Indiana Republicans and the Re-Election of President Lincoln WINFREDA

Indiana Republicans and the Re-election of President Lincoln WINFREDA. HARBISON Possibly the most famous single act of Abraham Lincoln was his issuance of the definitive Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. Such a fact, however, was hardly dis- cernible from the contemporaneous reception the Proclama- tion received in Indiana. The Democrats denounced it in comprehensive terms as unconstitutional, provocative of dissension throughout the North, and therefore detrimental to the Union cause. Most of the Republicans were willing to de- fend the measure, but relatively few were inclined to praise it with enthusiasm. Some agreed, to be sure, with the radical Julian brothers, who exclaimed that “The Year of Jubilee Has Come” and hailed the Proclamation as the greatest act in all history.’ Also a new journal, the Indianapolis soon made its appearance as the champion of the emancipation policy in the Hoosier state. But most of the journalists were lukewarm and careful to explain that the purpose of the war had not changed from the preservation of the Union since the Proclamation was designed to weaken the Confedera~y.~ In fact some Republicans expressed serious doubts of the effectiveness of the measure, and even energetic Governor Morton admitted in his message to the Legislature that “it remains to be seen what effect this proclamation will have in suppressing the rebelli~n.”~ There were two fundamental causes for this lack of enthusiasm among Lincoln’s Hoosier supporters. One was the relatively conservative nature of a majority of them on the emancipation issue.s The other was the particularly un- satisfactory condition of both political and military affairs

Indiana TTUE Republican (Centerville) edited by Isaac Julian. Jan. 8, 1863. On February 18, 1863, George W. Julian mad; 8;. long speech in Congress on “The Mis- takes of the Past-The Duty of the Present, in which he castigated Lincoln’s early slavery policy. Admitting that the Proclamation was moving in the right direction, Julian continued: “A wise policy of war is not enough. Proclamations of freedom will, of themselves, accomplish little. What we need is action, instant, decisive. defiant action, scourging faithless men from power, sweeping away obstacles and kindling in the popular heart the fires of a new courage and hose. The government should arm the colored men of the free States as well as the ,:laves of the South, and thereby give effect to the proclamation of freedom. . . . Congressional Gbbe, 37 Congress, 3 Session, 1064-1069. *Published by J. H. Jordan and J. C. Burnett. * Indianapolis Journal, Jan. 5, 1863 : Madison Courier. Jan. 3, 5 : Vincennes Gazette, Jan. 10 : Logansport Journal, Feb. 7. ‘William M. French (ed.), Life, Speeches, State Papers and Public SwVices of Gou. Oliver P. Morton (Cincinnati, 1866). 310. See also Princeton Clanon, Jan. 10, 1863. 5 Winfred A. Harbison, “Lincoln and Indiana Republicans, 1861-1862, ZndiQn0 Magazine of Histmy (Sept.. 1937). XXXIII, 277-303. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 43

at that time and the tendency to blame the President for this condition. In October, 1862, the Indiana Republicans had suffered a serious defeat in the state and congressional elections, which they were inclined to attribute largely to the unsuccessful prosecution of the war by the national Admin- istration.6 Although Lincoln responded to this rebuke at the polls by dismissing Generals McClelland and Buell, the conservative conmanding generals of the main aimies of the East and West respectively, the change did not bring victory to the Union. On December 13 the Army of the Potomac under the command of General Burnsides suffered one of the “most bloody and disastrous” reverses of the war at Fred- ericksburg. Any chance of advancing southward during the winter immediately vanished ; the capture of Richmond apparently was as remote as it had been a year before. A few days later the two key armies in the West fought major battles, suffered heavy losses but failed to make any perceptible progress towards the suppression of the rebellion. Many thousands of Indiana soldiers had been engaged in these tattles and many hundreds of them had been killed or wound- ed. The prevailing gloom and despondency deepened almost to despair, even among the Republicans.‘ As the people of Indiana came to the conclusion that the enormous sacrifice in life and fortune had been in vain, their enthusiasm for the Unicn cause reached its lowest ebb of the entire war.8 During the early weeks of 1863 the “Copperhead” element ic the Democratic party took advantage of this situa- tio:: to make defiant attacks upon the Lincoln Administration and its war program. As a result the Republicans were virtually impelled to become constant defenders of the President and his policies. Public meetings were held and “Union Leagues” were formed by Republicans and War Democrats to counteract the “Copperhead” activities, by pledging wholehearted

* Zbid., 301-303. ‘About the same time disquieting reports reached Indiana that the President had quarrelled with the Republican members of the Senate over the personnel of his cabinet, especially his ytention of the conservative Seward. The belief spread that the cabinet had not been harmonious in regard to the method of prosecuting the war” and “unquestionaEly” did not possess “the confidence of the nation.” On December 23, the Indianapolis Journal bluntly declared: “If the President had force of character enough for his place he would speedily end these turmoils by turning out the whole concern and making a new one. Most of the Republicans, however, directed their critiri-m at the retention of Seward, who, they declared, had lost the confidence of the nation bemuse he n.a< not in favor of a vigorous war policy. Lafayette Journd, Dec. 22, 1862: Lafayette Cowier, Dec. 23: Delphi Joiimnl. Dec. 21: Ind:ana Herald. Dec. 24: Indiana Trun Republican, Dec. 25.

+ Lafayette Journal. Der. 19, 1862 : La Porte Herald, Dec. 27 : Rushville Republican, Dw. 31. 44 Indiana Magazine of History support to the war policy of the Government. There was a tendency, nevertheless, to damn the President with faint praise, as the following resolution of the Union meeting in Muncie will illustrate : RESOLVED, That while we admit that the President, under the influence of the ordinary infirmities of human nature, and imperfections of human judgment may have fallen into mistakes, in many particulars, which have operated seriously to retard the overthrow of the rebellion, we believe that, as a whole, his administration has been characterized by great moderation, wisdom, caution, forbearance and the purest patriotism, and impartiality, and it is the duty of all citizens, patriots, and lovers of humanity to give him their warm, hearty and unwavering support to the end.9 By early spring a widespread popular reaction had set in against the obstructionist and anti-war tactics of the “Cop- perheads”.10 The people of Indiana longed for peace but they wanted permanent peace, which they felt could be secured only by the restoration of the Union. Therefore the adherents of the President faced the opening of the spring military cam- paigns with renewed hope and confidence, but with a better understanding of the difficulties involved than during the two previous years. Consequently, when the rejuvenated Army of the Potomac, under “Fighting Joe” Hooker, the idol of the Radicals, met defeat at Chancellorsville, most Republicans evinced keen disappointment but not the profound discouragement and discontent of the year before.ll They were still confident of ultimate victory and anxious for another trial of battle. When Lee undertook his second invasion of the North, however, the Indianapolis Gazette came forward as the newest and henceforth the most prominent Republican critic of the Administration. On June 2 the editor censured the President for not having sufficient troops in reserve to fol- low up a victory or to recover from a reverse, and urged the immediate application of conscription for that purpose. A few days later, as the situation steadily became more critical, the Gazette denounced the Administration’s military policy in most comprehensive terms, and demanded the display of more energy and efficiency or the substitution of more competent men, declaring that

sDeZaware Free Press (Muncie), Feb. 12, 1863. See the Indianapolis Jou~nal, Feb. 12, for a similar resolution. lo Madison Courier, Feb. 16 : Mar. 26, 1863 : La Porte Herald, Feb. 21 : Indianapolis Gazette, Am. 7; Frederick Thomas,. Indianapolis, to Ignatius Donnelly, Feb. 6. Don- nelly Mss., Minnesota Historical Society. Madison Courie7, May 13, June 9, 1863. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 45 the greatest deficiency.. . .on the part of the men at the head of affairs at Washington [is] forethought . . . . And it has been that, more than anything else, that has discouraged, vexed, and at times almost crushed the hopes of, and driven to despair, the loyal people of the Nation. The history of the world does not afford another example of such an utter lack of forethought, of energy, of inability and want of com- petency to comprehend and grapple v-ith a great emergency of state- of imbecility, we will say, for we believe it and feel it-as has been sh0R-n from the very commencement of this n-ar, and all the may through . . . by the men constituting the Administration. There is no use denying this, or in trying loiiger to blink it or hide it. It is true, and every earnest, loyal nian in the nation feels, sees. and deplores it. We have seen it and felt it all the n-hile, and have more than a hundred times urged the fact upon members of the Adrninistrationlz.. . . We presume thousands of others have done the same , . . . At this moment three hundred thousand more troops are needed in the field . . . . Why are they not there? Whose fault is it? . . . The fault is at Washington. ,4nd we do most soleninly think it is time the people should rise, en masse, and demand of the men at the head of the affairs of this imperiled Sation that they do something and at once, commensurate 1%-iththe magnitude of the occasion . . . or that they give way or be put away by the President, and let others take their places who are able for the task and in whom the people have confidence! The crisis of the Sation is upon us. Is the Administration prepared for it? If not, n-hy not and whose fault is it? God save the Republic.13 The great victories at Gettysburg and Vicksburg in July increased the confidence of the Republicans in the President as well as in the ultimate victory of the Union. From the out- break of hostilities the most basic cause of popular dissatis- faction with the Administration had been the lack of decisive military success; at last the people felt that the tide had turned. Although many Republicans were disappointed that Lee’s army was neither captured nor annihilated,I* and some blamed the Administration’s lenient treatment of disloyalty in the North for the serious draft riots in New York,15 nevertheless their criticism became infrequent and qualified, and their praise of Lincoln’s course became more widespread

J. H. Jordan, the editor, was a political friend and correspondenr of Secretary

Chase.~ ~~~ l3 June 17, 1863. Juiy 2 the Gazette censured the president for not superseding General Hooker immediately after his failure at Chancellorsrille: “To retain him 8: hour longer were cruel kindness to him and little less than treason to the country. June 18 the Madison Cowie?. said that croakers and critics of the Administration were becoming numerous again. I’ Indianapolis Gazette, July 7, 1863 ; Indianapolis Journal, July 15 ; Princeton Clarion, Aug. 1. ’SLafayette Journal, July 15, 1863: Indianpolis Gazette, July 14. The latter journal maintained that Seward was chiefly responsible for the timid, half-way meas- urc of the Administration “toward rebel sympathizers in the North and apprehended more danger from his continuance in the Administration than from “all other causes put together.” 46 Indiana Magazine of History and His political followers were particularly enthusiastic over his Springfield letter, in which he clearly indicated that he opposed any compromise with the rebels or any modification of his Emancipation Proclamation and favored the employment of all lawful means for the suppression of the rebellion. Even the critical Indianapolis Gazette com- mended highly “the plain, honest, straight-forward manner of the President, his candor and patriotic intentions, and his unanswerable arguments and conclusive reasoning.” Re- assured that he would take no backward steps on emancipation to appease the “Copperheads”, the radical organ declared that earnest patriots of all parties would “look at him with even more faith and confidence than ever before, to pilot our national ship out of the perils that now surround it.”’? Under these encouraging circumstances it was only natural that his Hoosier supporters should evidence their increasing satisfac- tion by giving substantial majorities to the Administration candidates in the fall elections of 1863.ls When the President, in his annual message, announced a moderate reconstruction policy, with a Proclamation of Amnesty for repentant rebels, he further increased his popularity with his political friends in Indiana. They felt that he had adopted the safest and soundest method of solving a very difficult problem. His program was enthusiastically w-elcomed as “eminently wise and satisfactory” and as the product of a “gigantic mind, a towering intellect, a learned lawyer, a great statesman, and a merciful Executi~e.”~~The strong anti-slavery men were especially impressed by Lin- coin’s rigid adherence to his emancipation policy for reconstruction as well as for the war. ‘We like ‘Old Abe’s’ way of getting at the merits of things”, exclaimed one journalist, “and his plan of reconstruction on a basis which will insure permanent peace, forever removing the one cause of our national difficulties from our midst, is peculiarly gracious

‘nMadison Courier, Aug. 31, 1863: Vincennes Gazette, Sept. 5. I7Sept. 6, 1863. On October 13, however, the Gazette severely censured Lincoln’s refuusal to espouse the cause of the “Radicals” in the factional controversy in Mis- souri. The editor declared that “nine-tenths of the truly loyal men of the Nation- certainly in the Western States-are . . . very far from satisfied, with his position . . . in regard to affairs in that State, And we will go further and say that if Mr. Lincoln fails to comprehend . . ~ the necessity of reform and fails or refuses to comply with the demands of the people who sent that delegation to see him-h milj make the greatest mistake of his life, and one that he will never recover from! . . . Only local and county elections were held. For results see The Tribune Almanac and PoEticd Register for 1864, 67. ‘OLa Porte Herald, Dec. 12, 1863: Delphi Jourrucl, Dec. 16: Indiana Herald (Hnnt- ington), Dec. 16; Indianapolis Journal, Dee. 10. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 47 to our way of thinking”.z0 Although the censorious Indian- apolis Gazette badly misinterpreted his policy, it rejoiced on December 10 that his Proclamation of Amnesty had “solved” the dangerous problem of reconstruction. A few weeks later “cheering accounts” of the “good effects’’ of the amnesty policy began to come in “from all quarters”.21 The real test of President Lincoln’s popularity was to come in his campaign for re-election. By the beginning of 1864, many Republicans were already considering the question of his renomination. The improved military situation, which presaged the victorious termination of hostilities and the restoration of the Union, naturally redounded to the political advantage of the Commander-in-Chief. In Indiana the Re- publicans or unionists were divided roughly into three classes in respect to their attitude towards the question of renomination. By far the largest class comprised those who believed that “Old Abe” was, all things considered, the best man to complete “the great task remaining before us”. Soon after the elections of 1863 it became evident that the popular confidence in the President was increasing rapidly, and that many people were coming to believe that he must be continued for another term. This sentiment was particularly prevalent in the southern section of the State, where the Republicans were relatively conservative on the war and emancipation issues. In Congress Senator Henry S. Lane was the most prominent Hoosier favoring the President’s re-election.22 Taking their cue from the people, several of the local journalists came out enthusiastically for Lincoln’s renomination, and some even placed his name at the head of their editorial columns. On November 14, 1863, the La Porte Herald practically declared for his renomination and on De- cember 8 the Evansville Journal took the same step in more emphatic terms. On January 2, 1864, Charles Powell, editor of the Herald, became one of the first to place Lincoln’s name at its masthead with this endorsement: “We believe that he is better qualified to lead this nation through the fiery ordeal through which it is now passing than any other living man”. During January the Madison Courier, Putmm Republican Banner, Vincennes Gazette, Wabash Express, and Mishawaka

*Delaware Free Press, Dec. 24, 1863: also hgansport Journal, Dec. 19. a La Porte Her&, Jan. 2, 1864; Madison Courier, Jan. 11, Mar. 24. 22 Schuyler Colfax to Chase, Dee. 5, 1864. Chase Mss., Library of Congress : Con- presSiod Globe, 38 Congress, 1 session, 2827. 48 Indiana Magazine of History

Enterprise declared stoutly for On February 10 the Express explained the prevailing sentiment : The people are emphatically for Mr. LINCOLN, for another term of office, and it would be unwise to not heed this fact. Almost every mechanic, merchant and farmer, together with the politicians, of the country, prefer him to any other man and will labor for his re-election with a zeal and indefatigability which no other candidate could possibly command. Besides being the strongest man, the past history of Mr. LINCOLN demands his renomination and re-election. His administration requires that endorsement from the people, and they will willingly bestow it, if their preferences are not overlooked. There is no man in the whole country who has the strength to oppose Mr. LIN- COLN’S nomination successfully. . . . Some of the Lincoln advocates, showing more enthusiasm than discretion, suggested that their champion should be nominated by the acclamation of all loyal men. To accomplish this, it was proposed that the separate Union State conventions should appoint presidential electors and thus obviate the necessity of a national c~nvention.~~When this plan proved impractical, the Lincolnites set to work to secure instructions for their candidate from the State conventions which would make his nomination in the national convention a mere formality.25 Naturally many postmasters and other federal office-holders, with a selfish interest involved, were working for the President, but the movement also rested on a solid popular foundation.26 Another group of Republicans took a less active part in the early discussion of the presidential question. Most of them were apparently friendly to the President’s renomination, but some felt that the agitation of the matter was either impolitic or premature. Others wanted to be in a position to support without reservations the Union nominee, who- ever he might be. The newspapers in this group included the Lafayette Courier, Lafayette Journal, Indiana Herald, Delphi Journal-perhaps even the Indianapblis Journal should be placed in this category.

23Co~~ier.Jan. 11, 1864; Banner, Jan. 21; Gazette, Jan. 30: EZPT~SS,Jan. 20; Enterprise, Jan. 23. 2( The Evansville Journal was in this group. See particularly Indianapolis Journrcl, Jan. 16, Feb. 27. 1864 : Indianapolis Gazette, Jan. 25 : Indiana Herald, Jan. .27 : John D. Defrees, Superintendent of Public Printing, Washington, D. C., to Col. Richard W. Thompson, Feb. 2, 1864. Thompson MsB., Lincoln National Life Foundation, Fort Wayne, Indiana. 25 Ibid. SZbid.; Vincennes Gazette Jan. 30. 1864. James H. McNeely, postmaster of Evansville, was accused by inti-Lincoln Republicans of manipulating the Lincoln movement for personal advantage. In a letter to the Indianapolis Gazette (Febmarr 25, 1864) McNeely denied that the postmasters were any more enthusiastic for Lincoln than the people. In May 1864 McNeely assumed the editorship of the Evansville Jotwd. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 49

The third class consisted of those Republicans who pre- ferred another candidate to Lincoln. Aside from a few disgruntled office-seekers, this opposition to renomination came almost exclusively from the radical wing of the party. These men believed that Lincoln had been too tender toward traitors, too cautious in his prosecution of the war, too slow in de- veloping his emancipation policy.zi For the next presidency they wanted a more aggressive executive, one more determined to crush the rebellion by any and every means. The most extreme element of this faction comprised the small band of German Unionists who bitterly opposed the President’s renomination. Their attitude was expressed by the Indiana Freie Presse, when it declared: ‘‘We cannot and dare not vote for Lincoln, unless we are willing to participate in the be- trayal of the republic, unless we are willing to remain for all future the most despicable step-children of the nation”.2S The more moderate opponents of renomination, however, generally realized and sometimes admitted that the vast majority of the Union men were for the Pre~ident.~~They ex- erted themselves chiefly to keep the presidential contest an open one as long as possible, so that their own candidate would have a chance for the nomination in case Lincoln’s popularity should substantially wane. The only radical candidates to attract much attention in Indiana were General Fremont and Secretary Chase. Fre- mont had the zealous support of most of the Germans and a few After Lincoln’s renomination in June, the In- diana Twe Republican declared that its “personal preference” at first had been Freni~iit.~~But the editor did not openly advocate his nomination-probably because he was afraid that such a course might defeat George J. Julian’s re-election to Congress by alienating some of the Lincoln supporters. The Chase men had been working for several months to

27 Indianapolis Gazette, Oct. 15 ; Dec. 8, 1863. Julian, PoZzticaZ Recollections, 237-240. 28Quoted by Mississippi Hatter, Mar. 6, 1864. 28 Indianapolis Gazette Jan. 14, 21, 25, 1864‘ Delaware Free Press Mar. 10. On March 1 W. D. Bickham, &-oprietor of the Dayton ’(0.1Daily Jou~nal,wrote John Sher- man that he strongly favored Chase’s nomination, “hut I am thoroughly convinced that five out of six people of the West-in Ohio and Indiana especially-where I have been most observant are enthusiastically in favor of the renomination of Xr. Lincoln. The movement is not managed; it is spontaneous beyond the possibility of a doubt; it is a great ground swell which will assuredly overwhelm everything in its path. . . . The people believe in Lincoln for President and will not be balked. . . .” Sherman Mss., Library of Congress. 30 Indianapolis Gazette, Feb. 20, 1864 ; Indianapolis Journal, Feh. 27. 51 June 16, 1864. 50 Indiana Magazine of History promote his candidacy. In October, 1863, Chase had visited Indianapolis and was particularly attentive to Morton ; a few days later one of Chase’s political lieutenants approached the Governor to see whether his support could be relied upon.32 But Morton was not willing to jeopardize his own chances of re-election by participating in the factional contest for the presidential n~mination.~~The two most influential Republi- can Congressmen from Indiana, Julian and Schuyler Colfax, the latter Speaker of the House of Representatives, were de- cidedly friendly to Chase’s candidacy;34but both hesitated to oppose Lincoln’s renomination as long as popular sentiment was evidently so strong in his favor. A few of the less prominent politicians and journalists were in a similar position. Urged on by some of Chase’s Treasury agents, these men were particularly anxious that the State convention should take no“premature” action in favor of Lincoln’s renomination. On February 5, 1864, one of Chase’s supporters wrote to him from Indianapolis that there was strong pressure for Lincoln Yet all are your friends, and . . . many are for you for the Presi- dency, before any one, and the number rapidly increasing. Your friends are at work, and if the State convention passes off without premature action, a vigerous [sic] effort will be made to carry the state for you. . . . 35 Although the Indianapolis Gazette was the chief radical organ in the State, its position on the presidential question was somewhat variable and inconsistent. As early as October 13, 1863, the editors had declared that Lincoln would ruin his chance of re-election unless he decided the factional controversy in Missouri in favor of the “Radicals.” Two days later, however, the Gazette announced with enthusiasm : We have always looked upon Mr. Lincoln not only as the best man. probably in America, for the place he now occupies, all things con- rsidered, but as a Providential man, or as the instrument in the hands

32 Indianapolis Jownal Oct. 15 1863 . Indianapolis Gazette Oct. 15 : William P. Mellen to Chase, Cincinnaii, Oct. 29: 1863.’ Chase Mss., Pa. Hist: Society. Foulke, Oliver P. Morton, I. 293 : Donnal V. Smith, Chase and Civil War Politics, 121 : B. F. Tuttle, to Chase, Indianapolis, Feb. 6, 1864. Chase Mss., Library of Congress. Colfax to Chase, Dec. 5, 1864. Chase Mss., Pa. Hist. Society : Indianapolis G5 zette, Feb. 9 1864: Julian, Political Recollections 237. March 10 the Delaware Free Press refuted the contentions of Julian’s opponents that he was working for Chase’s nomination: the editor declared that Julian had written to his friends, invariably expressing himself in favor of Lincoln. The Free Press maintained, however, that Chase was amply qualified for the presidency and that Julian had a right to support him if he wished. sz €3. F. Tuttle. Chase Mss., Pa. Hist. Society. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 51 of a wise and over-ruling Providence to manage the affairs of our nation during the present terrible In December the Gazette was again skeptical, maintaining that the President made a fatal mistake by deciding the Mis- souri question in favor of the “Conservatives,” and insisting that he must take a radical stand on reconstruction or be defeated for re-ele~tion.~’But by the opening of 1864 the editors were being swept along by the Lincoln current, publish- ing frequent editorials and articles commending the President and his course.3s On January 14 they declared that Lincoln “would be nominated by acclamation, and that too by the Peo- ple.” During February, however, the tone of the paper rapidly changed to one of cautious but persistent opposition to renomination. This shift was effected chiefly by the retire- ment of one of the publishers, J. C. Burnett, leaving J. H. Jordan, an old political friend of Chase, as sole editor.39 On February 9, Jordan led off with an expression of regret at the “disposition to go too fast . . . in the way of President- making.” Three days later the Gazette declared for “The One- Term Principle” for the presidency, an obvious ruse of the Lincoln opponents. Advancing in his opposition, the editor maintained that “the enthusiasm for Mr. Lincoln as the next President is fast dying out. There are very good reasons for this. The enthusiasm was not genuine, but fictitious and forced-and by the wrong class of men.’’4o On the eve of the state convention Jordan declared that since there was “a strong opposition” to Lincoln’s renomination, it would be very unwise for that body to take any action on the presidential question.41 Meanwhile the Republican supporters and opponents of

88 The Gazette continued with the following accurate appraisal: “We see things in Mr. Lincoln’s conduct at times-things that he does or fails to do-which we object to and think are not right. He is too slow or too easy, too cautious or too tender towards traitors. Thus we often feel, and doubtless thousands of others do the same. But on second, sober thought, it generally turns out that MI. Lincoln was nearest right-all things considered. . . . We do not believe he would do a wrong act, a cruel act, or an unconstitutional act, not even to save his own lifeunless he was convinced that it was his duty to do so for the greater good to the greater number. . . . For certain emergencies and particular causes we may often fancy that some other man would do better than Mr. Lincoln. Perhaps he would. But ‘in the long run’, taking all things into accoant and remembering the various interests and different classes of men and parties to deal with-where would we find a man so eminently fitted for the emergency and the times as Abraham Lincoln?” ‘?December 8, 1863. January 11, 16, 21, 1864. lls Smith. Clucse, 114. “Feb. 18, 1864. Feb. 20, 22, 1864. 52 Indiana Maguzine of Histoyy the President’s renomination were expressing themselves in a more official manner. In accordance with the instructions of the State Central Committee, the Union men in estch county met on February 13 to select delegates to the State convention. Practically every county convention adopted a resolution strongly endorsing the Lincoln Administration, and a considerable number of them officially declared for the Presi- dent‘s ren~mination.~~No record of a county declaring against renomination has been found; even the inaction of many county conventions does not generally signify opposition or lack of enthusiasm, for delegates to state conventions were ordinarily uninstructed on presidential nominations. Some of t!iese bodies, moreover, did not even declare for Morton’s renomination, which was very popular with Republicans and a more immediate concern. Under these circumstances the delegates, accompanied by thousands of others, gathered at Indianapolis on February 23 for the supreme test in the Union State Convention. The anti-Lincoln men fully realized that their only reasonable hope lay in preventing the convention from taking any definite action on the presidential question. What is of greater import- ance, they knew that if they lost Indiana their cause would be practically hopeless in other States. Aroused by these efforts to forestall the will of the majority, the ardent Lin- colnites were more than ever determined to secure a formal declaration for the President’s ren~mination.~~Prominent 2.mong the anti-Lincoln faction were the Germans and some of Chase’s henchmen,44while the leadership of the pro-Lincoln group included such Presidential apointees as Colonel “Dick” Thompson, a provost marshall, and John Defrees, Superin- tendent of the Government Printing Office. Between these extremes were the moderates, who were generally for Lin- coln but would favor expediency. The first break came immediately after the election of

42 Parke Countv Republican, Feb. 17. 1864 : Wabash Expyess, Feb. 17 ; Madison Couyier Feb. 17: Delphi Journal. Feb. 17: Putnam Repubkcan Banner, Feb. 18: Delawa;e Free Press, Feb. 18; Indiana Herald, Feb. 17; Logansport Journal, Feb. 20; Aurora Commercial, Feb. 18. *February 2, 1864, John D. Defrees, Washington, wrote to R. W. Thompson: “the right sort of a resolution must be adopted.” February 17, John P. Usher, Lin- coln’s Secretary of the Interior, wrote to Thompson to the same effect. Thompson Mss. See also Evansville Journal, Feb. 20: Indianapolis Journal, Feb. 27; W. T. Otco to Elihu Washburne, Feb. 23. Washburne Mss., Library of Congress. MMay 1, 1864 J. H. Jordan wrote Chase, denouncing W. A. Bradshaw. a Chase appointee as Assessor of Internal Revenue for Indianapolis, who pretended to be ‘a Chase man and then wrote to Lincoln describing the efforts and personnel of the Chase movement. Chase Mss. See also Foulke. Olive7 P. Morton, I. 292-293. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 53 temporary officers and before a permanent organization could be effected. In fact while the delegates and spectators were still intermingling, Cyrus M. Allen, Union candidate for Con- gress in the first district, rushed to the platform and hastily introduced a composite resolution endorsing both the Lincoln and Morton Administrations, renominating Morton and instructing the delegates to the national convention for Lin- ~0111.~~Such a popular move naturally brought forth tremendous enthusiasm and applause from both delegates and spectators, and amidst this excitement the resolution was put to a vote and declared unanimously carried. In the meantime Alexander Metzger submitted to the temporary President a counter resolution of the Germans requiring the delegates to the national convention to be “perfectly free and untram- melled” in their votes for President, but this resolution was never submitted to the delegates.46 Later in the day the platform committee obtained the Allen resolution from the Secre- tary of the convention, and rearranged its parts so that one resolution renominated Morton and another instructed the delegates to the national convention to use all their influence for Lincoln’s renomination. This last resolution was unanimously adopted by the committee as the fifth plank in the platform, was reported to the convention by Thompson, the chair- man, and was again adopted “by a perfect storm of ap- plau~e.”~~No speeches were made against Lincoln’s renomination, and those in his favor were received with “tremendous cheering,” especially the delegation of former-Governor Wright that the President was “the man for the times above all living men.”4s The State convention apparently had settled the “presidential question” as far as Indiana was concerned. But the delegates had scarcely reached their homes before the factional bickering was revived. The Germans strongly resented the utter disregard of their wishes by the majority of the convention ;49 their mouthpiece, the Indiana Freie Presse, bitterly denounced the Lincolnites and threatened that most of the

&On February 22 a popular convention or assemblage of Union men had met in Indianapolis and adopted a resolution in favor of Lincolns’ renomination. Allen was partially influenced, perhaps, by this action. Indianapolis Journal, Feb. 24. 46Ibid., Feb. 24. 27. All accounts are in substantial agreement this far. 472bid. Perhaps the most authoritative account of this part of the proceedings is a letter written on February 29 by John R. Cravens of Madison, a member of the platform committee, and published in the Madison Cacrier on March 2. a Indianapolis Journal, Feb. 24, 1864. 49 February 26 the Indianapolis Gazette printed a letter from Alexander Metzger explaining the attitude of the German Republicans. 54 Indiana Magazine of History

Germans would bolt the Union Party rather than support the President.60 The Chase men also were greatly chagrined and disgruntled at the result of the convention. Several of them wrote to their champion, explaining their failure and denouncing the tactics of the Lincoln “agents.” Their general contention was that the Lincoln supporters were afraid to let the presidential question come before the convention for open discussion and therefore attached the Lincoln resolution to Morton’s nomination in order to railroad it through on the Governor’s popularity, without even an opportunity to vote against it.51 Some of the Chase men maintained also that the Lincoln resolution was adopted merely by a popular assemblage and not by the official convention of delegates. The In- dianapolis Gazette publicly made the same complaints and insisted that the decision was “snap judgment” and not ‘‘a fair and honest expression of opinion.” That a majority of the people had come to “hurrah for Old Abe” the editor admitted, but he contended that many of the delegates were opposed to the resolution instructing for Lincoln because they realized the “great impropriety in committing the State to him at this time.”52 Such contentions did not long go unchallenged. In fact the editor of the Dayton (Ohio) Journal, one of Chase’s friends at the Convention, admitted openly that the ccunanimity’’for Lincoln was so strong that there was no perceptible under- current against the instructions for his ren~mination.~~While the moderate Indianapolis Journal believed that the instructions were premature and conducive to dissension, the editor sternly rebuked the radical Republicans for their “factious, persistent resistance” to the will of the great majority of the party.54 The avowed Lincoln journals showed much greater resentment toward the course of the Gazette and its allies. They maintained that fully nine-tenths of the Union men of Indiana were for Lincoln and that no action of the convention was “more deservedly popular” than the resolution for his re- n~mination.~~Some of the editors were aroused by the “stu-

6a The position of the Freie Presse is indicated by a letter of H. B. Carrington. to Chase, Indianapolis, February 27. Chase Mss., Library of Congress. 51 Ibid.. B. F. Tuttle, to Chase, Indianapolis, Feb. 24. 1864 : J. H. Jordan, ta Chase Indianapolis, May 1, 1864. Chase Mss., Library of Congress. 6z Feb. 25, 26, 21, Mar. 2. 1864. 69 Darton Journal, quoted by Madison Courier, Mar. 5, 1864 ; W. D. Bickham, editor of the Journal, to John Sherman. Mar. 1. Sherman Mss. =Feb. 24, 1864. QEvansville Journal, Mar. 1. 1864; Wabash Express Mar. 2. Madison Courier Mar. 2; Parke County Republican; Mar. 2, 9: Putnam Republican’ Banner, Mar. 10: Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 55

pidity” and “knavery” of a “class of wondrous wise politicians” who were attempting to destroy the widespread popular confidence in the President in order to advance the interests of their own andi id ate.^^ The simultaneous appearance of the Pomeroy Circular, and other anti-Lincoln pamphlets, with their impolitic disparagement of Lincoln by Chase men, furnished definite evidence of this policy and added new fuel to the flame. Other Lincolnites, with greater discretion, sought to reconcile the radicals to the President‘s renomination. Ad- mitting that he might at times have been a little slow, they argued that he was always sure and would be as firm for the future as Chase, Fremont, or any other “ultra” andi id ate.^' Although most of these journalists spoke highly of Chase, they insisted that Lincoln’s tested ability and integrity and his valuable experience made him the logical candidate for all loyal men. During March, 1864, the political skies began to clear in Indiana. To be sure the Pomeroy Circular temporarily in- tensified the factional strife,58but the popular current was so strong in Lincoln’s favor that his opponents were checked at every turn. Accepting the verdict of the State convention, such influential local journals as the Delaware Free Press, Logansport Journal, Rushville Republican and Worthington Gazette, all of which had previously taken little part in “Presi- dent making,” now came out for Lincoln and placed his name at their ma~theads.~~The blow that did most to check the anti-Lincoln movement, however, was Chase’s formal withdrawal from the presidential contest early in March.60 Thus left stranded, the Chase advocates temporarily acquiesced. Even the friends of Julian found it expedient to counteract reports that he favored Chase’s nomination by the announce- ment that “he has invariably expressed himself in favor of the re-election of President Lincoln.”s1 Although the Indian- apolis Journal previously professed neutrality, on March 10 it agreed that the “great mass of the Union party are for Mr.

* Madison Courier, Feb. 27, Mar. 2, 10, 1864 ; Evansville Journal, Mar. 5 : La Porte Herald, Mar. 5 : Parke County Republican, Mar. 9. 67Evan~villeJournal, Mar. 1, 1864; Wabash Espress, Mar. 2. See especially Madison Courier, Feb. 27. Mar. 10, 1864 : La Porte Herald, Mar. 5 : Crawfordsville Reutew, Feb. 21. Free Press, Feb. 26, 1864 : Journal, Feb. 27 : Republican, Feb. 24 : Gazette quoted in Putnam Repuhliean Banner, Mar. 10. BOApril 6, 1864, Chase wrote J. H. Jordan, that he withdrew because “a majorjty of our friends . . . desired the renomination of Mr. Lincoln.” Chase Mss., Pa. Hist. Society. See also Indianapolis Gazette, Mar. 3, 12. a Delaware Free Press, Mar. 10, 24, 1864. 56 Indiana Magazine of History

Lincoln so manifestly that a contest . . . can be little else than factious.” The President’s friends quickly pressed their advantage, answering the objections of his opponents and urging all loyal men to unite behind him. They emphasized his wise and far-seeing statesmanship, his firm adherence to liberty, his practical judgment, his extraordinary hold upon the confidence of the people, his invaluable experience, the psychologi- cal effect of his re-election upon the rebellion.“’ One ardent Hoosier solemnly proclaimed that Abraham Lincoln was “the instrument of God . . . to finish the work he has so well ~ommenced.”~~ Throughout the spring months this attitude of confidence tempered with conciliation persisted among the President’s But the defeated anti-Lincoln forces did not dis- appear. Many Germans continued to work for Fremont, despite the apparent futility of their efforts.‘;: During April the Indianapolis Gazette and the Chase men joined the agitation of the radicals to secure a postponement of the national convention from June until September.66 The alleged purpose was to avoid an almost certain split in the Union Party; the real objective was to provide additional opportunity for possible popular reaction against the President, which would en- hance the changes of preventing his renomination.G7 But his managers, realizing that a sufficient number of states had already instructed their delegates for him, felt confident that “the efforts of the ‘sore-heads’ ’’ would be unsuccessful“ Checked in their attempt to postpone the convention, the Indiana radicals were soon opposing the President upon a new front. They contended that his apparent countenance of the bitter attacks of the Blairs upon Chase was “A National Scandal.” Fearful that the episode would result in Chase’s resignation from the Treasury Department and a consequent lowering of his prestige, his chief journalistic organ boldly declared: “The country at this time can better afford to lose both Mr. Lincoln and the Blairs than Mr. Chase.”69Turo days

O2 See especially Madison Courier, Mar. 5, 10, 14, 1864: Evansville Journal. Mar. 5. 25, 30 : La Porte Herald, Mar. 5. Evansville Journal, Mar. 25. 1864. O4 The Madison Courier and Evansville Journal exemplify this attitude. =German American, quoted by Evansville Journal, Apr. 16, 1864. 66Apr. 4. 6. 15, 16, 1864. Ei J. H. Jordan. Indianapolis, to Chase, May 1. 1864. Chase Mss. es John D. Defrees, to Richard W. Thompson, Washington, D. C.. Apr. 16, 1864. Thompson Mss. See also Logansport Joural, Apr. 9. RD Indianapolis Gazette, Apr. 29. 1864. Lincolti rlnd Indiana Republicans 57

later the despondent editor wrote to his champion : “I feel now most positively that Mr. Lincoln ought not to be continued. I k’elieve this to be the darkest hoios this Republic has ever SL’C?l,/”TO As the day of the national convention approached, the Chase leaders admitted that the President would be renominated and prepared to acquiesce. They maintained that their opposition was not to Lincoln “personally” but to his retentiox of ”unreliable and dangerous” advisers. “If 541.. Lincoh . . . will form a new Cabinet . . . of Eadical mei; . . . he ill be the most popular mail in America.” The Gazett/J urged the cmr-enticn to require a pledge of him that “the Blair faction and ‘conservative’ inf lueiices” were no longer to dominate the Administration.T1 Some of the radica! Germans, however, were not so easily pacified. They sent delegates to a “Radical” convention which I?et in Cleveland on >la>- 31 and nominated Fremont on an anti-Administration platform. But many of the Germans as well as most of the other Hoosier friends of the General refused to bolt the Union Party.72In fact some were severely disappointed with his selfish and compromising stand against the Administration. The Julian organ declared that although for a long time Fremont had been “our personal preference,” he had ceased to be a real force in the “political Chase’s supporters declined to countenance the Cleveland movement. The Lincoln spokesmen almost unanimously be- littled the convention as an assemblage of “uiiknowns” and ariti-Linccln “sore-heads’’ who would have little or no effect upon the outcome of the presidential On June 8 at the national Union convention in Baltimore the Indiana delegates contributed to the unanimous renomi- cation of President Lincoln and probably voted with more

J. H. Jordan, Indianapolis. to Chase, May 1, 1861. Chase Xss. Although some of the moderate Administration journals espressed regret that the Preiident had taken siich an impolitic step, they did not share the evident despondency and “humiliation“ ol the Chase men. See Indianapolis Journal. Apr. 29, and Fort Wayne Gazette. May 5, 1864. 7’ Indiananolis.~ Gazette.I LIav~~ “ 31. 1864. 72 Evansville Union, quoted in Evansville .Jownal of Nay I?. gives an account of a local meeting of Germans. who divided sharply over the question of appointinr delegates to the Cleveland convention or adhering to the Union Party. See also JoiLmal, June 3, 1864. ‘ZIlnrliana True Republican, June 16, 1861; see also Lafayette Jmunal, June 7; Delaicare Free Press. June 16. 7’ Fort Wayne Gazette, May 12, 1864 : Wabash Express, May 24, June 29 : Logansport Journal. June 4; Indiana Herald. June 8; Delphi Journal, June 8. 13. June 11 the Democratic Crawfordsville Review declared that “the nomination of Fremont has cast a gloom over the feelings of the administration Reuublicans in our :own,“ but this was mostly campaign propaganda 58 Indiana Magazine of History genuine zeal than did some of the other delegates. The news of the nomination was received by the Republicans of Indiana with as much enthusiasm as the fact of its pre-determination and the critical condition of the country would allow. Popular “ratification meetings” were held in most of the important towns. At the Indianapolis meeting Governor Morton declared that the President, despite his occasional errors and apparent slowness, still retained the unbounded confidence of the people. His renomination “was the voice of the great people, speaking their confidence in a man who had been sorely tried and found true.” The masses believed in him because of his simplicity and directness of character, his keen sense of humor, his un- swerving integrity.15 Republican journalists hailed the action of the Convention as eminently wise and popular. Some ig- nored and others denied emphaticaIly the Democratic charge that the renomination was the work of politicians and office- holders and not the will of the people.76 Several stressed the fact that Lincoln was essentially a “working man’s’’ candidate.?? Even the pro-Chase Indianapolis Gazette joined the chorus of approval. June 9 the editor admitted that Lincoln could get more votes than “any other man in the nation,” but insisted that this circumstance resulted from “policy and justice more than from any personal preference.” Yet, perhaps “he has done better, all things considered than any other man would have done.” Despite the popularity of the nominee and the platform, the Unionist presidential campaign was handicapped almost from the beginning. The apparent failure of the Union armies to make substantial progress in crushing the Conferedacy greatly depressed the President’s political prospects. Conse- quently a widespread popular demand arose during July for the Administration to bring the war to an end immediately. This peace sentiment was particularly strong in Indiana, partly due to the large proportion of inhabitants of Southern birth or parentage.ls The peace advocates were mostly “Cop- perheads” but included many wavering Unionists. When Lincoln insisted upon emancipation as well as the restoration of the Union as a prerequisite for official negotiations, the

T6 June 13, 1864. the Indianapolis Jmrnal published Morton’s speech in part. 7eFort Wayne Gazette. June 11. 1864. n Evansville Journal, June 9, 1864: letter of “R” to Journal, June 7: Indkna Herald, June 22. ‘sMorton and others to Edwin M. Stanton. Indianapolis, Sept. 13, 1864. Stanton Mas., Library of Congress. Lincoln and Indiana Republicans 59

peace men were inclined to believe the Democratic allegation that he was unnecessarily prolonging the war. Motivated by either conviction or political expediency, the Republican press, with practical unanimity, upheld the President’s position and maintained that no honorable and permanent peace could be secured until the rebellion was Some journals virtually admitted, however, that there was considerable “croak- ing” among their faint-hearted “friends” but attributed this to impatience and misunderstanding.80 During August the Lincoln supporters were further alarmed by dissension and apathy within the party ranks. Some of the nationally prominent radical leaders, who had never fully acquiesced in the President’s renomination, were encouraged by changing public sentiment to renew their opposition. Their first open move came through the Wade- Davis Protest, which severely attacked both the constitutional- ity and the propriety of Lincoln’s entire reconstruction program. This attack, however, received little if any support from Indiana Republicans, who condemned it as the misguided efforts of “extremists,” who were futilely attempting to shake “the confidence of the people in Mr. Lincoln’s integrity, patriotism and fidelity to the Constitution and the Union.”81 Almost simultaneously the unique semi-secret attempt of certain Eastern radicals to force Lincoln’s withdrawal from the presidential contest and the nomination of a new candidate through another convention, was received with similar cool- ness by the Hoosiers. Even the former Chase journal denounced the efforts of “a few impracticables” and maintained that no man since Washington had had “so unanimous a call to serve a second term” as Despite this outward harmony and assumed enthusiasm, the Unionists were greatly discouraged with the political our- look. The postponement of the Democratic National Conven- tion forced them to remain on the defensive through the sum- mer months. Meanwhile the Democrats were pressing their advantage. They declared that the President was a failure,

WNone of the Republican newspapers examined by the writer opposed the Presi- dent‘s stand. See especially Indianapolis Gazette, July 25, 28, 29; Delaware Free Press, July 21; Fort Wayne Gazette, July 23, Aug. 6; Indiana Herald, Aug. 27. 8o Logansport Journal, July 23, 1864 : Parke County Republican, July 27 ; Lafayette Journal, Aug. 11; Wabash Express, July 29; Indium Herald, Aug. 10. 81Logansport Journal, Aw. 27, 1864: Evansville Journal, Aug. 23. 8PIndianapolis Gazette Aug. 10, 1864. also Rushville Republican Aug. 17. None of the Republican journals examined by t6e writer approved of eithgr the WadeDavis Manifesto or the demand for a new convention. 60 Indiana Magazine of Histoiy both in fighting the war and in obtaining peace; the results were high prices, oppressive taxes, enormous debts, and a new call for hundreds of thousands of additional troops, with almost certain prospects of a draft. Consequently, hundreds of disgruntled Republicans, according to Democratic authori- ties, were deserting the Lincoln ~tandard.~~ Publicly the Republican spokesmen had little to say except to deny the contentions of their opponents. Privately they admitted their anxiety and discouragement. “Things look . . . very blue,” lamented one good Unionist. “If we cannot carry the elections I believe our country is ruined-the government cannot exist one year.”84 Several prominent Republicans wrote to Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s running mate, urging him to come to Indiana to help “save the State.’’85Governor Morton and others made similar appeals to Joseph Holt of Kentucky.S6 Colfax and other influential Republicans tried to get General Sherman to furlough some of the Indiana soldiers so they could come home to When Sherman refused, Colfax wrote directly to the President for the fur- loughs. Both he and Morton strongly urged Lincoln to postpone the draft until after the state elections. Colfax also informed the President that his peace stand was being used “most mischievously and damagingly. No one of our friends wants an armistice, but a formal proffer . . . would help us, if rejected, even more.”88 During September the political tide began to turn. The capture of Atlanta and other military victories, plus the nomination of General McClellan on an anti-war platform by t.he Democrats, furnished convincing evidence to many wavering voters that the best road to the overthrow of the rebellion and to permanent peace lay through the re-election of Lincoln and his Unionist associates. With the Fremont movement on the verge of collapse, most of his supporters were drifting

83 New Albany Ledoer and Evansville Times. quoted in Evansville Journal Sept. 2, 1864. =A. B. Crane to Richard W. Thompson, A=. 13, 1864. Thompson Mss. =A. J. Fletcher, Evansville, July 30, 1864: John D. Defrees, Washinpton, D. C., Aug. 11: Sehulyer Colfax, South Bend, Aug. 17. Andrew Johnson Mss.. Library cf Congress. 6b Morton to Col. W. M. Dunn of Louisville, Ky., Aug. 22, 1864. Joseph Holt Mss., Library of Congress. Scbuyler Colfax to John Sherman, South Bend, Aug. 2, 1864: John Sherman to W. T. Sherman, Aug. 6. W. T. Sherman Mss.. Library of Congress. See also C. M. Allen to Morton, Vincennes. Aug. 28, 1864: Orris Blake to Morton, Indianapolis, Oet. 17. Morton Mss., Indiana State Library. -August 29. 1864. Colfax wrote to Lincoln, whc endorsed the letter and sent it to Stanton. Stanton Mss. See also Foulke, Oliver P. Mo~ton.I, 365-366. Linco1.n and Indiana Republicans 61 over to the Lincoln Although this change in popular sentiment was becoming evident to Republican managers, they were still anxious about the outcome of the elections. As one politician expressed it, “Our cause is hopeful . . . and yet . . . the odds are against us.”90 To counteract Democratic campaign tactics, Morton, Colfax and a dozen of the most pronii- nent Republicans wrote on September 12 to Secretary Stanton urging him to delay the draft until after the election and to arrange for the return of at least fifteen thousand Indiana

By the beginning of October the Republican campaigners had largely regained their c~nfidence.~~They were attacking the “Copperheads” with increasing vigor and defending the administrations of President Lincoln and Governor Morton with genuine enthusiasm. In the October elections, the Union Party easily re-elected Morton, regained control of the Leg- islature, aiid captured four additional congressional seats -and all this despite the failure to secure the postponement of the draft or the return of many soldiers. On November 8 the Indiana voters gave Lincoln a twenty thousand majority over McClellan. This was a moderate gain over 1860 and real comeback from the adverse vote of 1862. The most decided increase in the President’s supporters was in the central and the extreme southeastern sections of the Since Lin- coln’s majority was practically equal to that of the popular Governor, it is evident that relatively few Republicans voted against him, despite the criticism that he had frequently received from them during his first term.Q4 Although most of the newspapers attributed the victory chiefly to principles rather than personalities, yet some gave considerable credit to the President’s personal “hold on the affections and confidence of the people.”95

“The shift began even before Septeniber. See Indianapolis Gazette. July 1, 5, 1864. J. L. Williams to John Sherman, Fort Wayne, Sept. 27, 1864. John Sherman Mss. The original letter is among the Stanton Papers and is published in Foulke, Oliver P. Morton, I, 367-369. Sept. 7 John D. Defrees wrote from Indianapolis to Eliiu Washburne urging him to have Lincoln open peace negotiations. Washburne Mss.. Li- brary of Congress. O*After campaigning in southern Indiana, Chase wrote on October 2 to John Sherman: “There is not the slightest uncertainty about the re-election of Mr. Lincoln.” John Sherman Mss. See also Delmffare Free Press, Sept. 29, 1864; Madison GOurie?. Seot.- 17.~. 85 The following counties showed the greatest gain since 1860 : Marion, Delaware, Xamilton, Boone. Hendricks, Clark, Floyd, Washington, Switzerland, and Ohio. The only counties revealing substantial loss of Lincoln support were Allen and Adams. For election statistics see Tribune Al?anac. for 1865, p. 59. The vote was Morton 152,084. McDonald 131,201 : Lincoln 150,238, McClellan 130,233. Lincoln’s percentage of the total vote was 53.59, Morton’s 63.68. =Indianapolis Jouvnul, Nov. 12, 1864; Delaware Free Press, Nov. 3. 62 Indiana Magazine of History

Encouraged by such an impressive manifestation of popular confidence, Lincoln soon exemplified the great politician by strengthening his hold upon those radical Republicans who had given him a hesitant or reluctant vote. His forceful recommendation of a constitutional amendment to abolish slavery throughout the nation enabled many strong anti- slavery men to abandon their former lukewarmness toward him.g6 His appointment of Chase to be Chief Justice of the United States was a politic move that met the practically unanimous approval of Hoosier republican^.^^ Although Julian still opposed Lincoln’s moderate policies, he admitted that “Old Abe,” through his patronage, was “virtual dictator of the country.”98 Most important of all, during the early weeks of 1865, it became increasingly evident that the foundation of the Confederacy was crumbling rapidly. These factors almost completely silenced criticism, even from the radicals. Since military failure had been the most basic cause of Re- publican opposition, the ultimate victory of the Union arms raised the Lincoln Administration to the pinnacle of popularity. Unfortunately this situation was to be short-lived. The assassination of Lincoln produced one of the most sudden and unique transformations ever to occur in American public sentiment. Never before had the people of Indiana received such a horrible shock. Their President had led them slowly but triumphantly through the greatest civil war in the history of the world. They were just coming to realize what that leadership had meant. According to most Republicans, “Mr. Lincoln enjoyed the confidence and love of the people to a greater extent than any one upon whom the office of Chief Magistrate was ever conferred, and the regret at his death was heightened by the fact that he had been stricken down in the midst of an unfinished Virtually every editor and speaker attempted to analyze his character and accomp- lishments ; and some of these contemporary appraisals sur- pass many of those made more recently. These men had gone with Lincoln through a terrible ordeal; they knew both his

gBIndianapolis Gazette, Dee. 7, 1864; Fort Wayne Gazette, Dee. 7. Schuyler Colfax to Chase, Dec. 5, 1864. Chase Mss., Pa. Hist. Society; In- dianapolis Gazette. Dec. 7: LaPorte Herald, Dec. 17. BS“George W. Julian’s Journal.” Id. Mag. of Hist. (1915). XI, 329. ssDeEamre Free Press Apr. 20 1865. See also LaPorte Herd, Apr. 22. Parke County Rewblican, Apr. 18: Indiana’polis Gazette, Apr. 15. Lincoln and Indium Republicans 63

virtues and his imperfections. The Lafayette Journal typified this when it declared that, for kindness of heart, moderation verging on timidity, prudence border- ing on hesitation, he never had an equal since the great Republic started upon its career. Unassuming, yet truly great, caring neither for old forms nor new rules, so that he did his duty; bowed down with the burden of his own great thoughts, yet playful and approachable by any child; great among the greatest, yet humble among the humblest-such ABRAHAM LINCOLN was.lOO Amidst this praise of the slain man the Hoosier Re- publicans began to turn against his program for treatment of the conquered Confederates. They maintained that his plan was too mild and lenient, that “justice” demanded sterner treatment of the unrepentant “rebels.” Even before his death, protests were current that there was “great danger” of Lin- coln “being too generous just now, and overlooking and for- giving too rnuch.”lo1 “Yet so great was” the people’s “confidence in his honesty, his judgement, and his patriotism, that they acquiesced in whatever policy was adopted by him.”102 The assassination, however, not only removed the re- straining hand of Lincoln but also aroused the animosity and indignation of the Northern people to the greatest intensity of the entire war. Some thought that Lincoln’s death was almost providential, that his work was “accomplished,” that a firmer executive was needed to “complete the great task remaining before use.”103 Few Republicans were willing now to uphold openly Lincoln’s mild policy towards the South. The radicals and most of the moderates rejoiced therefore when President Johnson declared that justice demanded that rebel leaders should suffer their due punishment.lo4 In their anger they called for “the most relentless retribution”-“Death, Death, DEATH to traitors !”lo5 The misguided masses of the South might be forgiven, it was admitted. “But the Leaders! Let them Die!”, proclaimed one aroused editor.lo6 “Let the

l”Apr. 17, 1865. See also Parke Cumty Republican, Apr. 19: LaPorte Herald, Apr. 22; Indianapolis Journal, Apr. 17. *a Indianapolis Gazette, Apr. 15, 1865. The article was written for the preceding day. “George W. Julian’s Journal,” Zoe. eit., 329-333. 102Vincennes Gazette, Apr. 22, 1866. See also Indianapolis Journal, Apr. 14. ‘OS Lafayette Journal, Apr. 17, 1865 ; “George W. Julian’s Journal,” Zoc. Cit., 335. lo4 Vincennes Gazette, Apr. 22, May 6, 13, 1865 : Indiana TmLe Republican Apr. 20, 21 : Parke County Republican, June 7: “George W. Julian’s Journal,” loo, cit.: 335, 336. ‘OSlndiana True Republican, Apr. 20, 1865: Delaware Free Press, Apr. 20: Vin- eennes Gazette, Am. 22. ‘mPutmm RepubZicam Banner, Apr. 20, 1865. 64 Indiana Magazine of History government vindicate itself by branding treason as the blackest in the catalogue of crimes.” “Away with all rose water policy,” shouted a vindictive speaker.’O’ “Turn loose our armies and they will vindicate the death of our President, together with the mighty hosts of patriots whose lives have been sacrificed upon the altars of our country, at the hands of traitors and assassins.” This is indeed a far cry from Lin- coln’s “With malice towards none, with charity for all.” Most of the Hoosier Republicans were soon to join with others throughout the North in virtual repudiation of much of the statesmanlike policy of the greatest man who had ever lived in Indiana. The tragedy of assassination was to be followed by the tragedy of “Reconstruction.”

ImCol. W. A. Cullen in a speech at Rushville on Apr. 17, quoted by Rushville RswbZican, Apr. 19, 1865. See also Lewis Griffith to Morton, Ossian, Apr. 25. Nor- ton Mss.