The Truth of the War Conspiracy of 1861 by H W Johnstone

 

This booklet was published in 1921 by a veteran of the Civil War. The author’s intent is to advocate for The Cause and expose the “truth.” I’ve read several modern-day defenses of The Cause, but I wanted to get the perspective of someone closer in time to the conflict. A participant was even better, although Johnstone served for only an unexplained eight months. Unfortunately, time and participation provided few novel insights. I shouldn't have been surprised because years earlier Jefferson Davis had articulated the dogma of The Cause in his two histories of the Confederated States of America.

Johnstone presents the case that a duplicitous President Lincoln started the war by reinforcing Forts Sumter and Pickens, the last Union military presence in the seceded states. First, the duplicitous part. In his inaugural, Lincoln said, “The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government.” All other military installations had been confiscated prior to his inaugural, so he could only have been speaking about Sumter and Pickens.

What act started the war? Secession of seven states in response to the election of a Republican or Lincoln taking office despite threats of assassination? The confiscation of Federal property under threat of physical attack or denial of weapons, munitions, and battlements to a belligerent? Does relentless bombardment of Sumter constitute an act of war or providing food and water to those starving soldiers? The South had been threatening war ever since a split Democratic Party guaranteed the election of a Republican. They made good on their threats.

Despite the reality of the situation, Johnstone paints Lincoln as despotic for not surrendering to the demands of the seceded states. Prior to inauguration, did he distance himself from Seward and the Peace Conference? He did. In his mind, he did not yet have authority to intervene. Did he dispatch war ships to accompanying the resupply ships? He did, but he sent the South Carolina governor a message that he would peaceably resupply the fort unless met with resistance. To deal with resistance if encountered, he needed naval war ships. Did Lincoln maneuver to put Jefferson Davis in a box? He did. And he did this successfully because he was a better politician.

Johnstone was right about one thing. The war could have been avoided if Lincoln had acceded to every demand. Forever. 

Since the Constitutional Convention, slave states had been demanding that the North acquiescence to their peculiar institution or they would bolt. Bolt they did. Not over slavery in their own states, but because the Republican platform vowed to use federal powers to stop any further expansion of slavery.

Perhaps the war was inevitable. Once the South was independent, new demands of their neighbor would never cease. Sooner or later, there would be one demand too many.

A Short History of the Confederate States of America

 

After the Civil War, Jefferson Davis spent two years in prison without trial. He was released on bail and a year and a half later, the government finally dropped the treason charges against him. In 1877 he retired to Beauvoir, where he wrote, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government. This was a two-volume tome of over 1,500 pages. I did not read this book. I tried, but I kept following asleep. Luckily, ten years later, Davis wrote A Short History of the Confederate States of America. Roughly one-third in length, “A Short History” covers the same ground and is more readable.

Davis writing style is clear for modern readers, but I would recommend a good understanding of the war to provide context for his narrative. That said, for a thorough understanding of a major historical event, it always best to get the story from the horse’s mouth. The Davis perspective may be biased, but those perspectives did not change between the war and the writing of his memoir. That consistency makes this book valuable for understanding the motivations for war.

Davis extols victories and offers strained excuses for errors and failures. In Davis’ mind, nothing was his fault, the Confederacy was always honorable, the Union always vile. For those not imbued with The Cause mythology, this heavy-handed prejudice can be off-putting, but I found it helps understand the ethos of the period.

Most history books are written by winners. If you don’t study the losers, then you have an incomplete picture. An example would be the hallowed Federalist Papers. There is a collection of opposition opinion pieces called the Anti-Federalist Papers. I suggest reading both and I highly recommend Jefferson Davis’ A Short History of the Confederate States of America.

(This is a research book for Maelstrom, a sequel to Tempest at Dawn.)