DOCSLIB.ORG

© 2018 Robert O. Faith All Rights Reserved

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
© 2018 Robert O. Faith All Rights Reserved © 2018 ROBERT O. FAITH ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ‘THIS DESPOTIC AND ARBITRARY POWER’: BRITISH DIPLOMACY AND RESISTANCE IN THE HABEAS CORPUS CONTROVERSY OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR A Dissertation Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Robert O. Faith May, 2018 ii ‘THIS DESPOTIC AND ARBITRARY POWER’: BRITISH DIPLOMACY AND RESISTANCE IN THE HABEAS CORPUS CONTROVERSY OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR Robert O. Faith Dissertation Approved: Accepted: ______________________________ ______________________________ Advisor Department Chair Dr. Walter Hixson Dr. A. Martin Wainwright ______________________________ ______________________________ Co-Advisor Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences Dr. Lesley Gordon Dr. John Green ______________________________ ______________________________ Committee Member Interim Dean of the Graduate School Dr. Kevin Adams Dr. Chand Midha _____________________________ ______________________________ Committee Member Date Dr. Gina Martino ______________________________ Committee Member Dr. Karl Kaltenthaler iii ABSTRACT The following dissertation explores the impact of President Abraham Lincoln’s suspensions of the writ of habeas corpus on British nationals living in the Union and Anglo-American diplomacy during the American Civil War. By drawing primarily upon State Department records and private British diplomatic correspondence, as well as Union military records, the dissertation argues that the British habeas experience in the Union reveals the broader scope of the habeas corpus problem under Lincoln. During the American Civil War, the military arrests of Britons under Lincoln’s habeas policy presented both governments with a persistent foreign policy problem. Between 1861 and 1865, diplomats at the British Legation prioritized the protection of Britons living in the Union against various forms of military injustice, and devoted considerable energy toward relieving Britons wrongfully arrested or tried by Union military courts. Although Lincoln’s habeas policy placed a serious strain on Anglo-American relations during the latter part of 1861, and even pushed Lincoln to publicly embrace an unconstrained constitutional view of executive habeas suspension far earlier than scholars have recognized, the U.S. State Department and British Legation in Washington ultimately handled the problem successfully at the diplomatic level through a policy of cautious cooperation. Protecting Britons tried by military courts between 1862 and 1865 proved more difficult, however, as both governments struggled to negotiate the contentious boundary between citizenship and nationality inherent in such cases and as the Union military did not always accommodate British requests for cooperation or leniency. Across iv the Atlantic, many Britons inside and outside of the London government consistently condemned Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus as a dangerous blow to civil liberty, and the president’s policy contributed significantly to widespread anti-Union sentiment in England during the war. In analyzing the broader British habeas corpus experience under Lincoln, this dissertation will contribute to our understanding of Civil War Anglo- American relations, habeas corpus and civil liberties on the Northern homefront, Lincoln’s constitutionalism, and the conflicting and amorphous nature of “citizenship” and “liberty” within the crucible of Civil War America. v DEDICATION To the memory of Nathan Patrick Montler (1991-2014) vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The support of so many family members, colleagues, and friends went into the making of this dissertation beyond those mentioned here. I would like to especially thank the members of my committee from the University of Akron and Kent State University: Walter Hixson, Kevin Adams, Gina Martino, and Karl Kaltenthaler, for supporting my project from the beginning, and whose comments greatly improved this dissertation with every draft. Most importantly, I would like to thank Lesley Gordon, now at the University of Alabama, for being an incredible advisor every step of the way. For me, she is both a teacher and scholarly mentor of the highest order, and deserves far more gratitude than I can adequately express on paper. I would also like to thank Martha Santos who, as graduate coordinator in the history department for most of my time at the University of Akron, helped me through more administrative problems than I can count. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Ashleigh, whose unwavering love and support keeps me going not just as an historian, but as a person. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION1 Habeas Corpus: Transatlantic Origins and Transformations of the “Great Writ of Liberty”……………………………………………………………………..8 Historiography……………………………………………………………….14 Habeas Corpus and Civil Liberties under Lincoln…………………………...15 Great Britain and the American Civil War…………………………………..27 Methodology and Sources……………………………………………............41 Chapter Outline………………………………………………………………44 II. THE ORIGINS OF LINCOLN’S HABEAS POLICY AND ITS EARLY IMPLICATIONS FOR ANGLO-AMERICAN RELATIONS…………………………..50 The Context of Anglo-American Diplomacy at the Outset of the Civil War…………………………………………………………………………...51 Actions without Precedent: Lincoln’s Early Suspensions of the Writ of Habeas Corpus………………………………………………………………………..60 Ex Parte Merryman to Ex Parte McQuillon……………………………………..65 III. GREAT BRITAIN’S RESPONSE TO LINCOLN’S HABEAS CORPUS POLICY, 1861………………………………………………………………………………………87 Further Developments Surrounding Lincoln’s Habeas Policy through British Eyes, 1861……………………………………………………………………91 The Nature of Military Arrests of Britons during 1861………………….......96 The British Government’s Official Response to Lincoln’s Habeas Policy……………………………………………………………………….103 viii The Lincoln Administration’s Rebuttal…………………………………….110 The Official British Outlook at the End of 1861…………………………...116 IV. THE BRITISH HABEAS EXPERIENCE UNDER LINCOLN, 1862-1865………121 Lincoln’s Habeas Policy and the British Parliament……………………….123 Further Developments in Lincoln’s Habeas Policy through British Eyes, 1862- 65……………………………………………………………………………131 Further Developments: Nationwide Habeas Suspension, August-September 1862…………………………………………………………………………134 Further Developments: Britons and the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863………138 Further Developments: Lincoln’s Final Suspension Proclamation, September 1863…………………………………………………………………………143 Habeas Corpus at War’s End……………………………………………….146 The Nature of Military Arrests of Britons under Lincoln, 1862-65………..148 V. BRITISH NATIONALS AND MILITARY JUSTICE DURING THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR…………………………………………………………………………….159 The Nature of Martial Law vs. Suspension of Habeas Corpus……………..163 Habeas Corpus, Martial Law, and Military Trials during the American Civil War………………………………………………………………………….164 Military Trials of British Nationals during the American Civil War……….170 The Courts-Martial Trials of British Union Soldiers……………………….175 “English Bayonets in English Hands”: British Nationals Tried by Military Commission………………………………………………………………...180 Prosecuting “the Gentler Sex”: Trials of British Women by Military Commission………………………………………………………………...187 “So Blatant an Enemy to Our Government”: British Nationals, Military Trials, and Treason…………………………………………………………………192 VI. POPULAR BRITISH OBSERVATIONS AND ATTITUDES SURROUNDING LINCOLN’S HABEAS POLICY………………………………………………………207 ix First-hand British Observations: William Howard Russell………………...210 First-hand British Observations: Anthony Trollope………………………..215 First-hand British Observations: Sir James Fergusson……………………..220 “The Tyrant’s Plea of Necessity”: The British Press, Lincoln’s Habeas Corpus Policy, and Anti-Unionism in England……………………………………..224 A British Intellectual Critique of Lincoln’s Habeas Policy………………...237 VII. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………245 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………258 x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION On April 27, 1861, President Abraham Lincoln authorized his General-in-Chief, Winfield Scott, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus along the “military line” between Washington, D.C. and Philadelphia in response to violent protests in Baltimore which, if left unchecked, might threaten the safety of the Union capital.1 In the context of the American Civil War, Lincoln’s habeas corpus suspension policy—which eventually encompassed the entire North by the fall of 1862—essentially allowed military officials on the ground to arrest civilians suspected of broadly defined disloyal activities and hold them without charges for an indefinite period of time. Those arrested under Lincoln’s habeas suspension therefore could not count on the courts for legal redress, so long as the military power was willing to suppress the power of the civil courts to enforce due process of habeas procedures. Throughout the Civil War, the attitudes of Lincoln and his supporters toward executive suspension reflected a willingness to subordinate individual liberties to the paramount goal of national preservation in time of war, while those of his critics reflected a fear that his example would lead to a permanent contraction of American civil liberties. Before Lincoln, no President of the United States had unilaterally suspended the writ of habeas corpus. With this fateful step, Lincoln’s suspension of the writ set in motion a widespread repression of 1 See Lincoln’s first suspension order in Roy P. Basler, ed., Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (New Brunswick, N.J.:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Notes on the Development of the Linguistic Society of America 1924 To
    NOTES ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LINGUISTIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA 1924 TO 1950 MARTIN JOOS for JENNIE MAE JOOS FORE\\ORO It is important for the reader of this document to know how it came to be written and what function it is intended to serve. In the early 1970s, when the Executive Committee and the Committee on Pub1ications of the linguistic Society of America v.ere planning for the observance of its Golden Anniversary, they decided to sponsor the preparation of a history of the Society's first fifty years, to be published as part of the celebration. The task was entrusted to the three living Secretaries, J M. Cowan{who had served from 1940 to 1950), Archibald A. Hill {1951-1969), and Thomas A. Sebeok {1970-1973). Each was asked to survey the period of his tenure; in addition, Cowan,who had learned the craft of the office from the Society's first Secretary, Roland G. Kent {deceased 1952),was to cover Kent's period of service. At the time, CO'flal'\was just embarking on a new career. He therefore asked his close friend Martin Joos to take on his share of the task, and to that end gave Joos all his files. Joos then did the bulk of the research and writing, but the~ conferred repeatedly, Cowansupplying information to which Joos v.t>uldnot otherwise have had access. Joos and HiU completed their assignments in time for the planned publication, but Sebeok, burdened with other responsibilities, was unable to do so. Since the Society did not wish to bring out an incomplete history, the project was suspended.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to the Records of the Mayor and City Council at the Baltimore City Archives
    Governing Baltimore: A Guide to the Records of the Mayor and City Council at the Baltimore City Archives William G. LeFurgy, Susan Wertheimer David, and Richard J. Cox Baltimore City Archives and Records Management Office Department of Legislative Reference 1981 Table of Contents Preface i History of the Mayor and City Council 1 Scope and Content 3 Series Descriptions 5 Bibliography 18 Appendix: Mayors of Baltimore 19 Index 20 1 Preface Sweeping changes occurred in Baltimore society, commerce, and government during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. From incorporation in 1796 the municipal government's evolution has been indicative of this process. From its inception the city government has been dominated by the mayor and city council. The records of these chief administrative units, spanning nearly the entire history of Baltimore, are among the most significant sources for this city's history. This guide is the product of a two year effort in arranging and describing the mayor and city council records funded by the National Historical Publications and Records Commission. These records are the backbone of the historical records of the municipal government which now total over three thousand cubic feet and are available for researchers. The publication of this guide, and three others available on other records, is preliminary to a guide to the complete holdings of the Baltimore City Archives scheduled for publication in 1983. During the last two years many debts to individuals were accumulated. First and foremost is my gratitude to the staff of the NHPRC, most especially William Fraley and Larry Hackman, who made numerous suggestions regarding the original proposal and assisted with problems that appeared during the project.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mayor and the President by George W. Liebmann
    The Mayor and the President by George W. Liebmann This symposium has unlikely origins. It was in some measure prompted by a recent speech before the Supreme Court Historical Society by the celebrated Professor John Yoo. By way of demonstrating that the policies relating to detention and interrogation with which he is identified were consonant with American traditions, Professor Yoo delivered an address contending that the Merryman and Milligan cases were aberrations, what Justice Frankfurter called in another context, “derelicts on the waters of the law”. He alleged that “Merryman remains unknown to almost all but those scholars who toil in the academic fields of the separation of powers or the early days of the Civil War.”1 Merryman of course is better known than that. It was the subject of a centennial symposium in the federal district court for Maryland in 1961, addressed by William L. Marbury, Chief Judge Roszel C. Thomsen and Taney’s biographer H.H.Walker Lewis.2 It figures prominently in a number of books on executive power in wartime by such as Carl Brent Swisher (1974)3, Clinton Rossiter (1945)4, Frederick Bernays Wiener (1940)5 and Charles Warren (1935)6 that you will not find prominently cited in the recent writings of Professor Yoo, as well as in Chief Justice Rehnquist’s book on the subject.7 In 1961, executive detention without trial was not a burning issue. It is now. There is a vast literature, and there is therefore no excuse for another redundant discussion. The remarks of all three speakers today will therefore focus on unpublished documents by or about the contending 1 protagonists.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Northumbria Research Link
    Northumbria Research Link Citation: O'Connor, Peter (2014) ‘The Inextinguishable Struggle Between North and South,’ American Sectionalism in the British Mind, 1832-1863. Doctoral thesis, Northumbria University. This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/21423/ Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html ‘The Inextinguishable Struggle Between North and South,’ American Sectionalism in the British Mind, 1832- 1863 Peter O’Connor PhD 2014 ‘The Inextinguishable Struggle Between North and South,’ American Sectionalism in the British Mind, 1832- 1863 Peter O’Connor A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Northumbria for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Research undertaken in the School of Arts and Social Sciences February 2014 Abstract of Thesis Working within the field of nineteenth century transatlantic history this thesis takes as its starting point British attempts to engage with the American Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • Confederate Delusions: “King Cotton” and the Dream of Intervention
    Best Integrated Writing Volume 3 Article 6 2016 Confederate Delusions: “King Cotton” and the Dream of Intervention Shane Hapner Wright State University Follow this and additional works at: https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/biw Part of the Business Commons, and the History Commons Recommended Citation Hapner, S. (2016). Confederate Delusions: “King Cotton” and the Dream of Intervention, Best Integrated Writing, 3. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CORE Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Best Integrated Writing by an authorized editor of CORE Scholar. For more information, please contact library- [email protected]. SHANE HAPNER HST 4650 Confederate Delusions: “King Cotton” and the Dream of Intervention SHANE HAPNER HST 4650: Civil War, Spring 2015 Nominated by: Dr. Drew Swanson Shane is a senior majoring in History with a focus on early-modern European history. He tends to focus on diplomatic and political history. He states that this is his first paper “outside that aegis.” Shane notes: I’m not fond of American history, and from the start of this project, I consciously made every effort to tie in European perspectives to increase my interest. This required my topic to be economic; however, it is the first paper of that kind I’d written, and it necessitated a use of microfilm sources for the figures I required. This paper, therefore, represents a synthesis of political, economic, and diplomatic perspectives. Dr. Swanson notes: Mr. Hapner’s research paper examines the Confederacy’s efforts at cotton diplomacy in France and Britain during the Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of A.F. Pollard's Writings
    BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.F. POLLARD'S WRITINGS This bibliography is not quite complete: we omitted mention of very short book reviews, and we have not been able to trace every one of Pollard's contributions to the T.L.S. As to his letters to the Editor of The Times, we only mentioned the ones consulted on behalf of our research. There has been no separate mention of Pollard's essays from the years 1915-1917, collectedly published in The Commonwealth at War (1917). The Jesuits in Poland, Oxford, 1892. D.N.B. vol. 34: Lucas, Ch. (1769-1854); Luckombe, Ph. (d. 1803); Lydiat, Th. (1572-1646). vol. 35: Macdonald, A. (1834-1886); Macdonell, A. (1762-1840); Macegan, O. (d. 1603); Macfarlan, W. (d. 1767); Macha­ do, R. (d. lSI I?); Mackenzie, W.B. (1806-1870); Maclean, Ch. (1788-1824); Magauran, E. (IS48-IS93); Maguire, H. (d. 1600); Maguire, N. (1460-1512). vol. 36: Manderstown, W. (ISIS-IS40); Mansell, F. (1579-166S); Marshall, W. (d. 153S); Martin, Fr. (1652-1722); Martyn, R. (d. 1483); Mascall,R. (d. 1416); Mason,]. (1503-1566); Mason, R. (1571-1635). Review :].B. Perkins, France under the Regency, London, 1892. E.H.R. 8 (1893), pp. 79 1-793. 'Sir Edward Kelley' in Lives oj Twelve Bad Men, ed. Th. Seccombe, London, 1894, pp. 34-54· BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.F. POLLARD'S WRITINGS 375 D.N.B. vol. 37: Matcham, G. (1753-1833); Maunsfield, H. (d. 1328); Maurice, Th. (1754-1824); Maxfield, Th. (d. 1616); May, W. (d. 1560); Mayart, S. (d. 1660?); Mayers, W.F.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Historical Magazine, 1986, Volume 81, Issue No. 2
    Maryland Historical Masazine & o o' < GC 2 o p 3 3 re N f-' CO Published Quarterly by the Museum and Library of Maryland History The Maryland Historical Society Summer 1986 THE MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY OFFICERS, 1986-1987 William C. Whitridge, Chairman* Robert G. Merrick, Sr., Honorary Chairman* Brian B. Topping, President* Mrs. Charles W. Cole, Jr., Vice President* E. Phillips Hathaway, Treasurer* Mrs. Frederick W. Lafferty, Vice President* Samuel Hopkins, Asst. Secretary/Treasurer* Walter D. Pinkard, Sr., Vice President* Bryson L. Cook, Counsel* Truman T. Semans, Vice President* Leonard C. Crewe, Jr., Past President* Frank H. Weller, Jr., Vice President* J. Fife Symington, Jr.,* Richard P. Moran, Secretary* Past Chairman of the Board* The officers listed above constitute the Society's Executive Committee. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, 1986-1987 H. Furlong Baldwin Hon. Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. Mrs. Emory J. Barber, St. Mary's Co. Robert G. Merrick, Jr. Gary Black Michael Middleton, Charles Co. John E. Boulais, Caroline Co. Jack Moseley Mrs. James Frederick Colwill (Honorary) Thomas S. Nichols (Honorary) Donald L. DeVries James O. Olfson, Anne Arundel Co. Leslie B. Disharoon Mrs. David R. Owen Jerome Geckle Mrs. Brice Phillips, Worcester Co. William C. Gilchrist, Allegany Co. J. Hurst Purnell, Jr., Kent Co. Hon. Louis L. Goldstein, Calvert Co. George M. Radcliffe Kingdon Gould, Jr., Howard Co. Adrian P. Reed, Queen Anne's Co. Benjamin H. Griswold III G. Donald Riley, Carroll Co. Willard Hackerman Mrs. Timothy Rodgers R. Patrick Hayman, Somerset Co. John D. Schapiro Louis G. Hecht Jacques T. Schlenger E. Mason Hendrickson, Washington Co. Jess Joseph Smith, Jr., Prince George's Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Propaganda Use by the Union and Confederacy in Great Britain During the American Civil War, 1861-1862 Annalise Policicchio
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Duquesne University: Digital Commons Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Summer 2012 Propaganda Use by the Union and Confederacy in Great Britain during the American Civil War, 1861-1862 Annalise Policicchio Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Policicchio, A. (2012). Propaganda Use by the Union and Confederacy in Great Britain during the American Civil War, 1861-1862 (Master's thesis, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1053 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROPAGANDA USE BY THE UNION AND CONFEDERACY IN GREAT BRITAIN DURING THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR, 1861-1862 A Thesis Submitted to the McAnulty College & Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for The Degree of Masters of History By Annalise L. Policicchio August 2012 Copyright by Annalise L. Policicchio 2012 PROPAGANDA USE BY THE UNION AND CONFEDERACY IN GREAT BRITAIN DURING THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR, 1861-1862 By Annalise L. Policicchio Approved May 2012 ____________________________ ______________________________ Holly Mayer, Ph.D. Perry Blatz, Ph.D. Associate Professor of History Associate Professor of History Thesis Director Thesis Reader ____________________________ ______________________________ James C. Swindal, Ph.D. Holly Mayer, Ph.D. Dean, McAnulty College & Graduate Chair, Department of History School of Liberal Arts iii ABSTRACT PROPAGANDA USE BY THE UNION AND CONFEDERACY IN GREAT BRITAIN DURING THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR, 1861-1862 By Annalise L.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]