A DIPLOMATIC DUEL. 293 better qualified to discuss the true merits of Mr. Seward's course, delivered a masterly speech in the Senate on the 9th of January, 1862. . He set the public mind at ease by showing that we had emerged from the impending trouble not only with honor, but by putting England in a position in which neither former diplomacy nor, as Secretary Seward said, "the arbitrament of war" itself, had placed her. In the Napoleonic wars, when England had closed the coast of Europe from the Elbe to Brest by a paper blockade, and her own ports were similarly closed, our ships were everywhere subjected to the most arbitrary searches by British and French cruisers. Even our war vessels were fired into on our own coast. We were treated with the utmost contempt. The British press and British officers openly boasted that we "could not be kicked into a war." — We taught them a wholesome lesson on this point afterwards.— We had always refused to recognize the right of any belligerent power to take from an American neutral ship, under the right of search, "any description of persons except soldiers in the actual service of the enemy." Since the establishment of the United States as an independent government, our constant endeavor had been to get Great Britain to agree to this doctrine, but without success. Mr. Sumner applied this historic fact in his grand speech: "In the struggle," said he, "between Laertes and Hamlet, Hamlet was armed with the rapier of Laertes, and Laertes was armed with the rapier of Hamlet. And now, on this sensitive question, a similar exchange has occurred. Great Britain is armed with American principles, while to us are left only those British principles which throughout our history have been constantly, deliberately, and solemnly rejected." But it was only for a moment that Mr. Seward fenced with the rapier of Earl Russell. He soon threw it aside as a mere foil. He recovered his own American weapon. He saluted his disarmed antagonist. Great Britain bowed to a rule of conflict for which we had so long contended. As Mr. Sumner aptly said, "We did not even stoop to conquer." Great Britain had at last admitted our doctrine. The high seas were free to neutral ships in the transportation of all persons excepting only "soldiers in the actual service of the enemy." Hence, Messrs. Mason and Slidell were permitted to re-embark in their fruitless mission on an ocean whose waters would be forever after free from unlawful search and British arrogance. Where our humiliation had been sought we won the laurels of victory, and all the cabinets of continental Europe applauded. CHAPTER XV. THE CONFEDERATE AND OTHER GOVERNORS. - ISHAM G. HARRIS, OF TENNESSEE HEADING THE LIST OF FIVE EXECUTIVES - 1 - HIS REPRESENTATIVE OF BUNCOMBE LOVE OF BOOKS THE BASIS OF HIS EDUCATION HIS UNCLE'S LIBRARYHIS EXPERIENCES IN CONGRESS AND IN WAR - HIS EXECUTIVE ABILITY AND INTEGRITY. N some of the preceding chapters there has been more emphasis laid upon abstract theories and polities, than upon the personal administration of affairs and the actual legislation which the Executive branch has sought to carry out. But a history of these stirring times, in a Federal sense, would be incomplete without some reflections upon the constituent elements of the Federal system, namely, the states and their exponents. These exponents were their executives. A list of the Confederate governors of 1861 is as follows: Alabama, Andrew B. Moore; Arkansas, Henry M. Rector; Florida, John Milton; Georgia, Joseph E. Brown; Louisiana, Thomas O. Moore; Mississippi, John J. Pettus; Missouri, Claiborne F. Jackson; Kentucky, Beriah Magoffin; North Carolina, John W. Ellis; South Carolina, Francis W. Pickens; Tennessee, Isham G. Harris; Texas, Samuel Houston; and Virginia, John Letcher. ROSTER OF CONFEDERATE AND PROVISIONAL GOVERNORS. 295 Each of these Confederate governors, — except Governor Ellis, of North Carolina, who died and was succeeded by H. T. Clark, the Speaker of the State Senate, and General Sam : Houston, of Texas, who was succeeded by F. R. Lubbock,—remained in office during 1862 and 1863. Several of them served during 1864. One of them, John Milton, of Florida, served until the surrender, in 1865. The governors of Kentucky and Missouri are included in this list, from the fact that one took a prominent part as a Confederate general, while the other was a Unionist, though not favorable to aggressive war measures. He resigned in 1862. He was succeeded by James F. Robinson, a Unionist. In 1864, the Confederate governors were: Alabama, Thomas H. Watts; Arkansas, Harris Flannegan; Florida, John Milton; Georgia, Joseph E. Brown; Louisiana, Henry W. Allen; Mississippi, Charles Clarke; North Carolina, Zebulon B. Vance; South Carolina, Milledge L. Bonham; Texas, Pendleton Murrah; and Virginia, John Letcher. Missouri, Kentucky, and Tennessee had ceased, in 1864, to have resident Confederate governors. The above names include those who were in office at the time of the surrender at Appomattox. In 1863, Francis H. Pierpont was elected governor of Virginia, by the people inhabiting the western counties. When these counties formed a constitution for West Virginia, Arthur I. Boreman was chosen governor. Michael Hahn was elected governor of Louisiana by the so-called loyal people, in February, 1865. In Tennessee, William G. Brownlow was elected in 1865, to succeed the provisional, or military governor, Andrew Johnson, appointed by President Lincoln. The provisional governors appointed by President Andrew Johnson were as follows: North Carolina, William W. Holden; South Carolina, Benjamin F. Perry; Georgia, James Johnson; Alabama, Lewis E. Parsons; Mississippi, William L. Sharkey; Florida, William Marvin; and Texas, Andrew J. Hamilton. President Johnson recognized Michael Hahn as elected by the people, to be governor of Louisiana. William G. Brownlow was elected in like manner as governor of Tennessee, Francis H. Pierpont as governor of Virginia, and Isaac Murphy as governor of Arkansas. The military commanders under the Reconstruction acts of 1867 were named on the 11th of March, 1867, by the order of Adjutant-General E. D. Townsend. The order is number 10. It reads thus: "In pursuance of the act of Congress, entitled An Act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel states,' the President directs the following assignments to be made: "First District, State of Virginia, to be commanded by Brevet Maj.Gen. J. M. Schofield. Headquarters, Richmond, Virginia. "Second District, consisting of North and South Carolina, to be commanded by Maj.-Gen. Daniel E. Sickles. Headquarters, Columbia, South Carolina. "Third District, consisting of the states of Georgia, Florida, and Alabama, to be commanded by Maj.-Gen. George H. Thomas. Headquarters, Montgomery, Alabama. "Fourth District, consisting of the states of Mississippi and Arkansas, to be commanded by Brevet Maj.-Gen. Edward O. C. Ord. Headquarters, Vicksburg, Mississippi. "Fifth District, consisting of the states of Louisiana and Texas, to be commanded by Maj.-Gen. Philip H. Sheridan. Headquarters, New Orleans, Louisiana." By an order dated March 15, 1867, Maj.-Gen. George H. Thomas, by his request, was relieved from the duty of commanding the Third District. Major-General John Pope was assigned to that district. General Schofield having been appointed Secretary of War, was succeeded in the command of the First District on the 2d of June, 1868, by Major-General Stoneman. On March 5, 1869, an order was issued for the removal of General Stoneman, and Maj.-Gen. E. R. S. Canby was appointed to succeed him. But he was not relieved until March 31. In the meantime he removed Gov. H. H. Wells and assumed the functions of the civil government. On the 31st, General Stoneman was relieved by Gen. A. S. Webb, who held the command until General Canby could arrive. General Webb's first act was to restore Wells to the office of governor. General Canby took command of the district on the 20th of April. General Sickles was removed from the command of the Second District on the 26th of August, 1867, and was succeeded by Brevet Major-General Canby. On Dec. 28, 1867, General Pope was relieved from the command of the Third District, and Maj.-Gen. George G. Meade was appointed to succeed him. Dec. 28, 1867, General Ord was relieved from the command of the Fourth District, and Brevet Maj.-Gen. Irwin McDowell was appointed to succeed him. On Nov. 29, 1867, Maj.-Gen. W. S. Hancock was appointed to succeed General Sheridan in the command of the Fifth District. In all these changes there will appear much to ponder over. The executive was not in harmony with the legislature; and the attempt to resurrect order out of chaos by military rule seems to have been a great fiasco. Sketches of a few of these governors and their service are not here inappropriate. They were all men of ability, but none more so than Governors Harris, Letcher, Houston, Brown, and Vance. No one of this galaxy of executive intelligence and determination was more sagacious and courageous than the governor of Tennessee, whose portrait is at the head of the five Confederate governors in plate three of the volume. GOVERNOR ISHAM G. HARRIS, OF TENNESSEE. 297 It has been asserted that what Governor Andrew was to Massachusetts, or even a more energetic man, Governor Morton, of Indiana, was to his state and to the North, that was Isham G. Harris to Tennessee and the South. At no time did he shrink from the performance of any duty, however perilous, and from no responsibility, however fateful. Isham G. Harris was a Representative from the State of Tennessee, in the Thirty-first Congress, in December, 1849. He was then in the fresh vigor of young manhood. He impressed his associates with that ripeness of judgment, energy of action, and capacity for labor which mark his subsequent career. The successors of prominent and efficient members in the National Legislature have a trying ordeal. They arrest the critical attention of the friends and admirers of their predecessors. Contrasts and comparisons are made. Much more is expected of them than of the general body of Representatives. Isham G. Harris came from that district known as "Cave Johnson's old district." Mr. Cave Johnson was then a member of President Polk's Cabinet. He had obtained, in a long service as a member of Congress, a character second to none for honesty and ability. Young Harris stood the crucial test of comparison. He was assigned high rank. Having secured the esteem of his constituents, he was by them again returned to Congress. Determining to change his residence, although urged by his constituency and nominated by his party, he declined to be returned to the Thirty-third Congress. In 1853, he removed to the city of Memphis. It was then, as now, one of the leading centres of commerce on the Mississippi River. He removed there with a view of practicing law. At the bar of that city he took rank with its leading advocates. The character he had made in politics as a popular speaker and sound reasoner, made him the Presidential Elector for the state at large in 1856. No state in the Union ranks higher than Tennessee for the number and high character of its popular speakers. It was from the "college" of the "stump" that Polk, Grundy, Bell, Gentry, Jones, Henry, Heiskell, and Johnson sprang. These were men of elevated rank among the statesmen of the Union. In the canvass of the state, made by Isham G. Harris in 1856, with ex-Governor Neil S. Brown as his opponent, he made an indelible impression on the people of that commonwealth. So successful was he as a party leader and speaker, that he made Tennessee, whose political party status had, since 1836, been more or less doubtful, a fixed Democratic state. He was elected governor in 1857, 1859, and 1861. Here was his field! He filled that office from October, 1857, to the close of the Civil War. He displayed executive ability of the very highest order. It was during his second term that the great Civil War began. In his executive communications to the legislature are to be found the ablest and most succinct, as well as the most intelligent presentation and justification of the reasons for the action of the seceding states. Whatever may be thought as to this, |