Specific Letters – What To Do with Good Ol’ Jeff

This letter, written by the mother of Union soldier Joshua M. Irvin, a POW at Andersonville who died not long after his release, is one of many that discusses how Jefferson Davis was personally responsible for the horrors of all Confederate prison camps, and should be punished for causing the deaths of so many Union men.

Virtually all of the anti-pardon letters sent to Andrew Johnson were fascinating to read through. The boxes contained a mixture of letters written by Northern citizens and Union veterans, all expressing absolute hatred towards Davis. What surprised me most about the letters was the range of solutions and answer to the question, “What should be done with Jefferson Davis?” My initial thought was that all, or at least a majority, would be calling for his immediate trial and execution. While I did find a fair number who wrote those very words, they constituted a smaller percentage than I anticipated. This unexpected find helped me contemplate how these particular individuals thought in the first months and the first year after Appomattox, and made me question why they wanted something other than Davis’ trial and execution.

Mr. Bernard Glancy Jr. of Danbury Connecticut wrote to President Johnson on June 6, 1865, with a rather long letter detailing his position on the Davis matter. “After serving the term of almost four years in the cause of my country for the purpose of putting down the Rebellion and enforcing our laws against those arch traitors in Rebellion against us, … I have been spared to see its end and to see the capture of its various rebel leaders who were trying to overthrow our glorious Union and trample our beautiful and starry emblem in the dust,” he wrote. A survivor of Andersonville, he discussed at length the horrors of the prison and the intent of the “traitorous foes” to do “all that they could to starve us to death.” “Oh it made my heart leap with joy when I read of the capture of that arch traitor Jeff Davis while trying to escape in the garb of a woman and I would like to have a hand in building his scaffold …. I would like to be the one to lend a helping hand for I long to see him hang and I want to see him hang high for the sooner all such men are put to death the sooner we will enjoy happiness and the sooner we will have peace throughout our land.” Glancy concluded his letter asking Johnson to write him if there was any “chance for [him] to render [his] services in helping to build that scaffold,” as it would be a “great and noble duty to perform.”

A concerned citizen from Pontiac, Illinois wrote to Johnson on May 20, 1865, asking him to follow through on what he had said on January 21, 1861. Attached to the letter was a newspaper clipping with an excerpt from Johnson’s remarks in the Senate, where he stood after Davis had “terminated” himself from his congressional duties, shouting, “Were I the President of the United States, I would have you tried for treason, and, upon conviction, would hang you, so help me God!”

J.H. Heughey from Illinois requested on June 19, 1865, that “Jeff Davis and others found guilty of treason be hanged on the 4^th of July next. Such an occurrence would constitute an important item in American history.” Another citizen from Massachusetts also suggested to hang Davis and his fellow conspirators on the 4^th of July, as it would signify a great event in the nation’s history.

One man offered to build the gallows for Davis and included a drawing of how he would construct them and with what type of wood. Another offered to exercise his profession, a professional rope maker, and make the rope, free of charge, that would be used to hang Davis.

Majority of those calling for Davis’ swift trial and execution were primarily Union veterans, with some Northern civilians thrown into the mix. After reading all of the letters, though, I have concluded that Northern civilians differed on how to deal with the Davis question. While they all expressed their hatred for the man and what he stood for, less of them actively called for his execution but rather used his unusual situation to help the recovering nation in a positive way.

Washington Messill, a citizen in Washington, D.C., suggested on May 19, 1865, to not “hang Davis now,” but to let him live a few years, “put him in a strong iron cage,” and “conduct him then [around] the states with the same dress he was taken in at one dollar the sight.” The collected money would then be given to “all injured soldiers both north and south.”

J.H. Cheeseman from Oakly, Illinois wrote that “having received the news of the capture of the vile traitor Jefferson Davis, the thief and would be President of the Rebellion, it struck me, that to take him on [an] expedition through the Northern States, just as he was capture[d], in female attire, it [would] raise the funds to pay the National debt, for most every one would pay fifty cents or a dollar to see him. I have heard several say that they would already, and I should judge there are many more, it would be an easy way of making him help pay what he has helped to contract.” As part of this circus-like act, Cheeseman suggested to brand Davis on the forehead with “M for murder; and D for devil.”

Twelve year old Lilla Sibley from Lawrence, Massachusetts requested that Johnson “send Jeff Davis around to the loyal states and have him exhipited [sic] that we may pay 50 cents or a dollar apiece and have him carried to the metroplious [sic] of every state. … My father … works hard every day and he will pay enough to see that scoundrel who has caused so much blood to be shed and so much money to be spent and if you will have him sent around, the money that is received will help pay off the debt.” A man from Ohio echoed similar sentiments, saying that “as poor as I am [I] would give five dollars to see him, so that I could say I had seen a would be president.”

A loyal woman of Massachusetts wrote that “the North think that Jeff Davis might [lower] a large portion of the national debt by being exhibited in his costume in all the cities.” A man from Michigan suggested to have Davis “dressed the same as when captured,” and that the “proceeds of sale be appropriated in paying the expense of capture.” “It would meet with a ready sale here,” he wrote. James B. Smith of New York penned that “by request of a number of citizens of this city, it is respectfully suggested to your Excellency that the arch traitor Jeff Davis be brought to the city in his petticoat regimentals, and paraded, for the education of the public, through Broadway.”

These excerpts only represent a portion of the larger collection, but do show the difference between Northern civilians and Union veterans and the battle over what to do with Jefferson Davis. What ‘solution’ would better heal the nation and create a lasting peace, while at the same time attaining justice for the traitors? Would it be his trial, conviction, and execution? Or would it be parading him around like a circus freak, resulting in absolute humiliation for the Confederacy’s leader and cause? A tricky balance lay between healing and justice, with a range of possibilities on how to achieve both. But with no real precedent or guide on how to exactly do so, the question of what to do with good ol’ Jeffy D remained.

Specific Letters – Religion

One of my favorite finds… “For the love of Jesus, pardon Jefferson Davis.”

As promised, I will now focus on a few letters that I have found particularly interesting. The pro-pardon letters that initially caused me to pay more attention to the religious theme draw considerable attention to the “guilt” of the Confederacy and the burden of “southern sins” that seemed to inevitably be falling on Jefferson Davis. Mrs. M.S. Kimbrough wrote to President Johnson from Georgia. Though the letter did not have a date, I suspect it was written shortly after Davis’ capture and imprisonment:
“When then is Jefferson Davis left to bear the burden of the Southern sins Can it be just that he alone should be the sacrifice. He is not more to blame than those of our sons who fought and bled for their homes and firesides. Should the gov’t be pleased to release him, its benign influence be as the “dew of Heaven which descended upon the mountains, for their God commanded the blessing.” It would insensible state into the Southern heart and cause its throbbings to be with love towards those we had looked upon as enemies and in the future we would naturally forget the wrong committed on both sides. But should Jefferson Davis be sacrificed, his blood will be to every Southern woman’s heart, what the blood of Jesus was to the women of the cross, who stood near by but in fear and trembling, something for them to cling to, to love, to hope for in the future.
Mr. George E. McClellan from Florida wrote that Davis’ “private character” was “of the purest kind,” and “added to which was a devotion to Religion adding luster to his moral work.” He continued on to by stating that “this Gentleman [was] endowed by Heaven with eminent abilities and so many Christian graces that even his failings lean to Virtues side…. He labored for us, and suffered with us. We have failed, and now … becomes a conquered people, why visit on his devoted head, the sins of the whole country. Believe us every blow inflicted on him, is a stab deep down into our hearts. The angel of affliction has swept over our unhappy land, scattering a thousand woes on every hearthstone…. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.”
The undersigned petitioners from Macon, Georgia wrote on July 12, 1865, “we ask you to exercise towards him that justice and mercy which “the Prince of Peace” taught, when he laid before us the “golden rule” and that magnanimity which so well becomes the conqueror in the hour of friendship.”
These few letters help show the religious imagery that Southerners and ex-Confederates were invoking, hoping that an appeal to Johnson’s religious side would not only secure him in their favor but would also result in Davis’ release from prison. The frequency of terms like “guilt” or “sins” in reference to the South’s reasons for fighting the war was what surprised me most about these pro-pardon letters. The authors were almost begging for Johnson to forgive them of their sins, their transgressions, of slavery and the Confederacy. For all of the religious language that attributed Davis to Jesus, this one particular letter, written by a woman from Macon, Georgia, on August 13, 1865, made Johnson into the Jesus figure, which especially caught my attention. She wrote that she and others would gladly “bathe [his] feet with our tears and wipe them with our hair,” invoking the image of the sinful woman who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears and hair. What was the purpose of writing something like that? Was it simply a tool to gain Johnson’s attention, or did she actually view him as a Jesus-like man?
As interesting as these letters were (and they were very interesting!), they raised a great deal of questions about religion in the mid-nineteenth century, especially in the immediate post-war period. How much importance did Americans place on religion in the immediate aftermath of the war? Did Southerners really believe that they were “guilty” of sins and Davis, like Jesus, was to be sacrificed in order to clear them? Questions like these are not only compelling but are critical to answer to gain a better grasp on the intellectual climate of the country in the years after the American Civil War.

Petition Letters For/Against Pardoning Jefferson Davis

The five mystery boxes in Record Group 94 (which were much easier to find this time compared to last) that contain the petition letters sent to Andrew Johnson arguing for or against the pardoning of Jefferson Davis are absolutely fascinating. I find myself becoming so immersed in the letters and reading/deciphering them that it takes me a few hours to go through only a few folders. However, doing so and spending an incredible amount of time sifting through the letters has proven to be such a rewarding experience. In this blog, I will highlight the general conclusions I have drawn after reading the petition letters, and then in the next blog I will focus on a few specific letters that I found to be the most intriguing and representative of the sentiment felt by Northerners to the ex-president.

The five box collection was divided into petition letters urging Johnson to pardon Davis and those arguing to follow through on the trial and possible execution. The former was contained in three boxes, all divided up by state, and the latter was contained in two boxes, also divided up by state.

The letters sent to Johnson advocating Davis’ pardoning and release from jail were primarily focused around a theme I had never given much thought to: religion. Surprisingly, almost all of the letters contained religious overtones and appealed to Johnson’s moral side in granting Davis clemency and mercy. “The high privilege which God has given you… be merciful,” wrote a George McClellan from Florida. “Mr. Johnson, be like your God, “full of compassion and gracious long sufferings plenteous in Mercy,”” pleaded Mrs. M.S. Kimbrough from Georgia. A Mrs. M.A. Foard from Delaware penned a letter to Johnson claiming Davis was  “great” man, so “noble and righteous,” and that he is not to blame for any Southern ‘crimes.’ “Will you deal unmercifully, unrighteous with him for just one error? God forbid. Is not cruelty the greatest of all crimes?” she wrote. An anonymous citizen from Aiden, Ohio pleaded with Johnson, writing “I appeal to you as a Christian… May God in his infinite mercy, carry my appeal to your heart and may you in tender compassion, at once grant one.”

The letters sent to Johnson in favoring of not pardoning Davis took a more drastic turn than I initially anticipated. I expected all Northerners, citizens and veterans alike, to be calling for Davis’ trial and execution, or at least suggesting life in prison. While that was the case in a great deal of the letters, it was not the case for a surprising number of them. (This was a difference that I will talk more extensively about in the next blog). What I did find were solutions to the “Davis problem,” ways to not only punish Davis and humiliate him, but to put his imprisonment to good use for the nation. “Don[t] hang Jeff Davis now, but put him in a strong iron cage, … conduct him then [around] the states with the same dress he was taken in at one dollar the sight and give the same to all injured soldiers both north and south of which they so much need the debt…” wrote a man on May 19, 1865, in Washington, D.C. A resident of Illinois, J.H. Cheeseman penned Johnson in May 1865, with the request to take Davis on an “expedition through the Northern States, just as he was capture[d], in female attire, it [would] raise the funds to pay the National debt, for most every one would pay fifty cents or a dollar to see him.” Women, even, were voicing their opinions on what to do with “Old Jeff.” “Many others of the Northern Ladies would be mighty gratified to have Old Jeff put into an iron safe and exhibited through the country to help pay the public debt…” wrote a Mrs. B.S. May from South Boston, Massachusetts on May 19, 1865. One man from Ohio asserted that the national debt would be paid in a “short time” if Davis were to be “cage[d] up” and shipped around the North.

Similar language and sentiment regarding locking Davis up in a cage and sending him around the North to accrue money for the National debt was found in a surprising number of letters. I found it especially intriguing that these citizens were creating practical uses for Davis while he was still in Federal custody. Their ingenuity amazed me, and certainly adds another layer on determining what, exactly, to do with Traitor Jeff.

These brief excerpts from these various letters, from both the North and the South, give a glimpse into the religious imagery that citizens evoked when trying to push Johnson along to pardoning Davis, and also into other solutions for Davis that strike a balance (somewhat) between healing and justice. As I mentioned above, the next blog will focus on the “juicier” letters I found, ones that really accentuate this religious theme I identified and the letters from Union veterans pushing for Davis to hang from the gallows.

Until next time…

The Trials and Rewards of Research…

Such a great day at the National Archives!! I went to look through Record Group 94, which contains in the Records of the Adjutant General the Amnesty Papers, pardoning letters that former Confederates sent to President Andrew Johnson after the war ended to resume their status as citizens. An additional part of this section of the Record Group contains petition letters sent to Johnson from American citizens writing in regards to Davis and his presumed punishment. Virtually neglected by majority of historians minus a select few, these records will give me exciting and crucial insight into the hearts and minds of Northerners immediately after the war. But, before I could actually begin, I had to locate the petitions, which proved to be difficult, not only for me but for the archivists themselves! After thumbing through the finding aid for RG 94, I went to the microfilm room to view the Amnesty Papers (all of them had been put on microfilm), but the worker referred me back to the consultation room because the list of former rebel letters writing to Johnson in the collection did not contain any from Davis or regarding Davis. Back I went. After explaining the situation to a different archivist, he took me back to the microfilm room and looked through a different type of finding aid for the microfilm set. In bold letters, it said at the beginning of the aid that it contained petitions sent to Johnson from citizens arguing for or against the pardon of Davis. But apparently, the microfilm did not contain the petitions. I was confused, and the archivist even more so then me. Back we went to the consultation room.

The initial searching for the petition papers…

At this point, there were about three archivists trying to locate where these petitions were hiding. They were going through all of the possible finding aids and lists of items in Record Group 94 to find these petition letters and were still coming up empty handed. I couldn’t help but stand aside and watch them try and solve this mystery. Sensing disarray in the room, three more archivists came to see what was going on and offer their help. Now I had six archivists working to find these records! After about an hour and a half and incredible amounts of frustration, they told me that the petitions must have been entered under the specific names of the former Confederates, and were therefore dispersed among the microfilm and there was no way of finding out the names of the authors unless I sifted through the entire microfilm collection. I was incredibly disappointed. I knew the records existed, had seen them referred to in secondary material, and was so close to reading them to be told I couldn’t.

More searching

So, I did what any good historian would do. I looked at the reference notes in William Blair’s newest book, With Malice Towards Some: Treason and Loyalty in the Civil War Era, who had cited the petition letters, to see where exactly they could be found. I called over the remaining archivists in the room, and they looked at the citation, which pinpointed Box 250 of the Amnesty Papers as the source. They all looked confused. They were under the assumption that the entire collection of Amnesty Papers had been put on microfilm. I was told, yet again, to wait a few minutes, as they all dispersed to find this mysterious Box 250. Ten minutes passed, and they returned with smiles on their faces.

Utter confusion. About four archivists in the room at this time. Fifteen minutes after this, the petitions were found!!

 

Two hours and six archivists later, the box had been found! Even better, there were five boxes of petition letters sent to Andrew Johnson that were not microfilmed and had not been entered into the finding aid. I was so so happy!! I only expected one box of petition letters, not five. Needless to say, I was ecstatic, and thoroughly enjoyed reading some of the letters in the first box this afternoon. I will post another blog after I finish the petition letters, but here is a preview of what I looked at today. Until next time…

This picture, coupled with the letter on the right, is a sketch of the gallows a carpenter offered to build to hang Davis with.

Craven Papers and the Beginnings of the Bourne Papers

During another trip to the Library of Congress, I found myself looking through the papers of John Joseph Craven, the physician who tended to Jefferson Davis for about a year of his imprisonment in Fortress Monroe. It was a rather small collection, majority of the documents in it being letters sent from Craven to his wife in the late 1850s. There were, however, a few hidden gems that were just waiting for me to find.

The first three fragments worth mentioning came from Craven’s Fort Monroe Diary. The documents were torn pieces of paper that appeared to be ripped out of the diary. Nonetheless, they contained small pieces of interesting information. The first was dated the 24^th, no month or year, and read as follows:

“I found this morning on entering Mr. Davis’s cell the ground had been removed, and for the first he was eating alone he was eating his breakfast. He expressed himself pleased with the change and remarked that he had passed a delightfull night without disturbance. He complained of his eyes and a throbbing pain off to the back of his head and neck and said he wished me to give it particular attention for he had the same [headache] last year at Richmond and it was followed by a very severe illness.”

The second, also dated the 24^th, no month or year, reads as follows:

“Major General Miles came in … and announced to Mr. D. that we was to be allowed one hour each day in the open air and miscellaneous reading.”

The third, dated June 9, detailed a conversation between Davis and Craven about oysters (of all things!). This particular document was especially difficult to read; Craven’s handwriting was so sloppy that even the handy Cam Scanner could not make some of the words clearer to read.

Dr. John Joseph Craven, courtesy of the Library of Congress

 

Another rather interesting find I discovered, coupled with the Confederate one dollar bill that was featured in the previous post, was a letter from Clement Clay to Craven on April 7, 1866, with the header “In prison, Fort Monroe.” The letter reads as follows:

“My dear sir, this will in honor my friend, Dr. J.J. Craven of New Jersey, M.D., who was my physician during the first [few] months of my imprisonment here. He is a gentleman and I am indebted to him for many kindnesses and courtesies. I commend him to your favorable consideration.”

This especially stuck out to me. Clement Clay was a name that kept appearing in almost every secondary source on the Davis imprisonment and trial. More to come on Clay in the next blog!

 

The last intriguing piece I found in the Craven papers was a letter written to him from friends of Davis, dated 6 February 1866:

“Dear Sir, A report has reached us that you are about the exchange the position you now hold in the Fortress for another medical office in connection with the Freedman’s Bureau. As friends of Mr. Davis personally, feeling a deep solicitude for his welfare and comfort, and gratefully appreciating the kindness and attention extended to him by yourself whenever consistent with your official position and duty, we would respectfully solicit your good offices to secure for Mr D. from your successor (in the event of your removal a continuation of the courtesies he has received at your hands.) We are also extremely desirous of doing whatever may be permitted us to alleviate his condition …. We are ignorant of the nature and extent of the restrictions imposed on his case, and will be glad to be informed whether articles intended for his comfort or convenience will be permitted to reach him from his friends.”

Though a very small collection, I was extremely happy with what I found!

To wrap up my days at the Library of Congress, I began sifting through the William Oland Bourne papers. Bourne, through his publication The Soldier’s Friend, sought to aid disabled veterans by offering prizes to those who had lost their right arm during the war and learned to write with their left hands. I went through the first two folders of Series 1 and pinpointed two essays that were especially fascinating to me. The first was written by William Penn Sands, dated 15 August 1865:

“The sudden disbanding of our mighty army, has also tested the value of Republican Institutions. Many a patriotic heart was fearful, that the [paltering] of so many myriads of men, unused for years to the routine of citizen life, might result in turmoil and commotions, at home. But the intelligence of our Army has been equal to the emergency. And the quietude with which a million of veteran soliders, have laid aside their arms, and renewed the peaceful vocations of life, causes a new wonder …. This great work, together with the reconstruction of the disorganized states, will demand the most earnest, and devoted, attention of our legislators. The transition state through which we are passing, is fraught with many dangers, and we should see that the ship of State is manned only, with true and tried officers.”

The second essay was written by Ezra D. Hiltz, dated 26 August 1865:

“Let the people of the South learn from the “error of their way” and swear allegiance to the government and we will extend to them the “right hand of fellowship” and welcome them back beneath the folds of the old Flag. But I would not pardon rebels, especially the leaders, until they should first kneel in the dust of humiliation and show by their deeds that they sincerely repent. I fear our President is too lenient. Justice should be done to the perpetrators and leaders of the wicked rebellion. The tens of thousands of our brothers who were starved in Andersonville and other prison pens in the South cry from the ground for justice. Our work is not yet finished. We must build schoolhouses and educate the masses in the principle of eternal truth and liberty, and this will form a basis of our government as from as the everlasting hills. We must elect loyal men to fill places of trust: our public men – our rulers must be men who will work for the good of the whole country, and the interest of the people instead of working to gratify their own selfish ambitions. They must possess wisdom, honesty and decision. Then will the nation continue to prosper and be exalted for truly “righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.”

 

I only scratched the surface with the soldier essays in the Bourne papers, and will continue to pour over them on my next research visit to the Library of Congress!

A Cool Find in the John Joseph Craven Papers…

This note on the back of a Confederate one dollar bill, addressed to Dr. Craven, appears to be signed by Clement C. Clay, another Confederate who was imprisoned in Fortress Monroe with Jefferson Davis and cared for by Dr. Craven.

Beginnings of Research

First research trip: completed! After doing a great deal of secondary readings on the legality of the Davis trial, I sojourned to the Library of Congress to scour through manuscript collections of a few prominent names I identified.

Chief among the names was William Maxwell Evarts, the U.S. attorney assigned to lead the government’s prosecution of Jefferson Davis for treason. His papers contain letters from a large number of key players in the Davis trial – Attorney General Henry Stanberry, Richard H. Dana (another U.S. attorney assigned to the Davis case), L.H. Chandler (U.S. District Attorney for Virginia), Judge John C. Underwood (circuit court judge for the District of Virginia), and Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase. The documents were fantastic, and contain a lot of rich information about just how messy and complicated the legality questions and issues of secession and treason really were immediately after the war.

To make matters even messier, Evarts has some of the worst handwriting I have ever seen! I must have stared at a single letter for upwards of forty minutes trying to decipher what he was saying. Nineteenth century handwriting is beautiful when written neatly, not to mention easier to read, but hastily written letters quickly become tedious tasks and eye straining work.

Luckily, thanks to two of my recently graduated friends, I discovered an app called Cam Scanner. It is such a wonderful and easy way to quickly take photos of documents, crop them to a desired size, and then transfer them to PDFs to be viewed on my computer screen. Even better, though, the app allows me to enhance the images and change the filter to better see the written text. It is incredible! The documents that I had difficulty transcribing in the Reading Room were suddenly readable. I was able to save the enhanced and edited pictures into a PDF that I then was able to view on my computer and easily print out. Cam Scanner has and will continue to prove itself as a wonderful research partner!

Until next time…

First Blog!!

Hello, blog world! This is my first official blog for my 2014 Mellon summer research grant which is sponsoring my project, Jeff Davis, A Sour Apple Tree, and Treason: Fear in the Post-Civil War North. I am so excited to officially begin the research process! The idea for this project began a little more than a year ago, when I took a class at Gettysburg College titled Reconstruction and the Legacy of the Civil War. I went into the class not knowing much about what occurred after the fighting stopped in early 1865, and having absolutely no idea what ‘historical memory’ was or even meant.

The class, though, could not have been offered at a better time during my college career. Taken during the spring semester of my sophomore year, I had yet to discover what exactly my historical passion was. I came to Gettysburg with a genuine interest in the Civil War, not really knowing what I wanted to focus on, but learned through this class that my interest really lies in the Reconstruction era. My term paper examined the question of why the top Confederate leaders were not punished after the war. I chose to concentrate on Jefferson Davis, and why he was never tried or executed after his capture. I discovered a passion for this important yet unanswered question, which became the driving force behind my current research project.

The end of the American Civil War raised many questions, the main one how to piece the torn nation back together after four devastating years of fighting. With Abraham Lincoln’s assassination occurring five days after the Confederate surrender to Ulysses S. Grant, the exact course of how to survive Reconstruction was unknown. Would the Southern states be accepted back into the Union with no punishment? Or would the federal government harshly reprimand the former Confederacy as a warning against future rebellions?

An even more pressing question was how to handle the former Confederate leadership, chiefly Jefferson Davis. The ex-President of the Confederate States, his capture in Georgia by Union cavalry and imprisonment at Fortress Monroe raised the thorny question of what to do with him. With Lincoln and Andrew Johnson offering no clear solution on how to punish the rebels, Northern society had no guidance on how to move forward into Reconstruction and begin the healing process. Some Northerners – Union veterans, ex-slaves, religious leaders, politicians, and citizens – outspokenly called for Davis’s execution , a “quick fix” to the four bloody years of war. Others desired his release from prison with no further punishment.

The lack of uniformity amongst Northern society points to the larger issue that Northerners wrestled with on how to effectively achieve sectional reconciliation. Would Davis’s execution, in fact, be the quick fix that many hoped would help push the nation towards a fuller and more complete healing? Or would it do precisely the opposite, and cause the Southern states to erupt, yet again, in rebellion?

These questions were undoubtedly running through the post-war minds of Northerners, causing them to embrace sectional healing and reconciliation out of sheer paranoia, out of fear. While other historians like David Blight, Nina Silber, and Heather Cox Richardson have advanced arguments for embracing reconciliation in the months and years after Appomattox, scholars have reached little consensus as to the chief engine of sectional reconciliation. Blight insists that an ugly racism helped reconcile the North and South. Silber suggests that gender provided essential political metaphors that helped to heal the war’s wounds. Richardson argues that the imperatives of class and commerce put the nation back together. While each are convincing in their own right, these accounts, in the end, are not entirely satisfying.

Fear, on the other hand, offers a richer and more human explanation to the gaps in the historiography. Though few scholars have written either specifically or at length on the question of Davis and treason, the calls for and against his execution reveal much about the emotional state of the country in the preliminary stages of Reconstruction. While some sought retribution after the war, others preached reconciliation to avoid a second one. My project will specifically analyze and interpret the role that fear played in sparing Davis from the gallows, and why Northerners were so eager to forget the four bloody years of war.

Throughout the course of the summer, I will be diving into the archives at various research repositories, a few of them being Museum of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis Presidential Library, New York Public Library, National Archives, and Library of Congress. I will be probing for an answer to this question that has stumped not only me but other historians. Stay tuned for updates!