The First Democratic Hoax Against the Republican Party

Miscegenation

 The Theory of the Blending of the Races

In 1864, an anonymous hardbound pamphlet was published entitled Miscegenation: The Theory of the Blending of the Races, Applied to the American White Man and Negro. The word "miscegenation" was coined by the authors who claimed it was a scientific theory describing how racial blending enhances humanity. The pamphlet encouraged the interbreeding of people from different racial or ethnic groups through marriage or sexual relations.

During the Civil War, the North was terrified that freed slaves would swarm to their states. Racial bigotry was real and serious. Northerners were frightened for good reasons. For seven decades slaveholders and their Democratic Party allies had exclaimed on the floor of Congress, in newspapers, in churches, and in pubs that emancipation would cause hordes of black men to migrate north to take the White man’s job and daughters. Tribal instincts were fanned until they were burned into the subconscious of most Americans.

After their defeats at Gettysburg and Vicksburg, savvy Confederates knew the war was lost and placed their hope on a General McClellan victory in the Union presidential election. Running as a Peace Democrat, the South assumed McClellan would negotiate a peace that would include independence and retain the institution of slavery.

This is the environment that Miscegenation was tossed into. An anonymous publication that purported to be the official position of the Republican Party. Here are a couple of quotes.

The object of this work is to show that the amalgamation of the two races is not only desirable, but that it is inevitable, and that the sooner it is accomplished the better for all concerned.

The Republican party, in its platform of 1860, implicitly favored this great reform. Let us carry it to its logical conclusion! Encourage intermarriages; let the white daughters of the North wed the sable sons of Africa. Thus, shall we purify the Republic and fulfill its destiny as a beacon of liberty?

Miscegenation was published in December 1863, and over five thousand copies were distributed with countless newspaper articles and reviews. In July of 1864, the New York Times published an article tying the pamphlet to the pro-Confederate New York World. This article and those that followed proved that the pamphlet was published by Democrats to harm Abraham Lincoln’s chances of reelection.

The pamphlet is an interesting read and quite artful in its subterfuge. The hoax fooled many at the time and the term miscegenation has endured. Additionally, it seems that hoaxes have become an integral part of the Democratic Party's DNA.

 

Dixie Betrayed by Davis J. Eicher

Dixie Betrayed, How the South Really Lost The Civil War by Davis J. Eicher

The last words of Eicher’s book are “Jefferson Davis had lost his power as Confederate president — but not before the whole cause of the Confederacy was lost. Dixie was Betrayed.”

The title and these final words betray the worth of this book. Nearly twenty thousand books have been written about Lincoln and almost a hundred thousand about the Civil War. Less than an estimated twenty percent of these were written from a Confederate perspective and many of those were Lost Cause screeds. Since the Confederacy lost, official documents were often destroyed which requires a historian to rely on sources like newspapers, letters, and memoirs—and these are not nearly as well organized and indexed as Union sources. This may partially account for why relatively few Confederate histories have been published.  

Dixie Betrayed is a solid history of the Confederacy and does not attempt to propagate the Lost Cause myths. Eicher explains how the South lost, but betrayal played no role in it. The absence of an industrial base, limited manpower, naive political leadership, and a flawed constitution were the culprits.

The betrayal theme likely originated from an editorial meeting aimed at boosting sales, and it may have been effective for the launch. However, now Eicher’s book wears the title like an albatross, and it is perhaps overlooked by those seeking an erudite history of the Confederate States of America.

To understand the Civil War period, it is necessary to study the war from both sides. Dixie Betrayed by Davis J. Eicher provides the view from the Confederate side.

Duel Book Reviews: The Dahlgren Affair

 

Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren

Like A Meteor Blazing Brightly: The Short but Controversial Life of Colonel Ulric Dahlgren

These Ulric Dahlgren biographies present the Union and Confederate views of the Dahlgren Affair.

Here is the gist of the “Affair.” In February of 1864, a Union cavalry detachment raided Richmond in the hope of releasing imprisoned soldiers captured by the Confederacy. Colonel Ulric Dahlgren led a major arm of the assault. The raid was unsuccessful, and Dahlgren was killed in an ambush. Papers were found on Dahlgren’s body that ordered the raiding party to murder Jefferson Davis and his cabinet. The Union claimed the papers were forgeries while the Confederacy insisted they were genuine. At the time, the Dahlgren Affair became a cause célèbre. The authenticity of the papers remains unresolved.

Ulric’s father, Admiral Dahlgren, insisted that the papers were forgeries and his son would never have taken part in an assassination plot. The memoir, written by the admiral in 1872, makes the case for the papers being forged.

Eric J. Wittenberg's 2015 biography, Like A Meteor Blazing Brightly: The Short but Controversial Life of Colonel Ulric Dahlgren, argues for the authenticity of the papers. The book details Ulric’s brief life, focusing primarily on the Dahlgren Affair.

If you enjoy the Civil War or unsolved mysteries, read both books and decide for yourself.

Memoirs of General W. T. Sherman

 

Memoirs of General W. T. Sherman by William T Sherman

In turns fascinating and boring. General Sherman wrote a valuable memoir for historians, but too much minutia for the casual Civil War buff. Sherman includes innumerable orders and other correspondence and describes his entire command structure every time there is a significant change or battle. Although historians, especially military historians, will find this invaluable, it can often be dull reading. Sherman frequently allows these documents to tell the story without presenting a description in his narrative. This means the reader must at least review the correspondence to gain a sense of the events.

Disappointedly, Sherman seldom shares his opinions or even thoughts about significant issues. It’s sort of the Jack Webb version of his life. When Sherman does express an opinion, it’s pure gold, especially the chapter when he recounts what he believes are the military lessons from the Civil War.

Memorial Day Remembrance

I never met my father. He died in WWII in the cockpit of his P-51.

I don't have many pictures of him, but this one was posted to a website honoring the 506th Fighter Group. My father is the furthest out on the wing.

I'd like to thank him and his compatriots who keep us safe and free.

Lincoln’s Sanctuary: Abraham Lincoln and the Soldiers’ Home By Matthew Pinsker

 

Lincoln’s Sanctuary looks at Lincoln from a new vantage point. With thousands upon thousands of Lincoln books, this seems like quite a feat but Pinsker pulls it off. Lincoln’s Sanctuary explores Abraham Lincoln’s time at the Soldiers’ Home, a cottage in the heights of Washington that served much like Camp David does today.

From 1862 to 1864, Lincoln and his family spent summers at the cottage to escape the heat and in-city pressures. Pinsker, a historian, uses primary sources to paint a vivid picture of Lincoln’s personal and political life during this period. The book connects the cottage to key wartime events, including the Emancipation Proclamation, the firing of General McClellan, and Lincoln’s evolving public image.

Lincoln buffs looking for a peek into Lincoln’s private life will find this book interesting.

Killing Lincoln by Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard

Killing Lincoln was better than I expected. The breathless style at the beginning was a bit off-putting, but it settled down to a clean narrative. This was a fun read because Maelstrom will end when Lincoln leaves for the Ford Theater, which meant I took no notes and allowed myself to get absorbed in the story.

Some historians have criticized the accuracy of Killing Lincoln. I disagree. The book does not purport to be an academic treatment and appears accurate when describing relevant events and details. My only serious concern is that O’Reilly included asides that Secretary of War Edwin Stanton might have had a hand in the intrigue. I find Stanton’s involvement dubious and the inclusion unnecessary.

It may surprise many to discover the extent of the conspiracy, which went beyond Lincoln to include attempted assassinations of the vice president and secretary of state. Bad people do conspire to do bad things. 

There are so many Lincoln books that authors have begun to address a single event in his life. Considering the title, I don’t believe I’m revealing a spoiler to say that this book is about Lincoln's death. Killing Lincoln does a good job of describing the assassination in a readable style that makes the book hard to put down. 

If you are interested in Lincoln, conspiracies, or American history, you’ll enjoy this book.