Student Book_Dyer W. Hitchcock by saukcountyhistoricalsociety

Cover Sketch by Civil War sketch artist, Alfred Waud, Harpers Weekly, October 11, 1862

Student Book

Dyer Walker Hitchcock

Gathering Grit: Prelude to Vicksburg

1862 - 1863

Compiled by Beverly Vaillancourt, M.Ed

The Dyer Walker Hitchcock video and accompanying Student Booklet are dedicated to the Sons of Union Veterans Civil War (SUVCW) whose mission is to preserve the history and legacy of the heroes who fought to save the Union during the Civil War. Through their educational and archival efforts, the sacrifice and dedication of Union soldiers is remembered, shared, and honored.

Special thanks to America’s history teachers who help students unpack the complexities of the Civil War and foster a deeper understanding of this pivotal moment in history. Your efforts to bring its lessons to life inspire critical thinking and provide context to the sacrifices and struggles of the past, and with it create a meaningful present.

Sauk County Historical Society

This student booklet accompanies the video: Dyer W. Hitchcock: Gathering Grit 1862 - 1863.

https://vimeo.com/1044866291

Student Outcomes

To be able to:

1. Identify five challenges faced by the 23rd Wisconsin

2. Explain the impact of four months of inaction and boredom on the 23rd Wisconsin

3. Analyze the proposals, barriers, and potential impact contained in President Lincoln’s December 1, 1932 Annual Message to Congress

4. Interpret the importance of the Battles of Chickasaw Bayou and Arkansas Post on the Vicksburg Campaign

5. Analyze the military mindset of General Sherman based on comments he made regarding the course of the war

6. Speculate on what D.W. Hitchcock may have written when learning of the surrender of both Vicksburg and Port Hudson.

Common Core Reading Standards in Literacy in History/Social Studies, Grades 9 - 10

Key Ideas and Details

Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, attending to such features as the date and origin of the information.

Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary of how key events or ideas develop over the course of the text

Analyze in detail a series of events described in a text; determine whether earlier events caused later ones or simply preceded them.

Sauk County

https://www.loc.gov/item/2018670020/

To the Student

Dyer Walker Hitchcock, age 26, enlisted in the Union Army on August 14, 1862, in Baraboo, Wisconsin. He, like some 80% of Union soldiers, was unmarried. At not quite 5’ 4”, Hitchcock was 3 inches shorter than the average Union soldier who stood 5’ 7”tall. D.W. Hitchcock rose in rank from that of Private when he enlisted to 1st Lieutenant on April 26, 1865, when he was assigned to command Company I of the United States Colored Troops 79th Infantry. Between his enlistment and when he took command of Company I, D.W. Hitchcock, and the 23rd Wisconsin took part in several military engagements, including General Sherman’s Yazoo Expedition, General Grant’s Vicksburg Campaign, and General Bank’s Red River Expedition. By the time Lieutenant Hitchcock assumed command of Company I of the 79th US Colored Troops, the 79th had experienced the chaos of battle and had suffered some 182 casualties. In the spring and summer of 1865, D.W. Hitchcock and Company I continued their service in Arkansas until they mustered out of service at Pine Bluff, Arkansas, on October 1, 1865.

D.W. Hitchcock survived three years engaged in the roar of war. He had learned to manage under ever-changing commands and has assumed a position of leadership himself. Through his diary we gain a glimpse of what camp and battle life was like for himself and the other soldiers of the Wisconsin 23rd as events moved forward in the Western Theater toward the Vicksburg Campaign. We also learn of the uncertainty that results from defeat at the Battle of Chickasaw Bayou and the resolve that is strengthened with victory at the Battle of Arkansas Post. This gathering of grit on the part of the soldiers of the 23rd Wisconsin would serve them well at the Siege of Vicksburg from May 18 - July 4, 1863.

On December 14, four months after D.W. Hitchcock had enlisted, he tells us, “ most of us listed in ‘Uncle Sam’s service to put an end to this cursed Rebellion.” Why D.W. Hitchcock enlisted, however, remains uncertain. He notes in his diary that the”soldiers began to discuss the slavery question,” soon after Lincoln issued the January 1, 1863, Emancipation Proclamation. He notes that while some felt it was a great document, others stated they had not joined the Union Army to fight for an end to slavery. Why men volunteered to fight remains one of personal conviction. Why the Civil War began remains one of ongoing debate.

In his book Robert E. Lee and Me, author Ty Seidule argues that slavery alone was the cause of the Civil War. He suggests that all decisions, all motivations for dissolving the Union, were not born out of a concern for maintaining states rights (part of the Lost Cause narrative), but from the need to ensure the preservation of the right to hold human beings in bondage, as enslaved and as a practice of property holdings.

On May 23, 1861, just a month after the South Carolina Militia fired on Fort Sumter sparking the outbreak of the Civil War, (Union General) William Tecumseh Sherman writes home,

“I am satisfied with Mr. Lincoln’s policy, but I do not like that of Blair’s [Union General and Missouri Congressman]. I know Frank Blair openly declares war on slavery...I see the time is not yet come to destroy slavery, but it may be to circumscribe it. We have not in America the number of inhabitants to replace the slaves, nor have we the national wealth to transport them to other lands. The constitution has given the owners certain rights which I should be loath to disturb.”

What “policy” was Sherman referencing? Perhaps he was referring to the 1861 Corwin Amendment (March 2, 1861)? Perhaps he was referring to Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address, (March 4, 1861), when he states, “One section of our county believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended.” What is for certain is that the political winds of the 1850s and early 1860s and the secession of eleven Southern states resulted 640,000 Union casualties and 483,000 Confederate casualties. Combined, more than 1.1 million men were killed in action, died from disease, or survived their wounds. Men returned home to find devastation and change: in one way or another, all lives were turned upside down.

In the words of D.W. Hitchcock we hear the commitment, the anguish, and the resolve of a Union soldier. We hear his sense of fortitude and the gathering of grit from August of 1862 through January of 1863. As you watch the video and read through the primary sources in this student guide, consider the following:

• Compare and Contrast the impact of the Battles of Chickasaw Bluff and Battle of Arkansas Post appear on the the morale of the soldiers of the 23rd Wisconsin, as described by D.W. Hitchcock.

• Did D.W. Hitchcock’s attitude change from September 1862 through January 1863? Explain your answer.

• What was Abraham Lincoln’s postion on emancipation before the Civil War? What documents support your position?

• The surrender of Vicksburg (July 4, 1963) and the surrender of Port Hudson (July 7, 1863) are of equal importance to the course of Civil War as the Battle of Gettysburg, July 1 - 3, 1863. Is this an accurate statement? Why or why not?

• Why did President Lincoln remove General Sherman from command following the Battle of Chickasaw Bluffs? What was Sherman’s response? Do you agree with what

Dyer Walker Hitchcock: Gathering Grit

Following the Civil War, D.W. Hitchcock returned to Baraboo, Wisconsin, where he and four others began a wood cutting and drying business. He married Leona Case in 1867. They had four children. He practiced law in Michigan and later in Baraboo. Some might call D. W. Hitchcock a “common soldier.” He enlisted, followed orders, was promoted and given a command, and mustered out in 1865 carrying with him the experience of war. The story of the common soldier, such as D.W. Hitchcock, is the story of the Civil War.

During the Civil War, Wisconsin played a significant role in the Union war effort, contributing approximately 91,000 men to the Union Army. This represented nearly 10% of the state’s entire population at the time. These volunteers were organized into 53 infantry regiments, 4 cavalry regiments, 1 heavy artillery regiment, and several light artillery batteries. Wisconsin soldiers participated in major battles across the Western and Eastern theaters, including notable engagements like Shiloh, Gettysburg, and Vicksburg. The state’s high enlistment rate reflected its strong support for the Union cause, driven by a mix of patriotic fervor, opposition to slavery, and community pressure. Wisconsin’s contributions were marked by significant sacrifice, with over 12,000 casualties, including those killed in battle, wounded, or lost to disease.

In April 1865 Dyer Hitchcock was promoted to 1st Lieutenant and placed in command of Company I of the United States Colored Troups, 79th Infantry. This promotion speaks to D. W. Hitchcock’s character and leadership in his third year of service in the Union Army. Officers chosen to lead the United States Colored Troops (USCT) during the Civil War were expected to possess exceptional qualities of leadership, discipline, and moral conviction. The men had to demonstrate a firm belief in the Union cause and, often, a commitment to the principle of abolition. Given the racial prejudices of the era, they also needed strong resolve to command and defend their troops in the face of both Confederate hostility and skepticism from within the Union Army itself.

Courage and tactical skill were vital, as USCT units faced the wrath of Confederate soldiers both on the battlefield and if captured. Yet, the 180,000 soldiers of the USCT served with dedication and valor. The United States Colored Troops (USCT) suffered a disproportionately high casualty rate during the Civil War, with over 36,000 deaths among the approximately 180,000 men who served.

23rd Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry

The following pages describing the history of the 23rd Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry are taken from The Military History of Wisconsin: Civil and Military Patriotism of the State in the War for the Union, by E.B. Quiner, Esq. 1866. , pages 707–717.

courtesy Marc & Beth Storch collection

https://www.nps.gov/vick/learn/historyculture/23d-wisconsin-infantry-union.htm

Lt. Col. Joshua James Guppey

photo

Sauk County

Source: Quiner’s Military History of Wisconsin, 1866, https://www.loc.gov/ item/02015646/

79th Regiment USCT

• What can be learned from Dyer W. Hitchcock’s service record?

• What is not part of this record that would be helpful to know?

• Why were records like this kept?

Source: Fold3, US, Compiled Military Service Records of Volunteer Union Soldiers Who Served the United States Colored Troops: 56th-138th USCT Infantry, 1864-1866 (https://www.fold3.com/publication/762/us-civil-war-service-records-cmsr-union-colored-troops-56th-138th-infantry-1864-1866

• What assignments were given to the 70th Regiment?

• Where did it serve?

• Where do you think the soldiers of the 79th went after being discharged from the USCT?

Source: Compendium of the War of the Rebellion, 1908, pg 1735

Sauk County Historical Society

Newspapers

Newspapers played an important role in sharing battlefield victories and losses with the general public. Wartime sketch artists such as brothers Alfred and William Waud provided visual images that breathe life into the text. Often journalists and sketch artists were eye witnesses to battles. Not all soldiers welcomed their presence. General Sherman had a particularly annoyance with newspapers. Sherman often complained of journalists’ unflattering portrayals of himself, Grant, and other generals. For example, in his Letters Home following the Battle of Arkansas Post , Sherman wrote on January 28, 1863:

“The newspapers are after me again; I published an order they must not come along on pain of being treated as spies. I am now determined to test the question. Do they rule or the commanding general? If they rule I quit. I have ordered the arrest of one, shall try him, and if possible execute him as a spy. They publish all the data for our enemy and it was only by absolute secrecy that we could get to the Post of Arkansas without their getting ahead. They did reveal our attempt to attack Haines’s Bluff. I will never again command an army in America if we must carry along paid spies. I will banish myself to some foreign country first. ...”

Newspaper articles presented more than just the facts. Carefully worded reports were filled with opinions that admonished Union command sought to sway public opinion. Yet, they provided news from the battlefield that otherwise would be confined to official military reports. President Lincoln was acutely aware of public perception of the war as the 1864 presidential election approached. Victories at Vicksburg and Gettysburg, along with the Mobile Bay and the Battle of Atlanta helped to secure public support behind his re-election. While the newspaper reports may seem lengthy, keep in mind that newspapers were the storytellers of the time and provided a time stamp on the battles and their consequences.

As you read through the following newspaper articles

1. compare their reports with the reporting of the same event in Quiner’s 1866 Military History of Wisconsin found on pages 5–17,

2. compare the newspaper reports with what Dyer Hitchcock writes in his diary (video),

3. determine what new information is provided,

4. analyze if the reporting is biased,

5. determine if General Sherman has reason for his disdain of wartime journalists

6. speculate on the impact of the reporting on the “common soldier.”

Chicago Tribune (Chicago, Illinois)

September 16, 1862

Newspapers as Secondary Sources

Newspapers are considered secondary sources because they report on events after they occur. They often rely on eyewitness accounts, official statements, or other sources of information. The Civil War battlefield reports published in newspapers across the country provided the public with an ongoing narrative of the war’s progress. Newspapers were quick to criticize elected officials and generals for battlefield failures, adding pressure for victory. The stories often provided detailed reports of the battles for readers. Their impact was powerful.

Many 19th-century journalists employed a dramatic tone, vivid imagery, and emotional appeals to engage readers and emphasize the significance of the events they covered. While newspapers from this era provide valuable insight into contemporary perspectives, their content often reflected bias and an attempt to sway opinion

As you read the following newspaper accounts of the Battle of Chickasaw Bluffs, Arkansas Post, and Vicksburg, take note of writing style of the journalist. Watch for the following:

• Emotional Appeal: Is there use of vivid and dramatic language to evoke feelings of patriotism, pride, fear, or outrage?

• Heroic Portrayals: Are the bravery and the sacrifices of Union soldiers highlighted to create admiration and support for the army?

• Demonization of the Enemy: Are the efforts of Confederate troops demonized?

• Selective Reporting: Is there an emphasis on victories, strategic successes, or the downplaying losses to present an optimistic narrative that boosts morale and encourages continued support for the war effort?

• Inclusion of Anecdotes: Are stories or quotes from soldiers and officers used to humanize the conflict and make the reader feel personally connected to the events being described.

How does the newspaper account of each battle attempt to sway opinion? What changes are suggested? Is the report credible? Are suggested changes credible requests?

General Sherman Library of Congress

General Nathaniel Banks

https://www.loc.gov/item/2021669484/

General A.J. Smith

Rear Admiral Porter

https://www.loc.gov/item/95503132/

General George Morgan

https://www.loc.gov/item/2018670020/

https://www.loc.gov/item/2023631620/

Sauk County

Battle of Arkansas Post

January 9–11, 1863

source:

https://archive.org/details/harpersweeklyv7bonn/ page/81/mode/1up?q=s1item/2023631620/

Newspapers.com

Wisconsin_State_Journal_1863_0126mode/1up?q=s1it em/2023631620/

Siege of Vicksburg

May 18–July 4, 1863

Sherman’s Yazoo Expedition was a key component of General Ulysses S. Grant’s initial strategy to capture Vicksburg, Mississippi, with a plan to open a direct route to the city. Launched in late December 1862, the expedition aimed to approach Vicksburg from the north by navigating the Yazoo River and attacking Confederate defenses at Chickasaw Bluffs, which guarded the city’s northern approaches. This failed assault was intended to divert Confederate forces while Grant advanced southward through central Mississippi. However, logistical challenges and Confederate resistance forced Grant to abandon his overland campaign, leaving Sherman’s force to continue its assault alone. The expedition culminated in the Battle of Chickasaw Bluffs (December 29, 1862), where, as well documented in the newspapers, Sherman’s troops were repelled by strong Confederate fortifications.The lessons learned shaped Grant’s subsequent and ultimately successful Vicksburg Campaign, which focused on flanking the city from the south and cutting it off from supplies.

The 23rd Wisconsin Infantry played a critical role in the Siege of Vicksburg, which lasted from May 18 to July 4, 1863. Under the command of General John A. McClernand, who Lincoln named to replace Sherman after the failed assault at Chickasaw Bluffs, the regiment was engaged in intense operations to capture the strategically vital city of Vicksburg, Mississippi. The 23rd Wisconsin was tasked with participating in assaults on Confederate fortifications. Their actions included digging siege trenches, building fortifications, and enduring relentless artillery and sharpshooter fire while maintaining pressure on the Confederate defenses. Despite the harsh conditions, including heat, disease, and shortages of food and water, the regiment demonstrated steadfastness and discipline throughout the siege.

One of the regiment’s most notable moments during the siege occurred during the May 22nd assault, a coordinated attack ordered by General Ulysses S. Grant to break through the Confederate lines. The 23rd Wisconsin, along with other Union regiments, faced fierce resistance as they attempted to storm the heavily defended fortifications. Though the assault ultimately failed, the regiment’s determination contributed to the eventual Union success. Over the course of the siege, the regiment sustained casualties from both combat and disease, reflecting the high human cost of the campaign. The surrender of Vicksburg on July 4, 1863, marked a turning point in the war, giving the Union control of the Mississippi River and splitting the Confederacy.

Union General Ulysses S. Grant https://www.loc.gov/item/2018654269/

Confederate General John C. Pemberton https://www.loc.gov/item/2004679874/

“I shall not be able to move with my artillery or wagons...all roads are to strongly entrenched and the enemy is too heavy force for a reasonable prospect of success, unless you move in sufficient force to compel him to abandon his communications...which I still hope we may be able to do. I await your orders.” General Pemberton to General Johnston, Jue 21st, 1863

“The capture of Vicksburg is to me the first gleam of daylight in this war. It was strong by nature, and had been strengthened by immense labor and stores. Grant telegraphs me 27,000 prisoners, 128 field gunsand 100 siege pieces. Add to these 13 guns and 5000 prisoners at Arkansas Post...We have ravaged the land, and have sent away half a million of negroes, so that this country is paralyzed and cnnot recover its lost strength in twenty years.” ~ Home Letters of Sherman, July 5, 1863

“The fate of the Confederacy was sealed when Vicksburg fell...” ~ Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant, 1885, p 303.

Sauk County

Surrender at Vicksburg, originally published in Harper’s Weekly https://www.loc.gov/item/89706344/

50 Vicksburg, Mississippi 1863

https://www.loc.gov/item/2013649022/

Source: https://www.loc.gov/item/gvhs01.vhs00140/

After Vicksburg

The fall of Vicksburg and the victory at Gettysburg in July 1863 marked a major turning point in the Civil War, giving the Union a decisive strategic advantage. The capture of Vicksburg secured Union control of the Mississippi River, effectively splitting the Confederacy in two and cutting off vital supply lines to the western states. Meanwhile, General George Meade’s triumph at Gettysburg ended Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s second invasion of the North, forcing him to retreat back to Virginia and inflicting severe casualties on his army. These twin victories bolstered Northern morale and weakened the Confederate war effort both militarily and politically.

Following these events, the Union launched a series of coordinated campaigns to capitalize on its momentum. Grant was appointed General-in-Chief of the Union Army in 1864. In the Eastern Theater, Grant pursued Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia through the grueling Overland Campaign, including battles at the Wilderness, Spotsylvania Court House, and Cold Harbor. Meanwhile, General William Tecumseh Sherman captured Atlanta in September 1864 and embarked on his infamous March to the Sea and Carolinas Campaign, devastating Confederate infrastructure and undermining Southern morale. These campaigns aimed to exhaust Confederate resources and force surrender.

As the Union tightened its grip, the Confederacy faced internal strife, dwindling resources, and growing desertion rates among its soldiers. By April 1865, Grant’s forces had besieged Lee at Petersburg, forcing the evacuation of Richmond, the Confederate capital. Shortly thereafter, Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865, effectively ending the war.

Union soldiers at Appomattox Courthouse source: https://www.loc.gov/item/2014646186/

Source: https://www.loc.gov/item/2006677698/

Eastern Theater compared to the Western Theater

The Civil War (1861-1865) was primarily divided into two main theaters of operation: the Eastern and Western Theaters. The Eastern Theater encompassed the area east of the Appalachian Mountains, including Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and the coastal regions of North Carolina. This theater saw some of the war’s most famous and significant battles, such as those at Bull Run, Antietam, Fredericksburg, and Gettysburg. They involved the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee and the Union Army of the Potomac.

The Western Theater spanned the region between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River, including the states of Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, Mississippi, and Alabama. Key battles in this theater included Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chickamauga, and Atlanta. Union forces in the West, led by generals Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman, focused on gaining control of the Mississippi River and cutting off Confederate supply lines, which were crucial to the South’s ability to sustain its war effort.

Geography and Scope

Eastern Theater Western Theater

Region: Primarily focused on Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and parts of North Carolina.

Region: Spanned a much larger area, including Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and parts of the Mississippi River.

Main cities: Washington, D.C., Richmond (Confederate capital), Baltimore, and Philadelphia.

Terrain: Characterized by forests, rivers, and the Appalachian Mountains, which influenced military movements and logistics

Main cities: Nashville, Memphis, New Orleans, Atlanta, and Chattanooga.

Terrain: Included diverse landscapes such as the Mississippi River valley, plains, and mountain regions, affecting supply lines and strategies.

Key Battles and Campaigns

Eastern Theater Western Theater

Major Battles: First and Second Bull Run (Manassas), Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, and the Siege of Petersburg.

Notable Campaigns: The Overland Campaign, culminating in the Siege of Petersburg and the eventual fall of Richmond.

Major Battles: Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and the Battle of Atlanta.

Notable Campaigns: The Vicksburg Campaign, which gave the Union control of the Mississippi River, and Sherman’s Atlanta Campaign followed by his “March to the Sea,” which devastated the Confederate heartland.

Strategic Importance

Eastern Theater Western Theater

Political and Symbolic Significance: The proximity to the capitals of both the Union and the Confederacy made the Eastern Theater symbolically and politically significant.

Objective: Capturing Richmond was a primary objective for Union forces, while Confederates aimed to protect their capital and threaten Washington, D.C.

Economic and Logistical Significance: The Western Theater was crucial for controlling major rivers and railways, vital for the movement of troops and supplies.

Objective: Union strategies focused on dividing the Confederacy by gaining control of the Mississippi River and key transportation hubs, thus crippling Confederate supply lines and communications.

Commanders and Leadership

Eastern Theater Western Theater Union Commanders: Notable leaders included Major Generals George McClellan, Ambrose Burnside, Joseph Hooker, George Meade, and Ulysses S. Grant.

Confederate Commanders: General Robert E. Lee was the dominant Confederate leader, supported by commanders like Stonewall Jackson and James Longstreet.

Outcome and Impact

Union Commanders: Key figures included Major Generals Ulysses S. Grant, William Tecumseh Sherman, and George H. Thomas.

Confederate Commanders: Prominent leaders were Generals Albert Sidney Johnston, Braxton Bragg, and John Bell Hood.

Eastern Theater Western Theater

High Casualties: Many of the bloodiest battles occurred in the Eastern Theater, with significant casualties on both sides.

Symbolic Victories: Union victories, such as Gettysburg, provided crucial morale boosts and political leverage for the North.

Decisive Union Victories: Key victories at Vicksburg and Atlanta were turning points, significantly weakening the Confederacy and boosting Union morale.

Strategic Gains: The capture of key locations and the splitting of the Confederacy were pivotal to the Union’s overall strategy, contributing significantly to the eventual Union victory.

Think About It

Given the information provided in the tables, when do you believe the momentum of the war turned in the Union’s favor? Support your argument with information from the tables.

Primary Source Documents

source: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/

Corwin Amendment

The Corwin Amendment was a joint resolution passed by Congress on March 2 , 1861 as a last-ditch effort to prevent Southern states from seceding. It addressed their primary grievance: the threat to slavery. Drafted by Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio, the amendment sought to guarantee the federal government would not interfere with slavery in states where it already existed. Specifically, it proposed that no future constitutional amendments could authorize Congress to abolish or interfere with “domestic institutions” (a term widely understood to refer to slavery). The Corwin Amendment aimed to reassure the Southern states that their institution of slavery would be constitutionally protected, thus preventing further secession and preserving the Union.

Senator Thomas Corwin

source: https://www.loc.gov/item/2004664241/

The amendment was a reflection of the deep sectional divisions in the United States leading up to the Civil War. Following Abraham Lincoln’s election in 1860, many Southern states feared that his administration would move to abolish slavery, even though Lincoln had repeatedly stated he did not intend to interfere with slavery where it existed. The Corwin Amendment was supported by some Northern politicians, including President James Buchanan and Abraham Lincoln, as a way to preserve the Union. However, it failed to achieve its intended purpose. By the time it passed Congress in March 1861, seven Southern states had already seceded, forming the Confederacy. As a result, the Corwin Amendment was largely rendered moot, unable to prevent the escalating conflict that would erupt into the Civil War.

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln

Monday, March 4, 1861

In compliance with a custom as old as the Government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly and to take in your presence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President before he enters on the execution of this office.”

I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss those matters of administration about which there is no special anxiety or excitement.

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that--

Source: https://www.loc.gov/ item/2008680386/

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

President Abraham Lincoln

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so I only press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause--as cheerfully to one section as to another.

There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions:

No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution--to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause “shall be delivered up” their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath?

There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by national or by State authority, but surely that difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others by which authority it is done. And should anyone in any case be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it shall be kept?

Again: In any law upon this subject ought not all the safeguards of liberty known in civilized and humane jurisprudence to be introduced, so that a free man be not in any case surrendered as a slave? And might it not be well at the same time to provide by law for the enforcement of that clause in the Constitution which guarantees that “the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States”?

I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws by any hypercritical rules; and while I do not choose now to specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be enforced, I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both in official and private stations, to conform to and abide by all those acts which stand unrepealed than to violate any of them trusting to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional.

It is seventy-two years since the first inauguration of a President under our National Constitution. During that period fifteen different and greatly distinguished citizens have in succession administered the executive branch of the Government. They have conducted it through many perils, and generally with great success. Yet, with all this scope of precedent, I now enter upon the same task for the brief constitutional term of four years under great and peculiar difficulty. A disruption of the Federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted.

I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the express provisions of our National Constitution, and the Union will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not provided for in the instrument itself.

Again: If the United States be not a government proper, but an association of States in the nature of contract merely, can it, as acontract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it? One party to a contract may violate it--break it, so to speak--but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it?

Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured,

and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was “to form a more perfect Union.”

But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.

It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.

I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and Ishall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices.

The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised, according to circumstances

actually existing and with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and affections.

That there are persons in one section or another who seek to destroy the Union at all events and are glad of any pretext to do it I will neither affirm nor deny; but if there be such, I need address no word to them. To those, however, who really love the Union may I not speak?

Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it? Will you hazard so desperate a step while there is any possibility that any portion of the ills you fly from have no real existence? Will you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from, will you risk the commission of so fearful a mistake?

All profess to be content in the Union if all constitutional rights can be maintained. Is it true, then, that any right plainly written in the Constitution has been denied? I think not. Happily, the human mind is so constituted that no party can reach to the audacity of doing this. Think, if you can, of a single instance in which a plainly written provision of the Constitution has ever been denied. If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might in a moral point of view justify revolution; certainly would if such right were a vital one. But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, guaranties and prohibitions, in the Constitution that controversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable to every question which may occur in practical administration. No foresight can anticipate nor any document of reasonable length contain express provisions for all possible questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by State authority? The Constitution does not expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say.

From questions of this class spring all our constitutional controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the Government must cease. There is no other alternative, for continuing the Government is acquiescence on one side or the other. If a minority in such case will secede rather than acquiesce, they make a precedent which in turn will divide and ruin them, for a minority of their own will secede from them whenever a majority refuses to be controlled by such minority. For instance, why may not any portion of a new confederacy a year or two hence

arbitrarily secede again, precisely as portions of the present Union now claim to secede from it? All who cherish disunion sentiments are now being educated to the exact temper of doing this.

Is there such perfect identity of interests among the States to compose a new union as to produce harmony only and prevent renewed secession?

Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or to despotism. Unanimity is impossible. The rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left.

I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by all other departments of the Government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be overruled and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases properly brought before them, and it is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn their decisions to political purposes.

One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute. The fugitive- slave clause of the Constitution and the law for the suppression of the foreign slave trade are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, can not be perfectly cured, and it would be worse in both cases after the separation

of the sections than before. The foreign slave trade, now imperfectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived without restriction in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by the other.

Physically speaking, we can not separate. We can not remove our respective sections from each other nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other, but the different parts of our country can not do this. They can not but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to war, you can not fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions, as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you.

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I can not be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the National Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows amendments to originate with the people themselves, instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions originated by others, not especially chosen for the purpose, and which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

The Chief Magistrate derives all his authority from the people, and they have referred none upon him to fix terms for the separation of the States. The people themselves can do this if also they choose, but the Executive as such has nothing to do with it. His duty is to

administer the present Government as it came to his hands and to transmit it unimpaired by him to his successor.

Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal hope in the world? In our present differences, is either party without faith of being in the right? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with His eternal truth and justice, be on your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of the American people.

By the frame of the Government under which we live this same people have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief, and have with equal wisdom provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years.

My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step which you would never take deliberately, that object will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sensitive point, the laws of your own framing under it; while the new Administration will have no immediate power, if it would, to change either. If it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied hold the right side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for precipitate action. Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land are still competent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty.

In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to “preserve, protect, and defend it.”

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Excerpts from the

Second Annual Message by President Lincoln

December 1, 1862

The civil war, which has so radically changed for the moment the occupations and habits of the American people, has necessarily disturbed the social condition and affected very deeply the prosperity of the nations with which we have carried on a commerce that has been steadily increasing throughout a period of half a century...

Applications have been made to me by many free Americans of African descent to favor their emigration, with a view to such colonization as was contemplated in recent acts of Congress. Other parties, at home and abroad--some from interested motives, others upon patriotic considerations, and still others influenced by philanthropic sentiments--have suggested similar measures, while, on the other hand, several of the Spanish American Republics have protested against the sending of such colonies to their respective territories. Under these circumstances I have declined to move any such colony to any state without first obtaining the consent of its government, with an agreement on its part to receive and protect such emigrants in all the rights of freemen; and I have at the same time offered to the several States situated within the Tropics, or having colonies there, to negotiate with them, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, to favor the voluntary emigration of persons of that class to their respective territories, upon conditions which shall be equal, just, and humane. Liberia and Hayti are as yet the only countries to which colonists of African descent from here could go with certainty of being received and adopted as citizens; and I regret to say such persons contemplating colonization do not seem so willing to migrate to those countries as to some others, nor so willing as I think their interest demands. I believe, however, opinion among them in this respect is improving, and that ere long there will be an augmented and considerable migration to both these countries from the United States...

In the inaugural address I briefly pointed out the total inadequacy of disunion as a remedy for the differences between the people of the two sections. I did so in language which I can not improve...

There is no line, straight or crooked, suitable for a national boundary upon which to divide. Trace through, from east to west, upon the line between the free and slave country. and we shall find a little more than one-third of its length are rivers, easy to be crossed, and populated, or soon to be populated, thickly upon both sides; while nearly all its remaining length are merely surveyors’ lines, over which people may walk back and forth without any consciousness of their presence. No part of this line can be made any more difficult to pass

by writing it down on paper or parchment as a national boundary. The fact of separation, if it comes, gives up on the part of the seceding section the fugitive-slave clause, along with all other constitutional obligations upon the section seceded from, while I should expect no treaty stipulation would ever be made to take its place...

In this view I recommend the adoption of the following resolution and articles amendatory to the Constitution of the United States:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of both Houses concurring), That the following articles be proposed to the legislatures (or conventions) of the several States as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said legislatures (or conventions ), to be valid as part or parts of the said Constitution.

ART.--. Every State wherein slavery now exists which shall abolish the same therein at any time or times before the 1st day of January., A.D. 1900, shall receive compensation from the United States as follows, to wit:

The President of the United States shall deliver to every such State bonds of the United States bearing interest at the rate of per cent per annum to an amount equal to the aggregate sum of____for each slave shown to have been therein by the Eighth Census of the United States, said bonds to be delivered to such State by installments or in one parcel at the completion of the abolishment, accordingly as the same shall have been gradual or at one time within such State; and interest shall begin to run upon any such bond only from the proper time of its delivery as aforesaid. Any State having received bonds as aforesaid and afterwards reintroducing or tolerating slavery therein shall refund to the United States the bonds so received, or the value thereof, and all interest paid thereon.

ART--All slaves who shall have enjoyed actual freedom by the chances of the war at any time before the end of the rebellion shall be forever free; but all owners of such who shall not have been disloyal shall be compensated for them at the same rates as is provided for States adopting abolishment of slavery, but in such way that no slave shall be twice accounted for.

ART.--Congress may appropriate money and otherwise provide for colonizing free colored persons with their own consent at any place or places without the United States.

I beg indulgence to discuss these proposed articles at some length. Without slavery the rebellion could never have existed; without slavery it could not continue.

Discussion

1. Lincoln proposed gradual, compensated emancipation as a means to end slavery peacefully. What did he feel were the advantages and barriers of this approach compared to immediate abolition?

2. Lincoln argued that slavery was incompatible with the long-term survival of the Union. How did his position reflect the broader political and moral divisions of the time?

3. In his address, Lincoln suggested that freed African Americans could be encouraged to settle in foreign colonies, such Liberia and Hayti [Haiti]. What were his motivations for this proposal?

4. Do you think Lincoln’s proposed amendments had any chance of becoming part of the United States Constitution? Consider the following process required to amend the United States Constitution in your answer.

The process to amend the U.S. Constitution is outlined in Article V of the Constitution and involves two main steps: proposal and ratification. There are two ways an amendment can be proposed and two ways it can be ratified:

Step 1: Proposal of an Amendment

An amendment can be proposed in one of two ways:

Congressional Proposal – A proposed amendment must be approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Constitutional Convention – A national convention can be called if two-thirds (34 out of 50) of the state legislatures request it. This method has never been used.

Step 2: Ratification of an Amendment

Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified in one of two ways:

State Legislatures – The amendment must be approved by three-fourths (38 out of 50) of the state legislatures.

State Conventions – The amendment can be ratified by conventions held in three-fourths (38 out of 50) of the states.

Once ratified, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.

Emancipation Proclamation

January 1, 1863

By the President of the United States of America: A Proclamation.

Whereas, on the twenty-second day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, a proclamation was issued by the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the following, to wit:

“That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.

“That the Executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any, in which the people thereof, respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof, shall on that day be, in good faith, represented in the Congress of the United States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified voters of such State shall have participated, shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive evidence that such State, and the people thereof, are not then in rebellion against the United States.”

Now, therefore I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days, from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.

And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence; and I recommend to them that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for reasonable wages.

And I further declare and make known, that such persons of suitable condition, will be received into the armed service of the United States to garrison forts, positions, stations, and other places, and to man vessels of all sorts in said service.

And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the eighty-seventh.

By the President: ABRAHAM LINCOLN WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.

Second Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln

Monday, March 4, 1865

“Fellow countrymen: at this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement somewhat in detail of a course to be pursued seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the energies of the nation little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends is as well known to the public as to myself and it is I trust reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future no prediction in regard to it is ventured.

“On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it ~ all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place devoted altogether to saving the Union without war insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war ~ seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.

“One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves not distributed generally over the union but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen perpetuate and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered ~ that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offenses for it must needs be that offenses come but woe

to that man by whom the offense cometh.” If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which in the providence of God must needs come but which having continued through His appointed time He now wills to remove and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him. Fondly do we hope ~ fervently do we pray ~ that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword as was said three thousand years ago so still it must be said ‘the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.’

“With malice toward none with charity for all with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right let us strive on to finish the work we are in to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan ~ to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Discussion

1. “With malice toward none, with charity for all” – Lincoln emphasized reconciliation rather than punishment for the South. Why do you think he took this approach, and how might history have been different if he had instead called for retribution?

2. Lincoln’s Use of Religious Themes – Lincoln frequently referenced God and divine justice in his speech. How did his use of religious language shape the tone of the address, and how might it have influenced his audience during a time of war and national division?

3. Slavery and the Cause of War – Lincoln stated that slavery was the fundamental cause of the Civil War, even suggesting that the war was a form of divine punishment for the nation’s role in perpetuating it. How did this acknowledgment reflect a shift in his views from the beginning of the war, and why was it significant at this stage?

4. The Purpose of the War’s End – In his address, Lincoln did not celebrate victory but instead focused on healing and national unity. What does this reveal about his vision for Reconstruction, and how does it contrast with the challenges that followed his assassination?

Historic Images

Historic images serve as valuable primary sources because they provide direct visual evidence of people, places, and events from the past. These images help historians analyze historical settings, clothing, technology, and cultural practices, offering insights that might not be fully conveyed in written records. However, like any primary source, they must be examined critically for context and bias.

Photography played a crucial role during the Civil War, providing the public with unprecedented visual documentation of battlefields, soldiers, and the war’s devastation. Photographers like Mathew Brady, Alexander Gardner, and Timothy O’Sullivan captured powerful images that shaped public perception, bringing the realities of war to civilians in a way never seen before.

Likewise, sketch artists played a vital role in documenting battles, military camps, and daily soldier life, as photography at the time was unable to capture action scenes. Artists such as Alfred Waud, his brother William, and Edwin Forbes worked for newspapers like Harper’s Weekly, creating detailed illustrations that were later engraved and published, bringing vivid depictions of the war to the public.

Confederate prisoners, photo by Timothy H. O’Sullivan, Aldie, Virginia, June, 1864

Source: https://www.loc.gov/resource/ppmsca.33762/

Essay Suggestions

1. Compare the words of D.W. Hitchcock with newspaper articles describing the Battles of Chickasaw Bluffs (Bayou) and the Arkansas Post. What conclusions do you draw?

2. What was the Corwin Amendment? What would have been necessary for it to become part of the United States Constitution? Do you think it would have gained the support needed for ratification? Why or why not?

3. The American Colonization Society had been active for half a century before Lincoln refers to its purpose in his Second Annual Message to Congress. What was the American Colonization Society? Why did it cause discord among abolitionists? Why did the tenets of the American Colonization Society angered Southern slaveholders?

4. What battles followed the Battle of Arkansas Post as part of the Siege of Vicksburg? What role did Admiral Porter play in those battles? What caused General Pemberton to surrender? In your opinion, why did the Union win the Siege of Vicksburg? Support your opinion with facts.

5. Of what value is reading the diaries of Civil War soldiers, Union and Confederate?

Project-based Learning

Work with a team of 3 to 5 classmates to research a topic of your choice related to the diary of D.W. Hitchcock. Determine how the topic will be studied and presented. Who will manage the research? Who will design the presentation? Who will manage the research timeline and plan the presentation? Who will write the script for a media presentation or develop a paper to present? How will the presentation be evaluated?

Begin by listing five ideas for research. As a team, determine which topic would be the most interesting to research and present. Then determine a timeline for your research and presentation. Be sure to meet as a team at particular times to share your progress. Share your learning. How will you present your information to others?

Vicksburg and its defences. Constructed and engraved to illustrate “The war with the South,”by Charles Shull, 1863: Library of Congress

Resources

Library of Congress Civil War Collection

https://www.loc.gov/search/?in=&q=civil+war+collection&new=true

The Sauk County Historical Society Civil War Collection https://saukcountyhistory.org/voices-of-the-civil-war

Wisconsin Historical Society https://www.wisconsinhistory.org/

Wisconsin Veterans Museum https://wisvetsmuseum.com/

Davis, William C., Diary of a Confederate Soldier, University of South Carolina Press, 1990.

Grant, Ulysses S., Personal Memoirs, Random House, Inc,. 1885 (original publication date)

Sherman, William Tecumsch, edited by M.A. DeWolfe Howe, Charles Schribner’s Sons, 1909.

Questions?

For information about the Voices of the Civil War series, please email education@saukcountyhistory.org.