2:30-3:45 Texts: the Writings of Abraham Lincoln
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Dispute Over the Annexation of Texas and Opposition to the Mexican War Prior to Texas's Independence, the Nueces River Was R
American Studies Mr. Carlson The Dispute over the Annexation of Texas and opposition to the Mexican War Prior to Texas's independence, the Nueces River was recognized as the northern boundary of Mexico. Spain had fixed the Nueces as a border in 1816, and the United States ratified it in the 1819 treaty by which the United States had purchased Florida and renounced claims to Texas. Even following Mexico's independence from Spain, American and European cartographers fixed the Texas border at the Nueces. When Texas declared its independence, however, it claimed as its territory an additional 150 miles of land, to the Rio Grande. With the annexation of Texas in 1845, the United States adopted Texas's position and claimed the Rio Grande as the border. Mexico broke diplomatic relations with the United States and refused to recognize either the Texas annexation or the Rio Grande border. President James Polk sent a special envoy, John L. Slidell, to propose cancellation of Mexico's debt to United States citizens who had incurred damages during the Mexican Revolution, provided Mexico would formally recognize the Rio Grande boundary. Slidell was also authorized to offer the Mexican government up to $30 million for California and New Mexico. Between Slidell's arrival on December 6, 1845, and his departure in March 1846, the regime of President Jose Herrara was overthrown and a fervently nationalistic government under General Mariano Paredes seized power. Neither leader would speak to Slidell. When Paredes publicly reaffirmed Mexico's claim to all of Texas, Slidell left in a temper, convinced that Mexico should be "chastised." American Studies Mr. -
Image Credits
the exclusive roster of conferees points to the fact that the honor remains one of the few ways the United States gov- NOTES ernment can acknowledge a foreigner’s contribution to the nation and/or to mankind. The congressional joint resolu- 1. T. Lawrence Larkin, “A ‘Gift’ Strategically tion clearly enumerated Gálvez’s contributions: he led a truly Solicited and Magnanimously Conferred: The multi-national military force to strategically significant American Congress, the French Monarchy, and the victories against Great Britain during the Revolutionary State Portraits of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette,” War; he later served the cause of science as viceroy of New Winterthur Portfolio 44, no. 1 (2010): 31–75; Larkin, Spain by sponsoring hydrographic expeditions of the Gulf “Final Report for Research Undertaken with the Aid of Mexico; his name has been given to several localities in of the U.S. Capitol Historical Society, April–June Texas and Louisiana; and the state of Florida named him a 2000,” Research Files, USCHS. “Great Floridian” in 2012. 2.James Alton James, “Oliver Pollock, Financier of In the spring of 2014, Representative Jeff Miller (FL) the Revolution in the West,” Mississippi Valley His- introduced H.J. Res. 105 in the House, and Senator Marco torical Review, 16, no. 1(June 1929): 67–80; Robert Rubio (FL) introduced S.J. Res. 38 in the Senate, to confer Morris to Bernardo de Gálvez, 21 Nov. 1781, in honorary United States citizenship on Gálvez. As president E. James Ferguson and John Catanzariti, eds., The general of the Sons of the American Revolution, I wrote a Papers of Robert Morris, 1781-1784 (9 vols., Pitts- letter to every member of the House Foreign Affairs Com- burgh, PA, 1980–99), 2:221–22. -
University of Cincinnati
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:_December 13, 2006_ I, James Michael Rhyne______________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Doctor of Philosophy in: History It is entitled: Rehearsal for Redemption: The Politics of Post-Emancipation Violence in Kentucky’s Bluegrass Region This work and its defense approved by: Chair: _Wayne K. Durrill_____________ _Christopher Phillips_________ _Wendy Kline__________________ _Linda Przybyszewski__________ Rehearsal for Redemption: The Politics of Post-Emancipation Violence in Kentucky’s Bluegrass Region A Dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in the Department of History of the College of Arts and Sciences 2006 By James Michael Rhyne M.A., Western Carolina University, 1997 M-Div., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1989 B.A., Wake Forest University, 1982 Committee Chair: Professor Wayne K. Durrill Abstract Rehearsal for Redemption: The Politics of Post-Emancipation Violence in Kentucky’s Bluegrass Region By James Michael Rhyne In the late antebellum period, changing economic and social realities fostered conflicts among Kentuckians as tension built over a number of issues, especially the future of slavery. Local clashes matured into widespread, violent confrontations during the Civil War, as an ugly guerrilla war raged through much of the state. Additionally, African Americans engaged in a wartime contest over the meaning of freedom. Nowhere were these interconnected conflicts more clearly evidenced than in the Bluegrass Region. Though Kentucky had never seceded, the Freedmen’s Bureau established a branch in the Commonwealth after the war. -
Lincoln and Habeas: of Merryman and Milligan and Mccardle
Lincoln and Habeas: Of Merryman and Milligan and McCardle John Yoo* Three cases define the Supreme Court's encounter with the Civil War: Ex parte Merryman,' Ex parte Milligan,2 and Ex parte McCardle.3 All three case names bear the styling "ex parte" because all three were brought on behalf of citizens detained by the armed forces of the Union. All three detainees sought release under the ancient writ of habeas corpus, which requires the government to demonstrate to a federal judge the factual and legal grounds for detention.4 I will explain why the cases of the Civil War did not assume the landmark importance, despite their circumstances and language, as a Marbury v. Madison, McCullough v. Maryland, or Brown v. Board of Education, but instead showed the deferential attitude of the Supreme Court to the other branches of the government during wartime. Merryman was a Maryland militia officer who had blown up railroad bridges between Washington, D.C. and the North, and was training secessionist troops in the earliest days of the Civil War.5 Milligan was an alleged member of an insurgent force in Indiana that was sympathetic to the Confederacy.6 He was tried and sentenced by a military commission-an old form of ad hoc military court established by commanders for the trial of violations of the laws of war and the administration of justice in occupied territory.7 * Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law, Chapman Law School (2008-09); Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley; Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute. The author thanks Ben Petersen and Janet Galeria for outstanding research assistance. -
Greenberg – a Wicked
POLK, CLAY, LINCOLN, AND THE 1846 U.S. INVASION OF MEXICO WICKED WAR AMY S. GREENBERG I do not think there was ever a more wicked war than that waged by the United States on Mexico. I thought so at the time, when I was a youngster, only I had not moral courage enough to resign. —ULYSSES S. GRANT, 1879 Introduction THIS is THE STORY of five men, four years, and one foreign war. Henry Clay, James K. Polk, Abraham Lincoln, John J. Hardin, and Nicholas Trist were bound together in unexpected political and personal battle during the years 1844-48 as AmericaVwar against Mexico unfolded, then stumbled to an end. That conflict, which breached George Washington's injunction to avoid entanglements abroad, was an act of expansionist aggression against a neighboring country. It reshaped the United States into lord of the continent and announced the arrival of a new world power. TheJJ.S.-Mexican conflict also tipped an internecine struggle over slaveryjnto civil war. Though both Its justification and its consequences are dim now, this, America's first wgr against another republic, decisively broke with the past, shaped the future, and to this day affects how the United States acts in the world. This is also a story about politics, slavery, Manifest Destiny, Indian kill- ing, and what it meant to prove one's manhood in the nineteenth century. It explores the meaning of moral courage injVmerica, the importance of legacies passed between generations, and the imperatives that turn politi- cians into leaders. And it attempts to explain why the United States invaded a neighboring country and how it came to pass that a substantial number of Americans determined to stop the ensuing war. -
Abraham Lincoln: Preserving the Union and the Constitution
ABRAHAM LINCOLN: PRESERVING THE UNION AND THE CONSTITUTION Louis Fisher* I. THE MEXICAN WAR ..................................................................505 A. Polk Charges Treason ...................................................507 B. The Spot Resolutions ....................................................508 C. Scope of Presidential Power .........................................510 II. DRED SCOTT DECISION ...........................................................512 III. THE CIVIL WAR .....................................................................513 A. The Inaugural Address.................................................515 B. Resupplying Fort Sumter .............................................518 C. War Begins ...................................................................520 D. Lincoln’s Message to Congress .....................................521 E. Constitutionality of Lincoln’s Actions .......................... 523 F. Suspending the Writ .....................................................524 G. Statutory Endorsement ................................................527 H. Lincoln’s Blockade .......................................................528 IV. COMPARING POLK AND LINCOLN ...........................................531 * Specialist in constitutional law, Law Library, Library of Congress. This paper was presented at the Albany Government Law Review’s symposium, “Lincoln’s Legacy: Enduring Lessons of Executive Power,” held on September 30 and October 1, 2009. My appreciation to David Gray Adler, Richard -
Civil War Almanac: the Best Civil War Books of All Time James Marten Department of History, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI J
Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette History Faculty Research and Publications/College of Arts and Sciences This paper is NOT THE PUBLISHED VERSION; but the author’s final, peer-reviewed manuscript. The published version may be accessed by following the link in the citation below. Civil War Monitor, (November, 2017). DOI. This article is © [Civil War Monitor] and permission has been granted for this version to appear in e-Publications@Marquette. [Civil War Monitor] does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from [Civil War Monitor]. Civil War Almanac: The Best Civil War Books of All Time James Marten Department of History, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI J. Matthew Gallman Department of History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL Matthew C. Hulbert Department of History, Texas A&M University, Kingsville, TX Amy Murrell Taylor Department of History, University of Kentucky, For our latest newsstand-only special issue, The Civil War Almanac, we asked a panel of Civil War historians—J. Matthew Gallman, Matthew C. Hulbert, James Marten, and Amy Murrell Taylor—for their opinions on a variety of popular topics, including the war's most overrated and underratred commanders, top turning points, most influential women, and best depictions on film. Space constraints prevented us from including their answers to one of the questions we posed: What are the 10 best Civil War books ever published (nonfiction or fiction)? Below are their responses. J. Matthew Gallman: 1. Memoir. Ulysses S. Grant, The Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant (1885). Often described as the best book by a U.S. -
Lincoln, the Civil War, and the New Approval-Ratings
Review Essay Lincoln, the Civil War, and the New Approval-Ratings Michael Perman ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND THE SECOND AMERICAN AMERICAN REVOLUTION. By James M.McPherson. New York: Oxford University Press. 1991. THE FATE OF LIBERTY: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties. By Mark E. Neely, Jr. New York: Oxford University Press. 1991. WHAT THEY FOUGHT FOR, 1861-1865. By James M. McPherson. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. 1994. THE PRESIDENCY OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN. By Phillip Shaw Paludan. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press. 1994. The most important recent scholarship on the American Civil War and its preeminent protagonist, Abraham Lincoln, is represented by the four books under review. Two of the authors, James McPherson and Mark Neely, have won the Pulitzer Prize in History, while several of these volumes have been History Book Club selections, Paludan's even being chosen by the Book of the Month Club. Since they have been acknowledged as significant and deemed worthy of notice to a broad readership and since two of them appeared as long ago as 1991, there seems little need, at this point, to review them individually in the traditional way. 0026-3079/93/3601-131$1.50/0 131 Instead, this essay will treat them as a group and will suggest what they indicate about the state and tone of current scholarship on those two topics of endless fascination, Lincoln and the Civil War. Although they deal with different aspects of these two subjects, all three authors are in agreement that the Civil War was not a "needless war" or a conflict lacking in purpose. -
Pulitzer Prize-Winning History Books (PDF)
PULITZER PRIZE WINNING HISTORY BOOKS The Past 50 Years 2013 Embers of War: The Fall of an Empire and the Making of America's Vietnam by Fredrik Logevall 2012 Malcolm X : A Life of Reinvention by Manning Marable 2011 The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery by Eric Foner 2010 Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World by Liaquat Ahamed 2009 The Hemingses of Monticello: An American Family by Annette Gordon- Reed 2008 "What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848" by Daniel Walker Logevall 2007 The Race Beat: The Press, the Civil Rights Struggle, and the Awakening of a Nation by Gene Roberts and Hank Klibanoff 2006 Polio: An American Story by David M. Oshinsky 2005 Washington's Crossing by David Hackett Fischer 2004 A Nation Under Our Feet: Black Political Struggles in the Rural South from Slavery to the Great Migration by Steven Hahn 2003 An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942-1943 by Rick Atkinson 2002 The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America by Louis Menand 2001 Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation by Joseph J. Ellis 2000 Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945 by David M. Kennedy 1999 Gotham : A History of New York City to 1898 by Edwin G. Burrows and Mike Wallace 1998 Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion by Edward J. Larson 1997 Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution by Jack N. Rakove 1996 William Cooper's Town: Power and Persuasion on the Frontier of the Early American Republic by Alan Taylor 1995 No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt: The Home Front in World War II by Doris Kearns Goodwin 1994 (No Award) 1993 The Radicalism of the American Revolution by Gordon S. -
The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln
REVIEWS THm COLLECTED WORKS OF ABRAHAm LiNcoLN. Roy P. Basler, ed. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1953. 9 vols. $115.00. THIs stupendous work is the definitive collection of Lincoln papers. It is superbly edited and handsomely published. It has been widely reviewed, and has already become a commercial success, fully vindicating the daring of the press which published it and the patience of the editors who created it. A review of any collected works of this kind is likely to develop into a catalog of treasures. The treasures are here. Each volume necessarily contains much minutia of no great significance, but the deep-seated Lincoln enthusiast will want to know about everlthing, and the casual browser will find a good deal to interest him which is not in the shorter collections. Though the Works omit most of the exclusively legal writings by Lincoln, as for example his pleadings, what is here can be seen by a law:yer with the eye of a fellow craftsman, which makes it look a little different than it does to others. If Lincoln is read with a professional eye, any lawyer can learn from his reading. I Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States from 1861 to 1865. He romanced with Ann Rutledge (if he did at all) for only a few months. He pulled a puppy out of a river, rescued a pig, went down the Mississippi on a flatboat, and ran a store, unsuccessfully, for a year. He gave the Gettys- burg Address in something under five minutes, asked a particularly probing question of Stephen A. -
Chapter Eight “A Strong but Judicious Enemy to Slavery”: Congressman Lincoln (1847-1849) Lincoln's Entire Public Service O
Chapter Eight “A Strong but Judicious Enemy to Slavery”: Congressman Lincoln (1847-1849) Lincoln’s entire public service on the national level before his election as president was a single term in the U. S. House. Though he had little chance to distinguish himself there, his experience proved a useful education in dealing with Congress and patronage. WASHINGTON, D.C. Arriving in Washington on December 2, 1847, the Lincolns found themselves in a “dark, narrow, unsightly” train depot, a building “literally buried in and surrounded with mud and filth of the most offensive kind.”1 A British traveler said he could scarcely imagine a “more miserable station.”2 Emerging from this “mere shed, of slight construction, designed for temporary use” which was considered “a disgrace” to the railroad company as well as “the city that tolerates it,”3 they beheld an “an ill-contrived, 1 Saturday Evening News (Washington), 14 August 1847. 2 Alexander MacKay, The Western World, or, Travels in the United States in 1846-47 (3 vols.; London: Richard Bentley, 1850), 1:162. 3 Letter by “Mercer,” n.d., Washington National Intelligencer, 16 November 1846. The author of this letter thought that the station was “in every respect bad: it is cramped in space, unsightly in appearance, inconvenient in its position, and ill adapted to minister to the comfort of travellers in the entire character of its arrangements.” Cf. Wilhelmus Bogart Bryan, A History of the National Capital from Its Foundation through the Period of the Adoption of the Organic Act (2 vols.; New York: Macmillan, 1914-16), 2:357. -
Lincoln, Vallandingham, and Anti-War Speech in the Civil War
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 7 (1998-1999) Issue 1 Article 3 December 1998 Lincoln, Vallandingham, and Anti-War Speech in the Civil War Michael Kent Curtis Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Legal Commons Repository Citation Michael Kent Curtis, Lincoln, Vallandingham, and Anti-War Speech in the Civil War, 7 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 105 (1998), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol7/iss1/3 Copyright c 1998 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj LINCOLN, VALLANDIGHAM, AND ANTI-WAR SPEECH IN THE CIVIL WAR Michael Kent Curtis' In the early morning hours of May 5, 1863, Union soldiersforcibly arrested Clement L. Vallandigham, a prominent Democratic politician and former congressman,for an anti-war speech which he had given a few days earlier in Mount Vernon, Ohio. Vallandigham'sarrest ignited debate aboutfreedom ofspeech in a democracy duringa time of war and the FirstAmendment rights of critics of an administration. This Article is one in a series by ProfessorCurtis which examines episodes in the history offree speech before and during the Civil War. In this Article, ProfessorCurtis explores the FirstAmendment's guarantee of free speech and the contention that other constitutionalvalues must supersede this guarantee during a time of war. He discusses and evaluates theories that Vallandigham's contemporariesadvocated in support of protectionfor anti-war speech, as well as theoriessupporting the suppression of anti-war speech. Curtis concludes that even in a time of war,free speech is essential to the preservation of a representativegovernment and individuals' Constitutionalright to discuss issues crucialto their lives.