Samuel Medary & the Crisis Samuel Medary & the Crisis Testing the Limits of Press Freedom Reed W. Smith Ohio State University Press Columbus Copyright © 1995 by the Ohio State University Press. All rights reserved. Frontispiece: Samuel Medary ca. 1859. Courtesy of the Ohio Historical Society. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Smith, Reed W. (Reed Williams), 1949­ Samuel Medary and the Crisis : testing the limits of press freedom / Reed W. Smith p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8142-0672-7 (cloth: alk. paper). — ISBN 0-8142-0673-5 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Medary, S. (Samuel), 1801-1864. 2. Editors—United States—19th century- Biography. 3. Crisis (Columbus, Ohio). 4. Freedom of the press—United States. I. Title. PN4874.M48398S65 1995 070.4'r092—dc20 [B] 95-19133 CIP Text designed by John Delaine. Type set in Sabon. Printed by Thomson-Shore, Inc., Dexter, MI. The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources. 987654321 Contents Preface vii 1. "Our Constitution Is a Beacon Light" 1 2. "Unawed by the Influence of the Rich, the Great or Famous ... the People Must Be Heard" 13 3. "When Freedom Is Permitted to .. .Violate Laws and Con­ stitutions ... It Becomes a Curse Rather Than a Blessing" 39 4. "Steady Hands, Sound Heads and Warm Hearts, and We Shall All Be Right Again" 62 5. "Our Troubles Thicken upon Us at a Whirlwind Pace" 84 6. "We Have Just Passed the Rubicon ... to the Season of Discussion" 105 7. "The Victory for Free Discussion Is Being Won" 124 8. "We Have Told Some Unpalatable Truths ... and Time Vindicates Them" 146 Notes 159 Bibliography 185 Index 193 Preface In the Crisis, Samuel Medary, an editor who published a controversial newspaper in Columbus, Ohio, during the American Civil War, op­ posed the conflict because he believed North and South could settle their differences peacefully. Government officials and the majority of the Northern population disagreed with him, and some called for, or took steps to achieve, the suppression of the Crisis. This account of Medary's effort to employ the First Amendment to defend his ability to publish an adversarial newspaper is not one of definitive achievement. Rather, it is a study of how Medary's failure coincidentally resulted in a degree of journalistic success. His story is an example of how a prin­ ciple that is uniquely American—freedom of the press—has evolved over time through continual testing of its practical application. Freedom of the press has not existed in its current form through­ out U.S. history. It has taken the experiences of people like Medary to broaden the parameters of press freedom. The nature of the First Amendment demands that such delineation be an ongoing process. There have always been and continue to be Americans who persist in defining freedom of the press in their own terms, testing its power— and proving its integrity. And it is in times of national conflict that such individuals most need First Amendment protection, for during these periods opposing comments are most likely to be viewed as du­ bious, even treasonous. Providing a safeguard for the right to voice unpopular opinion is why the Founding Fathers created the First Amendment. Without minority opinion, Americans would not have adequate information to make decisions about the best course of ac­ tion for themselves or their country. Majority opinion scarcely needs constitutional protection. This project began during the winter of 1990 when, as a Ph.D. candidate at Ohio University, I began searching for a topic to research vu vm Preface in a journalism historiography course. My instructor, Patrick Wash- burn, told me about Medary, and that his personal papers and a com­ plete collection of the Crisis were at the Ohio Historical Center in nearby Columbus. Washburn noted that Medary was an enigmatic character, and that an in-depth analysis of his case had not been at­ tempted. Although I had spent most of my life in Ohio, and had an in­ terest in Civil War history, I had never heard of Medary. But journalism historians Edwin and Michael Emery had. In their book, The Press and America, they write that charges of conspiracy were brought against Medary late in the war, and his case was "one of the most celebrated [newspaper] suspension cases outside of New York during the Civil War." They do not mention, however, why it was so celebrated or how it ended. During my research I found that Medary was not a journalistic fig­ ure of the magnitude of, say, Horace Greeley. Nevertheless, many his­ torians mention him, although usually in a negative vein. Because his sphere of influence was largely within a political movement that has been relegated to one of the dark corners of Civil War history, Medary's impact on the field of journalism has been dismissed. Medary's case, in which he allegedly committed conspiracy against the Union, was never tried. If Medary was the most visible editorialist for a peace movement that was constantly threatened, why had he been able to continue publishing throughout the war? And when he was eventually charged with conspiracy against the Union, why was he not tried and convicted? No historical project is completed without the guidance, assis­ tance, and encouragement of numerous individuals. I am particularly grateful to two men who served as mentors during this process. With­ out Patrick Washburn, this project would never have become a book. His advice that I pattern my narrative after that of historian Barbara Tuchman opened up a new world of scholarly inquiry to me. Without the support of Washburn and the inspiration of Tuchman, my re­ search would not have uncovered the significance of Medary's Crisis. And I owe a special debt of gratitude to Michael Kline, history in­ structor and colleague at the Zanesville campus of Ohio University, whose encouragement and advice throughout the writing process were invaluable. I thank the members of my dissertation committee at Ohio Univer­ sity, all of whom in significant ways aided the completion of this proj­ Preface ix ect. David Mould gave freely of his time throughout the summer of 1992 to act, along with Washburn, as coeditor of each chapter. Mould's knowledge of Ohio history was of great value in spotting ar­ eas that needed strengthening. Phyllis Field and Robert Stewart also were very helpful. Field provided insight into various areas of the Civil War framework that required more depth; Stewart sharpened the prose. In addition, I wish to thank the numerous librarians and archivists who played an important role in helping secure the information neces­ sary to complete my research. In particular, Amy Underwood, at the Ohio University library in Zanesville, helped track down materials and processed many interlibrary loan requests. I received gracious and able assistance from individuals at the Ohio Historical Center Li­ brary, the Ohio State Law Library, the National Archives in Chicago, the Ohio State School of Journalism, the Historical Society of Mont­ gomery County, Pennsylvania, the Columbus Public Library, and the Cincinnati Historical Society. I also want to thank Charlotte Dihoff, Acquisitions Editor at Ohio State University Press, for seeing this project through. She, along with her reviewers and editorial board, made constructive comments that helped strengthen the manuscript. I am especially grateful to Nancy Woodington, whose precise editing improved my writing. Finally, I am indebted to my wife, Bev, who shouldered a heavy load of family responsibility and was always nearby with understanding and sup­ port. She also helped with research and proofreading and by posing important questions. Most important, she believed in my ability to complete the project. 'Our Constitution Is a Beacon Light3 As the miles raced by on May 20, 1864, the newspaperman on the train wondered what the day held for him. It was spring in Ohio, but as the small towns and farm fields sped past the window Samuel Medary found little in the scenery to cheer him. The two federal mar­ shals who accompanied him on the 110-mile ride from Columbus to Cincinnati were a reminder that this was no pleasure trip, but little in Medary's life of the previous three years had been pleasurable. As publisher of the Columbus Crisis, a dissident newspaper, Medary opposed the Civil War and the concomitant restraints on civil liberties, especially threats to limit the editorial comment of noncon­ formists like himself. As a result, Medary waged a "war within the war," a battle for his First Amendment right to print dissenting opin­ ion. Although this war was not so widely chronicled as such battles as Gettysburg, Antietam, or Vicksburg, Medary carried out his crusade in Columbus with an intense passion. At the end of Medary's train ride he faced Circuit Court Judge Humphrey H. Leavitt. A year earlier the same judge had sentenced an­ other activist, Clement Vallandigham of Dayton, to military prison. Would Medary suffer a similar fate? Would his greatest fears be real­ ized with the silencing of the Crisis and abridgment of his First Amendment freedom? And had his critics finally been proved correct? As it happened, Medary would not secure vindication in a court of law. In the court of public opinion, his struggle had a mixed reception. Six months after his court appearance in Cincinnati, Medary died. 1 2 Chapter 1 With him were buried the answers to his questions, and although a bullet did not end his life, he was nonetheless a casualty of war. Unlike in the case of another press freedom zealot of nineteenth- century America, Elijah Lovejoy, historians have dismissed any con­ tribution Medary might have made to the development of freedom of the press in America.