DOCSLIB.ORG

Andrew Johnson and the Patronage James Lewis Baumgardner

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Andrew Johnson and the Patronage James Lewis Baumgardner University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-1968 Andrew Johnson and the Patronage James Lewis Baumgardner Recommended Citation Baumgardner, James Lewis, "Andrew Johnson and the Patronage. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 1968. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1874 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by James Lewis Baumgardner entitled "Andrew Johnson and the Patronage." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in History. LeRoy Graf, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: John Muldowney, D. H. Carlisle, Harold S. Fink, Richard C. Marins Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) November 22, 1968 To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by James Lewi s Baumgardner entitled "Andrew Johnson and the Patronage . " I recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a maj or in History. We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance : Accepted for the Council: Vice Chancellor for Graduate Studies and Research D!: S SEi:T.r\TIOf,: Blr:n :. :: 6639 �:\EE:� ANDREW JO�SON AND THE PATRONAGE A Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of The University of·Tennessee In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree .. Doctor of Philosophy by James Lewis Baumgardne� December 1968 ABSTRACT The Constitution bestows upon the president the right to make appointments "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate" to federal posi tiona at home and abroad. Over the passage of time, through free use of this power and the implied power of removal, the several chief executives constructed a vast patronage system, ot which one primary goal was to reward the party tai thf'ul for their services. The purpose of this dissertation is to determine how well Andrew Johnson, the unexpected successor of Abraham Lincoln, used the seemingly powerful patronage weapon. and the reasons why he used it as he did. Prior to his elevation to the presidency, Johnson had been a Jacksonian Democrat with a great faith in the wisdom of the masses of people. As such, he had subscribed to the spoils system with its attend­ ant principles of loyalty to the party and rotation in office. There is little evidence to indicate that he subsequently changed his views, despite the tact that they were of questionable validity in the unbal­ anced postwar political context of 1865-1869. Andrew Johnson was also a decided individualist, a characteristic which showed itself on several occasions during his presidential career . This trait at times overshadowed his political co�victions and, increas­ ingly during the course of his presidency, dictated his actions. Nowhere was this tact more clearly evident than in his use of the patronage . As president, Johnson initially was allowed a tree patronage hand, but as he and the dominant element of the Republican party, the Radicals ; ii 81:Jl62 iii increasingly clashed on the issues of reconstruction, the latter moved to wrest control of the system trom him. Seeking endorsement for his policies, he appealed to the people in the 1866 congressional campaign. Many of his supporters urged that he use the federal patronage to affect the outcome of the elections , and a number of changes were made, but the Radicals emerged victorious. Some observers, both at that time and later, charged that this result occurred because Johnson misused his patronage powers , but he probably realized that he could not have changed the outcome of the elections regardless of how he might have used his powers of removal and appointment. Having failed to win popular support for his position, Johnson then faced the alternative of either turning to the Democratic party and bolstering it with the federal patronage or becoming politically isolated. The leaders of that party .both expected and encouraged him to return to the fold, but the chief executive steadfastly refused to do so. The people had not elected a Democratic president in 1864 and Johnson's integrity and honesty dictated that they were not to receive one against their will. While becoming increasingly politically isolated, Johnson sought to reward those who had remained faithful to him. Close supporters were appointed to office, and despite demands from Democrats that changes be made, he refused to remove loyal cabinet members from their posts. At the same time, however, the president would not tolerate disloyalty. Wh�n his secretary of war proved unfaithful, Johnson, defying Radical legislative �fforts to secure Edwin M. Stanton in his position, removed iv him-from office. This move led to the chief executive's impeachment and trial, a process which the Radicals unsuccessfully attempted to turn into a condemnation of his entire patronage policy. Both primary and secondary sources were used for this study. Heavy dependence was placed upon certain manuscript collections, parti­ cularly those of Andrew Johnson, Senators John Sherman and Lyman Trum­ bull, and Representative Elihu B. Washburne. The Congressional Globe, the United States Senate Executive Journal, and the official account·of the impeachment trial were also of considerable value. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 I. PATRONAGE : THE PRE-PRESIDENTIAL VIEW 13 II . A TIME OF CONSENSUS 36 III . FOR WANT OF A POLICY • 61 IV. LAME DUCK PATRONAGE 96 V. THE INHERITED FAMILY • 114 VI . PRESIDENTIAL PATRONAGE ON TRIAL 136 VII. IN SEARCH OF A POLICY 155 BIBLIOGRAPHY 167 APPENDIX 175 VITA ••• 179 v INTRODUCTION Two clauses of the Constitution relate to the subject of execut ive patronage . The first provides that the president shall nominate , and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate , shall appoint Amb assadors , other public Ministers and Consuls , Judges of the supreme Court , and all other Officers of the United.States , whose Appointments are not herein other­ wise provided for , and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers , as they think proper , in the President alone , in the Courts of Law , or in the Heads of Departments.1 Wh ile the Constitution thus gave the president an extensive role in the process of appointment to federal office , it ·failed to make any provision for removals . Under what circumstances and by whom were removals to be made? This question became the center of a prolonged discussion in·the First Congress when the bill establishing the Depart- ment of Foreign Affairs (later State Department ) came before that body in June , 1789 , with the provision that the secretary was "to be removable by the President ." During the course of the debat e in the House of Representatives several greatly variant ideas were aired, but the central issue for the maj ority of the members was whether the right to remove was an � officio power of the president or an incident of the power to 2 appoint and therefore to be shared by the president and the Senate. !united States Constitution, Art icle II , Section 2, Clau se 2. The only restriction placed on this provision was that incumbent congress­ men could not hold other federal offices . Ibid. , Article I, Section 6 , · Clause 2. -- 2virtually unsupported was the position of William Smith of South Carolina who insisted that the only provision made by the Constitution 1 2 The latter view was presented clearly by Alexander White of Virginia, who maintained that , since the Constitution divided the power of appointment between the president and the Senate , "they ought also to 3 be associated in the dismission from office. " In support of the view, John Page , a fellow Virginian , gave expression to a thought which undoubt- edly also was troubling some of his colleagues. Arguing that leaving the power of removal with the president alone would encourage the growth of an organization of civil servant s loyal to him, Page warned that "con- ferring this power , so far from making the President more responsible , diminishes his responsibility , and inclines to establish him an independent 4 monarch. " The chief spokesman for the president 's right to remove from office was James Madison, who had argued in an earlier House discussion on this subject that to divide the removal power between the president and the Senate would have the effect of diminishing the president 's 5 responsibility for the actions of those officials under him. He now summarized his position : for removal was impeachment , thereby implying that offices were to be held during good behavior or at least for terms fixed by law. Annals of Congress , First Congress , 475. A view receiving some moderate sup­ port was presented by Sherman of Connecticut , who maintained that office was the creation of Congress and therefore within the limits of the Con­ stitution could be regulated in any manner Congress saw fit . Ibid. , 511. 3 Ibid.' 473. 4 Ibid. ' 540-41. 5 !bid. , 387 , 394-95. 3 Vest this power in the Senate jointly with the President , and you abolish at once that great principle of unity and responsibility in the executive department , which was in­ tended for the security of liberty and the public good.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • American Civil War Civil War Reconstruction
    American Civil War Civil War Reconstruction History >> Civil War Much of the Southern United States was destroyed during the Civil war. Farms and plantations were burned down and their crops destroyed. Also, many people had Confederate money which was now worthless and the local governments were in disarray. The South needed to be rebuilt. The rebuilding of the South after the Civil War is called the Reconstruction. The Reconstruction lasted from 1865 to 1877. The purpose of the Reconstruction was to help the South become a part of the Union again. Federal troops occupied much of the South during the Reconstruction to insure that laws were followed and that another uprising did not occur. A street in Charleston, SC after the war To Punish the South or Not Many people wanted the South to be punished for trying to leave the Union. Other people, however, wanted to forgive the South and let the healing of the nation begin. Lincoln's Plan for Reconstruction Abraham Lincoln wanted to be lenient to the South and make it easy for southern states to rejoin the Union. He said that any southerner who took an oath to the Union would be given a pardon. He also said that if 10% of the voters in a state supported the Union, then a state could be readmitted. Under Lincoln's plan, any state that was readmitted must make slavery illegal as part of their constitution. President Johnson President Lincoln was assassinated at the end of the Civil War, however, and never had the chance to implement his Reconstruction plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. XIX, No. 5
    the side bar THE NEWSLETTER OF THE WESTMORELAND BAR ASSOCIATION VOLUME XIX, NUMBER 5 OCTOBER 2007 WBA Members Vote “Yes” for Retention of Hathaway, Ober Editor’s note: Voters teacher and a mother fostered an January 2004, and has been a judge in in Westmoreland awareness of issues facing children in the Criminal Division since January County will be our society, and sparked an interest in 2004. asked on Tuesday, becoming an advocate for children and She has been a member of or November 6, 2007, other victims of crime. Prompted by active in the following professional whether they wish the desire to find a way to better serve organizations: American Bar to retain Common the needs of abused children, she Association; Pennsylvania Bar Pleas Court Judge Rita enrolled at Duquesne Law School, and Association; Ned J. Nakles American Donovan Hathaway and graduated in 1988. She was hired by Inn of Court; Westmoreland County Judge William J. Ober, who will each then-District Attorney John J. Driscoll Multi-Disciplinary Team on Child be completing a ten-year elected term of as a prosecutor that same year. In her Abuse and Neglect; Subcommittee of office in January 2008. Westmoreland capacity as an Assistant District PA Supreme Court Committee on County attorneys—in a poll conducted Attorney, she was the Supervisor of the Racial and Gender Bias in the Justice earlier this year by the Westmoreland Bar Sexual Crimes and Child Abuse Unit System; Pennsylvania District Association—have already cast their vote. from 1991 through 1997, as well as Attorneys Association; Commissioner A solid majority voted “Yes, both Judges Chief Trial Attorney from 1995 for County Probation and Parole should be retained.” through 1997, when she was elected to Officers’ Firearm Education and the bench.
    [Show full text]
  • The Diamond of Psi Upsilon June 1928
    W^^www^ @ �l^lt] [*) l^^^iW^W^W^ DIAMOND f^ . of . ^ Psi Upsilcsn �a? June 1928 Volume XIV Number Four i Ti?'zi?'ii?'^^^^l [f] IT] [T] ? BIjEII^ |Ny%^^ii<>'-tifW THE DIAMOND OF PSI UPSILON Official Publication of Psi Upsilon Fraternity Published in November, January, March and June, by The Diamond of Psi Upsilon, a corporation not for pecuniary profit, organized under the laws of Illinois An Open Forum for the Free Discussion of Fraternity Matters Volume XIV JUNE, 1928 Numbee 4 BOARD OP EDITORS Mask Bowman ....... Delta Delta '20 R. BouRKE Corcoran Omega '15 Ralph C. Guenther Tau'26 Kenneth Laied Omega '25 George W. Ross, Jb Phi '26 ALUMNI ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE DIAMOND Henet Johnson Fisher Beta '96 Herbert S. Houston Omega '88 Edward Hungeefoed Pi '99 Julian S. Mason . .... Beta '98 EXECUTIVE COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON THE DIAMOND Walter T. Collins Iota '03 R. BouRKE Corcoran Omega '15 Herbert S. Houston Omega '88 LIFE SUBSCRIPTION TEN DOLLARS ONE DOLLAR THE YEAR BY SUBSCRIPTION SINGLE COPIES FIFTY CENTS MdresB all communications to the Board of Editors, Room 500, 30 N. Dearborn St., TABLE of CONTENTS The 1928 Convention 209 Notes of the Convention 211 The Alumni Conference 212 The Convention Banquet 216 A Scholarship Prize of $500 230 Delta Chapter Life Subsceibers 232 Chapter Scholaeship Recoeds 233 Omiceon Alumni of Unknown Address 238 Expulsion Notice 238 In Memoeiam 239 Edwaed a. Bradford, Beta '73 Jay Feank Chappell, Omega '20 Eael W. DeMoe, Rho '92 Chauncey M. Depew, Beta '56 Rev. Edw. C. Feillowes> Beta '88 Colonel Moses M.
    [Show full text]
  • John AJ Creswell of Maryland
    Dickinson College Dickinson Scholar Faculty and Staff Publications By Year Faculty and Staff Publications 2015 Forgotten Abolitionist: John A. J. Creswell of Maryland John M. Osborne Dickinson College Christine Bombaro Dickinson College Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.dickinson.edu/faculty_publications Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Osborne, John M., and Christine Bombaro. Forgotten Abolitionist: John A. J. Creswell of Maryland. Carlisle, PA: House Divided Project at Dickinson College, 2015. https://www.smashwords.com/books/ view/585258 This article is brought to you for free and open access by Dickinson Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Forgotten Abolitionist: John A.J. Creswell of Maryland John M. Osborne and Christine Bombaro Carlisle, PA House Divided Project at Dickinson College Copyright 2015 by John M. Osborne and Christine Bombaro Distributed by SmashWords ISBN: 978-0-9969321-0-3 License Notes: This book remains the copyrighted property of the authors. It may be copied and redistributed for personal use provided the book remains in its complete, original form. It may not be redistributed for commercial purposes. Cover design by Krista Ulmen, Dickinson College The cover illustration features detail from the cover of Harper's Weekly Magazine published on February 18, 1865, depicting final passage of Thirteenth Amendment on January 31, 1865, with (left to right), Congressmen Thaddeus Stevens, William D. Kelley, and John A.J. Creswell shaking hands in celebration. TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword by Matthew Pinsker Introduction Marylander Dickinson Student Politician Unionist Abolitionist Congressman Freedom’s Orator Senator Postmaster General Conclusion Afterword Notes Bibliography About the Authors FOREWORD It used to be considered a grave insult in American culture to call someone an abolitionist.
    [Show full text]
  • Carl Schurz's Contribution to the Lincoln Legend
    Volume 18 No 1 • Spring 2009 Carl Schurz’s Contribution to the Lincoln Legend Cora Lee Kluge LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, LC-5129 CONGRESS, OF LIBRARY LC-9301 CONGRESS, OF LIBRARY Carl Schurz, undated Abraham Lincoln, 1863 mong all the works about of approximately 22,000 words is INSIDE Abraham Lincoln that too long to be a book review and are currently available at the same time surprisingly short Ain this Lincoln bicentennial year, for the well-respected assessment • MKI 25th Anniversary including both new titles and new of Lincoln and his presidency that Banquet and Conference editions of older titles, one contri- it has become. It was republished • Letters of a German in bution that catches our attention repeatedly between 1891 and 1920 the Confederate Army is an essay by Carl Schurz that first and several times since, includ- • Citizens and Those Who appeared in 1891. Written origi- ing at least three times in German Leave, Book Review nally as a response to the Atlantic translation (1908, 1949, 1955), and • Rembering Robert M. Bolz Monthly’s request for a review of now has appeared in new editions • Racial Divides, Book Review the new ten-volume Abraham Lin- (2005, 2007, and twice in 2008), coln: A History by John G. Nicolay and John Hay (1891), this essay Continued on page 11 DIRECTOR’S CORNER Greetings, Friends Our online course “The German- diaries of the Milwaukee panorama American Experience,” a joint project painter F. W. Heine. Second is the and Readers! of the Wisconsin Alumni Asso- project entitled “Language Matters ciation, the Division of Continuing for Wisconsin” (Center for the Study Studies, and the Max Kade Institute, of Upper Midwestern Cultures, MKI, pring is here—almost—and is in full swing.
    [Show full text]
  • ESSSAR Masthead
    EMPIRE PATRIOT Empire State Society of the Sons of the American Revolution Descendants of America’s First Soldiers Volume 10 Issue 1 February 2008 Printed Four Times Yearly THE CONCLUSION OF . THE PHILADELPHIA CAMPAIGN In Summary: We started this journey several issues ago beginning with . LANDING AT THE HEAD OF ELK - Over 260 British ships arrived at Head of Elk, Maryland. Washington was ready. The trip took overly long, horses died by the hundreds. British General Howe was anxious to move on, but first he had to unload his massive armada. ON THE MARCH TO BRANDYWINE - Howe heads for Philadelphia. Washington blocks the path. On the way to their first engagement of 1777, Washington exposes himself to capture, Howe misses an opportunity, the rains fall, and everyone seems prepared for what happens next. THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE- The first battle in the campaign. Howe conceives and executes a daring 17 mile march catching Washington by surprise. The Continental Army is impressive, but the day belongs to the British. THE BATTLE OF THE CLOUDS Both armies were poised for another major engagement Five days after the Battle of Brandywine, a confrontation is rained out PAOLI MASSACRE Bloody bayonets in a midnight raid Mad” Anthony Wayne, assigned to attack the rear guard of the British army, is himself surprised in a “dirty” early morning raid. MARCH TO GERMANTOWN Washington prepares to win back the capital Congress flees Philadelphia as the British occupy the city amid chaos and fear. THE BATTLE OF GERMANTOWN The battle is fought in and around a mansion. For the first time the British retreat during battle, but fog and confusion turned the American advance around.
    [Show full text]
  • To the William Howard Taft Papers. Volume 1
    THE L I 13 R A R Y 0 F CO 0.: G R 1 ~ ~ ~ • P R I ~ ~ I I) I ~ \J T ~' PAP E R ~ J N 1) E X ~ E R IE S INDEX TO THE William Howard Taft Papers LIBRARY OF CONGRESS • PRESIDENTS' PAPERS INDEX SERIES INDEX TO THE William Ho-ward Taft Papers VOLUME 1 INTRODUCTION AND PRESIDENTIAL PERIOD SUBJECT TITLES MANUSCRIPT DIVISION • REFERENCE DEPARTMENT LIBRARY OF CONGRESS WASHINGTON : 1972 Library of Congress 'Cataloging in Publication Data United States. Library of Congress. Manuscript Division. Index to the William Howard Taft papers. (Its Presidents' papers index series) 1. Taft, William Howard, Pres. U.S., 1857-1930.­ Manuscripts-Indexes. I. Title. II. Series. Z6616.T18U6 016.97391'2'0924 70-608096 ISBN 0-8444-0028-9 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $24 per set. Sold in'sets only. Stock Number 3003-0010 Preface THIS INDEX to the William Howard Taft Papers is a direct result of the wish of the Congress and the President, as expressed by Public Law 85-147 approved August 16, 1957, and amended by Public Laws 87-263 approved September 21, 1961, and 88-299 approved April 27, 1964, to arrange, index, and microfilm the papers of the Presidents in the Library of Congress in order "to preserve their contents against destruction by war or other calamity," to make the Presidential Papers more "readily available for study and research," and to inspire informed patriotism. Presidents whose papers are in the Library are: George Washington James K.
    [Show full text]
  • 5, Webisode 7
    Please note: Each segment in this Webisode has its own Teaching Guide Rutherford B. Hayes Reconstruction—the process by which the Confederate states returned to full membership in the Union—jolted along not under the generous and steady leadership of Abraham Lincoln but under the late president’s successor, Andrew Johnson. Johnson, a Southerner, thwarted almost all congressional moves to assure African Americans the rights of full citizenship. The South was in ruins, its economy flattened. Fields were empty, and so were Southern pocketbooks. Many Southerners were angry; they had lost their enslaved work force and political clout, and now they had to accept former slaves as equals. While Johnson looked the other way, Southern legislators created black codes, which restricted the civil rights of African Americans. Other white men, hiding under white hoods, terrified African Americans by using violence and intimidation. African Americans saw the hard-earned reforms of Reconstruction evaporate under black codes, voting restrictions, and the intimidation of the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacy groups. Johnson’s successor, Civil War hero Ulysses S. Grant, was an ineffective president whose administration was immobilized by the corruption of those he appointed. Reconstruction policies eventually determined the disputed election of 1876 between Samuel Tilden and Rutherford B. Hayes; when Hayes promised to pull federal troops out of the South, an election commission awarded him all the disputed votes and thus the presidency. Teacher Directions 1. Use the following questions to guide class discussion. • Which amendment gave African American men the right to vote? • What obstacles did African Americans in the South face? • What were Redeemers? • Why was Ulysses S.
    [Show full text]
  • Hart Family History Silas Hart, His Ancestors and Descendants
    HART FAMILY HISTORY SILAS HART, HIS ANCESTORS AND DESCENDANTS By WILLIAM LINCOLN HART ALLIANCE, OHIO 1 9 4 2 "Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations; ask thy father, and he will show thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee."-­ Deut. 32, 7. "Those who do not look upon themselves as a link connecting the past with the future, do not perfonn their duty to the world."-Daniel Webster. "Ancestral glory is a lamp to posterity. "-Gallust. "We are the carriages in which our ancestors ride."-Unknown. "The great ocean of national existence is made up of the single drop;i of Individual life and action."-Edward Everett. CJOAT OF ARMS Adopted and Register<>d by the Stephen Hart Family Prior to 1500, A, D, Pilgrim Hymn O God, beneath thy guiding hand Our exiled fathers crossed the sea; And when they trod the wintry sti·and, With prayer and Psalm they worshipped Thee. Thou heard'st well pleased, the song, the prayer; Thy blessing came; and still its power Shall onward, through all ages, bear The memory of that holy hour. Laws, freedom, truth, and faith in God Came with those exiles o'er the waves; And where their pilgrim feet have trod, The God they trusted guards their graves. And here Thy Name, O God of love, Their children's children shall adore, 'Till these eternal hills remove, And spring adorns the earth no more. (John Hatton, died 1793) Presbyterian Hymnal, No. 462 Methodist Hymnal, No. 493 Christian Worship Hymnal No. 543. HART FAMILY HISTORY 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Public Commemoration of the Civil War and Monuments to Memory: the Triumph of Robert E
    SSStttooonnnyyy BBBrrrooooookkk UUUnnniiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy The official electronic file of this thesis or dissertation is maintained by the University Libraries on behalf of The Graduate School at Stony Brook University. ©©© AAAllllll RRRiiiggghhhtttsss RRReeessseeerrrvvveeeddd bbbyyy AAAuuuttthhhooorrr... Public Commemoration of the Civil War and Monuments to Memory: The Triumph of Robert E. Lee and the Lost Cause A Dissertation Presented By Edward T O’Connell to The Graduate School In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Stony Brook University August 2008 Copyright by Edward Thomas O’Connell 2008 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Edward T O’Connell We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Wilbur Miller, Professor, Department of History, Dissertation Advisor Herman Lebovics, Professor, Department of History, Chairperson of Defense Nancy Tomes, Chair and Professor, Department of History Jenie Attie, Assistant Professor, C.W. Post College of Long Island University, Outside Member This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School. Lawrence Martin Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Public Commemoration and Monuments to Memory: The Triumph of Robert E. Lee and the Lost Cause by Edward T. O’Connell Doctor of Philosophy in History Stony Brook University 2008 This dissertation examines the significance of the Virginia Memorial located on the former battlefield of the Gettysburg Military Park in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Dedicated on June 8, 1917 and prominently featuring an equestrian image of Robert E. Lee, this work of public commemorative art represents a dominant voice in the dialogue of the constructed public memory of the causes and the consequences of the Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright Hy Willism J{*N Ulrich
    Copyright hy Willism J { * n Ulrich i960 THE HCKTHERN MILITARY MIBD IM RBSARD TO RECOHSTRaCTlOH, 1865-1872: THE ATTITUDES OF TEN LEADBKj UMIŒ GENERALS DISSERTATIOH Presented in Partial Fulfillnsent of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Phi losopby in the Graduate School of the Oiio State University By m U A M JŒ3N ULRICH, B.A., H.Ac The Ohio State University 19^9 Approved by AdviS D^artment of History ACKBiaWLEDGMEIfrS The writer must acknowledge his indebtedness to many indivi­ duals idio were of significant help to him in the preparation and cOTçletîon of this manuscript. ^ thanks must go to Professor Henry H. Simms, History Department, of the Ohio State University, It was he who first introduced me to the subject, and gave invaluable and suggestive advice during all stages of the work. Words cannot express adequately sy p r e d a t i o n for the vast services rendered by the staff of the Ohio State University Library, especially the Interlibrary Loan department. The staff of the Library of Congress gave ^lendid assistance as did Mr. Drag and Mr. DePorry of the Manuscripts Division. Mr. Boyer of the Bcwdoia College Library was very cooperative in permitting me to make use of the Howard Psmers. Special thanks are again extended to Mr. Blanchette and staff of the Essex Institute located at Salem, Massachusetts. They allowed me to inspect the Banks Papers. It is nearly icfflossible to say "thank you" enough to my dearest mother for all her sacrifices and words of inspiration. Like­ wise a sincere ^>preciation for all her assistance, encouragement and understanding is due my beloved wife.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAIRMEN of SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES [Table 5-3] 1789–Present
    CHAIRMEN OF SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES [Table 5-3] 1789–present INTRODUCTION The following is a list of chairmen of all standing Senate committees, as well as the chairmen of select and joint committees that were precursors to Senate committees. (Other special and select committees of the twentieth century appear in Table 5-4.) Current standing committees are highlighted in yellow. The names of chairmen were taken from the Congressional Directory from 1816–1991. Four standing committees were founded before 1816. They were the Joint Committee on ENROLLED BILLS (established 1789), the joint Committee on the LIBRARY (established 1806), the Committee to AUDIT AND CONTROL THE CONTINGENT EXPENSES OF THE SENATE (established 1807), and the Committee on ENGROSSED BILLS (established 1810). The names of the chairmen of these committees for the years before 1816 were taken from the Annals of Congress. This list also enumerates the dates of establishment and termination of each committee. These dates were taken from Walter Stubbs, Congressional Committees, 1789–1982: A Checklist (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985). There were eleven committees for which the dates of existence listed in Congressional Committees, 1789–1982 did not match the dates the committees were listed in the Congressional Directory. The committees are: ENGROSSED BILLS, ENROLLED BILLS, EXAMINE THE SEVERAL BRANCHES OF THE CIVIL SERVICE, Joint Committee on the LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, LIBRARY, PENSIONS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS, RETRENCHMENT, REVOLUTIONARY CLAIMS, ROADS AND CANALS, and the Select Committee to Revise the RULES of the Senate. For these committees, the dates are listed according to Congressional Committees, 1789– 1982, with a note next to the dates detailing the discrepancy.
    [Show full text]