Posted on 08/18/2020 5:41:36 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson
Free Republic University, Department of History presents U.S. History, 1855-1860: Seminar and Discussion Forum
Bleeding Kansas, Dred Scott, Lincoln-Douglas, Harper’s Ferry, the election of 1860, secession – all the events leading up to the Civil War, as seen through news reports of the time and later historical accounts
First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: Sometime in the future.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.
Posting history, in reverse order
To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.
New York City’s Central Park was brand spanking new as it had been opened up to the public in late 1858. It is a testament to its landscape architects, Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux, that so many think that it is mostly natural beyond its roads and bridges.
Olmsted and his associates, including his namesake son, Frederick Law Olmsted Jr, did much to enhance America’s parks from the 1850s to the early 1900s. One of his biggest projects was the Vanderbilt property at Asheville, NC, ‘Biltmore Estate’, where he took near-dead farmlands and made it look like centuries old parklands. Still hoping that his Chicago Jackson Park can be saved from the expansive Barack Obama Presidential Center.
Perhaps notable in Mr Olmsted’s list of NON-accomplishments was his refusal to offer a design for Michigan’s Presque Isle Park on Lake Superior. With his public statement of “[it] should not be marred by the intrusion of artificial objects.”, much of it was left in a natural state.
COLUMBUS, Aug 20h [1860]
DEAR SIR, Yours of the 11th reached me yesterday on my return from Michigan; & I hasten to thank you for the expressions of regard & confidence which it contains.
It would be a vain attempt were I to try to correct all or a very small part of the misrepresentations or misconceptions of my views which find their way into the Press: & I do not think it worth while to make the effort in respect to these to which you call my attention.
Fortunately I have no new opinions to express on any question connected with Nationalized Slavery. In my speech on Mr. Clay's compromise Resolutions in 1850, I distinctly stated my views in respect to legislative prohibition of Slavery in Territories. You will find this speech in the Congressional Globe Appendix, 1849-50, and this particular question discussed on page 478. I reaffirmed the same views in the Nebraska-Kansas Debate; & I have seen no occasion to change them. They are now substantially embodied in the Republican National Platform.
In respect to the organization of Territorial Governments I think Mr. Jefferson's plan of 1784 the better plan. It contemplated the prohibition of Slavery, as did the plan subsequently adopted, but it left more both in Organization & Administration to the people. The great objections to the “Territorial bills” of last winter, to which you refer, were in my judgment that they did not contain so distinct and explicit prohibition of Slavery, & that they did provide for the appointment of Territorial Officers by the Administration; which was equivalent to giving them pro-slavery Governors, Judges &c. To these bills I certainly preferred Mr. Thayer's Land District Bills: & I should have preferred bills framed on the plan of Jefferson, but with larger freedom of Legislation, to either.
I regret very much to hear of the feeling which exists in the Worcester District in regard to Mr. Thayer. I have but a slight personal acquaintance with him, but that acquaintance impressed me with a belief that he is sincere, earnest, & able. He has certainly rendered great service to the cause of Freedom. His plan of Organized Emigration contributed largely to save Kansas from Slavery. And if he now pushes his ideas too far in the direction of absolutely unlimited control by the settlers of a territory over every matter within their own limits whether national in its reach & consequences or not, it should be remembered that nothing is more certain than that the ripening convictions of the people favor — not the substitution of Presidential Intervention for Slavery, in place of Congressional Intervention against Slavery, which is the sole achievement of the Douglas Nebraska Scheme — but the admission of a far larger measure of true Popular Sovereignty, — fully harmonized with the fundamental principles of Human Rights, in the organization of Territorial Governments.
I write this for your own satisfaction, & because your kind letter calls for a frank response; I do not write for publication: because no opinions of individuals at this time are important enough to be thrust before the public. We are engaged in a great struggle upon a great issue fairly joined through our National Convention. God forbid that any personal strifes should endanger the Cause! Let us gain the victory; & I am sure that there will be then no difficulty in so harmonizing views, by honest endeavors to satisfy each others reasonable demands, as to secure that after success without which the preliminary success at the November Polls will be of little value.
* From letter-book 7, pp. 68-70. John Denison Baldwin 1809-1883; journalist at this time, owner and editor of the Worcester Spy; member of Congress 1863-1869.
SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 289-90
COLUMBUS Nov. 10, [I860]
MY DEAR FRIEND, There is no one whom I would more willingly “entrust with my views and feelings” on any subject than yourself. No man, in my belief, better deserves the confidence of the true friends of the cause which has just triumphed so gloriously through the election of Mr. Lincoln.
Your “apprehensions” that I “do not desire the place” you speak of, are well founded. I appreciate beyond my capacity of expression, the sentiments of regard and confidence which Mr. Lincoln has expressed towards me. To manifest, in some measure, that appreciation by an honest, faithful and unselfish support of his administration is among my most cherished wishes. One wish only more occupies my heart — that his administration by its fidelity to the principles of the great and noble party which has elected him may ensure the permanence and permanent ascendancy of the organization and thereby the welfare and happiness of the country.
It would be most agreeable to me to render what help I may to the attainment of these ends in a station absolutely private. My duty to my brother Republicans of Ohio, however, requires me to take the part they have assigned me, and, as one of the Senators from this State to labor for the advancement of the cause they love. I have no political objects or aspirations beyond the simple performance of that duty.
Besides this, I know I have not the sort of ability necessary to fill the position you refer to, as it ought to be filled. The best I could do would be a mere approximation to what I think ought to be done.
My wish, therefore, is to make no change of position; but to give to Mr. Lincoln, in the place my State has directed me to take, whatever aid a true personal friend and faithful supporter of the common cause can give, in carrying on the government.
Such are my views and feelings candidly expressed. I can not, therefore say that I will take an administrative “post if offered under circumstances entirely agreeable.” Such an offer would, however, doubtless, impose on me the duty of carefully considering, with the advice of judicious friends the question of duty, and I should not, 1 hope permit any considerations purely personal to prevent me from taking that course which public obligations might seem to require.
* From letter-book 7, pp. 71-72. George Gilman Fogg, 1815-1881; editor Manchester (N. H.) Independent Democrat, 1854-1861; member of Republican national committee, 1856-1864; United States minister to Switzerland, 1861-1865; United States Senator, 1866-1867.
SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 290-1
I just realized the second letter from Salmon Chase in today’s post is misdated in the header. It won’t be written until November 20. Sorry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.