in any good work for the Confederate 
 cause, seeing that he was deprived of any hand in the dis- 
 posal of prisoners, telegraphed to Mr, Benjamin, almost in 
 a wail of dispair, asking : "What shall I do?" With Car- 
 roll and Leadbetter and their courts-martial and summary 
 proceedings, what could he do? 
 
 All these things were, however, very disgusting to the 
 zealous Leadbetter, who assumed command when General 
 Carroll moved with the army to the front to take part in 
 the battle of Fishing Creek. Carroll had organized a reg- 
 ular court-martial, which had already condemned forty-nine 
 persons to imprisonment during the war, besides those 
 condemned to death. But this did not satisfy the impatient 
 Leadbetter. He informs General S. Cooper, January 7, 
 1862, that there were then confined in Knoxville 130 po- 
 
396 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 litical prisoners. The number had "lately been increas- 
 ing," and others it was expected would be "captured soon." 
 He could not see ' 'how the court-martial was to keep pace 
 with the exigencies of the occasion." Acting under this 
 conviction he said : "I shall dissolve the court-martial con- 
 vened by General Carroll on its determination of the few 
 purely military cases yet to be tried, and shall proceed 
 with the political offenders as I have heretofore done at 
 Greeneville." 
 
 It will be remembered how speedily he had disposed of 
 Hensie and Fry at Greeneville. Court-martials were too 
 slow for him. They did not "keep pace with the exigen- 
 cies of the occasion." 
 
 But it seems that Judges Brown and Humphreys, with 
 their stubborn old-fashioned ways, still continued to issue 
 writs in favor of Union men. In view of these obstructions 
 to his summary proceedings, Leadbetter appealed to Mr. 
 Benjamin for instructions and guidance in his new em- 
 barrassments, but it does not seem that he received any. 
 
 A milder policy was expected of General Carroll. He 
 had a noble name behind him. His father was a soldier 
 of renown. In all of General Jackson's campaigns he was 
 the right arm of the iron general. He had been for six 
 years the honored chief magistrate of Tennessee. His 
 career was full of honor and glory, and only mild conduct 
 was expected of his son in the treatment of the sons of 
 the old friends of his father. However bitter Southern 
 officers might be, they were at all times expected to bear 
 themselves, especially toward the weak and unfortunate, 
 as gentlemen. And this they generally did.' 
 
 In order to preserve the advantage of a continuous nar- 
 
 ' It is only just to the memory of General Carroll to add, and I most 
 cheerfully do so, that it somewhere appears in the voluminous correspond- 
 ence of that time, that he could not manifest, in his treatment of Union 
 men his real feelings of kindness and mercy, because of positive instruc- 
 tions from Richmond. This was probably so. 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 397 
 
 rative of the events connected with the administrations of 
 General Carroll and General Leadbetter, I have run 
 ahead of the order of some of the facts, to which I now 
 return. 
 
 Harrison Self was the next man tried and convicted of 
 the Lick Creek bridge burning. The sentence was ap- 
 proved by General Carroll, and the time of his execution 
 fixed for the 26th of December, 1861, at 4 p. m. Much in- 
 terest was awakened on his account. Colonel James "W. 
 Gillespie, Colonel R. F. Looney and Lieutenant-Colonel 
 Reuben Arnold, all of Tennessee Confederate regiments, 
 and twenty-five other officers and citizens, sent petitions to 
 Richmond for his pardon. All proved unavailing. Mr. 
 Self had a charming, beautiful daughter, whose steadfast- 
 ness to her crushed father in his misfortunes was sublime 
 and heroic. She was notified on the morning of the day 
 of the execution that he was to be hanged at 4 o'clock p. m. 
 I will let Mr. Brownlow, who was at that time confined 
 in the Knoxville jail, describe what followed : 
 
 . . "His daughter, a noble girl, modest and neatly 
 attired, came in this morning to see him (her father) . 
 Heart-broken and bowed down under a fearful weight of 
 sorrow, she entered his iron cage, and they embraced each 
 other afi'ectionately. My God, what a sight ! What an 
 affecting scene I May these eyes of mine, bathed in tears, 
 never look upon the like again. 
 
 "But her short limit to remain with her father expired, 
 and she came out weeping bitterly, and shedding burning 
 tears. Requesting me to write a dispatch for her, and sign 
 her name to it, I took out my pencil and a slip of paper, 
 and wrote the following : 
 
 " 'Knoxville, Dec. 26, 1861. 
 *' 'Hon. Jefferson Davis : 
 
 *' 'My father, Harrison Self, is sentenced to hang at four 
 o'clock this evening on a charge of bridge burning. As 
 
398 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 he remains my earthly all, and all my hopes of happiness 
 center on him, I implore you to pardon him, 
 
 " 'Elizabeth Self.' 
 
 "With this dispatch the poor girl hurried off to the tele- 
 graph office, some two or three hundred yards from the 
 jail ; and about two o'clock in the afternoon an answer 
 came to General Carroll, telling him not to allow Self to 
 be hung. Self was turned out of the cage into the jail 
 with the rest of us, and looks as if he had gone through a 
 long spell of sickness. But what a thrill of joy ran 
 through the heart of that noble girl ! Self is to be con- 
 fined, as I understand, during the war."* 
 
 Was there ever a more touching scene? 
 
 It affords me sincere pleasure to record this act of clem- 
 ency and goodness of heart on the part of President Davis, 
 so much at variance with what is usually regarded as his 
 character, for he was considered by the world an austere 
 man. This, however, is not the first instance in which he 
 appears to have been more generous in his sentiments 
 towards the Union people of East Tennessee than those 
 who surrounded him at Richmond, and more so than many 
 even of our own leading citizens. No doubt Mr. Benjamin 
 had been appealed to earnestly in behalf of this unfortu- 
 nate man, but without effect. It is seen, however, that 
 the moment the appeal of the daughter reached Mr. 
 Davis, his heart was touched, and he at once granted the 
 petition of the despairing girl. After knowing this beau- 
 tiful act of mercy, no word of bitterness against Mr. Davis 
 shall ever escape my lips. This was the third time in 
 which he had manifested a disposition to be just and gen- 
 erous towards the suffering Union men of East Tennessee. 
 So far as we can see, he desired to treat them and rule 
 them with impartial justice. 
 
 Confined in the jail at Knoxville at the same time with 
 
 ^ " Parson Brownlow's Book," page 326. 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 399 
 
 Mr. Brownlow and Harrison Self were Jacob Harmon and 
 his son, Thomas Harmon. Thej were also accused, and I 
 presume correctly, of having taken part in burning the 
 Lick Creek bridge. They were therefore tried by a court- 
 martial, found guilty, and sentenced to be hanged. Al- 
 though an earnest and determined eflPort was made by 
 their counsel, Mr. John Baxter, both here and in Rich- 
 mond, to save them, all his efforts were in vain. On the 
 17th day of December, 1861, they were executed on a gal- 
 lows erected a short distance north of the railway track in 
 North Knoxville. This gallows remained standing, a con- 
 spicuous object, until after the Federal army entered the 
 city, when it was destroyed by the soldiers with a fury 
 similar to that which characterized the destruction of the 
 Old Bastile by the populace of Paris. It was stated at the 
 time, and no doubt correctly, that the young man Harmon 
 was first executed, while the father, an aged man, was 
 compelled to sit and look on at the shocking sight.' 
 
 Two other persons, Daniel Smith and Jacob Myers, were 
 tried and found guilty of having had some connection with 
 the burning of the Lick Creek bridge. They were both 
 sent to Tuscaloosa. Captain Fry, the leader in that un- 
 fortunate affair, was arrested in trying to make his escape 
 into Kentucky. He was tried for bridge burning, con- 
 victed and sentenced to be hanged. No doubt he would 
 have been executed, but for the remonstrance of General 
 S. P. Carter, of the Federal army in Kentucky. On the 
 16th of April, 1862, General Carter appears to have ad- 
 dressed a letter, in reference to Captain Fry, to General E. 
 Kirby Smith, then in command in East Tennessee. The 
 correspondence in full can not be found. Enough, how- 
 ever, appears to show that the Federal commander in 
 Kentucky remonstrated against the execution of Fry, on 
 the ground that in burning bridges he was acting under 
 orders from the Federal military authorities. 
 
 ^ " Parson Brownlow's Book," page 319. 
 
400 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 In June, 1862, when General Mitchell was advancing on 
 Chattanooga, and General George W. Morgan was re- 
 ported to be advancing on Knoxville with a Federal force 
 from Cumberland Gap, a number of prisoners then con- 
 fined in Jail at Knoxville were hurriedly sent to Atlanta. 
 Among them was Captain David Fry. At the same time, 
 there were in the Atlanta prison, as there had previously 
 been in the Knoxville prison, a number of Federal soldiers 
 who were tried and convicted of the offense of being spies. 
 These were a portion of the men who had seized and at- 
 tempted to carry off a locomotive on the "Western Atlantic 
 Railroad, intending to run it back to the Federal army in 
 Middle Tennessee, burning all the bridges as they went.^ 
 Fry and these men were to be hanged at the same time. 
 On the night before the day of their intended execution, 
 they seized and overpowered the guard in the Atlanta 
 prison, and, after a desperate struggle, succeeded in mak- 
 ing their escape , Fry and a part of these men, after en- 
 during almost incredible hardships, succeeded in escaping 
 through North Carolina into Eastern Tennessee, and 
 finally, after an absence of more than a year, Fry made 
 his way back to the Federal army near Murfreesboro, 
 where he again assumed command of his old company. 
 The adventures and hair-breadth escapes of this daring 
 man, if written out, would form a history of thrilling in- 
 terest. After the close of the war. he was killed by a 
 railway train, in Greeneville, his native home. 
 
 Although I am satisfied that not three hundred people in 
 East Tennessee, outside of those actually engaged in the 
 
 ^ About fifteen of these " train stealers," as they were called, were 
 brought to Knoxville for trial by a court-martial. Eight were successively 
 tried on the charge of being spies and found guilty. These, with their 
 leader, J. J. Andrews, were subsequently executed in Atlanta. In the 
 midst of the trials, news of the approach of a Federal army, under General 
 George W. Morgan, broke up the court, and the prisoners were all hurried 
 off to Atlanta. A portion of these were the men who, with Captain Fry, 
 overpowered the guard and made their escape. The late Judge John Bax- 
 ter and the author defended those who were tried in Knoxville. 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 401 
 
 work, knew of the purpose to destroy the bridges, yet the 
 belief generally existed in the minds of the Confederate 
 authorities that nearly all the Union men knew in advance 
 of this contemplated movement. The fact that hundreds 
 of men in Carter, Johnson and Sevier counties, immedi- 
 ately flew to arms with such weapons as they could com- 
 mand, and that hundreds more assembled who had no arms, 
 furnished apparently strong corroborative evidence of their 
 complicity in the burning of the bridges. And yet such 
 was not the fact, except as to a limited number. If it had 
 been generally known that such a thing was to happen, I 
 ought to have known it. And yet I had not the slightest 
 intimation or suspicion of such a thing. The mustering 
 of these men was very unwise, and productive of the most 
 disastrous consequences, not only to themselves and their 
 families, but likewise to the whole Union population. Their 
 rising was not prearranged. It was the sudden uprising 
 of a few of the people who thought the Federal army was 
 coming, many of them attracted merely by idle curiosity. 
 Looking back to 1861, with a full knowledge of the facts 
 as they are known to us now, the excitement among the 
 Confederates at that time seems to have been the result of 
 little more than a ludicrous scare. There were at that 
 time from five to ten thousand Confederate troops in East 
 Tennessee and on the border of Kentucky. Governor 
 Harris, as we have seen, wrote to Mr. Davis, November 
 12th : *'I shall send immediately about 10,000 men to that 
 section" (East Tennessee), and he urged Mr. Davis "to 
 send from Western Virginia a number of Tennessee regi- 
 ments." On the 13th Mr. Benjamin telegraphed to J. R. 
 Branner that "troops were moving to East Tennessee to 
 crush the traitors." In all there were probably gathered'; 
 here, within the next ten days, not less than twenty thou- ' 
 sand, and possibly twenty-five thousand soldiers. The 
 singular part of this strange farce was that the excitement 
 and the scare continued nearly two months. And yet 
 26 
 
402 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 during all this time there was not a Federal soldier within 
 the borders of East Tennessee, except Captains Fry and 
 Cross, who had come to aid in the burning of the bridges, 
 and they were hiding and trying to get back to Kentucky. 
 And none were threatening to come. 
 
 At the very time the Confederates were in the wildest 
 state of excitement — on the very tip-toe of apprehension — 
 the outline of the little army of Federals under General 
 Thomas might have been seen receding beyond the hills 
 of Wild Cat, in the direction of Camp Dick Robinson, 
 wholly unconscious of the great commotion it had created, 
 while the Union men, after a few days, like partridges 
 when the hawk is abroad, were hiding, or seeking safety 
 in the hills and mountains, or secretly fleeing to Kentucky, 
 The reported uprising was greatly exaggerated, and in 
 some cases imaginary, and altogether contemptible, as 
 against organized troops. There were not one hundred 
 men in all East Tennessee, well armed, nor two thousand 
 even half armed, nor ammunition for a half hour's fight. 
 
 It might be easily suspected that the incident of the 
 bridge burning was used as a pretext for arresting, disarm- 
 ing and imprisoning Union men. This was certainly not 
 the motive. It was a sincere, honest fright, laughable by 
 reason of its extent, its intensity, and the length of its du- 
 ration. In this view, it was comical and farcical. But to 
 the Union people, it was full of terror, suffering and woe. 
 Violent wrath and apprehension seized the Confederate 
 army. Confederate citizens were thrown into a panic. 
 The storm of anger naturally burst on the heads of Union 
 men, and all were suspected. Arrests were made until the 
 prisons overflowed. The poor, frightened Union men 
 fled terror-stricken to such places of safety as they could 
 find. 
 
 But one great and important fact was developed by these 
 stirring events. It was made manifest that the Southern 
 Confederacy rested, in East Tennessee, on a live and an ever- 
 burning volcano, which needed only the slightest vent to 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 403 
 
 cause it to burst forth at any moment in a terrific ex- 
 plosion. The solid Union ranks of June had been thinned 
 by no desertions. And now, sufferings had welded them 
 into a solid mass, which would make them terrible in the 
 day of battle. Strange that those in authority did not see, 
 could not see, that it was better to let these determined, 
 these lion-hearted people alone in their quiet pursuits and 
 secluded homes than to force them into active hostility. 
 
 If there were those, at the time the bridges were burned, 
 who thought that their destruction was a good thing for the 
 loyal people of East Tennessee, surely they must have been 
 convinced of its folly during the long, sad, dismal months 
 that followed. With the wild excitement and the blind 
 panic which everywhere filled the minds of the Confeder- 
 ate people, there soon came to the Union people an 
 overwhelming sense of insecurity. For the first time, 
 they began to realize fully that they were among enemies, 
 who counted the success of the new government above 
 all things else — above kinship, above old friendship, above 
 the most sacred ties hitherto uniting them. This sense 
 of personal insecurity and of alienship extended to every 
 Union fireside in East Tennessee. There was not a man 
 so high, nor one so noble, but felt that he was liable to 
 be accused, seized and thrust into prison at any moment. 
 
 On the 20th of November, 1861, Rev. Colonel Wm. B. 
 Wood, commanding the post at Knoxville, wrote to Mr. 
 Benjamin as follows : 
 
 •'The rebellion in East Tennessee has been put down in 
 some of the counties. . . . Their camps in Sevier 
 and Hamilton counties have been broken up, and a large 
 number of them made prisoners'; some are confined in 
 jail at this place, and others sent to Nashville. . . 
 
 "We have now in custody some of their leaders — Judge 
 (David T.) Patterson, the son-in-law of Andrew Johnson, 
 Colonel (Samuel) Pickens, the senator in the legislature 
 from Sevier and other counties, and several members of 
 the legislature, besides others of influence and some dis- 
 
404 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 tinction in their counties. . . . They really deserve 
 the gallows, and if consistent with the laws ought speedily 
 to receive their deserts. ... I have to request at 
 least that the prisoners I have taken be held, if not as 
 traitors, as prisoners of war. ... To release them is 
 ruinous." ... 
 
 Colonel Leadbetter, November 28th, says in a letter to 
 General S. Cooper : 
 
 "Twenty-two persons have been sent to Nashville from 
 Carter county, and we have now in confinement some five 
 or six known to have been in arms, and who will be sent 
 to Tuscaloosa." 
 
 On the 11th of December, 1861, General W. H. Carroll, 
 in a letter from Knoxville, to Mr. Benjamin, said : 
 
 "In addition to those suspected of burning the bridges, 
 I have now in confinement about 150 prisoners charged 
 with taking up arms, giving aid and assistance to the 
 enemy, inciting rebellion, etc. ... I have already 
 sent there (Tuscaloosa) forty-eight to be held as prisoners 
 of war." 
 
 Thus the work of arresting Union men went on through 
 November and December, 1861, and in the early months 
 of 1862. Among the prominent men thus arrested was, 
 as we have just seen, Samuel Pickens, an old and respect- 
 able citizen of Sevier county, then a senator in the legisla- 
 ture. His crime was being a Union man and the father 
 of W. C. Pickens, the leader in the attempt to burn 
 Strawberry Plains bridge. Without even the form of a 
 trial, unless by the secret and ex parte action of Lead- 
 1^ better's or Carroll's court, he was sent to Tuscaloosa, 
 where he died. There was no evidence against him, and 
 he was guilty of no offense. He was a quiet, peaceable 
 and an excellent citizen. 
 
 Dr. R. H. Hodsden, also of Sevier county, and John M. 
 Fleming of Knox, both members of the legislature, were 
 also soon afterward arrested. They were released by the 
 Confederate States judge, West H. Humphreys, on being 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 405 
 
 brought before him, who, though a noisy and ardent se- 
 cessionist, was a kind hearted and just man. 
 
 Edmond Hodges and Wm. E. Hodges, of Sevier county, 
 were also arrested, and sent to Tuscaloosa without trial, 
 where they were confined for many months. Both of 
 these men were good citizens and had been guilty of no 
 offense, except an earnest and active support of the Union 
 cause. Edmond Hodges was a superb specimen of nature's 
 nobility. 
 
 A little later on, Mr, Montgomery Thornburgh, of Jeffer- 
 son county, was arrested, and without trial sent to Madi- 
 son, Georgia, for confinement, Alas ! he never returned. 
 He was a strong, powerful man physically, and in good 
 health, but the privations of prison life proved too much 
 for even his robust constitution. Mr. Thornburgh had 
 served two or three terms as senator in the state legisla- 
 ture, and had acted with ability one or two terms as 
 prosecuting state's attorney in the judicial circuit in 
 which he resided. He was the father of Jacob M, Thorn- 
 burgh, who was afterwards a colonel in the Federal army, 
 and represented the Knoxville district for three terms in 
 congress after the close of the war. He was also the 
 father of Thomas Tipton Thornburgh, a major in the 
 United States army, who was killed in Colorado, in 1879, 
 gallantly fighting at the head of his command in a des- 
 perate battle with the Ute Indians. The offense of Mr. 
 Thornburgh was that he had been a prominent Union 
 speaker and leader. I happened to know that during the 
 troubles that followed the burning of the bridges all his 
 influence was exerted in trying to preserve the peace of the 
 country and in keeping the Union men quiet. 
 
 At the same time that Mr. Thornburgh was arrested, 
 Mr. James Monroe Meek and Samuel P. Johnson, of the 
 same county and town, were arrested and hurried off to 
 prison in Macon, Georgia. The former was a worthy 
 citizen, had been a member of the legislature and was a 
 
406 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 lawyer in fair practice. He still lives, commanding the 
 respect and esteem of his fellow-citizens. 
 
 The only tangible evidence, or rather charge, against 
 both Mr. Meek and Mr. Thornburgh was that a large body 
 of Union men from their town and vicinity had attempted 
 to escape into Kentucky, and they were held responsible 
 for this attempt. 
 
 Levi Trewhitt, of Bradley county, near seventy years of 
 age, was also arrested and sent to Tuscaloosa, without 
 trial, where he died some months afterward. His offense 
 was being a Union man. Mr. Trewhitt was an able law- 
 yer, had been prominent at the bar for a great many 
 years, and was a peaceable and an upright citizen. He 
 was the father of Daniel C. Trewhitt, a colonel in the 
 Federal army, and for many years after the war an able 
 chancellor and circuit judge in the Chattanooga chancery 
 division and circuit. 
 
 Dr. William Hunt, the brother-in-law of William G. 
 Brownlow, was also arrested at the same time with Mr. 
 Trewhitt, and sent to Tuscaloosa. He had no trial, was 
 guilty of no offense, and accused of none except that of 
 being an outspoken Union man. Dr. Hunt was noted as 
 a peaceable, amiable man, and was one of our purest and 
 best citizens. He never returned to his home, but died 
 from prison life. Many other citizens were sent to prisons 
 in the South. I only name the more prominent ones. 
 
 In reference to Mr. Trewhitt, I quote the following 
 statement of Colonel James W. Gillespie, a Confederate 
 colonel : 
 
 "Knoxville, Tenn., January 20, 1862. 
 
 "On the 19th day of November last, I arrested and 
 brought to this place Levi Trewhitt, Esq., of Cleveland, 
 Tennessee. This arrest was made under an order from 
 Colonel W. B. Wood, commanding the Sixteenth Alabama 
 regiment, who at that time was the commander of this 
 post. The arrest was ordered because Mr. Trewhitt was 
 suspected of a knowledge of the burning of the railroad 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 407 
 
 bridges and the plans by which it was done. He was re- 
 tained here for some weeks and then sent to Tuscaloosa by 
 order of General W. H. Carroll, who succeeded Colonel 
 Wood in command. There was no trial or investigation of 
 the charges so far as I know or have understood. 
 
 Jas. W. Gillespie, 
 Col. Forty-third Reg. Tenn. {Confederate) Volunteers.'" 
 
 I insert also the petition of divers neighbors of Mr. 
 Trewhitt for his release from prison, as follows : 
 
 **. . . His Excellency Jefferson Davis, 
 
 '■^President of the Confederate States of America : 
 "Your petitioners, the undersigned citizens of Bradley 
 county, humbly represent and show unto your excellency 
 that Levi Trewhitt, who is now as they understand con- 
 fined in Mobile as a prisoner of war, is one of the old, 
 influential citizens of Bradley county, Tennessee ; that he 
 is about sixty-five years of age, and has been for the past 
 few years aflBicted with paralysis, and as they now under- 
 stand is sick and in the hospital at Mobile. They further 
 state that said Trewhitt was a very useful man at home. 
 We therefore pray that said Levi Trewhitt be released 
 from said confinement upon his becoming a loyal citizen, 
 and taking an oath to support the constitution of the 
 Confederate States of America, and as in duty bound, will 
 ever pray, etc., William Grant, T. L. Hoyl, Jno. B. Hoyl 
 (and 31 others) . 
 
 "We, the undersigned officers in the Confederate service, 
 fully concur with the above petitioners. 
 
 D. M. Key, Lieut. -Colonel, 
 (James W.) Gillespie, 
 
 Col. Reg. Tenn. Vols., 
 (and 16 others)." 
 
 While Mr. Trewhitt was in confinement, the afiidavits of 
 John Blackburn, E. Ramsey, Benjamin Hambright, G. R. 
 
408 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Hambright, Welcome Beard and A. A. Clingan, all Con- 
 federate sympathizers, were forwarded to headquarters, 
 showing that he had been not only guilty of no offense, 
 but that he had been active in using his influence among 
 the Union men in trying to preserve the peace. Not- 
 withstanding the mass of testimony in the possession of 
 the authorities, at Knoxville, this feeble old man, who had 
 been afflicted with paralysis for years, was kept in prison 
 until he died in 1862. 
 
 In view of the failure of the army in Kentucky to ad- 
 vance into East Tennessee and cover and protect those 
 who were engaged in bridge burning, as well as the loyal 
 people generally, this attempt to destroy the bridges was 
 one of the most unfortunate and doubtless one of the most 
 unwise military schemes of the war. The destruction of 
 the five bridges, as it turned out, did but little harm to 
 the Confederacy, and no good whatever to the Union 
 cause. On the contrary, it resulted in incalculable injury 
 to the Union people of East Tennessee. In addition to the 
 fact that several persons were hung for their participation 
 in burning the bridges, this was the cause of the arrests of 
 hundreds, not to say thousands, of Union men, and the 
 long incarceration of many of them in prisons in Tusca- 
 loosa, Mobile, Madison and Macon. It created in the 
 minds of the Confederates wide-spread alarm and the most 
 intense bitterness. The next few months were the most 
 fearful and terrible to the Union men of any during the 
 whole war. It was the "noc/ie triste^^ in their history. 
 Then followed those several repressive acts on the part of 
 the military authorities which have made the sufferings of 
 the people of East Tennessee known throughout the land. 
 While it would be presumptuous in me to question the 
 military plans or opinions of such a great general as 
 Thomas, yet I may venture the opinion that Sherman was 
 right, and that the proposed expedition into East Tennes- 
 see, in November, 1861, with the forces then contemplated, 
 was premature, and would have been a failure, except as 
 
Executions and Imprisonments, 409 
 
 a mere raid. The general plans of the army were not ripe 
 for such an expedition. The force intended for this expe- 
 dition was not sufficient. It was too early for such a move- 
 ment. The other armies were not in co-operation with it. 
 Knoxville, if it had been taken at that time by General 
 Thomas, in all probability, could not have been held, and 
 untold calamities to Union men would have followed. As 
 it was, the proposed movement sent five men to the gal- 
 lows, fifteen hundred or two thousand to long confine- 
 ments in prisons, where many died, and drove from five 
 to ten thousand men from their homes into exile. It filled 
 the minds of all loyal people with fear and anxiety, and 
 put them in constant and extreme peril for nearly two 
 years. 
 
 I have not insisted in the foregoing criticisms of the 
 conduct of the Confederate authorities, and do not insist 
 that they had not the rightful authority to punish men, not 
 engaged as soldiers in actual war, for destroying their 
 bridges. I waive the consideration of the limitations of 
 that right entirely, and confine myself to a point which 
 cannot be disputed, namely, the unseemly haste of their 
 conduct. Concede this right in the most ample form, and 
 I do concede it, and that furnishes no justification for the 
 hasty hanging of Henzie and Fry, and but little less for 
 that of old man Harmon. Nor is there any possible jus- 
 tification for sending Pickens, Thornburgh, Hodges, Tre- 
 whitt. Hunt, Meek and others to southern prisons, without 
 any kind of trial. They had been guilty of no offense 
 against the laws of the Southern Confederacy ; they were 
 all peaceable citizens, and, according to the laws of all 
 civilized nations, they were entitled to a trial before con- 
 demnation and punishment. The treatment of these men, 
 as well as others not named, was unjustifiable and inde- 
 fensible. At the same time, it brings out in bright relief 
 the noble and the humane conduct of President Davis, Col- 
 onel James W. Gillespie, Colonel Robert F. Looney, Col- 
 
410 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 onel D. M. Key, Lieutenant-Colonel Reuben Arnold and 
 other honorable Confederate oflScers. 
 
 It is not overlooked that, when the Federal army occu- 
 pied East Tennessee, many arrests of citizens sympathiz- 
 ing with secession were made, and that many were cast 
 into prison, and some sent North for confinement. Many 
 of these arrests, perhaps most of them, were made because 
 the parties arrested were accused of having persecuted 
 Union men in some form or another during the ascendency 
 of the Confederacy. In many cases these charges were 
 true. In divers other cases men were arrested solely be- 
 cause they had been active and prominent secessionists. 
 Often the arrests were instigated by a spirit of retaliation 
 and hate. Possibly the larger number was of this class. 
 In a large majority of cases, the prisoners, after being held 
 under guard or in jail awhile, were released on bond for 
 good behavior, and on an oath of allegiance, as often hap- 
 pened with Union men under the Confederate rule. In 
 nearly all cases there was some kind of an examination, 
 generally an ex parte one, by the provost-marshal, of the 
 charges against the prisoners. 
 
 There was undoubtedly a disposition on the part of 
 General S. P. Carter, the provost-marshal-general, to be just 
 and humane, for such was his nature ; but it was difficult 
 for the most humane man, under the circumstances, to 
 hold the scales of justice level. Beyond question, there 
 was in some cases, possibly in a number, unnecessary se- 
 verity. In this category falls the confinement in a north- 
 ern prison of Rev. R. M. Stevens, W. W. Wallace and 
 Chancellor T. N. Van Dyke. These men were sent, so far 
 as I understood their history, simply because they were 
 outspoken, prominent secessionists, who were unwilling to 
 give up the cause of the Confederacy after the Federals 
 obtained control of East Tennessee. As I have condemned 
 the imprisonment of peaceable citizens because of political 
 opinions in the case of Union men, so likewise I condemn 
 it in these cases. But it is to be observed that the latter 
 
Executions and Imprisonments. 411 
 
 class of cases did not amount to a third of the former in 
 point of number, nor the severity of treatment, and that 
 they occurred after the unjust and unnecessary persecu- 
 tions of Union men by the Confederate authorities. 
 
 It is hoped that if, unfortunately, there should ever be 
 another civil war in this country, there may be greater 
 toleration of opinion. In a revolution, especially one in- 
 volving a disruption of the government, all men cannot 
 be expected to see alike. The minority may be quite as 
 honest as the majority. Why should this minority be mo- 
 lested or coerced in their opinions? "When, however, a 
 new government is established, this minority is bound to 
 yield obedience to the new authority. If they disregard 
 its laws, they are subject to punishment. It follows, there- 
 fore, that the Union men of East Tennessee had no right 
 to defy the laws of the Confederacy as long as those laws 
 Avere over them, and that private citizens who engaged in 
 burning bridges took upon themselves the hazard of their 
 lives. 
 
412 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 THE FLIGHT. 
 
 Bitterness in 1861 against Union men— Mr. Davis' desire to be just— Feel- 
 ing of Confederate officers — Names given — Extracts from letters — 
 Unionists arrested for political opinions — Protests of distinguished 
 Confederate citizens — Arrests instigated by local leaders — Seizing arms 
 of Union men — Enforcing conscript law — Flight of Union men — Uni- 
 versal alarm — Capture of 400 refugees — Notice of pilots — Noble women 
 — Condition of Union men — Full of danger and anxiety. 
 
 The feeling of a majority of the Confederate citizens of 
 East Tennessee, at this time against the Union people, was 
 that of intense bitterness. Nearly every prominent citizen 
 among them felt and acted in this spirit. There could be 
 no line of policy adopted, however severe, that did not 
 meet their approval. Their policy of pacification meant 
 banishment, or imprisonment. The crime of being, or 
 having been, a Union man was one that could not be con- 
 doned. The bitter and earnest outcry against any tolera- 
 tion of these "traitors and tories," as they were esteemed 
 and called, helped to increase the already swollen stream 
 of bitterness, until it burst all bounds, and for a season 
 nearly submerged all sense of justice and mercy. At all 
 times, and perhaps that was natural under the circum- 
 stances, our worst and most implacable enemies were the 
 old political leaders, and a few of the officers from our 
 own section. 
 
 It was unfortunate that the three representatives in the 
 Confederate congress, from East Tennessee, were intense 
 in their condemnation of the course of the Union people. 
 They were naturally looked to by the authorities at Rich- 
 mond for information and advice as to the condition of 
 things in their districts. Two of them, Joseph B. Heiskell 
 and William G. Swan, were men of decided ability. The 
 
The Flight. 413 
 
 first named, though still a young man, had become eminent 
 as a lawyer, which reputation he fully sustained for more 
 than twenty years after the close of the war. He was 
 honorable in all things, but from some cause he had become 
 extreme in his views and feelings. Mr. Swan, though not 
 quite so able a lawyer as Mr. Heiskell, was quite his equal, 
 in shrewdness, sagacity and natural ability. He too, was 
 exceedingly ultra, except as to his own personal friends. 
 These he was willing to shield and protect. Personal 
 friendship counted for much with him even amid the bitter 
 strife of civil war. The third of these representatives, 
 William H. Tibbs, was perhaps more extreme than either 
 of the others, but of far less capacity. 
 
 Whatever the truth may be, it was universally charged 
 and believed at that time, that the policy pursued in East 
 Tennessee was largely the result of the advice of these 
 three men. It is certain that they did not arrest the 
 wrong, nor so far as was known to the public, protest 
 against it. It was also charged at the time, that they 
 earnestly insisted on the enforcement of the Confederate 
 conscription law in East Tennessee. This may have been 
 the case. How far they were supported in these meas- 
 ures by the two Confederate senators from this state does 
 not clearly appear. 
 
 There are a number of facts that tend to show that Mr. 
 Davis was animated by a sincere desire to deal kindly, and 
 even magnanimously, toward the Union people of East 
 Tennessee. I believe that such was the fact. He was an 
 honorable gentleman, and though somewhat bitter, he was 
 possessed of a clear sense of justice. 
 
 Fortunately for the Union people there were many per- 
 sons, both privates and officers, from other sections of the 
 state, and from other states, who never ceased to be South- 
 ern gentlemen, and who turned the shield of their protec- 
 tion in front of these people, as far as they dared, and in 
 this way helped to mitigate their hard condition. I should 
 be unjust to both the living and the dead if I were to fail 
 
414 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 to mention in this connection the names of Colonel H. 
 Casey Young, of Memphis, since the war a prominent 
 member of congress for several terms ; James W. Gillespie, 
 Colonel of the Forty-third regiment Tennessee Volunteers ; 
 Colonel D, M. Key, since distinguished by holding seats in 
 the cabinet, in the senate, and on the federal bench, and 
 Colonel Robert B. Vance, of North Carolina. The Hon. 
 Samuel A. Smith, a prominent Democratic member of 
 congress, from the Chattanooga district for a number of 
 terms before the war, and Mr. John C. Burch, since the 
 war a distinguished Nashville editor, also comptroller of 
 the state, both seem to have been, at this time, animated 
 by the most generous sentiments, as will appear from ex- 
 tracts from their letters to persons in Richmond. I also 
 mention the names of Colonel A. M. Perry, ex-governor 
 of Florida; Lieutenant Joseph H. Speed, of Alabama; 
 Colonel George H. Monsarat, of Memphis ; Colonel Edward 
 Golliday, of Lebanon, Tennessee, and Major T. S. Webb 
 and Colonel Louis A. J. Dupre, of Memphis. I also men- 
 tion the noble Colonel D. H. Cummings, of our own sec- 
 tion. Colonel Young, while serving as the Adjutant-Gen- 
 eral of General W. H. Carroll, when the latter was in 
 command in East Tennessee, showed by many acts that he 
 was both a just and a humane man. The people of East 
 Tennessee owe to him a debt of gratitude for his justice 
 that they can never repay. 
 
 In this connection, I would do injustice to a noble gen- 
 tleman and a gallant Confederate officer, should I fail to 
 mention, in fitting terms of praise, Colonel Robert F. 
 Looney, of Memphis. 
 
 I quote extracts from the letters of Mr. S. A. Smith and 
 Frank W. Lea, to show that at this time men were being 
 sent to Southern prisons solely because of their political 
 opinions. 
 
 Mr. Smith wrote as follows : 
 
The Flight. 415 
 
 "Cleveland, Tenn., January 8, 1862. 
 "Colonel Charles M. McGhee. 
 
 ^'■Dear Sir: — James S. Bradford, of this county, was ar- 
 rested some time since and sent to Tuscaloosa. Mr. Brad- 
 ford was originally a Union man, but I know of no other 
 charge that has been brought against him. Since the sep- 
 aration of the state from the Federal Government, he has 
 recommended submission to the will of the majority of the 
 people of the state. . . . Now that everything is calm 
 and quiet, it is believed by the original secessionists, of 
 whom I am one, that Bradford ought to be released. You 
 know that I would be the last one who would screen any- 
 one who had any connection with toryism in East Ten- 
 nessee. I am satisfied, however, that Bradford had noth- 
 ing to do with it, and was arrested simply because he had 
 been a Union man. . . . You have only inquired of 
 me as to Bradford. I might, perhaps, give you the names 
 of others who have been subjected to equally as great out- 
 rages by the petty personal prejudices of some of our re- 
 cent converts who are now in brief authority. 
 "Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 "Sam'l a. Smith." 
 
 Mr. Lea also wrote as follows : 
 
 "Cleveland, Tenn., January ^, 1862. 
 "Colonel Charles M. McGhee. 
 
 ^'■Dear Sir: — I have received your request to write you the 
 facts about the arrest of James S. Bradford by Captain W. 
 L. Brown's command, and he was a few days after sent to 
 Tuscaloosa. I feel confident that his arrest and transporta- 
 tion from here must have been done under a misconception 
 of his position as regards the rebellious feeling that has 
 disturbed East Tennessee, and, had an investigation been 
 allowed, he would have been discharged without spot or 
 blemish. It is true he was originally a Union man, . . . 
 but, before the period at which our state linked her future 
 with the Southern Confederacy, he became a loyal South- 
 
416 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ern man, and from that day exerted all his influence and 
 power for peace and submission. I know that it told to 
 such a degree that their numbers were greatly lessened 
 amongst us. Franck W.Lea." 
 
 Nothing that I can say will so clearly reveal the true 
 condition of the Union people of East Tennessee, at this 
 time, as the letters of Hon. Robertson Topp, Colonel H. 
 C. Young, and Mr. John C. Burch, herein inserted. It 
 must be kept in mind that all these gentlemen were Con- 
 federates in high standing with the authorities, one of them 
 being on the staff of General Carroll, and that these letters 
 were the enforced protests of these honorable gentlemen 
 against the wrongs which were at that time inflicted on 
 these suffering people, largely by the instigation of our own 
 public men of East Tennessee. 
 
 The Hon. Robertson Topp, a distinguished citizen of 
 Memphis, under date of October 26, 1861, in a letter to 
 Robert Josselyn, intended for President Davis (this was 
 before the bridges were burned) , says : 
 
 "More than one hundred persons have been arrested in 
 East Tennessee, without warrants in some cases, marched 
 great distances, and carried into court on no other charge 
 than that they were Union men. In one case, an old man 
 named Duggan, a Methodist preacher, was arrested, car- 
 ried fifty miles on foot (he being a, large, fleshy man) , re- 
 fused the privilege of riding his own horse, and all they 
 had against him was that, in February last, he had prayed 
 for the Union. . . 
 
 "Just as the people were quieting down, getting recon- 
 ciled, raising volunteers, etc., they commenced these ar- 
 rests, which have gone far to poison the minds of the 
 people against the government, and, if tolerated and per- 
 sisted in, the people of that end of the state, at a critical 
 moment, will rise up enemies, instead of friends. You 
 ask me who makes these arrests. As far as I can learn. 
 
The Flight. 417 
 
 they are instigated by a few malicious, troublesome men 
 in and around Knoxville." 
 
 (Indorsement.) 
 "Referred to the secretary of war, that such inquiry 
 may be made and action taken as will prevent, as far as 
 we may, such proceedings as are herein described. 
 
 *'J. D." 
 The Hon. H. C. Young says : 
 
 "Headquarters Carroll's Brigade, 
 
 Knoxville, Tenn., December 19, 1861. 
 "Hon. D. M, Currin, Richmond, Va. 
 
 '■''Dear Sir: — . . . In September, Major-General Polk 
 sent General W. H. Carroll here for the purpose of en- 
 deavoring to bring the people over to the support of the 
 Confederate government, and to enlist one or more regi- 
 ments for the army. General Carroll succeeded beyond 
 his expectations, raising and organizing in a very short 
 time a full regiment. . . . By these (bad men) and 
 these alone were the bridges burned, and other depreda- 
 tions committed, while the mass of the people were en- 
 tirely ignorant of their designs and utterly opposed to any 
 such wickedness and folly. The numbers engaged in these 
 outrages have, I know, been greatly overestimated, as facts 
 have developed in the investigations that have been made 
 by the court-martial now in session at this place, which 
 satisfy me beyond doubt that there was not at the time 
 the bridges were burned 500 men in all East Tennessee who 
 knew anything of it or who contemplated any organized 
 opposition to the government. . . . Scouting parties 
 were sent out in every direction, who arrested hundreds 
 suspected of disloyalty and incarcerated them in prison 
 until almost every jail in the eastern end of the state was 
 filled with poor, ignorant and for the most part harmless 
 men who had been guilty of no crime save that of lending 
 27 
 
418 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 a too credulous ear to the corrupt demagogues whose coun- 
 sels have led them astray. Among those thus captured 
 were a number of bridge burners. These latter were tried 
 and promptly executed. . . . About 400 of the poor 
 victims of designing leaders have been sent to Tuscaloosa 
 as prisoners of war, leaving in many instances their 
 families in a helpless and destitute condition. The great- 
 est distress prevails throughout the entire country in con- 
 sequence of the various arrests that have been made, to- 
 gether with the facts that the horses and the other prop- 
 erty of the parties that have been arrested have been 
 seized by the soldiers and in many cases appropriated to 
 personal uses or wantonly destroyed. 
 
 "Old political animosities and private grudges have been 
 revived, and bad men among our friends are availing 
 themselves of the opportunity afforded them by bringing 
 Southern men to hunt down with the ferocity of blood- 
 hounds all those against whom they entertain any feeling 
 of dislike. . . . The wretched condition of these un- 
 fortunate people appeals to the sympathy and commisera- 
 tion of every humane man. When in Richmond a short 
 time since, I was present at an interview with the Presi- 
 dent, and feel assured that he has no disposition to exer- 
 cise any unnecessary severity toward the deluded dupes. 
 Those best acquainted with affairs here are fully impressed 
 with the belief that if the proper course were pursued, all 
 East Tennessee could be united in support of the Con- 
 federate government. 
 
 "Respectfully your friend, 
 
 "H. C. Young." 
 
 Let it be remembered that the foregoing was written by 
 an officer on the staff of General Carroll. 
 
 The following is the letter of Mr. John C. Burch : 
 
The Flight. 419 
 
 "Richmond, Va., January 26, 1862. 
 "His Excellency the President of the Confederate 
 States — 
 
 '^Sir: — In passing through East Tennessee, I have been 
 informed by a gentleman of integrity, and whose loyalty 
 to the Confederacy has never been questioned, that some 
 forty-five or fifty of the citizens of that section of country 
 (Bradley county) have been arrested by persons having 
 or assuming to have military authority under this govern- 
 ment, that after arrest the most of them have been told 
 they must volunteer or be sent to the government prison 
 at Tuscaloosa, Alabama, and that those who refused to 
 volunteer under such compulsion have been sent to and im- 
 prisoned at Tuscaloosa where they now remain. 
 
 "The names of the persons thus dealt with, as far as my 
 information extends, are as follows : Dr. John G, Brown, 
 Charles B. Champion, James S. Bradford, Allen Marlow, 
 Sidney Wise, John F. Kinchelow, Samuel Hunt, — Potts, 
 W. R. Davis, — Gamble, Thomas L. Cate, John Bean, Sr,, 
 and John Boon. These men were arrested by a captain 
 of Tennessee Cavalry, and as I learn without any specifi- 
 cation of charges and without the examination of a single 
 witness, they were hurried off to imprisonment. Levi 
 Trewhitt, William Hunt, Stephen Beard, John McPher- 
 son, George Munsey, — ThomjDson were taken to Knox- 
 ville, but had no investigation before any tribunal. The 
 first two were sent from thence to Tuscaloosa. The re- 
 maining four were released either on parole or uncondi- 
 tionally, but after returning to their homes, they were 
 arrested by the captain of cavalry before alluded to and 
 also sent to Tuscaloosa. As I am informed, none of the 
 persons whose names I have given were taken in arms or 
 suspicioned of having been in arms against the govern- 
 ment. 
 
 "It is insisted and I presume correctly that the terror en- 
 
420 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 gendered by these arrests was an efficient cause in chang- 
 ing public sentiment in East Tennessee. 
 
 "Respectfully, 
 
 "John C. Burch." 
 
 (Indorsement, presumably by Mr. Davis.) 
 "Secretary of War, for attention : 
 
 "Those who acted for the government can inform you 
 whether political arrests were made and prisoners sent to 
 Tuscaloosa as herein affirmed." 
 
 Thus it is incontestably established by the testimony of 
 five honorable Confederate citizens that hundreds of Union 
 men were arrested and imprisoned solely because of their 
 Union sentiments. 
 
 The condition of the Union men of East Tennessee was 
 at that time rendered still more helpless and hopeless by 
 orders issued to agents to search for and seize their arms. 
 All houses were to be searched and all arms seized. This 
 was in violation of the bill of rights in the constitution of 
 the state in three particulars, namely, "that the people shall 
 be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions 
 from unreasonable searches and seizures ; that no man's 
 property shall be taken or applied to public use . . . 
 without just compensation being made therefor," and 
 "that the free white men of this state have the right to 
 keep and bear arms for their common defense." 
 
 The last declaration is but the embodiment of a senti- 
 ment springing up in the heart of every freeman. The 
 highest indignity that can be put on a spirited man is to 
 strip him of his arms. With a mountain people their 
 arms are the true mark and insignia of liberty. Without 
 them half of their manhood is gone. Rulers, when they 
 would enslave a people, first take away their arms. But 
 for the fact of the utter hopelessness of resistance, not a 
 gun would have been surrendered without bloodshed. 
 Most of these brave people were disarmed one by one. 
 Some, however, to avoid humiliation such as had never 
 
The Flight. 421 
 
 befallen them, nor their ancestors before them, sought the 
 recesses of the hills or mountains, and there, with their 
 trusty guns, awaited the coming of a better day. 
 
 One more cause of discontent awaited these brave-spirited 
 Union people. This quickly followed the disarming. 
 These men, who had thus far resisted every seductive ap- 
 peal and every intimidation, and had grown more defiant 
 with each new wrong put upon them, must now yield their 
 manhood and fight for a government they disliked, and 
 against the one they loved with more than a mother's love. 
 Squads of soldiers were sent out over the country to gather 
 up the men liable to military service under the Confeder- 
 ate conscript law. These were to be put into a camp for 
 instruction, at Knoxville, and from time to time sent off 
 to fill up depleted Southern companies and regiments. 
 
 And now followed a general exodus of Union men. 
 Great as were the dangers and hardships of seeking se- 
 curity in Kentucky, by a journey through the wild moun- 
 tains, these were infinitely preferable in their estimation 
 to service against the government of their choice. Im- 
 mediately the minds of almost the entire male population, 
 of age for military duty, were turned toward Kentucky. As 
 fast as they could procure guides and companions, they 
 silently slipped away on their perilous journey. Many had 
 already gone and were enrolled in regiments which helped 
 to swell the army of deliverance, waiting over the border 
 for the time for their return. 
 
 In the whole history of the war nothing can be found so 
 blind, so infatuated, so absolutely devoid of wisdom and 
 statesmanship, as the conduct of those who dictated the 
 policy of the Confederate authorities toward the Union 
 people of East Tennessee. It was the policy of coercion. 
 The mistake was in thinking that a high-spirited, proud 
 people could be forced, contrary to all their traditions and 
 glorious history, as they believed, into the support of a gov- 
 ernment they hated. As I have shown in another chapter, 
 after the June election in 1861, when the people of the 
 
422 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 state decided to cast their fortunes with their brethren of 
 the South, especially after the action of the Greeneville con- 
 vention, a majority of the Union people were willing to 
 abide the result, so far as to remain quietly at home un- 
 til the national government should be able to come to 
 their relief and restore its authority. Most of the men 
 who finally fled to Kentucky and entered the army did not 
 at first contemplate such a thing. They were willing to 
 pursue their usual avocations, on their farms, raising stock 
 and grain for sale, and for the support of their families. 
 By conciliation and toleration, such as were exhibited 
 toward the Union people in Southwest Virginia and "West- 
 ern North Carolina, thousands who crossed the mountains 
 as exiles and entered the Federal army might have been 
 kept at home as producers and peaceable citizens. But 
 madness ruled the hour. Folly held its high carnival. 
 Personal and political animosity were in the saddle. The 
 feeling among their enemies at home was that these men 
 should be coerced to fight for the South, or driven out of 
 the country. Under this policy nearly three-fourths of the 
 male population became exposed to arrest or imprisonment, 
 or to be forced to fight for a cause they disliked. Despera- 
 tion at last drove them into the hills, or into exile. They 
 were told by their own people that they were "tories," and 
 that neither they nor their families should remain on the 
 soil of Tennessee ; and yet, when goaded to desperation 
 they made an attempt to escape from this terrible condi- 
 tion, they were arrested in their flight and sent to Southern 
 prisons. And all this was done under the advice of home 
 leaders. It was not the work of Mr. Davis, nor the Con- 
 federate authorities. 
 
 But this was civil war. If the conditions had been re- 
 versed, the Union men would doubtless have been just as 
 bitter as were the Secessionists. In fact, it is not surpris- 
 ing that Southern men were bitter against the Union peo- 
 ple of East Tennessee. They believed that the latter 
 should have joined them in their great struggle for inde- 
 
The Flight. 423 
 
 pendence. From their point of view, the Union men were 
 false to their brethren of the South in the hour of their 
 supreme need. On the other hand, the Union men believed 
 the Secessionists, from selfish and ambitious motives, were 
 attempting to destroy a great and beneficent government. 
 Neither side had any charity or toleration for the other ; so 
 hate and bitter passion ran riot on both sides. Perhaps in 
 the end it might have been better for the Union men of 
 East Tennessee to have submitted to the mil of the major- 
 ity of the state after the June election, as a majority of 
 them would have done if they had been treated with clem- 
 ency and toleration. But, unfortunately, they were not 
 thus treated. Thousands, if not tens of thousands, of 
 these men, who would have remained at home as peaceable 
 citizens if a policy of moderation and conciliation had 
 been adopted, were driven into exile and the army solely 
 from a sense of insecurity. In violent revolutions, result- 
 ing in civil war, it is always an overwhelming calamity for 
 a people to be divided in opinion and action. Perhaps in 
 such a case it would be better for the minority to yield. 
 
 It must be kept in mind that the Union people were per- 
 fectly quiet and peaceable until after the bridges were 
 burned. Let it be kept in mind, also, that the system of 
 arrests and imprisonments had been commenced before 
 that event. We have just seen that the Hon. Robertson 
 Topp, in his letter, intended for Mr. Davis, of October 
 26th — twelve days before the bridge burning — said : "More 
 than one hundred persons have been arrested in East Ten- 
 nessee on no other charge than that they were 'Union 
 men.' " Here is the evidence of a distinguished Confed- 
 erate gentleman, written at the time to a friend, after hav- 
 ing spent some days in Knoxville. And after the bridges 
 were burned, and it was found that no Federal army was 
 coming, the Union men again became perfectly quiet, and 
 remained so for twenty-two months following. During all 
 these long, gloomy months, arrests and imprisonments 
 
424 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 numbering thousands were made, so that at last most of 
 the male j^opulation were driven into exile. 
 
 By the spring and early summer of 1862, when it be- 
 came evident that the conscript act would be enforced, 
 nearly every male inhabitant, liable to military duty, who 
 was able to endure the hardships of the journey and could 
 leave his family, had determined to seek safety in flight. 
 The hardships of a journey in winter, and the hope that 
 the storm would pass by, that a milder policy might pre- 
 vail, had kept thousands at home until that time. This 
 pleasant hope was now dispelled. Sometimes whole com- 
 munities were seized with the determination to leave. In 
 April, 1862, between four and five hundred young men 
 and boys from New Market and its vicinity, Jefiferson 
 county, started as refugees to Kentucky. Some of them 
 were armed, and they seem to have expected that their 
 number and arms would secure them safety. In this they 
 were mistaken. In crossing Powell's Valley, when in 
 sight of the Cumberland Mountains, where there was 
 safety, nearly forty miles from home, after a feeble effort 
 at resistance, they were intercepted and captured, except a 
 few who were in the rear, by a regiment of East Tennessee 
 Confederate cavalry. 
 
 As soon as these unfortunate men were captured, though 
 already exhausted by their journey, they were placed in 
 line for an immediate march to Knoxville, distant more 
 than forty miles. They were hurried forward as rapidly 
 as they could be forced to go. It was a hot, sultry after- 
 noon when they arrived at Knoxville. They were driven 
 to the already crowded jail or small jail-yard, into which 
 they were huddled, making their condition almost intoler- 
 able. Soon afterwards, they were marched under a strong 
 guard to the railroad and sent off to Tuscaloosa, or some 
 other prison, to be held during the war as political pris- 
 oners. 
 
 And who were these young men who were thus sent off 
 to Southern prisons? They were the tender and gentle 
 
The Flight. 425 
 
 sons of the intelligent and independent farmers around 
 New Market and of the beautiful and rich valley of the 
 same name, celebrated all over the state and beyond it as 
 one of the fairest and wealthiest regions in all the land. 
 Many of these young men were the descendants of the 
 pioneer Covenanters who had helped to win King's Moun- 
 tain, who had planted civilization in the valley of the 
 Holston, and who had defended and held the state against 
 the terrible Indian tribes of the great wilderness west and 
 south of them. A better population nowhere existed. 
 
 And what was the crime of these innocent, ingenuous 
 young men? They still loved the government of their 
 fathers, and were trying to escape from one they did not 
 love. This was the "very head and front of their offend- 
 ing." 
 
 The imprisonment of these young men was done under 
 the order of General E. Kirby Smith, who had recently 
 taken command of this department. General Smith was 
 of Connecticut parentage. He had the reputation, both 
 before and since the war, of being a fair and a just, indeed 
 a good man, and that was true of him in his normal con- 
 dition. But he had caught the spirit then prevailing in 
 East Tennessee and was no longer himself. 
 
 Soon after the accession of General Smith, the celebrated 
 orders directing Mrs. Andrew Johnson, Mrs. W. G. Brown- 
 low, Mrs. Horace Maynard and Mrs. William B. Carter, 
 with their families, to leave the state and go north, were 
 issued at his command, as stated on their face. These 
 families were ordered to leave in thirty-six hours. Not a 
 word of comment is necessary as to the time allowed. The 
 time, however, was afterwards extended. Nor will I dwell 
 a single moment on the policy and justice of thus sending 
 from their homes harmless, innocent ladies, who were 
 especially noted for their mildness and peaceable disposi- 
 tion, all of whom were verging on old age, and two of 
 them well advanced in life. 
 
 It is no justification of such a policy to say that General 
 
426 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 S. P. Carter afterwards sent out of Knoxville women and 
 children, nor that Andrew Johnson did the same at Nash- 
 ville and General Sherman at Atlanta. It is enough to 
 say that the practice, except in cases of actual danger to 
 the general cause, is one to be discountenanced rather than 
 encouraged. 
 
 The necessities of the situation in East Tennessee natu- 
 rally called forth a class of men known as guides or pilots, 
 who engaged in the hazardous business of conducting 
 Union refugees through the woods and mountains to 
 places of safety, generally the Federal army in Kentucky. 
 These men became exceedingly skillful in this business. 
 They did not expect to fight their way through, but by 
 traveling at night and pursuing unfrequented and pathless 
 ways — cautiously, silently and stealthily creeping past 
 their enemies, who were always patrolling the roads and 
 mountain passes — thus to make their escape from danger. 
 There were a number of guides who became celebrated in 
 this business. Perhaps the most noted of these was 
 Captain Daniel Ellis, of Carter county, who has pub- 
 lished a book of his adventures, full of thrilling interest. 
 He was a man of great coolness, daring and shrewdness, 
 always able to extricate himself from perils that at the 
 time seemed to be absolutely hopeless. In him the future 
 writers of historical romances will find a second Horse- 
 shoe Robinson. Captain Ellis still lives in his native 
 county, enjojdng the esteem and confidence of his fellow- 
 citizens. I believe that he claims to have piloted to the 
 Federal army, in Kentucky and Tennessee, ten thousand 
 men. 
 
 Spencer Deaton, of Knox county, was another celebrated 
 pilot. He conducted many parties through the mountains. 
 At last, probably in 1864, he was captured and carried to 
 Richmond, where he was tried, condemned and hanged as 
 a spy in Castle Thunder, 
 
 Isaac Bolinger, of Campbell county, Seth Lea and Frank 
 Hodge, of Knox, Washington Vann and William B. Rey- 
 
The Flight. 427 
 
 nolds, of Anderson, and James Lane, of Greene, were 
 all successful pilots and conducted many parties to Ken- 
 tucky, Doubtless there were others, whose names I have 
 not learned. 
 
 Captain W. B. Reynolds, of Anderson county, became 
 quite noted as a guide, a spy, a recruiting officer and a 
 fighter. He acted in all these capacities as occasion de- 
 manded. No danger kept him from undertaking the most 
 perilous trips. He would slip into Knoxville, bringing 
 messages and news, showing himself to such persons as 
 he wished to see, then, ascertaining all that was important 
 about the Confederate army, would slip out and return to 
 Kentucky, leading back a small number of recruits or 
 refugees. His daring often amounted to brazen effrontery. 
 Captain Reynolds was a veteran of the Mexican War. 
 
 There were thousands of noble women in East Tennes- 
 see who were always ready to help these refugees by every 
 means in their power. Perhaps none of these was so 
 widely and so favorably known as Mrs . Jeannette Laurimer 
 Mabry, of Knox county, the wife of Colonel George W. 
 Mabry, a wealthy farmer. Her husband and all his 
 family early espoused the cause of the Confederacy, but 
 she remained unflinchingly true to the Union. She was 
 at all times outspoken in its favor. Being a woman of 
 prominence, by reason of her social position and wealth, 
 and possessing a large degree of intelligence, her open 
 stand for the Union became widely known. Her influ- 
 ence among her neighbors and acquaintances in the 
 country in holding them true and stedfast to the govern- 
 ment was remarkable. Besides she had the reputation, 
 and deservedly too, of being the most universally charita- 
 ble woman in the country. She never turned the needy 
 away empty-handed, nor the hungry vinfed. No wonder 
 such a woman had influence. When, therefore, the dark 
 days of 1861 and 1862 came, and the males of almost 
 whole communities were fleeing for safety, these men 
 naturally turned to this noble woman for advice and 
 
428 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 assistance. The poor, starving, needy refugee, always 
 found in her a generous friend ; the timid and the fearful 
 loyalist took new hope from her unshaken faith and 
 courage. She always knew the latest news from the 
 front. If a guide came in from the Federal lines his 
 mission was not considered complete without communi- 
 cating in some way with her. And thus she lived through 
 the war, aiding in her humble way the cause of her 
 country. And around the camp-fires in Kentucky, and 
 in other distant fields where duty called them, no name 
 left behind was uttered more frequently by the exiles, 
 nor with a tenderer or more sincere invocation of a bless- 
 ing on it, than that of Jeannette Laurimer Mabry. 
 
 It is impossible to give even an approximate estimate of 
 the number of men who were secretly conducted to the 
 Federal lines. Possibly it amounted to fifteen or twenty 
 thousand. Estimating that thirty-five thousand men from 
 East Tennessee entered the Federal army during the war, 
 including those who became connected with the organiza- 
 tions of other states, and were therefore not counted as 
 Tennessee troops, the estimate I have made seems reason- 
 able. Besides a considerable number of persons fled from 
 East Tennessee who did not enter the army. 
 
 The condition of the Union men of East Tennessee dur- 
 ing the latter part of the year 1861 and during the year 
 1862, and until September of the year 1863, was gloomy 
 beyond description. No pen can picture the mental 
 anxiety they endured. Many, it must be remembered, 
 could not get away. Some were physically unable to en- 
 dure the hardships of such a perilous journey on foot 
 through the mountains. Some found their families in such 
 a helpless condition that they could not leave. Some 
 hoped until the last that the terrors and hardships which 
 encompassed them would be mitigated, and that their con- 
 dition would become more tolerable. It was hard, very 
 hard to leave home and family as an exile, not knowing 
 when, nor whether at all, they should ever return. It was 
 
The Flight. 429 
 
 a sad, hard lot which thus forced men to such a step. 
 Dark indeed must things have seemed. But whether men 
 stayed or went, there was peril before them. 
 
 Many persons who could not go, did not dare to remain 
 at home. So, they hid themselves in the hills or the 
 mountains, coming in when no danger seemed to be near. 
 
 An overwhelming sense of danger at all times filled the 
 minds of the Union men. The feet of the enemy, often 
 strangers, pressed the soil, and roamed in triumph over 
 the valleys and hills once their own. These hills and val- 
 leys, lately so lovely to the Union men, had now become 
 almost hateful to them. Even the great mountains which 
 they loved so fondly, seemed almost to mock them in 
 their despair. The chill of evening had settled on their 
 minds. 
 
 Overwhelming and terrible was their condition. While 
 the excitement of the canvasses of 1861 lasted, it gave 
 courage and buoyancy to their minds. But when it 
 was no longer safe to speak except in a whisper, when a 
 new, a hostile government was manifesting its spirit, as 
 well as its power by arrests and by imprisonments in 
 distant states, then indeed they awoke to a sad realization of 
 the change. As time wore on, and the policy of the authori- 
 ties in East Tennessee became more and more rigorous, often 
 despair, darker than midnight, overcast their minds. 
 Dangers were on every hand — danger of arrest, of conscrip- 
 tion, of imprisonment, of transportation — these were a few of 
 the things that rendered the condition of loyal men so 
 desperate from the day the state seceded until September, 
 1863. Add to this the fact that they had no reliable news 
 from the North. Then consider the fact, that scarcely a 
 ray of hope cheered them until Grant, the coming general 
 of the war, won Donelson in the winter of 1862, and that 
 after the spring of that year there was no real progress 
 made until the triumphs of Vicksburg and of Gettysburg 
 suddenly burst upon an impatient and almost despairing 
 people in 1863. 
 
430 The Causes of Secession. 
 
 Hard as was the lot of the refugees, the condition of those 
 who remained at home, in mental anxiety and fear, was 
 even harder, especially if they were men of prominence. 
 During the year 1861 and a part of 1862, the Union seemed 
 to them to be dissolving and melting away. There were 
 feebleness and indecision in the North ; unparalleled energy 
 and determination in the South. The cry of war rang from 
 the Potomac to the Rio Grande. In only one small section 
 in all this vast region were the people still loyal to the old 
 flag, and their voice was now silenced amid the din of war. 
 
 During the long, long months of waiting, hoping and 
 despairing, following June 8, 1861, how the hearts of the 
 Union men grew sick and faint ! The darkness of despond- 
 ency overcast them. At all times the odium of being 
 traitors to the South rested on them. If the South tri- 
 umphed, for all future time they were to be regarded — were 
 then in fact regarded — as the Tories of the Revolution are 
 regarded by this generation. Social ostracism and outlawry 
 were to be their fate and that of their children. Like Cain, 
 their punishment was almost greater than they could bear. 
 
 The intense anxiety of these people can never be esti- 
 mated. Cut off from communication with the North, filled 
 with doubt and perplexity, with the noise of the storm of 
 war constantly in their ears, with no light breaking from 
 any quarter, surrounded by dangers and threatened with 
 personal violence, what situation could have been more 
 gloomy? It looked as if all was lost. They could not 
 forecast the brightness of the future. And yet, amid all 
 this gloom, they remained true and firm. The darker the 
 hour, the more intensely glowed their love for the Union. 
 
 The very dangers which surrounded them, increased 
 their dislike of the new government, and heightened their 
 love of the old. Never did a people love the Union so 
 lavishly as did these heart-sick people. Little wonder they 
 wept and laughed and shouted like children, when in 
 1863, they once more beheld the old flag.^ 
 * The author deems it onlj' just to say that personally he never had any 
 
The Flight. 431 
 
 cause of complaint against the Confederate authorities. He was alwaj's 
 treated kindly by them, and enjoyed as many privileges as were consistent 
 with a state of civil war. He received courtesies from numerous Confeder- 
 ate officers. Scores of them visited his house. All knew he had been a 
 Union leader, and yet their treatment was kind and cordial. 
 
432 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 WAITING OVER THE BORDER. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln determines to relieve East Tennessee — Appoints General 
 Robert Anderson to lead an army for this purpose — He retires — Then 
 General Sherman — He declines— General Buell succeeds Sherman — 
 Views of Sherman — Sherman and Buell both at first in favor of an ad- 
 vance into East Tennessee — Both change their minds — Mr. Lincoln 
 and General McClellan urge Buell to advance — Correspondence — Buell 
 opposed to an independent expedition — General Thomas — General 
 ZoUicofFer — Battle of Fishing Creek — Way open to East Tennessee — 
 General Grant asks permission to take Fort Henry — Capture of that 
 place — Invests Fort Donelson — Surrender of that place — Battle of 
 Shiloh — Confederate lines forced southward — Way again open to East 
 Tennessee — Buell's objections to an advance considered — Importance 
 to the Confederacy of holding East Tennessee and its line of railroads — 
 War should not have lasted so long— No reflection on the military 
 capacity of General George H. Thomas. 
 
 When Mr. Lincoln heard, in 1861, the romantic and thrill- 
 ing story of the loyalty of the people of East Tennessee, of 
 their sublime struggle for the Union, and of their continued 
 faithfulness amid general desertion in the South, his sym- 
 pathy was deeply touched in behalf of these unyielding 
 and unconquerable people. He at once determined to 
 rescue them from their perils by sending an army to their 
 support. The first suggestion of the kind, so far as we 
 can see, sprang up in the kind heart and emanated from 
 the brain of this extraordinary man. In the summer of 
 1861, as we have seen, he appointed General Robert An- 
 derson to command an army to be concentrated in Ken- 
 tucky. Anderson was selected with special reference to 
 this specific object. He did not attempt to conceal the 
 fact that he was af)pointed to lead an army designed for 
 the relief of the people of East Tennessee. We have also 
 seen that General Anderson, sick and broken down in 
 health, was soon overwhelmed with the hopelessness of 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 433 
 
 his situation. Therefore, in October, he asked to be re- 
 lieved of his command, which was accordingly done. 
 General W. T, Sherman was his successor, who, likewise 
 in a few weeks, despairing of accomplishing anything in 
 Kentucky, asked to be relieved. About the middle of 
 November, General Don Carlos Buell was appointed to 
 succeed him. While Sherman was in command in Ken- 
 tucky in the Department of the Cumberland, General 
 Ormsby M. Mitchel was stationed at Cincinnati in com- 
 mand of the Department of the Ohio. He was engaged in 
 organizing Ohio troops and sending them forward to Camp 
 Dick Robinson, in Kentucky, for the use of General Sher- 
 man. General George H. Thomas was in command at 
 Dick Robinson under Sherman. On the 20th of October, 
 the secretary of war, Mr. Cameron, and Ij. Thomas, adju- 
 tant-general of the army, were in Cincinnati, and while 
 there issued to General Mitchel an order to repair at once 
 to Camp Dick Robinson, and there "prepare troops for a 
 forward movement, the object being to take possession of 
 Cumberland Ford and Cumberland Gap and ultimately to 
 seize the railroad," in East Tennessee, at Knoxville. 
 
 General Mitchel entered upon the discharge of the 
 duties of his new command with all his usual energy. He 
 immediately commenced throwing forward from Cincin- 
 nati all the troops he could prepare for the field, to con- 
 centrate at once at Dick Robinson, ten or twelve regi- 
 ments, for the purpose of this expedition. As the field of 
 his operations was within the territory embraced by the 
 Department of General Sherman, and as General George 
 H. Thomas had been placed in command of the troops 
 at Camp Dick Robinson, soon there came to be serious 
 friction between General Mitchel and these several com- 
 manders. Mitchel, though assigned by the secretary of 
 war to a special duty, and apparently an independent com- 
 mand, was to report to Sherman. The latter was finally 
 opposed, as we shall see more fully, to the movement 
 28 
 
434 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 toward East Tennessee. He believed it unwise. On the 
 other hand, Mitchel regarded it as a military movement 
 of the first importance. He also believed it entirely 
 feasible with ten or twelve regiments and with suflScient 
 artillery. If any one could have succeeded in reaching 
 the railroad, in East Tennessee, and destroying the 
 bridges at that time, it was General Mitchel. He subse- 
 quently developed a tireless energy and a brilliant dash, 
 as well as military sagacity, similar to those displayed by 
 Sheridan and Stonewall Jackson. If he had lived, it can 
 scarcely be doubted that he would have become one of the 
 great generals of the war. He was a graduate of West 
 Point, and in 1862, won the rank of brevet major-general 
 by his operations in Alabama. 
 
 Sherman had constantly insisted on having more troops, 
 if the government expected to retain Kentucky. He be- 
 lieved that it would be impossible to hold Louisville and 
 Frankfort without a larger army, against a combined at- 
 tack of Johnston, Buckner and ZoUicoffer, much less 
 make offensive movements. He became exceedingly an- 
 noyed at the perplexities and difficulties which encom- 
 passed the cause of the Union in that state. 
 
 About the middle of October, Mr. Simon Cameron, 
 secretary of war, and Adjutant-General Lorenzo Thomas, 
 with a full staff of newspaper correspondents, stopped at 
 Louisville, on their return from St. Louis, to confer with 
 General Sherman. The latter pointed out in their con- 
 ference very fully the danger which threatened the na- 
 tional cause in that state, and after explaining that he 
 had a line three hundred miles long to defend, extending 
 from the mouth of the Big Sandy to Paducah, he insisted 
 that he needed 60,000 men for defense, and that for 
 oifensive operations — that is, to conquer and hold tlie 
 country to the Gulf of Mexico and the sea — he needed 
 200,000 men. Mr. Cameron, at this statement, threw 
 up his hands and exclaimed: "Great God, where are 
 they to come from?" General Sherman asserted "that 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 435 
 
 there were plenty of men in the North ready and willing 
 to come if he — the secretary of war — would only accept 
 their services ; . . . for it was a notorious fact that regi- 
 ments had been formed in all the North-western States 
 whose services had been refused by the war department, on 
 the ground that they would not be needed." ^ 
 
 Mr. James Guthrie, who was present, was called on for 
 his opinion as to the condition of affairs in Kentucky, and 
 he corroborated all General Sherman had said, and added, 
 what General Sherman says he had often heard him say, 
 "that no man who owned a slave or a mule in Kentucky 
 could be trusted." On the return of Mr. Cameron to 
 Washington, by some means a newspaper man got hold of 
 the fact and published it that General Sherman had de- 
 manded two hundred thousand men. Immediately the 
 report was current, both in the East and the West, that 
 he was "insane." Wherever he went this charge followed 
 him. It was not until after the battle of Shiloh, the next 
 April, that he was relieved from the injury of this cruel 
 and widely circulated slander. 
 
 It might possibly afiford a curious mathematical problem 
 to determine how many less men than 200,000 it finally 
 took, during the next three years, to clear out the country 
 to the Gulf of Mexico, as contemplated by General Sher- 
 man when he named that number. Then again, military 
 men ought to be able to say whether or not, with a 
 sufficient force, the Confederacy could have been cut in 
 two in 1861-62, as it was by this same general in 1864. 
 The truth is, General Sherman was greatly in advance in his 
 ideas of the men around him, excepting General Mitchel, 
 as well as in advance of the authorities in Washington. 
 
 Sherman, like General Buell, when first placed in com- 
 
 ^ " Sherman's Memoirs," Vol. I, pp. 200, 203. 
 
 The quota of Indiana, under the 75,000 call, was less than 5,000 men. 
 The governor oflfered 10,000. The governor of Ohio telegraphed : " We 
 will furnish the largest number you will receive." The governor of Mich- 
 igan oflfered to furnish 50,000 men. — " Life of Lincoln," by Ida M. Tarbell ; 
 "McClure's Magazine," February, 1899. 
 
436 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 mand of tlie Department of Ohio, appeared to think favor- 
 ably of the project of an expedition into East Tennessee. 
 No doubt he was encouraged in that direction by the 
 instructions he had from General McClellan. General 
 Buell at first seemed to heartily approve of the project 
 also. Mr. W. B. Carter in his letter of September 15, 
 1861, before quoted, says, that on his return to London, 
 Kentucky, from Tennessee, where he had been directing 
 the bridge burning, he found a message from Buell for 
 him to repair at once to Louisville to meet that general. 
 He says : 
 
 "One of Buell's objects in sending for me was to ask me 
 this question : 'You have just been over the road ; can I, 
 at this season of the year, march an army into East Ten- 
 nessee?' I replied: 'Much as I desire you to do so, 
 I feel obliged to say you can not do it.' " This was about 
 the 1st of December. Mr. Carter says Buell had "his 
 heart set on relieving East Tennessee." 
 
 All through the late fall of 1861 and the winter of 1862, 
 General McClellan was urging Buell to advance into East 
 Tennessee. On the 25th of November, he said: "I am 
 still convinced that political and strategical considerations 
 render a prompt movement in force on Eastern Tennessee 
 imperative. The object to be gained is to cut communi- 
 cation between the Mississippi Valley and Eastern Vir- 
 ginia ; to protect our Union friends in Tennessee, and to 
 re-establish the government of the Union in the eastern 
 portion of that state. I think we owe it to our Union 
 friends in Eastern Tennessee to protect them at all haz- 
 ards. First secure that, then, if you possess the means, 
 carry Nashville." 
 
 The matter of the relief of the Union men of East Ten- 
 nessee was still weighing heavily on Mr. Lincoln. In his 
 message to congress in December, he recommended "that 
 the loyal regions of East Tennessee and Western North 
 Carolina should be connected with Kentucky and other 
 faithful parts of the Union by railroad. I therefore re- 
 commend," said he, "as a military measure that congress 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 437 
 
 provide for the construction of such a road as speedily as 
 possible." Nothing ever resulted from this suggestion. 
 
 I have given General Buell the credit of being, at first, 
 like General Sherman, sincerely in sympathy with the 
 proposed expedition into East Tennessee. But, in a short 
 time, if such were the case, his mind underwent a decided 
 change. General McClellan continued to send him re- 
 enforcements, and to urge the imperative necessity of reliev- 
 ing East Tennessee. In a dispatch of November, 1861, he 
 said: "What is the reason of concentration of troops at 
 Louisville? I urge movement at once on Eastern Tennes- 
 see, unless it is impossible." 
 
 Again, November 29th, he said : "Keep up the hearts of 
 the Tennesseans. Make them feel that, far from any in- 
 tention of deserting them, all will be done to sustain 
 them. . . . I believe in attacks by concentrated masses, 
 but it seems to me, with the little local knowledge I pos- 
 sess, that you might attempt two movements — one on 
 Eastern Tennessee, say with 15,000 men, and a strong 
 attack on Nashville, as you propose, with, say 60,000 
 men." 
 
 Again, December 3, 1861, General McClellan wrote to 
 Buell, saying : "... Please send there, with the least 
 possible delay, troops enough to protect these men. I still 
 feel sure that the best strategical move in this case will be 
 that dictated by the simplest feeling of humanity. We 
 must preserve these noble fellows from harm ; everything 
 urges us to do that — faith, interest and loyalty. For the 
 sake of these Eastern Tennesseans who have taken part 
 with us, I would gladly sacrifice mere military advantages ; 
 they deserve our protection, and, at all hazards, they must 
 have it." . . . 
 
 These are noble words, and show that General McClellan 
 had a heart of genuine sympathy, whatever his faults as 
 a commander may have been. 
 
 Again, December 5th, General McClellan wrote to Gen- 
 eral Buell: " ... Let me again urge the necessity 
 of sending something into East Tennessee as promptly as 
 
438 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 possible ; our friends there have thrown their all into the 
 scale, and we must not desert them." 
 
 In the meantime, the East Tennesseans who were in the 
 North, and in Kentucky, were importunate in demanding 
 that something should be done for their suffering fellow- 
 countrymen at home. General Samuel P. Carter, on the 
 21st of November, wrote to the Hon. Horace Maynard : 
 " . . . Our men are most anxious to return to East- 
 ern Tennessee, not so much to see their families as to drive 
 the rebels from the country. . . . Two or three bat- 
 teries, and 10,000 men, provided even with powder and 
 lead for the people, could save Eastern Tennessee at this 
 time. "Will help never come?" . . . 
 
 On the 25th of November, General Carter wrote again 
 to the same gentleman : 
 
 "... I know not what will be the next move, but 
 hope most sincerely it may be toward Eastern Tennessee. 
 If something is not done, and that speedily, our people 
 will be cut up and ruined. . . . If we had a battery, 
 I believe we could go into Tennessee, and then we could 
 carry arms, or even powder and lead to furnish to our 
 people, I believe we could stay there. "Will help ever 
 come? . 
 
 "If it be possible, have it so arranged that the Eastern 
 Tennesseans shall not again, except in case of urgent and 
 pressing necessity, be ordered back to Central Kentucky. 
 Many would sooner perish in battle than turn their backs 
 toward the Tennessee lines again." . . . 
 
 On the 7th of December, 1861, the following dispatch 
 was sent from "Washington to General Buell : 
 
 "General D. C. Buell: 
 
 ""We have just had interviews with the President and 
 General McClellan, and find they concur fully with us in 
 respect to the East Tennessee expedition. Our people are 
 oppressed and pursued as beasts of the forest. The gov- 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 439 
 
 eminent must come to their relief. We are looking to you 
 with anxious solicitude to move in that direction. 
 
 "Andrew Johnson, 
 "Horace Maynard." 
 
 To which General Buell sent the following reply, on 
 the 8th : 
 
 "I have received your dispatch. I assure you I recog- 
 nize no more imperative duty and crave no higher honor 
 than that of rescuing our loyal friends in Tennessee, whose 
 sufferings and heroism I think I can appreciate. I have 
 seen Colonel Carter, and hope he is satisfied of this." 
 
 On the same day (October 8th) , Mr. Maynard wrote 
 the following caustic letter to General George H. Thomas : 
 
 "... You are still further from East Tennessee 
 than when I left you nearly six weeks ago. There is 
 shameful wrong somewhere ; I have not yet satisfied my- 
 self where. That movement so far has been disgraceful 
 to the country and to all concerned. I feel a sense of per- 
 sonal degradation from my connection with it greater than 
 from any part of my public actions. My heart bleeds for 
 these Tennessee troops. I learn they have not yet been 
 paid, and are left without either cavalry or artillery at 
 London. 
 
 "With Nelson, and the measles, and blue grass, and 
 nakedness, and hunger and poverty, and home-sickness, 
 the poor fellows have had a bitter exjDerience since they 
 left their homes to serve a government which as yet has 
 hardly given them a word of kindly recognition. The 
 soldiers of all the other states have a home government to 
 look after them. These have not, and but for Carter (Gen- 
 eral Samuel P.) , who has been like a father to them, they 
 would have sufi'ered still more severely. That they at 
 times get discouraged and out of heart, I do not wonder. 
 My assurances to them have failed so often that I should 
 be ashamed to look them in the face. . . . 
 
 "Horace Maynard.' 
 
440 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Mr. Maynard seems to have had. a poor opinion of Gen- 
 eral Nelson and Kentucky blue grass, as he ranked them 
 with measles and other horrible things. 
 
 On the 20th of December, the war department telegraphed 
 to General Buell : "Do you need more regiments than are 
 now under your orders; if so, how many?" The next 
 day Buell answered, saying : "I am not willing to say that 
 I need more regiments. I can use more with decided ad- 
 vantage, if they can be sent." Two days later, he stated 
 that "he had a force of 70,000 men; about 57,000 for 
 duty." 
 
 He then for the first time disclosed his plan ; that is, it 
 was "one of defense on the East" (in Kentucky toward 
 East Tennessee) "and of invasion on the South," that is 
 toward Nashville. 
 
 But General McClellan and Mr. Lincoln still pressed 
 the matter of relieving East Tennessee upon his considera- 
 tion. On December 29th, the former telegraphed him : 
 
 "Johnson, Maynard, etc, are again becoming frantic, 
 and have President Lincoln's sympathy excited. Political 
 considerations would make it advisable to get the arms and 
 troops into Eastern Tennessee at a very early day ; you 
 are, however, the best judge. Can you tell me about 
 when and in what force you will be in Eastern Tennes- 
 see? . . . Better get the Eastern Tennessee arms and 
 clothing into position for distribution as soon as possi- 
 ble. . . ." 
 
 On the same day. General Buell answered as follows : "I 
 intend a column of 12,000, with three batteries for East 
 Tennessee, but as I have telegraphed you, it is impossible 
 to fix a time for it to be there, so much depends on the 
 circumstances which may arise in the meantime. 
 In any event I must tell you, what I have been unwill- 
 ing to do all along, you will require more troops in Ken- 
 tucky. . . ." 
 
 It was now becoming painfully evident to those who had 
 the inside view of General Buell's movements, that he was 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 441 
 
 unwilling to do what he had been so earnestly and so often 
 urged to do, both by the President and the commander-in- 
 chief. The President doubtless saw, or suspected this 
 fact, when, on the 4th of January, 1862, he sent this 
 searching dispatch to him : 
 
 "Have arms gone forward for East Tennessee? Please 
 tell me the progress and condition of the movement in that 
 direction. Answer," 
 
 The time had at last come when General Buell must 
 deal with this question with explicitness. The President 
 would be put off no longer ; he must know the intentions 
 of his subordinate . Accordingly he wrote as follows to the 
 President, January 5, 1862 : 
 
 "To THE President: 
 
 "Arms can only go forward for East Tennessee under 
 the protection of an army. My organization of the troops 
 has had in view two columns with reference to that move- 
 ment : a division to move from Lebanon, and a brigade 
 to operate offensively or defensively according to circum- 
 stances on the Cumberland Gap route. 
 
 "While my preparations have had this movement con- 
 stantly in view, I will confess to your excellency that I 
 have been bound to it more by my sympathy for the peoj)le 
 of East Tennessee, and the anxiety with which you and the 
 general-in-chief have desired it, than by my opinion of its 
 wisdom as an unconditional measure. As earnestly as I 
 wish to accomplish it, my judgment has from the first 
 been decidedly against it, if it should render at all doubtful 
 the success of a movement against the great power of tlie 
 rebellion in the West, which is mainly arrayed on the line 
 from Columbus to Bowling Green, and can speedily be con- 
 centrated at any point of that line which is attacked singly. 
 
 D. C. Buell." 
 
 To this dispatch the President, with a sorrowful heart, 
 sent the following reply, January 6th : 
 
442 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 "Brigadier-General Buell : 
 
 "Your dispatch of yesterday has been received and it 
 disappoints and distresses me. . . . My distress is that 
 our friends in East Tennessee are being hanged and driven 
 to despair, and even now I fear are thinking of taking rebel 
 arms for the sake of personal protection. In this we lose 
 the most valuable state we have in the South. My dis- 
 patch to which yours is an answer was sent with the 
 knowledge of Senator Johnson and Representative May- 
 nard, of East Tennessee, and they will be upon me to 
 know the answer which I can not safely show them. They 
 would despair ; possibly resign to go and save their 
 families somehow, or die with them. 
 
 "I do not intend this to be an order in any sense, but 
 merely as intimated before to show you the grounds of my 
 anxiety. Yours, very truly, 
 
 "A. Lincoln." 
 
 On the same day, General McClellan sent the following 
 dispatch to General Buell, marked "confidential:" 
 
 "My Dear General: . . . There are few things I 
 have more at heart than the prompt movement of a strong 
 column into Eastern Tennessee . The political consequences 
 of the delay of this movement will be much more severe 
 than you seem to anticipate. If relief is not soon afforded 
 these people we shall lose them entirely, and with them the 
 power of inflicting the most severe blow upon the secession 
 cause. 
 
 "I was extremely sorry to learn from your telegram to 
 the President that you had from the beginning attached 
 little or no importance to a movement in East Tennessee. 
 I had not so understood your views, and it develops a rad- 
 ical difference between your views and my own, which I 
 deeply regret. . . . Interesting as Nashville may be 
 to the Louisville interests, it strikes me that its possession 
 is of very secondary importance in comparison with the 
 
Waiting Over ths Border. 443 
 
 immense results that would arise from the adherence to our 
 cause of the masses in East Tennessee, West North Caro- 
 lina, South Carolina, North Georgia and Alabama — results 
 that I feel assured would ere long flow from the movement 
 I allude to. Geo. B. McClellan, 
 
 ' ' Major- General, Commanding . ' ' 
 
 This brought out from General Buell an explanatory dis- 
 patch to General McClellan, dated January 13, 1862, as 
 follows • 
 
 "My Dear Friend : I did not intend to be understood 
 in my dispatch to the President as attaching little impor- 
 tance to the movement on East Tennessee ; on the con- 
 trary, it is evidently of the highest importance, if thor- 
 oughly carried out. But I believe that if the other object 
 were attained, the same result would be accomplished quite 
 as promptly and effectually. I have taken no step thus 
 far that has not had that in view also. . . . The Ten- 
 nessee arms are being unpacked and put in order and for- 
 warded to Lebanon. Truly yours, D. C. Buell." 
 
 In this same letter he admitted that his command had 
 risen to 90,000 men, and promised to carry out General 
 McClellan 's instructions. 
 
 On February 1st, General Buell again addressed General 
 McClellan, in a long letter, on the subject of their previous 
 correspondence, giving his reasons for thinking an expedi- 
 tion into East Tennessee not only unwise, but impracti- 
 cable. It was as follows : 
 
 "My Dear General: . . . It is 200 miles or 
 thereabouts from our depots (at the terminus of the rail- 
 road) to Knoxville, or the nearest point on the Tennessee 
 Railroad. At the best, supplies are meager along the 
 whole route, and if they suffice for a trip or two, must by 
 that time be entirely exhausted for any distance that we 
 can reach on both sides of the road. 
 
 From Somerset to Jacksborough we will scarcely find any 
 
444 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 at all. East Tennessee is almost entirely stripped of wlieat 
 by the enemy. In the productive region there is still a 
 small siiri^lus of corn and wheat. We must supply two- 
 thirds of the rations from our depots here, and we must of 
 course depend on them also for our ordnance and other 
 stores. It will take 1,000 wagons constantly going to sup- 
 jDly 10,000 men. , . . If the number of troops, and 
 consequently the amount of hauling is increased, the diffi- 
 culty is increased in a greater proportion. The limited 
 amount of forage on the route wdll be speedily exhausted, 
 as besides provisions for our men, we must have forage for 
 our animals — a thing that is not to be lightly thought of. 
 
 "In my previous letter I set down three divisions (say 
 30,000 effective men) as the force that would be required 
 for East Tennessee — two to penetrate the country and one 
 to keep open communications, I believe that is the least 
 force that will suffice, and it ought to be able to establish 
 itself promptly before it can be anticipated by a force of 
 the enemy sufficient to make the result doubtful. "With 
 railroads converging from the east, west and south, it 
 ought not to be difficult for them to get a pretty formidable 
 force in that country in ten days. . . . 
 
 "For the reasons I have stated, I have been forced re- 
 luctantly to the conviction that an advance into East Ten- 
 nessee is impracticable at this time on any such scale 
 which will be sufficient. I have ordered General Carter's 
 brigade to move on the Gap, but I fear very much that 
 even that will be compelled to fall back for supplies, such 
 is the condition of the roads over which they have to be 
 hauled. . . . Truly yours, D. C. Buell." 
 
 I have given the correspondence of the authorities at 
 Washington with General Buell, in reference to the occupa- 
 tion of East Tennessee, as well as his letters and explana- 
 tions in reference thereto, almost in full. This I have done 
 not only because of the great importance of this matter, 
 but also as an act of justice to General Buell, who has beea 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 445 
 
 held responsible for the long delay in giving relief to the 
 loyal people of East Tennessee. That he persistently dis- 
 regarded the oft and constantly-repeated suggestions of his 
 superiors in this respect, is only too manifest from the fore- 
 going corresi^ondence , 
 
 The point I am making is not affected in the slightest 
 by the consideration that General Buell was probably 
 right, as I think he was, in the opinion he held that an 
 expedition into East Tennessee, at that time, was both un- 
 wise and impracticable. It must be admitted that there 
 was great force in the reasons he gave for his conduct. 
 
 During all this time. General George H. Thomas had 
 been posted on the south-eastern border of Kentucky, 
 watching the movements of General Zollicoffer, who, hav- 
 ing received re-enforcements, established himself on the 
 north bank of the Cumberland River. From this point 
 Zollicoffer could defend Cumberland Gap, and at the same 
 time encourage the disloyal element in Kentucky. Late 
 in December, Thomas was sent with orders to dislodge 
 him. 
 
 Thomas was posted at Somerset, about ten miles from 
 Fishing Creek or Mill Springs ; Crittenden and Zollicoffer 
 occupied a fortified camp on the Cumberland. They had 
 built cabins for the soldiers and had gone into winter 
 quarters. Thomas was anxious for a fight, but he did not 
 wish to attack a fortified position. He therefore resorted 
 to strategy, as we have reason to believe, though he does 
 not say so, to draw the enemy out of his strong position. 
 On the 17th of January, he sent two regiments of soldiers 
 in the direction of the enemy with orders to cross Fishing 
 Creek, that is, to get on the same side occupied by Zolli- 
 coffer. Two other regiments were within supporting dis- 
 tance. In the meantime, he put the remainder of his 
 force in motion, but as quietly as possible, and on the 
 night of the 17th, he got them in position for the expected 
 fight on the other side of Fishing Creek. 
 
 The prospect of capturing and destroying a considerable 
 
446 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 force of Thomas' army, which had, as was doubtless sup- 
 posed, incautiously ventured so near, could not be resisted 
 by an enterprising general like Zollicoffer, who was as 
 ready to fight as Thomas. Accordingly, on the night of 
 the 18th of January, the army of Zollicoffer moved out of 
 its intrenchments, and started in the direction of the two 
 regiments which had come so near. The night was cold 
 and rainy, the roads muddy and almost impassable. Upon 
 no other theory, except the one given above, can we ac- 
 count for the action of prudent generals in leaving their 
 fortified position, on such a night, and marching nine 
 miles over horrible roads, where they were to encounter an 
 enemy with nearly as large a force as they had. The re- 
 sult of all this was that Thomas' men were rested on the 
 morning of the battle, while Zollicoffer 's arrived on the 
 field only a little while before the commencement of the 
 action in a worn out and exhausted condition. 
 
 The morning was wet and chilly, the atmosphere dark 
 and murky. About seven o'clock, or soon after, the fight 
 was commenced with spirit and determination on both 
 sides. It raged without ceasing, or any intermission in 
 courage and effort, until some time after eleven o'clock, 
 when an event happened which soon put an end to the 
 fighting, as such things often did with inexperienced 
 troops in the early stages of the war. This was the death 
 of General Zollicoffer. This officer, mistaking a Union 
 regiment for one of his own, rode forward and told its 
 commander. Colonel Speed S. Fry, that he was firing on 
 friends. Fry, not recognizing Zollicoffer as an enemy, 
 turned away to order his men to cease firing. At this 
 moment, one of Zollicoffer 's aides-de-camp rode up, and, 
 seeing the true state of facts, commenced firing on Fry, 
 wounding his horse. Fry, wheeling in turn, drew his 
 navy revolver and returned the fire, shooting Zollicoffer 
 through the heart. ^ 
 
 ' The above account of the death of General Zollicoffer I have taken al- 
 most literally from Vol. 5, p. 116, of Nicholay & Hay's " Life of Lin- 
 
Waiting Over tlte Border, 447 
 
 The fall of the brave Confederate leader soon put an end 
 to the fight. As soon as his death was known, the Con- 
 federate forces gave way. They retreated in disorder to 
 their fortified camp at Mill Springs. Thomas made im- 
 mediate pursuit, and invested their camp that night, in- 
 tending to assault the intrenchments the next morning. 
 But when morning came, it was found that the enemy had 
 crossed the Cumberland River during the night, and had 
 fled in the wildest disorder and precipitation, abandoning 
 their wounded, their supplies, twelve pieces of artillery and 
 many small arms. 
 
 The forces engaged in this battle were as follows, namely : 
 on the Confederate side, officers, 333 ; privates, 6,111 ; on 
 the Union side, 4,829 men. It is possible that the full 
 number given above as the force of the Confederates was 
 not on the battlefield. But, be that as it may, it is plain 
 that there was no great disparity in the forces of the re- 
 spective sides. It is a singular fact that Zollicoffer's en- 
 tire command, except one Mississippi and one Alabama 
 regiment, was composed of Tennessee troops, most of them 
 being from Middle Tennessee, from the wealthy country 
 around Nashville ; while fully one-half of Thomas' men 
 were Kentuckians and East Tennesseans — the First Ten- 
 nessee (Colonel Byrd) , and the Second Tennessee (Colonel 
 J. P. T. Carter), being in the engagement.^ 
 
 An eye-witness of this fight, as well as a participant, 
 
 coin." They cite as authorities Henry M. Cist, Army of the Cumberland, pp. 
 17, 18, also "History of the Army of the Cumberland," Vol. I, p. 67, by 
 Thomas B. Van Home. 
 
 General Crittenden, in his official report, gives a somewhat different ac- 
 count of his death. He says that General Zollicoffer rode up to the Nine- 
 teenth Tennessee, commanded by Colonel D. H. Cummings, and ordered 
 him to cease firing, under the impression that he was firing on one of his 
 own regiments. He then rode forward toward the Federal troops, as if to 
 give orders, when he was killed just as he discovered his mistake. 
 
 * Judging by General George B. Crittenden's report, the battle must have 
 lasted an hour after the death of Zollicoffer. He says that Thomas had 
 12,000 men in the engagement, while he had but 4,000. A report of all 
 the commands engaged under Thomas shows the number I have given in 
 the text. 
 
448 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 says that both armies fought with steadiness and courage 
 up to the time of the death of Zollicoffer, that no decided 
 advantage had been gained by either side up to that time, 
 and that no one could tell how the fortunes of the day 
 were going. In all his experience during the war, and he 
 served four years, he says he never saw harder fighting 
 than that between the Second Minnesota (Colonel Van 
 Cleve) , and the Fifteenth Mississippi (Colonel Walthall) , 
 in a struggle to hold an old fence-row which had grown up 
 with underbrush, and which afforded some kind of shelter. 
 These regiments charged each other three times successively 
 in the effort to hold this vantage ground. Finally, the 
 Minnesota regiment gained and held it.^ 
 
 The victory of Thomas was complete ; the disaster of 
 the Confederates overwhelming. The importance of this 
 victory has never received the recognition it was rightly 
 entitled to. Soon after it was won, it was eclipsed, 
 and therefore obscured, by other and very much greater 
 victories, and, therefore, soon almost forgotten. And yet 
 it was the first real decisive Union victory of the war. By 
 it an army of from six to ten thousand Confederates was 
 destroyed for the time being, and lost as an element in 
 battles and in the movement of forces for sometime to 
 come. This defeat does not in the slightest degree reflect 
 on the courage of the Confederate soldiers, nor imply that 
 they were less brave than the Union soldiers. It was just 
 such a calamity as all raw armies were liable to have in 
 the early stages of the war. If General Thomas had met 
 the fate of Zollicoffer in that battle, the disaster which be- 
 fell the Confederates might have fallen on the Union army. 
 Very likely the Confederate soldiers trusted more in the 
 well-known courage and coolness of Zollicoffer than they 
 
 ^ Major D. A, Carpenter, who was at that time adjutant of the Second 
 Tennessee (Union), and afterwards major of that regiment, is my authority 
 for the above. I am also indebted to Major Carpenter for other details of 
 this fight. He was one of the bravest officers in either army. 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 449 
 
 did in their own courage, as inexperienced soldiers are apt 
 to do. 
 
 There was the wildest excitement over this defeat. As 
 it was fought just over the border of Tennessee, and within 
 one hundred miles of Kuoxville, it created the greatest 
 alarm in that place. Every one expected the Federal 
 army would enter in a few days. In Nashville the news 
 was received with overwhelming consternation and grief. 
 Zollicoffer, the pride, and, to some extent, the hope of 
 Nashville, was dead. Young Lieutenant Balie Peyton, the 
 son of Hon. Balie Peyton, was also dead. In many other 
 families and homes, in that place and in the surrounding 
 country, there were weeping and lamentations over the 
 loss of noble sons. Never did Nashville — never did any 
 city anywhere — send forth to battle braver young men 
 than those who followed Zollicoffer with exultant confi- 
 dence, and with manly spirit, to the fatal field of Fishing 
 Creek. 
 
 The way to East Tennessee was now open to General 
 Thomas. He could have marched his army, at that time, 
 into Knoxville almost without opposition. It had been 
 stripped bare of soldiers in strengthening the army of Zolli- 
 coffer. Now, as that was scattered, new forces had to be 
 sent there. 
 
 Events of a still more startling character than the battle 
 of Fishing Creek were, at this time, being quietly evolved 
 and developed, which were soon to burst on the world with 
 brilliant suddenness. General Grant, since his seizure and 
 occupation of Paducah, in his quiet, ceaseless manner, had 
 been preparing the means of aggressive operations against 
 the enemy. Finally, he was ready, and telegraphed to 
 General Halleck, his superior, for permission to strike a 
 blow, saying : "With permission, I shall take Fort Henry, 
 on the Tennessee." He received no permission. Rear- 
 Admiral Foote repeated the request, with no better success. 
 Again Grant, and again, for the third time, with renewed 
 29 
 
450 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 earnestness, urged his petition on his superior in St, Louis. 
 At length, the permission was given. There was no delay 
 in the movements of this silent, earnest man. Receiving 
 Halleck's instructions on February 1st, the next day the 
 expedition, with fifteen thousand men, was under way, on 
 board of transports, and on the 4th, Grant and Foote, with 
 seven gun-boats, also moved up the river. On the 6th, the 
 gun-boats attacked the fort, while Grant's forces landed 
 with the view of an investment and an assault by land. 
 Before this could be completely done, the fort surrendered. 
 Grant telegraphed to Halleck : "Fort Henry is ours. . . . 
 I shall take and destroy Fort Donelson on the 8th." How 
 positive this remarkable man was. Whatever he promised 
 to do, he did. 
 
 The sudden fall of Henry threw the Confederate generals, 
 A. S. Johnston, Buckner and Hardee, into the wildest ex- 
 citement. At once 12,000 re-enforcements for Donelson 
 were sent forward under Buckner, Floyd and Pillow. The 
 army at Bowling Green soon commenced a hasty retreat 
 on Nashville. Thus had the plans and the energy of 
 Grant not only opened up the Tennessee, but they had 
 also virtually cleared Kentucky of all hostile armies, while 
 Buell still remained quiet and inactive, with an army of 
 90,000 men under his command. In the meantime the tele- 
 graph wires were burdened with messages passing between 
 McClellan, at Washington, and Buell in Louisville, and 
 Halleck at St. Louis. None of them seemed to know what 
 to do, and therefore nothing was done. Halleck wanted 
 Buell to unite his forces with his own, then under Grant 
 operating on the Tennessee and the Cumberland, and thus 
 with their joint forces, to invest and capture Donelson. 
 Buell, after much deliberation and indecision, rather pre- 
 ferred following the retreating army of Johnston now on 
 its way to Nashville. So, he declined going to Donelson. 
 General McClellan also thought this was the best plan. 
 The result was that with the addition of a few thousand 
 troops sent to him by Halleck, Grant was left to capture 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 451 
 
 Donelson with his original 15,000 men, and with the aid 
 of the gun-boats. Halleck finally had a keen sense of the 
 importance of the capture of this fort. He telegraphed to 
 McClellan as follows: "United to Grant" (^. e. Buell's 
 forces) "we can take and hold Fort Donelson and Clarks- 
 ville. . . . Unless we can take Fort Donelson very- 
 soon, we shall have the whole force of the enemy on 
 us. Fort Donelson is the turning point of the war." . . . 
 
 While these generals were talking about concerted action 
 in order to take Donelson, Grant was busy investing and 
 assaulting that great stronghold. He would have taken 
 the place on the 8th as he had promised, but extremely 
 high water, impassable roads and terrible weather rendered 
 it impossible. After encountering difficulties not often met 
 with at that day, in the midst of one of the worst spells of cold 
 and rain and snow ever experienced in that climate. Grant 
 had made such a show of determination and bravery, by his 
 assaults on the works, that on the morning of the 16th, just 
 as his forces were ready for a last assault, he received a 
 note from Buckner, proposing an armistice, so as to arrange 
 for capitulation. Grant's reply has served very largely to 
 give immortality to his name. He said : "No terms except 
 unconditional and immediate surrender can be accepted. 
 I propose to move immediately upon your works . ' ' Buckner 
 complained that the terms were "ungenerous and un- 
 chivalric." But he nevertheless accepted them. Four thou- 
 sand men, under Floyd, Pillow and Forrest, made their 
 escape on the night of the 15th. The number who sur- 
 rendered, according to the rations issued at Cairo by the 
 commissary of prisoners was 14,623. Many escaped who 
 are not enumerated above. General Grant estimated the 
 Confederate force at 21,000, and his own at 17,000, when 
 he first invested the place, but this was increased by re-en- 
 forcements during the investment until it finally amounted 
 to 27,000 men. 
 
 This was one of the most complete victories of the war. 
 Here were first conspicuously manifested the peculiar 
 
452 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 qualities which made Grant unlike any other general of 
 the war on either side. During the fight, on the 15th, 
 while he was away in consultation with Rear-Admiral 
 Foote, the enemy had come out of their fortifications and 
 attacked McClernand's command on the right, and driven it 
 back. General Lew "Wallace sent fresh troops to the ex- 
 posed point, who got in between those and repulsed the 
 enemy, and thus checked the disaster which might have 
 proved most serious. Grant did not expect an attack while 
 he was gone, for the Confederates were in no condition for 
 offensive operations at that time. When he returned, he 
 found part of his troops in wild excitement over this re- 
 pulse or disaster. He was convinced that the enemy had 
 made the attack on his lines with the view of cutting their 
 way out and escaping, as they came with their knapsacks 
 full of rations. He said to Colonel J. D. "Webster of his 
 staff: "Some of our men are pretty badly demoralized, but 
 the enemy must be more so. . . . the one who attacks 
 first now will be victorious, and the enemy will have to be 
 in a hurry if he gets ahead of me." He determined to 
 make an assault at once on the left of his line . He directed 
 Colonel "Webster to ride with him along the lines, and to 
 call out to the men as they passed : "Fill your cartridge 
 boxes, quick, and get into line ; the enemy is trying to es- 
 cape, and he must not be permitted to do so." This 
 inspired his men. General C. F. Smith at once led the as- 
 sault on the works of the enemy, and that night he and his 
 command bivouacked inside of the Confederate lines. The 
 next morning came the request for an armistice. 
 
 Thus General Grant, seizing the critical moment when 
 both armies were demoralized, by an act of supreme dar- 
 ing, inspired the minds of his own soldiers with con- 
 fidence, and at the same time created alarm and fear 
 in the minds of the enemy. ^ As he tells elsewhere, he 
 
 1 " Grant's Memoirs," Vol. I, pp. 306 and 307. 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 453 
 
 acted on this same i)rinciple, with successful effect, at 
 a critical moment in the battle of Shiloh. 
 
 Six weeks after this time, the battle of Shiloh was fought 
 by this same modest man, and after a disaster the first 
 day, another victory was finally won on the second. The 
 question of the fall of Nashville was settled by him while 
 Buell was still quietly waiting in Louisville. Grant, a 
 subordinate, had unostentatiously gone ahead, at the sug- 
 gestion of his own fertile brain, and inaugurated move- 
 ments of such stupendous importance that they created a 
 deep rapid Southward flowing current behind it which 
 drew the army of Halleck and the cautious Buell after 
 it, almost without an effort on their part. It was simply 
 what is often seen on streams — smaller objects floating 
 and following in the current made by the movement of 
 some greater one. Grant's enterprises drew everything 
 Southward, within the wide region affected by their in- 
 fluence. At Donelson he had driven a wedge into the 
 territory of the Southern Confederacy, which had riven 
 it asunder as far south as the Memphis and Charleston 
 railroad. Columbus, Bowling Green and Nashville fell 
 as naturally as ripe fruit falls from its parent stem. And 
 now, after the battle of Shiloh, under the guidance of 
 his matchless genius, the Confederate lines again moved 
 Southward.^ 
 
 The great commander of the war — modest, quiet and 
 sleepless — had at last appeared. Unpretending and un- 
 heralded, rising by the force of his own genius and match- 
 less qualities, he suddenly appeared amid the smoke and 
 noise of battles and men began to inquire : "Who is this 
 strange man that wins victories?" 
 
 Perhaps the most favorable opportunity which had ever 
 occurred for relieving East Tennessee had now presented 
 
 ^ Though it took three appeals from Grant and Foote to get permission 
 from Ilalleck to undertake the expedition up the Tennessee and the Cum- 
 berland, Halleck asked for promotion, not for Grant, but for himself, on 
 account of these operations. 
 
454 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 itself. There was universal consternation throughout the 
 South, Mr. Lincoln, ever alive with keenest sympathy 
 for the noble people of East Tennessee, telegraphed to 
 Kentucky to inquire if a cavalry force might not at that 
 time be sent into that region to seize the railroad. It was 
 not done, however, and from this time for eighteen 
 months following, but little was done toward accomplish- 
 ing this patriotic object. 
 
 Why was this? Was it because the conviction was 
 gradually forcing itself on the minds of military men 
 that the force originally proposed for this work was 
 grossly inadequate? 
 
 It is probably true that a small force of men, say eight 
 or ten thousand, might have seized Knoxville and the 
 railroad immediately after the battle of Fishing Creek, 
 and almost certainly after the fall of Donelson. But the 
 vital question was : Could such a force have held it after 
 it was seized? It seems to have been taken for granted at 
 that time that if the road could be reached and seized it 
 could be held. 
 
 There was much truth and force in the letter of General 
 Buell to General McClellan, dated February 1, 1862, in 
 which he gives some of his reasons for his opinion that 
 such an expedition was unwise and impracticable at that 
 time. He overestimates, however, the difficulty as to 
 supplies. He was correct as to the scarcity of forage 
 on the route, but the moment the army had reached 
 Jacksborough, or descended at any point from the Cum- 
 berland Plateau into the fertile valley of East Tennessee, 
 provisions sufficient for the support of such an army for a 
 long time could have been found. This region was the 
 richest grain field in the Southern Confederacy, excepting 
 the valley of Virginia. It not only furnished wheat and 
 corn for the armies of the South, but also hay, beef and 
 bacon, as well as horses and mules. Hence no spot of 
 territory in the South, of no greater area, was more vital 
 to the support of her armies. It constantly supported out 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 455 
 
 of its surplus an army of eight or ten thousand men, from 
 June, 1861, to September, 1863, and also shipped large 
 quantities of provisions and forage to supply other armies. 
 From October, 1863, until the next summer, both Long- 
 street's and the Federal army, the two probably aggregating 
 fifty thousand men, lived nearly entirely on the resources 
 of Upper and Middle East Tennessee. It must be kept 
 in mind that there were two other armies, namely Bragg 's 
 and Sherman's, at that time in this region, which in part 
 lived off the country. It so happened that, while the 
 crop of 1861 was a fair one, the wheat crops of 1862 and 
 1863 in this region were unprecedented in quantity. They 
 were simply enormous. 
 
 Now, the fact of the great abundance of supplies in East 
 Tennessee, rendering it easy for an army of invasion to 
 subsist indefinitely, constituted one of the strongest rea- 
 sons why a mighty effort should have been made by the 
 Confederates to drive such an army back. Provisions and 
 supplies were needed by the South as badly as men. It 
 could not afford to give up a region of such plenteous 
 supplies. If the South could not get the men of this 
 region for its armies, it could get its grain and its forage, 
 its beef and bacon, and its horses and mules. In this re- 
 spect. East Tennessee was as important to the South as 
 Middle Tennessee. 
 
 Now, consider the importance of holding the line of 
 railroads in East Tennessee. These roads, for there were 
 two, but forming only one line, constituted the shortest and 
 the main line of transit to Virginia, for Southern armies 
 and their supplies, from North Alabama, North Mississippi, 
 Arkansas, North Louisiana and Texas, from Missouri and 
 Kentucky, and from Nashville and Memphis. If it were 
 seized and held by hostile forces, both armies and supplies 
 must go by the longer and the circuitous route by way of 
 Augusta, and through the Carolinas, in order to reach 
 Virginia. So the possession of the roads in East Tennessee 
 was of supreme importance to the Confederacy. No sacri- 
 
456 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 fice made in keeping possession of them was too great for 
 the resulting benefits to arise from their control. 
 
 Judging by the light of experience, and looking at the 
 question as seen at the time from an East Tennessee point 
 of view, I do not hesitate to express the opinion that the 
 proposed expedition into East Tennessee, under Thomas 
 ''with four good regiments," in November, 1863, was full 
 of peril. It might have been successful at first. Zollicoffer 
 would most probably have fallen back from Kentucky, and 
 his forces, when united with those already in East Ten- 
 nessee, would have given him a greater number of men 
 than Thomas had. While Thomas was marching from 
 Cumberland Gap to Knoxville, a distance of sixty miles, 
 over bad roads, and across a succession of high parallel 
 ridges, little less difficult to cross than the mountains of 
 Kentucky, the Confederates could have drawn from Bow- 
 ling Green and from other points in the South, or Virginia, 
 ten or fifteen thousand other troops. So, Thomas would 
 have encountered at Knoxville an army twice or three 
 times as large as his own. The chances are that he would 
 have been defeated and driven back before he planted his 
 feet on the railroad. If successful at first, forces would 
 have been drawn from other quarters, until they were suf- 
 ficient to overthrow him. Better would it have been for 
 the Confederacy to sacrifice twenty thousand men than 
 lose the control of these railroads, and the possession of 
 this region of inexhaustible plenty. So the authorities of 
 the South evidently thought. The desperate efi'ort made by 
 General Bragg, in 1863, to hold his line at Chattanooga, and 
 that made by General Longstreet to regain its possession 
 at Knoxville, the same year, prove the tenacity with which 
 they clung to it. In fact, the great battles of Chickamauga, 
 Missionary Ridge and Knoxville were but desj)erate efi"orts 
 on the part of the Confederates to hold this line of com- 
 munication. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln and General McClellan appreciated the mili- 
 tary advantages of seizing and holding this great artery 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 457 
 
 connecting Virginia and the South, but evidently did not 
 comprehend the difficulties to be encountered in their ac- 
 complishment. Neither General Sherman nor General 
 Buell attached any great importance to this movement, 
 as a military enterprise, though they did realize in some 
 degree the magnitude of the undertaking. 
 
 General Buell's idea of sending a column of thirty thou- 
 sand men into East Tennessee, twenty thousand for offens- 
 ive operations and ten thousand to guard the rear and keep 
 open communications, probably would have proved a suc- 
 cess for a time, provided he had moved on Nashville at the 
 same time with a large co-operative force. If such an ex- 
 pedition had been an independent one, and if the lines of 
 the enemy everywhere else had been left unbroken, and 
 its armies unengaged, this expedition would most probably 
 have proved a failure in the end. Two years later, when 
 the Confederate lines were everywhere forced back South 
 of Tennessee, except in a small territory around Chatta- 
 nooga, General Burnside entered East Tennessee, with an 
 army of fifteen or twenty thousand men (said at the time 
 to be thirty thousand) literally without firing a gun. And 
 yet three months later he was shut up and besieged in 
 Knoxville by Longstreet, with a greatly superior force, and 
 but for the assistance sent by General Grant — the army of 
 Sherman — and the failure to completely invest the place, 
 the chances are that starvation would have compelled a 
 surrender. This shows with what desperate tenacity the 
 Confederates clung to East Tennessee. But when General 
 Buell moved forward and occupied Nashville, in the sjDring 
 of 1862, and especially after the battle of Sliiloh, the 
 Confederate lines, except in East Tennessee, being every- 
 where forced back beyond the state line, the time had come 
 when the relief of East Tennessee was practicable, and an 
 expedition for that purpose wise and advisable. 
 
 It is easy to understand why Buell did not make this 
 movement. He was opposed to it, as he was finally forced 
 to admit to McClellan. But why the latter and Mr. Lin- 
 
458 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 coin, wlio were all the time earnestly in its favor, did not 
 insist on such an expedition, in the spring or the early 
 summer of 1862, is not by any means as easily compre- 
 hended. Indeed, it is a source of profound astonishment. 
 The fall before, McClellan had insisted on this movement 
 as one in co-operation with and in aid of his own great 
 movement against Richmond, which he was at length about 
 to commence. If fifty thousand men, or even thirty thou- 
 sand, had been thrown into Knoxville in May, 1862, how 
 many men would it have withheld or withdrawn from the 
 enemy in Virginia? How many would it have drawn off 
 from the army of Bragg? With such a force in possession 
 of the railroad at Knoxville, the expedition into Kentucky 
 in the fall of 1862, under General E. Kirby Smith, having 
 Knoxville as a base, would have been impossible. And if 
 that were impossible, it being merely a co-operative move- 
 ment, then the expedition of Bragg into the same state at 
 the same time would have been impossible also. These 
 movements of Bragg and E. Kirby Smith into Kentucky, 
 although disastrous in their results to the forces engaged 
 in them, threw back the operations of the Union armies in 
 Tennessee nearly a year. A strong force sent into East 
 Tennessee at the propitious moment, in May, 1862, would 
 have changed the whole plans of the campaigns in the 
 South, as well as produced momentous results on the final 
 operations. This was an error on some one's part of vast 
 consequences. This one single movement made at the 
 right time ought to have shortened the war in the South 
 one year. Men are slow to believe such things as this. 
 They think because the war dragged its slow length along 
 for four years, it necessarily had to last so long. This is a 
 great mistake. With proper appreciation of the deter- 
 mined spirit and the resources of the South, and with the 
 necessary preparations to overcome them, the war ought to 
 have been closed in the fall of 1863. 
 
 The first two years of the war, on the part of the North, 
 except the work of Grant, Sherman, Thomas and Mitchel, 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 459 
 
 iivas little more than holiday parades, and heart-sickening 
 failures. The people were not in earnest. They were 
 speculating — making fortunes. It took defeat after defeat, 
 disaster after disaster, approaching and threatening their 
 own homes and cities and business, to arouse them, both 
 people and rulers, to a realization of the danger of the gov- 
 ernment, and to a proper conception of the masterly peo- 
 ple they had to subdue. 
 
 The peculiar racial traits in the Southern people seemed 
 to be forgotten. They were nearly entirely of Scotch-Irish 
 (or Covenanter) , Cavalier, and Huguenot blood. The Cov- 
 enanter blood largely predominated. The Southern people 
 were the nearest a pure original race of men of any in all 
 the states. Immigration never flowed Southward. From 
 colonial days downward there had never been much inter- 
 mixture of foreign blood with that of the original races. 
 So it was kept almost as pure as it was when the immi- 
 grants landed in the colonies. Those who supposed that 
 the demonstrations in the South in 1861 were mere noise 
 and bluster which would soon die out, overlooked an im- 
 portant element in the calculation. This persistent, stub- 
 born, determined Covenanter race, which so largely filled 
 the South, never gave up anything it had undertaken until 
 human effort became futile. 
 
 In the latter part of 1863, and in the early part of 1864, 
 there was such an outpouring of men and money for the 
 prosecution of the war to a successful termination as should 
 have ended it in two years, if the same means had been 
 provided and used in 1861 by the government. To avoid 
 being ruinous, great wars should be short and sharp. The 
 German government in the Franco-Prussian war set the 
 world an -example that will not be forgotten. General 
 Moltke hurled with such momentum his vast masses against 
 the French armies that each day there was an advance, and 
 each day a victory. In a few weeks the war was over. 
 There will never again be as long a war as ours between 
 civilized nations. The recently-invented means for the 
 
460 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 destruction of human life, as well as property, are so 
 amazing, and indeed so appalling, that either one side or 
 the other must soon sue for peace } 
 
 In the summer of 1862 General Buell had an opportunity 
 to occupy East Tennessee such as had never occurred be- 
 fore. When he left Nashville in the spring to join Grant, 
 just before the battle of Shiloh, General Mitchel was left 
 in charge of Middle Tennessee. In a short time, by a 
 rapid march, he suddenly appeared with four thousand men 
 in Huntsville, Alabama, and seized the Memphis and 
 Charleston Railroad from Decatur to Bridgeport, holding 
 it nearly three months. After Halleck, with one hundred 
 and twenty thousand men, allowed Beauregard with forty 
 thousand to hold him in check for some time before Cor- 
 inth, and finally to slip away, Buell marched with his army 
 to Huntsville, where Mitchel was stationed, arriving June 
 29th. On his arrival a conference took place between him 
 and Mitchel in reference to the movements of the army. 
 Mitchel urged Buell to move upon and seize East Tennes- 
 see immediately. His plan was to occupy Chattanooga 
 with a column of ten thousand men, with the view of seiz- 
 ing the railroad at Dalton or Cleveland ; another similar 
 column to march on Rome, Georgia, and another one to 
 march across the mountains and seize the railroad about 
 twenty miles west of Knoxville, while the army of General 
 Morgan, then at Cumberland Gap, should seize the rail- 
 road, presumably at Knoxville. These movements, if ex- 
 ecuted with promptness and energy, could not have failed, 
 for the force then in East Tennessee, under General E. 
 Kirby Smith, did not amount to one-fourth of that pro- 
 posed for their execution. None could have been drawn 
 from Virginia, for at that time the fighting was going on 
 around Richmond. 
 
 After parts of three days had been spent by General 
 Mitchel in earnestly urging on his superior the great mili- 
 
 ^ This was written before the late Spanish- American war. iii4^ -f^A^/Vi 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 461 
 
 taiy importance of at once occupying East Tennessee, 
 General Buell still hesitated, still had not made up his 
 mind. Thereupon Mitchel, disgusted Avith this indecision, 
 sent his resignation to Washington, saying he could no 
 longer serve under his present commander.^ He was 
 thereupon ordered to report to Washington. After some 
 •delay he was appointed to the command of a department 
 at Port Royal, where in a few months he died from an at- 
 tack of yellow fever. Thus the country lost one of its most 
 promising oflficers almost in the beginning of his splendid 
 career. He, like General Grant and General Lyon, be- 
 lieved that armies were organized to move and to fight. 
 
 The evil results flowing from this inaction of General 
 Buell, and the delay of Halleck at Corinth after the battle 
 of Shiloh, are thus commented upon by General Grant in 
 his "Memoirs," in his usual mild language : 
 
 "After the capture of Corinth a movable force of eighty 
 thousand men could have been set in motion, for the ac- 
 complishment of any great campaign for the suppression 
 of the rebellion. In addition to this, fresh troops were 
 being raised to swell the effective force. . . . Buell 
 with the Army of the Ohio was sent East, following the 
 line of the Memphis and Charleston Railroad. ... If 
 he had been sent directly to Chattanooga as rapidly as he 
 could march, leaving two or three divisions along the line 
 of railroad from Nashville forward, he could have arrived 
 with but little fighting, and would have saved much loss 
 of life, which was afterwards incurred on gaining Chatta- 
 nooga. Bragg would then not have had time to raise an 
 army to contest the possession of Middle and East Tennes- 
 see and Kentucky ; the battles of Stone River and Chicka- 
 mauga would not necessarily have been fought. These are 
 the negative advantages — if the term negative is appli- 
 cable — which would probably have resulted from prompt 
 movements, after Corinth fell into possession of the na- 
 
 1 "Life of Ormsby M. Mitchel," by F. A. Mitchel, p. 339. 
 
462 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 tional forces. The positive results might have been : a 
 bloodless advance to Atlanta, to Vicksburg, or to any 
 other desired point South of Corinth, in the interior of 
 Mississippi."' 
 
 In conclusion, I remark that it has been far from my 
 purpose to reflect on or to question the great military 
 ability of General George H. Thomas, in what I have said 
 in reference to the contemplated expedition into East Ten- 
 nessee in 1861. He was certainly one of the greatest gen- 
 erals produced by the Civil War. If that expedition was 
 not feasible at that time, then Mr. Lincoln and Generals 
 McClellan, Sherman, Buell, Mitchel, Anderson and Carter 
 were all in error on that point, as well as General Thomas. 
 For it will be remembered that General Sherman at one 
 time approved it, and ordered General Thomas to proceed 
 with its execution. Then he adopted the policy of "con- 
 centration," as he styled it, and not that of "divergence," 
 and recalled Thomas. The objection urged by General 
 Sherman was to its expediency and wisdom as a military 
 movement, and not to its feasibility. He thought it better 
 to move on Nashville with his whole force, and not to 
 divide it by undertaking two expeditions. And these were 
 the final views of General Buell also. At first he approved 
 the movement and only changed his mind at a late hour. 
 It was not until some months had elapsed and he found 
 himself hard pressed by Mr. Lincoln and General McClel- 
 lan, for failing to second their wishes in this regard, that 
 lie began openly to question the expediency and the feasi- 
 bility of this movement. Besides all this General McClel- 
 lan had promised General Thomas that he would keep the 
 enemy, both in Virginia and in Kentucky and Tennessee, 
 so busy that it could not interfere with his movement on 
 East Tennessee. And this also must be considered : Gen- 
 eral Thomas was to bring arms for the Union men, and he 
 expected, as there assuredly would have been, a general 
 
 1 "Grant's Memoirs," p. 347. 
 
Waiting Over the Border. 463 
 
 rising of Union men on his approach. After all, this 
 might have saved him from a disaster and a retreat I Who 
 knows? Besides this, he relied on the destruction of the 
 bridges on the line of railway to aid him. This might 
 have given him immunity for a time at least. 
 
 So it is clear that there is nothing in the conduct of 
 General Thomas, in reference to this matter, that can re- 
 flect upon or detract from his great military sagacity and 
 reputation . 
 
464 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 THE RETURN. 
 
 The exiles in Kentucky — Bitter disappointment— Cumberland Gap occu- 
 pied by Union army — East Tennessee Union soldiers there — Historic 
 point— Time hangs heavily— General E. Kirby Smith starts to Ken- 
 tucky with army — General Bragg does the same thing — Buell fol- 
 lows—Safety of Morgan threatened— Abandons the Gap — Long retreats 
 through Eastern Kentucky— SuflFering of army— Armies safely at 
 Portsmouth— Battle of Perryville— Retreat of Bragg and Smith— East 
 Tennessee soldiers sent to Rosecrans — Are in battle of Stone River — 
 With Thomas at Chickamauga— Exiles in Kentucky— Impatience to 
 return home — General Burnside to lead an army to East Tennessee- 
 Preparations — Knoxville evacuated by the Confederates— Burnside in 
 motion— Joy of Union people along the line of his march — Advance 
 unknown in Knoxville — Almost despair of people — Suddenly Colonel 
 Foster's brigade of cavalry dashes into the town — The gathering and 
 joy of Union people — General Burnside's army enters — Tumultuous 
 rejoicing — The old flag hoisted — Burnsides speaks to the people — De- 
 scription of scenes by Colonel Foster — Further wanderings of the 
 exiles— 400 at Vicksburg, April 24, 1865— On board the "Sultana," with 
 other troops for Cairo to be exchanged — Vessel blows up— 1,400 men 
 perish — 332 out of the 400 East Tennesseans lost — Gloom and sorrow 
 at home — Annual re-union of the survivors. 
 
 lu October, 1861, there was not an exile in Kentucky 
 who did not expect to be back in East Tennessee in a few 
 days or a few weeks. Mr. Maynard, who was at that 
 time with the soldiers, confidently declared that he ex- 
 pected to eat his Christmas dinner in his own home in 
 Knoxville. But these fond hopes were doomed to bitter 
 disappointment. The expedition to East Tennessee on 
 which their hopes rested was suddenly abandoned, and all 
 they could do was to wait. When the advance movement 
 was countermanded, and the exiles, now in the Union 
 army, were ordered to turn toward Ohio, their hearts were 
 crushed within them. They shed bitter tears of anguish. 
 This was not childish weakness. It was the sad condition 
 
The Return. 465 
 
 of their families at home that filled their minds with 
 trouble. How the long, weary months passed with them 
 can not be described. It would reveal many a sad, heavy 
 heart, as the months slowly passed, and there was no for- 
 ward movement. 
 
 In June, 1862, Cumberland Gap was evacuated by the 
 Confederates, and successfully occupied by the Federal 
 troops, under the command of General George W. Mor- 
 gan. Nearly all, perhaps all, of the Tennessee troops 
 were there with him. There they remained until Septem- 
 ber. This point was on the line of their native state. A 
 part of the "Gap" was in Tennessee. But there was a 
 "dead line" between these exiles and their homes which 
 none of them dared to pass. To be caught beyond it was 
 to incur the hazard of arrest as spies, followed by a trial 
 and conviction and probably by a speedy execution, or by 
 imprisonment in the South. 
 
 Sometimes scouting or skirmishing parties, in force, 
 were sent across this line, and then these sad, brave fellows 
 had the pleasure of once more treading their native soil. 
 
 Cumberland Gap is, on many accounts, an interesting 
 historical point. It is a deep cut or gap in the Cumber- 
 land Mountain, with high peaks rising on either side. In 
 this gap the line of the three states of Virginia, Tennessee 
 and Kentucky unite at a common spot. In 1748, Dr. 
 Thomas Walker and others, from Virginia, on an explor- 
 ing expedition, discovered and passed through this remark- 
 able depression. Walker was the first white man whose 
 feet pressed the soil of Kentucky. He called the moun- 
 tain "Cumberland" and the gap "Cumberland Gap." Be- 
 yond this gap a few miles, he came to a beautiful river, 
 which he called the "Cumberland" also, all in honor of 
 the Duke of Cumberland, then prime minister of En- 
 gland.* As early as 1761, possibly in 1760, Daniel Boone 
 
 ^ Ramsey, p. 65. Ramsey says that these names and that of Loudon are 
 the only names of English origin in Tennessee. 
 30 
 
466 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 passed through this gap on his way to Kentucky. On one 
 of his trips, vast herds of buffalo were found grazing in 
 the valley, at the foot of the mountain, now known as 
 Powell's Valley. In all his trips from North Carolina to 
 Kentucky, Boone invariably passed through this gap. 
 The pioneers and hunters of Virginia, on their way to 
 Kentucky, as well as those of North Carolina, beyond the 
 mountains, all followed the well-beaten trail through Cum- 
 berland Gap. 
 
 Time hung heavily on these East Tennesseans at Cum- 
 berland Gap, as they waited there during the long summer 
 months of 1862. Often they climbed to the highest peak 
 of the Cumberland, called the "Pinacle," overlooking 
 their encampment, and from its lofty crest gazed with 
 heavy hearts upon the valley of East Tennessee, stretch- 
 ing away a half hundred miles eastwardly, and more 
 than one hundred and fifty miles westwardly, lying be- 
 fore them so serenely in quiet beauty. Sixty or seventy 
 miles southwardly the lofty mountains of North Carolina 
 rose up in solemn grandeur. And between these lay the 
 beautiful undulating valley of East Tennessee. To the 
 longing eyes of these gazers never was there such an 
 enchanting scene. Summer had arrayed everything in 
 loveliest colors. To add to this beauty, fields of golden 
 wheat dotted the valleys and the hill sides. A sea of 
 deepest green lay before them, stretching away further 
 and further until lost in the blue haze, or until it faded 
 into the shadowy outlines of the distant mountains. As 
 these men gazed on this picture of loveliness, and cast 
 their eager eyes in the direction of their homes, in imagi- 
 nation they could almost hear the lowing of their own 
 herds, or the barking of their own watch dogs. They try 
 to trace to their own homes the blue line of curling smoke 
 that away off in the distance rises out of a valley, and 
 slowly and gracefully ascends higher and higher, until it 
 is caught and carried away by a passing breeze. 
 
 At long intervals some of the faithful guides, who 
 
The Return. 467 
 
 piloted men through the mountains, would come into 
 camp with a few letters from home. Often these con- 
 tained sorrowful news. One poor soldier's wife had died 
 in his absence ; others had been sick for many months ; 
 this one had lost his favorite little daughter, and that one 
 the little boy named after him. More than one com- 
 plained that guerrillas had taken and carried off their 
 last horse. "But," added the faithful wives, "Providence 
 will take care of us and the children in some way until 
 you come home. Be of good courage. We can get along 
 somehow until you return. Never come back unless with 
 honor in the army and under the flag." Noble words 
 from noble mothers. 
 
 And now commenced the wanderings of these exiles. In 
 September, 1861, General E. Kirby Smith, then in com- 
 mand of the Confederate Department of East Tennessee, 
 started with a large force, probably fifteen thousand men, 
 to Kentucky. Passing through Big Creek Gap, about 
 forty miles west of Cumberland Gap, he moved in such 
 a manner as to threaten the safety of General Morgan 
 and his command. Smith's cavalry had already cut off 
 Morgan's supply trains. For five days the soldiers lived 
 on beans. At length, to avoid being captured, Morgan 
 destroyed everything he could not carry away and hastily 
 evacuated the "Gap." Smith was marching in the di- 
 rection of Lexington and Central Kentucky. Therefore 
 Morgan had to avoid that route. So he did the only 
 thing he could do ; he struck out into the mountains of 
 Eastern Kentucky, through a country where there were 
 no good roads, and in the dry season of September but 
 little water and even less food. The country was wild, 
 barren and rough. For two weeks Morgan's army strug- 
 gled on through these mountains, sometimes suffering 
 from thirst, living mostly on fresh corn. At length after 
 perhaps the hardest march made by any army during the 
 war, of over two hundred miles, harassed at every step by 
 
468 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 John Morgan's cavalry, tlie command, worn out and ex- 
 hausted, reached Portsmouth, on the Ohio River. 
 
 General George W. Morgan was an able and a worthy 
 officer. He conducted this retreat with great judgment 
 and skill, and yet, somehow, unjust as it was, it left a 
 little cloud on his military record from which he was 
 never entirely relieved. He was unfortunate in not meet- 
 ing more favorable circumstances. Success is the standard 
 in war by which generals are measured. 
 
 At the same time that Morgan was retreating toward the 
 Ohio, General Bragg with a large army was pushing 
 toward Central Kentucky, drawing the army of General 
 Buell after him, along parallel lines. Thus there were 
 four armies moving northward at the same time, along 
 roads leading substantially in the same direction. At 
 length Bragg and Smith united their forces, and Buell 
 having overtaken them, the not very great nor decisive 
 battle of Perryville was fought, with victory on the side 
 of the Union army. Then Smith and Bragg hastily 
 retreated from Kentucky, the former to his old position 
 in Knoxville, and the latter to Murfreesborough, Ten- 
 nessee. 
 
 Most of the East Tennesseans in the command of Morgan 
 were conveyed by boats from Portsmouth to Louisville, 
 thence to Bowling Green. 
 
 In the meantime General W. S. Rosecrans superseded 
 Buell, and took charge of the army of the Cumberland. 
 The East Tennesseans, consisting of Spear's brigade, who 
 had been attached to this army, moved with it to Nash- 
 ville, thence to Murfreesborough. Then on the 31st of 
 December, 1862, and on January 1, 1863, followed the 
 battle of Murfreesborough, or Stone River, with a victory 
 again on the side of the Federal army. Then followed a 
 long pause, so long that everybody from the President 
 down to the common people wondered and began to com- 
 plain. At length, in June — a delay of five months — 
 Rosecrans' army moved forward, following Bragg in the 
 
The Return. 469 
 
 direction of Chattanooga. Finally the two armies met on 
 the battlefield of Chickamauga, and struggled for su- 
 premacy on the 19th and 20th of September. Rosecrans 
 was defeated, and with Crittenden and McCook was driven 
 back in disorder into Chattanooga. Thomas stood his 
 ground, and by his firmness and coolness prevented a 
 disastrous rout, and won for himself the sobriquet of the 
 "Rock of Chickamauga." It is a source of no little pride 
 to add that the brigade of East Tennesseans, who had 
 started on their long wanderings at Cumberland Gap, 
 under Morgan a year before, was in Thomas' command that 
 day, and shared in the glory of that desperate battle. 
 
 Rosecrans was soon relieved, and Thomas placed in com- 
 mand, at Chattanooga. Bragg moved forward after his 
 victory, and occupied Missionary Ridge and Lookout Moun- 
 tain. Soon after this. Grant was sent to take command, 
 and Sherman and McPherson, with their splendid veterans 
 of Vicksburg, were ordered to that point. Hooker, with 
 Howard and Slocum, from the Army of the Potomac, was 
 sent to Chattanooga also. On assuming command at 
 Louisville, Grant telegraphed to Thomas "to hold Chat- 
 tanooga at all hazards." The reply was, "We will hold 
 the town till we starve." The truth was they were nearly 
 starving at that very time. Grant says that the soldiers a 
 little later on were in the habit of saying that they were 
 living on "half rations of hard bread and beef dried on the 
 hoof.''' 
 
 We now leave these two great armies confronting each 
 other on the soil of East Tennessee, and return to Ken- 
 tucky, where we left a part of the exiles more than 
 a year ago. The attempted enforcement of the Confeder- 
 ate act of conscription, together with the persecutions in 
 1862 and the first half of 1863, had driven thousands more 
 of the Union men of East Tennessee from their homes. 
 These sought safety in the Federal army in Kentucky. 
 
 » "Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 25. 
 
470 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Many new regiments had been organized and put into the 
 field. All were burning for an opportunity to return to 
 the relief of their oppressed families and countrymen. 
 
 No human pen can describe the sufi'erings or the mental 
 anguish of these exiles fleeing from their homes and their 
 families. They went away stealthily at night, as if they were 
 fleeing criminals. Danger beset them at every step. A moun- 
 tain wilderness, full of armed enemies waiting to seize them, 
 lay between them and safety. They knew not that they 
 should ever return. They must travel at night. Safety 
 lay only over the steepest mountains and through the dark- 
 est ways. Every human habitation must be avoided. Fires 
 must not be kindled even in the coldest weather, lest they 
 should betray their presence to the enemy. And when 
 they at length reach the army to join it, new anxiety fills 
 their minds. What will become of their families at home? 
 What will their enemies do to them when it is learned that 
 their husbands have fled to the Federal army? And how 
 will their families support themselves? 
 
 As time rolled on impatience to return home became a 
 torment. As they waited over the border their hearts 
 grew sick at the long delay. Winter came and passed. 
 Summer came, then winter again came and passed, and 
 still no advance. And while they were away in the army, 
 what were the anxieties, the fears, the sufferings of the 
 brave mothers and wives at home ? Will the loved ones 
 ever come back? Will the way ever be open to them to 
 return? Seek not to penetrate the agony and sorrow of 
 those noble women during these months and years of sep- 
 aration and uncertainty. Suffice it to say, that if ever 
 the endurance and the fortitude of women were more he- 
 roic, more patriotic, more exalted, or more sublime than 
 those of these women of East Tennessee, from 1861 to 
 1863, I know not where to find the record of it. No 
 Spartan mothers nor Roman matrons ever surpassed them. 
 
 All through the summer of 1863, and especially toward 
 the autumn, when something decisive seemed to be im- 
 
The Return. 471 
 
 pending at and around Chattanooga, the hearts of the 
 Union men were naturally turned toward Kentucky, as 
 the quarter from which their deliverance was to come. A 
 well-settled conviction everywhere prevailed that the Fed- 
 erals were certainly coming, but no one knew when. Gen- 
 eral Ambrose E. Burnside, a brave and experienced officer, 
 who had won unfading laurels on the coast of North Caro- 
 lina, had been sent to take command of the expedition. 
 This fact was known to but few persons in East Ten- 
 nessee, for all news tending to encourage hope in the minds 
 of Union men was carefully suppressed. They had been 
 most sadly disappointed with the delusive expectation of 
 speedy relief more than once before. The year before a 
 Federal army was confidently expected, by the Union men 
 as well as by the Confederate authorities. Indeed, so cer- 
 tain did this seem, that preparations for abandoning Knox- 
 ville went forward for several days. But the Federals did 
 not come and the panic passed off. 
 
 The first knowledge of the fact that a Federal army was 
 about to enter East Tennessee came from the Confederate 
 military authorities. This time the fact seemed to be too 
 certain for doubt. A little after the middle of Auirust, 
 they commenced shipping Southward, in great haste, all 
 their supplies of every description. Everything that could 
 be transported to another place was moved. All was 
 haste and confusion. The town was cleared of most of 
 the army supplies four or five days before the Federals en- 
 tered it. The army, too, had departed. Nearly all the 
 citizens who sympathized with the South, who could get 
 away, had most unwisely gone, too. The alarm was uni- 
 versal. Why they were in such haste has always seemed 
 remarkable. There could not have been at the time of 
 the final evacuation a Federal soldier within the state ad- 
 vancing toward Knoxville, and perhaps there was not for 
 days afterward. 
 
 On this occasion, for the first time in my life, I realized 
 the importance of government — of an ever-present power 
 
472 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 capable of giving protection. There was, for nearly a 
 week, absolutely no one in Kuoxville with authority to give 
 a command, or to enforce obedience to law. There was no 
 protection for any one. To add to the uneasiness and inse- 
 curity, a straggling band of "Scott's Louisiana Tigers" 
 remained behind, apparently, and as it was believed at the 
 time, for the purpose of committing depredations. These 
 were the only soldiers in Knoxville during these days of 
 anxiety. No one went out on the streets unless forced tc lo 
 so. The days were as the stillness of the sacred Sabbath. 
 A vague and yet terrible sense of insecurity and uncer- 
 tainty filled the minds of all. They knew not at what 
 moment the men in their midst might set fire to the town, 
 or enter their houses for pillage. So, the week wore away 
 slowly and heavily to the anxious Union men. Not a man 
 among them had heard a word from the advancing army. 
 
 In the meantime, important events were being matured 
 and pushed forward in Kentucky, General Burnside was 
 ready to put his army in motion for East Tennessee. Prep- 
 arations went forward rapidly. A part of the wanderers, 
 with happy, exultant hearts, were at last about to turn 
 their faces and steps homeward. In the latter part of Au- 
 gust, the joyous march was commenced. The route lay 
 through the mountains of Kentucky and Tennessee. 
 
 As the army advanced into and through East Tennessee, 
 the excitement and enthusiasm among the citizens became 
 wild and tumultuous. There was scarcely a family in all 
 the mountain region to be traversed that had not given 
 every able-bodied man to the army. Women and children 
 and old men alone remained at home. All these, as the 
 advance became known, flocked to the roadside to see the 
 army, bringing with them for distribution such food as 
 they had on hand. Shouting and rejoicing, the waving of 
 bonnets and handkerchiefs, weeping and sobbing, and en- 
 thusiastic praise to God for the great deliverance, every- 
 where greeted the army. Never did marching soldiers 
 find such a reception. Mothers and wives came to meet 
 
The Return. 473 
 
 their long-absent loved ones. But short must be the happy 
 communion. The army must move forward. Every man 
 would be needed soon. Many sad hearts turned away 
 in tears ; for their sons were absent in other armies. 
 
 From the bottom of my heart, I am thankful that the 
 loyal women of East Tennessee were what they were — 
 brave, true and sublime in their unfaltering devotion to 
 the government ; that, when the Federal army came, in 
 th fullness of their unbounded joy, and out of the very 
 depths of their hearts, there issued from their lips, in sin- 
 cerest reverence and thankfulness for their great deliver- 
 ance, the thrilling shout: "Glory to God! glory to God! 
 the army has come." No wonder these touching scenes 
 melted a whole army into tears. 
 
 Surely, had they not cause for thankfulness and rejoic- 
 ing? Had they not suffered as women seldom suffered 
 before? Had they not yielded to their country their last 
 stay and support? Had not many of them toiled in the 
 fields to save the children from starving while the men 
 were away in the army? Had they not suffered hunger, 
 and cold, and want, and anguish for two whole j^ears for 
 the sake of the Union? And, when the day of deliverance 
 came, should any human power restrain nature's outburst 
 of exultation and thankfulness? 
 
 Before any one was aware of the proximity of the Fed- 
 eral force, on a beautiful, bright day, September 1, 1863, a 
 splendid brigade of cavalry, the advance of Burnside's 
 army, led by the gallant Colonel John W. Foster, of In- 
 diana, with the old banner afloat, suddenly dashed into 
 Knoxville . 
 
 About 3 o'clock in the afternoon, anxious, restless, and 
 sick at heart at the uncertain delay on the part of the Fed- 
 eral army, I had walked down to the depot of the East 
 Tennessee and Virginia Railroad to see the superintendent, 
 Mr. J. B. Hoxsie, to ascertain if he knew anything of the 
 advance of the Union army. Like myself, he had not 
 heard one word in reference to it. While sitting there, 
 
474 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 talking to Mr. Hoxsie, and to Mr. John R. Branner, the 
 president, I heard the chatter of horses' feet rapidly advanc- 
 ing toward us. Instinctively realizing the situation, I 
 si)rang to my feet, and rushed out into the street. Just as 
 I reached the center of it, the head of a column of cavalry 
 was passing within five feet of me. I believed that they 
 were Federals, but was not certain. In this conviction, I 
 cried out : "Who are you? who are you?" Major John M. 
 Sawyers, of Union county, whom I had known, but had 
 not recognized in the rapid dash, shouted to me : "We are 
 Federals." So speaking, without a moment's pause, he 
 and his troops galloped rapidly up the street. 
 
 The entrance of the Federal army was to a Union man 
 a moment of supreme happiness, for it was the moment of 
 deliverance. For more than two years, the loyal people 
 had been mentally enslaved. 
 
 If, therefore, in the first moments of relief, there was a 
 joyous upward bound of feeling, like the flight of an eagle 
 let loose from its cage, no one will be surprised. 
 
 When the horsemen passed, I immediately sprang for- 
 ward, following on after them in the direction of the center 
 of the town. I broke into a run, in a vain effort to keep 
 up with them. As rapidly as I could go, I followed the 
 horsemen along Gay street, to the Lamar House, where the 
 cavalry had concentrated, and where I was met by a mes- 
 senger, who informed me that Colonel Foster wished to 
 see me in the parlor of the hotel. Going thither, I met 
 the commander of the forces which had just entered the 
 town. James C. Luttrell, the mayor of the town, was 
 present, and possibly one or two others. 
 
 Two days later, on the 3d of September, General Burn- 
 side with his staff, rode into town at the head of a splendid 
 army, amid the rejoicing and cheering of the people who 
 lined the streets. Colonel Foster had held possession of 
 the place two days before Burnside's arrival, and was, in 
 fact, but perhaps not in a military sense, the captor of 
 
The Return. 475 
 
 Knoxville.^ It was reported at the time that Burnside had 
 entered East Tennessee with an army of 30,000 men, but 
 in fact, it probably did not exceed 15,000. 
 
 The news, first of Foster's, then of Burnside 's entrance 
 into Knoxville, spread over the country with marvelous 
 celerity. Each man seemed to act as a special courier to 
 carry the news to his neighbor, and he to the next. It is 
 said that signal lights blazed from the high hill-tops. Thus 
 the joyous news spread from man to man, and soon it was 
 known to every man, woman and child within a circuit of 
 fifty miiles. And now was witnessed a remarkable change 
 and transformation. Suddenly, like the followers of 
 Roderic Dhu at "a blast upon his bugle horn," there 
 sprang from the recent silence and loneliness of the hills 
 and the forests, thousands of men, who at last, felt free to 
 come forth from their long hiding places. The first im- 
 pulse of all was to hurry to Knoxville, to see the Federal 
 army. With one accord, men, women and children 
 hastened thither. Many of them, in their joyous zeal, 
 traveled all night. On the first day after Colonel Foster 
 entered, the people commenced pouring in. On the next 
 day, the crowd had swollen to thousands, and on the third 
 day, the day after Burnside entered, it had grown to tens 
 of thousands. The streets were literally packed with 
 human beings. On this day and the following one, there 
 
 ^ Colonel John "W. Foster has had since that time a most distinguished 
 career, and has proved himself to be a noteworthy man. After the close 
 of the war, he filled with marked success the positions of minister to Mexico, 
 Eussia and Spain. On the death of Mr. Blaine, President Harrison made 
 him secretary of state, which position he filled with high honor to the na- 
 tion. When the Behring Sea Fishery controversy was referred to arbitra- 
 tion for settlement, Mr. Foster represented the government in preparing 
 the case for trial. And in 1895, China selected him to aid in negotiating a 
 treaty of peace between that power and Japan. This is perhaps the highest 
 compliment that was ever paid by China or any other government to a 
 foreigner. These things conclusively prove his excellent ability. All these 
 honors came from genuine merit, for he is as modest and unpretending as 
 he is worthy. Soon after his capture of Knoxville, he went North and I 
 met him no more for twenty-nine years. 
 
476 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 was witnessed on the streets of the thronged city — scenes 
 which could have occurred nowhere else in all this land — 
 scene never to be forgotten, and such as these aged eyes shall 
 never see again — the meeting of mothers, fathers, wives 
 and sisters with the long absent, but now returned exiles. 
 The bliss of that day will never fade from the memory 
 of thousands of persons present. Not much more raptur- 
 ous was the meeting of kindred, so long separated, than 
 was the joy of the people at once more beholding the old 
 flag of their country floating over Knoxville . Strong men 
 and brave women wept at its sight like children. In the 
 wild exuberance of their rejoicing, they fell into one 
 another's arms, and laughed and wept aloud, as if bereft 
 of reason. All day long as the exiles met mothers, fathers, 
 wives, children or sisters, scenes such as these — scenes of 
 wildest rapture — could be witnessed nearly every moment 
 on the streets. It was the frenzy of overpowering delight. 
 Now and then, as a wife met her husband, or a mother her 
 boy, a wild scream was heard. From morning till night, 
 the people gave themselves up to the most unrestrained 
 demonstrations of rejoicing. The long gloom, doubt, al- 
 most despair, which had filled their minds were all gone. 
 The exiles had returned, with the old banner waving over 
 them. They had come, as these noble wives and mothers 
 had written to them they should come, "with honor, in the 
 army, and under the old flag." 
 
 Nearly every city and village north of Tennessee had its 
 rejoicings, and its meetings of returning soldiers with 
 their kindred and friends. But there were none like this. 
 There were no exiles in the North. There the boys in blue 
 went away amid cheers and smiles, huzzas and demonstra- 
 tions, encouraged by music and waving banners. They 
 went on the high swelling current of popular sympathy 
 and popular enthusiasm. The way to their return was at 
 all times open. Letters and messages passed as freely as 
 in times of peace. How different with these Union 
 soldiers of East Tennessee ! 
 
The Return. 477 
 
 But on this great day of joy, there were here and there 
 mournful hearts and tearful eyes that joined not in the 
 general rejoicing. A sad, natural curiosity had drawn 
 them hither with their friends. But they knew that their 
 loved son, or brother, or husband had not come, and 
 never would come home again. He slept in another state, 
 perhaps on some battlefield where he had fallen in honor, 
 or in some hospital cemetery, his grave unmarked by 
 stone or tablet. No flowers bedecked his resting-place. 
 
 General Burnside was hailed, not as a conqueror, but 
 as a deliverer by the people. In no part of the South, 
 outside of East Tennessee, was such a demonstration of 
 loyalty and unbounded joy possible. All day long the 
 people poured in a constant stream in the direction of his 
 headquarters, in order that they might have the chance of 
 shaking hands with him, or at least catching a sight of 
 him. It would have seemed a strange sight in some gen- 
 erals to see them shaking hands by the hour with plain 
 old men and women from the country, as General Burn- 
 side that day did ; but he was a kindly man, and knew 
 that these parties were Spartan fathers and mothers, whose 
 sons then constituted a part of the very flower of his army, 
 and that they had suff'ered as it seldom falls to the lot of 
 men to suffer. 
 
 So universal was the desire to see General Burnside that 
 some time on the second day, it was arranged that he 
 should appear on the balcony of the Mansion House and 
 address a few words to the people. Accordingly, sur- 
 rounded by his staff and army ofiicers and a few citizens, 
 he appeared on the balcony above referred to. He was 
 greeted with loud cheering. He then addressed a few re- 
 marks to the sea of people who filled the streets. He 
 thanked them for the patriotic reception they had given 
 him and his army. He referred to the wonderful loyalty 
 and fidelity of the people of East Tennessee to the govern- 
 ment, and told them that President Lincoln had sent him 
 and his army to deliver them. He assured them that he 
 
478 East Tennessee and the Civil War, 
 
 expected to remain in East Tennessee, and that secession 
 would be suppressed. General Burnside was an awkward, 
 stammering speaker, but he was an honest, noble man. 
 He had a heart, and therefore spoke to the heart. He 
 won the undying love of our people. 
 
 To show that my descriptions of the wild and unbounded 
 joy of the Union people of East Tennessee are not over- 
 colored, I give an extract from a letter written home by 
 Colonel John W. Foster on the day after his arrival : 
 
 "Knoxville, Tenn., September 2, 1861. 
 
 ". . . About four o'clock yesterday morning, I re- 
 ceived orders to push on into Knoxville and occupy the 
 town. We were in motion within an hour, and all along 
 the road, as heretofore in our march through East Ten- 
 nessee, we were received with warmest expressions and 
 demonstrations of joy. . . . A few miles before we 
 reached the town, we ascertained that the rebels had all 
 left, the last of them that morning. The Eighth Tennes- 
 see Cavalry, which was in the advance, surrounded the 
 town, and about four o'clock yesterday afternoon, I rode 
 into the town with the staff and escort, and such an 
 ovation as we received was never before during this war 
 given to any army. The demonstration beggars all de- 
 scription. Men, women and children rushed to the streets, 
 no camp-meeting shouting ever exceeding the rejoicing of 
 the women. . . . The men huzzaed and yelled like 
 mad-men, and in their profusion of greeting, I was almost 
 pulled from my horse . Flags long concealed were brought 
 from their hiding-places. As soon as I could get to a 
 hotel, I was waited upon by the mayor (a true Union 
 man) and a large number of loyal men, prominent citi- 
 zens, and they received me with heartiest congratulations 
 and welcome. All afternoon and into the night, the 
 streets resounded with yells and cheers for the 'Union' and 
 'Lincoln.' 
 
 "It is stated that last night, after the occupation of the 
 
The Return. 479 
 
 town, the intelligence was communicated to the people 
 throughout the country by firing of guns from place to 
 place, and by signal fires on the mountains. And this 
 morning the streets were crowded with people from the 
 country, far and near, and such rejoicing I never saw be- 
 fore. How they shouted, and stood with uncovered heads 
 beneath the stars and stripes. The mayor ^ of the city 
 brought forth an immense flag which he had kept, wait- 
 ing anxiously for the day when he could unfurl it. This 
 was suspended early this morning over Main (or Gay) 
 street, and at the sight of it the people, as they came in 
 from the country, yelled with a perfect frenzy of delight. 
 Early in the day a procession of ladies was formed, and, 
 bearing two American flags, they marched down Main 
 street and under the large flag, in order that they might 
 fulfill a vow they had made early in the war, that they 
 would in a body march under the first American flag raised 
 in Knoxville." . . . 
 
 "September 3d, 
 
 "We had this morning a fresh outbreak of patriotism. 
 The news of the Federal occupation of the town by last 
 night spread into the adjoining counties, and the people 
 flocked in from every direction. A large delegation of 
 men and women of all ages formed in a long procession 
 (from Sevier county), and, carrying the American flag, 
 paraded through the town and out to camp, and tlie town 
 again ran wild with patriotic joy. Men who had been in 
 hiding among the rocks and caves of the mountains, and 
 who had not seen each other for years, or since the rebel- 
 lion broke out, stood grasping each other's hands beneath 
 the folds of the old flag, while tears streamed down their 
 cheeks. I have read of 'tears of joy,' but never saw so 
 much of it as here. 
 
 "But General Burnside and the rest of the army will be 
 
 ^ Colonel James C. Luttrell. 
 
480 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 in town this morning, and I must get ready to receive 
 them, so good-by for the present. 
 
 "John W. Foster." 
 
 It was significant and most fitting on many accounts 
 that East Tennessee troops should have been in the ad- 
 vance of the relieving army and the first to enter the 
 town. Two years before they had been driven from their 
 homes, and now they came back triumphantly in the post 
 of honor, and their enemies fled trembling or hid them- 
 selves at the sound of their horses' feet. Major John M. 
 Sawyers, whom I had encountered at the depot as he 
 turned into and dashed up Gay street at the head of his 
 troops, was in command that day of Colonel S. N. K. Pat- 
 ton's regiment, the Eighth Tennessee Cavalry. 
 
 Many old flags, which had been hidden for two years, 
 were brought out and unfurled. Soon the enthusiastic Union 
 people of Knoxville and vicinity erected a new flag-pole on 
 Gay street, on the site of the one which had been cut down 
 by the Confederates thirty months before. From its lofty 
 top they hung the stars and stripes amid the sound of mar- 
 tial music and the shouts of thousands of joyous specta- 
 tors. The national flag had come to have a meaning never 
 dreamed of until it was displaced by one representing a 
 foreign power. Then it became to the imprisoned Union 
 men of East Tennessee, confined and hedged in by a wall 
 of fire and lines of bayonets, as dear to them as their own 
 children. Dr. Swan M. Burnett, a native of East Tennes- 
 see, but now of Washington, D. C.,in an address delivered 
 in that city in 1894, entitled "The Over-Mountain Men," 
 and published in the American Historical Register, touch- 
 ingly refers to this sentiment among these people, and 
 especially with the wives of the exiles in Kentucky, as 
 follows : 
 
 "It was no wonder, then, that some of these lonely 
 women made for themselves flags emblematic of their faith, 
 
JAMES KOBERTSON. 
 
 Father mid Defender of Middle Tennessee. 
 
The Return. 481 
 
 which they tooh secretly from their hiding places in hours of 
 darkness and caressed, often with tears, as a devotee would the 
 relic of a patron saint. ' ' 
 
 I have said that a part of the exiles came home in tri- 
 umph with the army of General Burnside. Some came and 
 stayed a few days and were then hurried to other fields of 
 service. Some spent the winter of 1863-'4 here, but they 
 were always on the front, fighting or skirmishing with 
 Longstreet and his veterans. In the spring some of them 
 commenced a new career of wandering. They marched 
 Southward with Schofield to join Sherman in his "hun- 
 dred days' fight." In every engagement in which they 
 took part they did their duty nobly. When Atlanta was 
 taken, they followed Thomas back toward Nashville. 
 They were present with Schofield in the desperate battle of 
 Franklin. A few weeks later, they participated in the 
 dangers as well as the glories of the magnificent victory 
 of Nashville. Here "brave old General Cooper," as Gen- 
 eral Schofield calls him, by a wonderful march and by his 
 bravery in battle, won his second star. Other East Ten- 
 nessee troops (Gillem's brigade) moved from point to point 
 till the close of the war, fighting the battles and winning 
 the victories of Morristown and Greeneville, thence on into 
 South-west Virginia, breaking up the salt works at Salt- 
 ville and the lead-mines near Wytheville, and then dash- 
 ing across the state line into North Carolina, destroying 
 railroads and communications, and finally winning the 
 victory at Salisbury, and releasing the Federal prisoners 
 who had been confined there. 
 
 There were still other East Tennessee troops far away 
 from home. Some were with General Schofield in North 
 Carolina, and were present at the surrender of brave Joe 
 Johnston. Some were with General Sooey Smith when 
 he made his raid into Mississippi where they fought For- 
 rest nearly every day. Finally, they found themselves in 
 Alabama, again fighting Forrest. After an obstinate all-day 
 31 
 
482 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 fight, in SeiDtember, 1864, four liundred of these men, under 
 command of the brave ColonelJ. B. Minnis, of the Third Ten- 
 nessee Cavalry, and other soldiers, were forced by over- 
 whelming numbers to surrender. Minnis shed tears and pro- 
 tested against surrendering, but further resistance was mere 
 madness. Those who surrendered were sent to Cahaba, 
 Alabama, for confinement, until they could be exchanged. 
 
 In April, 1865, the exiles and wanderers nearly all re- 
 turned to their homes. Some of them had been absent 
 two, some three and some nearly four years. They returned 
 wiser and generally better men. War and time had to 
 some extent mellowed their fierce spirits. Hardships and 
 absence had chastened them. They had faithfully served 
 their country. They were proud that they had helped to 
 save it from disruption. Now, new duties lay before them. 
 The soldier must sink into the citizen. They must take 
 the places of their fathers who were passing away. The 
 burdens and the duties of citizenship must rest on them. 
 And right bravely did they assume their new responsi- 
 bilities, and to-day we see the result in happy, prosperous 
 homes all over East Tennessee. 
 
 The end was long delayed. At length it came. Spring 
 had once more come. The events of the 9th of April, 
 1865, had made Appomattox immortal. Peace was soon 
 to smile once more on the land. The imprisoned soldiers 
 all over the country would be released and sent home. So 
 it happened that there was assembled at Vicksburg, on the 
 24th day of April, 1865, a large number of Union soldiers 
 on their way to Cairo, to be exchanged. They had all been 
 in prison, some at Cahaba and some at Andersonville or 
 Macon. They belonged to the States of Ohio, Michigan, 
 Tennessee, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia. Among 
 these were four hundred East Tennesseans, mostly belong- 
 ing to the Third Tennessee Cavalry (Colonel Minnis) , 
 with a few also belonging to the First, Second, Fourth, 
 Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Eleventh and Twelfth Ten- 
 nessee Cavalry, and also a few to the Second and Third 
 
The Return. 483 
 
 Tennessee Mounted Infantry. These were mostly from 
 the counties of Knox, Blount, Sevier aad Jefferson. 
 
 On the 24th of April, 1,965 Federal soldiers and 35 
 officers — 2,000 in all — were loaded on the packet-boat 
 "Sultana" for Cairo. There were about 200 passengers, 
 besides the crew of the boat, and two companies of infantry 
 underarms, making a total of 2,300 souls. ^ Everything 
 went well until the boat had gotten eight or nine miles 
 above Memphis. Then, at 2 o'clock in the morning of the 
 27th, the loud noise of the explosion of the boiler startled 
 every one on board. Soon this was followed by a rapidly- 
 spreading fire. It had been raining and the night was 
 dark. The Mississippi was swollen by the melting snow 
 on its upper waters. The water was cold and icy. The 
 river was at that time three miles wide at the point where 
 the explosion took place. 
 
 No pen nor tongue can describe the confusion and the 
 alarm that followed. Whole masses of men leaping into 
 the river together and falling on top of one another made 
 the destruction of life terrible. The struggling human 
 beings striving to get rid of those who were frantically 
 clinging to them for life created a sickening scene of hor- 
 ror. In many cases those who could swim, and who would 
 have escaped, if left alone, were dragged down by others 
 to the bottom and perished. Horrible struggles often took 
 place in the water between drowning men. Some escaped 
 on pieces of the wrecked boat ; some seized the mane or 
 tail of escaping horses, letting them pull them ashore ; 
 and some, by getting on the bodies of cattle which were 
 killed by the explosion, floated with them to the bank. 
 One Confederate soldier, on the Arkansas shore, rescued 
 fifteen persons by means of a little dug-out. Would that 
 I could give the name of that brave, noble fellow ! 
 
 Of the 2,000 Federal soldiers (including officers) on the 
 boat, 1,235 were lost and 765 escaped. Of the 400 East 
 
 ' " Loss of the ' Sultana,' " by Rev. Chester D. Berry, pp. 7, 8. 
 
484 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Tennesseans, 332 were lost and 68 survived. The propor- 
 tion of loss among these brave fellows seems to have been 
 much greater than among the other passengers. The gen- 
 eral loss was less than two to one, but among these East 
 Tennesseans it was about five to one. There was some- 
 thing peculiarly sad in the loss of these East Tennesseans. 
 They had been exiles, and had not been at home since they 
 fled for safety in 1861 or 1862. When Burnside entered 
 East Tennessee, they did not follow him, for they were on 
 duty elsewhere. They had been captured and confined in 
 Southern prisons. Finally approaching peace was assured 
 by the surrender at Appomattox. Then they were released 
 and sent forward to be exchanged. They sped forward to- 
 ward their destination with exultant hope, full of reveries 
 and dreams and plans for the future. Never did imagina- 
 tion kindled by joy paint brighter visions of home and 
 kindred and the future. And the loved ones at home, too, 
 whose hearts had long since grown sick at the long, long 
 separation, now felt a new hope and a new joy, for they 
 at last knew the absent ones were coming. How the noble 
 women strove to be ready for their return ; how many deli- 
 cate little surprises they planned and prepared. And how 
 their anxious, expectant hearts, running ahead of time, 
 anticipated and daily looked for them long before they 
 could possibly get back. 
 
 The eyes of the nation were still wet with tears shed 
 over the sad and tragic and never-to-be-forgotten death of 
 the great and beloved Lincoln, Followed by the hearts of 
 millions of people, his remains had just been laid away in 
 their last resting-place. Just as the people were recover- 
 ing from the stupefaction caused by this overwhelming ca- 
 lamity, this other appalling accident followed. Nothing 
 in all the war was so heartrending, so mournful, as the 
 sinking of the Sultana. Fourteen hundred human souls 
 swallowed up in the angry waters of the Mississippi in an 
 hour ! And nearly three hundred and fifty of these men 
 were brave East Tennesseans. Most of them resided in 
 
The Return. 485 
 
 one part of the state, and for the most part in two coun- 
 ties. And, when the startling news of the disaster came, 
 and quickly spread over that region, the blackness of de- 
 spair seemed to brood over and settle on nearly every 
 household. And, though thirty summers have come and 
 gone, and time has frosted the heads and furrowed the 
 cheeks and dimmed the eyes of the surviving mothers, 
 wives and daughters, within their bosoms there are still 
 concealed wounds that will never heal, never close, never 
 cease to bleed, as the 27th of April comes around. The 
 memory of the great loss is too sacred to be given up. 
 And year by year the sweet flowers that were to have 
 greeted the returning exiles, in 1865, are still planted by 
 the walk leading up to the humble cottage. And, uncon- 
 sciously, at eventide, when the air is laden with their fra- 
 grance, the aged wife or mother, sitting in her door, still 
 looks anxiously up the road as if expecting some one. 
 
 And on the 27th of April, annually, the survivors of 
 these men, with their friends, hold a sad re-union generally 
 near Knoxville. This re-union took place a few months 
 since, two miles south of the Tennessee River, on the farm 
 of the colonel of the Third Tennessee Cavalry Regiment 
 (Colonel Minnis) , to which most of the lost belonged. 
 Only fourteen of the survivors were present. These meet- 
 ings are always sad and mournful. In a few more fleeting 
 years, there shall be no one left to answer ad sum to the 
 roll-call ! 
 
486 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 THE SIEGE OP KNOXVILLE. 
 
 General Burnside ordered to Chattanooga to the assistance of General 
 Rosecrans — Fails to go — Receives the surrender of Cumberland Gap — 
 Better in the end if he had gone to Chattanooga— General Longstreet 
 sent to capture Knoxville— Burnside falls back — Skirmishes with 
 Longstreet— Fight at Campbell Station— Siege of Knoxville — Sherman 
 sent by Grant to relief of Burnside — Assault on Fort Sanders— Long- 
 street repulsed— Assault described — Mr. Lincoln proclaims a general 
 thanksgiving for the safety of Knoxville — Longstreet retires from 
 Knoxville as Sherman approaches— Scarcity of provisions during the 
 siege — Dinner given by Burnside to Sherman — Loyal people of the 
 French Broad saved Knoxville — Provisions floated down that stream — 
 Colonel Doughty — Another dinner — Thrilling incidents connected 
 with the assassination of Mr. Lincoln — Sad fate of Colonel Eathbone 
 and Clara W. Harris. 
 
 When General Rosecrans became involved in peril, by 
 Bragg's army, in McLemore's Cove in 1863, General Hal- 
 leck, on the 13th of September, ordered General Burnside 
 to "move down his infantry from Knoxville as rapidly as 
 possibly toward Chattanooga to connect with Rosecrans." 
 The next day he said : "There are reasons why you should 
 re-enforce General Rosecrans with all possible dispatch. It 
 is believed that the enemy will concentrate to give him 
 battle. You must be there to help him." The President 
 also repeatedly urged Burnside to go to the help of Rose- 
 crans. Burnside promised to do so, but did not. He 
 seems to have been at first misled by a dispatch he re- 
 ceived from General Thomas L. Crittenden sent by Rose- 
 crans' direction, when Chattanooga was evacuated, which 
 indicated the flight of Bragg. ^ On the 10th Burnside had 
 been at Cumberland Gap — sixty miles from Knoxville, 
 whither he had marched by land — and had received the 
 
 1 Nicolay & Hay, Vol. VIII, p. 165. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 487 
 
 surrender of the Gap at the hands of General J. W. Frazer 
 with two thousand troops.^ Then returning, with a part 
 of his army, he started by trains eastwardly toward the 
 Virginia line, skirmishing with and scattering the Con- 
 federate forces which met him. On the 23d, three days 
 after the battle of Chickamauga, he was at Carter's 
 Station, one hundred and twenty miles east of Knox- 
 ville. ^ 
 
 The probabilities are that Burnside had no idea at any 
 time of giving up East Tennessee, and abandoning his 
 own conquests. He was greatly attached to these loyal 
 people, and sympathized with them most sincerely. He 
 had seen enough during his stay there to satisfy himself 
 of the paramount importance of holding its plentiful grain 
 fields, and above all this nursery of brave men for the 
 army. 
 
 The result of the obstinacy of General Burnside was to 
 bring upon himself, for the time being, the serious dis- 
 pleasure of the authorities in "Washington. This became 
 so grave that in the latter part of September he requested 
 Mr. John Baxter and the author to proceed to "Washington 
 to explain to the authorities the situation of things in 
 East Tennessee. Accordingly, equipped with the neces- 
 sary letters, they proceeded to that place. But by the 
 time they arrived (having had to travel by the overland 
 route through Kentucky to Lexington) the situation at 
 
 * It was while on his march to the Gap, but near it, that General Burn- 
 side and his staff were met and halted by Hamilton, familiarly known far 
 and wide as "Ham Scott." Scott was the son of a former celebrated judge 
 of the state ; he was a man of honor and integrity, and an ardent Union 
 man. He was excitable, odd and eccentric beyond description or even 
 imagination. Meeting General Burnside, in his wild tumultuous joy, he 
 hailed him as his deliverer, and throwing himself on his knees before the 
 general's horse, he poured out in a most dramatic and wild manner his joy 
 and thankfulness to God and to General Burnside for his deliverance. 
 The general was deeply affected by this incident ; by this sincere exhibi- 
 tion of the wonderful love of these East Tennessee people for the Union. — 
 "The Loyal Mountaineers," p. 218. 
 
 =» Nicolay & Hay, Vol. Ill, p. 165. 
 
488 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Chattanooga had become more hopeful, and the storm 
 which threatened to burst upon the head of Burnside died 
 away. His subsequent splendid conduct during the siege 
 of Knoxville restored him to the full confidence of the ad- 
 ministration. 
 
 Perhaps in the end it might have been as well for Burn- 
 side to have gone to the support of Rosecrans. For a 
 time, it would have exposed all of Upper East Tennessee, 
 as well as Cumberland Gap, to seizure and re-occupation 
 by General Jones, then in South West Virginia. But it 
 almost certainly would have saved Rosecrans from defeat, 
 averted the subsequent struggle around Chattanooga, and 
 prevented the presence of Longstreet in Upper East Ten- 
 nessee during the whole winter. 
 
 General Burnside was not destined to remain long in 
 peaceable possession of Knoxville and Upper East Tennes- 
 nessee. Early in November General Longstreet was de- 
 tached, by order of President Davis, ^ from the army of 
 General Bragg at Chattanooga, and ordered to march on 
 Knoxville and capture Burnside and his army. The latter 
 fell back from Loudon, Lenoir's and Campbell Station, be- 
 fore the superior force of Longstreet, skirmishing as he did 
 so. General Burnside had suggested to General Grant 
 that he would adopt this course, and draw Longstreet 
 further and further away from Bragg, and thus prevent 
 him from returning to take part in the impending fight at 
 Chattanooga. This was a noble act on the part of Burn- 
 side. Grant approved the suggestion, and ordered him to 
 fall back slowly to Knoxville.^ This accounts for the fact 
 
 1 It was reported at the time that there was a serious misunderstanding 
 between General Bragg and General Longstreet, and that Mr. Davis' visit 
 to Chattanooga was for the purpose of reconciling them, and failing in this, 
 he planned the campaign against Knoxville. General Longstreet, in a 
 carefully prepared address, delivered at Knoxville at a reunion of Federal 
 and Confederate soldiers in October, 1890, said that he was opposed to the 
 expedition to Knoxville, and that it was ordered by Mr. Davis and General 
 Bragg. 
 
 ^ " Grant's Memoirs," Vol. II, pp. 50, 51. 
 
The Siege of Knozville. 489 
 
 that such feeble resistance was made by Burnside at Huff's 
 Ferry, near Loudon, to the passage of Longstreet's army 
 over the Tennessee River. 
 
 At Campbell Station,^ fifteen miles west of Knoxville, 
 there was a sharp and spirited fight lasting several hours, 
 after which Burnside continued his retreat to Knoxville. 
 In a day or two he was shut up on three sides in the im- 
 perfect fortifications surrounding the place, with an army 
 of 20,000 men besieging him, which was afterwards in- 
 creased to 27,000. Most likely it was the plan of Long- 
 street to starve Burnside into a surrender, for if he had in- 
 tended to carry the place by assault, that might have been 
 done at first more easily than three weeks later, when the 
 works had been greatly strengthened and extended by the 
 most incessant labor, day and night, under the direction of 
 the best engineering skill, And yet he delayed an assault 
 for three weeks. 
 
 Here then, we have in November, 1863, four great armies 
 on the soil of East Tennessee, two facing each other at 
 Chattanooga, and two smaller ones at Knoxville. It may 
 be recalled by the reader that in the letter of General 
 Sherman to his brother John, of February 3, 1862, he 
 said : "East Tennessee can not exercise much influence on 
 the final result." And yet here were four armies, num- 
 bering in the aggregate nearly 200,000 men, on the point 
 of measuring their strength in battle in an effort to retain 
 the control of this region. East Tennessee had become the 
 pivotal point in the South on which every movement 
 turned. It was the gateway to Georgia and South Caro- 
 lina, and hence Bragg, re-enforced by the best troops from 
 Lee's army, stood in this gateway prepared to resist any 
 attempt at an advance Southward. And so, too, Johnson 
 afterward resisted the advance of Sherman through this 
 
 * Campbell Station, where this fight took place, was the undoubted birth- 
 place of the great naval hero, David Glascoe Farragut. This fact is well 
 known. But it is not so well known and yet pretty well attested that when 
 he was a boy, he lived with his father in Knoxville. 
 
490 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 gateway, with a skillful determination showing how much 
 importance was attached to this region in a military point 
 of view. And Longstreet likewise, lingered many months 
 in Upper East Tennessee, long after his mission to this 
 region had failed. He too, was reluctant to yield the 
 position which was the key to the whole Southern situation. 
 
 On the 18th of November, as Longstreet's forces were 
 approaching Knoxville, General William P. Sanders was, 
 by order of General Burnside, sent with seven hundred 
 dismounted cavalry, to hold them in check on the Kingston 
 road, two miles west of town. While thus engaged, with 
 daring intrepidity, he exposed himself to the enemy's fire 
 and fell mortally wounded. He died the next day. A 
 solitary cedar tree, on the top of the ridge, overlooking 
 the river that silently washes its base, is still pointed out 
 as the spot where one of the most gallant Federal officers 
 fell. Romantic, beautiful spot. Let no vandal hand 
 touch that lonely cedar tree, but let it stand as a monu- 
 ment to this brave Kentucky hero ! 
 
 Said General Burnside : "I told Sanders not to expose 
 himself, but he would do it." On the next night, amid 
 the gloom of darkness, relieved only by the flickering light 
 of a lantern, he was buried in the yard of the Episcopal 
 Church. No martial music, no volley of musketry dis- 
 turbed the solemn silence. The beautiful service of the 
 Episcopal Church was read by the Rev. Thomas W. 
 Humes, D.D., rector of the church, in the presence of 
 General Burnside and a few other faithful friends. Then 
 these hastened away to their several posts of duty, for 
 while they linger over the grave, the sound of the enemy's 
 cannon is heard off in the west, and armed hosts are 
 rapidly moving into position along the ridges on the north- 
 west of the town. The scene was most solemn and im- 
 pressive, reminding those present, as was remarked at the 
 time, of the "burial of Sir John Moore." ^ 
 
 Loyal Mountaineers," by Thomas W. Humes, D.D., pp. 256, 258. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 491 
 
 The brilliant victory of Grant over Bragg in the battle 
 of Chattanooga settled the fate of Knoxville. General 
 Sherman was sent from the battlefield to the relief of 
 Burnside. Hearing of this fact (for Grant had managed 
 that the news should reach Longstreet as well as Burn- 
 side) , ^ Longstreet made an assault on Fort Sanders with 
 the veterans who had won undying honor at Gettysburg on 
 the morning of November 29, 1863. 
 
 Before the assault on Fort Sanders, wire had been 
 stretched from stump to stump in front of the fort where 
 the attack was expected. This formed a perfect net-work 
 twelve or fifteen inches above the ground. The forest had 
 recently been cut away leaving high stumps. The front 
 was also protected by abatis. The ground gradually 
 sloped down from the top of the ridge on which the fort 
 stood to the railroad track, a distance of about eight hun- 
 dred feet. The track of the railroad was formed by a deep 
 cut near the foot of the slope, extending for a quarter of a 
 mile, thus affording complete shelter for an attacking 
 column. Along this cut the forces of Longstreet intended 
 for the assault were massed in the darkness of the latter 
 part of the night. Some time before daylight, the bat- 
 teries of Longstreet, posted on the long ridge north and 
 north-west of the fort, as well as those south of the Ten- 
 nessee, opened a simultaneous and terrific fire on the fort. 
 It was a sublime and awe-inspiring scene, as fifty or 
 seventy-five guns thundered forth shot and shell in the 
 darkness of night. 
 
 The moat or ditch around the fort was nearly eight 
 feet deep, with almost perpendicular walls. The dirt was 
 all thrown on the inside, thus increasing the height of the 
 inside walls. General Burnside, who was a vigilant and 
 an active commander, knowing an assault was to be made 
 on that part of his line, had put four thousand loaded guns 
 
 ^ Grant's " Memoirs," Vol, II, p. 94. General Longstreet captured, as he 
 states in his official report, one of the couriers who had been sent by Grant 
 with dispatches to Burnside, just as Grant desired. 
 
492 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 inside of the fort, so that when one was fired another was 
 ready for use without waiting for reloading,^ Burnside 
 had twelve thousand effective men all told inside of the 
 city to defend his long line of trenches against about 
 twenty thousand men at first, and finally twenty-seven 
 thousand, under Longstreet. 
 
 The enemy did not know that there was a moat outside 
 of the fort, as some of the prisoners stated afterwards. 
 With their glasses they had seen men and dogs passing 
 from the outside into the fort, and supposed they were 
 walking on the natural earth. They did not see and know 
 that they were walking on planks thrown across the moat. 
 These planks were all removed during the night before the 
 attack. In this way Longstreet was misled. In conse- 
 quence thereof, the assaulting column brought no scaling 
 ladders. 
 
 Just as the gray of early dawn began to appear, the 
 heavy cannonading ceased, and suddenly there arises from 
 their concealment the dark outline of that mass of brave 
 men who are to make the assault. In perfect silence they 
 pushed up the gentle slope with the dreadful rush of a 
 tempest. Suddenly they are thrown into confusion. They 
 have struck the network of wire, and many of them are 
 prostrate on the ground. Other columns behind press on 
 the entangled mass in front. At length partial order is 
 restored. They press forward again and suddenly come 
 upon the moat. Whether willingly or unwillingly they 
 plunge into it, being pushed forward by the heavy mass 
 behind. And now the fire of the fort is doing its terrible 
 work. Grape and canister are poured upon them. Mus- 
 ketry flashes from every opening. Cannon charged with 
 grape, fired from the angles, enfilade the struggling 
 mass in the moat. Those pushed into the embrasures are 
 blown to pieces. Fifty or more daring men, notwithstand- 
 
 ^ I am indebted to Mr. E. J. Sanford, who was in the fight, for this state- 
 ment. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 493 
 
 ing the appalling danger, clamber up the steep wall and 
 reach the top, in nearly every case only to be instantly 
 shot or captured. With a burning cigar, Lieutenant Ben- 
 jamin is lighting grenades, and casting them over into 
 the ditch. The scene on the outside is one of horror. 
 Says one who was in the fort : "The dead, the dying and 
 the living were piled on top of one another in the moat, 
 an indiscriminate and helpless mass,"^ In the western 
 corner the blood is literally over shoe top deep. Three 
 times the brave men put forward to attempt this daring 
 enterprise dash themselves against the strong earthworks 
 and the death-dealing cannon and musketry, only to be 
 hurled back with terrible loss of life. Both the assaults 
 and the resistance are desperate. In a few minutes, nearly 
 a thousand brave men fall before the murderous fire which 
 is poured on them from the fortifications. The deep moat 
 is finally almost literally bridged with human bodies. 
 Longstreet at length recalls his troops. On the night of 
 December 4th, he and his forces give up the siege and 
 withdraw from Knoxville. 
 
 That fight on Burnside's part was made by two hundred 
 and twenty men and eleven guns actually engaged against 
 four brigades. General Edward Ferrero, of New York, 
 was in command. Lieutenant Samuel N. Benjamin, in 
 command of a light battery of the Second United States 
 Artillery, directed the defense. The troops inside of the 
 
 * Mr. E. J. Sanford, of Knoxville. I am indebted to this gentleman for 
 many of the foregoing facts in reference to this fight. When the siege of 
 Knoxville commenced, though he did not belong to the army, he asked 
 for a gun. He was in Fort Sanders during the fight and took part in it. 
 Some years before the war he came to Knoxville from Connecticut, where 
 his ancestors had been prominent at the founding of that colony. When 
 the Civil War broke out, he espoused the side of the Union, and never for 
 a moment faltered in his adhesion to it. He formed a conspicuous contrast 
 to a number of New England men in East Tennessee, who espoused the 
 cause of the South. By his industry, sagacity and honorable life, Mr. San- 
 ford has become a man of large wealth, and a citizen of influence through- 
 out the state. 
 
494 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 fort were composed of part of the Nineteenth Highlanders, 
 of New York, and a part of the Second Michigan Volun- 
 teers. Burnside reported thirteen killed and wounded in 
 this terrible assault. For the time it lasted, this was one 
 of the most desperate assaults of the war, while the de- 
 fense was most brilliant.^ 
 
 The Southern historian. Pollard, in his work, says : "In 
 this terrible ditch the dead were piled eight or ten deep. . 
 . . Never, excepting at Gettysburg, was there in the his- 
 tory of the war, a disaster adorned with the glory of such 
 devout courage as Longstreet's repulse at Knoxville." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln, now regarding East Tennessee as safe, and 
 considering its occupation by the Federal troops as a mat- 
 ter of great national importance, in the fullness of his joy 
 at the accomplishment of this object, long so near his 
 heart, on the 7th day of December issued a proclamation 
 for general thanksgiving throughout the land on account of 
 this glorious result, in which he said : "Esteeming this to 
 be of high national consequence I recommend that all 
 loyal people do, on receipt of this information, assemble 
 at their places of worship and render special homage to 
 Almighty God for this great advancement of the national 
 cause." ^ 
 
 Evidently it was the purpose of Longstreet, as before 
 stated, before he heard that Sherman was on his way to 
 Knoxville with his army, not to assault the place, but let 
 hunger do its work. It was probable, too, that he would 
 have succeeded if Sherman had not come. Burnside in- 
 formed Grant that he could subsist only until the 3d of De- 
 cember. Neither Grant nor Sherman seem to have thought 
 that there was at any time any very serious want of pro- 
 visions. The fact that Burnside fixed the 3d of December 
 as the time when his provisions would fail, shows that he 
 thought the situation very critical. 
 
 But there are many facts showing the serious condition 
 
 1 Nicolay & Hay's " Life of Lincoln," Vol. VIII, p. 180. ' Id. p. 187. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 495 
 
 of the army during the siege, on account of the scarcity 
 of provisions. At the reunion of General Gillem's brig- 
 ade, in Knoxville, in August, 1894, Major Wilson, of the 
 Eighth Tennessee Cavalry, stated that as commissary of 
 that regiment he issued at one time during the siege to 
 the men, for two days' rations, one little potato and one 
 ear of corn. 
 
 In the "National Tribune" of October 12, 1893, there is 
 an account of the siege published, by W. H. Brearly, of 
 the Seventeenth Michigan, in a private letter to a friend 
 at home, written from day to day as the siege progressed. 
 More than once he says the soldiers were living on one- 
 fourth rations. Under date of November 28th he says : 
 
 "Last night we drew to-day's rations of bread and two 
 days' rations of boiled meat. It all made a scant supper 
 for me. All we draw here now is bread and meat, and 
 you can judge of the amount we get." 
 
 December 3d he says : 
 
 "I picked up a handful of kernels of corn from the dirt, 
 washed them, and ate them, of course." 
 
 December 4th he writes : 
 
 "December 4th (18th day) — Yesterday I was out in 
 the skirmish pit again, but just before starting we got our 
 day's rations. What do you think it was? A nubbin of 
 corn — corn on the cob which is not more than six inches 
 long. All our regiment got the same, so I have no reason 
 to grumble ; only, if Burnside don't try to break out, or 
 if help don't come pretty soon, we may have to go to 
 Richmond after all. The rebs can't take these works in 
 any other way except by starving us out. 
 
 "I have just heard that Burnside sent word to our 
 colonel that he has quarter rations, such as they are, for 
 only three days more." 
 
 Here are statements that are worth more than the infer- 
 ences of General Sherman, drawn from one or two facts 
 witnessed by him during his brief stay in Knoxville. The 
 siege was raised on the night of the 4th of December. 
 
496 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 On the 6tli General Sherman rode over from Maryville to 
 Knoxville, having been informed by General Burnside, 
 through a staff officer, that Longstreet was gone. He 
 says he saw a pen of cattle near the river, and that Gen- 
 eral Burnside 's table was abundantly supplied with good 
 things to eat/ Therefore he seemed to think lightly of the 
 story of starvation or suffering. 
 
 Between the morning of the 5th and a fashionable din- 
 ner hour — say 5 or 6 o'clock p. m. — on the 6th, there was 
 ample time to send to the loyal people south of the 
 river, as was done, and say to them that General Burnside 
 wanted provisions for his own use and also for General 
 Sherman. Such a message would have commanded the 
 very best that was in the country. And this was the way 
 the ample table of General Burnside was provided, when 
 he was expecting so distinguished a guest as General Sher- 
 man. He simply sent to the country, and the loyal women 
 divided with their beloved general what they had hidden 
 away. The appearance of the cattle in the pens can be 
 accounted for in the same way. They had been sent in 
 probably as soon as the siege was raised, or they were a 
 few that had not been doled out to the army, but were re- 
 served for the last bitter extremity. 
 
 A writer in the "Chattanooga Times" of December, 1894, 
 thus speaks of General Burnside 's famous dinner, gotten 
 up in honor of General Sherman, on December 6, 1863 : 
 
 "It was an occasion of rejoicing on all sides. The sol- 
 diers were elated over their victory, and doubly rejoiced 
 at having escaped rebel prisons by so narrow a margin. 
 
 "General Burnside, always a prince of good fellows, set 
 about to do the honors to his distinguished guest and his 
 staff. Orders were given for a good dinner. It was to be 
 a sort of supplemental Thanksgiving dinner. The larder 
 of the gallant Burnside was none too full just on the heels 
 of a fortnight's imprisonment on half rations within the 
 
 1 " Memoirs," Vol. I, p. 381. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 497 
 
 confines of the city ; but there were willing hands to go 
 out in all directions in search of such delicacies as could 
 be drummed up in the town and surrounding country. 
 There was a fairly good supply in the headquarters de- 
 canter, for it must be remembered that Burnside's staff was 
 composed almost entirely of well-to-do officers, who always 
 went provided with an abundance of the best of every- 
 thing. 
 
 "As luck would have it, an ample supply of turkeys was 
 found over in the hill country to the south of Knoxville. 
 Butter and eggs were also secured by the same forage 
 party which unearthed the turkeys — the typical Thanks- 
 giving bird of America. Never in our history was there a 
 more ideal offering on the altar of thanksgiving than these 
 turkeys from the loyal South, when brought forth steam- 
 ing to the festive board, at which grand and picturesque 
 Tecumseh and his staff sat as guests of Burnside, the 
 savior of East Tennessee, surrounded by his staff and officers 
 who had but recently done such gallant service in the 
 bloody trenches. 
 
 "A member of Burnside's staff, Colonel C. E. Mallam, 
 not long since recited his recollections of this famous 
 dinner. He said the spirit of felicity ran high, and never 
 before or since had it been his pleasure to enjoy such a 
 scene. Burnside mindful of the courtesies due his dis- 
 tinguished guest, made apology to Sherman for the almost 
 boisterous manner in which his own staff and other 
 guests demeaned themselves. 
 
 "'Oh I that is all right. General,' said Sherman. 'I 
 wouldn't give a farthing for an officer who was afraid of 
 either wine or women.' 
 
 "Thirty-one years ago this memorable dinner was en- 
 joyed by those grim old warriors. Since then nearly 
 all who participated in it have gone to the beyond. Like 
 the old fort on the hill, they now dwell only in our 
 memories. 
 
 "It is almost unaccountable that the loyal people of 
 32 
 
498 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 East Tennessee should have permitted Fort Sanders to be 
 destroyed. It is the ideal spot around which the glories 
 of their valor cluster. 
 
 "How grand a thing it would be to restore Fort Sanders 
 and convert it into a j^ark to be graced by monuments to 
 our military heroes — Sevier, Houston, Crockett, Jackson, 
 Gaines and Farragut. 
 
 "Truly, the fires of our patriotism are low in the em- 
 bers." 
 
 But whatever may have been the true condition of the 
 commissary department inside of the besieged city at the 
 time of its deliverance, the fact can not well be denied that the 
 loyal people of the country east of the town saved the army 
 from starvation and Knoxville from capture. The people 
 had hoarded up corn, wheat and bacon for the use of the 
 Federal army when it should come . Most of these provisions 
 had been raised by old men and women and children. The 
 bottom lands along the French Broad River are as generous 
 in their yield of corn as the lands of the Nile. The year 
 1863 had been a season of unprecedented plentifulness in 
 East Tennessee. Nothing like it had been known for 
 a long time. The fields literally groaned with the teeming 
 abundance of wheat and corn. 
 
 ^ Appropriate to the reference to the demolition of Fort Sanders, and in 
 marked contrast to the sentiment which permitted it, I refer to that pre- 
 vailing among the descendants of the brave defenders of Londonderry, even 
 after the lapse of nearly two hundred years, as described by Macaulay. 
 
 " The citizens of Londonderry are to the last degree jealous of the in- 
 tegrity of those walls. No improvement that would deface them would be 
 proposed without raising a storm, and I do not blame them. . . . 
 
 "The wall is carefully preserved, nor would any plea of health or con- 
 venience be held by the inhabitants sufficient to justify the demolition of 
 that sacred inclosure ; which, in the evil time, gave shelter to their race 
 and their religion. It is impossible not to respect the sentiment which in- 
 dicates itself by these tokens. It is a sentiment which belongs to the higher 
 and purer part of human nature, and which adds not a little to the strength 
 of states. A people which takes no pride in the noble achievements of re- 
 mote ancestors, will never achieve anything to be remembered with pride 
 by remote descendants." — Treveylan's " Life and Letters of Macaulay," 
 Vol. II, p. 196. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 499 
 
 It is a singular fact that the people dwelling in the re- 
 gion watered by the French Broad and its tributaries were 
 the most universally loyal of all the people of East Ten- 
 nessee. Another singular fact or coincidence was that the 
 only part of Knoxville not completely invested and closed 
 was the part lying on the side of these rich cornfields and 
 these loyal people, from which the town could be reached 
 at all times by watercraft, floating on the waters of this 
 large stream. 
 
 No sooner was it known that General Burnside's army 
 was shut up in the fortifications at Knoxville, than these 
 noble people began to fill little boats with provisions, and 
 silently float them down the river after night to the town. 
 Sometimes little flat-boats were filled, and then turned 
 loose on the water, leaving them to float in the current. 
 At Knoxville they were checked by a boom devised for 
 this purpose. General Burnside seeing the immense im- 
 portance of these supplies, ordered Colonel James A. 
 Doughty (who recently died in this city) , of the Seven- 
 teenth Tennessee Cavalry, with two or three companies, 
 to take charge of this important work. Colonel Doughty 
 fixed his headquarters at Bowman's Ferry, on the French 
 Broad, ten miles above Knoxville. The loyal people of 
 the surrounding country literally poured to this point 
 their supplies of all kinds, such as corn, wheat, flour, 
 bacon, pork, beeves, potatoes and hay, and even lard and 
 chickens and turkeys. The wheat was ground into flour 
 by the mills in the country. As fast as received these pro- 
 visions and supplies were dispatched under the care of 
 trusty men to Knoxville. Finally Colonel Doughty and 
 his men, and the loyal citizens, became so bold as to 
 openly navigate the river in broad daylight, landing their 
 boats within the city, on Crozier street, at the mouth of 
 First Creek. This point was within sight and within half 
 a mile of the Confederate battery erected on the high bluff 
 south of the Holston (now called the Tennessee) , nearly 
 opposite the University of Tennessee. The supplies thus 
 
500 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 furnished were alone nearly half sufficient to support the 
 army and the people of the city/ Of course these little 
 boats were continually liable to be fired on by Confederate 
 videttes or scouting parties, but in most places the stream 
 was wide, and the boats low and flat, and at night could 
 be seen only a short distance away. When force was 
 necessary they were j)ropelled so quietly and gently that 
 the noise could scarcely be heard on the shore. 
 
 Thus the Union people dwelling on the waters of the 
 French Broad, by their generous contributions of supplies, 
 at a critical moment, saved the army of Burnside from 
 starvation and surrender. Generals Grant and Sherman, 
 and Charles A. Dana, assistant secretary of war, all bear 
 testimony to the patriotic assistance thus rendered to the 
 army by these loyal people. 
 
 Nicolay & Hay, in their "Life of Lincoln," thus speak 
 of it: 
 
 "Loyal farmers floated down all kinds of necessary sup- 
 plies in rafts on the river, which were caught by the booms 
 of the town, and the same device was used to stop the pro- 
 gress of the heavy rafts sent down by the Confederates in 
 hope of breaking up the pontoon bridges." ^ 
 
 Never in the history of war did a people labor more 
 willingly or more enthusiastically for a cause, or give 
 more generously than these patriots on the French Broad. 
 Nor was such disinterested conduct confined to the people 
 on the waters of that stream. The same spirit animated 
 the loyal people of East Tennessee everywhere. 
 
 General 0.0. Howard says in his report of his march to 
 the relief of Burnside: "Along the entire route . . . 
 we were cheered by the most lively demonstrations of 
 loyalty on the part of the inhabitants." In the "National 
 
 1 Colonel Doughty is my authority for the foregoing details. He says 
 the next day after the siege was raised, the 5th of December, his recol- 
 lection is that he sent in a drove of cattle. This accounts for the cattle 
 General Sherman saw as he entered the town on the 6th. 
 
 ^ Nicolay & Hay, Vol. VIII, p. 175. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 601 
 
 Tribune" of October 9, 1884, lie states that many of his 
 troops had worn out their shoes in their long march, and 
 were tramping barefoot over the frozen ground. He saw 
 citizens, meeting them, sit down on the ground, take off 
 their own shoes and give them to the soldiers. General 
 Howard recently repeated this statement in an address in 
 Chicago. General Frank P. Blair paid a similar tribute 
 to the patriotism of East Tennessee. Howard says that 
 such patriotism he had never seen or read of. He is 
 right. Such patriotism, purified, sanctified and exalted 
 by suffering and exile did not exist, and could not exist 
 anywhere else outside of East Tennessee, except with a 
 people under similar circumstances. 
 
 Colonel Doughty performed the work assigned to him 
 faithfully and efficiently. In fact, the honor of saving 
 Knoxville and the army is as largely due to him (and these 
 loyal farmers) as to any other man, perhaps more so than 
 to any one else, excepting General Burnside. The latter 
 was enthusiastic in his praise. I quote from a letter of 
 his to the secretary of war, dated April 15, 1868 : 
 
 "Hon. Edwin M. Stanton, 
 
 Secretary of War, Washington, D. 0. 
 '■'■Dear Sir: — I desire to present to you the claims of Col- 
 onel James A. Doughty, who was one of the most promi- 
 nent Union men in East Tennessee during my service 
 there, and whose arduous and unremitting labors were of 
 the greatest service to our command. His knowledge of 
 the country and its people enabled him to obtain informa- 
 tion and supplies that would otherwise have been withheld 
 from us, and he, without regard to the risk of capture, 
 constantly penetrated the enemy's lines and brought to us 
 supplies during the siege, floating them down the river 
 under cover of night, encountering many obstacles that 
 would have discouraged any but the most thoroughly loyal 
 and devoted friend of our forces, thus giving us the means 
 of subsistence without which our command must have 
 
502 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 been reduced to actual starvation. I have no hesitation in 
 saying that it was greatly owing to the efforts of Colonel 
 Doughty and his command that our soldiers and animals 
 were so well enabled to withstand the long siege of the 
 enemy. . . . Yours respectfully, 
 
 "A. E. BuRNSiDE, Late Major-General.^^ 
 
 Charles A. Dana, who accompanied General Sherman 
 to Knoxville on the 6th of December, says, in his work 
 now going through the press, that at the close of the siege 
 there were twenty days' rations on hand; in fact, more 
 than when the siege commenced. This must certainly be 
 an error. If not, it shows the amazing amount of sup- 
 plies brought in by Colonel Doughty and the people east 
 of the city.^ 
 
 ^ There had been a Thanksgiving and turkej'' eating dinner in Knoxville 
 previously to the one given by General Burnside — one given in his honor. 
 On Thanksgiving Day, November 26, 1863, Mrs. Temple, wife of the au- 
 thor, gave a dinner to him and a part of his staflf. Among those were Col- 
 onel Wm. Hamilton Harris, of New York ; Captain (now Colonel U.S. A.) 
 D. H. Larned, retired ; and probably Major William Cutting, of New York 
 City, and others. I was absent at the time. Before the siege commenced, 
 Mrs. Temple had procured a splendid large turkey for that occasion. 
 Other supplies she always had on hand. The entertainment was sump- 
 tuous, and, considering the time, profuse. The occasion was one of anx- 
 iety, especially to General Burnside, and well calculated to cast a gloom 
 over the company. The fate of Knoxville and the army at that very time 
 hung wavering in the balance. But the genial sunshine of the hostess, 
 and her inspiring animation, drove away all gloom, even from the brow of 
 the stern old chief. All went well with him through the various courses 
 until coffee was reached, and there he drew the line, declaring that he 
 could not think of drinking coffee while his poor soldiers were lying in 
 wet trenches and had none. Noble-hearted man 1 But, worthy as was 
 this sentiment, I never heard that he refused to partake of the turkey be- 
 cause his soldiers had none ! This was perhaps the only Thanksgiving 
 dinner given in Knoxville on that day. This incident is given as an in- 
 troduction and as indirectly related to the thrilling incidents which 
 follow : 
 
 Thirty years after that time, a carriage drove up to my house in Knox- 
 ville, one Sabbath afternoon, containing a gentleman and two ladies. On 
 being ushered into the parlor, the gentleman introduced himself by saying 
 that he was Wm. Hamilton Harris, a son of ex-United States Senator Ira 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 503 
 
 Harris, of New York, who served in the senate during the late war. He 
 further stated that he served on the staff of General Eurnside with the 
 rank of colonel ; that he was in Knoxville during the siege ; that he was 
 one of the party who had partaken of the Thanksgiving dinner given by 
 Mrs. Temple to General Burnside, and that we had had the honor of carv- 
 ing the large turkey on that occasion. He explained that he had called 
 to pay his respects to my daughter and myself out of regard for the mem- 
 ory of Mrs. Temple, who was then dead, and of whom he spoke in the 
 most tender praise. This courtesy, after the lapse of thirty years, cer- 
 tainly proved Colonel Harris to be a refined gentleman. 
 
 He further stated, in the course of the conversation, that he was a 
 brother of Miss Clara W. Harris, who, in company with Brevet Colonel W. 
 E. Rathbone, had accompanied Mr. and Mrs. Lincoln to Ford's Theater on 
 the night of April 14, 1865, and were in the box with Mr. Lincoln when 
 be was assassinated by J. Wilkes Booth. It will be recollected that Gen- 
 eral Grant and bis wife were invited to accompany Mr. and Mrs. Lincoln, 
 but they finally declined. They took the train that afternoon for New 
 Jersey to visit their children. Otherwise General Grant might have been 
 tilled with Lincoln. Then Colonel D. R. Rathbone and Miss Clara W. 
 Harris, the daughter of Senator Ira Harris, of New York, who were en- 
 gaged to be married, were invited in their place. 
 
 A sad fate awaited each of the four persons who sat in the theater box 
 that night chatting so cheerfully, whose happiness seemed at that hour as 
 full as ever falls to the lot of mortals. Suddenly the sharp sound of a 
 pistol rang out near the President's box. Mr. Lincoln's head fell over on 
 his shoulder, and blood oozed from a fatal wound and ran down his cheeks. 
 Almost at the same instant, J. Wilkes Booth — young, handsome and 
 dramatic in every movement — rushed by, brandishing a large knife, ex- 
 claiming, "Sic semper tyrannis." Colonel Rathbone seized him, but was 
 severely wounded in the struggle. The assassin escaped with a shattered 
 leg caused by a fall. That night the President died, and in a few days he 
 was borne to his last resting-place, followed by the tears of millions of his 
 countrymen. Mrs. Lincoln never recovered from the shock of that terri- 
 ble night, but lingered out a mournful life, her reason darkened and some- 
 times gone, overwhelmed by sorrow and an ever-present melancholy. 
 
 A few months later, the two young lovers. Colonel Rathbone and Miss 
 Clara W. Harris, who witnessed the sad tragedy at the theater, were 
 united in the holy bonds of matrimony. But Colonel Rathbone — young 
 and sensitive — like Mrs. Lincoln, could never shake off the dark shadow 
 of that terrible night. The image of the dying President and the gloating 
 frenzy of J. Wilkes Booth, as he strode across the theater, would come 
 back. A homicidal tendency was developed in him ; he lost his reason, 
 and with wild, gleaming eyes, like those of the assassin on that fatal night, 
 he killed his young, beautiful wife. And at last accounts, Colonel Rath- 
 bone, so full of promise and hope in April, 1865, was confined in a lunatic 
 asylum near Hanover, Germany — a raving maniac ! And thus was cut off 
 lovely Clara Harris, who seemed to be born only for sunshine, falling in 
 the very freshness of young womanhood, like a beautiful flower, plucked 
 
504 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 in the early morning, just as it opened its "waxen leaves and began to 
 drink in the sunlight." 
 
 And thus the fates demanded these sad tragedies. Such a picture of 
 calamity — so pathetic and so horrible— as that presented by this group of 
 persons who were together at Ford's Theater that terrible night, can not 
 be found in all our annals. Who will not shed a tear over the mournful 
 fate of lovely Clara Harris Rathbone ? On the night of the assassination, 
 she alone seemed to keep her self-possession, and know what ought to be 
 done. She coolly called for water, and directed that the dying martyr 
 should be carried across the street to the historic house where he breathed 
 out his life. 
 
 A part of these facts I have from the lips and pen of her brother, Colonel 
 Wm. Hamilton Harris, and a part from other authentic sources. 
 
 One other singular fact, almost a coincidence : Sergeant Boston Corbett, 
 ■who was one of the squad of soldiers who accompanied Lieutenant L. C. 
 Baker in the pursuit of Booth, and who, contrary to orders, shot and killed 
 the assassin, some years afterward became demented, and in 1890, was con- 
 fined in a lunatic asylum in Kansas. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 505 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 THE SIEGE OP KNOXVILLE (CONTINUED) . 
 
 Knoxville never completely invested by army of Longstreet— One side 
 open by the river during the siege — Longstreet misled by inaccurate 
 maps as to the mouth of the French Broad — Thought it was below 
 Knoxville — French Broad open all the time to navigation — The reason 
 Fort Sanders was selected for the assault — Sherman returns with most 
 of his army to neighborhood of Chattanooga — Gordon Grainger's corps 
 remains — Longstreet halts his army east of Knoxville — Burnside's 
 army follows — No general engagement — Much skirmishing between 
 the armies — Longstreet remains until spring — His army consumes all 
 the supplies — People driven to Knoxville to avoid starvation — General 
 Grant visits Knoxville — Extremely cold weather — His plans — Travels 
 on horseback to Lexington — Plans of campaign for the spring of 
 1864 — Campaign contemplated up the French Broad or the valley of 
 East Tennessee — Plan as disclosed from Washington — All the Union 
 armies move on the same day — Interesting incidents connected with 
 siege of Knoxville — Mary Love and John T. Brown, 
 
 There can exist no doubt of the fact that Knoxville was 
 never completely invested by General Longstreet. As well 
 as can be ascertained, all the country south of the Holston 
 and the French Broad and lying east of the Maryville road 
 was not in the possession of General Longstreet. 
 
 Mr. Charles A. Dana is explicit in his statement to this 
 ejBfect. It was by reason of this fact that provisions were 
 sent into Knoxville, by way of the French Broad and the 
 Holston and along the Sevierville road, during the whole 
 siege. Why the Holston above Knoxville was left open 
 to navigation has always been a mystery to me, as it 
 doubtless has been to all familiar with the fact. 
 
 In the course of my investigation of the incidents re- 
 lating to the siege of Knoxville, I have ascertained some 
 remarkable facts, if they are true. It turns out that it 
 was the result of misinformation on the part of General 
 Longstreet as to the location of the mouth of the French 
 
506 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Broad river, that the navigation of the river remained 
 open. He was informed that this stream united with the 
 Holston below or west of Knoxville. He mistook the 
 Little River below Knoxville for the French Broad. When, 
 therefore, he threw his forces around on the north side 
 of the Holston, to a point on that stream a few miles 
 above Knoxville, he supposed his command of the river 
 at that point would cut off all navigation of its waters 
 below. He was totally ignorant of the fact that one or 
 two miles below the point he commanded on the Holston, 
 the French Broad, a much larger and deeper stream, 
 united with the stream he commanded. The French 
 Broad in its entire length was therefore left open to navi- 
 gation. It must be kept in mind that Longstreet never 
 had the command of the south bank of the Holston above 
 Knoxville. Indeed, his troops did not occupy permanently 
 any of the territory south of the Holston above or east of 
 the Maryville road. His cavalry may have ranged through 
 that country occasionally, but they had no permanent foot- 
 hold on the south bank of the river above the line indi- 
 cated. One of the high hills south of the river just oppo- 
 site Knoxville, and perhaps two of them, were fortified 
 and held by the Federal command of General Shackleford 
 and Colonel Woolford. This was perhaps one of the 
 reasons why no Confederate troops were stationed on the 
 south side of the river above the town. This, however, 
 would have been wholly immaterial, if Longstreet had 
 been correct in his information as to the location of the 
 mouth of the French Broad. In that event he would have 
 held, or could have held, the north bank of the Holston 
 down to the Federal lines, and thus cut off all supplies, 
 except such as slipped by at night. As it was, the country 
 south or east of the Holston, from the point held by Long- 
 street, lying between that stream and the French Broad 
 (called the "Forks") , was wholly unoccupied permanently 
 by his troops, leaving both banks of the latter stream un- 
 der the control of Burnside. And it was along the waters 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 507 
 
 of this stream, and by the Sevierville road, south of the 
 French Broad, that Burnside received his supplies. 
 
 If Longstreet had contracted the upper or eastern line 
 of his investment, and thrown it below the junction of the 
 Holston and the French Broad, he could have cut off the 
 supplies, for then he would have held the north bank of 
 the Holston, by which they all had to pass. 
 
 Thus, there appears to have been a remarkable mistake 
 on the part of Longstreet in the siege of Knoxville. The 
 French Broad is no insignificant stream, but a broad and 
 deep one, double the size of the Holston, and fully as large 
 as the Cumberland at Nashville, or even larger. The fact 
 that Little River enters the Holston on the south side, a 
 few miles below Knoxville, might have confused a casual 
 observer ; but it is expected that a general and his en- 
 gineers, before entering a strange country, with an army 
 of invasion, would make themselves perfectly familiar with 
 both the geography and topography of that country. Of 
 course, in all such cases, the general must rely on his en- 
 gineers, and here is, doubtless, where the fault primarily 
 lay in this case. 
 
 When General Longstreet was ordered to march on 
 Knoxville, as he states in his ofiicial report, he applied to 
 the headquarters of General Bragg "for maps and informa- 
 tion about the country he was to operate in," and "for an 
 engineer officer who had been serving on Major-General 
 Buckner's staff at Knoxville." 
 
 He obtained none of these, except one map of the Hi- 
 wassee and Tennessee rivers. General Buckner furnished 
 him with "some inaccurate maps of the country along the 
 Holston." 
 
 It thus appears that General Longstreet had no engineer, 
 at first at least, who knew the country, and that he had 
 only "inaccurate maps." He was a stranger and knew 
 nothing of it himself. 
 
 During the siege, Richard Wilson, of Rockford, ten 
 miles south of Knoxville, owner of the Rockford Cotton 
 
508 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Mills, and a most worthy gentleman, seeing that General 
 Burnside was getting supplies by the French Broad, and 
 knowing, or suspecting the cause, hired a Mr. James 
 Henry to go to the headquarters of General Longstreet, 
 taking with him a rough map of the country, to inform 
 him of the location of the mouth of the French Broad. 
 Mr. Henry went and saw General Longstreet, and pointed 
 out to him the exact location of the rivers. The reply of 
 General Longstreet was that his information was that the 
 French Broad entered the Holston below and west of Knox- 
 ville and not above it, and that he must act on his own 
 information.^ 
 
 I have discovered another singular fact in this connec- 
 tion, which may explain the error of General Longstreet 
 in reference to the mouth of the French Broad. This is a 
 map published by C. 0. Perrin, in Indianapolis, Indiana, 
 in 1862, entitled a "Military Map of the Seat of War," by 
 which it clearly appears that the French Broad enters the 
 Holston below and not above Knoxville.^ 
 
 This is probably one of the "inaccurate maps" obtained 
 by General Longstreet from General Buckner, which the 
 latter had probabl}^ obtained from Kentucky. That Gen- 
 eral Longstreet had good reasons for believing the mouth 
 of the French Broad was below Knoxville, can admit of 
 no serious doubt. On any other theory his conduct is in- 
 explicable, unless the monstrous conclusion is drawn that 
 he purposely left open the navigation of the French Broad 
 and the Holston. Surely it would seem that the exalted 
 character of this distinguished general should shield him 
 from such an imputation. 
 
 If turns out to be a fact, that the eastern or upper line 
 
 1 This is stated on the authority of the late Thomas E. Oldham. 
 
 ^ This map is now the property of Mr. Charles Dawes, of Knoxville,. 
 purchased by his father, Wm. Dawes, in 1864. It is very probable that 
 General Longstreet had a copy of this map, and it led him into his error. 
 If Mr. Perrin is still alive, he may have the satisfaction of knowing that 
 his unintentional mistake helped to save Knoxville from capture and the 
 army of Burnside from a surrender in 1863. 
 
y 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 509 
 
 of investment rested on the Holston one mile or more 
 above the mouth of the French Broad, near and just above 
 Boyd's Ferry. This, it will be seen, by the accompanying 
 map, left the waters of the Holston below that point to 
 Knoxville, as well as the French Broad in its whole length, 
 entirely open to navigation, both day and night. The 
 pickets of General Longstreet did not extend to the east- 
 ern side of the Holston at all. The large territory lying in 
 the fork of the two streams was not occupied by Confederate 
 soldiers. It thus appears that there were no Confederate 
 soldiers to interfere with navigation on either bank of the 
 river between Bowman's Ferry and Knoxville.* 
 
 Additional confirmation of the facts I have stated, is 
 furnished by the testimony of James Park, D. D., a native 
 of Knoxville, and now residing in that place, a gentleman 
 of the highest worth and character. He states that the 
 evening General Longstreet invested Knoxville, the latter 
 took supper with him in his home, nine miles below Knox- 
 ville. Dr. Park was a warm Southern sympathizer. In 
 conversation he learned from General Longstreet, who was 
 inquiring about the roads leading out from Knoxville, that 
 he intended to throw the left or eastern line of investment on 
 the Holston River, about Boyd's Ferry, as he indicated. 
 Dr. Park told General Longstreet that unless he threw his 
 line southward as low as the junction of the Holston and 
 the French Broad, he would leave all the productive lands 
 on the waters of the French Broad open to General Burn- 
 
 * These facts I have just obtained from Colonel James E. Carter, com- 
 manding the First Tennessee Confederate Cavalry. During the siege, his 
 regiment with two others was stationed near Boyd's Ferry and had to pro- 
 tect that region. He, in conjunction with Colonel Giltner, of Kentucky, 
 and one or two other oflBcers, made a reconnoissance of the country, and 
 determined the point where the line of investment should strike the river. 
 Colonel Carter was born and reared only a few miles away, and knew the 
 country and the rivers. Knoxville was his home, and it still is. He was 
 a brave soldier and a reliable, honorable gentleman. He says that it was 
 not deemed safe to throw their line below Boyd's Ferry so as to strike the 
 river below the mouth of the French Broad. If they had had one more 
 regiment, which they expected, they could and would have done so. 
 
510 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 side's army. General Longstreet said: "No, because the 
 junction of the two rivers just named was below Knoxville 
 and not above it." Dr. Park told him that he was raised in 
 Knoxville, and that he preached for a number of years at 
 Lebanon Church within a few hundred feet of the junction of 
 those streams, and that he knew positively that they united 
 above and not below Knoxville. General Longstreet said 
 that he had a map showing the facts as he stated them, 
 and refused to be convinced otherwise. In addition to 
 this, as I am informed by Dr. Park, during the siege, 
 General Longstreet visited Boyd's Ferry. There he acci- 
 dentally met Dr. J. G. M. Ramsey, the Historian of Ten- 
 nessee, who resided at that time, at the mouth of the French 
 Broad and Holston, his farm being between the two 
 rivers. General Joseph Brooks, the owner of the farm on 
 which the line of investment rested, was also present. In 
 a conversation which followed between Dr. Ramsey and 
 General Longstreet, the former pointed out that the French 
 Broad River entered the Holston at his residence, one mile 
 below where they stood. General Longstreet again in- 
 sisted that the map in his possession showed that that 
 could not be so. 
 
 Amazement has sometimes been expressed by his Con- 
 federate friends, that General Longstreet when he attacked 
 the fortifications of Knoxville, selected the strongest point, 
 instead of the weakest, for the assault. It may be that 
 there were weak places in the line of defenses, which could 
 have been easily carried. But whether they could have 
 been held, if taken, under the fire of Fort Sanders and 
 other commanding points, is a question which military 
 men alone are capable of determining. 
 
 The point of attack, as appears by the reports of General 
 Longstreet and Generals Alexander and Leadbetter, had been 
 the subject of consideration for some days, and a careful 
 examination of different points was made by them. Mabry's 
 Hill was at first selected, but this was abandoned, as all 
 other points were, in deference to the opinion of General 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 511 
 
 Leadbetter, chief engineer of Longstreet, because of the 
 open ground in its front, and the long distance the assault- 
 ing party would have to march under fire. Fort Sanders 
 was finally selected by the advice of Alexander and Lead- 
 better because the assaulting force would be protected un- 
 til close by the fort. 
 
 General Longstreet was confessedly one of the great com- 
 manders of the war, and it would be gross injustice to 
 him for persons who neither understand the science of war, 
 nor have experience in the field to set themselves up in 
 judgment and in condemnation of his plans of battle. It 
 may be mentioned that both Grant and Sherman were 
 familiar with the defenses of Knoxville, and both wrote 
 about the siege, and that neither of them mentions any 
 error committed by Longstreet. 
 
 It only remains further to say of the siege of Knoxville 
 that General Sherman, after examining the line of forti- 
 fications, pronounced them a "wonderful production for 
 the short time allowed in their selection of ground and 
 construction of work." He says: "They seemed to me 
 (him) that they were nearly impregnable." 
 
 It has already been stated that Sherman came to the re- 
 lief of Burnside with a large army. He had with him the 
 three army corps of Howard, Blair and Grainger. He pro- 
 posed to Burnside to stay at Knoxville, and aid him in 
 driving Longstreet out of East Tennessee . Burnside thought 
 that with the aid of Grainger's ten thousand men, who 
 were to remain, he would not need any greater force. He 
 expected to be able to drive Longstreet out in a short time. 
 Indeed, Burnside thought that he would voluntarily leave. 
 In this he was seriously mistaken. Longstreet went as far 
 as Rogersville, and then returned to Bean's Station, and 
 there he spread his army along a line running southward 
 from that point to the French Broad, where he remained 
 until spring. The region occupied by his army was the 
 most productive part of East Tennessee. 
 
 Burnside 's army moved out of Knoxville about the 7th 
 
512 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 of December, in pursuit of Longstreet. It followed to 
 Strawberry Plains, Bean's Station and Dandridge, and 
 never got any further. A number of partial fights and 
 many severe skirmishes took place between the opposing 
 armies during the following two or three months, but 
 there was no general engagement. There was some severe 
 fighting at Dandridge, at Bean's Station and near Morris- 
 town, and at other points, but no decisive results. At his 
 own request Burnside was relieved of his command, and 
 on the 10th of December he left the state. He was suc- 
 ceeded by General John G. Foster. Longstreet remained 
 through the entire winter within fifty miles of Knoxville, 
 but holding the country down to within twenty-five miles 
 of it, and subsisting his army on its supplies. 
 
 It is admitted by both Grant and Sherman that an er- 
 ror was committed in not retaining Sherman's army to 
 aid in driving Longstreet beyond the state. Burnside, 
 with his usual frankness and nobility, took all the blame 
 on himself. He thought, as before stated, that Grainger's 
 corps, in addition to his own army, would be sufiicient 
 for this purpose. Sherman acquiesced perhaps too readily 
 in this opinion, and took the rest of his army back to the 
 region of the Hiwassee River, where they were not needed. 
 Bragg undertook no new enterprise during the winter, 
 and Sherman's army was scattered along the Tennessee 
 River. Thomas lay watching Bragg until the movement 
 on Atlanta should be commenced. In the meantime Long- 
 street fattened his men and his stock on the ample sup- 
 plies of East Tennessee. No laurels were won by either 
 Longstreet 's or Foster's armies during the winter of 
 1863-'64. 
 
 It was a great error that Longstreet was not pursued 
 vigorously until he had passed the state line. If Burnside 
 had remained here in command there can be but little 
 doubt that he would have made an honest, determined 
 effort to that effect. Whatever may be thought as to his 
 ability to manage a great army, like that of the Potomac, 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 513 
 
 one thing was admitted by all — he was always willing to 
 fight. He was a brave, honest, energetic, pushing officer, 
 who thought fighting to be the business of himself and his 
 army. If, therefore, he had remained in his command he 
 would have fought Longstreet as long as he could have 
 moved his guns or his men. General Foster was in ill 
 health on account of old wounds, and was therefore un- 
 able to take the field in person. When he was relieved on 
 account of ill health, and General Schofield was sent to 
 this department to take command, spring was near at 
 hand, and preparations for Sherman's great campaign, in 
 which his army was to take part, were already going on. 
 So this able and enterprising officer had no opportunity to 
 attempt to drive Longstreet out of the state, and he is in 
 no sense responsible for the failure of the campaign in- 
 augurated by Grant, Sherman and Burnside for this pur- 
 pose. Early in the spring nearly all of his army moved 
 southward, toward Dalton, to join Sherman. About this 
 time Longstreet, having wintered his army on the loyal 
 people of East Tennessee, and stripped it bare of provisions 
 and stock, quietly folded his tents and moved away to Vir- 
 ginia, to take part in the wonderful campaigns of Grant 
 and Lee.^ 
 
 Longstreet's object in remaining in East Tennessee must 
 have been to exhaust the country and cut off supplies from 
 the army holding Knoxville. With Sherman's great army 
 near Chattanooga, within easy reach of Knoxville by rail, 
 
 ^ When a successor to Foster was under consideration, as General Scho- 
 field recently informed the author, Mr, Lincoln suggested to him several 
 places where he might go, among them to East Tennessee. General Scho- 
 field gladly accepted this place, and regarded himself as most fortunate 
 in doing so. It placed him in a position to take a leading part in the 
 great campaign against Atlanta, where he commanded with signal ability 
 the left wing of Sherman's army. And when Thomas was sent back to 
 Nashville to meet General Hood, Schofield went also, and in this way he 
 happened to be in the immediate command at Franklin, and there won one 
 of the noted victories of the war. So also in this way he was present and 
 gained a part of the glory of the great battle of Nashville. 
 33 
 
514 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 he could not have hoped again to strike at the latter 
 place. 
 
 If his object were to protect the salt works and the lead 
 mines in South-west Virginia, as it is most probable, this 
 could have been done just as well on the state line at 
 Bristol, or even at Abingdon, as on the line he occupied. 
 But in that case his army would have had to subsist in 
 part at least on his friends, while on the line he held it 
 lived off his enemies. It at the same time crippled the 
 Union army by cutting off its supplies. 
 
 The failure to drive Longstreet out of the country was 
 the cause of the greatest calamity that ever befell the 
 people of Upper East Tennessee. It brought upon them 
 actual famine. It was his presence that caused so much 
 suffering in all that region, which continued until the 
 close of the war. Tens of thousands of people, on account 
 of actual starvation, had to leave their homes and flee to 
 Knoxville, where they were fed and clothed, in part at 
 least, by the East Tennessee Relief Association, out of 
 means generously contributed by the North, mostly by 
 Boston and New England. 
 
 It is no mere figure of speech when I say that actual 
 starvation would have followed, if the people in thousands 
 of instances had not fled to Knoxville. They came in 
 great crowds, by whatever means they could provide, 
 many on foot, without shoes and almost without clothing, 
 and threw themselves on the charity of the army and the 
 noble people of the North, who moved by the touching ap- 
 peals of the Hon. N. G. Taylor, our own splendid orator, 
 and by the burning words of Edward Everett, poured out 
 their treasures generously to save our patriotic suffering 
 people from a sad fate. 
 
 When I recall the sufferings inflicted on the people of a 
 whole section by the presence of Longstreet's army from 
 December till April, and remember that there were enough 
 troops in East Tennessee to have expelled him within ten 
 days after the siege was raised, I can scarcely refrain from 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 515 
 
 bitter words of censure. Yet I know that the ever just 
 Grant, and the kind and noble Burnside, and the impul- 
 sive, brilliant Sherman, anticipated no such sad results. 
 Still, it seems to me that Sherman listened to the san- 
 guine words of Burnside too readily, when he determined 
 to return to Chattanooga with his army, excepting Grain- 
 ger's corps, "What would the tender-hearted Lincoln have 
 thought if he had known the actual fact that nearly one- 
 half of East Tennessee, which he thought freed of the 
 enemy, was still in its possession, and that that enemy was 
 eating out the very life support of the loyal people, leaving 
 them as destitute as if they had dwelt on the plains of 
 Sahara? What would the dashing, the daring Sheridan, 
 who was present, but in a subordinate position, have done 
 if he had been in command? He would have fought 
 Longstreet and driven him out, or would have been driven 
 back himself in defeat into the fortifications in Knoxville. 
 
 On the publication of the Memoirs of Grant, the rea- 
 son of the inaction of the two armies in upper East Ten- 
 nessee was disclosed. 
 
 General Foster advised Grant that " he thought it would 
 be a good thing to keep Longstreet Just where he was ; 
 that he was perfectly quiet in East Tennessee, and that if 
 he were forced to leave, his whole, well-equipped army 
 would be free to go to any place where it would efifect the 
 most for their cause." Now, the strangest part of this 
 winter's campaign is, that Grant thought "this advice was 
 good," and adopted it, and "countermanded the orders for 
 the pursuit of Longstreet." ^ Here, then, we had mimic, 
 not real war. It must have been delightful to see the two 
 armies dwelling together in peace, the one doing all it could 
 in a hospitable way to induce the other not to depart, and 
 the other, complacently glancing at the rich cornfields yet 
 untouched, graciously agreeing to accept the proffered hos- 
 pitality as long as there was anything left to eat 1 
 
 » " Grant's Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 113. 
 
516 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 In the latter part of December, 1863, General Grant vis- 
 ited Knoxville, where he remained several days. The 
 weather was extremely cold, the mercury being down be- 
 low zero for a week while he was at that place and on his 
 way to Lexington.^ He came from Nashville on a tour of 
 inspection. It was especially his desire to examine the 
 road from Knoxville to Lexington, and judge for himself 
 as to the feasibility of still using that road for the trans- 
 portation of army supplies. So important did he deem 
 this matter that in the midst of one of the coldest spells 
 on record, he set out to make this examination, traveling 
 one hundred and seventy-five miles on horseback, over as 
 execrable roads as could be found in the land, having 
 "been cut up," as he says, "to as great a depth as clay 
 could be by mules and wagons." No doubt he ordered 
 the road abandoned, as it was never used much for mil- 
 itary purposes after that time.^ 
 
 1 " Grant's Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 101. 
 
 ' It was during his trip from Knoxville to Lexington that the following 
 incident occurred, as related in the " Louisville Courier- Journal." The 
 " boisterous" party referred to was not Grant's, but one pretending to be: 
 
 "... Big Hill is the dividing line between the Blue Grass and the 
 Mountains, and one Merritt Jones kept there a tavern for the accommoda- 
 tion of the traveling public. There were then no railroads in this part of 
 the state nearer than Lexington. Mr. Jones and his sons were absent in 
 the Confederate army, and his wife and younger children kept the tavern. 
 Late in the afternoon of the day before a cavalry officer had come hur- 
 riedlj' up from the direction of the Gap, announced to the Jones house- 
 hold that General Grant was coming to spend the night ; that they must 
 prepare for him a good supper, with all the silverware, and to be particular 
 to have a nice, warm room ready for the General about one hour from that 
 time. In fact, the oflScer demanded the best of everything they had. 
 Mrs. Jones was ill, and the dictatorial manner of the officer made her ex- 
 ceedingly nervous. She thought of her husband and sons in the far-away 
 South, and feared that it would not be well with her should the Unionists 
 discover her to be a rebel sympathizer. Much disturbed, she retired to 
 her room and bed, and directed the children to do the best they could for 
 the General's party. 
 
 " In a few minutes the advance guard of eight or ten men arrived, and 
 their boisterous manner increased Mrs. Jones' alarm. The hour was short, 
 and General Grant and staflF came. There was a marked change ; all was 
 quiet and orderly among the men ; supper was soon over and the guests 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 617 
 
 On the first day of January, 1864, General Grant and 
 General John G. Foster, then commanding this department, 
 called at my residence to pay their respects to Mrs. Tem- 
 ple, who was well known as a prominent Union lady. 
 Here I first became acquainted with General Grant. He 
 declined both wine and cigars at my house. On the same 
 day, he called on Mrs. William G. Brownlow. 
 
 On the 2d of January, I called on him at his head- 
 quarters, in the residence then belonging to the Hon. W. 
 H. Sneed, then a refugee in the South, this being general 
 headquarters of the army.^ General Grant was very quiet, 
 having but little to say. He was as modest as a woman. 
 However, he was exceedingly sensible in all he did say. 
 His stajff officers, General Rawlins and Colonel Comstock 
 
 Boon asleep. When General Grant arose next morning, a nice breakfast 
 awaited him. After breakfast, General Grant asked Mrs. Jones' little 
 daughter where her father was. 'He is in the South,' she [answered. 
 ' Where are your brothers, if you have any?' asked the General. 'They 
 are in the Confederate army,' she replied. ' Then where is your mother ?' 
 he asked. * She is in her room, sick,' said the little girl. * Can I see her?' 
 asked the General; *I wish to bid her good-by.' The door was opened, 
 the little girl led the way, and General Grant was in the presence of the 
 mother of several of General John H. Morgan's most gallant Confederates. 
 
 " General Grant said to her: ' I am told that your husband and sons are 
 in the South, and I want to say that I hope they may return in safety to 
 you. I am sorry to find you sick, and hope you may soon be well. I have 
 ordered that our bill for the night's lodging be promptly paid you. You 
 will now allow me to bid you good-by.' At this he shook her hand and 
 bowed himself out, his staff in turn shaking hands with the good lady. 
 
 " This indication of kindly feeling on the part of General Grant made 
 many friends in Madison county for the great Union General." 
 
 ^ This house was built in 1816 or 1817 by William Park. The brick was 
 laid by William Morgan, the man who, in 1826, published or was about to 
 publish a book revealing the secrets of Free Masonry, and who was ab- 
 ducted at Batavia, in the State of New York, and carried oflF and drowned 
 in Lake Ontario, as alleged by the enemies of the Masonic fraternity. He 
 wrote his book in Knoxville, or at lea^t he took it to the late Hiram Barry, 
 who had a printing office, and wanted him to publish it, but the latter de- 
 clined. This house was the headquarters of Federal officers for eighteen 
 months, and gave shelter to Generals Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, Thomas, 
 Schofield, Foster, Grainger, Stoneman and many others when they were in 
 Knoxville in 1864-65. 
 
518 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 (I believe) , had much to say. They took me into another 
 room, and asked me a great many questions as to the 
 feasibility of sending an army up the pass through the 
 mountains, along the French Broad River, into North 
 Carolina. As I was born, and lived for some time after 
 my manhood, not far from that stream, but over the moun- 
 tain in Tennessee, I was able to give them pretty full in- 
 formation as to this remarkable pass in the mountains, 
 made by that stream cutting the great mountains in two 
 for a distance of nearly fifty miles. There is no other pass 
 through the mountains for a distance of fifty miles or 
 more on either side. 
 
 Without disclosing their plans or the plans of their 
 chief, it was evident from the questions asked that an ex- 
 pedition up the French Broad into North Carolina was 
 one of the near probabilities, if not certainties. It was 
 evidently in contemplation by General Grant at that time 
 to send an army up that river with the view of penetrating 
 the interior of North Carolina, seizing the railroads, reach- 
 ing the coast and cutting the Confederacy into two parts, 
 as Sherman afterwards did in Georgia. And if this had 
 been done in the spring of 1864, simultaneously with the 
 march on Atlanta, by a force sufficiently strong to have 
 made sure of its steps, Lee's surrender ought to have 
 taken place in the fall of 1864, instead of the spring of 
 1865. But General Grant and his military staff have not 
 informed the world why this daring conception was never 
 carried into execution. Doubtless the difficulty of keeping 
 up, or securing on the way, supplies for a large army con- 
 stituted the main and a sufficient reason. That General 
 Grant at that time contemplated military operations, in 
 the spring of 1864, on a line east of Knoxville, either 
 through Virginia or North Carolina, admits of no doubt. 
 This explains the reason of his personal inspection of the 
 road through Cumberland Gap to Lexington. 
 
 General Sherman says that on the 21st of December, 
 1863, he went up to Nashville "to confer with General 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 519 
 
 Grant." He says : "At that time General Grant was un- 
 der the impression that the next campaign would be up the 
 valley of East Tennessee in the direction of Virginia, and 
 as it would be the last and most important campaign of 
 the war, it became necessary to set free as many of the 
 old troops serving along the Mississippi River as pos- 
 sible."^ 
 
 It is not quite easy to reconcile all the facts and state- 
 ments as to the plans for the campaign of the spring of 
 1864, except upon the hypothesis that in December and 
 early in January they were not absolutely fixed, but were, 
 to some extent, matters of speculation and subject to 
 change. In December, as we have seen, on the authority 
 of General Sherman, a campaign, and the most important 
 one of the war, was contemplated "up the valley of East 
 Tennessee" into Virginia, or, as I inferred by conversation 
 with Grant's highest staff officers, into North Carolina. 
 It follows logically that, at that time, the great campaign 
 afterwards inaugurated against Atlanta had not yet been 
 considered, or at least settled, as a part of the next move- 
 ment. That seems to have been a later conception, the 
 date of which can not be given. The whole plan, as finally 
 executed, was probably a gradual development or evolu- 
 tion. At first, Atlanta and Mobile were the objective 
 points. "The plan was," said Grant, "for Sherman to 
 attack Johnston, and destroy his army, if possible ; to 
 capture Atlanta and hold it, and with his troops and those 
 of Banks to hold a line through to Mobile, '^ thus cutting 
 the Confederacy in two. Banks was to take Mobile, but 
 failed to perform the part assigned to him. Again, he 
 says : 
 
 "I expected to retain the command I then had, and pre- 
 pared myself (this was sometime in the winter of 1864) 
 for the campaign against Atlanta. ... I expected, 
 
 1 Sherman's " Memoirs," Vol, I, p. 386. 
 ' Grant's " Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 120. 
 
620 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 after Atlanta fell, to occupy that place permanently, and 
 to cut off Lee's army from the West by way of the road 
 running through Atlanta to Augusta and thence south- 
 west. I was preparing to hold Atlanta with a small gar- 
 rison, and it was my expectation to push through to Mo- 
 bile, if that city was in our possession ; if not, to Savan- 
 nah, and in this manner to get possession of the only east 
 and west railroad that would then be left to the enemy. 
 But the spring campaign against Mobile was not made." 
 
 So it will be seen that Savannah was a possible objective 
 point from the beginning with Grant. The great object, 
 next after destroying Johnston's army and taking Atlanta, 
 was to cut off communication between the East and the 
 "West. So far as I can see, Sherman nowhere claims that 
 the Georgia campaign originated with him. Long before 
 Grant was ordered to the command of the Army of the 
 Potomac, indeed to the command of all the armies of the 
 United States, the first steps in this great campaign were 
 definitely settled in the mind of Grant, and all the contin- 
 gencies provided for. 
 
 This great commander, from his headquarters near 
 Washington, on the 4th of April, 1864, sent a letter to 
 General Sherman, in which he frankly revealed all his 
 plans for the different armies in the approaching cam- 
 paigns. The very first sentence contained the promise and 
 gave the assurance of success. He said : 
 
 "It is my design, if the enemy keep quiet and allow me 
 to take the initiative in the spring campaign, to work all 
 parts of the army together and somewhat toward a common 
 center."^ For the first time, there was now unity in the 
 armies. One great military genius guided and directed 
 the movements of all these vast armies. On the 6th of 
 May, at the very time appointed by Grant for the com- 
 mencement of the great campaign, Sherman's three splen- 
 did armies, consisting of one hundred thousand men, com- 
 
 1 " Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 130. 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 521 
 
 manded respectively by Schofield, Thomas and McPlierson, 
 and Grant's and Meade's still greater armies, commanded 
 respectively by Hancock, Warren, Sedgwick and Sheridan, 
 moved out from their positions, and advanced in line of 
 battle in search of the enemy/ And soon the noise of 
 battle was heard in the land, giving an assurance that the 
 end of the greatest civil war recorded in history was not 
 far off. And yet so brave, so skillful, and so determined 
 was the resistance offered to these great armies, with all 
 their outlying assistance, directed and guided by one mas- 
 ter mind, that it took twelve months to overcome it. Sher- 
 man swept through the Confederacy to the sea, then, turn- 
 ing northward, he bisected the Atlantic States, while 
 Grant commenced a series of the most stupendous opera- 
 tions with his great armies ever witnessed on this conti- 
 nent. As last, the day of Appomattox came, and victory 
 was crowned with peace, Esto perpetual 
 
 Two interesting little incidents are connected with one 
 of the dispatches sent by Grant from Chattanooga to Burn- 
 side during the siege of Knoxville. It will be remem- 
 bered that he sent five couriers with dispatches by dif- 
 ferent routes. One of these couriers was never heard of 
 afterwards. One dispatch only reached Burnside. The 
 courier in charge of this one was sent from Chattanooga 
 by way of the north side of the Tennessee River. Arriv- 
 ing at Kingston, a distance of about seventy or eighty 
 miles, he was, it is presumed, unable to go any further. 
 There still remained forty miles to Knoxville, by the direct 
 road, and more than fifty by the circuitous route necessary 
 to be taken. Burnside must get the dispatch. Who 
 would carry it forward? The men present hesitated and 
 held back. Most of the men were absent. The trip was 
 
 1 " Sherman's Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 31. 
 
 * On March 7, 18(55, General Grant ordered Thomas to throw a good force 
 at Bull's Gap (East Tennessee), and fortify it so as to be prepared if it 
 should be required to make "a campaign toward Lynchburg or into North 
 Carolina."—" Memoirs," Vol. II, p. 615. 
 
522 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 full of peril. Longstreet's forces held all the country be- 
 tween that point and Knoxville. The weather was cold, 
 the roads execrable. At this moment, a delicate, brave 
 young woman, Miss Mary Love, stepped forward, and said 
 she would go. Her services were accepted. Mounted on 
 a fleet horse, away she sped as fast as nimble feet and 
 sinewy limbs could carry her. Now along the public high- 
 way, now along by-paths, and now through the forests, 
 this brave woman swept on over a constant succession of 
 hills, that she might save Burnside's army. At length she 
 is arrested by Confederate soldiers, and conducted out of 
 her way to a provost-martial. This proved to be Philo B. 
 Shepard. She tells him with perfect self-composure that 
 she is the sister of Dr. Love, a Confederate surgeon, who 
 had been stationed at Knoxville, whom Shepard knew, 
 and that she was riding his horse, both of which state- 
 ments were true. She further said that the wife of Dr. 
 Love was dangerously sick, at the village of Louisville, 
 and that she was going there to wait on her. This story 
 was told with such an air of sincerity that it gained cre- 
 dence and she was released. 
 
 Once more she dashes on in her perilous journey. After 
 a long and circuitous ride she reaches the river opposite 
 Louisville, her native town ; she crosses the wide stream, 
 and hastens to the house of her brother-in-law, Horace 
 Foster, and tottering in, falls exhausted. Tired nature, 
 hitherto sustained by a masterly will and a great purpose, 
 could endure no more. She had traveled in a few hours 
 nearly thirty-five miles, partly at night. The dispatch 
 was so far safe. 
 
 But who would carry it on the remaining fifteen miles, 
 after night, through a country swarming with Confederate 
 soldiers. The men were absent in the army, or had fled 
 at the approach of Longstreet's forces. After a hasty con- 
 sultation, Mrs. Elizabeth Brown, the mother of a thirteen 
 year old boy, John T. Brown, announced that her son 
 could go, and that he was the only one who could get 
 
The Siege of Knoxville. 523 
 
 through. He was called and was willing to go. He was 
 a daring boy, and delighted in such adventures. Wheeler's 
 Confederate cavalry held the little town, and pickets were 
 stationed on all the roads. At nightfall, Mrs. Brown and 
 her brave little boy, quietly slipped down to the bank of 
 the river, and silently scrambled through the dense under- 
 growth along the stream for two miles, until they were out 
 of the picket lines. Here the mother turned back. 
 
 The night was bitter cold ; the ground frozen. The 
 brave boy picks his way on foot through the cold, the 
 darkness and the silent forests. At length he reaches Lit- 
 tle River, a distance of eight or nine miles. The river is 
 swollen and he cannot cross. Returning, he goes some 
 distance back to the house of an old friend of his 
 father's, Mr. Isaac Lebow, where he stays all night. 
 Realizing that an explanation of his strange trip after 
 night was necessary, he frankly tells Mr. Lebow that he is 
 carrying papers to General Burnside. The generous old 
 man, though a warm Confederate, makes no objection and 
 no inquiries, but treats him kindly, gives him his breakfast 
 before daylight the next morning, and starts him on his 
 way. Again coming to the river, he succeeds in crossing. 
 At length he comes to Federal pickets. Now he is sent 
 forward, under the charge of a sergeant to General Burn- 
 side's headquarters, still several miles away. 
 
 The dispatch was eagerly read by the veteran hero. In 
 a few minutes bands of music struck up with thrilling 
 national airs all over the city, and the batteries pealed 
 forth their thunders, the joyous announcement that de- 
 liverance was near at hand. Little Johnnie sat there in 
 the meantime, wondering what all this meant. Suddenly 
 soldiers gathered around the brave little hero, and with 
 strong arms and weeping eyes, threw him upon their 
 shoulders, and with cheers and shouts carried him up and 
 down the streets. And now, and for the first time , he learned 
 the import of the dispatch he had brought, and understood 
 that he was the cause of all he saw and heard. 
 
524 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Miss Love years ago passed to her long home, but Mrs. 
 Brown and her son, now forty-five years of age, still live 
 worthy citizens of Knox county. Noble, heroic Mary- 
 Love, and brave young Johnny Brown ! Forever green 
 and sweet be their memories in the minds and the hearts 
 of all good people who shall read these patriotic incidents I 
 And that Spartan mother, let not her deed be forgotten as 
 long as patriotism burns in the hearts of the American 
 people. The history of East Tennessee, if fully written, 
 would reveal many incidents of heroic daring on the part 
 of its brave, noble women. 
 
 The famous ride of Paul Revere, on the night of April 8, 
 1775, from Boston toward Concord — distant twenty miles — 
 though he only went something over twelve miles — to warn 
 the patriots that the British were coming to seize the am- 
 munition and arms stored at that place, has been cele- 
 brated in song and prose, and perpetuated in marble. 
 That ride on that beautiful moonlight night, made Revere 
 immortal. And yet, here was a ride, by a delicate young 
 lady, of thirty-five miles or more, in bitter cold weather, 
 over rough roads, and through a country of high ridges 
 and hills, patroled in every direction by a watchful 
 enemy, with a wide river (the Tennessee) to be crossed. 
 Surely a lofty marble column should mark the spot for all 
 generations where repose the remains of the dauntless 
 Mary Love ! Thirty-five years have come and gone, and 
 Brave Johnny Brown has not received any recognition from 
 the government for his share in saving the army of Gen- 
 eral Burnside. Let us hope, at least, that some Long- 
 fellow may arise some day, who shall in verse give 
 immortality to this daring woman and this heroic boy.^ 
 
 * A part of the foregoing facts relating to Mary Love, I had from a 
 nephew of hers, and most of those as to John Brown and his mother, I 
 learned from his own lips. On the 4th of July, 1866, I took dinner with 
 Miss Love and her brother and another sister. At that time I had not 
 heard of her famous ride, and she was too modest to mention it. She be- 
 longed to a highly respectable and refined family of Blount county. 
 
The Returned Union Soldiers. 525 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 THE RETURNED UNION SOLDIERS. 
 
 A country inn— Good effects of the Civil War — Sent men away from 
 home — A practical education — The soldiers learned obedience, subor- 
 dination, faithfulness — East Tennessee soldiers returned home better 
 men — Had learned much by travel and experience — Soon filling all 
 the important county offices — General progress made by them — One 
 neighborhood described — Union and Confederate soldiers become 
 neighbors — Live together in peace — Families intermarry — Soldiers of 
 East Tennessee described — Honesty of motives of Union men in join- 
 ing Federal army — No exiles or refugees in the North. 
 
 A good many years ago, a judge and three or four law- 
 yers, going to court, late in the afternoon of an exceed- 
 ingly bitter January day, rode up and alighted at a modest 
 little hotel, in a village in a mountain county in East Ten- 
 nessee. Soon they were all seated around a bright, blaz- 
 ing wood fire in the sitting-room. Looking around, one 
 of them remarked : "Look at this room ; look at the neat 
 furniture, at the chairs, at the carpet, and, above all, at 
 those pictures on the walls. Our landlord has traveled — 
 he has been away from home." Half seriously, he said 
 "that he wanted the county court of the several counties 
 annually to appropriate money to pay the expenses of five 
 or ten Avide-awake men in each county, for the purpose of 
 traveling in other states, as a means of education." Going 
 out to supper soon afterwards, they found everything there 
 in such contrast with the sitting-room that one of them 
 remarked: "But our good landlady has not traveled — she 
 has not been away from home. "We must have the women 
 travel as well as the men." 
 
 This playful conversation contains much food for thought, 
 and suggests one of the means of a practical education. 
 
 The late war, with all its countless evils, had many com- 
 
526 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 pensations in it. It was productive of much good, because 
 it sent men away from home. In every quarter of this 
 vast republic, men were put in motion. They traveled, 
 they saw, they learned. They went into different states, 
 and many of them visited every section of our country. 
 All had opportunities of seeing much that was new, much 
 that was instructive. Take, for example, the Union soldiers 
 of East Tennessee. Many of them had never before crossed 
 the state line. Going abroad was the revelation to them 
 of a new world. New objects burst on their sight every 
 day. They saw everywhere new ways ; new methods in 
 farming, in living, in architecture, in dress, in education. 
 At every turn, some new idea, some practical suggestion, 
 flashed upon their minds. They talked with men from 
 Maine, from Ohio, from Minnesota, from Kansas. By this 
 daily contact with new men and new objects, they were 
 enlarged and broadened. Many of them were very young • 
 some were mere boys. They had joined the first Union 
 army they came to. They entered it as a frolic. Soon 
 they discovered that soldiering was a serious business. 
 From the start they were in a severe school of training. 
 They learned rapidly. Soon they realized that merit and 
 courage were to be rewarded and promoted ; that coward- 
 ice and worthlessness were to be punished. The army — 
 the common soldiers — had their own unwritten code of 
 honor. Every soldier must be brave, truthful, honorable 
 and faithful. Everything appealed to his higher nature. 
 To the ambitious, honor waved her garlands from above, 
 and he struggled upward to grasp them. More than one 
 enlisted in the ranks, and came out with stars on his 
 shoulders. War, undertaken as a frolic, thus became, 
 with its awful consequences, as serious as life itself. The 
 soldiers underwent a transformation. They grew into 
 new men of a grander mold. They aspired to become he- 
 roes. Obedience, subordination, constancy, fidelity were 
 quickly acquired. Men grew better every way. Life had 
 a new motive, a higher object to be attained — a grander 
 
The Returned Union Soldiers. 527 
 
 and a wider horizon. The army thus became a great 
 university, in which tens of thousands of men were ed- 
 ucated. 
 
 After two, three or four years of fighting, the survivors 
 came home. They were older, graver, wiser, more manly. 
 They had sown their wild oats . They had ceased to be boys . 
 Their manly forms wore the toga virilis. Soon they set- 
 tled down in life. Many of them had saved their money. 
 This they invested in farms, or merchandise, or in other 
 business. In their new callings, they made and saved 
 money. The community respected them for their worth 
 and good conduct. In course of time they were filling 
 nearly all the offices of honor and profit in their respective 
 counties. They became sheriffs, clerks of courts, registers, 
 trustees, tax collectors, county judges, and justices of the 
 peace. Many were elected members of the legislature, and 
 sometimes one was elected to congress. Some became 
 judges. And thus these soldiers have become among 
 the first and the best citizens of the several counties of 
 East Tennessee. 
 
 In time of peace they turned to account what they saw 
 and learned while they were away from home. New 
 methods of cultivation have been introduced on their 
 farms, new machinery, new crops and better farm stock. 
 In a word there is a revolution in the country. A new 
 race of men is in the lead. These are the men who, with 
 the aid of Confederate soldiers, are helping to push the 
 state forward, and saving it from retrogression. Contrary to 
 all expectations, the war made the soldiers of both armies 
 better citizens. 
 
 A short time ago, in passing through a certain neighbor- 
 hood near Knoxville, south of the river, which I was 
 familiar with forty years ago, I halted at a way-side store 
 and asked : "What has become of the log-cabins that used 
 to be here?" The reply was : "They are all gone." It 
 was so. I looked in vain for a solitary one, and from that 
 point of view the only one left was the old residence of 
 
528 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Governor Sevier, nearly one hundred years old, and it was 
 ■weatherboarded and painted white, and so seemed new. 
 It was spared out of respect for the father of the state. ^ 
 Forty years ago, there was scarcely a frame house in all 
 that region. In the contest of 1861, that whole section 
 embracing a large district of country, was nearly a solid 
 unit for the old government. "When the war suddenly 
 burst upon the country, in little squads, or singly, the 
 able bodied men silently slipped away from home, crossed 
 the mountains into Kentucky, and joined the Federal 
 Army. No section of the United States was hardly so 
 thoroughly winnowed of all men fit for duty in the army. 
 The women, children and old men only were left at home. 
 
 It was these brave Union soldiers who had gone out 
 from this neighborhood in 1861 and 1862, who had now 
 returned to their homes. On their return scenes of deso- 
 lation everywhere met their eyes. War had ruthlessly 
 swept away everything but the rough log cabins. Scarcely 
 a relic of peaceful days remained. 
 
 Behold the change wrought by thirty years of peace. 
 Standing by the side of the little wayside store, just re- 
 ferred to, on the macadam road leading to Martin's Mill, 
 and looking over the country, comfortable frame houses, 
 containing from four to six rooms, were seen thickly dot- 
 ting the little farms. In every direction the houses were 
 new and fresh. They were all painted on the outside 
 mostly white, and papered or plastered in the inside. On 
 the front of nearly every house, there is a neat porch or 
 veranda. There are generally carpets on the floors, and 
 
 1 It is not generally known in Knoxville that Governor Sevier built and 
 once lived in a house one mile from the south side of the river, opposite 
 the city, on the left side of the Maryville road. The house was built of 
 hewn logs, with a foundation of marble. It is now weatherboarded on the 
 outside and ceiled in the inside. It once belonged to Mr. John Wrinkle 
 and now to Mr, William Owens. The fact tliat Governor Sevier built this 
 house, and once lived in it, is as well established by tradition and by the 
 testimony of old people, as any fact can be. 
 
The Returned Union Soldiers. 529 
 
 plain, comfortable, new furniture in the rooms. In many 
 of these homes, there is either a piano or an organ. 
 
 In the rear of these houses stand the barn, the cow- 
 house, and sometimes a little carriage-house. All are en- 
 closed. Up the side of the porch, or on the walls of the 
 house, clambers the sweet wild honeysuckle or the running 
 rose. Potted plants often fill the windows or adorn the 
 steps. In many a little lawn can be seen carnations, 
 chrysanthemums, roses and flowering shrubs. In some 
 cases a nice brick or gravel walk leads from the gate to 
 the house. Newspapers, a few books, magazines, and 
 plain household ornaments are found in most of these 
 homes. While I stand talking to the storekeeper, a num- 
 ber of neighbors call to see if the daily mail has arrived, 
 and to get their papers. Each morning the children of 
 these small proprietors who are of school age are sent off 
 to the nice white frame school-house in the neighborhood. 
 They are comfortably dressed, and each has a little satchel 
 to hold the books. On the Sabbath, no noise is heard. A 
 solemn stillness reigns around. The children, clean, trim 
 and happy, are sent to the Sabbath School. Later on the 
 plain family carriage is brought out, and the father and 
 mother and the elder daughters drive to church. 
 
 Take another road in this same region, the one leading 
 to Sevierville, and stop on the eminence which the public 
 highway crosses and gaze around. Wherever the eye 
 turns, it rests in serene pleasure on white cottages, nest- 
 ling in the hills, in the midst of green fields and pastures. 
 These are for the most part the homes of ex-Union soldiers. 
 They have transformed this country into a garden of beauty 
 and fertility. Marked as is this change, the moral trans- 
 formation is as striking. Intemperance is banished. Idle- 
 ness is gone. Thrift, industry and morality prevail. 
 And all over East Tennessee, in every county, just such 
 changes as I have described, not always perhaps so 
 marked, have been going on ever since the war. Literally 
 34 
 
530 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 old tilings are becoming new. The church, the Sabbath 
 School, temperance, industry and education have wrought 
 this marvelous reformation. Much of it is directly trace- 
 able to the new ideas, new habits, new education learned 
 in the war. More moral communities can scarcely be 
 found in all the land than the ones just referred to, com- 
 posed almost entirely of ex-Union soldiers. Similar 
 changes have taken place in communities occupied by ex- 
 Confederate soldiers. 
 
 Some of this amelioration and change is undoubtedly 
 due to the natural progress going on all over the country. 
 But whence came this spirit of progress? Did not the war 
 develop it, in part at least? Were not the energy and the 
 intellect of the nation stimulated into intense activity by 
 the great conflict? Does not the marvelous progress of 
 the country in wealth and improvements since the close of 
 the Civil War prove the fact that new forces were set in 
 motion by it? But, independent of this consideration, I 
 insist that the army was a vast training school, an educa- 
 tion in fact, for a majority of the Union soldiers from 
 East Tennessee ; that they came back to the pursuit of 
 peace better, broader, more enlightened citizens, and that 
 the changes I have noted were largely due to their travels, 
 experience and training in the army. And so far as my 
 observation extends, the same is true of the Confederate 
 soldiers of this section, though for some years after the 
 war they labored under serious disadvantages. As a gen- 
 eral rule, they have certainly proved themselves to be 
 good and valuable citizens. 
 
 Often the Union soldier and the Confederate soldier set- 
 tled side by side. Both were brave ; both were faithful to 
 their cause ; both had acted as honorable soldiers. They 
 had been neighbors before the war. Each had chosen his 
 side from honest convictions. When they returned they 
 respected each other, and met as old friends. The Confed- 
 erate, too, came back after four years of marching and fight- 
 ing and suffering, a wiser and a better man. His fiery spirit 
 
The Returned Union Soldiers. 531 
 
 had been chastened by four years of war. He also had sown 
 his wild oats. He had had enough of frolic and battle 
 and blood. With the deepest intensity he longed for his 
 old home, for peace, for the good old days of brotherly 
 love. He and his Union neighbor at once became friends 
 as of old. They visited each other. They were prompt 
 in helping one another. They talked about the war as 
 they rode to town, or sat together in the evening, or on 
 Sabbath afternoons. They recalled their battles and their 
 marches. They laughed at amusing incidents, or silent 
 tears stole down their bronzed cheeks as they told of the 
 sad fate of some fellow soldier who never came back. 
 They had become members of the same church. Time 
 wore on. Their eldest children were now grown. The 
 son of the one is married to the daughter of the other. 
 And thus the ties of friendship are cemented by the 
 stronger ties of relationship. 
 
 Both these men have had enough of war. In talking 
 of it they respect the motives which guided each other in 
 1861. They praise the courage displayed by the opposite 
 side, and never disparage their late enemies. Each now 
 votes according to his own political convictions. 
 
 All over East Tennessee just such cases as the above 
 can be found. Brave Union soldiers and equally brave 
 Confederate soldiers dwell together in peace, and all live 
 the lives of good citizens. Peace has at last come to such 
 neighborhoods. What a pity editors and politicians can- 
 not see, cannot feel, its blessed influence in their own 
 hearts. It was not the Confederate or Federal soldiers who 
 kept alive the smouldering embers of the late unfortunate 
 civil war, but ambitious politicians who had for the most 
 part grown up since the war. 
 
 These old soldiers of East Tennessee, on both sides, 
 are what their hero fathers were. Most of them are plain, 
 independent farmers. As a class, with some exceptions, 
 they are sober, industrious, thrifty and moral. Moral and 
 religious sentiments prevail among them in a remarkable 
 
532 
 
 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 degree. Temperance is the rule and drunkenness tlie ex- 
 ception. The observance of hiw and order is general. It 
 would perhaps be hard to find a more orderly people any- 
 where than are these old soldiers of both armies. Most of 
 them were stalwart men — tall, brawny, active, powerful. 
 In height and weight, they were on an average considera- 
 bly above those of the soldiers of any other state or 
 country, excepting those of Kentucky.^ In intellect, they 
 
 ^ In reference to the size and muscular and brain power of the soldiers 
 of Tennessee (a large majority of whom were from East Tennessee) and 
 Kentucky in the late Civil War, I copy the following table and remarks 
 thereon. They disclose some remarkable facts. 
 
 COMPARATIVE SIZE OF SOUTHERN MEN. 
 A Table op the Measttbement op Men in the Federal Army during 
 THE Civil War, compiled from the " Report op the Sanitary Com- 
 mission," MADE at that TIME BY B. A. GoULD, AND COPIED FROM Z. F. 
 
 Smith's "History of Kentucky," recently published. 
 
 Nativity. 
 
 C n 
 
 p fa 
 
 
 o » 
 
 u 
 
 ^ 
 
 C 3 » 
 O 
 
 P crS 
 o m 2 
 
 5*2. 
 
 s ® 
 
 Kentucky and Tennessee 
 
 Ohio-Indiana 
 
 New England 
 
 New York, New Jersey, Penn. . . 
 Michigan, Illinois and Missouri.. 
 
 Free States west Miss. River 
 
 Canada 
 
 England 
 
 Ireland 
 
 Germany 
 
 50,334 
 220,796 
 152,370 
 273,026 
 
 71,196 
 3,811 
 
 31,698 
 3,037 
 
 83,128 
 
 89,021 
 
 68,605 
 68.169 
 67.834 
 67.529 
 67.820 
 67.419 
 67.086 
 66.741 
 66.951 
 66.620 
 
 149.85 
 145.37 
 139.39 
 140.83 
 141.78 
 
 141.35 
 137.61 
 139.18 
 140.36 
 
 37.83 
 37.53 
 36.71 
 37.06 
 37.29 
 37.53 
 37.14 
 36.91 
 37.54 
 37.20 
 
 22.32 
 22.11 
 22.02 
 22 10 
 22.19 
 21.97 
 22.11 
 22.16 
 
 22.09 
 
 Dr. Wilkinson comments on these figures : 
 
 " It will be observed from the above table that the Southern men in the 
 Federal army were greater in height, greater in weight, greater in the size 
 of the chest, and greater in the size of their heads than the same measure- 
 ments showed in either the Americans of the Northern army or the troops 
 in this army natives of Europe. The latter numbered 255,979. The ne- 
 cessities of the South required the acceptance of volunteer soldiers without 
 critical regard to their physical features, but it is reasonable to accept the 
 
The Returned Union Soldiers. 533 
 
 were naturally alert, bright, sagacious. In action, tliey 
 were brave and daring. They delighted in perils and ad- 
 ventures. They had known danger in every form. Rough 
 many of them undoubtedly were, with grizzly beard and 
 long, shaggy hair ; but in every breast there beat a war- 
 rior's heart. 
 
 Braver men than these never marched to battle. On 
 every field they showed their courage. Many a hero whose 
 name does not appear in official reports, nor in history, 
 performed feats of valor which should render his name 
 imperishable . 
 
 Whatever the world may think of the conduct of the 
 Union men of East Tennessee in refusing to join their 
 Southern brethren, there can be no difference of opinion 
 as to the honesty of the intentions of the Union soldiers. 
 "What possible selfish motive could have induced them to 
 expatriate themselves, and become exiles and wanderers for 
 two , three , or even four years ? What evil motive could have 
 induced them to quit their families and homes, and undergo 
 the perils and sufferings of a long journey through the 
 mountains in search of the Federal army? Men do not do 
 such things without powerful impelling incentives. Stated 
 in the simplest words, it was love of the Union which 
 made them refugees and exiles. They fled from a govern- 
 
 average measurement of over 50,000 Southern men in the Northern army 
 as that which would have been shown in the Southern troops had their 
 measurements been taken. The greater size of the skull excites the logical 
 conclusion that the native intellect of these 50,000 Southern soldiers must 
 have been proportionately greater than that of the same number of North- 
 ern American troops, and the same of the allied foreign contingent. All 
 brainologists declare that the skulls of the superior white race are larger 
 than those of the Mongolians, Malayans, Hindoos, Africans and American 
 Indians, from which it is reasonable to infer that this distinction must in 
 the aggregate prevail in masses of the same race. The proper directing 
 influence of Southern intellect in forming the Constitution of the United 
 States, and the great influence for many years exerted in the legislative 
 and administrative departments of this government by Southern men, 
 incline to the belief that in these also the brain mass had the same ratio of 
 excess." 
 
534 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 ment they disliked. They sought protection under one 
 they loved as dearly as life itself. The brave Southern 
 people who demanded the right in 1861 of free speech and 
 free thought in reference to the momentous questions of 
 that period, and who claimed for themselves honesty of 
 purpose in their course, surely ought to concede equal 
 honesty of intention to others who by their conduct placed 
 themselves beyond the reach of evil imputations. In all 
 the land, neither North nor South, was there so conspicu- 
 ous an example of suffering and sacrifices for the sake of 
 principle as was manifested by these refugees of East Ten- 
 nessee. There were no refugees among the Northern men. 
 Conscriptions were not necessary to get these East Tennes- 
 seans into the army. In the history of nations, there was 
 never exhibited a higher or more unselfish devotion to duty 
 than that of these brave men. They fought for the right 
 as they understood it, and their memory should be held in 
 honor by their grateful countrymen through all coming 
 time. 
 
The Antecedents of the Union Party of East Tennessee. 535 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 THE ANTECEDENTS OP THE UNION FARTY OF EAST TENNESSEE. 
 
 Antecedents of Union party in East Tennessee — Were supporters of Gen- 
 eral Jackson for the presidency — Wished Hugh Lawson White to be 
 his successor — Jackson opposes the White movement — The Whig 
 party — White's supporters become Whigs — Names of distinguished 
 Whig leaders in East Tennessee — Names of Democratic leaders — Old 
 history recalled — The Whig party one of wealth and education — De- 
 scribed by Democratic orators — A decided majority of the better 
 classes in East Tennessee Whigs — What Mrs. Jefferson Davis said of 
 Mississippi — Slaveholders as a class were Whigs — Teachings of Demo- 
 cratic leaders — Changes in the two political parties when civil war 
 came on — A majority of Whigs were Union men — Three-fifths of 
 Democrats vote for the Union — Estimate of changes — Overwhelming 
 weight of talent on the Union side — In moral worth and respectability 
 two parties finally about equal — The hope of the Republic. 
 
 It may be well to trace out briefly the antecedents of the 
 Union party in East Tennessee. Who were these men and 
 of what political origin? In General Jackson's races for 
 the presidency an overwhelming majority of the people of 
 East Tennessee were his supporters, though there were a 
 few anti-Jackson men. In 1835, the people of the state, 
 through its legislature, nominated for the presidency its 
 own pure and able citizen, Judge Hugh Lawson White, of 
 Knoxville, then a senator in congress, to succeed General 
 Jackson. White had been one of Jackson's ablest defend- 
 ers in the senate. Jackson, however, wished Martin Van 
 Buren to be his successor, and took open ground for him. 
 This interference gave grave offense to the friends of White. 
 In the election of 1836, Mr. White's friends cast a large 
 majority of votes for him, and carried the state against all 
 the influence and patronage of Jackson's administration. 
 White was more popular in East Tennessee than Jackson. 
 
 During this presidential contest the many elements of 
 
536 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 opposition to the administration of Jackson throughout the 
 country coalesced and came together, assuming the vener- 
 able, revolutionary name of Whig. As a party it was 
 eminently respectable on account of its wealth, its educa- 
 tion and its general worth. It was pre-eminent for the 
 ability of its leaders. At its head stood Clay and Webster. 
 Mr. Clay was the vital force that gave it strength and in- 
 spiration. He breathed into it his own intrepid spirit, 
 and led it with unfaltering courage. He proclaimed cer- 
 tain great principles for the administration of the govern- 
 ment, which he called the "American Policy." Many of 
 Jackson's old followers in Tennessee, with John Bell, 
 the rising young statesman, at their head, united with the 
 Whig party. In East Tennessee the followers of Mr. 
 White most naturally joined these. Keenly resenting the 
 war made on him by General Jackson, they ardently sup- 
 ported Mr. Clay's policy. A majority of the people thus 
 became Whigs, and in after years they never swerved from, 
 this faith. The leaders in this movement were well 
 worthy of the large following they received. Well might 
 the people follow such men as Colonel John Williams, 
 Judge W. B. Reese, Chancellor Thomas L. Williams, 
 Spencer Jarnegin, Judge E. Alexander, James A. White- 
 sides, John A. McKinney, Judge Robert J. McKinney, T. 
 
 A. R. Nelson, John Netherland, Thomas D. Arnold, W. 
 T. Senter and Wm. G. Brownlow, and at a little later 
 period such men as W. H. Sneed, John H. Crozier, Joseph 
 
 B. Heiskell, Horace Maynard, John Baxter, C. F. Trigg 
 and John C. Gaut. The only leaders on the other side for 
 whom even a plausible claim of equal ability could be 
 made were AndreAV Johnson, Landon C. Haynes, Thomas 
 
 C. Lyon and Samuel Milligau. 
 
 Here then we have the antecedents of the Union party 
 of East Tennessee. It was for the most part the old Whig 
 party of 1835-6 — the party that sprang up in opposition to 
 General Jackson. 
 
 To show the character of this party, the material of 
 
The Antecedents of the Union Party of East Tennessee. 537 
 
 which it was composed, its moral and mental standing, I 
 desire to recall a little almost-forgotten history. Away- 
 back in 1840 and 1844, Democratic orators were in the 
 constant habit, in this state, of arraigning the Whig party 
 as the aristocratic Federal party. It was denounced as 
 purse proud and aristocratic and as an enemy of the com- 
 mon people. The Democratic party, it was said, was 
 made up of the poor and laboring men. The rich and 
 the proud and those who "wore broadcloth" were "Whigs. 
 In some form or another these sentiments were constantly 
 heard from Democratic orators. In 1843, or 1844, one 
 Barclay Martin, a Democratic orator from Middle Tennes- 
 see, came into the upper part of this region to make 
 speeches. He told the people that the Democrats con- 
 stituted the poor man's party, that it was made up of the 
 laboring men, and of those who wore "copperas breeches 
 and one gallows." He denounced the Whigs as aristo- 
 crats who looked down upon Democrats. 
 
 Andrew Johnson put forth ideas similar to these from 
 the time he ceased to be a Whig. Indeed these senti- 
 ments were more or less common everywhere. The 
 Whigs scarcely attempted to conceal the consciousness of 
 their real or assumed superiority. They claimed for their 
 party the best talents, the larger share of the wealth and 
 intelligence of the land, and the best blood of the country. 
 So it came to be very well understood before the war, all 
 over Tennessee, and especially in East Tennessee, that the 
 larger part of the riches and education in nearly every 
 county belonged to the Whigs. And the fact was to a 
 large extent that way. It was, indeed, so all over the 
 land, with varying modifications. It was well recognized 
 that a majority of the leading farmers in nearly every 
 county, and in nearly every civil district in East Tennes- 
 see, were Whigs, A majority of the prominent citizens of 
 nearly every town also belonged to that party. Of course 
 there were many men of means and intelligence in the 
 
538 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 Democratic party. But the general rule was as I have 
 stated it. 
 
 On this point, Mrs. Jefferson Davis, in the memoirs of 
 her late distinguished husband,^ speaking of her father, W. 
 B. Howell, a very large planter, says : 
 
 "His politics (this was in 1845) were what was then 
 called a Whig, as indeed, were those of most of the gentle- 
 folk of Natchez. Everybody took the 'National Intelli- 
 gencer,' then edited by Messrs. Gales and Seaton, who 
 were men of sterling honesty, with strong Federal views. 
 They held Mr. Van Buren's name and fame as anathema. 
 They believed all they published, and, as a consequence, 
 the Whigs believed them. . . . General Jackson had re- 
 moved the treasury deposits from the national banks, 
 thereby ruining half the people of the South, and this 
 added to the detestation felt by the 'best people' for the 
 Democratic principles and theories." . . . 
 
 After meeting Jefferson Davis for the first time, Miss 
 Howell (subsequently Mrs. Davis) wrote a letter to her 
 mother giving her impressions of him, which concluded in 
 these words: "Would you believe it, he is refined and 
 cultivated, and yet he is a Democrat?" 
 
 What Mrs. Davis says of Natchez, and less directly of 
 Mississippi, was true, it is believed, to a large extent, of 
 nearly all the Southern States, excepting South Carolina. 
 A majority of the slaveholders, as a class, were Whigs, and 
 in 1860, Union men. Elsewhere I quote from a letter of 
 "a Virginian," who was indorsed as one of the first men 
 of the state, published in the "American Register," in 
 which he affirms repeatedly, with an appeal to facts to sus- 
 tain his affirmation, that the slaveholders of the South 
 were Whigs — that they were the educated, the wealthy, 
 the conservative class, and in 1861, the Union class. This 
 was probably true in 1860, and in the early part of 1861. 
 •They were known as the "broadcloth party." This writer 
 says : 
 
 1 Vol. I, p. 189. 
 
The Antecedents of the Union Party of East Tennessee. 539 
 
 " . . . The rule was, the slaveholding people were 
 Whigs and Union, the slaveholding politicians and the 
 roaring rabble Secessionists." . . 
 
 What "a Virginian" affirms of nearly all the Southern 
 States, was certainly a fact in East Tennessee, namely, 
 that a majority of the slaveholders and property owners 
 were Whigs before the war. 
 
 From an early day, down to the Civil War, the teach- 
 ings of the Democratic party, in East Tennessee, at least, 
 were of such a character as tended to set the poor against 
 the rich. The latter resented it, and gradually arrayed 
 themselves against that party. Property is conservative, 
 and naturally seeks to protect itself against attacks. 
 
 In the presidential election of 1860, Mr. Bell received in 
 East Tennessee 22,145 votes, Mr. Breckenridge 18,713 and 
 Mr. Douglas 1,377. 
 
 This does not include the vote of Union county which 
 from some cause was omitted from the published tables. 
 The Whig majority in this county was generally from 400 
 to 500, say 445. Adding the vote of Mr. Douglas to that 
 of Mr. Breckenridge, which is assumed to have been com- 
 posed nearly entirely of Democrats, the majority for 
 Mr. Bell in East Tennessee was 2,055. This majority, 
 when added to the 445 from Union county, gives a total 
 Whig majority of 2,500. This, it is believed, is nearly the 
 correct majority. 
 
 As the Union majority in June, 1861, was over 19,000, 
 it is evident that there was a great change in the relative 
 strength of the two old parties. It is a fact admitting of 
 little doubt that the Whig party remained largly intact, 
 while the Democratic party was seriously divided. A 
 large number of Democrats in the first district, under the 
 influence of Andrew Johnson, adhered to the Union, and a 
 great many did so all over East Tennessee.^ A consider- 
 
 ^ A remarkable change took place in Greene county, the home of Andrew 
 Johnson. In the November presidential election the plurality of Mr. 
 Breckenridge over Mr. Bell was 1,006 votes. In the following June the 
 
540 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 able number of Whigs, on the other hand, especially in the 
 counties of Carter, Washington, Greene, Cocke, Blount, 
 Roane and Knox, joined in secession. As the Whig 
 majority in East Tennessee was about 2,500, and the total 
 vote in June was 48,800, that gives, in round numbers, a 
 Whig vote of 25,650 and a Democratic vote of 23,150. 
 Taking these figures as a basis of calculation, in order to 
 reach the result manifested by that election, namely 
 14,800 votes for secession and a little over 34,000 against 
 it, it was necessary that one-fifth of the Whigs should have 
 voted for that measure, and three-fifths of the Democrats 
 against it. No other proportions will give results so 
 nearly corresponding to the election returns. Thus the 
 proportion of one-fifth Whigs for secession and three-fifths 
 Democrats for the Union, gives the result of 34,410 for the 
 Union and 14,390 for secession, making together the num- 
 ber cast in the election. The actual result was 34,033 for 
 the Union, and 14,872 for secession. These facts prove 
 that my figures are nearly correct. 
 
 It thus appears that the Union party in East Tennessee 
 in the June election of 1861 was composed of about 20,520 
 Whigs and of 13,890 Democrats, and the secession party 
 of about 9,260 Democrats and 5,130 Whigs. 
 
 These are surprising results, particularly the large num- 
 ber of old Democrats who voted for the Union. But these 
 figures are necessary in order to account for the well- 
 known Union majority. The Whigs who thus joined the 
 Confederacy were among the best men in the party, many 
 of them being slaveholders. In Greene county, while a 
 number of prominent Democrats remained loyal, many of 
 them went into secession. 
 
 So the Whig or Union party remained largely as it had 
 been in 1861. It lost a small part of its old followers, 
 but gained a much greater number from the Democratic 
 
 Union majority was 1,947. It is a significant fact that Douglas only re- 
 ceived thirty-eight votes in this county where the influence of Mr. John- 
 son was all controlling. 
 
The Antecedents of the Union Party of East Tenneseee. 541 
 
 party. It thus appears that the great body of Union fol- 
 lowers were the old Whigs of the times long ago. The 
 Union party of East Tennessee, in 1861, was in fact the 
 Whig party of 1860, with the addition of about three- 
 fifths of the Democratic party, and the loss of about one- 
 fifth of the Whigs. These figures are not exact, but 
 nearly so. 
 
 At the close of the presidential canvass of 1860, there 
 was a marked difference between the attitude of the 
 Democratic and the Whig parties in reference to seces- 
 sion. The first, especially the Breckenridge wing, was al- 
 ready favorably inclined toward that measure. Every in- 
 telligent voter for Mr. Breckenridge who resided in the 
 South ought to have known in November, 1860, as well 
 as he knew in the following February, the designs of the 
 secession leaders. The traditions and teachings of the 
 party for many years previously all tended to enlist both 
 his sympathy and his judgment on that side. The 
 speeches and publications in the South, in 1860, were un- 
 mistakable in disclosing an unalterable purpose to dis- 
 solve the Union. It is manifest, therefore, that the pre- 
 disposition on the part of Breckenridge Democrats to 
 favor secession had to be overcome before they could be- 
 come supporters of the Union. They had to change front. 
 That more than one-half the party in East Tennessee did 
 thus change front, shows more impressively than any 
 other fact in his history the marvelous influence and power 
 which Andrew Johnson exercised over the minds of his 
 own people. 
 
 On the contrary, it was not necessary for the Whig 
 party of East Tennessee to change a single principle, a 
 single idea, in order to be on the side of the Union. It 
 involved no change on their part. They had always faced 
 in that direction. In espousing the Union cause in Febru- 
 ary, 1861, they were simply acting in harmony with all 
 their past history and teachings. It is not a surprising 
 fact, therefore, that only one-fifth of them abandoned the 
 
542 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 standard of their fathers ; rather, it is surprising that so 
 many as one-fifth did so. 
 
 I have already stated that in the contest of 1861 the 
 overwhelming weight of talent among the leaders in East 
 Tennessee was on the side of the Union. This was clearly 
 knd unmistakably so. The only really prominent leaders 
 in the secession party were Landon C. Haynes, Jose]oh B. 
 Heiskell, W. H. Sneed, John H. Crozier, W. G. Swan, 
 Thomas C. Lyon and D. M. Key. It is difficult, as it is 
 at all times in such matters, to weigh and measure the 
 exact proportion of moral worth and resiDectability, among 
 the body of the people, which finally existed in the two 
 parties. No fair-minded man, however, will claim that all 
 of these were either on the one side or on the other. It 
 was probably about equally divided. In this respect, the 
 changes that occurred, on the whole, were possibly more 
 favorable to the secession than to the Union party. While 
 a majority of the larger slave owners finally became seces- 
 sionists, there were many of that class who never yielded 
 to that delusion. The largest as well as the third largest 
 slaveholders in Knox county were Union men. Many 
 non-slaveholders, in East Tennessee, were for secession, 
 and many slave owners were bitterly and unalterably op- 
 posed to it. There was, in reference to this question, no 
 certain rule or criterion by which the position of anyone 
 could be Judged in advance. The nearest approach to 
 such a rule was that afforded by old party affiliations. 
 Whigs were nearly certain to be loyal, while the Democrats 
 were rent asunder ; but there were many variations from 
 this indefinite rule. It required moral as well as physical 
 courage to resist the dominating spirit of secession. Only 
 men of strength of character could do it. There were 
 worthless men then, as there are to-day, in both parties. 
 All I claim for the Union party in East Tennessee is an 
 equality with their opponents in every element that con- 
 stitutes an intelligent, a moral and a respectable people. 
 
 It is plain, honest, industrious farming citizens like 
 
The Antecedents of the Union Party of East Tennessee. 643 
 
 these, constituting a majority of the Union party of East 
 Tennessee, as well as the larger part of the Democratic 
 party, who are the wealth-producing class of the land. 
 This great class numbers eight or ten millions of men in 
 the United States. In the Civil War, it was this class, 
 mbre than all others, which by its patriotism saved the 
 government from disruption. In every time of danger it 
 will always be the government's mainstay and support. 
 Should agrarianism, communism, labor strikes and mob 
 law at any time seize our large cities, as they seized Chi- 
 cago in 1893, and threaten the stability and existence of 
 both government and society, the strong bulwark against 
 this lawless spirit will be found in the end to be the rural 
 population. They own an interest in the soil. They love 
 their little homes. By the simplest reasoning, this love of 
 home is transferred to the government which protects their 
 title to their homes. Their homes thus become the bond 
 by which they are linked to the government. Lawlessness 
 and anarchy, as they can see, threaten their security. 
 They are, therefore, the friends of stability, order and 
 good government. Naturally, inevitably, they are con- 
 servative, cautious and anti-revolutionary in sentiment. 
 Selfish ambition has no place in their minds. Corruption 
 has not found a lodgment in their hearts. In all things 
 these are the most honest, the most patriotic, the most vir- 
 tuous and conservative, and the best citizens of the repub- 
 lic. And if the sad day should ever come when there 
 shall be in this country a wild upheaval and upturning of 
 society, of everything sacred and valuable, the last defense 
 of our institutions will rest with this vast and incorrupt- 
 ible farming population, such as are the honest farmers of 
 East Tennessee of both parties. 
 
544 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 WHY WERE THE PEOPLE OF EAST TENNESSEE LOYAL IN 1861? 
 
 Under certain conditions better for the people of East Tennessee to have 
 gone with the South — Easier, safer and more popular than to remain 
 loyal — The reasons for not joining the South — Vital principles of gov- 
 ernment and administration involved — No suflficient cause for seces- 
 sion — Views of the old Whig party — Secession a heresy — Free trade — 
 Easy to be a Union man in the North — A fearful thing in the South — 
 He incurred danger, hatred and odium — Washington's exalted integrity 
 and fame interwoven with the Union — A majority of the people every- 
 where opposed to secession — Drawn into it by excitement — People of 
 East Tennessee not under the influence of a slaveholding aristocracy — 
 Love of country among a semi-mountainous people — But one supreme 
 question — Hated changes — Secession meant a change — Drew their in- 
 spiration from the words and example of Clay and Jackson — Victory 
 for the Union was won by local leaders in February, 1861 — But little 
 change afterwards — Leaders exactly suited to the crisis — The common 
 people everywhere true until deserted by their leaders— The Union 
 men of East Tennessee. 
 
 Party names are nothing, excepting so far as they rep- 
 resent ideas and principles. If there had been no import 
 tant question as to the form of government and the funda- 
 mental ideas and principles on which it rested and on 
 which it should be administered, involved in the contest 
 of 1861, it would have been much better for the Union 
 men of East Tennessee to have united their destiny with 
 the people of the South, rather than make, under the most 
 adverse circumstances, a desperate and unequal, and, in 
 some respects, an unnatural struggle for the Union. Look 
 at the facts. In common with the secessionists, the Union 
 men lost their slaves — their property — in the struggle with- 
 out receiving compensation therefor. The other property, 
 which was taken from them for the support of the Union 
 armies, was generally receipted for at about half of its 
 market value, and often no receipt at all was given. They 
 
Why were the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861? 545 
 
 suffered by persecutions and imprisonment as the Confed- 
 erates never did. For some years after the war, they were 
 the constant subjects of hatred and denunciation on the 
 part of the Southern people, and of sneers and misrepre- 
 sentations on the part of a portion of the Northern people. 
 If the Southern Confederacy had succeeded, the brand of 
 infamy would have rested on them forever. If their lot 
 has been a hard one, notwithstanding they were on the 
 winning side, what would it have been if the secessionists 
 had been successful? 
 
 If the love of ease and the desire of popularity and high 
 social position had controlled them, and especially the 
 leaders, they would have joined their brethren of the 
 South. It was easy to go in that direction, and hard to go 
 in the other. Sympathy and a common brotherhood drew 
 them toward their friends and kindred. To separate from 
 them the tenderest ties of human nature had to be severed. 
 It was like the parting of a family in a quarrel. In turn- 
 ing away from their neighbors and kindred, social ostra- 
 cism, so tyrannical in the South, awaited them. Dangers 
 encompassed them on every side . Perpetual infamy might 
 be attached to their names. Exile might be, as it actually 
 became to tens of thousands, their fate. 
 
 It was, therefore, easier, safer and more popular every 
 way to be a secessionist than a Union man. A vast ma- 
 jority of the better classes in the cotton states, after the 
 war began, for these very reasons, cast their fortunes with 
 the secessionists. These would naturally mold the policies 
 and control the destinies of those states. In Tennessee, 
 too, after the June election, in 1861, it was evident that a 
 majority of the ruling class had joined the South. This ma- 
 jority, it was seen, would govern the state. The Union men 
 must remain in a minority. They must live under the 
 supposed reproach of having adhered to the enemies of the 
 South. They could not escape their environments, nor the 
 consequences of their political acts and opinions. It mat- 
 35 
 
546 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 tered but little that in East Tennessee the highest talents 
 and an equal part of the wealth and moral worth were on 
 the side of the Union. The loyal population formed less 
 than one-third of the people of the entire state, and would, 
 therefore, be controlled, as they have been, by the South- 
 ern element. 
 
 In every aspect of the case, so far as safety, social posi- 
 tion, personal influence, and future advancement were 
 concerned, loyalty to the Union threatened to become a 
 serious drawback. There was no open highway leading in 
 that direction for aspiring ambition. There was no easy 
 road to promotion or social distinction. To abandon old 
 party relations, and form alliances with a party so odious 
 as the Republican party was in the South, in 1860-61, was ab- 
 horrent . To do so , all the deep-seated pre j udices of a quarter 
 of a century had to be uprooted and overcome . Besides this, 
 and infinitely worse than this, the curses, the anathemas, 
 the bitter denunciations of our Southern brethren who 
 thought we were betraying them in their hour of supreme 
 need, had to be endured. And yet more terrible was the 
 withering, the annihilating public opinion of the South, 
 which crushed out all open opposition to slavery and seces- 
 sion, and doomed to deepest infamy all who halted, hesi- 
 tated or refused to blindly follow its trend. 
 
 So, I repeat, that if there had been no choice between 
 the two forms of government, and the underlying prin- 
 ciples on which they rested ; if there had been no sacred 
 memories, no glorious history to be surrendered ; if there 
 had been an assured guarantee — such as the old government 
 gave by nearly a century of experience — of liberty, equality 
 and stability, in the new government, it would have been 
 much better for the Union men to join the South. 
 
 Why, then, did the loyal i^eople of East Tennessee cling 
 to the Union so tenaciously and so heroically in 1862? 
 Different motives influenced different minds. Some had 
 one motive, some another, and some many. No uniform 
 reason can be given that is applicable to all. The reasons. 
 
Why ivere the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861 ? 547 
 
 however, wliicli influenced the minds of the more intelli- 
 gent in the old Whig party may be stated nearly correctly. 
 They were as follows : 
 
 First, but not most important, a majority of the people 
 of East Tennessee had been disciples of Clay and Webster, 
 both as to the theory and the administrative policy of the 
 government. They knew that these theories and policies 
 would be repudiated in a Southern Confederacy, and that 
 the later but extreme views of Mr. Calhoun and others of 
 the Southern school would prevail. This alone constituted 
 with many a sufficient objection to secession. 
 
 Second. There was no adequate cause, as they believed, 
 furnishing a justification for revolution and for a dissolu- 
 tion of the government. The utmost that could be said 
 truthfully was that the people of the South undoubtedly 
 had serious cause of complaint against a portion of the 
 people of the North, on account of their nullification of 
 the Fugitive Slave Law and their bitter and unceasing 
 warfare against the institution of slavery. 
 
 Third. Granting that there were the gravest causes of 
 complaint on the part of the South, secession was no rem- 
 edy for any existing evil. It tended only to aggravate 
 every wrong endured or complained of by the South. Un- 
 der this head may be mentioned, as an illustration, the in- 
 security of slave property which would have obtained un- 
 der the Southern Confederacy. 
 
 Fourth. The constitutional right of secession was abso- 
 lutely and unqualifiedly denied. The right of revolution, 
 when wrongs had become so serious as to be no longer 
 tolerable by freemen, was freely admitted. But it was 
 denied that at that time there existed any wrong justify- 
 ing an immediate resort, without an earnest effort at con- 
 ciliation and compromise, to the last right of an oppressed 
 people — revolution . 
 
 Fifth. Individually, and this is true of every prominent 
 Union leader, I was at that time the moderate friend of 
 African slavery, as it existed in the South, and wished to 
 
548 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 see that institution preserved. Speaking for myself, I had 
 not then learned that it was a curse and not a blessing to 
 the South. My conscience did not trouble me on the sub- 
 ject. I was a slave-owner, as my father and grandfather 
 had been. I believed that secession would destroy slavery. 
 In one of my speeches, in June, 1861, as shown in Chapter 
 IX, I laid down the propositions that slavery could only 
 exist in the Union, and by virtue of the constitution, and 
 that if we cut loose from these, it would perish ; that I was 
 a friend to the Union, because in part, I was a friend of 
 slavery ; and that secession was only a short cut to emanci- 
 pation. 
 
 Sixth. It was insisted that "peaceable secession" was a 
 dream and would never be tolerated ; that the people of 
 the North would never permit the Union to be dissolved 
 without an effort to save it ; that a mighty war would be 
 the result, and that the government, having both the 
 wealth and the numerical strength sufficient, would put 
 down the secession movement, and reduce the people 
 of the seceding states to submission, and that slavery 
 would perish in the conflict. How prophetic these words 
 of June, 1861? 
 
 Seventh. It was urged that a government founded on the 
 principle of secession and the doctrine of state's rights, as 
 held in the South, could not permanently endure, and 
 must sooner or later fall to pieces, or eventuate in anarchy. 
 
 Eighth. The thought of a cruel civil war, which was 
 certain to result from secession, was viewed with horror 
 by Union men. They wished, if possible, at least, to save 
 this state from its multiplied evils. 
 
 Some of the Union leaders were ardent believers in a 
 powerful and splendid central government, just in the ad- 
 ministration of wise laws, with ample power to secure pro- 
 tection to each of its citizens, and respect for its majesty 
 in every part of its wide dominions. Their reverence for 
 the old government was unbounded. They grew sick at 
 heart at the idea of being compelled to look upon its dis- 
 
Why lucre the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861 f 549 
 
 membered parts. Thej loved to linger on the magnificent 
 picture of Mr. Webster in his reply to Mr. Hayne : 
 
 "When my eyes shall be turned to behold for the last 
 time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the 
 broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union ; 
 on states dissevered, discordant, belligerant ; on a land 
 rent with civil fueds, or drenched it may be in fraternal 
 blood ! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather 
 behold the gorgeous ensign of the republic, now known 
 and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, 
 its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, 
 not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured." 
 
 The foregoing views were substantially those of the 
 Union leaders of East Tennessee, in 1861, excepting An- 
 drew Johnson, who perhaps held different views, as to one 
 or two points. The form of the statement is nothing. The 
 ideas alone are insisted upon. 
 
 These were some of the reasons which arose in the minds 
 of the more thoughtful Union men. But there was a much 
 larger class of men, who, though they might not reason so 
 exactly, were yet capable of clear thinking. These had 
 decided convictions upon the supreme question as to 
 whether the Union should be preserved or destroyed. 
 They needed no formal logical process to comprehend the 
 importance of such a problem . Considerations of the highest 
 and gravest import demanded the attention of these prac- 
 tical and thoughtful men. What were they to gain by de- 
 stroying the Union? Would they be, in any possible con- 
 tingency, better off, more prosperous, safer in their persons 
 and property, more secure in their rights? 
 
 To the old Whig party, the claim on the part of the 
 Southern States of the right to secede from the Union, 
 at their own sovereign pleasure, was contrary to all its 
 cherished convictions. Secession was as odious and as 
 revolutionary as nullification. Both were, as they be- 
 lieved, destructive of all stable government. This doc- 
 trine, as taught in the South, contained within itself the 
 
550 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 seeds of disintegration, weakness and dissolution. An- 
 .»;archy would probably sooner or later follow in its train. 
 A government founded on tins idea must of necessity be 
 weak and subject to frequent and violent revolutions. 
 There could hardly be any long-enduring tranquillity. To 
 men who believed in a strong central government, power- 
 ful enough to protect and defend all its parts, and all the 
 people dwelling under it, however weak, or however re- 
 mote from its center, and yet with ample local self-gov- 
 ernment in the states, enabling each to work out its own 
 destiny in its own way, the Southern idea of the new 
 government was fraught with evil only. The Whigs 
 looked with startled fear on such a scheme. This leaves 
 out of view a consideration of the sentiment of love for 
 the Union, so strong in the j)eoi3le, and which had become 
 a part of their very lives. No new government, however 
 perfect, could ever be to them what the old one had been. 
 No sacred memories and associations could ever be hal- 
 lowed in their hearts as this one was. Sad and sorrowing 
 would they have been if separated from the government of 
 their first love. 
 
 Thoughtful minds also did not fail to see the evil con- 
 sequences of the doctrine of free trade, proclaimed in the 
 very constitution of the new government. To the Whigs 
 of East Tennessee this seemed to be a fatal blow at the 
 fondly anticipated development of their future industries. 
 They could not therefore wisely overlook the consideration 
 of this question of domestic policy. As has been said be- 
 fore, the question of slavery, on the one side, or of human 
 freedom, on the other, was not a controlling one. The 
 Union men were neither emancipationists nor slavery 
 propagandists. Many of them were indeed small slave- 
 holders. They believed slavery was safer in the Union 
 than it would be out of it. But this belief alone did not 
 make them cling to the Union. A higher sentiment and 
 broader views animated and guided them. A patriotic, 
 national spirit fixed them unchangeably in their noble 
 
Wliy were, the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 186 If 551 
 
 course. An enlightened and far seeing apprehension as to 
 their future safety and -welfare, combined with deep de- 
 votion to the old government, held them firmly in their 
 loyalty, from which nothing could move or seduce them. 
 Neither dangers, nor obloquy, nor prisons, nor any human 
 agency or power ever made them waver in their sted- 
 fastness. 
 
 As intimated before, it was painful to separate from 
 their section, their kindred and their brethren. At first 
 it was much harder even than this, to incur the odium of 
 alljing themselves with the Republican and the Abolition 
 parties (so universally hated in the South) even for the 
 glorious purpose of saving the Union. But this was in- 
 finitely preferable to an alliance with the secession party 
 for the purpose of destroying it. To encounter and endure 
 this odium mere courage was not sufficient. Only high 
 moral convictions and an overpowering sense of duty, an 
 intense amor patriae were equal to this hard trial. 
 
 It was easy to be a Union man in Ohio or Pennsylvania, 
 but difficult and dangerous to be one in the South. In the 
 one case the person was in sympathy with his section ; in 
 the other, he stood in odious array against it. In the one 
 case, there was no danger to be encountered, no sacrifices 
 to be made ; in the other, there were countless dangers 
 and sacrifices to be met. In the one case, honors and re- 
 wards awaited him ; in the other, stigma and social os- 
 tracism. In the one case, he was a patriot ; in the other, 
 a traitor to his section and kindred. In the one case, the 
 doors to honor and position flew open at his approach ; in 
 the other, they were rudely closed in his face and locked 
 against him. 
 
 Personal considerations all drew them toward the South ; 
 sentiment and political considerations drew them the other 
 way. Sympathy and the ties of kindred and association 
 drew them toward secession : patriotism and duty drew 
 them the other way. Narrow sectionalism tempted them 
 
552 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 one way ; a spirit of broad national unity inclined them 
 the other. 
 
 The term "Abolitionist," in 1860-61, in the minds of 
 the vast body of the people of the South, was a term of 
 the deepest reproach and infamy. An Abolitionist was re- 
 garded as a malicious enemy of the South, contemplating 
 some diabolical evil to her people. In order to accomplish 
 his purpose of freeing the slaves, he was ready to apply 
 the torch to their homes, and to arm the slaves against 
 their masters, as John Brown had tried to do. He was 
 justly regarded by all parties in the South with loathing, 
 because he was attempting to interfere with and destroy 
 the value of a species of property just as much protected 
 by the constitution as houses and lands. The Abolitionist 
 who went beyond the use of reason and moral suasion to 
 get rid of slavery was a revolutionist and an enemy to the 
 constitution. Of course, intelligent people knew that there 
 were not many Abolitionists of this class. The misfortune 
 was that the large body of the people who had supported 
 Mr. Lincoln were regarded in the South as Abolitionists, 
 whereas in fact they were only "Free-soilers," or persons 
 opposed to the extension of slavery. The news of Mr. 
 Lincoln's election, therefore, aided by the extravagant and 
 false statements as to his purposes, caused ominous fore- 
 bodings everywhere in the South. Immediately after the 
 election, there followed a solemn pause. No one knew 
 what terrible calamity was about to occur. The bravest 
 Union men were bewildered by the new and appalling situ- 
 ation they had to face. In Nashville, at the meeting of the 
 electoral college in December, some of the strongest men 
 who had voted for Mr. Bell were alarmed, unmanned and 
 uncertain. It was only too evident even then that the 
 shadow of slavery was creeping over and paralyzing the 
 minds and hearts of men in large slaveholding communi- 
 ties. 
 
 If the most intelligent men in the state were fearful and 
 uncertain as to the future, it was not surprising that the 
 
Why were the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861 ? 553 
 
 rural population, who had less means of correct informa- 
 tion, were perplexed at the new condition of things. They 
 were in that state of doubt and apprehension as to their 
 duty which might easily have made many of them the 
 blind followers of secession leaders, if such men had first 
 gotten their ears. But fortunately a great public meeting 
 was held in Knoxville on the 8th day of December, an ac- 
 count of which is given elsewhere, at w^hich the speakers 
 on the Union side boldly declared their purpose to adhere 
 to the government and to resist secession with all the 
 ability they possessed. These utterances, together with 
 the loyal resolutions almost unanimously adopted, touched 
 the popular heart and mind and gave new hope and confi- 
 dence to the doubting. From that hour the Union victory 
 in East Tennessee was assured. The swellinf^ tide of 
 Unionism that day put in motion never for a moment 
 ebbed nor flowed backward. This public meeting became, 
 as is elsewhere shown, the turning point in the history of 
 the Union canvass in East Tennessee. 
 
 Fortunately for mankind, the people of the United States 
 had a grand and a good man to lead their armies in the 
 Revolution and to administer the new government for the 
 first eight years of its existence. Washington so im- 
 pressed himself on the minds and hearts of the people as a 
 virtuous and patriotic citizen, that his influence ever since 
 has been almost supreme. With his name is associated 
 the powerful central idea of nationality. No thought of 
 him of a less comprehensive character ever enters the 
 minds of men. This very idea has become a strong bond 
 of national unity. It is impossible to estimate its value in 
 giving permanency and stability to our government. The 
 goodness of Washington sanctifies and hallows his mighty 
 work. The common people, much more than scholars and 
 statesmen, reverence the past. They are not innovators, 
 not iconoclasts. They are slow to destroy and pull down 
 that which is consecrated by sacred memories, and espe- 
 cially that which has been purchased with costly blood. 
 
554 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 In application of these principles, I venture the assertion 
 that, at the beginning of the late Civil War, a majority of 
 the people were everywhere opposed to the disruption of 
 our government. They were finally drawn into it in the 
 cotton states, by the hurry, the excitement and the glare 
 of military preparations and parades, and the dominating 
 spirit of the slaveholding oligarchy. In these states the 
 powerful slaveholders moulded and fashioned public 
 opinion ; the common people followed where they led. 
 This was not the case in East Tennessee, where there were 
 but few large slaveholders. Here the mass of the people 
 were not dazzled and blinded by the overpowering influ- 
 ence of that class. While these people had no hostility 
 against slavery and slaveholders, for many were slave- 
 holders themselves, yet they had not that abject fear of 
 them, that reverence for that institution, which character- 
 ized the non-slaveholding classes further South. This 
 statement is true also, to a certain extent, of a majority of 
 the people of the border counties of North Carolina, Vir- 
 ginia and Kentucky, and to a limited extent of North 
 Alabama and North Georgia. But by the hot contagion of 
 secession and the want of leaders, these people were soon 
 overborne by the pressure and clamor of outside public 
 opinion. Under its influence, especially in the states I 
 have named, except Kentucky, the Union sentiment was 
 soon stifled, and the people drifted into the current of 
 secession. But in East Tennessee, though the outside 
 pressure was tremendous, with daring leaders to cheer and 
 encourage the people in maintaining their own inherent 
 sentiments of loyalty, they stood unmovable and un- 
 shaken, amidst the raging storm which surrounded them. 
 
 Thus far, I have been stating in general terms, the 
 reasons why a majority of the people of East Tennessee 
 were loyal to the government during the Civil War. Some 
 of these reasons were philosophical, and founded on gen- 
 eral principles. Others were purely local. The latter 
 were by far the most potent. These general principles 
 
Why ivere the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861 ? 555 
 
 were more or less prevalent under similar conditions in all 
 parts of the South. The fact was manifest, in 1861, that 
 most of the common people, even in the seceding states, 
 were opposed to secession. They had felt no heavy hand 
 of oppression laid on them by the national government. 
 The burdens they bore came from the states. They knew 
 the national government only by its blessings. Aside 
 from the alleged wrongs done, or threatened to the insti- 
 tution of slavery, there was not a good citizen from the 
 capes of Delaware to the Rio Grande, who could point 
 to a wrong he had endured from this source. In Virginia 
 and Tennessee propositions to secede were at first voted 
 down by an overwhelming majority. In Georgia a ma- 
 jority of the people were at first clearly against secession. 
 In Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana there was always strong 
 opposition to it. North Carolina was slow to give adher- 
 ence to the Southern movement. In Alabama secession 
 was arrested and held back for a long time. So warmly 
 were the hearts of the people wedded to the old govern- 
 ment, that it required the most extraordinary and start- 
 ling events and means to draw them away from it. Mr. 
 Gilchrist, a member of the legislature of that state, under- 
 stood this when he warned Mr. Davis as we have elsewhere 
 seen, that something had to be done to keep Alabama from 
 returning to the Union. 
 
 In the end the work of secession was largely accomplished 
 by fear and terrorism. The people were blindly driven 
 into acquiescence in an act they hated, or doubted, by the 
 wildest storm of passion and fury witnessed since the 
 French Revolution. 
 
 But there were other reasons, besides those I have given, 
 some of them almost purely local, why a majority of the 
 people of East Tennessee were loyal to the Union. These 
 people were a semi-mountainous race, and like all such 
 people, the love of country among them was almost 
 idolatrous. A majority of them were the descendants of 
 the old Covenanters (the Scotch-Irish) who first settled 
 
556 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 East Tennessee. The spirit of these brave Covenanters 
 had descended to their posterity. The same love of 
 liberty, the same love of country, the same love of home 
 which animated them, also animated their children and 
 grand-children . 
 
 These people had heard from their grandfathers how 
 they had marched in 1780, across the mountains, under 
 Sevier and Shelby and Campbell, and had destroyed the 
 army of Ferguson. Some few still lingered who helped 
 to win independence a second time under Jackson on the 
 plains of New Orleans. And a yet larger number re- 
 mained who had marched with Scott from Vera Cruz and 
 had participated in the victory of Cerro Gordo and the 
 triumphs around the City of Mexico. The descendants of 
 these old heroes were to be found in every neighborhood. 
 Naturally they supposed that the existence of the govern- 
 ment, with all the liberties they enjoyed, was in part due 
 to their patriotic ancestors. Thus the government came 
 to be a i)art of their own possessions, just as the lands 
 were which had descended from their fathers. 
 
 The affections of these people were not fixed on wealth, 
 nor honor, nor distinction These things tend to lessen 
 the love of country by bringing new and selfish objects 
 before the mind. They knew that they were free under 
 the government as it existed. They knew that not one 
 man in all the land was oppressed by it. Its blessings, 
 like the dew of heaven, silently descended on all. To lay 
 a hostile hand on it was to commit treason and sacrilege, 
 and to trample on the blood of their ancestors. Love of 
 countiy was tlie strongest passion of their souls. It 
 moved, thrilled and drew them, as love drew them to their 
 wives and children. 
 
 With these people all other questions were insignificant 
 in comparison with that of the preservation of the govern- 
 ment. The dazzling glory of Washington mingled with 
 all their ideas of it. The sacred memories of the Revolu- 
 tion still lingered in their minds and hallowed the govern- 
 
Why were the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861 f 557 
 
 ment wrought by it. The separate states were little more 
 to them than their separate counties. They could not con- 
 ceive of Washington fighting for Virginia alone. So 
 these people reasoned, and so they felt. Fortunate it was 
 that they had grasped and held fast to the idea of a power- 
 ful central government, instead of the narrow one of many 
 small sovereignties. 
 
 Outside political issues had but little to do, in 1861, with 
 the mass of the people of East Tennessee. There was but 
 one supreme question : Should the government stand, 
 or should it be destroyed ? The question of slavery did not 
 enter largely into their minds. Seven-tenths of the Union 
 men were non-slaveholders. They cared little about that 
 institution. Some of them were opposed to it on moral 
 grounds. "With some it was in no special favor, because 
 associated with an aristocracy of wealth. Many, perhaps 
 nearly every one of the Union men who were slaveholders, 
 preferred the government to slavery. They cared nothing 
 whether slavery were carried into the new territories or 
 not. A majority of them were Whigs. They knew that 
 secession was in its origin a Democratic dogma. They re- 
 membered that South Carolina would have left the Union 
 long before, but for the iron will of General Jackson. 
 They now saw that same state, that same Democratic 
 party, leading in a second effort to disrupt the government. 
 
 They had been taught by their ancestors that King's 
 Mountain was the turning point in the Revolution. They 
 believed that to their ancestors the chief and highest honor 
 of that brilliant achievement was due. They felt, there- 
 fore, that they had justly inherited a considerable share of 
 the glory of winning American independence. Liberty to 
 them was an heirloom, a priceless jewel, an inheritance 
 bought with blood. It was something personal to them- 
 selves, something which belonged to them — their most 
 precious possession. This liberty was wrapped up, em- 
 bodied and made perpetual in the august government of 
 
558 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 the United States. To touch it was to profane the sacred 
 work of their ancestors and take away their birthright. 
 
 The people of East Tennessee knew that secession meant 
 a change in the form of government. They were told by 
 some of the leaders in the movement that slavery was to 
 be the chief corner-stone of the new government. This 
 new government was to constitute a sj^lendid aristocracy of 
 slaveholders. The people knew that this meant degraded 
 white labor. Large slaveholding communities were always 
 inimical to non-slaveholding white men. The latter class 
 was regarded with little respect. Their labor was not 
 wanted. Labor by white men was in low repute, if not 
 dishonorable. The best lands would be appropriated for 
 slave labor. Poor white men would be driven out by the 
 imperious demands of slavery. 
 
 Rural people never lose their liberty without stern re- 
 sistance. They love peace, though ready for war when it 
 comes. They hate changes. Revolutions never originate 
 with them. Such things are hatched in cities or in large 
 manufacturing centers, among the ambitious, the restless, 
 the desperate and the idle. Industrious men have no time 
 for revolutionary plots. Such a people have no taste for 
 war. The people of East Tennessee knew that secession, 
 as Robert E. Lee said, meant "revolution" and "revolution 
 was rebellion and war," A war to destroy the government 
 was abhorrent to every feeling of their nature. 
 
 The Union men of East Tennessee drew their inspiration 
 from the words and example of Clay and Jackson. Clay 
 had been their idol as a i)olitical leader and the eloquent 
 champion of the Union. Three times had he thrown him- 
 self between warring factions ready to rush to arms, and 
 saved the country. Though they had quarreled with Jack- 
 son in politics and had denounced him bitterly, yet they 
 honored the courage, the honesty and the lofty patriotism 
 of this majestic person. He had by the exercise of his 
 imperious will crushed nullification in 1832, and in his 
 dying hours had declared that if the leaders in that scheme 
 
WJiy were the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 1861 f SSO' 
 
 had persisted in their course, he would have hanged them 
 as high as Haman.^ 
 
 Before the election of Mr. Lincoln, the hearts of Southern 
 Democrats had been "fired," and their heads instructed, as 
 Mr. W. L.Yancey had advised should be done, preparatory 
 to the work of secession. The election of Mr. Lincoln was 
 a foregone conclusion long before it took place. With 
 many of the original movers in the scheme of disunion, his 
 election was a cherished hope and wish. The announce- 
 ment of his election was the signal for increased activity in 
 hastening forward the work of preparation for the final 
 acts of separation. There seemed to be a perfect under- 
 standing among all its advocates. In every town in the 
 South where there were any sympathizers with this move- 
 ment, they seemed to be inspired with new courage by the 
 election of Mr. Lincoln. 
 
 It is remarkable what momentous consequences some- 
 times follow the action of a few persons or depend on 
 even a single individual. The inauguration of the late 
 Civil War was the work primarily of not exceeding fifty 
 men. The chief of these — the most brilliant and the most 
 daring of them — was William L. Yancey. To him above 
 all others belongs the "bad eminence" of having caused 
 the conflict. Governor Isham G. Harris almost alone is 
 responsible for carrying the State of Tennessee out of the 
 Union. Frank Blair and General Nathaniel Lyons, in a 
 critical hour, saved Missouri from seceding. The past as 
 well as the present status of East Tennessee was fixed in 
 the winter of 1860-61 by less than a dozen men. Among 
 these were Brownlow, Baxter, Trigg, Arnold, Netherland, 
 Fleming, Carter and a half-dozen others. All the subse- 
 quent speaking in April, May and June by better-known 
 men only confirmed the people in the opinions and resolu- 
 tions they had formed under the teachings of these less 
 distinguished leaders. 
 
 * Parton's " Life of Jackson," Vol. 1. 
 
560 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 But after all the great, the supreme reason why a ma- 
 jority of the people of East Tennessee remained true to the 
 old government was the fact that they had strong and de- 
 termined leaders to encourage and stand by them, and 
 share their perils. Notwithstanding their intense natural 
 devotion to the Union, they would have yielded ultimately 
 to Southern sentiment, to the wild outcry against the 
 North, if brave men had not stood up and cheered them 
 in their course. We have just seen that Mr. Johnson 
 almost alone brought three-fifths of the Democratic party 
 over from a position of sympathy for the South to one of 
 unalterable adherence to the Union. Mr. Nelson, while 
 he could not sway large masses as Mr. Johnson did, had 
 the influence to control many separate individuals in his 
 party. This was true also of many other Whig leaders. 
 
 Never perhaps were men better suited for such a grave 
 occasion, and never did leaders appeal to more responsive, 
 patriotic hearts. In the first canvass, in January and 
 February, no more devoted and determined men than 
 those named above existed anywhere. In March, or 
 April, Johnson, Maynard, Nelson and Brabson returned 
 home from congress and joined in the work which had 
 been so ably, so fearlessly and so successfully carried on by 
 the home leaders. Nowhere in the state could be found 
 men combining such courage and ability to inspire and 
 guide the people in the midst of the violent upheavel of 
 1861 as these. Little wonder the people stood firm under 
 their brave words. Throughout the exciting and startling 
 scenes of that wonderful period, the need and the influence 
 of leadership were never more manifest. 
 
 The people of East Tennessee were naturally loyal. Be- 
 sides they found they had leaders whom they could trust. 
 The leaders, on the other hand, knew they could confide in 
 the firmness and loyalty of the people. There was thus 
 established between them reciprocal confidence and de- 
 pendence. Each leaned upon and trusted the other. 
 
Why were the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 186 If 561 
 
 Each if left alone would have been overwhelmed by 
 the panic and the pressure. 
 
 The startling and rapidly succeeding events which hap- 
 pened between November, 1860, and May, 1861, were well 
 calculated to unsettle and bewilder the coolest judgments. 
 Strange and unheard-of things were transpiring every day. 
 His was indeed a clear head who always knew, in that 
 period of doubt and alarm, what was best to be done. 
 Leaders were needed, as they always are in great emer- 
 gencies, to instruct, to encourage and to direct the people 
 as to the best policy to be pursued. Suppose there had 
 been none such in East Tennessee in the winter of 1860-61, 
 or in the meeting of December 8, 1860, what headway 
 could the common people have made in stemming the 
 surging tide of secession as it poured like an overflowing 
 flood over them? They would have been swept away as 
 stubble in a torrent. Those to command as well as those 
 to follow are necessary in all important movements ; the 
 one to direct, the other to give power and momentum. 
 
 Western North Carolina and South-west Virginia were 
 nearly as united for the Union until April, 1861, as East 
 Tennessee. But when Sumter was fired upon the leaders 
 rushed into secession. The peojDle thus deserted became 
 disheartened, and were scattered like sheep without a 
 shepherd. Thousands of true Union men, who were thus 
 abandoned by those they had trusted, soon became recruits 
 for the Confederate army, and helped to swell its ranks. 
 Thus these loyal regions were lost to the Union. The 
 same state of sentiment, perhaps less distinctly, prevailed 
 in North Alabama and in North Georgia. 
 
 But what better illustration can be given than is fur- 
 nished by the example of our own state. In the February 
 canvass, nearly every Whig leader, aided by a few Demo- 
 crats, was earnestly and determinedly for the preservation 
 of the Union. The state was carried in its favor by a ma- 
 jority of sixty-four thousand votes. Then came the firing 
 36 
 
562 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 on Sumter, and "the sprinkling of blood in the faces of the 
 people." This was followed by a wild panic, such as was 
 scarcely ever seen before. Outside of East Tennessee, 
 universal terror and fear prevailed. Passion ruled the 
 hour. Men of mildest disposition, in many cases, became 
 at once types of hatred. No man dared openly to declare 
 himself a Union man. The venerable John Catron, an 
 associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, 
 as we have seen, the friend and appointee of Jackson, fled 
 from his state and from his home in Nashville in terror 
 and despair, never to return until after the Federal occu- 
 pation of Nashville. Return J. Meigs, eminent for his 
 great worth and many virtues, and for his distinguished 
 ability as a lawyer, terror stricken at the fury he saw 
 around him, also fled as if from a community of lunatics.^ 
 All the old honored leaders of the Whig party deserted the 
 people and the cause they professed to love and hastened 
 over to secession. Balie Peyton, in deep gloom and de- 
 spair, gave up the fight and became silent. And John 
 Bell, in an evil hour, allied his fortunes with the South. 
 City and country alike followed the example of these lead- 
 ers. A wild storm of angry, unreasonable passion swept 
 over the state. 
 
 Let it be kept in mind that the common people in none 
 of these cases gave way until after their leaders had done so. 
 "When they found themselves standing alone, in a stirring 
 crisis, with no one left capable of guiding them, most nat- 
 urally they gave up the Union. And thus the cause of the 
 Union was first deserted by its professed friends, and then 
 by the people, in the States of North Carolina, Virginia 
 and Tennessee. Had the leaders of these states, unitedly 
 
 ' When the secession convention -was in session at Columbia, South Car- 
 olina, a countryman who had never before been at the capitol asked the 
 distinguished lawyer and Unionist, James C. Pettigru, to point out the 
 lunatic asylum to him. Pointing to the church where the convention was 
 in session, he exclaimed : " There it is ; there it is ; such a band of lunatics 
 has never before been gathered together." 
 
Why lucre the People of East Tennessee Loyal in 186 If 663 
 
 and heroically, stood like a wall between secession and the 
 people, all of them might probably have been saved. But 
 this required masterly courage. How far these leaders 
 would have been equal to the high demands on them, I am 
 unable to say. One of the first efforts of the enemies of 
 the Union everywhere was to alarm, intimidate and terror- 
 ize all who opposed them. He that had the courage, in 
 the winter and spring of 1861, to withstand the angry and 
 despotic public opinion of the South, on the subject of 
 slavery, was indeed made of heroic stuff. 
 
 In the latter part of 1860 and the early half of 1861, so 
 strange, so startling, so unexpected, were the events — so 
 out of line with anything known in previous experience — 
 that all men in the South needed the support of others. 
 This was especially the case with the large body of the 
 people. It is no reflection on their intelligence to say so. 
 
 Fortunately the leaders in East Tennessee precisely met 
 the grave demands of the occasion. They were not only 
 men of ability, but also men of courage. Nothing could 
 intimidate them. The people's instincts were right in the 
 beginning, and it required but little argument to convince 
 them as to their duty in the threatening emergency. As 
 long as they could be kept free from a panic, all was safe. 
 If the people had been sustained and encouraged in their 
 patriotic instincts and opinions, in 1861, by strong leaders, 
 a very powerful Union party might have been preserved 
 in the very heart of the South. North Alabama, North 
 Georgia, Western North Carolina, South West Virginia 
 and Eastern Kentucky, combined with East Tennessee, 
 would have formed a territory larger than any of the 
 Southern States, save only Texas. All that was needed to 
 have solidified that whole region into almost a compact 
 union against secession was a half dozen able and daunt- 
 less men to take the lead in each of those sections. If 
 there had been co-operation, as well as sympathy between 
 the people of these adjacent sections, no man can now 
 estimate the effect it would have had on the war or its dura- 
 
564 East Tennessee and the Civil War. 
 
 tion. It is obvious that it would have been very wide- 
 reaching in its results. 
 
 That the people of these regions would have been over- 
 borne and silenced in the end, as the peojDle of East Ten- 
 nessee finally were, admits of little doubt. Such united 
 loyalty, however, covering a wide extent of territory, and 
 a large population, animated by the same spirit and in- 
 spired by the same purpose, would not only have weakened 
 the secession armies in the field, but its moral effect on the 
 minds of men both North and South would have been most 
 important. 
 
 When the leaders gave way, this Union party, as a force 
 in the national contest, silently disappeared. The feeling 
 of loyalty, however, was never entirely extinguished in 
 North Carolina and Virginia, nor indeed in any of the 
 regions I have named. The people soon became assimi- 
 lated with the followers of the Confederacy, breathing 
 their spirit and holding their opinions, and were forever 
 lost as a party or a conservative element in those states. 
 On the other hand, the Union men of East Tennessee, after 
 the lapse of thirty-five years, stand out to-day as distinct 
 in their political opinions and party relations as they did 
 in June, 1861. Time has not modified, nor changed their 
 views of government, nor of their duties as citizens in re- 
 lation to it. They still revere the old Union with idola- 
 trous devotion. Seldom in the history of nations has a 
 people shown a higher, a sublimer love for a cause which 
 they esteemed just and wise. No such splendid record of 
 patriotic ardor can be found in our national annals. As 
 long as unselfish patriotism, unyielding constancy, heroic 
 courage and noble sacrifices for country excite admiration, 
 so long will the conduct of these Union men of East Ten- 
 nessee command the respect and challenge the homage of 
 mankind. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 DECLARATION OF GRIEVANCES ADOPTED AT THE GREENE- 
 VILLE CONVENTION. 
 
 We, the people of East Tennessee, again assembled in a convention of 
 our delegates, make the following declaration in addition to that hereto- 
 fore promulgated by us at Knoxville, on the 30th and 31st days of May 
 last. 
 
 So far as we can learn the election held in this state on the 8th day of 
 the present month was free, with but few exceptions, in no part of the 
 state, other than East Tennessee. In the larger parts of Middle and West 
 Tennessee no speeches or discussions in favor of the Union were per- 
 mitted — Union papers were not allowed to circulate. Measures were 
 taken in some parts of West Tennessee, in defiance of the constitution and 
 laws, which allowed folded tickets, to have the ballot numbered in such 
 manner as to mark and expose the Union votes. A disunion paper, the 
 "Nashville Gazette," in urging the people to vote an open ticket declared 
 that a " thief takes a pocketbook, or effects an entrance into forbidden 
 places by stealthy means — a tory, in voting, usually adopts pretty much 
 the same course of procedure." Disunionists, in many places, had charge 
 of the polls, and Union men, when voting, were denounced as Lincolnites 
 and Abolitionists. The unanimity of the votes in many large counties 
 where, but a few weeks ago, the Union sentiment was so strong, proves 
 beyond doubt that Union men were overawed by the tyranny of the 
 military power, and the still greater tyranny of a corrupt and subsidized 
 press. In the city of Memphis, where 5,613 votes were cast, but five free 
 men had the courage to vote for the Union, and these were stigmatized in 
 the public press as " ignorant traitors who opposed the popular edicts." 
 Our earnest appeal made at the Knoxville Convention, to our brethren in 
 the other divisions of the state, was published there only to a small extent 
 and the members and names of those who composed our convention, as 
 well as the counties they represented, were suppressed, and the effort 
 made to impress the minds of the people that East Tennessee was favorable 
 to secession. The " Memphis Appeal," a prominent disunion paper, pub- 
 lished a false account of our proceedings, under the head — " The Traitors 
 IN Council" — and styled us who represented every county but two in 
 East Tennessee "the little batch of disaffected traitors, who hover around the 
 noxious atmosphere of Andrew Johnson's home." Our meeting w'as tele- 
 graphed to the " New Orleans Delta," and it was falsely said that we had 
 passed a resolution recommending submission, if 70,000 votes were not 
 cast against secession. The dispatch added that "the southern eights 
 
 (565) 
 
566 Appendix. 
 
 MEN ARE DETERMINED TO HOLD POSSESSION OF THE STATE, THOUGH THEY 
 
 SHOULD BE IN A MINORITY. Voluuteers Were allowed to vote in and out 
 of the state, in flagrant violation of the constitution. From the moment 
 the election was over, and before any detailed statement of the vote in the 
 different counties had been published, and before it was possible to ascer- 
 tain the result, it was exultingly proclaimed that separation had been 
 carried by from 50,000 to 70,000 votes. This was to prepare the public 
 mind to enable "the secessionists to hold possession of the state though 
 tliey should be in a minority." The final result is to be announced by a 
 disunion governor, whose existence depends upon the success of secession, 
 and no provision is made by law for an examination of the vote by disin- 
 terested persons, or even for contesting the election. For these and other 
 causes we do not regard the result of the election as expressive of the will 
 of a majority of the freemen of Tennessee. Had the election everywhere 
 been conducted as it was in East Tennessee, we would entertain a different 
 opinion. Here, no effort was made to suppress secession papers, or pre- 
 vent secession speeches or votes, although an overwhelming majority of 
 the people were against secession. Here, no effort has been made to pre- 
 vent the formation of military companies, or obstruct the transportation of 
 armies, or to prosecute those who violated the laws of the United States 
 and of Tennessee against treason. The Union men of East Tennessee, 
 anxious to be neutral in the contest, were content to enjoy their own opin- 
 ions and to allow the utmost latitude of opinion and action to those who 
 differed from them. Had the same toleration prevailed in other parts of 
 the state, we have no doubt that a majority of our people would have voted 
 to remain in the Union. But, if this view is erroneous, we have the same 
 (and, as we think, a much better) right to remain in the Government of 
 the United States than the other divisions of Tennessee have to secede 
 from it. 
 
 We prefer to remain attached to the government of our fathers. The 
 Constitution of the United States has done us no wrong. The Congress of 
 the United States has passed no law to oppress us. The President of the 
 United States has made no threat against the law-abiding people of Ten- 
 nessee. Under the Government of the United States, we have enjoyed as 
 a nation more of civil and religious freedom than any other people under 
 the whole heaven. We believe there is no cause for rebellion or secession 
 on the part of the people of Tennessee. None was assigned by the legis- 
 lature in their miscalled Declaration of Independence. No adequate cause 
 can be assigned The select committee of that body asserted a gross and 
 inexcusable falsehood in their address to the people of East Tennessee, 
 when they declared that the Government of the United States had made 
 war upon them. The secession cause has thus far been sustained by de- 
 ception and falsehood : by falsehoods as to the action of congress, by false 
 dispatches as to battles that were never fought and victories that were 
 never won ; by false accounts as to the purposes of the President ; by false 
 representations as to the views of Union men ; and by false pretenses as 
 to the facility with which the secession troops would take possession of the 
 capitol and capture the highest officers of the government. 
 
Appendix. 567 
 
 The cause of secession or rebellion has no charm for us, and its progress 
 has been marked by the most alarming and dangerous attacks upon the 
 public liberty. In other states, as well as our own, its whole course 
 threatens to annihilate the last vestige of freedom. While peace and pros- 
 perity have blessed us in the Government of the United States, the follow- 
 ing may be enumerated as the fruits of secession : 
 
 It was urged forward by members of congress who were sworn to sup- 
 port the Constitution of the United States and were themselves supported 
 by the government. 
 
 It was effected without consultation with all the states interested in the 
 slavery question, and without exhausting peaceable remedies. 
 
 It has plunged the country into civil war, paralyzed our commerce, inter- 
 fered with the whole trade and business of the country, lessened the value 
 of property, destroyed many of the pursuits of life, and bids fair to involve 
 the whole nation in irretrievable bankruptcy and ruin. 
 
 It has changed the entire relations of states, and adopted constitutions 
 without submitting them to a vote of the people, and where such a vote 
 has been authorized, it has been upon the condition prescribed by Senator 
 Mason, of Virginia, that those who voted the Union ticket " must leave 
 
 THE STATE." 
 
 It has advocated a constitutional monarchy, a king and a dictator, and is 
 through the Richmond press at this moment, recommending to the con- 
 vention in Virginia a restriction of the right of suffrage, and " in severing 
 connection with the Yankees, to abolish every vestige of resemblance to the in- 
 stitutions of that detested race." 
 
 It has formed military leagues, passed military bills and opened the door 
 for oppressive taxation without consulting the people, and then in mockery 
 of a free election has required them by their votes to sanction their usurpa- 
 tions under the penalties of moral proscription or at the point of the 
 bayonet. 
 
 It has offered a premium for crime in directing the discharge of volun- 
 teers from criminal prosecutions and in recommending the judges not to 
 hold their courts. 
 
 It has stained our statute book with the repudiation of Northern debts, 
 and has greatly violated the constitution by attempting through its unlaw- 
 fnl extension to destroy the right of suffrage. 
 
 It has called upon the people in the State of Georgia, and may soon re- 
 quire the people of Tennessee, to contribute all their surplus cotton, corn, 
 wheat, bacon, beef, etc., to the support of pretended governments alike 
 destitute of money and credit. 
 
 It has attempted to destroy the accountability of public servants to the 
 people by secret legislation, and has set the obligation of an oath at 
 defiance. 
 
 It has passed laws declaring it treason to say or do anything in favor of 
 the Government of the United States, or against the Confederate States, and 
 such a law is now before, and we apprehend will soon be passed by, the 
 legislature of Tennessee. 
 
568 Appendix. 
 
 It has attempted to destroy, and, we fear soon will, utterly prostrate the 
 freedom of speech and of the press. 
 
 It has involved the Southern States in a war, whose success is hopeless, 
 and which must ultimately lead to the ruin of the people. 
 
 Its bigoted, overbearing and intolerant spirit has already subjected the 
 people of East Tennessee to many petty grievances ; our people have been 
 insulted ; our flags have been fired upon and torn down ; our houses have 
 been rudely entered ; our families subjected to insult ; our peaceable meet- 
 ings interrupted ; our women and children shot at by a merciless soldiery ; 
 our towns pillaged, our citizens robbed, and some of them assassinated and 
 murdered. 
 
 No efi'ort has been spared to deter the Union men of East Tennessee from 
 the expression of their free thoughts. The penalties of treason have been 
 threatened against them, and murder and assassination have been openly 
 encouraged by leading secession journals. As secession has thus been 
 overbearing and intolerant while in the minority in East Tennessee, noth- 
 ing better can be expected of the pretended majority, than wild, uncon- 
 stitutional and oppressive legislation ; an utter contempt and disregard of 
 law ; a determination to force every Union man in the state to swear to the 
 support of a constitution he abhors, to yield his money and property to aid 
 a cause he detests and to become the object of scorn and derision as well 
 as the victim of intolerable and relentless oppression. 
 
 In view of these considerations, and of the fact that the people of East 
 Tennessee have declared their fidelity to the Union, by a majority of 
 about 20,000 votes, therefore we do resolve and declare : 
 
 EESOLUTIONS. 
 
 First. That we do earnestly desire the restoration of peace to our whole 
 country, and most especially that our own section of the State of Tennes- 
 see should not be involved in civil war. 
 
 Second. That the action of our state legislature in passing the so-called 
 " Declaration of Independence," and in forming the " Military League " with 
 the Confederate States, and in adopting other acts looking to a separation 
 of the State of Tennessee from the Government of the United States, is un- 
 constitutional and illegal, and, therefore, not binding upon us as loyal 
 citizens. 
 
 Third. That in order to avert a conflict with our brethren in other parts 
 of the state, and desiring that every constitutional means shall be resorted 
 to for the preservation of peace, we do, therefore, constitute and appoint 
 O. P. Temple, of Knox, John Netherland, of Hawkins, and James P. Mc- 
 Dowell, of Greene, commissioners, whose duty it shall be to prepare a 
 memorial and cause the same to be presented to the General Assembly of 
 Tennessee, now in session, asking its consent that the counties composing 
 East Tennessee, and such counties in Middle Tennessee as desire to co- 
 operate with them, may form and erect a separate state. 
 
 Fourth. Desiring, in good faith, that the general assembly will grant this 
 our reasonable request, and still claiming the right to determine our own 
 
Appendix. 569 
 
 destiny, we do further resolve that an election be held in all the counties 
 of East Tennessee, and in such other counties in Middle Tennessee, adjacent 
 thereto, as may desire to co-operate with us, for the choice of delegates to 
 represent them in a general convention to be held in the town of Kingston, 
 at such time as the president of this convention, or in case of his absence 
 or inability, any one of the vice-presidents, or, in like case with them, the 
 secretary of this convention may designate; and the officer so designating 
 the day for the assembling of said convention, shall also fix the time 
 for holding the election herein provided for, and give reasonable notice 
 thereof. 
 
 Fifth. In order to carry out the foregoing resolution, the sheriffs of the 
 different counties are hereby requested to open and hold said election, or 
 cause the same to be so held, in the usual manner and at the usual places 
 of voting, as prescribed by law ; and in the event the sheriff of any county 
 should fail or refuse to open and hold said election, or cause the same to be 
 done, the coroner of such county is requested to do so ; and should such 
 coroner fail or refuse, then any constable of such county is hereby author- 
 ized to open and hold said election, or cause the same to be done. And if 
 in any county none of the above-named ofiicers will hold said election, 
 then any justice of the peace or freeholder in such county is authorized to 
 hold the same or cause it to be done. The officer or other person holding 
 said election shall certify the result to the president of this convention, or 
 to such officer as may have directed the same to be holden, at as early a 
 day thereafter as practicable, and the officer to whom said returns may be 
 made shall open and compare the polls and issue certificates to the dele- 
 gates elected. 
 
 Sixth. That in said convention the several counties shall be represented 
 as follows : The county of Knox shall elect three delegates ; the counties 
 of Washington, Greene and Jefferson, two delegates each, and the remain- 
 ing counties shall each elect one delegate 
 
 THE MEMORIAL 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE LEGISLATURE BY THE COMMITTEE ON BEHALF OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 To the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee : 
 
 The undersigned, memorialists, on behalf of the people of East Tennes- 
 see, beg leave respectfully to show, that at a convention of delegates, 
 holden at Greeneville on the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th days of June, in- 
 stant, in which was represented every county of East Tennessee, except 
 the county of Rhea, it was resolved: 
 
 "First. That we do earnestly desire the restoration of peace to our whole 
 country, and most especially that our own section of the State of Tennes- 
 see shall not be involved in civil war. 
 
 " Second. That the action of the state legislature in passing the so-called 
 ' Declaration of Independence,' and in forming the ' Military League ' with 
 the Confederate States, and in adopting other acts looking to a separation 
 
570 Appendix. 
 
 of Tennessee from the Government of the United States, is unconstitu- 
 tional and illegal, and therefore not binding upon us as loyal citizens. 
 
 " Third. And it was further resolved, ' that in order to avert a conflict 
 with our brethren in other parts of the state, and desiring that every con- 
 stitutional means shall be resorted to for the preservation of peace, we do, 
 therefore, constitute and appoint O. P. Temple, of Knox, John Netherland, 
 of Hawkins, and James P. McDowell, of Greene, commissioners, whose 
 duty it shall be to prepare a memorial and cause the same to be presented 
 to the General Assembly of Tennessee, now in session, asking its consent 
 that the counties composing East Tennessee, and such other counties in 
 Middle Tennessee as desire to co-operate with them, may form and erect a 
 separate state. 
 
 The idea of a separate political existence is not a recent one, but it is not 
 deemed necessary here to restate the geographical, social, economical and 
 industrial reasons which have often been urged in support of it. The rea- 
 sons which operated upon the convention and seemed to them conclusive 
 was the action of the two sections, respectively, at the election held on the 
 8th instant to determine the future national relations of the state. In that 
 election, the people of East Tennessee, by a majority of nearly twenty 
 thousand votes, decided to adhere to the Federal Union, established prior 
 to the American Revolution, and to which Tennessee was admitted in the 
 year 1796 ; while the rest of the state is reported to have decided, by a 
 majority approaching even more nearly to unanimity, to leave the Federal 
 Union and to join the body politic recently formed under the name of the 
 Confederate States of America. The same diversity of sentiment was ex- 
 hibited, but less distinctly, at the election of the 9th of February last, 
 when the people of East Tennessee decided by a heavy majority against 
 holding a convention to discuss and determine our Federal relations, over- 
 coming by nearly fourteen thousand the majority in the rest of the state in 
 favor of such a convention. 
 
 This hopeless and irreconcilable difference of opinion and purpose leaves 
 no alternative but the separation of the two sections of the state ; for it is 
 not to be presumed that either would for a moment think of subjugating 
 the other or of coercing it into a political condition repugnant alike to its 
 interest and to its honor. Certainly the people of East Tennessee enter- 
 tain no such purpose toward the rest of the state. And the avowals of 
 their Western brethren, in connection with their recent political action, 
 have been too numerous and explicit to leave us in any doubt as to their 
 views. 
 
 It remains, therefore, that measures be adopted to effect a separation, 
 amicably, honorably, and magnanimously, by a settlement of boundaries, 
 so as to divide East Tennessee, and any contiguous counties or districts 
 which may desire to adhere to her, from the rest of the state, and by a fair, 
 just and equitable division of the public property and the common liabili- 
 ties. It has occurred to the undersigned, as the best method of accom- 
 plishing this most desirable end, that your body should take immediate 
 action in the premises, by giving a formal assent to the proposed separa- 
 tion, pursuant to the provisions of section 3, article 4, of the Constitution 
 
Appendix. 571 
 
 of the United States, and by convoking a convention representing the 
 sovereign power of the people of the respective divisions of Tennessee, 
 ■with plenary authority to so amend the constitution of the state as to carry 
 into eflfect the change contemplated. 
 
 With a view to such action, or to action leading to the same result, the 
 undersigned ask permission to confer with your body, either in general 
 session or through a committee appointed for this purpose, so as to con- 
 sider and determine the details more satisfactorily than could otherwise be 
 done. 
 
 Awaiting a response to this memorial, the undersigned beg to add assur- 
 ances of every endeavor on their part not only to preserve the peaceful 
 relations heretofore subsisting between the people in the two sections of 
 the state, but to remove, as far as possible, all causes of disturbance in the 
 future, so that each may be left free to follow its chosen path of prosperity 
 and honor, unembarrassed by any collision with the other. 
 
 0. P. Temple, 
 John Netheeland, 
 Jas. p. McDowell." 
 
572 Appendix. 
 
 LIST OF DELEGATES TO THE GREENEVILLE CONVENTION, 
 
 Anderson county. L. C. Houk. 
 
 Bledsoe. J. G. Spears. 
 
 Blount. W. T. Dowdell, H. J. Henry, J. R. Frow, Solomon Farmer, La- 
 vater Wear, A. Kirkpatrick, F. M. Cruze. 
 
 Bradley. J. G. Brown, R. M. Edwards. 
 
 Campbell. J. A. Cooper. 
 
 Carter. A. Tipton, Wm. Marsh, L. Slagel, S. P. Hilton, L. Carter, W. B. 
 Carter, H. Slagel, J. Emmet, D. Stover, J. Hendrickson, J. G. Lewis, W. 
 J. Crutcher, J. Perry, S. P. Angel, V. Singletary, J, L. Bradley, B. M. G. 
 O'Brien, C. P. Toncray, Robert Williams, John M. Smith, C. Wilcox, H. C. 
 Smith. 
 
 Cocke. J. W. Clarke, P. Easterly, G. L. Porter, W. Nicely, J. Bible, Wm. 
 Wood, W. Graham, W. Hornett, S. H. Inman, W. A. Campbell. 
 
 Claiborne. E. E. Jones, V. Myers, J. J. Bunch, J. J. Sewell, H. Sewell, F. 
 Jones. 
 
 Cumberland. R. K. Byrd (alternate). 
 
 Grainger. H. G. Lea, D. C. Senter, E. L. Tate, James James, John 
 Brooks. 
 
 Greene. J. P. McDowell, W. H. Crawford, T. D. Arnold, Charles Gass, Peter 
 Harmon, J. P. Holtsinger, J. B. Dodson, R. A. Crawford, James Jones, 
 S. H. Baxter, David Rush, Israel Woolsey, A. W. Walker, J. Easterly, B. 
 Earnest, N. Earnest, B. B. Sherfie, John Love, J. Myers, Geo. Kinney, Wm. 
 Jones, Anthony Moore, J. Brannon, J. Kerbaugh, C. Harden, Jacob Bible, 
 B. McDaniel, A. W. Howard, C. M. Vestal, J. G. Reeves, Wm. Cavender, 
 D. G. Vance, Thos. Davis, E. Davis, J. W. Harold, John Jones, Solomon 
 Good, Sam. McGaughey, Hon. D. T. Patterson, John Maloney, Charles 
 Johnson, Alexander A. Lane, Abe Hammond, W. D. Culver, Major J. 
 Britton, J. Britton, Jr., Geo. F. Gillespie, Robt. Johnson, H. B. Boker, G. 
 Glick, Dr. Wm. West, James A. Galbreath, W. R. Brown, W. D. 
 McClelland. 
 
 Hawkins. John Netherland, John Blevins, W. C. Kyle, A. A. Kyle, C. 
 W. Hall. James White, C. J. McKinney, H. Mitchell, A. P. Caldwell, A. B. 
 Keel, Thos. Benny. 
 
 Hancock. Chas. L. Barton. 
 
 Johnson. S. E. Northington, J. H. Norris, H. C. Northington, J. W. M. 
 Grayson, L. Venable, J. H. Vaught, Alex. Baker, A. D. Smith, John Mur- 
 phy, A. G. Shown, H. P. Murphy, Kemp Murphy, R. R. Butler, Samuel 
 Howard, J. F. Norris. 
 
 Jefferson. J. L. Coile, Rev. J. R. Birchfield, N. B. Swann, M. Thornburgh, 
 John Thornhill, R. D. Rankin, N. Newman, E. A. Sawyers, Ed. West, Wm. 
 Harris, John Alderson, L. McDaniel, W. Kirkpatrick, C. K. Scruggs, J. P. 
 Swann, Dr. Samuel Anderson, Wm. Jones, Wm. Dick, Dr. Cawood, J. Mon- 
 roe Meek, Wiley Foust, Dr. A. A. Caldwell, L. F. Leeper, John Tate. 
 
Appendix. 573 
 
 Knox. Henry Roberts, H. E. Clapp, A. Thompson, Dr. R. Snead, T. A. 
 Smith, A. C. Callen, D. W. Parker, A. Davis, P. A. Ruble, J. D. French, 
 Sam. McCammon, J. F. Bunker, Andrew Knott, John Williams, Horace 
 Manyard, John Baxter, C. F. Trigg, John Smith, Jas. Maxwell, John M. 
 Fleming, A. G. Jackson, Dr. W. A. Rodgers, W. G. Brownlow, John Devers, 
 Louis Letsinger, O. P. Temple, A. P. Rambo. 
 
 Monroe. Dr. B. Franklin, "Wm. Heiskell. 
 
 Morgan. E. Langley, T. H. Davis, J. M. Melton, J. Stonecipher, Rev. W. 
 R. Jackson, S. C. Honeycutt. 
 
 Hamilton. D. C. Trewhitt, S. McCaleb, Wm. Clift. 
 
 Marion. W. G. Brownlow (alternate). 
 
 McMinn. John McGaughey, A. C. Derrick, G. W. Bridges, M. D. An- 
 derson. 
 
 Meigs. T. J. Matthews. 
 
 Polk. W. M. Biggs, W. J. Copeland. 
 
 Rhea. (Not represented.) 
 
 Roane. J. T. Shelley, R. K. Byrd, W. B. Staley, T. J. Tipton, F. M. Wylie, 
 M. Rose, J. W. Bowman, W. M. Alexander, D. F. Harrison, J. J. West, 
 George Littleton, J. H. Johnston, W. J. Hornsby, F. Young. J. Atkisson, 
 T. J. Mason, Jo. Anderson, J. Wyatt, J. S. Hagler, L. M. Wester. 
 
 Scott. S. C. Honeycutt (alternate). 
 
 Sevier. John Caldwell, J. Gate, H. Mount, J. H. Caldwell, Jno. Douglas, 
 J. K. Franklin, L. D. Alexander, E. Hodges, D. McCrosky, Sam. Pickens, 
 J. T. Havis, R. H. Hodsden, D. M. Ray, J. C. Murphy, Wilson Duggan, C. 
 Inman, Rev. James Cummings, F. L. Emmert. 
 
 Sullivan. J. Shewalter, J. Lynn, G. R. Netherland, J. Hughes, Dr. R. L. 
 Stanford. 
 
 Washington. C. A. Fames, J. F. Mahoney, J. Slack, S. K. N. Patton, C. 
 Bashor, A. Kibbler, E. H. West, W. H. Maxwell, A. J. Brown, S. T. Logan, 
 Dr. W. Smith, J. A. Estes, Dr. R. H. Palmer, E. Keezel, Dr. R. B. McCall. 
 G. W. Nelson, E. S. Harvey, A. Hoss, Dr. J. W. Hartmann, J. Yerger, W, 
 Slemmons, W. M. Reese, A. B. Tadlock, J. W. Deaderick, G. W. Wilson, 
 J. Biddle, H. Pressnel, R. L. Gillespie, T. S. Gillespie, John Pennybaker, 
 R. M. McKee, D. M. McFall, E. W. Oughbrough, J. W. Ellis, W. Glaze, S. 
 West, M. H. Clark, E. S. Matthews, D. Onk, T. A. R. Nelson, P. H. Grisham. 
 
 Union. J. W. Thornburgh, Isaac Bayless, M. V. Nash. 
 
 Fentress. E. B. Langley (alternate). 
 
INDEX. 
 
 A. 
 
 Abolitionism, 246 ; petitions, 280. 
 Abolitionists, 90, 132, 160, 164, 167, 
 
 215, 246; Garrisonian described, 
 
 247-8, 252-3, 257-8, 262-4, 268, 
 
 270-2, 283, 290, 294, 300, 304, 
 
 307, 311, 324, 327, 552. 
 Abolition party, 168-9, 177, 246, 273, 
 
 280-1,326,551. 
 Abraham, Old, 4, 19. 
 Academy, Martin, chartered, 42. 
 Adair, John, 21. 
 Adams, Charles Francis, 297. 
 Adams, John Quincy, 59. 
 Adams, Governor (S. C), 141, 316. 
 African slave trade, 288, 315-16. 
 Alabama, 46, 288, 321, 443, 554-6, 561, 
 
 563. 
 Alamance, Battle of, 11, 16. 
 Alexander, Judge E., 536. 
 Alexander, Prof. Eben, 76. 
 Alexander, General, 510. 
 Allen, 114. 
 
 Allen, Colonel Ethan, 30. 
 Amendments to the constitution, 
 
 297, 318. 
 Anderson, Rev. Dr. Isaac, note, 87-8. 
 Anderson, Judge Joseph, 51. 
 Anderson, Major Robert, 140, 142, 
 
 320-1, 372, 376, 432, 462. 
 Anderson, Judge Robert M., 87-8. 
 Anderson, Judge Samuel, 88. 
 Anderson. William E., 88. 
 Andrews, J. J., note, 400. 
 Andrews, Bishop James O., silenced, 
 
 101, 103-4. 
 Anti-slavery party, 247-8, 283, 300, 
 
 311. 
 Anti-slavery sentiment. 111, 251. 
 Anti-slavery societies, 85-6, 88, 92, 
 
 252 ; of New England, 253 ; of 
 
 New York, 253 ; American, 253. 
 Anthony, 297. 
 Appomattox, 482, 521. 
 Arizona, 285. 
 Arkansas, 169, 289, 555. 
 Arnell, Samuel M., 219. 
 Arnold, General Benedict, 30. 
 Arnold, Lieutenant-Colonel Reuben, 
 
 397, 410. 
 
 Arnold, General Thomas D., 341-2, 
 349, 351-2, 361, 536, 559. 
 
 Armstrong, Hugh C, 112. 
 
 Armstrong, R. H., 182, 191. 
 
 Army, of the state, 210; of the Cum- 
 berland, 468, 472. 
 
 Arrests and imprisonments, 414-25, 
 429. 
 
 Asbury, Bishop Francis, 82, 97. 
 
 Ashville, 64. 
 
 Association, Watauga, three original 
 settlements, 5, 6; written con- 
 stitution, 7; Nolichucky settle- 
 ment joins, 8; law and order, 
 13 ; record in fighting for inde- 
 pendence, 17, 36, 82. 
 
 Atkins, Rev, D., 72. 
 
 Atlanta, 513, 518-20. 
 
 Axley, James, 95. 
 
 B. 
 
 Badger, George E., 283. 
 
 Bailey, James E., 216, 219, 230; de- 
 scribed, 242. 
 
 Baker, Caleb H., 182. 
 
 Baker, C. F., 341. 
 
 Baker, Senator Edward D., 297. 
 
 Baker, Lieutenant L. C, 504. 
 
 Baker, Dr. W. J., 111. 
 
 Bancroft, George, 11. 
 
 Banks, General Nathaniel P., 519. 
 
 Baptists, 60, 66, 104, 307. 
 
 Barnwell, R. W., 141. 
 
 Barrow, Washington, 210-11. 
 
 Barry, Hiram, note, 517. 
 
 Barton, R. M., 171. 
 
 Barton, Dr. William, 75. 
 
 Bate, Senator William B., 222. 
 
 Bates, Edward, 128, 359. 
 
 Battles — Alamance, 11 ; Campbell 
 Station, 487 ; Chattanooga, 491 ; 
 Chickamauga, 469; Fishing 
 Creek,446 ; Fort Donelson, 450-4 ; 
 Franklin, 481 ; Greeneville, 481 ; 
 Monterey, 238 ; Morristown,481 ; 
 Murfreesboro, 468; Peachtree, 
 222; Perry ville, 468; Point Pleas- 
 ant, 35; Salisbury, 481; Shiloh, 
 435, 453, 457, 465 ; Stone River, 
 461. 
 
 (575) 
 
576 
 
 Index. 
 
 Baxter, John, 148, 150, 152-3, 155-6, 
 159, 165, 171-3, 175, 181-2, 187, 
 191, 224, 341-2, 349, 351-2, 361, 
 363, 399, note, 400, 487, 536, 559. 
 
 Bayless, Isaac, 154. 
 
 Beard, Stephen, 419. 
 
 Beard, Welcome, 408. 
 
 Bean, John, Sr., 419. 
 
 Beauregard, General P. G. T., 320-1, 
 460. 
 
 Bell, John, 122-4, 128, 130-1, 160, 
 219-20, described, 230-1. 
 Speech in Knoxville, 232 ; speaks 
 there again, 234 ; interview, 235, 
 283, 294, 536, 539, 552, 562. 
 
 Benjamin, J. P., 118, 320, 388; his 
 order, 390-1; 2d order, 393-6; 
 401, 403. 
 
 Benjamin, Lieutenant Samuel N., 
 493. 
 
 Benton,' Thomas H., 253, 285. 
 
 Bill of rights, 43. 
 
 Black, Jeremiah, 142. 
 
 " Black Republican Party," 129, 160, 
 164, 312. 
 
 Blaine, James G., quoted, 255, 282-3, 
 298, note, 475. 
 
 Blair, General Frank P., 501, 511, 559. 
 
 Blair, Montgomery, 359. 
 
 Blevins, John, 353. 
 
 Blount, Willie, 112. 
 
 Blount, William, 51. 
 
 Blue Ridge, 10. 
 
 Bolinger, Isaac, 426. 
 
 Bonds of state, 210. 
 
 Boone, Daniel, 2, 10, 19, 71, 465. 
 
 Booth, Wilkes, note, 503. 
 
 Border slave states, 258, 289. 
 
 Boston, abolition meetings, 249 ; An- 
 ti-man Hunting League, 250, 267, 
 300, 514. 
 
 Bowling Green, 372, 378, 453, 454. 
 
 Boyd, James S., 182, 191. 
 
 Boyd, Colonel J. S. R., 386. 
 
 Boyd's Ferry, 508-10. 
 
 Brabson, Reese B., 163, 560. 
 
 Bragg, General Braxton, 453, 456, 458, 
 461; invades Kentucky, 468-9, 
 486, 488-9, 491, 507, 512. 
 
 Bradley County — names of persons 
 arrested — 419. 
 
 Bradford, James S., 415, 419. 
 
 Bradshaw, Richard, 112, 117. 
 
 Bramlette, Colonel Thomas E., 374. 
 
 Branner, John R., 388, 390, 401, 474. 
 
 Brearly, W. H., 495. 
 
 Breckenridge, John C, 126, 128, 201, 
 294, 374, 539, 541. 
 
 Bridge-burners hanged, 393, 418. 
 Bridge-burning in East Tennessee, 
 
 374; plan of, 375, 376-81; de- 
 scribed, 379 ; burned, 380, 384-7 ; 
 general alarm, 388. 
 
 Bridges, G. W., 361-7. 
 
 Brien, Judge John S., 122, 219-20, 
 228, 230, described, 240. 
 
 Bristol, 69. 
 
 Brookes, James A., 124. 
 
 Brooks, General Joseph, 510. 
 
 Brooks, Rev. Stephen, 43, 87. 
 
 Brown, A. J., 349, 351-2. 
 
 Brown, Mrs. Elizabeth, 522, 524. 
 
 Brown, John, 261-3, 552. 
 
 Brown, JohnT., 222, 224. 
 
 Brown, Dr. John G., 419. 
 
 Brown, George, 374, 396. 
 
 Brown, Neill S., 122, 219-20, 228-30; 
 described, 238. 
 
 Brown, Captain W. L., 415. 
 
 Brownlow, Colonel James P., note, 
 203. 
 
 Brownlow, Colonel John B., note, 
 110, 197. 
 
 Brownlow, William G., 91, 122, 148, 
 150. 158, 161, 164, 171, 173, 180, 
 182, 192, 234, 236, 341, 361, 384, 
 391 ; quoted, 397, 399, 536, 559. 
 
 Brownlow, Mrs. William G., 425, 517. 
 
 Bryant, W. C, 7. 
 
 Buchanan, James, 139-40 ; his 
 141-2-6, 183. 
 
 Buckner, General Simon B., 201, 
 272-3, 434, 450, 507-8. 
 
 Buell, General Don Carlos. 218, 256, 
 433, 434, 453-7, 460-2; follows 
 Bragg, 468. 
 
 Buford, Colonel, 30. 
 
 Bull Run, Battle of, 228, 367, 371. 
 
 Burch, John C, 414, 416, quoted, 419. 
 
 Burnett, David, 341. 
 
 Burnett, Dr. Swan M., 480. 
 
 Burns, 238, 248. 
 
 Burnside, General Ambrose E., 457, 
 471-5; hailed as a deliverer, 
 477-9, 481, 484, 486-97, 499-513, 
 515, 521-2. 
 
 Butler, R. R., 352, 361. 
 
 Byrd, Robert K., 368-9, 447. 
 
 C. 
 
 Cahaba, Alabama, 282. 
 
 Cahal, Terry H., 112. 
 
 Cairo, 482-3. 
 
 Caldwell, John, 87-8. 
 
 Calhoun, John C, 59, 231, 260, 276, 
 
 278 ; quoted, 385, 308, 311, 547. 
 California, 280, 282, 289-90. 
 Callender, J. H., 221, 228. 
 Calvin, John, 52. 
 Cameron, Simon, 128, 433-4. 
 
Index. 
 
 577 
 
 Gamp Dick Robinson, 370-7, 402, 433. 
 Campbell, Arthur, 22, 32, 34, 238. 
 Campbell, David, 9, 14. 
 Campbell, Douglas, quoted, 8, 14, 34, 
 
 47. 
 Campbell, Colonel William, joins 
 
 King's Mountain expedition, 
 
 20-1 ; commands, 25-9, 32, 34 ; 
 
 influence of family, 38, 72, 238, 
 
 556. 
 Campbell. Governor Wm. B., 23, 219, 
 
 221, 227, 230; described, 238. 
 Campbell Station, fight, 489. 
 Canvass of 1860, 121 ; last speech, 
 
 195, 197-8. 
 Carpenter, Major D. A., note, 448. 
 Carroll, Wm. H., 394; annoyed, 
 
 395-7, 404, 407, 414, 417. 
 Carter, John, 6. 
 
 Carter, Colonel James E., note, 509. 
 Carter, J. P. T., 344, 368, 447. 
 Carter, General Samuel P., 372-6, 
 
 399, 410, 426, 438-9, 444, 462. 
 Carter, W. B., 112, 349, 352, 362, 368; 
 
 scheme to burn bridges, 370, 
 
 375-9, 436, 559. 
 Carter, Mrs. W. B., 425. 
 Carter, W. R., note, 203. 
 Carter's Valley, 5. 
 Castle Pincknev, 139-44. 
 Cate, A. M., 380. 
 €ate, Thomas L., 380, 419. 
 Cate, W. T., 380. 
 Catron, Justice John 219, 221, 233, 
 
 562. 
 Cavalier, 14, 54, 459. 
 Chandler, Zack., 299. 
 Charleston, 137, 312, 320. 
 Chase, Salmon P., 128, 360. 
 Chattanooga, 69, 456, 460-1, 469, 471 ; 
 
 486; 488-9; battle of, 491, 521. 
 Cheatham, Benjamin H., 222. 
 Cherokee, 4. 
 
 Chicago Platform 1860, 295. 
 Chickamauga, battle of, 461, 469, 487. 
 Chronicle, Major, 27, 30. 
 Churchwell, Wm. M., 180. 
 Cist, Harry M., note. 447. 
 Civilization of Covenanters, 7. 
 Civil War, cause, of., 273-4,554-9. 
 Clarke, General George Rogers, 31, 
 
 46. 
 Clav, Henry, 58, 88, 133, 175, 231, 
 
 "276,281,283,536,547,558. 
 Clayton, John M., 283. 
 Clements, Andrew J., 368. 
 Clements, Jessie, 124. " 
 
 Cleveland, Colonel, 24, 27-8, 32, 39. 
 Cleveland, Eli, 380. 
 Cleveland, Jessie F., 380. 
 
 Clift, D. B., 349, 352. 
 
 Clingman, A. A., 408. 
 
 Cobb, Howell, 139, 141. 
 
 Cobb, Robert L., 112. 
 
 Cocke, William, 51. 
 
 Coercion, 324. 
 
 Colfax, Schyler, 297. 
 
 Colleges, Blount, 42, 56 ; Center, 91 ; 
 Greeneville 42, 56, 65; Holly 
 Springs, 65; Kings, 65; Milli- 
 gan, 65; Princeton, 309; South- 
 western Theological, 88; Tuscu- 
 lum, 65; Washington, 42, 56; 
 Yale, 309. 
 
 Collamer, Jacob M., 128, 298. 
 
 Colorado, 285, 299. 
 
 Columbus, Kentucky 372, 378, 453. 
 
 Colyer, A. S., 219, 230, 239; de- 
 scribed, 241. 
 
 Commissioners, Watauga, 6; South 
 Carolina, 141 ; to memoralize 
 legislature, 353. 
 
 Compromise measures of 1850, 281. 
 
 Comstock, Colonel, 517. 
 
 Confederate Army, 203, 222; first 
 Tennessee regiment, 225, 370-1 ; 
 527,530,561. 
 
 Confederate authorities, 421-2, 429; 
 note, 431, 471. 
 
 Confederate leaders, 203, 552. 
 
 Confederate lines, 453, 457. 
 
 Confederates, 188, 203, 356, 372, 387, 
 401 ; fright of, 402, 409, 411, 416, 
 447-8, 455-6 ; noble soldiers, 483 ; 
 good citizens, 530-2, 545. 
 
 Confederacy, 314, 319, 343, 356-7, 
 455, 521, 545, 564. 
 
 Congress, 293, 370. 
 
 Conscription law, 413 ; enforced, 421, 
 469. 
 
 Constitution, first west of Allegha- 
 nies, 7, 83; of 1787, 84-5; of U. 
 S., 207, 212, 215, 246-63; obedi- 
 ence to, 264, 277-80, 552; of Ten- 
 nessee, 207, 210. 
 
 Convention, constitutional, 42, 82, 
 87; that of 1834, 111; Whig 
 national, 122; Mr. Bell nomi- 
 nated, 123; Democratic, 125; 
 divides, minority withdraws, 
 126; re-assembles in Baltimore, 
 126; Republican, 127, 170, 206- 
 210, 215-16, 224; Greeneville. 
 228-342; constitu tonal, 256 ; of 
 Tennessee, 275; Gubernatorial, 
 224-27; that of 1787, 288-9; 
 Knoxville's call for, 340. 
 
 Cooper, Henry, 122. 
 
 Cooper, General Joseph A., 362, 481. 
 
 Cooper, General Samuel, 388-7, 395. 
 
578 
 
 Index. 
 
 Corbett, Sergeant Boston, note, 504. 
 Corinth, 461. 
 
 Cornwallis, General, 19, 20, 26-7, 174, 
 Corwin, Thomas, 297, 300. 
 Court-martial, 394r-6 ; note, 400. 
 Covenanters, 5 ; ruling class, 7 ; 
 conduct schools, 8; came in 
 three streams, 10; settle Ken- 
 tucky and Middle Tennessee, 11 ; 
 definition, 15-23, 34; fostered 
 education, 41-54; Sabbath, 57, 
 78, 85, 308, 365, 459, 524, 555. 
 Craddock, Charles Egbert, 72, 75, 81. 
 Craig, John J., 341. 
 Crawford, R. A., 171, 177. 
 Crawford, Captain Wm., 379, 881. 
 Crawford, W. H., 58. 
 Crittenden compromise, 300. 
 Crittenden, George B., 201, 445. 
 Crittenden, John J., 124, 323. 
 Crittenden, Thomas L., 469, 486. 
 Crockett, David, 114, 498. 
 Cromwell, 268. 
 
 Cross, Captain Wm., 379, 381. 
 Crowder, W. H., 380. 
 Crozier, John H., 153, 156-7, 164, 
 
 180, 536, 542. 
 Cruger, Colonel, 26. 
 Crutchfield, Wm., 361. 
 Cullom, Wm., 283. 
 Cumberland Gap, 344, 371-2, 377, 
 
 444-5, 450, 456, 465-7, 486, 518. 
 Cumberland River, 445, 447, 465. 
 Cummins, Rev. Charles, 33-4. 
 Cummings, Colonel D. H., 180, 414, 
 
 441. 
 Cumniings, Rev. James, 384. 
 Currin, Hon. D. M., 417. 
 Curtis, George Ticknor, 251, 253. 
 Curtis, George William, 300. 
 Gushing, Caleb B., 126. 
 Cutting, Major William, note, 502. 
 
 D. 
 
 Dakota, 299. 
 
 Dana, Charles A., 500, 502, 505. 
 
 Davidson County, note, 243. 
 
 Davis, Mrs. Jefferson, 538. 
 
 Davis, Jeff'erson, 118, 187, 226, 238, 
 311, 320, 323, 326, 343, 389, 390, 
 397-8; letter to, 407, 409; clem- 
 ency of, 413, 416-17, 420, 422, 
 488, 538, 555. 
 
 Dawes, Charles, note, 508. 
 
 Dayton, 128. 
 
 Deadrick, James W., 171, 352, 355, 
 363. 
 
 Deaton, Spencer, 426. 
 
 Deckard, rifle, 28. 
 
 Delaware, 326. 
 
 Democratic leaders, 242. 
 Democratic party, 121 ; demands of 
 
 anti-Douglas men, 126, 280-1, 
 
 326, 537-42, 557, 559-60. 
 De Peyster, Major, 29. 
 Devens, Charles, 249. 
 Dickinson, Perez, 234. 
 District of Columbia, 290. 
 Dixon, Archibald, 282. 
 Dixon, Senator, 297. 
 Doak, Samuel, 21 ; preaches to army, 
 
 23-4, 42, note, 56, 91. 
 Donelson, Major Andrew Jackson, 
 
 note, 218. 
 Doolittle, 124. 
 Doughty, Colonel James A., 499, 
 
 note, 500, 501. 
 Douglas, S. A., 118, 125-8, 276, 282-3; 
 
 Lincoln debates, 291, 318-9, 539. 
 Draper, 20, 22-3, 25-6 ; quoted, 32-3, 
 
 35-6, 39. 
 Dred Scott decision, 126. 
 Duggan, 416. 
 
 Dunmore, Governor, 3, 34, 36. 
 Dupre, Colonel Louis A. J., 414. 
 
 E. 
 
 Early settlers, 2 ; adopted written 
 constitution, 6 ; preserve order, 
 7 ; God-fearing, 7 ; Covenanters, 
 8 ; from Pennsylvania, 9 ; Pres- 
 byterians, 10; both Virginians 
 and Carolinians, 11 ; less than 
 two per cent made their mark, 
 12; Revolutionary War, 16; rec- 
 ord in war, 17 ; described, 31-3 ; 
 characteristics, 51 ; women, 55 ; 
 religious controversies, 59, 71. 
 
 East, E. H., 230, 239; described, 
 242. 
 
 East Tennesseans, 466, 468-9, 482, 
 484-5. 
 
 East Tennessee troops, 48, 481. 
 
 East Tennessee, 61 ; described, 62 ; 
 mountain region, 63 ; valley, 68, 
 70 ; errors corrected, 72, 80 ; a 
 serious people, 81 ; Manumis- 
 sion Society of, 85; anti-slavery 
 sentiments, 88, 160-3, 166, 170 ; 
 result in February election, 175; 
 vote by counties, note, 178, 188; 
 Union majority in June, vote 
 of counties, note, 199, 202-3; 
 soldiers of, 204, 217, 220, 222, 
 228, 326, 343, 348, 350; new 
 state, 351, 354, 356-60, 364, 371, 
 388; general alarm, 389; Ben- 
 jamin's order, 402, 408; Con- 
 federate citizens of, 412, 416, 423, 
 426; number of soldiers from. 
 
Index. 
 
 579 
 
 428, 432, 436-7 ; relief of, 438-42 
 expedition into, 443 ; force re 
 quired, 444; troops, 447, 453-5 
 importance of, 455, 457-8, 466, 
 469 ; women of, 470, 473, 475-7 
 482, 484, 487; four armies in 
 489 ; pivotal point, 490, 494, 498 
 500-1,411, 514-5; country hotel 
 525, 527 ; improvement of, 529 
 535 ; vote of in 1860, 539, 541 
 Union party of, 542 ; farming 
 class, 543; reasons for being 
 loval, 546, 549, 554-5 ; people of, 
 556-64. 
 
 East Tennessee, people of, 343. 
 
 East Tennessee, valley of, 519. 
 
 Education, universal, 44 ; Southern 
 colonies in reference to, 45 ; pub- 
 lic lands for, 46; Morrill and 
 Hatch acts, 47, 49 ; of mountain 
 people, 63, 73-9, 76, 78, 309, 
 526-7, 530. 
 
 Edney, Leven, 98. 
 
 Edwards, Jonathan, 82, 307. 
 
 Elections, 208-9. 
 
 Ellis, Daniel, 386, 426. 
 
 Ellis, Dr. J. H., 383. 
 
 Emancipation, 85; names of mem- 
 bers of first annual convention, 
 86 ; first paper, 91 ; Lundy's 
 paper, 93; societies 96, 106; 
 legislature forbids, 107; legisla- 
 tion on, 109-12 ; proceeding of 
 convention as to, 113-4, 119, 246, 
 251, 254-7; gradual, 258, 295, 
 548, 550. 
 
 Embree, Elihu, 91-4. 
 
 Embree, Elijah, 92. 
 
 Emigrant Aid Societies, 169. 
 
 Emory, Rev. Isaac, note, 63. 
 
 Enslavement, voluntary, 108. 
 
 Episcopalians, 307. 
 
 Establish church, 14. 
 
 Ethridge, Emerson, 283. 
 
 Everett, Edward, 123, 131, 514. 
 
 Ewing, Andrew, 219-20, 242. 
 
 Ewing, Edwin H., 219-20, 230, 238. 
 
 Expedition into East Tennessee, 
 375-8. 
 
 Exiles in Kentucky— gloom, 464, 
 467, 469, 470 ; return of, rejoic- 
 ing, 476, 481-2, 484-5, 533. 
 
 Expansion, 315. 
 
 Farragut, Admiral David Glascoe, 
 
 note, 489, 498. 
 Federal Army, 203, 217, 222, 365, 
 
 371, 386, 399, 400, 410, 423, 426, 
 
 428, 449, 455, 465, 468-71, 474-5, 
 
 483, 494, 498, 528. 
 Federal government, 357. 
 Federal party, 537. 
 Ferguson, Colonel, 19 ; insolent 
 
 message, 20, 23; on King's 
 
 Mountain, 26-29. 
 Silver whistle, 29 ; killed, 29, 556. 
 Ferrera, General Edward, 493. 
 Fessenden, Wm. P., 298. 
 *' Fifth Monarchy men," 268. 
 Fillmore, 228. 
 Fishing Creek, 445; battle of, 446; 
 
 forces engaged, 447, 449, 454. 
 Fleming, John M., 122, 147, 149, 
 
 153-4, 156-9, 165, 175, 181, 187, 
 
 191-2, 224, 234,342,346, 352,361, 
 
 363, 404, 559. 
 Florida, 289. 
 Floyd, 144, 185. 
 
 Floyd, John B., 139, 141-2, 450, 452. 
 Fogg, Godfrey M., 114. 
 Foote, Rear Admiral, 449. - — 
 
 Foote, Henry S., 131, 188, 219, 221, 
 
 242. 
 Forrest, Napoleon B., 222, 451, 481. 
 Forsythe, John, 317. 
 Fort Donelson, 218, 450-1; surren- 
 der, 454. 
 Fort Henry, 449. 
 Fort Moultrie, 139. 
 Fort Sanders, 491-3, 498. 
 Fort Sumter, 139, 320, 325. 
 Foster, Ephraim H., 237. 
 Foster, Horace, 522. 
 Foster, Captain John G., 140, 144, 
 
 512-13, 515, 517. 
 Foster, Colonel John W., 473-5 ; let- 
 ter of, 478. 
 Foster, Senator, 297. 
 FrankUn, B. F., 381. 
 Franklin, battle of, 481, note, 513. 
 Franklin, State of, 82, 365. 
 Frazer, General J. W., 487. 
 Franco-Prussian War, 459. 
 Free negroes, 83, 118, 257. 
 Free states, 257, 260, 263, 266, 285, 
 
 293, 300, 327. 
 Free-soil partv, 168, 246, 281, 283, 
 
 298, 327, 552. 
 Fremont, John C, 284. 
 French Broad River, 498, 500, 505-6 ; 
 
 mouth of, 507-11, 518. 
 Fry, Captain David, 379, 384, 399, 
 
 400. 
 Fry, Henry, 384, 393, 409. 
 Fry, Colonel Speed S., 446. 
 Fugitive slaves, 265, 318. 
 Fugitive Slave law, 249, 250; ten 
 
'580 
 
 Index. 
 
 states nullify, 260-1, 265, 269, 
 280, 282 ; of 1783, 288, 290 ; non- 
 execution of, 293, 317, 327, 331, 
 547. 
 
 G. 
 
 Gaines, General Edmund P., 498. 
 
 Gales & Seaton, 538. 
 
 Gamble, Elijah, 381, 383. 
 
 Gardner, Colonel, 140. 
 
 Garrett, Rev. Wm., 95-6. 
 
 Garrison, William Lloyd, 94, 246, 
 252, 873. 
 
 Gates, General, 25. 
 
 Gaut, John C, 536. 
 
 Gentry, Meredith P., 219, 221, 230, 
 237. 
 
 Georgia overrun by British, 19, 44, 
 46, 71, 251, 288, 443, 554-6, 561, 
 563. 
 
 Gettysburg, 494. 
 
 Graham, Major, 24, 27, 32. 
 
 Grainger, General Gordon, 511-12, 
 515, note, 517. 
 
 Grant, William, 407. 
 
 Grant, U. S., 356, 383, 429, 449-51, 
 457-61, 469, 488, 491, 494, 500, 
 note, 503, 511-13, 515-21. 
 
 Graves, Rev. W. C, note, 97, 100. 
 
 Gray Friers Church, covenant, 23. 
 
 Gray, Dr. W. C, 74-6. 
 
 Greeley, Horace, 93, note, 94, 300, 
 323. 
 
 Green, General, 30. 
 
 Green, James, 299. 
 
 Green, James L., 112. 
 
 Granville, 69, 343, 359, 365, 384, 393 ; 
 battle of, 481. 
 
 Greeneville convention, 228 ; assem- 
 bles, 343; names of business 
 committee, 344; declaration of 
 grievance, 345; published pro- 
 ceedings and original minutes, 
 346; Nelson's resolutions, 347- 
 52; report of committee, 349; 
 Temple's substitute, 350; de- 
 bate, 350; resolutions adopted, 
 353; Federal aid, 355; objects 
 of substitute, 359; character of 
 members, 361 ; secret executive 
 committee, 363-4; re-assembles 
 1864, 365, 422. 
 
 Greeneville — Tusculum College, 65. 
 
 Grimes. Senator, 297. 
 
 Grundy, Felix, 237. 
 
 Gubernatorial convention, 224, 227. 
 
 Guides, 421, 426, 466. 
 
 Guthrie, James, 435. 
 
 Gwin, Wm., 297. 
 
 H. 
 
 Habeas corpus, 393-4. 
 
 Hale, John P., 281-4. 
 
 Halleck, General, 449-50, 453, 460- 
 61, 486. 
 
 Hambright, Colonel, 24, 27, 32. 
 
 Hambright, Benjamin, 407. 
 
 Hambright, G. R., 408. 
 
 Hamilton, Alexander, 276. 
 
 Hamilton County, 389, 403. 
 
 Hamlin, Hannibal, 302. 
 
 Hammond, Senator James H., 
 quoted, 259, 312, 314. 
 
 Hampton, Wade, 137. 
 
 Hancock, General W. S., 521. 
 
 Hardee, General W. J., 450. 
 
 Harding, Francis A., silenced, 101. 
 
 Harlan, Senator, 297. 
 
 Harmon, Jacob, 384; hanged, 399, 
 409. 
 
 Harmon, Thomas, 384, 399, 409. 
 
 " Harriet Lane," 145, 322. 
 
 Harris, Miss Clara W., 503-4. 
 
 Harris, Senator Ira, note, 502. 
 
 Harris, Isbam G., message of, 167-9 ; 
 179, 191, 205-9, 213, 216, 221, 
 240-3, 376, 389, 401, 559. 
 
 Harris, Colonel Wm. Hamilton, note, 
 502, 504. 
 
 Harrison, Benjamin, note, 475. 
 
 Harrison, N. H., 59, 230. 
 
 Harrison, Wesley, 96. 
 
 Hartford, first written constitu- 
 tion, 7. 
 
 Harvey, Charles M., note, 251. 
 
 Haskell, Wm. T., 237. 
 
 Hatton, Robert, 219, 230 ; described, 
 240. 
 
 Havis, S. T., 349. 
 
 Hawkins, Colonel Isaac, note, 203. 
 
 Hawn, A. C, 384, 394. 
 
 Hayes, R. B., President, 165. 
 
 Hayne, Mr. Robert Y., 549. 
 
 Haynes, Landon C, 536, 542. 
 
 Haywood, Historian, 39. 
 
 Heiskell, Frederick, 368. 
 
 Heiskell, F. S., 182, 341. 
 
 Heiskell, J. B., 368, 412, 536, 542. 
 
 Heiskell, Wm., 342, 352, 355, 
 
 Henderson, W. A., 3. 
 
 Henry, Gustavus A., 122, 123, 188, 
 210-11, 219, 221; described, 238. 
 
 Henry, James, 508. 
 
 Henry, John F., 171. 
 
 Henry, Patrick, 54, 267. 
 
 Hensie, Jacob M., 384, 393, 409. 
 
 Herndon, , note, 127. 
 
 Higginson, T. W., 249. 
 
Index. 
 
 581 
 
 "Higher Law party," 248; higher 
 law, 261, 268-9, 326, 385. 
 
 Hill, Colonel, 24-5. 
 
 Hill, Isaac, 112. 
 
 Hillard, George S., 123. 
 
 Hilliard, Henry W., 211. 
 
 Hiawassee River, 512. 
 
 Hodge, Frank, 426. 
 
 Hodges, Edmund, 405, 409. 
 
 Hodges, Wm. E., 405. 
 
 Hodson, Dr. R. H., 404. 
 
 Holland, 45. 
 
 Holly Springs College, 65. 
 
 Holt, Joseph, 143-4. 
 
 Holston River, 505-6. 
 
 Holston settlement, uncertain as to 
 state line, 4 ; no protection from 
 either Virginia or North Caro- 
 lina, 5 ; educated men, 8, 425. 
 
 Holtsinger, J. P., 344. 
 
 Hood, General John B., note, 513. 
 
 Hooker, General Joseph, 469. 
 
 Home Guards, 186, 210. 
 
 Houk, L. C, 361. 
 
 House, John F., 131, 188, 216-17, 
 221, 230; described, 239. 
 
 Houston, Russell, 218, 220. 
 
 Houston, Sam., 218, 283, 498. 
 
 Howard, J., 91. 
 
 Howard, Wm. A., 297. 
 
 Howard, General O. 0., 469, 500-1, 
 511. 
 
 Howe, Dr. S. G., 249. 
 
 Ho wells, W. B., 538. 
 
 Hoxsie, J. B., 473-4. 
 
 Hoyl, Jno. B., 407. 
 
 Hoyl, T. L., 407. 
 
 Huguenots, 11, 459. 
 
 Humes, James W., 150, 156, 158, 165. 
 
 Humes, Rev. Thomas W., 346. 
 
 Humphreys, Judge West H., 148, 
 394, 396, 404. 
 
 Hunt, Governor Washington, 124. 
 
 Hunt, Samuel, 419. 
 
 Hunt, Theodore G., 283. 
 
 Hunt, Dr. William, 406, 409, 419. 
 
 Hunter, Senator R. M., 297. 
 
 Huntsman, Adam, 112, 114. 
 
 Hurst, Colonel Fielding, note, 203. 
 
 I. 
 
 Inaugural address of Lincoln, 318. 
 
 Incompatibility, 312. 
 
 Indians, Creek, 4; Cherokees, 4; 
 purchasing lands from, 5 ; dan- 
 ger from, 16, 21, 35 ; Chickasaws, 
 36-7, 82. 
 
 Ingles, 313, 
 
 Iverson, Alfred, quoted, 301, 311. 
 
 Jackson, Abner G., 363. 
 
 Jackson, Andrew, 3, 36-7, 51, 58, 59, 
 72,82, 91, 175, 184, 211, 218, 230, 
 276, 278, 330, 341, 367, 398, 498, 
 535-6, 538, 556-8, 562. 
 
 Jackson, Stonewall, General, 434. 
 
 Jarnagin, Spencer, 237, 536. 
 
 Jarvis, H. C, 369. 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, 48, 51, 53-4, 251, 
 269, 277-8, 289, 315. 
 
 Jobe, Dr. A., note, 39. 
 
 Johnson, Andrew, 163, 181, 183; 
 speech in Knoxville, 184; and 
 Nelson, 189, 191, 197, 201, 219, 
 242, 331, 342, 344, 361, 375, 426, 
 439-40, 442, 489, 536-9, 549, 560. 
 
 Johnson, Mrs. Andrew, 425. 
 
 Johnson, Herschel V., 126. 
 
 Johnson, Robert, 352. 
 
 Johnson, Samuel P., 405. 
 
 Johnston, A. S., 389, 434, 450. 
 
 Johnston, Cave, 219, 220, 242. 
 
 Johnston, Albert S., 374. 
 
 Jones, George W., 219, 221, 242. 
 
 Jones, James, 110. 
 
 Jones, James C, 237, 283. 
 
 Jones, General, 488. 
 
 Jones, Mrs. Merritt, note, 516. 
 
 Jones, W.T., 221. 
 
 Josselyn, Robert, 416. 
 
 K. 
 
 Kansas, troubles in, 169, 282, 285-6, 
 291, 298. 
 
 Kansas-Nebraska Bill, 285, 290-1. 
 
 Keelin, James, 382-3. 
 
 Keener, James D., 380. 
 
 Keitt, Lawrence M., 313. 
 
 Kelley, John, 112. 
 
 Kentucky, 11, 46; its share in win- 
 ning the west, 50, 71, 201-3, 251, 
 254, 277, 287, 309, 320, 326, 367-8, 
 372; legislature of, 373-4, 421, 
 424, 426, 434, 436, 440 ; troops of, 
 447, 450, 465, 467, 471-2, 554-63. 
 
 Key, D. M., 407, 410, 414, 542. 
 
 Kimbrough, Bradley, 112. 
 
 Kincaid, Dr. Joseph, 117. 
 
 Kings College, 65. 
 
 King's Mountain, battle of, 17-18; 
 origin of expedition, 19 ; plan 
 of, 20 ; number of men, 24 ; offi- 
 cers to regulate movement, 25 ; 
 Ferguson, 26; men selected for 
 forced march, 27 ; plan of attack, 
 28 ; description of, 28 ; Ferguson 
 attempts to escape, 29 ; surren- 
 der, 29; number of killed, 
 
582 
 
 Index. 
 
 30; importance of the victory, 
 30 ; soldiers described, 31-3, 557. 
 
 Knox County, 162, 171 ; vote in Feb- 
 ruary election, 177, 199; vote of, 
 243. 
 
 Knox, John, 52. 
 
 Knoxville, constitutional conven- 
 tion, 42, 69 ; emporium, 160, 180, 
 200, 316 ; call for Union conven- 
 tion, 340, 356, 371, 374-5, 394, 406, 
 409, 417, 421, 426, 433, 443, 449, 
 454, 456, 457-8; evacuation, 471- 
 472, 473-9; flag unfurled, 480, 
 485, 488 ; seige of, 489 ; assault, 
 490-5, 498-9, 501-2 ; never com- 
 pletely invested, 505-19, 522-53. 
 
 Kyle, W. C, 171, 354. 
 
 Lacy, Colonel, 24, 27, 32-3. 
 
 Lamar, G. B., 141. 
 
 Lands, public ceded to government, 
 45 ; N. Y., Va., N. C, Ga., pos- 
 session of, 46; act of congress 
 setting apart for school pur- 
 poses, 46; number of acres grant- 
 ed for education, 47 ; squandered 
 by congress, 48 ; territories pur- 
 chased, 49. 
 
 " Lane, The Harriet," 145, 322. 
 
 Lane, James, 427. 
 
 Lane, Joseph, 126. 
 
 Larnard, Captain D. H., note, 502. 
 
 La Vendee, 357. 
 
 Lea, Frank W., 414; quoted, 415. 
 
 Lea, Seth, 426. 
 
 Leadbetter,'General D., 386; hangs 
 Heusie and Fry, 393. 
 
 Lebow, Isaac, 523. 
 
 Lee, Ephraim, note, 87. 
 
 Lee, Henrv, 146. 
 
 Lee, Henry, 276. 
 
 Lee, Eobert E., quoted, 276-7, 489, 
 513, 518-19, 558. 
 
 Lee, T. E., note, 87. 
 
 Lee, William, 87. 
 
 Leggett, J. C, note, 89. 
 
 Legislature of Tennessee, 167 ; con- 
 vention called, 170; convenes, 
 179; convenes a second time, 
 205-6, 208, 210-11, 214, 216; 
 names of those voting for and 
 against secession, note, 222-3. 
 
 Lewis, J. W., 389. 
 
 Lexington, 373, 516, 518. 
 
 " Liberator," 252. 
 
 Lick Creek Bridge, 399. 
 
 Lincoln, Abraham, 125, 127 ; nomi- 
 nated, 128, 133, 145, 152, 158, 
 160-1, 167, 185, 187, 204, 220, 233, 
 
 239, 276, 284; Douglas debates, 
 
 291, 294-6, 302, 311-13, 317, 319; 
 
 quoted, 322-25, 356, 370, 372, 432, 
 
 436-49 ; letter of, 442, 453, 457-8, 
 
 462, 468, 477-8, 484, 486, 494, 
 
 note, 503; assassination, 503, 
 
 513, 515, 552, 559. 
 Lincoln, Mrs., note, 603. 
 Lochrane, Mr. (Ga.), 316. 
 Logan, S. T., 362. 
 Londonderry, note, 498. 
 Long, General, 276. 
 Longstreet, General J. A., 455-7, 481, 
 
 488, 496, 505-15, 522. 
 Lookout Mountain, 469. 
 Looney, Colonel R. F., 393, 397, 409, 
 
 414. 
 Lossing, Benson J., quoted, 320. 
 London, Ky., 377, 439. 
 Louisiana, 169; territory of, 289; 
 
 tigers, 472, 555. 
 Louisville, 436. 
 Love, Dr., 522. 
 Love, Miss Nancy, 522-4. 
 Lovejoy, 299. 
 
 Lowell, James Russell, 58. 
 Lowrey, Jean, note, 56. 
 " Loyal Mountaineers, the," 346, 363. 
 Loyal people, 360, 408, 429, 445, 474, 
 
 496, 500, 546, 560. 
 Luckey, Hon. Seth J. W., 107, note, 
 
 108. 
 Lundy, Benjamin, 92 ; his paper — 
 
 history of, 93-4 ; compared with 
 
 Rankin, 273. 
 Luttrell, James C, 474, note, 479. 
 Lyon, Thomas C, 180, 536, 542. 
 Lyons, General Nathaniel, 461, 559. 
 
 M. 
 Mabry, Colonel George "W., 427. 
 Mabry, Mrs. Jeannette Laurimer, 
 
 427-8. 
 Mabry, Joseph A., 113, 118, 185. 
 Mcaculay, T. B., note, 498. 
 Madison, James, 37. 
 Magoffin, Governor Beriah, 373. 
 Mallen, Colonel C. E., 497. 
 Marshall, Humphrey, 374. 
 Marshall, John, 276. 
 Martial law, 389, 393. 
 Martin, Barclay, 537. 
 Mason, George, 251. 
 Mason, James, 290. 
 Massachusetts, 25, 261, 265, 267, 307, 
 
 308. 
 Mathes, Ebenezer, 107. 
 Maryland, 201, 203, 251, 298, 325. 
 Maynard, Horace, note, 84, 87, note, 
 
 no, 113, 150, note, 160, 163, 181, 
 
Index. 
 
 583 
 
 183, 187, 192, 224, 352-3, 361, 367, 
 375, 438-40, 442, 560, 586. 
 
 Maxwell, W. H., 363. 
 
 Meade, General George G., 521. 
 
 Meek, A. K., 193-4. 
 
 Meek, James M, 405-9. 
 
 Meigs, R. J., 219-21, 233, 262. 
 
 Memphis, 180, 483. 
 
 Memminger, Charles G., 320. 
 
 Methodist, 60, 66, 95-6 ; Conference, 
 Western Annual, 97; Nashville, 
 99; Columbia, 100; Holston, 
 100 ; General, 101 ; discipline of, 
 102-3, 106, 307. 
 
 Mexico, war with, 280; city, 556. 
 
 Middle Tennessee, 219-20; aggres- 
 sive leaders, 221, 226; Whig 
 leaders of, 230; leaders described, 
 236-8, 243, 455, 460. 
 
 Military expedition into East Ten- 
 nessee, 371. 
 
 Military league with Confederate 
 States, 210, 211, 213. 
 
 Miller, Charles A., 176. 
 
 Miller, Colonel John K., 384. 
 
 Milligan College, 65. 
 
 Milligan, Samuel, 536. 
 
 Mill Springs, 447. 
 
 Millson, John, 285. 
 
 Minnis, Colonel J. B., 482, 485. 
 
 Missionary Ridge, 469. 
 
 Mississippi, 46, 281, 288 ; River, 378, 
 483, 538. 
 
 Missouri, 169, 201, 203, 231, 282, 289, 
 320, 326, 559. 
 
 Missouri Compromise, 122, 168, 247, 
 281-2 ; repealed, 283-4, 327. 
 
 Mitchel, General 0. M., 400, 433-5, 
 458, 460-2. 
 
 Mobile, 519. 
 
 Moltke, General, 459. 
 
 Monroe, James, 36, 282. 
 
 Monsaret, Colonel George H., 41 
 
 Monterey, battle of, 238. 
 
 Montgomery, James, 381. 
 
 Montgomery, W. W., 381, 383. 
 
 Moore, Enoch, 95. 
 
 Moorehead, James K., 297. 
 
 Morgan, General George W., 297, 
 400, 460, 465, 467-9. 
 
 Morgan, General, 25. 
 
 Morgan, General John H., 201, 374, 
 468. 
 
 Morgan, S. O., 220. 
 
 Morgan, Jno. W. S., note, 209. 
 
 Morgan, Wm., note, 517. 
 
 Morrill and Hatch acts, 47-9. 
 
 Morrill, Lot M., 298. 
 
 Morristown, battle of, 481. 
 
 Moultrie, Fort, 139, 142-4. 
 
 Mountain City, 69. 
 
 Mountain people, education, relig- 
 ion, civilization, 63, 67 ; errors 
 corrected, 72; dialect of, 75; 
 characteristics, 76 ; ignorance 
 of, 77-8,80-1. 
 
 Murfrees, Miss, 75-6. 
 
 Murfreesborough, battle of, 468. 
 
 Myers, Jacob, 399. 
 
 Myers, Rev. A. A., 74-5, 
 
 Myers, V., 349. 
 
 Mynett, Dr. Linville, 194. 
 
 Mc. 
 McClellan, Captain David, 385. 
 McClellan, General George, 356, 370, 
 
 371, 375, 426-7, 440, 442-3, 454, 
 
 457-8, 462. 
 McClelland, W. D., 344. 
 McClernard, General John A., 452. 
 McCook, W. McD., 374, 469. 
 McDowell, Charles, Colonel, 24-5, 
 
 27, 32, 
 McDowell, James P., 352-3, 355. 
 McDowell, Joseph, Major, 25. 
 McDuflae, Governor, 313. 
 McEwen, Robert H., note, 56. 
 McFerrin, Dr. J. B., note, 15, 95, 98. 
 McGaughey, John, of Greene, 353. 
 McGaughev, John, 112-13, 117; note, 
 
 234. 
 McGhee, Colonel Charles M., 415. 
 McKendree, Bishop William, 
 KcKinney, John A., 114, 117-8, 536. 
 McKinney, Robert J., 113, 536. 
 McLean, Robert M., 128. 
 McMinn, Joseph, 51, 58. 
 McPherson, Edward, 297, 469, 521. 
 
 N. 
 
 Nashville, 180, 436-7, 440, 442, 447, 
 449, 453, 457; victory of, 481, 
 507 ; note, 513, 516, 552, 562. 
 
 Natchez, 538. 
 
 National flag, 211,1479-80. 
 
 Neil, John, 113. 
 
 Nebraska, 282. 
 
 Nelson, Dr. David, 90. 
 
 Nelson, T. A. R., 163, 181-3, and 
 Johnson, joint canvass, 189, 195, 
 197, 331, 342, 347, 352-3 ; resolu- 
 tions, 355, 361-2; arrested, 367, 
 536, 560. 
 
 Nelson, General Wm., 439-40. 
 
 Netherland, John, 171, 353 ; speech 
 quoted, 354, 355, 363, 636, 559. 
 
 Nevada, 285, 299. 
 
 New England, its people, education, 
 4-45; states, 289, 298, 308, 324, 
 514. 
 
584 
 
 Index. 
 
 New Market, four hundred refugees, 
 
 424. 
 New Mexico, 285, 289-91, 297-8. 
 New Orleans, 556. 
 New York, colony, 45-6, 267 ; state, 
 
 324. 
 Nicholson, Judge A. O. P., 219, 242, 
 
 297. 
 Nicolay & Hay, cited, 176, 447, 500. 
 Nolichucky, settlement of, 4, 8. 
 North, the, 284-6, 324; united, 
 
 32^6, 332, 337, 436, 564. 
 North Carolina, 4, 5 ; cool neglect, 
 
 16; cession of territory, 42,45; 
 
 cedes Tennessee, 46, 50, 71, 251, 
 
 288, 320, 323, 325, 481, 518-19, 
 
 554-5, 562, 564. 
 North Carolina, Western, 5, 422,436, 
 
 555, 561, 563. 
 Northern states, 329. 
 North-west territory, 288, 324. 
 Nullification, 184, 250, 261, 276-7; 
 
 act, 278, 294, 549, 558. 
 Nullifier, 264. 
 
 O. 
 
 Ohio, 267, 298. 
 
 "Old Abraham," 4. 
 
 Oldham, Thomas E., note, 508. 
 
 Ordinance of secession of South 
 
 Carolina, 141, 205, 207-22. 
 Ordinance of 1787, 287. 
 Oregon, 298. 
 Orr, James L., 141. 
 Osborne, Charles, 86, 92. 
 Outlaw, Alexander, 51. 
 
 P. 
 
 Packer, 313. 
 
 Paddock, Mrs., 72-3. 
 
 Paducah, 375, 445, 449. 
 
 Park, Rev. James, 509-10. 
 
 Park, Wm., note, 517. 
 
 Parker, Theodore, 249 ; quoted, 269. 
 
 Pate, John F., note, 190. 
 
 Parton, James, " Life of Jefferson," 
 
 53. 
 Patterson, D. T., 361-2, 391, 403. 
 Patterson, N. A., 362. 
 Patton, S., 103. 
 Patton, Colonel S. N. K., 480. 
 Paxton, Dr. James, 172, 177. 
 Peachtree, battle of, 222. 
 Peck, Jacob, 110. 
 Pendleton, Edmund, 251. 
 Perrin, C. O., 508. 
 Perry, A. L., 12. 
 Perry, Colonel A. M., 414. 
 Perryville, battle of, 468. 
 Persecutions, 414, 416 ; arrests, 417, 
 
 422, 490. 
 
 Personal liberty laws, 297, 319. 
 
 Pettigru, James C, note, 562. 
 
 Peyton, Balie, 122, 129, 219-20 ; de^ 
 scribed, 237, 562. 
 
 Peyton, Balie, Jr., 449. 
 
 Phelan, James, historian, note, 39. 
 
 Phillips, Wendell, 249, 269, 300, 335. 
 
 Pickens, Francis M., 141. 
 
 Pickens, Colonel Samuel, 391, 403-4, 
 409. 
 
 Pickens, Wm. C, 381-3, 404. 
 
 Pierce, Franklin, 281; quoted, 282, 
 323, 326. 
 
 Pierce, James A., 283. 
 
 Pillow, General Gideon, 450. 
 
 Pioneers from Pennsylvania and 
 Virginia, 9 ; Covenanter, 10 ; law- 
 abiding, 12, 13* assist in Revo- 
 lutionarv War, 16. 
 
 Planters, 254, 310. 
 
 Political prisoners, 396. 
 
 Polk, James K., 112, 289. 
 
 Polk, Leonidas, 222, 372, 417. 
 
 Polk, W. H., 219, 221, 227-8, 242. 
 
 Pollard, quoted, 494. 
 
 " Popular sovereignty," 319. 
 
 Porter, Fitzjohn, 140. 
 
 Porter, Dr. J. H., 73. 
 
 Porter, James D., 222. 
 
 Port Royal, 461. 
 
 Powell's Valley, 466. 
 
 Prentiss, S. S., 129. 
 
 Presbyterians, 32, 60, 65, 104, 106. 
 
 Presbyteryanism, 307. 
 
 Preston, William, 374. 
 
 Price, Ex-Governor, 324, 326. 
 
 Princeton, 309. 
 
 Pryor, Roger A., quoted, 302 ; quoted,. 
 320. 
 
 Public meetings in Knoxville, 148- 
 53 ; in daytime, 154 ; Union 
 resolutions adopted, 158; im- 
 portance of result, 159-60; turn- 
 ing point, 161-2, 164, 172, 181 ; 
 second canvass opened, 182; 
 Strawberry Plains, 192, 200, 553. 
 
 Public opinion, 546. 
 
 Puritan, 52, 307. 
 
 Q. 
 
 Quakers, 85, 103. 
 Quebec, expedition to, 30. 
 Quincy, Edmund, 247. 
 
 R. 
 
 Ramsey, J. C, 392, 395. 
 
 Ramsey, E., 407. 
 
 Ramsey, J. C. M., 7, note, 23, note,. 
 
 39, 180, note, 465, 510. 
 Randolph, Jefferson, 251. 
 
Index. 
 
 585 
 
 Rankin, Rev. A. T., note, 56. 
 
 Rankin, Rev. John, note, 56, 88-91, 
 and Lundy, 95, 278. 
 
 Rathborue, Colonel W. B., note, 508. 
 
 Rawlins, General M. A., 517. 
 
 Ray, Daniel M., 381-4. 
 
 Raymond, Henry J., 124. 
 
 Ready, Charles, 230; described, 240. 
 
 Reasons why East Tennessee was 
 loyal, 546-49, 554-60. 
 
 Reese, John J., 150, 153, 156, 158, 165. 
 
 Reese, Judge W. B., 165, 536. 
 
 Reese, W. B., Jr., 150, 153. 155-7, 
 165. 
 
 Reeve, Felix A., 368. 
 
 Republican party, 127-32, 168, 177, 
 247, 269; formed, 283, 298-9, 
 546, 551. 
 
 Resolutions of '98, 277. 
 
 Revolution, 213-5 ; right of, 275. 
 
 Reynolds, Wm. B., 427. 
 
 Rhea, John, 51. 
 
 Rhea, Samuel, 107. 
 
 Rhett, R. Barnwell, 134, 313 ; quoted, 
 314-15. 
 
 Richmond, 458, 460. 
 
 Ridgway, Robert, 124. 
 
 Roadman, Wm. C., 113. 
 
 Roane, Archibald, 3, 51. 
 
 Robertson, Charles, 17, 32. 
 
 Robertson, James, 2; defends Wa- 
 tauga, 4; high reputation, 6, 
 19-20, 32-4; influence of fam- 
 ily, 38, 51, 71, 82, 385. 
 
 Rogers, Samuel R., Ill, 150, 153, 156, 
 165, 341. 
 
 Rodgers, W. H., 341. 
 
 Rodgers, Dr. W., 341. 
 
 Rogan, R. B., 380. 
 
 Rosecrans, General W. S., 468-9, 
 486-8. 
 
 Roosevelt, Theodore, quoted, 7-12, 
 14, 34, note, 287. 
 
 Ross, Dr. Frederick A., 107, note, 
 257. 
 
 Rousseau, General L. H., 372. 
 
 Ruffin, Edmund, 50, 320-1. 
 
 Rule, Captain William, 76, 234. 
 
 S. 
 Sales, A. W., 189. 
 Salisbury, Battle of, 481. 
 Saltvi]le,481. 
 
 Sanders, General Wm. P., death, 490. 
 Sanders, Fort, 591, 510-11. 
 Sanford, E. J., notes, 492, 493. 
 Savannah, 520. 
 
 Sawvers, Major John M., 474, 480. 
 Schofield, General John M., 481, 513, 
 note, 517, 521. 
 
 Scotch-Irish, 15, 32-4, 52, 75, 459. 
 
 Scott County, 197. 
 
 Scott, Dred., decision, 291. 
 
 Scott, Ham, note, 487. 
 
 Scott, General Winfield, 13^-40, 278, 
 556. 
 
 Sebastian, Senator W. K., 397. 
 
 Secessionists, 150-4, 200-1, 364, 357, 
 367 ; uprising in Kentucky, 373, 
 422, 539,545,551-3. 
 
 Secession ordinance of South Caro- 
 lina, 141 ; spirit abroad, 149, 152- 
 161, 186-90; majority for, 199, 
 205-9, 212-16; vote, note, 222, 
 225-8, 232, 242-3, 272-5 ; theory 
 of, 276, 278, 290-3, 301-3 ; causes 
 of, 307-13, 317-19, 327, 334, 540-2, 
 547-9, 554-8, 560-4. 
 
 Secession party, 248, 542. 
 
 Sedgwick, General, 521. 
 
 Self, Elizabeth, 398. 
 
 Self, Harrison, 384, 397-8. 
 
 Self, Hugh A., 384. 
 
 Senter, Dewitt C, 361. 
 
 Senter, Wm. T., 113, 536. 
 
 Separation, 243. 
 
 Sergeant, Wm., note, 138. 
 
 Sevier, " Bonnie Kate," 22. 
 
 Sevier, E. F., 103. 
 
 Sevier, James, 22. 
 
 Sevier, John, character, 2-6, 17-19; 
 consults with Shelby, 20 ; raises 
 money for expedition, 21,27-32 ; 
 influence of family, 38, 51, 71, 
 82, 91, 103, 174, 365, 385, 498; old 
 house. 528, 556. 
 
 Sevier, Captain Robert, killed, 30. 
 
 Sevier, Valentine, 107. 
 
 Sevier County, 58-9; first Union 
 speech, 132; canvass in 172-4; 
 vote in Februarv election, 176. 
 199, 390, 401-3, 479. 
 
 Seward, Wm. H., 127, 298-9, 310,. 
 note, 321-33, 360, 370-1, 375. 
 
 Seymour, Horatio, 323, 326. 
 
 Shackelford, General, 506. 
 
 Shadrack, 267, 327. 
 
 Sharkev, Judge, 124. 
 
 Sharp, 'Henry, 113. 
 
 Shelby, Evan, 18, 32, 35, 82. 
 
 Shelby, Isaac, 17-19; consults Se- 
 vier, 20; calls out contingent, 
 21 ; self-denial, 25-32 ; brief his- 
 tory of, 35 ; influence of family, 
 38, 72, 82, 174, 385, 556. 
 
 Shelby County, vote, 243. 
 
 Shellmound, 69. 
 
 Shepard, Philo B., 522. 
 
 Sheridan, Phil. S., 435, 515, note, 517, 
 521. 
 
586 
 
 Index. 
 
 Sherman, John, 297, 316, 378, 429. 
 
 Sherman, General W. T., 356, 373-8, 
 408, 426, 433-5, 454, 457-8, 462, 
 469, 481, 489, 494-7, 600, 502, 
 511-21. 
 
 Shiloh, battle of, 435, 453, 457, 460. 
 
 Slavery in East Tennessee, 83 ; slave 
 trade, 84, 95, 105 ; in Tennessee, 
 106; stringent safe-guards, 107, 
 109, 119, 129, 136, 169, 246, 251 ; 
 slave trade, 351, 253-61 ; legality 
 of, 263, 269-73 ; 280-5 ; last con- 
 test, 286-7; law of 1793, 288; 
 compromise line, 289-90, inter- 
 vention demanded, 291 ; first 
 congress in, 295, 298, 303, 307; 
 corner-stone, 312-18, 335, 446-8, 
 550-2, 555, 558. 
 
 Slaves, number, 109,111,254,256-60, 
 262-3 293. 
 
 Slaveholder, 257, 281, 284, 287, 289, 
 392, 311, 326, 331-5, 542-50, 554, 
 557-8. 
 
 Slave states, 289, 328. 
 
 Slocum, General Henry W., 469. 
 
 Smart, Wm. C, 113. 
 
 Smedes, Susan Dabney, note, 53.' 
 
 Smith, Abe, 381. 
 
 Smith, General C. F., 452. 
 
 Smith, Daniel, 399. 
 
 Smith, Gerrit, 273. 
 
 Smith, H. C, 362. 
 
 Smith, John M., 362. 
 
 Smith, General E. Kirby, 399, 425, 
 458, 460, 467. 
 
 Smith, Hon. Samuel A., 414; quoted, 
 415. 
 
 Smith, General Sooey, 481. 
 
 Sneed, Wm. H.. 150, 153, 156, 165, 
 172, 180, 517, 536, 542. 
 
 South, the, 251-8, 284, 324, 326, 333-7, 
 430, 459, 551-2, 563-4. 
 
 South Carolina overrun by British, 
 19, 45, 132 ; preparing to secede, 
 137-8; ordinance of secession, 
 141 ; commissioners to Washing- 
 ton, 141, 143, 148, 250-1, 269, 
 276-8, 281, 286, 288, 293, 296, 
 307-8 ; convention, 313, 322, 330, 
 443, 538, 557, 562. 
 
 Southern Commercial Convention, 
 316. 
 
 Southern Confederacy, 203-5, 209-11, 
 221; organized, 286, 314-17, 
 320-25, 364, 388, 402, 547. 
 
 Southern leaders, 298, 301, 317, 333, 
 337. 
 
 Southern States overrun, 19, 248, 252, 
 266, 281, 285, 292, 298, 301, 319, 
 332, 568. 
 
 Southern people, 326, 335, 337, and 
 
 traits, 459. 
 Southern women, their zeal, 188, 
 
 338. 
 Sovereign state, attributes of, 278-9. 
 Spratt, L. W., quoted, 316. 
 Spears, James G., 342, 362, 468. 
 Speed, Lieutenant Joseph H., 414. 
 Spence, Rev. John F., note, 63. 
 Squatter sovereignty, 126. 
 Staley, W. B., 362. 
 Stanton, Edwin M.. note, 143, 160. 
 " Star of the West," 144. 
 States rights, 548. 
 Stephens, Alexander H., quoted, 269, 
 
 289, 294, 296, 313, 315-16, 328, 331. 
 Stevens, Rev. R. M., 410. 
 Stevens, Thadeus, 299. 
 Stevenson, Mathew% 113, 117-18. 
 Stokes, Jordan, 122, 219, 230; de- 
 scribed, 240. 
 Stokes, Colonel W. B., note, 203, 
 
 219. 
 Stone River, battle of, 461. 
 Stoneman, General George, 517. 
 Stover, Daniel, 385. 
 Stringfield, Thomas, 100, 103. 
 Stuart, A. H. H., 124. 
 Suffrage, names of those voting 
 
 against restricting it, 119, note. 
 Sultana, the, explosion of, 483 ; union 
 
 of survivors, 485. 
 Sumner, Charles, 299. 
 Sumter, Thomas, 31. 
 Sumter, Fort, 139-40, 143, 186,216; 
 
 fired upon, 286, 296, 320-2, 325, 
 
 372, 561-2. 
 Supreme Court of United States, 
 
 quoted, 264, 277-8. 
 Swan, William G., 180, 412, 542. 
 Swaney, P., 349, 362. 
 Sycamore shoals, place to assemble, 
 
 20, 23, 385. 
 
 T. 
 
 Tarlton, Colonel, 19, 23, 26, 30. 
 
 Taylor, Nathaniel G., 129, 171, 514. 
 
 Temple. Major, note, 28. 
 
 Temple', Mrs. O. P., note, 502-3, 517. 
 
 Temple, O. P., 171-3, 175, 177, 182, 
 189, 191-4; speech at Concord, 
 195, 197, 224, 234, 341-2, 349; 
 substitute offered, 350-3, 363, 
 note, 400, 473. 
 
 Ten Eyck, Senator, 298. 
 
 Tennessee, 46 ; share in winning the 
 West, 50 ; constitution of, 51 ; 
 votes for Bell, 131, 170; result 
 February election, 175; vote in 
 June, 199; commissioners ap- 
 
Index. 
 
 587 
 
 pointed, 210, 213-14, 217-18, 222 ; 
 first regiment, 225, 251-4; con- 
 stitution, 275, 287, 309, 320-5, 
 350 ; troops, 447, 545, 555-9, 562. 
 
 Territory south-west Ohio River, 42 ; 
 legislature and council of, 51. 
 
 Texas, 48, 169, 218, 275 ; annexation, 
 280-1, 289, 293, 555, 563. 
 
 Tibbs, Wm. H., 413. 
 
 Ticonderoga, 30. 
 
 Tillman, Benjamin, 137. 
 
 Tipton, John, 3 ; influence of familj', 
 38 ; correct name, note, 39, 51, 72. 
 
 Thayer, James S., 323. 
 
 Thirteenth amendment, 318. 
 
 Thomas, Adam, 380. 
 
 Thomas, General George H., 373-8, 
 402, 408, 433, 439, 445-8, 458, 
 462-3, 469, 481, 512, note, 517, 
 521. 
 
 Thomas, James D., 130. 
 
 Thomas, L., 433-4. 
 
 Thompson, Jacob, 139, 141, note, 
 143, 144-5. 
 
 Thornburgh, Jacob M., 405. 
 
 Thornburgh, Dr. John W., 369. 
 / Thornburgh, Montgomery, 192, 194, 
 349, 351-2, 405, 409. 
 
 Thornburgh, Thomas Tipton, 405. 
 
 Todd, Mary, 128. 
 
 Toombs, Robert, 122, 167. 
 
 Topp, Hon. Robertson, 416, 423. 
 
 Tories, 24. 
 
 Totten, A. W. 0., 210-11. 
 
 ♦' Tract No. 3," 312. 
 
 Train stealers, 400. 
 
 Transylvania Seminary, note, 42. 
 
 Treason defined by Mr. Webster, 
 267-8. 
 
 Trent, Prof. W. P., quoted, 315. 
 
 Trescott, William H., 139. 
 
 Trewhitt, D. C, 362, 406. 
 
 Trewhitt, Levi, 406-7, 409, 419. 
 
 Trigg, Connally F., 150, note, 160, 
 171-3, 175, 181, 183, 187, 191, 
 224, 234, 341-2, 349, 352, 361, 363, 
 559. 
 
 Trimble, John, 217, 221, 230; de- 
 scribed, 239. 
 
 Trousdale, Governor William, 239. 
 
 Tunnell, John, 341. 
 
 Turner, Nat., 252. 
 
 Turney, Peter, 224-5. 
 
 Tuscaloosa, Ala., 391-3, 399, 404-6, 
 408, 415, 418-20, 424. 
 
 u. 
 
 " Uncle Tom's Cabin," 90. 
 Underdown, White, 381, 383. 
 
 Union army, 360, 448, 468, 473, 514; 
 education of, 527. 
 
 " Union and American " Nashville, 
 note, 178. 
 
 Union leaders, 162, 180, 186, 189-90; 
 great work, 200, 220, 243, 331, 
 342, 356-7, note, 431, 545, 547-9, 
 560-3. 
 
 Union men, 151-2, 154, 162, 166,170, 
 177, 186, 193, 195, 198; vote in 
 June, 199, 200, 202-4, 216, 224, 
 228, 341, 354-8, 367; flight of, 
 368 ; arrests of, 369, 385 ; uprising 
 of, 389-90; fill prisons of South, 
 392, 396 ; clemency of Mr. Davis, 
 398, 401-3, 411, 416 ; arrests, 417, 
 420; seizure of arms, exodus, 
 421; exiles, 422-3 ; gloomy con- 
 dition, 428-30; relief of, 436, 
 469, 471, 480, 538, 542-52, 555, 
 561, 564. 
 
 Union party, 236, 364, 388 ; antece- 
 dents of, 535, 540-3, 564. 
 
 Union people, 366 ; sense of insecur- 
 ity, 403, 408, 421-2 ; joy of, 478, 
 480, 500, 554, 561. 
 
 Union rally, 154. 
 
 Union soldiers, 203, 498 ; return and 
 joy, 482, 496 ; travels of, 526; fill 
 offices, 527-8, 530, 532. 
 
 University of Virginia, 48, 309. 
 
 Utah, 285, 290-1. 
 
 Valley of East Tennessee, 68, 70-1, 
 454. 
 
 Valley people, 79; austerity of re- 
 ligion, 81. 
 
 Van Buren, Martin, 59, 129, 535,538. 
 
 Vance, Colonel Robert B., 414. 
 
 Van Cleve, Colonel, 448. 
 
 Van Dyke, T. N., 410. 
 
 Van Home, Thomas B., note, 447. 
 
 Vance, Washington, 426. 
 
 Vermont, 328. 
 
 Vicksbxirg, 482. 
 
 Virginia, 4-6; law of, 14-16, 19, 45-6, 
 48, 50; eastern shore, 53, 71; 
 251-2, 254, 293, 316, 321, 323, 
 325-6 ; South-west, 422, 454, 458, 
 514, 518-19, 554-5, 557, 561-4. 
 
 Vote in the legislature on secession, 
 note, 222-3. 
 
 W. 
 
 Wade, Ben., 299. 
 Walker, Colonel Frank, 222. 
 Walker, Joseph H., 152. 
 Walker, L. P., 320. 
 
588 
 
 Index. 
 
 Walker, Dr. Thomas, 465. 
 
 Walker, Wilburn W., 172. 
 
 Wallace, Campbell, 180. 
 
 Wallace, General Lew., 452. 
 
 Wallace, W. AV., 156, 158, 165, 410. 
 
 Walthall, Colonel, 448. 
 
 Walton, Isaac, 115. 
 
 War, Civil, causes of, 273-4, 564. 
 
 Ward, Nancy, 4 
 
 Warren, General G. K., 521. 
 
 Washington College, 42, 56, 65. 
 
 Washington, George, 31, 55, 141, 174, 
 251, 269; quoted, 337, 553, 656, 
 557. 
 
 Watauga Kiver, 1 ; valley, 2 ; state 
 line, 4; bridge, 385; Watauga 
 Association formed, 5; Commit- 
 tee of Thirteen, 6; written con- 
 stitution, 7; Nolichucky joins, 
 8; freedom from disorder, 13; 
 record in war, 17, 36, 82. 
 
 Wayne, General Anthony, Stony 
 "Point, 30-1. 
 
 Webb, Major T. S., 414. 
 
 Webster, Colonel J. D., 452. 
 
 Webster, Daniel, 129, 231 ; quoted, 
 265, 268, 271, 276, 288, 291, 299, 
 326, 536, 547; reply to Hayne, 
 549. 
 
 Weed, Thurlow, 323. 
 
 AVeirs, Cove, 384. 
 
 Wells, Gideon, 359. 
 
 West Point, 309. 
 
 West Tennessee, 221, 378. 
 
 West Virginia, 202, 325, 359, 360. 
 
 Whig, Brownlow's letter to people, 
 133, 148-9, 155, 171, note, 178, 
 182, 184, 190, 192, 341. 
 
 Whig's leaders, 230, 242, 560-2. 
 
 Whig party, national convention of, 
 122; Mr. Bell nominated, 123, 
 127, 236, 281, 283-4, 334-5; or- 
 ganized, 536-42, 547, 549-50, 657. 
 
 White, Hugh Lawson, 237, 535. 
 
 White, Moses, 188. 
 
 Whitesides, James A., 536. 
 
 Whitney, Eli, 261. 
 
 Whittier, John G., on Webster, 271, 
 
 273. 
 Wild Cat, 377, 402. 
 Williams, Colonel, 24, 27; killed, 
 
 30, 32. 
 Williams, Colonel John, 536. 
 Williams, John, 182, 191, 224, 234, 
 
 341, 363. 
 Williams, Colonel L., 385. 
 Williams, Chancellor Thomas, L., 
 
 536. 
 " Wilmot proviso," 398. 
 Wilson, Henry, 93, 95, 247, 250; 
 
 quoted, 324, 326. 
 Wilson, Major, 495. 
 Wilson, Richard, 507. 
 Windom, William, 297. 
 Winston, Colonel, 24, 27, 32. 
 Wise, Henry A., 129, 138. 
 Womack, Mr., Ala., 316. 
 Wood, Fernando, 324, 326. 
 Wood, Rev., Colonel W. B. 388,, 
 
 389-90, 403, 406. 
 Woodruff, Colonel W. W. 368, 372. 
 Woolford, Colonel, 506. 
 Wythe, George, 251. 
 
 Y. 
 
 Yale, 309. 
 
 Yancey, Wm. L., 153, 167, 200, 311, 
 
 316, 559. 
 Young, Judge D. K., 362. 
 Young, H. Casev, 414, 416 : quoted,, 
 
 417. 
 
 Z. 
 
 Zollicoffer, General Felix K., 219, 
 221-2, 372-4, 377, 389, 390, 434-5 ; 
 killed, 446, 447-9, 466. 
 
-0^ 
 
 
 
 
 cP^ .; 
 
 
 ^<<< 
 
 ^ ^^'^-.f- -, 
 ,* > ^ ' 
 
 lP 
 
 cS . 
 
 ^^V^ ^y^^^^J" -^y^^^^yjT ^.^Tff^SJ^^ 
 
 ^v^^:^^/^ c^.^;:::^.% ^^i^^% c^^^^: 
 
 
 
 
 i' °^ ^ 
 
 
 
 
 N^""-^ =. 
 Q^ % 
 
 ' K>..< 
 
 
 

 
 ^.^:^?^^^. ^ 
 
 
 - ^^-^■'•" %,# :M/k^- ^<^' ^^S^u ^^ r 
 
 
 
 c^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .^ ^ 
 
 
 vx^ 
 
 
 .^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 7- ^ C 
 
 
 
 -' <i^ ^ %^ 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 ' , V -^ vV^ So. ^ , X * AV