








[Illustration: MAP SHOWING ROUTE OF RAIL ROAD THROUGH BALTIMORE FROM
PRESIDENT ST. STATION TO CAMDEN ST. STATION.]




                 BALTIMORE

                    AND

       THE NINETEENTH OF APRIL, 1861

             A Study of the War


          By GEORGE WILLIAM BROWN

     _Chief Judge of the Supreme Bench of
    Baltimore, and Mayor of the City in 1861_


                BALTIMORE
      N. MURRAY, PUBLICATION AGENT,
        JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
                   1887

      COPYRIGHT, 1887, BY N. MURRAY.
        ISAAC FRIEDENWALD, PRINTER,
                BALTIMORE.




CONTENTS.

                                                                  Page
CHAPTER I.

   1. INTRODUCTION,                                                  9

   2. THE FIRST BLOOD SHED IN THE WAR,                              10

   3. THE SUPPOSED PLOT TO ASSASSINATE THE INCOMING PRESIDENT,      11

   4. THE MIDNIGHT RIDE TO WASHINGTON,                              17


CHAPTER II.

   1. THE COMPROMISES OF THE CONSTITUTION IN REGARD TO SLAVERY,     20

   2. A DIVIDED HOUSE,                                              23

   3. THE BROKEN COMPACT,                                           25

   4. THE RIGHT OF REVOLUTION,                                      27


CHAPTER III.

   1. MARYLAND'S DESIRE FOR PEACE,                                  30

   2. EVENTS WHICH FOLLOWED THE ELECTION OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN,      31

   3. HIS PROCLAMATION CALLING FOR TROOPS,                          32

   4. THE CITY AUTHORITIES AND POLICE OF BALTIMORE,                 34

   5. INCREASING EXCITEMENT IN BALTIMORE,                           39


CHAPTER IV.

   1. THE SIXTH MASSACHUSETTS REGIMENT IN BALTIMORE,                42

   2. THE FIGHT,                                                    47

   3. THE DEPARTURE FOR WASHINGTON,                                 52

   4. CORRESPONDENCE IN REGARD TO THE KILLED AND WOUNDED,           54

   5. PUBLIC MEETING,                                               56

   6. TELEGRAM TO THE PRESIDENT,                                    57

   7. NO REPLY,                                                     58

   8. BURNING OF BRIDGES,                                           59


CHAPTER V.

   1. APRIL 20th--INCREASING EXCITEMENT,                            60

   2. APPROPRIATION OF $500,000 FOR DEFENSE OF THE CITY,            60

   3. CORRESPONDENCE WITH PRESIDENT AND GOVERNOR,                   61

   4. MEN ENROLLED,                                                 63

   5. APPREHENDED ATTACK ON FORT McHENRY,                           66

   6. MARSHAL KANE,                                                 69

   7. INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT, CABINET, AND GENERAL SCOTT,         71

   8. GENERAL BUTLER, WITH THE EIGHTH MASSACHUSETTS, PROCEEDS
      TO ANNAPOLIS AND WASHINGTON,                                  76

   9. BALTIMORE IN A STATE OF ARMED NEUTRALITY,                     77


CHAPTER VI.

   1. SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,                              79

   2. REPORT OF THE BOARD OF POLICE,                                80

   3. SUPPRESSION OF THE FLAGS,                                     82

   4. ON THE 5th OF MAY GENERAL BUTLER TAKES POSITION SIX MILES
      FROM BALTIMORE,                                               83

   5. ON THE 13th OF MAY HE ENTERS BALTIMORE AND FORTIFIES FEDERAL
      HILL,                                                         84

   6. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY WILL TAKE NO STEPS TOWARD SECESSION,     85

   7. MANY YOUNG MEN JOIN THE ARMY OF THE CONFEDERACY,              85


CHAPTER VII.

   1. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY AND THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS,            87

   2. A UNION CONVENTION,                                           92

   3. CONSEQUENCE OF THE SUSPENSION OF THE WRIT,                    93

   4. INCIDENTS OF THE WAR,                                         95

   5. THE WOMEN IN THE WAR,                                         95


CHAPTER VIII.

   1. GENERAL BANKS IN COMMAND,                                     97

   2. MARSHAL KANE ARRESTED,                                        97

   3. POLICE COMMISSIONERS SUPERSEDED,                              97

   4. RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,                   98

   5. POLICE COMMISSIONERS ARRESTED,                                98

   6. RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,                  100

   7. GENERAL DIX IN COMMAND,                                      100

   8. ARREST OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, THE MAYOR,
      AND OTHERS,                                                  102

   9. RELEASE OF PRISONERS,                                        108

  10. COLONEL DIMICK,                                              111


CHAPTER IX.--A PERSONAL CHAPTER.                                   113


APPENDIX I.

      ACCOUNT OF THE ALLEGED CONSPIRACY TO ASSASSINATE ABRAHAM
      LINCOLN ON HIS JOURNEY TO BALTIMORE, FROM THE "LIFE OF
      ABRAHAM LINCOLN," BY WARD H. LAMON, pp. 511-526,             120


APPENDIX II.

      EXTRACT FROM THE OPINION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED
      STATES, DELIVERED BY CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY, IN THE CASE OF
      DRED SCOTT VS. SANFORD (19 HOW. 407),                        138


APPENDIX III.

      THE HABEAS CORPUS CASE.--OPINION OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE
      UNITED STATES (_Ex Parte_ JOHN MERRYMAN),                    139


APPENDIX IV.

      MESSAGE OF THE 12th OF JULY, 1861, TO THE FIRST AND SECOND
      BRANCHES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, REFERRING TO THE EVENTS OF
      THE 19th OF APRIL AND THOSE WHICH FOLLOWED.--THE FIRST
      PARAGRAPH AND THE CONCLUDING PARAGRAPHS OF THIS DOCUMENT,    157


APPENDIX V.

      AS A PART OF THE HISTORY OF THE TIMES, REPRODUCTION FROM THE
      BALTIMORE "AMERICAN" OF DECEMBER 5, 1860, OF THE RECEPTION
      OF THE PUTNAM PHALANX, OF HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT, IN
      THE CITY OF BALTIMORE,                                       160


APPENDIX VI.

      VISIT OF A PORTION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SIXTH MASSACHUSETTS
      REGIMENT TO BALTIMORE ON THE 19th OF APRIL, 1880, AND AN
      ACCOUNT OF ITS RECEPTION, FROM THE BALTIMORE "SUN" AND
      THE BALTIMORE "AMERICAN,"                                    167


      INDEX,                                                       171




BALTIMORE AND THE NINETEENTH OF APRIL, 1861.

_A STUDY OF THE WAR._




CHAPTER I.

     INTRODUCTION. -- THE FIRST BLOOD SHED IN THE WAR. -- THE SUPPOSED
     PLOT TO ASSASSINATE THE INCOMING PRESIDENT. -- THE MIDNIGHT RIDE
     TO WASHINGTON.


I have often been solicited by persons of widely opposite political
opinions to write an account of the events which occurred in Baltimore
on the 19th of April, 1861, about which much that is exaggerated and
sensational has been circulated; but, for different reasons, I have
delayed complying with the request until this time.

These events were not isolated facts, but were the natural result of
causes which had roots deep in the past, and they were followed by
serious and important consequences. The narrative, to be complete,
must give some account of both cause and consequence, and to do this
briefly and with a proper regard to historical proportion is no easy
task.

Moreover, it is not pleasant to disturb the ashes of a great
conflagration, which, although they have grown cold on the surface,
cover embers still capable of emitting both smoke and heat; and
especially is it not pleasant when the disturber of the ashes was
himself an actor in the scenes which he is asked to describe.

But more than twenty-five years have passed, and with them have passed
away most of the generation then living; and, as one of the rapidly
diminishing survivors, I am admonished by the lengthening shadows that
anything I may have to say should be said speedily. The nation has
learned many lessons of wisdom from its civil war, and not the least
among them is that every truthful contribution to its annals or to its
teachings is not without some value.

I have accordingly undertaken the task, but not without reluctance,
because it necessarily revives recollections of the most trying and
painful experiences of my life--experiences which for a long time I
have not unwillingly permitted to fade in the dim distance.

There was another 19th of April--that of Lexington in 1775--which has
become memorable in history for a battle between the Minute Men of
Massachusetts and a column of British troops, in which the first blood
was shed in the war of the Revolution. It was the heroic beginning of
that contest.

The fight which occurred in the streets of Baltimore on the 19th of
April, 1861, between the 6th Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteers and
a mob of citizens, was also memorable, because then was shed the first
blood in a conflict between the North and the South; then a step was
taken which made compromise or retreat almost impossible; then
passions on both sides were aroused which could not be controlled.[1]
In each case the outbreak was an explosion of conflicting forces long
suppressed, but certain, sooner or later, to occur. Here the
coincidence ends. The Minute Men of Massachusetts were so called
because they were prepared to rise on a minute's notice. They had
anticipated and had prepared for the strife. The attack by the mob in
Baltimore was a sudden uprising of popular fury. The events themselves
were magnified as the tidings flashed over the whole country, and the
consequences were immediate. The North became wild with astonishment
and rage, and the South rose to fever-heat from the conviction that
Maryland was about to fall into line as the advance guard of the
Southern Confederacy.

[Footnote 1: At Fort Sumter, it is true, one week earlier, the first
collision of arms had taken place; but strangely, that bombardment was
unattended with loss of life. And it did not necessarily mean war
between North and South: accommodation still seemed possible.]

       *       *       *       *       *

In February, 1861, when Mr. Lincoln was on his way to Washington to
prepare for his inauguration as President of the United States, an
unfortunate incident occurred which had a sinister influence on the
State of Maryland, and especially on the city of Baltimore. Some
superserviceable persons, carried away, honestly no doubt, by their
own frightened imaginations, and perhaps in part stimulated by the
temptation of getting up a sensation of the first class, succeeded in
persuading Mr. Lincoln that a formidable conspiracy existed to
assassinate him on his way through Maryland.

It was announced publicly that he was to come from Philadelphia, not
by the usual route through Wilmington, but by a circuitous journey
through Harrisburg, and thence by the Northern Central Railroad to
Baltimore. Misled by this statement, I, as Mayor of the city,
accompanied by the Police Commissioners and supported by a strong
force of police, was at the Calvert-street station on Saturday
morning, February 23d, at half-past eleven o'clock, the appointed time
of arrival, ready to receive with due respect the incoming President.
An open carriage was in waiting, in which I was to have the honor of
escorting Mr. Lincoln through the city to the Washington station, and
of sharing in any danger which he might encounter. It is hardly
necessary to say that I apprehended none. When the train came it
appeared, to my great astonishment, that Mrs. Lincoln and her three
sons had arrived safely and without hindrance or molestation of any
kind, but that Mr. Lincoln could not be found. It was then announced
that he had passed through the city _incognito_ in the night train by
the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad, and had reached
Washington in safety at the usual hour in the morning. For this signal
deliverance from an imaginary peril, those who devised the ingenious
plan of escape were of course devoutly thankful, and they accordingly
took to themselves no little amount of credit for its success.

If Mr. Lincoln had arrived in Baltimore at the time expected, and had
spoken a few words to the people who had gathered to hear him,
expressing the kind feelings which were in his heart with the simple
eloquence of which he was so great a master, he could not have failed
to make a very different impression from that which was produced not
only by the want of confidence and respect manifested towards the city
of Baltimore by the plan pursued, but still more by the manner in
which it was carried out. On such an occasion as this even trifles are
of importance, and this incident was not a trifle. The emotional part
of human nature is its strongest side and soonest leads to action. It
was so with the people of Baltimore. Fearful accounts of the
conspiracy flew all over the country, creating a hostile feeling
against the city, from which it soon afterwards suffered. A single
specimen of the news thus spread will suffice. A dispatch from
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to the New York _Times_, dated February
23d, 8 A. M., says: "Abraham Lincoln, the President-elect of the
United States, is safe in the capital of the nation." Then, after
describing the dreadful nature of the conspiracy, it adds: "The list
of the names of the conspirators presented a most astonishing array of
persons high in Southern confidence, and some whose fame is not
confined to this country alone."

Of course, the list of names was never furnished, and all the men in
buckram vanished in air. This is all the notice which this matter
would require except for the extraordinary narrative contributed by
Mr. Samuel M. Felton, at that time President of the Philadelphia,
Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company, to the volume entitled "A
History of Massachusetts in the Civil War," published in 1868.

Early in 1861, Mr. Felton had made, as he supposed, a remarkable
discovery of "a deep-laid conspiracy to capture Washington and break
up the Government."

Soon afterwards Miss Dix, the philanthropist, opportunely came to his
office on a Saturday afternoon, stating that she had an important
communication to make to him personally, and then, with closed doors
and for more than an hour, she poured into his ears a thrilling tale,
to which he attentively listened. "The sum of all was (I quote the
language of Mr. Felton) that there was then an extensive and organized
conspiracy throughout the South to seize upon Washington, with its
archives and records, and then declare the Southern conspirators _de
facto_ the Government of the United States. The whole was to be a
_coup d'état_. At the same time they were to cut off all modes of
communication between Washington and the North, East or West, and thus
prevent the transportation of troops to wrest the capital from the
hands of the insurgents. Mr. Lincoln's inauguration was thus to be
prevented, or his life was to fall a sacrifice to the attempt at
inauguration. In fact, troops were then drilling on the line of our
own road, and the Washington and Annapolis line and other lines."

It was clear that the knowledge of a treasonable conspiracy of such
vast proportions, which had already begun its operations, ought not to
be confined solely to the keeping of Mr. Felton and Miss Dix. Mr. N.
P. Trist, an officer of the road, was accordingly admitted into the
secret, and was dispatched in haste to Washington, to lay all the
facts before General Scott, the Commander-in-Chief. The General,
however, would give no assurances except that he would do all he could
to bring sufficient troops to Washington to make it secure. Matters
stood in this unsatisfactory condition for some time, until a new
rumor reached the ears of Mr. Felton.

A gentleman from Baltimore, he says, came out to Back River Bridge,
about five miles east of the city, and told the bridgekeeper that he
had information which had come to his knowledge, of vital importance
to the road, which he wished communicated to Mr. Felton. The nature of
this communication was that a party was then organized in Baltimore to
burn the bridges in case Mr. Lincoln came over the road, or in case an
attempt was made to carry troops for the defense of Washington. The
party at that time had combustible materials prepared to pour over the
bridges, and were to disguise themselves as negroes and be at the
bridge just before the train in which Mr. Lincoln travelled had
arrived. The bridge was then to be burned, the train attacked, and Mr.
Lincoln to be put out of the way. The man appeared several times,
always, it seems, to the bridgekeeper, and he always communicated new
information about the conspirators, but he would never give his name
nor place of abode, and both still remain a mystery. Mr. Felton
himself then went to Washington, where he succeeded in obtaining from
a prominent gentleman from Baltimore whom he there saw, the judicious
advice to apply to Marshal Kane, the Chief of Police in Baltimore,
with the assurance that he was a perfectly reliable person. Marshal
Kane was accordingly seen, but he scouted the idea that there was any
such thing on foot as a conspiracy to burn the bridges and cut off
Washington, and said he had thoroughly investigated the whole matter,
and there was not the slightest foundation for such rumors. Mr. Felton
was not satisfied, but he would have nothing more to do with Marshal
Kane. He next sent for a celebrated detective in the West, whose name
is not given, and through this chief and his subordinates every nook
and corner of the road and its vicinity was explored. They reported
that they had joined the societies of the conspirators in Baltimore
and got into their secrets, and that the secret working of secession
and treason was laid bare, with all its midnight plottings and daily
consultations. The conspiracy being thus proved to Mr. Felton's
satisfaction, he at once organized and armed a force of two hundred
men and scattered them along the line of the railroad between the
Susquehanna and Baltimore, principally at the bridges. But, strange to
say, all that was accomplished by this formidable body was an enormous
job of whitewashing.

The narrative proceeds: "These men were drilled secretly and regularly
by drill-masters, and were apparently employed in whitewashing the
bridges, patting on some six or seven coats of whitewash saturated
with salt and alum, to make the outside of the bridges as nearly
fireproof as possible. This whitewashing, so extensive in its
application, became (continues Mr. Felton) the nine days' wonder of
the neighborhood." And well it might. After the lapse of twenty-five
years the wonder over this feat of strategy can hardly yet have ceased
in that rural and peaceful neighborhood. But, unfortunately for Mr.
Felton's peace of mind, the programme of Mr. Lincoln's journey was
suddenly changed. He had selected a different route. He had decided to
go to Harrisburg from Philadelphia, and thence by day to Baltimore,
over another and a rival road, known as the Northern Central. Then the
chief detective discovered that the attention of the conspirators was
suddenly turned to the Northern Central road. The mysterious unknown
gentleman from Baltimore appeared again on the scene and confirmed
this statement. He gave warning that Mr. Lincoln was to be waylaid and
his life sacrificed on that road, on which no whitewash had been used,
and where there were no armed men to protect him.

Mr. Felton hurried to Philadelphia, and there, in a hotel, joined his
chief detective, who was registered under a feigned name. Mr. Lincoln,
cheered by a dense crowd, was, at that moment, passing through the
streets of Philadelphia. A sub-detective was sent to bring Mr. Judd,
Mr. Lincoln's intimate friend, to the hotel to hold a consultation.
Mr. Judd was in the procession with Mr. Lincoln, but the emergency
admitted no delay. The eagerness of the sub-detective was so great
that he was three times arrested and carried out of the crowd by the
police before he could reach Mr. Judd. The fourth attempt succeeded,
and Mr. Judd was at last brought to the hotel, where he met both Mr.
Felton and the chief detective. The narrative then proceeds in the
words of Mr. Felton: "We lost no time in making known to him (Mr.
Judd) all the facts which had come to our knowledge in reference to
the conspiracy, and I most earnestly advised sleeping-car. Mr. Judd
fully entered into the plan, and said he would urge Mr. Lincoln to
adopt it. On his communicating with Mr. Lincoln, after the services of
the evening were over, he answered that he had engaged to go to
Harrisburg and speak the next day, and that he would not break his
engagement, even in the face of such peril, but that after he had
fulfilled his engagement he would follow such advice as we might give
him in reference to his journey to Washington." Mr. Lincoln
accordingly went to Harrisburg the next day and made an address. After
that the arrangements for the journey were shrouded in the profoundest
mystery. It was given out that he was to go to Governor Curtin's house
for the night, but he was, instead, conducted to a point about two
miles out of Harrisburg, where an extra car and engine waited to take
him to Philadelphia. The telegraph lines east, west, north and south
from Harrisburg were cut, so that no message as to his movements could
be sent off in any direction. But all this caused a detention, and the
night train from Philadelphia to Baltimore had to be held back until
the arrival of Mr. Lincoln at the former place. If, however, the delay
proved to be considerable, when Mr. Lincoln reached Baltimore the
connecting train to Washington might leave without him. But Mr. Felton
was equal to the occasion. He devised a plan which was communicated to
only three or four on the road. A messenger was sent to Baltimore by
an earlier train to say to the officials of the Washington road that a
very important package must be delivered in Washington early in the
morning, and to request them to wait for the night train from
Philadelphia. To give color to this statement, a package of old
railroad reports, done up with great care, and with a large seal
attached, marked by Mr. Felton's own hand, "Very Important," was sent
in the train which carried Mr. Lincoln on his famous night ride from
Philadelphia through Maryland and Baltimore to the city of
Washington. The only remarkable incident of the journey was the
mysterious behavior of the few officials who were entrusted with the
portentous secret.

I do not know how others may be affected by this narrative, but I
confess even now to a feeling of indignation that Mr. Lincoln, who was
no coward, but proved himself on many an occasion to be a brave man,
was thus prevented from carrying out his original intention of
journeying to Baltimore in the light of day, in company with his wife
and children, relying as he always did on the honor and manhood of the
American people. It is true we have, to our sorrow, learned by the
manner of his death, as well as by the fate of still another
President, that no one occupying so high a place can be absolutely
safe, even in this country, from the danger of assassination, but it
is still true that as a rule the best way to meet such danger is
boldly to defy it.

Mr. C. C. Felton, son of Mr. Samuel M. Felton, in an article entitled
"The Baltimore Plot," published in December, 1885, in the _Harvard
Monthly_, has attempted to revive this absurd story. He repeats the
account of whitewashing the bridges, and of the astonishment created
among the good people of the neighborhood. He has faith in "the
unknown Baltimorean" who visited the bridgekeeper, but would never
give his name, and in the spies employed, who, he tells us, were "the
well-known detective Pinkerton and eight assistants," and he leaves
his readers to infer that Mr. Lincoln's life was saved by the
extraordinary vigilance which had been exercised and the ingenious
plan which had been devised by his worthy father, but alas!--

  "The earth hath bubbles as the water has,"

and this was of them.

Colonel Lamon, a close friend of President Lincoln, and the only
person who accompanied him on his night ride to Washington, has
written his biography, a very careful and conscientious work, which
unfortunately was left unfinished, and he of course had the strongest
reasons for carefully examining the subject. After a full examination
of all the documents, Colonel Lamon pronounces the conspiracy to be a
mere fiction, and adds in confirmation the mature opinion of Mr.
Lincoln himself.

Colonel Lamon says:[2] "Mr. Lincoln soon learned to regret the
midnight ride. His friends reproached him, his enemies taunted him. He
was convinced that he had committed a grave mistake in yielding to the
solicitations of a professional spy and of friends too easily alarmed.
He saw that he had fled from a danger purely imaginary, and felt the
shame and mortification natural to a brave man under such
circumstances. But he was not disposed to take all the responsibility
to himself, and frequently upbraided the writer for having aided and
assisted him to demean himself at the very moment in all his life when
his behavior should have exhibited the utmost dignity and composure."

As Colonel Lamon's biography, a work of absorbing interest, is now out
of print, and as his account of the ride and of the results of the
investigation of the conspiracy is too long to be inserted here, it is
added in an Appendix.

The account above given has its appropriateness here, for the midnight
ride through Baltimore, and the charge that its citizens were plotting
the President's assassination, helped to feed the flame of excitement
which, in the stirring events of that time, was already burning too
high all over the land, and especially in a border city with divided
sympathies.

[Footnote 2: The Life of Abraham Lincoln, p. 526; and see Appendix I.]




CHAPTER II.

     THE COMPROMISES OF THE CONSTITUTION IN REGARD TO SLAVERY. -- A
     DIVIDED HOUSE. -- THE BROKEN COMPACT. -- THE RIGHT OF REVOLUTION.


For a period the broad provisions of the Constitution of the United
States, as expounded by the wise and broad decisions of the Supreme
Court, had proved to be equal to every emergency. The thirteen feeble
colonies had grown to be a great Republic, and no external obstacle
threatened its majestic progress; foreign wars had been waged and vast
territories had been annexed, but every strain on the Constitution
only served to make it stronger. Yet there was a canker in a vital
part which nothing could heal, which from day to day became more
malignant, and which those who looked beneath the surface could
perceive was surely leading, and at no distant day, to dissolution or
war, or perhaps to both. The canker was the existence of negro
slavery.

In colonial days, kings, lords spiritual and temporal, and commons,
all united in favoring the slave trade. In Massachusetts the Puritan
minister might be seen on the Sabbath going to meeting in family
procession, with his negro slave bringing up the rear. Boston was
largely engaged in building ships and manufacturing rum, and a portion
of the ships and much of the rum were sent to Africa, the rum to buy
slaves, and the ships to bring them to a market in America. Newport
was more largely, and until a more recent time, engaged in the same
traffic.

In Maryland, even the Friends were sometimes owners of slaves; and it
is charged, and apparently with reason, that Wenlock Christison, the
Quaker preacher, after being driven from Massachusetts by persecution
and coming to Maryland by way of Barbadoes, sent or brought in with
him a number of slaves, who cultivated his plantation until his death.
In Georgia, the Calvinist Whitefield blessed God for his negro
plantation, which was generously given to him to establish his
"Bethesda" as a refuge for orphan children.

In the Dred Scott case, Chief Justice Taney truly described the
opinion, which he deplored, prevailing at the time of the adoption of
the Constitution, as being that the colored man had no rights which
the white man was bound to respect.[3]

[Footnote 3: Judge Taney's utterance on this subject has been
frequently and grossly misrepresented. In Appendix II. will be found
what he really did say.]

The Constitution had endeavored to settle the question of slavery by a
compromise. As the difficulty in regard to it arose far more from
political than moral grounds, so in the settlement the former were
almost exclusively considered. It was, however, the best that could be
made at that time. It is certain that without such a compromise the
Constitution would not have been adopted. The existence of slavery in
a State was left in the discretion of the State itself. If a slave
escaped to another State, he was to be returned to his master. Laws
were passed by Congress to carry out this provision, and the Supreme
Court decided that they were constitutional.

For a long time the best people at the North stood firmly by the
compromise. It was a national compact, and must be respected. But
ideas, and especially moral ideas, cannot be forever fettered by a
compact, no matter how solemn may be its sanctions. The change of
opinion at the North was first slow, then rapid, and then so powerful
as to overwhelm all opposition. John Brown, who was executed for
raising a negro insurrection in Virginia, in which men were wounded
and killed, was reverenced by many at the North as a hero, a martyr
and a saint. It had long been a fixed fact that no fugitive slave
could by process of law be returned from the North into slavery. With
the advent to power of the Republican party--a party based on
opposition to slavery--another breach in the outworks of the
Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, had been made.
Sooner or later the same hands would capture the citadel. Sooner or
later it was plain that slavery was doomed.

In the memorable Senatorial campaign in Illinois between Stephen A.
Douglas and Abraham Lincoln, the latter, in his speech before the
Republican State Convention at Springfield, June 17, 1858, struck the
keynote of his party by the bold declaration on the subject of slavery
which he then made and never recalled.

This utterance was the more remarkable because on the previous day the
convention had passed unanimously a resolution declaring that Mr.
Lincoln was their first and only choice for United States Senator, to
fill the vacancy about to be created by the expiration of Mr.
Douglas's term of office, but the convention had done nothing which
called for the advanced ground on which Mr. Lincoln planted himself in
that speech. It was carefully prepared.

The narrative of Colonel Lamon in his biography of Lincoln is
intensely interesting and dramatic.[4]

[Footnote 4: Lamon's Life of Lincoln, p. 808.]

About a dozen gentlemen, he says, were called to meet in the library
of the State House. After seating them at the round table, Mr. Lincoln
read his entire speech, dwelling slowly on that part which speaks of a
divided house, so that every man fully understood it. After he had
finished, he asked for the opinion of his friends. All but William H.
Herndon, the law partner of Mr. Lincoln, declared that the whole
speech was too far in advance of the times, and they especially
condemned that part which referred to a divided house. Mr. Herndon sat
still while they were giving their respective opinions; then he sprang
to his feet and said: "Lincoln, deliver it just as it reads. If it is
in advance of the times, let us--you and I, if no one else--lift the
people to the level of this speech now, higher hereafter. The speech
is true, wise and politic, and will succeed now, or in the future.
Nay, it will aid you, if it will not make you President of the United
States."...

"Mr. Lincoln sat still a short moment, rose from his chair, walked
backward and forward in the hall, stopped and said: 'Friends, I have
thought about this matter a great deal, have weighed the question well
from all corners, and am thoroughly convinced the time has come when
it should be uttered; and if it must be that I must go down because of
this speech, then let me go down linked to truth--die in the advocacy
of what is right and just. This nation cannot live on injustice. A
house divided against itself cannot stand, I say again and again.'"

The opening paragraph of the speech is as follows: "If we could first
know where we are and whither we are tending, we could then better
judge what to do and how to do it. We are now far on into the fifth
year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object and confident
promise of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of
that policy that agitation has not only not ceased, but is constantly
augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have
been reached and passed. A house divided against itself cannot stand.
I believe this Government can not endure permanently half slave and
half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved. I do not expect
the house to fall; but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It
will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of
slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the
public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of
ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward till it
shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North
as well as South."

The blast of the trumpet gave no uncertain sound. The far-seeing
suggestion of Mr. Herndon came true to the letter. I believe this
speech made Abraham Lincoln President of the United States.

But the founders of the Constitution of the United States had built a
house which was divided against itself from the beginning. They had
framed a union of States which was part free and part slave, and that
union was intended to last forever. Here was an irreconcilable
conflict between the Constitution and the future President of the
United States.

When the Republican Convention assembled at Chicago in May, 1860, in
the heat of the contest, which soon became narrowed down to a choice
between Mr. Seward and Mr. Lincoln, the latter dispatched a friend to
Chicago with a message in writing, which was handed either to Judge
Davis or Judge Logan, both members of the convention, which runs as
follows: "Lincoln agrees with Seward in his irrepressible-conflict
idea, and in negro equality; but he is opposed to Seward's higher
law." But there was no substantial difference between the position of
the two: Lincoln's "divided house" and Seward's "higher law" placed
them really in the same attitude.

The seventh resolution in the Chicago platform condemned what it
described as the "new dogma that the Constitution, of its own force,
carries slavery into any or all of the Territories of the United
States." This resolution was a direct repudiation by a National
Convention of the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott
case.

On the 6th of November, 1860, Abraham Lincoln was elected President of
the United States. Of the actual votes cast there was a majority
against him of 930,170. Next came Mr. Douglas, who lost the support of
the Southern Democrats by his advocacy of the doctrine of "squatter
sovereignty," as it was called, which was in effect, although not in
form, as hostile to the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred
Scott case as the seventh resolution of the Chicago Convention itself.
Mr. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, the candidate of the Southern
Democracy, fell very far, and Mr. Bell, of Tennessee, the candidate of
the Union party, as it was called, a short-lived successor of the old
Whig party, fell still farther in the rear of the two Northern
candidates.

The great crisis had come at last. The Abolition party had become a
portion of the victorious Republican party. The South, politically,
was overwhelmed. Separated now from its only ally, the Northern
Democracy, it stood at last alone.

It matters not that Mr. Lincoln, after his election, in sincerity of
heart held out the olive branch to the nation, and that during his
term of office the South, so far as his influence could avail, would
have been comparatively safe from direct aggressions. Mr. Lincoln was
not known then as he is known now, and, moreover, his term of office
would be but four years.

What course, then, was left to the South if it was determined to
maintain its rights under the Constitution? What but the right of
self-defense?

The house of every man is his castle, and he may defend it to the
death against all aggressors. When a hostile hand is raised to strike
a blow, he who is assaulted need not wait until the blow falls, but on
the instant may protect himself as best he can. These are the rights
of self-defense known, approved and acted on by all freemen. And where
constitutional rights of a people are in jeopardy, a kindred right of
self-defense belongs to them. Although revolutionary in its character,
it is not the less a right.

Wendell Phillips, abolitionist as he was, in a speech made at New
Bedford on the 9th of April, 1861, three days before the bombardment
of Fort Sumter, fully recognized this right. He said: "Here are a
series of States girding the Gulf, who think that their peculiar
institutions require that they should have a separate government. They
have a right to decide that question without appealing to you or me. A
large body of the people, sufficient to make a nation, have come to
the conclusion that they will have a government of a certain form. Who
denies them the right? Standing with the principles of '76 behind us,
who can deny them the right? What is a matter of a few millions of
dollars or a few forts? It is a mere drop in the bucket of the great
national question. It is theirs just as much as ours. I maintain, on
the principles of '76, that Abraham Lincoln has no right to a soldier
in Fort Sumter."

And such was the honest belief of the people who united in
establishing the Southern Confederacy.

Wendell Phillips was not wrong in declaring the principles of '76 to
be kindred to those of '61. The men of '76 did not fight to get rid of
the petty tax of three pence a pound on tea, which was the only tax
left to quarrel about. They were determined to pay no taxes, large or
small, then or thereafter. Whether the tax was lawful or not was a
doubtful question, about which there was a wide difference of opinion,
but they did not care for that. Nothing would satisfy them but the
relinquishment of any claim of right to tax the colonies, and this
they could not obtain. They maintained that their rights were
violated. They were, moreover, embittered by a long series of disputes
with the mother country, and they wanted to be independent and to have
a country of their own. They thought they were strong enough to
maintain that position.

Neither were the Southern men of '61 fighting for money. And they too
were deeply embittered, not against a mother country, but against a
brother country. The Northern people had published invectives of the
most exasperating character broadcast against the South in their
speeches, sermons, newspapers and books. The abolitionists had
proceeded from words to deeds and were unwearied in tampering with the
slaves and carrying them off. The Southern people, on their part, were
not less violent in denunciation of the North. The slavery question
had divided the political parties throughout the nation, and on this
question the South was practically a unit. They could get no security
that the provisions of the Constitution would be kept either in letter
or in spirit, and this they demanded as their right.

The Southern men thought that they also were strong enough to wage
successfully a defensive war. Like the men of '76, they in great part
were of British stock; they lived in a thinly settled country, led
simple lives, were accustomed to the use of arms, and knew how to
protect themselves. Such men make good soldiers, and when their armies
were enrolled the ranks were filled with men of all classes, the rich
as well as the poor, the educated as well as the ignorant.

It is a mistake to suppose that they were inveigled into secession by
ambitious leaders. On the contrary, it is probable that they were not
as much under the influence of leaders as the men of '76, and that
there were fewer disaffected among them. At times the scales trembled
in the balance. There are always mistakes in war. It is an easy and
ungrateful task to point them out afterward. We can now see that grave
errors, both financial and military, were made, and that opportunities
were thrown away. How far these went to settle the contest, we can
never certainly know, but it does not need great boldness to assert
that the belief which the Southern people entertained that they were
strong enough to defend themselves, was not unreasonable.

The determination of the South to maintain slavery was undoubtedly the
main cause of secession, but another deep and underlying cause was the
firm belief of the Southern people in the doctrine of States' rights,
and their jealousy of any attack upon those rights. Devotion to their
State first of all, a conviction that paramount obligation--in case of
any conflict of allegiance--was due not to the Union but to the State,
had been part of the political creed of very many in the South ever
since the adoption of the Constitution. An ignoble love of slavery was
not the general and impelling motive. The slaveholders, who were
largely in the minority, acted as a privileged class always does act.
They were determined to maintain their privileges at all hazards. But
they, as well as the great mass of the people who had no personal
interest in slavery, fought the battles of the war with the passionate
earnestness of men who believed with an undoubting conviction that
they were the defenders not only of home rule and of their firesides,
but also of their constitutional rights.

And behind the money question, the constitutional question and the
moral question, there was still another of the gravest import. Was it
possible for two races nearly equal in number, but widely different in
character and civilization, to live together in a republic in peace
and equality of rights without mingling in blood? The answer of the
Southern man was, "It is not possible."




CHAPTER III.

     MARYLAND'S DESIRE FOR PEACE. -- EVENTS WHICH FOLLOWED THE
     ELECTION OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN. -- HIS PROCLAMATION CALLING FOR
     TROOPS. -- THE CITY AUTHORITIES AND POLICE OF BALTIMORE. --
     INCREASING EXCITEMENT IN BALTIMORE.


I now come to consider the condition of affairs in Maryland. As yet
the Republican party had obtained a very slight foothold. Only 2,294
votes had in the whole State been cast for Mr. Lincoln. Her sympathies
were divided between the North and the South, with a decided
preponderance on the Southern side. For many years her conscience had
been neither dead nor asleep on the subject of slavery. Families had
impoverished themselves to free their slaves. In 1860 there were
83,942 free colored people in Maryland and 87,189 slaves, the white
population being 515,918. Thus there were nearly as many free as
slaves of the colored race. Emancipation, in spite of harsh laws
passed to discountenance it, had rapidly gone on. In the northern part
of the State and in the city of Baltimore there were but few
slaveholders, and the slavery was hardly more than nominal. The
patriarchal institution, as it has been derisively called, had a real
existence in many a household. Not a few excellent people have I known
and respected who were born and bred in slavery and had been freed by
their masters. In 1831 the State incorporated the Maryland
Colonization Society, which founded on the west coast of Africa a
successful republican colony of colored people, now known as the State
of Maryland in Liberia, and for twenty-six years, and until the war
broke out, the State contributed $10,000 a year to its support. This
amount was increased by the contributions of individuals. The board,
of which Mr. John H. B. Latrobe was for many years president, was
composed of our best citizens. A code of laws for the government of
the colony was prepared by the excellent and learned lawyer, Hugh
Davey Evans.

While there was on the part of a large portion of the people a
deep-rooted and growing dislike to slavery, agitation on the subject
had not commenced. It was in fact suppressed by reason of the violence
of Northern abolitionists with whom the friends of emancipation were
not able to unite.

It is not surprising that Maryland was in no mood for war, but that
her voice was for compromise and peace--compromise and peace at any
price consistent with honor.

The period immediately following the election of Mr. Lincoln in
November, 1860, was throughout the country one of intense agitation
and of important events. A large party at the North preferred
compromise to war, even at the cost of dissolution of the Union. If
dissolution began, no one could tell where it would stop. South
Carolina seceded on the 17th of December, 1860. Georgia and the five
Gulf States soon followed. On the 6th of January, 1861, Fernando Wood,
mayor of the city of New York, sent a message to the common council
advising that New York should secede and become a free city.[5]

[Footnote 5: John P. Kennedy, of Baltimore, the well-known author, who
had been member of Congress and Secretary of the Navy, published early
in 1861 a pamphlet entitled "The Border States, Their Power and Duty
in the Present Disordered Condition of the Country." His idea was that
if concert of action could be had between the Border States and
concurring States of the South which had not seceded, stipulations
might be obtained from the Free States, with the aid of Congress, and,
if necessary, an amendment of the Constitution, which would protect
the rights of the South; but if this failed, that the Border States
and their allies of the South would then be forced to consider the
Union impracticable and to organize a separate confederacy of the
Border States, with the association of such of the Southern and Free
States as might be willing to accede to the proposed conditions. He
hoped that the Union would thus be "reconstructed by the healthy
action of the Border States." The necessary result, however, would
have been that in the meantime three confederacies would have been in
existence. And yet Mr. Kennedy had always been a Union man, and when
the war broke out was its consistent advocate.

These proposals, from such different sources as Fernando Wood and John
P. Kennedy, tend to show the uncertainty and bewilderment which had
taken possession of the minds of men, and in which few did not share
to a greater or less degree.]

On February the 9th, Jefferson Davis was elected President of the
Southern Confederacy, a Confederacy to which other States would
perhaps soon be added. But the Border States were as yet debatable
ground; they might be retained by conciliation and compromise or
alienated by hostile measures, whether directed against them or
against the seceded States. In Virginia a convention had been called
to consider the momentous question of union or secession, and an
overwhelming majority of the delegates chosen were in favor of
remaining in the Union. Other States were watching Virginia's course,
in order to decide whether to stay in the Union or go out of it with
her.

On the 12th and 13th of April occurred the memorable bombardment and
surrender of Fort Sumter. On the 15th of April, President Lincoln
issued his celebrated proclamation calling out seventy-five thousand
militia, and appealing "to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate and
aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity and existence of
our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government, and to
redress wrongs already long enough endured." What these wrongs were
is not stated. "The first service assigned to the forces hereby called
forth," said the proclamation, "will probably be to re-possess the
forts, places and property which have been seized from the Union." On
the same day there was issued from the War Department a request
addressed to the Governors of the different States, announcing what
the quota of each State would be, and that the troops were to serve
for three months unless sooner discharged. Maryland's quota was four
regiments.

The proclamation was received with exultation at the North--many
dissentient voices being silenced in the general acclaim--with
defiance at the South, and in Maryland with mingled feelings in which
astonishment, dismay and disapprobation were predominant. On all sides
it was agreed that the result must be war, or a dissolution of the
Union, and I may safely say that a large majority of our people then
preferred the latter.

An immediate effect of the proclamation was to intensify the feeling
of hostility in the wavering States, and to drive four of them into
secession. Virginia acted promptly. On April 17th her convention
passed an ordinance of secession--subject to ratification by a vote of
the people--and Virginia became the head and front of the Confederacy.
North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas soon followed her lead.
Meanwhile, and before the formal acts of secession, the Governors of
Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee sent prompt and defiant answers
to the requisition, emphatically refusing to furnish troops, as did
also the Governors of Kentucky and Missouri.

The position of Maryland was most critical. This State was especially
important, because the capital of the nation lay within her borders,
and all the roads from the North leading to it passed through her
territory. After the President's proclamation was issued, no doubt a
large majority of her people sympathized with the South; but even had
that sentiment been far more preponderating, there was an underlying
feeling that by a sort of geographical necessity her lot was cast with
the North, that the larger and stronger half of the nation would not
allow its capital to be quietly disintegrated away by her secession.
Delaware and Maryland were the only Border States which did not
attempt to secede. Kentucky at first took the impossible stand of an
armed neutrality. When this failed, a portion of her people passed an
ordinance of secession, and a portion of the people of Missouri passed
a similar ordinance.

It is now proper to give some explanation of the condition of affairs
in Baltimore, at that time a city of 215,000 inhabitants.

Thomas Holliday Hicks, who had been elected by the American, or
Know-Nothing party, three years before, was the Governor of the State.
The city authorities, consisting of the mayor and city council, had
been elected in October, 1860, a few weeks before the Presidential
election, not as representatives of any of the national parties, but
as the candidates of an independent reform party, and in opposition to
the Know-Nothing party. This party, which then received its quietus,
had been in power for some years, and had maintained itself by methods
which made its rule little better than a reign of terror.[6] No one
acquainted with the history of that period can doubt that the reform
was greatly needed. A large number of the best men of the American
party united in the movement, and with their aid it became
triumphantly successful, carrying every ward in the city. The city
council was composed of men of unusually high character. "Taken as a
whole" (Scharf's "History of Maryland," Vol. III., p. 284), "a better
ticket has seldom, if ever, been brought out. In the selection of
candidates all party tests were discarded, and all thought of
rewarding partisan services repudiated." Four police commissioners,
appointed by the Legislature--Charles Howard, William H. Gatchell,
Charles D. Hinks and John W. Davis--men of marked ability and worth,
had, with the mayor, who was _ex officio_ a member of the board, the
appointment and control of the police force. Mr. S. Teackle Wallis was
the legal adviser of the board. The entire police force consisted of
398 men, and had been raised to a high degree of discipline and
efficiency under the command of Marshal Kane. They were armed with
revolvers.

[Footnote 6: The culmination of this period of misrule was at the
election in November, 1859, when the fraud and violence were so
flagrant that the Legislature of the State unseated the whole
Baltimore delegation--ten members. The city being thus without
representation, it became necessary, when a special session of the
Legislature was called in April, 1861, that a new delegation from
Baltimore should be chosen. It was this same Legislature (elected in
1859), which took away from the mayor of the city the control of its
police, and entrusted that force to a board of police commissioners.
This change, a most fortunate one for the city at that crisis,
resulted in the immediate establishment of good order, and made
possible the reform movement of the next autumn.]

Immediately after the call of the President for troops, including four
regiments from Maryland, a marked division among the people manifested
itself. Two large and excited crowds, eager for news, and nearly
touching each other, stood from morning until late at night before two
newspaper offices on Baltimore street which advocated contrary views
and opinions. Strife was in the air. It was difficult for the police
to keep the peace. Business was almost suspended. Was there indeed to
be war between the sections, or could it yet, by some unlooked-for
interposition, be averted? Would the Border States interfere and
demand peace? There was a deep and pervading impression of impending
evil. And now an immediate fear was as to the effect on the citizens
of the passage of Northern troops through the city. Should they be
permitted to cross the soil of Maryland, to make war on sister States
of the South, allied to her by so many ties of affection, as well as
of kindred institutions? On the other hand, when the capital of the
nation was in danger, should not the kindest greeting and welcome be
extended to those who were first to come to the rescue? Widely
different were the answers given to these questions. The Palmetto flag
had several times been raised by some audacious hands in street and
harbor, but it was soon torn down. The National flag and the flag of
the State, with its black and orange, the colors of Lord Baltimore,
waved unmolested, but not side by side, for they had become symbols of
different ideas, although the difference was, as yet, not clearly
defined.

On the 17th of April, the state of affairs became so serious that I,
as mayor, issued a proclamation earnestly invoking all good citizens
to refrain from every act which could lead to outbreak or violence of
any kind; to refrain from harshness of speech, and to render in all
cases prompt and efficient aid, as by law they were required to do, to
the public authorities, whose constant efforts would be exerted to
maintain unbroken the peace and order of the city, and to administer
the laws with fidelity and impartiality. I cannot flatter myself that
this appeal produced much effect. The excitement was too great for any
words to allay it.

On the 18th of April, notice was received from Harrisburg that two
companies of United States artillery, commanded by Major Pemberton,
and also four companies of militia, would arrive by the Northern
Central Railroad at Bolton Station, in the northern part of the city,
at two o'clock in the afternoon. The militia had neither arms nor
uniforms.

Before the troops arrived at the station, where I was waiting to
receive them, I was suddenly called away by a message from Governor
Hicks stating that he desired to see me on business of urgent
importance, and this prevented my having personal knowledge of what
immediately afterward occurred. The facts, however, are that a large
crowd assembled at the station and followed the soldiers in their
march to the Washington station with abuse and threats. The regulars
were not molested, but the wrath of the mob was directed against the
militia, and an attack would certainly have been made but for the
vigilance and determination of the police, under the command of
Marshal Kane.

"These proceedings," says Mr. Scharf, in the third volume of his
"History of Maryland," page 401, "were an earnest of what might be
expected on the arrival of other troops, the excitement growing in
intensity with every hour. Numerous outbreaks occurred in the
neighborhood of the newspaper offices during the day, and in the
evening a meeting of the States Rights Convention was held in Taylor's
building, on Fayette street near Calvert, where, it is alleged, very
strong ground was taken against the passage of any more troops through
Baltimore, and armed resistance to it threatened. On motion of Mr.
Ross Winans, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted:

     "_Resolved_, That in the opinion of this convention the
     prosecution of the design announced by the President in his late
     proclamation, of recapturing the forts in the seceded States,
     will inevitably lead to a sanguinary war, the dissolution of the
     Union, and the irreconcilable estrangement of the people of the
     South from the people of the North.

     "_Resolved_, That we protest in the name of the people of
     Maryland against the garrisoning of Southern forts by militia
     drawn from the free States; or the quartering of militia from the
     free States in any of the towns or places of the slaveholding
     States.

     "_Resolved_, That in the opinion of this convention the massing
     of large bodies of militia, exclusively from the free States, in
     the District of Columbia, is uncalled for by any public danger or
     exigency, is a standing menace to the State of Maryland, and an
     insult to her loyalty and good faith, and will, if persisted in,
     alienate her people from a government which thus attempts to
     overawe them by the presence of armed men and treats them with
     contempt and distrust.

     "_Resolved_, That the time has arrived when it becomes all good
     citizens to unite in a common effort to obliterate all party
     lines which have heretofore unhappily divided us, and to present
     an unbroken front in the preservation and defense of our
     interests, our homes and our firesides, to avert the horrors of
     civil war, and to repel, if need be, any invader who may come to
     establish a military despotism over us.

                                         "A. C. ROBINSON, _Chairman_."
     "G. HARLAN WILLIAMS,
     "ALBERT RITCHIE,
               "_Secretaries_."

The names of the members who composed this convention are not given,
but the mover of the resolutions and the officers of the meeting were
men well known and respected in this community.

The bold and threatening character of the resolutions did not tend to
calm the public mind. They did not, however, advocate an attack on the
troops.

In Putnam's "Record of the Rebellion," Volume I, page 29, the
following statement is made of a meeting which was held on the morning
of the 18th of April: "An excited secession meeting was held at
Baltimore, Maryland. T. Parkin Scott occupied the chair, and speeches
denunciatory of the Administration and the North were made by Wilson
C. N. Carr, William Byrne [improperly spelled Burns], President of the
National Volunteer Association, and others."

An account of the meeting is before me, written by Mr. Carr, lately
deceased, a gentleman entirely trustworthy. He did not know, he says,
of the existence of such an association, but on his way down town
having seen the notice of a town meeting to be held at Taylor's Hall,
to take into consideration the state of affairs, he went to the
meeting. Mr. Scott was in the chair and was speaking. He was not
making an excited speech, but, on the contrary, was urging the
audience to do nothing rashly, but to be moderate and not to interfere
with any troops that might attempt to pass through the city. As soon
as he had finished, Mr. Carr was urged to go up to the platform and
reply to Mr. Scott. I now give Mr. Carr's words. "I went up," he says,
"but had no intention of saying anything in opposition to what Mr.
Scott had advised the people to do. I was not there as an advocate of
secession, but was anxious to see some way opened for reconciliation
between the North and South. I did not make an excited speech nor did
I denounce the Administration. I saw that I was disappointing the
crowd. Some expressed their disapprobation pretty plainly and I cut my
speech short. As soon as I finished speaking the meeting adjourned."

After the war was over, Mr. Scott was elected Chief Judge of the
Supreme Bench of Baltimore City. He was a strong sympathizer with the
South, and had the courage of his convictions, but he had been also an
opponent of slavery, and I have it from his own lips that years before
the war, on a Fourth of July, he had persuaded his mother to liberate
all her slaves, although she depended largely on their services for
her support. And yet he lived and died a poor man.

On the 16th of April, Marshal Kane addressed a letter to William
Crawford, the Baltimore agent of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and
Baltimore Railroad Company, in the following terms:

     "_Dear Sir_:--Is it true as stated that an attempt will be made
     to pass the volunteers from New York intended to war upon the
     South over your road to-day? It is important that we have
     explicit understanding on the subject.

     Your friend,
                                                      GEORGE P. KANE."

This letter was not submitted to me, nor to the board of police. If it
had been, it would have been couched in very different language. Mr.
Crawford forwarded it to the President of the road, who, on the same
day, sent it to Simon Cameron, the Secretary of War.

Mr. Cameron, on April 18th, wrote to Governor Hicks, giving him notice
that there were unlawful combinations of citizens of Maryland to
impede the transit of United States troops across Maryland on their
way to the defense of the capital, and that the President thought it
his duty to make it known to the Governor, so that all loyal and
patriotic citizens might be warned in time, and that he might be
prepared to take immediate and effective measures against it.

On the afternoon of the 18th, Governor Hicks arrived in town. He had
prepared a proclamation as Governor of the State, and wished me to
issue another as mayor of the city, which I agreed to do. In it he
said, among other things, that the unfortunate state of affairs now
existing in the country had greatly excited the people of Maryland;
that the emergency was great, and that the consequences of a rash step
would be fearful. He therefore counselled the people in all
earnestness to withhold their hands from whatever might tend to
precipitate us into the gulf of discord and ruin gaping to receive us.
All powers vested in the Governor of the State would be strenuously
exerted to preserve peace and maintain inviolate the honor and
integrity of Maryland. He assured the people that no troops would be
sent from Maryland, unless it might be for the defense of the national
capital. He concluded by saying that the people of this State would
in a short time have the opportunity afforded them, in a special
election for members of Congress, to express their devotion to the
Union, or their desire to see it broken up.

This proclamation is of importance in several respects. It shows the
great excitement of the people and the imminent danger of domestic
strife. It shows, moreover, that even the Governor of the State had
then little idea of the course which he himself was soon about to
pursue. If this was the case with the Governor, it could not have been
different with thousands of the people. Very soon he became a thorough
and uncompromising upholder of the war.

In my proclamation I concurred with the Governor in his determination
to preserve the peace and maintain inviolate the honor and integrity
of Maryland, and added that I could not withhold my expression of
satisfaction at his resolution that no troops should be sent from
Maryland to the soil of any other State.

Simultaneously with the passage of the first Northern regiments on
their way to Washington, came the news that Virginia had seceded. Two
days were crowded with stirring news--a proclamation from the
President of the Southern Confederacy offering to issue commissions or
letters of marque to privateers, President Lincoln's proclamation
declaring a blockade of Southern ports, the Norfolk Navy Yard
abandoned, Harper's Ferry evacuated and the arsenal in the hands of
Virginia troops. These events, so exciting in themselves, and coming
together with the passage of the first troops, greatly increased the
danger of an explosion.




CHAPTER IV.

     THE SIXTH MASSACHUSETTS REGIMENT IN BALTIMORE. -- THE FIGHT. --
     THE DEPARTURE FOR WASHINGTON. -- CORRESPONDENCE IN REGARD TO THE
     KILLED AND WOUNDED. -- PUBLIC MEETING. -- TELEGRAM TO THE
     PRESIDENT. -- NO REPLY. -- BURNING OF BRIDGES.


The Sixth Massachusetts Regiment had the honor of being the first to
march in obedience to the call of the President, completely equipped
and organized. It had a full band and regimental staff. Mustered at
Lowell on the morning of the 16th, the day after the proclamation was
issued, four companies from Lowell presented themselves, and to these
were added two from Lawrence, one from Groton, one from Acton, and one
from Worcester; and when the regiment reached Boston, at one o'clock,
an additional company was added from that city and another from
Stoneham, making eleven in all--about seven hundred men.[7] It was
addressed by the Governor of the State in front of the State House. In
the city and along the line of the railroad, on the 17th, everywhere,
ovations attended them. In the march down Broadway, in New York, on
the 18th, the wildest enthusiasm inspired all classes. Similar scenes
occurred in the progress through New Jersey and through the city of
Philadelphia. At midnight on the 18th, reports reached Philadelphia
that the passage of the regiment through Baltimore would be disputed.

[Footnote 7: Hanson's Sixth Massachusetts Regiment, p. 14.]

An unarmed and un-uniformed Pennsylvania regiment, under Colonel
Small, was added to the train, either in Philadelphia or when the
train reached the Susquehanna--it has been stated both ways, and I am
not sure which account is correct--and the two regiments made the
force about seventeen hundred men.

The proper course for the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore
Railroad Company was to have given immediate notice to the mayor or
board of police of the number of the troops, and the time when they
were expected to arrive in the city, so that preparation might have
been made to receive them, but no such notice was given. On the
contrary, it was purposely withheld, and no information could be
obtained from the office of the company, although the marshal of
police repeatedly telegraphed to Philadelphia to learn when the troops
were to be expected. No news was received until from a half hour to an
hour of the time at which they were to arrive. Whatever was the reason
that no notice of the approach of the troops was given, it was not
because they had no apprehensions of trouble. Mr. Felton, the
president of the railroad company, says that _before_ the troops left
Philadelphia he called the colonel and principal officers into his
office, and told them of the dangers they would probably encounter,
and advised that each soldier should load his musket before leaving
and be ready for any emergency. Colonel Jones's official report, which
is dated, "Capitol, Washington, April 22, 1861," says, "_After_
leaving Philadelphia, I received intimation that the passage through
the city of Baltimore would be resisted. I caused ammunition to be
distributed and arms loaded, and went personally through the cars, and
issued the following order--viz.:

"'The regiment will march through Baltimore in columns of sections,
arms at will. You will undoubtedly be insulted, abused, and perhaps
assaulted, to which you must pay no attention whatever, but march
with your faces square to the front, and pay no attention to the mob,
even if they throw stones, bricks, or other missiles; but if you are
fired upon, and any of you are hit, your officers will order you to
fire. Do not fire into any promiscuous crowds, but select any man whom
you may see aiming at you, and be sure you drop him.'"

If due notice had been given, and if this order had been carried out,
the danger of a serious disturbance would have been greatly
diminished. The plainest dictates of prudence required the
Massachusetts and Pennsylvania regiments to march through the city in
a body. The Massachusetts regiment was armed with muskets, and could
have defended itself, and would also have had aid from the police; and
although the Pennsylvania troops were unarmed, they would have been
protected by the police just as troops from the same State had been
protected on the day before. The mayor and police commissioners would
have been present, adding the sanction and authority of their official
positions. But the plan adopted laid the troops open to be attacked in
detail when they were least able to defend themselves and were out of
the reach of assistance from the police. This plan was that when the
train reached the President-street or Philadelphia station, in the
southeastern part of Baltimore, each car should, according to custom,
be detached from the engine and be drawn through the city by four
horses for the distance of more than a mile to the Camden-street or
Washington station, in the southwestern part of the city. Some one had
blundered.

The train of thirty-five cars arrived at President-street Station at
about eleven o'clock. The course which the troops had to take was
first northerly on President street, four squares to Pratt street, a
crowded thoroughfare leading along the heads of the docks, then along
Pratt street west for nearly a mile to Howard street, and then south,
on Howard street, one square to the Camden-street station.

Drawn by horses across the city at a rapid pace, about nine[8] cars,
containing seven companies of the Massachusetts Sixth, reached the
Camden-street station, the first carloads being assailed only with
jeers and hisses; but the last car, containing Company "K" and Major
Watson, was delayed on its passage--according to one account was
thrown off the track by obstructions, and had to be replaced with the
help of a passing team; paving-stones and other missiles were thrown,
the windows were broken, and some of the soldiers were struck. Colonel
Jones was in one of the cars which passed through. Near Gay street, it
happened that a number of laborers were at work repaving Pratt street,
and had taken up the cobble-stones for the purpose of relaying them.
As the troops kept passing, the crowd of bystanders grew larger, the
excitement and--among many--the feeling of indignation grew more
intense; each new aggressive act was the signal and example for
further aggression. A cart coming by with a load of sand, the track
was blocked by dumping the cartload upon it--I have been told that
this was the act of some merchants and clerks of the neighborhood--and
then, as a more effectual means of obstruction, some anchors lying
near the head of the Gay-street dock were dragged up to and placed
across the track.[9]

[Footnote 8: According to some of the published accounts _seven_ cars
got through, which would have been one to each company, but I believe
that the number of the cars and of the companies did not correspond.
Probably the larger companies were divided.]

[Footnote 9: For participation in placing this obstruction, a wealthy
merchant of long experience, usually a very peaceful man, was
afterward indicted for treason by the Grand Jury of the Circuit Court
of the United States in Baltimore, but his trial was not pressed.]

The next car being stopped by these obstructions, the driver attached
the horses to the rear end of the car and drove it back, with the
soldiers, to the President-street station, the rest of the cars also,
of course, having to turn back, or--if any of them had not yet
started--to remain where they were at the depot. In the cars thus
stopped and turned back there were four companies, "C," "D," "I" and
"L," under Captains Follansbee, Hart, Pickering and Dike; also the
band, which, I believe, did not leave the depot, and which remained
there with the unarmed Pennsylvania regiment. These four companies, in
all about 220 men, formed on President street, in the midst of a dense
and angry crowd, which threatened and pressed upon the troops,
uttering cheers for Jefferson Davis and the Southern Confederacy, and
groans for Lincoln and the North, with much abusive language. As the
soldiers advanced along President street, the commotion increased; one
of the band of rioters appeared bearing a Confederate flag, and it was
carried a considerable distance before it was torn from its staff by
citizens. Stones were thrown in great numbers, and at the corner of
Fawn street two of the soldiers were knocked down by stones and
seriously injured. In crossing Pratt-street bridge, the troops had to
pick their way over joists and scantling, which by this time had been
placed on the bridge to obstruct their passage.

Colonel Jones's official report, from which I have already quoted,
thus describes what happened after the four companies left the cars.
As Colonel Jones was not present during the march, but obtained the
particulars from others, it is not surprising that his account
contains errors. These will be pointed out and corrected later:

"They proceeded to march in accordance with orders, and had proceeded
but a short distance before they were furiously attacked by a shower
of missiles, which came faster as they advanced. They increased their
step to double-quick, which seemed to infuriate the mob, as it
evidently impressed the mob with the idea that the soldiers dared not
fire or had no ammunition, and pistol-shots were numerously fired into
the ranks, and one soldier fell dead. The order "Fire!" was given, and
it was executed; in consequence several of the mob fell, and the
soldiers again advanced hastily. The mayor of Baltimore placed himself
at the head of the column beside Captain Follansbee, and proceeded
with them a short distance, assuring him that he would protect them,
and begging him not to let the men fire. But the mayor's patience was
soon exhausted, and he seized a musket from the hands of one of the
men, and killed a man therewith; and a policeman, who was in advance
of the column, also shot a man with a revolver. They at last reached
the cars, and they started immediately for Washington. On going
through the train I found there were about one hundred and thirty
missing, including the band and field music. Our baggage was seized,
and we have not as yet been able to recover any of it. I have found it
very difficult to get reliable information in regard to the killed and
wounded, but believe there were only three killed.

"As the men went into the cars" [meaning the men who had marched
through the city to Camden Station], "I caused the blinds to the cars
to be closed, and took every precaution to prevent any shadow of
offense to the people of Baltimore, but still the stones flew thick
and fast into the train, and it was with the utmost difficulty that I
could prevent the troops from leaving the cars and revenging the death
of their comrades. After a volley of stones, some one of the soldiers
fired and killed a Mr. Davis, who, I ascertained by reliable
witnesses, threw a stone into the car." This is incorrectly stated, as
will hereafter appear.

It is proper that I should now go back and take up the narration from
my own point of view.

On the morning of the 19th of April I was at my law office in Saint
Paul street after ten o'clock, when three members of the city council
came to me with a message from Marshal Kane, informing me that he had
just received intelligence that troops were about to arrive--I did not
learn how many--and that he apprehended a disturbance, and requesting
me to go to the Camden-street station. I immediately hastened to the
office of the board of police, and found that they had received a
similar notice. The Counsellor of the City, Mr. George M. Gill, and
myself then drove rapidly in a carriage to the Camden-street station.
The police commissioners followed, and, on reaching the station, we
found Marshal Kane on the ground and the police coming in in squads. A
large and angry crowd had assembled, but were restrained by the police
from committing any serious breach of the peace.

After considerable delay seven of the eleven companies of the
Massachusetts regiment arrived at the station, as already mentioned,
and I saw that the windows of the last car were badly broken. No one
to whom I applied could inform me whether more troops were expected or
not. At this time an alarm was given that the mob was about to tear up
the rails in advance of the train on the Washington road, and Marshal
Kane ordered some of his men to go out the road as far as necessary to
protect the track. Soon afterward, and when I was about to leave the
Camden-street station, supposing all danger to be over, news was
brought to Police Commissioner Davis and myself, who were standing
together, that some troops had been left behind, and that the mob was
tearing up the track on Pratt street, so as to obstruct the progress
of the cars, which were coming to the Camden-street station. Mr. Davis
immediately ran to summon the marshal, who was at the station with a
body of police, to be sent to the point of danger, while I hastened
alone in the same direction. On arriving at about Smith's Wharf, foot
of Gay street, I found that anchors had been placed on the track, and
that Sergeant McComas and four policemen who were with him were not
allowed by a group of rioters to remove the obstruction. I at once
ordered the anchors to be removed, and my authority was not resisted.
I hurried on, and, approaching Pratt-street bridge, I saw a battalion,
which proved to be four companies of the Massachusetts regiment which
had crossed the bridge, coming towards me in double-quick time.

They were firing wildly, sometimes backward, over their shoulders. So
rapid was the march that they could not stop to take aim. The mob,
which was not very large, as it seemed to me, was pursuing with shouts
and stones, and, I think, an occasional pistol-shot. The uproar was
furious. I ran at once to the head of the column, some persons in the
crowd shouting, "Here comes the mayor." I shook hands with the officer
in command, Captain Follansbee, saying as I did so, "I am the mayor of
Baltimore." The captain greeted me cordially. I at once objected to
the double-quick, which was immediately stopped. I placed myself by
his side, and marched with him. He said, "We have been attacked
without provocation," or words to that effect. I replied, "You must
defend yourselves." I expected that he would face his men to the rear,
and, after giving warning, would fire if necessary. But I said no
more, for I immediately felt that, as mayor of the city, it was not my
province to volunteer such advice. Once before in my life I had taken
part in opposing a formidable riot, and had learned by experience
that the safest and most humane manner of quelling a mob is to meet it
at the beginning with armed resistance.

The column continued its march. There was neither concert of action
nor organization among the rioters. They were armed only with such
stones or missiles as they could pick up, and a few pistols. My
presence for a short time had some effect, but very soon the attack
was renewed with greater violence. The mob grew bolder. Stones flew
thick and fast. Rioters rushed at the soldiers and attempted to snatch
their muskets, and at least on two occasions succeeded. With one of
these muskets a soldier was killed. Men fell on both sides. A young
lawyer, then and now known as a quiet citizen, seized a flag of one of
the companies and nearly tore it from its staff. He was shot through
the thigh, and was carried home apparently a dying man, but he
survived to enter the army of the Confederacy, where he rose to the
rank of captain, and he afterward returned to Baltimore, where he
still lives. The soldiers fired at will. There was no firing by
platoons, and I heard no order given to fire. I remember that at the
corner of South street several citizens standing in a group fell,
either killed or wounded. It was impossible for the troops to
discriminate between the rioters and the by-standers, but the latter
seemed to suffer most, because, as the main attack was from the mob
pursuing the soldiers from the rear, they, in their march, could not
easily face backward to fire, but could shoot at those whom they
passed on the street. Near the corner of Light street a soldier was
severely wounded, who afterward died, and a boy on a vessel lying in
the dock was killed, and about the same place three soldiers at the
head of the column leveled their muskets and fired into a group
standing on the sidewalk, who, as far as I could see, were taking no
active part. The shots took effect, but I cannot say how many fell. I
cried out, waving my umbrella to emphasize my words, "For God's sake
don't shoot!" but it was too late. The statement that I begged Captain
Follansbee not to let the men fire is incorrect, although on this
occasion I did say, "Don't shoot." It then seemed to me that I was in
the wrong place, for my presence did not avail to protect either the
soldiers or the citizens, and I stepped out from the column. Just at
this moment a boy ran forward and handed to me a discharged musket
which had fallen from one of the soldiers. I took it from him and
hastened into the nearest shop, asking the person in charge to keep it
safely, and returned immediately to the street. This boy was far from
being alone in his sympathy for the troops, but their friends were
powerless, except to care for the wounded and remove the dead. The
statement in Colonel Jones's report that I seized a musket and killed
one of the rioters is entirely incorrect. The smoking musket seen in
my hands was no doubt the foundation for it. There is no foundation
for the other statement that one of the police shot a man with a
revolver. At the moment when I returned to the street, Marshal Kane,
with about fifty policemen (as I then supposed, but I have since
ascertained that in fact there were not so many), came at a run from
the direction of the Camden-street station, and throwing themselves in
the rear of the troops, they formed a line in front of the mob, and
with drawn revolvers kept it back. This was between Light and Charles
streets. Marshal Kane's voice shouted, "Keep back, men, or I shoot!"
This movement, which I saw myself, was gallantly executed, and was
perfectly successful. The mob recoiled like water from a rock. One of
the leading rioters, then a young man, now a peaceful merchant, tried,
as he has himself told me, to pass the line, but the marshal seized
him and vowed he would shoot if the attempt was made. This nearly
ended the fight, and the column passed on under the protection of the
police, without serious molestation, to Camden Station.[10] I had
accompanied the troops for more than a third of a mile, and regarded
the danger as now over. At Camden-street Station there was rioting and
confusion. Commissioner Davis assisted in placing the soldiers in the
cars for Washington. Some muskets were pointed out of the windows by
the soldiers. To this he earnestly objected, as likely to bring on a
renewal of the fight, and he advised the blinds to be closed. The
muskets were then withdrawn and the blinds closed, by military order,
as stated by Colonel Jones.

[Footnote 10: The accounts in some of our newspapers describe serious
fighting at a point beyond this, but I am satisfied they are
incorrect.]

At last, about a quarter before one o'clock, the train, consisting of
thirteen cars filled with troops, moved out of Camden Station amid the
hisses and groans of the multitude, and passed safely on to
Washington. At the outskirts of the city, half a mile or more beyond
the station, occurred the unfortunate incident of the killing of
Robert W. Davis. This gentleman, a well-known dry-goods merchant, was
standing on a vacant lot near the track with two friends, and as the
train went by they raised a cheer for Jefferson Davis and the South,
when he was immediately shot dead by one of the soldiers from a
car-window, several firing at once. There were no rioters near them,
and they did not know that the troops had been attacked on their march
through the city. There was no "volley of stones" thrown just before
Mr. Davis was killed, nor did he or his friends throw any.[11] This
was the last of the casualties of the day, and was by far the most
serious and unfortunate in its consequences, for it was not
unnaturally made the most of to inflame the minds of the people
against the Northern troops. Had it not been for this incident, there
would perhaps have been among many of our people a keener sense of
blame attaching to themselves as the aggressors. Four of the
Massachusetts regiment were killed and thirty-six wounded. Twelve
citizens were killed, including Mr. Davis. The number of wounded among
the latter has never been ascertained. As the fighting was at close
quarters, the small number of casualties shows that it was not so
severe as has generally been supposed.

[Footnote 11: Testimony of witnesses at the coroner's inquest.]

But peace even for the day had not come. The unarmed Pennsylvanians
and the band of the Massachusetts regiment were still at the
President-street station, where a mob had assembled, and the police at
that point were not sufficient to protect them. Stones were thrown,
and some few of the Pennsylvania troops were hurt, not seriously, I
believe. A good many of them were, not unnaturally, seized with a
panic, and scattered through the city in different directions. Marshal
Kane again appeared on the scene with an adequate force, and an
arrangement was made with the railroad company by which the troops
were sent back in the direction of Philadelphia. During the afternoon
and night a number of stragglers sought the aid of the police and were
cared for at one of the station-houses.

The following card of Captain Dike, who commanded Company "C" of the
Sixth Massachusetts Regiment, appeared in the Boston _Courier_:

                                         "BALTIMORE, _April 25, 1861_.

     "It is but an act of justice that induces me to say to my friends
     who may feel any interest, and to the community generally, that
     in the affair which occurred in this city on Friday, the 19th
     instant, the mayor and city authorities should be exonerated from
     blame or censure, as they did all in their power, as far as my
     knowledge extends, to quell the riot, and Mayor Brown attested
     the sincerity of his desire to preserve the peace, and pass our
     regiment safely through the city, by marching at the head of its
     column, and remaining there at the risk of his life. Candor could
     not permit me to say less, and a desire to place the conduct of
     the authorities here on the occasion in a right position, as well
     as to allay feelings, urges me to this sheer act of justice.

                                                         JOHN H. DIKE,
     "_Captain Company 'C,' Seventh Regiment,
               attached to Sixth Regiment Massachusetts V. M._"

In a letter to Marshal Kane, Colonel Jones wrote as follows:

     "HEADQUARTERS SIXTH REGIMENT M. V. M.

                                 "WASHINGTON, D. C., _April 28, 1861_.

     "_Marshal Kane, Baltimore, Maryland._

     "Please deliver the bodies of the deceased soldiers belonging to
     my regiment to Murrill S. Wright, Esq., who is authorized to
     receive them, and take charge of them through to Boston, and
     thereby add one more to the many favors for which, in connection
     with this matter, I am, with my command, much indebted to you.
     Many, many thanks for the Christian conduct of the authorities of
     Baltimore in this truly unfortunate affair.

     "I am, with much respect, your obedient servant,

                                                     "EDWARD F. JONES,
                                   "_Colonel Sixth Regiment M. V. M._"

The following correspondence with the Governor of Massachusetts seems
to be entitled to a place in this paper. Gov. Andrew's first telegram
cannot be found. The second, which was sent by me in reply, is as
follows:

                                         "BALTIMORE, _April 20, 1861_.

     "_To the Honorable John A. Andrew, Governor of Massachusetts._

     "_Sir_:--No one deplores the sad events of yesterday in this city
     more deeply than myself, but they were inevitable. Our people
     viewed the passage of armed troops to another State through the
     streets as an invasion of our soil, and could not be restrained.
     The authorities exerted themselves to the best of their ability,
     but with only partial success. Governor Hicks was present, and
     concurs in all my views as to the proceedings now necessary for
     our protection. When are these scenes to cease? Are we to have a
     war of sections? God forbid! The bodies of the Massachusetts
     soldiers could not be sent out to Boston, as you requested, all
     communication between this city and Philadelphia by railroad and
     with Boston by steamer having ceased, but they have been placed
     in cemented coffins, and will be placed with proper funeral
     ceremonies in the mausoleum of Greenmount Cemetery, where they
     shall be retained until further directions are received from you.
     The wounded are tenderly cared for. I appreciate your offer, but
     Baltimore will claim it as her right to pay all expenses
     incurred."

     "Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

                                                      "GEO. WM. BROWN,

                                               "_Mayor of Baltimore._"

To this the following reply was returned by the Governor:

     "_To His Honor George W. Brown, Mayor of Baltimore._

     "_Dear Sir_:--I appreciate your kind attention to our wounded and
     our dead, and trust that at the earliest moment the remains of
     our fallen will return to us. I am overwhelmed with surprise that
     a peaceful march of American citizens over the highway to the
     defense of our common capital should be deemed aggressive to
     Baltimoreans. Through New York the march was triumphal.

                                                       JOHN A. ANDREW,

                                        "_Governor of Massachusetts._"

This correspondence carries the narrative beyond the nineteenth of
April, and I now return to the remaining events of that day.

After the news spread through the city of the fight in the streets,
and especially of the killing of Mr. Davis, the excitement became
intense. It was manifest that no more troops, while the excitement
lasted, could pass through without a bloody conflict. All citizens, no
matter what were their political opinions, appeared to agree in
this--the strongest friends of the Union as well as its foes. However
such a conflict might terminate, the result would be disastrous. In
each case it might bring down the vengeance of the North upon the
city. If the mob succeeded, it would probably precipitate the city,
and perhaps the State, into a temporary secession. Such an event all
who had not lost their reason deprecated. The immediate and pressing
necessity was that no more troops should arrive.

Governor Hicks called out the military for the preservation of the
peace and the protection of the city.

An immense public meeting assembled in Monument Square. Governor
Hicks, the mayor, Mr. S. Teackle Wallis, and others, addressed it.

In my speech I insisted on the maintenance of peace and order in the
city. I denied that the right of a State to secede from the Union was
granted by the Constitution. This was received with groans and shouts
of disapproval by a part of the crowd, but I maintained my ground. I
deprecated war on the seceding States, and strongly expressed the
opinion that the South could not be conquered. I approved of Governor
Hicks's determination to send no troops from Maryland to invade the
South. I further endeavored to calm the people by informing them of
the efforts made by Governor Hicks and myself to prevent the passage
of more troops through the city.

Governor Hicks said: "I coincide in the sentiment of your worthy
mayor. After three conferences we have agreed, and I bow in submission
to the people. I am a Marylander; I love my State and I love the
Union, but I will suffer my right arm to be torn from my body before I
will raise it to strike a sister State."

A dispatch had previously been sent by Governor Hicks and myself to
the President of the United States as follows: "A collision between
the citizens and the Northern troops has taken place in Baltimore, and
the excitement is fearful. Send no troops here. We will endeavor to
prevent all bloodshed. A public meeting of citizens has been called,
and the troops of the State have been called out to preserve the
peace. They will be enough."

Immediately afterward, Messrs. H. Lennox Bond, a Republican, then
Judge of the Criminal Court of Baltimore, and now Judge of the Circuit
Court of the United States; George W. Dobbin, an eminent lawyer, and
John C. Brune, President of the Board of Trade, went to Washington at
my request, bearing the following letter to the President:

                         "MAYOR'S OFFICE, BALTIMORE, _April 19, 1861_.

     "_Sir_:--This will be presented to you by the Hon. H. Lennox
     Bond, and George W. Dobbin, and John C. Brune, Esqs., who will
     proceed to Washington by an express train at my request, in order
     to explain fully the fearful condition of affairs in this city.
     The people are exasperated to the highest degree by the passage
     of troops, and the citizens are universally decided in the
     opinion that no more should be ordered to come. The authorities
     of the city did their best to-day to protect both strangers and
     citizens and to prevent a collision, but in vain, and, but for
     their great efforts, a fearful slaughter would have occurred.
     Under these circumstances it is my solemn duty to inform you that
     it is not possible for more soldiers to pass through Baltimore
     unless they fight their way at every step. I therefore hope and
     trust and most earnestly request that no more troops be permitted
     or ordered by the Government to pass through the city. If they
     should attempt it, the responsibility for the blood shed will not
     rest upon me.

     "With great respect, your obedient servant,

                                             "GEO. WM. BROWN, _Mayor_.

     "_To His Excellency Abraham Lincoln, President United States._"

To this Governor Hicks added: "I have been in Baltimore City since
Tuesday evening last, and coöperated with Mayor G. W. Brown in his
untiring efforts to allay and prevent the excitement and suppress the
fearful outbreak as indicated above, and I fully concur in all that is
said by him in the above communication."

No reply came from Washington. The city authorities were left to act
on their own responsibility. Late at night reports came of troops
being on their way both from Harrisburg and Philadelphia. It was
impossible that they could pass through the city without fighting and
bloodshed. In this emergency, the board of police, including the
mayor, immediately assembled for consultation, and came to the
conclusion that it was necessary to burn or disable the bridges on
both railroads so far as was required to prevent the ingress of
troops. This was accordingly done at once, some of the police and a
detachment of the Maryland Guard being sent out to do the work.
Governor Hicks was first consulted and urged to give his consent, for
we desired that he should share with us the responsibility of taking
this grave step. This consent he distinctly gave in my presence and in
the presence of several others, and although there was an attempt
afterward to deny the fact that he so consented, there can be no doubt
whatever about the matter. He was in my house at the time, where, on
my invitation, he had taken refuge, thinking that he was in some
personal danger at the hotel where he was staying. Early the next
morning the Governor returned to Annapolis, and after this the city
authorities had to bear alone the responsibilities which the anomalous
state of things in Baltimore had brought upon them.

On the Philadelphia Railroad the detachment sent out by special train
for the purpose of burning the bridges went as far as the Bush River,
and the long bridge there, and the still longer one over the wide
estuary of the Gunpowder, a few miles nearer Baltimore, were
partially burned. It is an interesting fact that just as this party
arrived at the Bush River bridge, a volunteer party of five gentlemen
from Baltimore reached the same place on the same errand. They had
ridden on horseback by night to the river, and had then gone by boat
to the bridge for the purpose of burning it, and in fact they stayed
at the bridge and continued the work of burning until the afternoon.




CHAPTER V.

     APRIL 20th, INCREASING EXCITEMENT. -- APPROPRIATION OF $500,000
     FOR DEFENSE OF THE CITY. -- CORRESPONDENCE WITH PRESIDENT AND
     GOVERNOR. -- MEN ENROLLED. -- APPREHENDED ATTACK ON FORT McHENRY.
     -- MARSHAL KANE. -- INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT, CABINET AND GENERAL
     SCOTT. -- GENERAL BUTLER, WITH THE EIGHTH MASSACHUSETTS, PROCEEDS
     TO ANNAPOLIS AND WASHINGTON. -- BALTIMORE IN A STATE OF ARMED
     NEUTRALITY.


On Saturday morning, the 20th, the excitement and alarm had greatly
increased. Up to this time no answer had been received from
Washington. The silence became unbearable. Were more troops to be
forced through the city at any cost? If so, how were they to come, by
land or water? Were the guns of Fort McHenry to be turned upon the
inhabitants? Was Baltimore to be compelled at once to determine
whether she would side with the North or with the South? Or was she
temporarily to isolate herself and wait until the frenzy had in some
measure spent its force and reason had begun to resume its sway? In
any case it was plain that the authorities must have the power placed
in their hands of controlling any outbreak which might occur. This was
the general opinion. Union men and disunion men appeared on the
streets with arms in their hands. A time like that predicted in
Scripture seemed to have come, when he who had no sword would sell his
garment to buy one.

About ten A. M. the city council assembled and immediately
appropriated $500,000, to be expended under my direction as mayor,
for the purpose of putting the city in a complete state of defense
against any description of danger arising or which might arise out of
the present crisis. The banks of the city promptly held a meeting, and
a few hours afterward a committee appointed by them, consisting of
three bank presidents, Johns Hopkins, John Clark and Columbus
O'Donnell, all wealthy Union men, placed the whole sum in advance at
my disposal. Mr. Scharf, in his "History of Maryland," Volume 3, page
416, says, in a footnote, that this action of the city authorities was
endorsed by the editors of the _Sun_, _American_, _Exchange_, _German
Correspondent_, _Clipper_, _South_, etc. Other considerable sums were
contributed by individuals and firms without respect to party.

On the same morning I received a dispatch from Messrs. Bond, Dobbin
and Brune, the committee who had gone to Washington, which said: "We
have seen the President and General Scott. We have from the former a
letter to the mayor and Governor declaring that no troops shall be
brought to Baltimore, if, in a military point of view and without
interruption from opposition, they can be marched around Baltimore."

As the Governor had left Baltimore for Annapolis early in the morning,
I telegraphed him as follows:

                                         "BALTIMORE, _April 20, 1861_.

     "_To Governor Hicks._

     "Letter from President and General Scott. No troops to pass
     through Baltimore if as a military force they can march around. I
     will answer that every effort will be made to prevent parties
     leaving the city to molest them, but cannot guarantee against
     acts of individuals not organized. Do you approve?

                                                      GEO. WM. BROWN."

This telegram was based on that from Messrs. Bond, Dobbin and Brune.
The letter referred to had not been received when my telegram to
Governor Hicks was dispatched. I was mistaken in supposing that
General Scott had signed the letter as well as the President.

President Lincoln's letter was as follows:

                                        "WASHINGTON, _April 20, 1861_.

     "_Governor Hicks and Mayor Brown._

     "_Gentlemen_:--Your letter by Messrs. Bond, Dobbin and Brune is
     received. I tender you both my sincere thanks for your efforts to
     keep the peace in the trying situation in which you are placed.
     For the future troops _must_ be brought here, but I make no point
     of bringing them _through_ Baltimore.

     "Without any military knowledge myself, of course I must leave
     details to General Scott. He hastily said this morning, in
     presence of these gentlemen, 'March them _around_ Baltimore, and
     not through it.'

     "I sincerely hope the General, on fuller reflection, will
     consider this practical and proper, and that you will not object
     to it.

     "By this, a collision of the people of Baltimore with the troops
     will be avoided unless they go out of their way to seek it. I
     hope you will exert your influence to prevent this.

     "Now and ever I shall do all in my power for peace consistently
     with the maintenance of government.

     "Your obedient servant,

                                                          A. LINCOLN."

Governor Hicks replied as follows to my telegram:

                                         "ANNAPOLIS, _April 20, 1861_.

     "_To the Mayor of Baltimore._

     "Your dispatch received. I hoped they would send no more troops
     through Maryland, but as we have no right to demand that, I am
     glad no more are to be sent through Baltimore. I know you will do
     all in your power to preserve the peace.

                                                      THOS. H. HICKS."

I then telegraphed to the President as follows:

                               "BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, _April 20, 1861_.

     "_To President Lincoln._

     "Every effort will be made to prevent parties leaving the city to
     molest troops marching to Washington. Baltimore seeks only to
     protect herself. Governor Hicks has gone to Annapolis, but I have
     telegraphed to him.

                               "GEO. WM. BROWN, _Mayor of Baltimore_."

After the receipt of the dispatch from Messrs. Bond, Dobbin and Brune,
another committee was sent to Washington, consisting of Messrs.
Anthony Kennedy, Senator of the United States, and J. Morrison Harris,
member of the House of Representatives, both Union men, who sent a
dispatch to me saying that they "had seen the President, Secretaries
of State, Treasury and War, and also General Scott. The result is the
transmission of orders that will stop the passage of troops through or
around the city."

Preparations for the defense of the city were nevertheless continued.
With this object I issued a notice in which I said: "All citizens
having arms suitable for the defense of the city, and which they are
willing to contribute for the purpose, are requested to deposit them
at the office of the marshal of police."

The board of police enrolled temporarily a considerable number of men
and placed them under the command of Colonel Isaac R. Trimble. He
informs me that the number amounted to more than fifteen thousand,
about three-fourths armed with muskets, shotguns and pistols.

This gentleman was afterward a Major-General in the Confederate Army,
where he distinguished himself. He lost a leg at Gettysburg.

By this means not only was the inadequate number of the police
supplemented, but many who would otherwise have been the disturbers of
the peace became its defenders. And, indeed, not a few of the men
enrolled, who thought and hoped that their enrollment meant war, were
disappointed to find that the prevention of war was the object of the
city authorities, and afterwards found their way into the Confederacy.

For some days it looked very much as if Baltimore had taken her stand
decisively with the South; at all events, the outward expressions of
Southern feeling were very emphatic, and the Union sentiment
temporarily disappeared.

Early on the morning of Saturday, the 20th, a large Confederate flag
floated from the headquarters of a States Rights club on Fayette
street near Calvert, and on the afternoon of the same day the Minute
Men, a Union club, whose headquarters were on Baltimore street, gave a
most significant indication of the strength of the wave of feeling
which swept over our people by hauling down the National colors and
running up in their stead the State flag of Maryland, amid the cheers
of the crowd.[12] Everywhere on the streets men and boys were wearing
badges which displayed miniature Confederate flags, and were cheering
the Southern cause. Military companies began to arrive from the
counties. On Saturday, first came a company of seventy men from
Frederick, under Captain Bradley T. Johnson, afterward General in the
Southern Army, and next two cavalry companies from Baltimore County,
and one from Anne Arundel County. These last, the Patapsco Dragoons,
some thirty men, a sturdy-looking body of yeomanry, rode straight to
the City Hall and drew up, expecting to be received with a speech of
welcome from the mayor. I made them a very brief address, and informed
them that dispatches received from Washington had postponed the
necessity for their services, whereupon they started homeward amid
cheers, their bugler striking up "Dixie," which was the first time I
heard that tune. A few days after, they came into Baltimore again. On
Sunday came in the Howard County Dragoons, and by steamboat that
morning two companies from Talbot County, and soon it was reported
that from Harford, Cecil, Carroll and Prince George's, companies were
on their way. All the city companies of uniformed militia were, of
course, under arms. Three batteries of light artillery were in the
streets, among them the light field-pieces belonging to the military
school at Catonsville, but these the reverend rector of the school, a
strong Union man, had thoughtfully spiked.

[Footnote 12: Baltimore _American_, April 22.]

The United States arsenal at Pikesville, at the time unoccupied, was
taken possession of by some Baltimore County troops.

From the local columns of the _American_ of the 22d, a paper which was
strongly on the Union side, I take the following paragraph:

"WAR SPIRIT ON SATURDAY.

"The war spirit raged throughout the city and among all classes during
Saturday with an ardor which seemed to gather fresh force each
hour.... All were united in a determination to resist at every hazard
the passage of troops through Baltimore.... Armed men were marching
through the streets, and the military were moving about in every
direction, and it is evident that Baltimore is to be the battlefield
of the Southern revolution."

And from the _American_ of Tuesday, 23d:

"At the works of the Messrs. Winans their entire force is engaged in
the making of pikes, and in casting balls of every description for
cannon, the steam gun,[13] rifles, muskets, etc., which they are
turning out very rapidly."

[Footnote 13: Winans's steam gun, a recently invented, and, it was
supposed, very formidable engine, was much talked about at this time.
It was not very long afterwards seized and confiscated by the military
authorities.]

And a very significant paragraph from the _Sun_ of the same day:

"Yesterday morning between 300 and 400 of our most respectable colored
residents made a tender of their services to the city authorities.
The mayor thanked them for their offer, and informed them that their
services will be called for if they can be made in any way available."

Officers from Maryland in the United States Army were sending in their
resignations. Colonel (afterward General) Huger, of South Carolina,
who had recently resigned, and was in Baltimore at the time, was made
Colonel of the Fifty-third Regiment, composed of the Independent Greys
and the six companies of the Maryland Guard.

On Monday morning, the 22d, I issued an order directing that all the
drinking-saloons should be closed that day, and the order was
enforced.

On Saturday, April 20th, Captain John C. Robinson, now Major-General,
then in command at Fort McHenry, which stands at the entrance of the
harbor, wrote to Colonel L. Thomas, Adjutant-General of the United
States Army, that he would probably be attacked that night, but he
believed he could hold the fort.

In the September number, for the year 1885, of _American History_
there is an article written by General Robinson, entitled "Baltimore
in 1861," in which he speaks of the apprehended attack on the fort,
and of the conduct of the Baltimore authorities.

He says that about nine o'clock on the evening of the 20th, Police
Commissioner Davis called at the fort, bringing a letter, dated eight
o'clock P. M. of the same evening, from Charles Howard, the president
of the board, which he quotes at length, and which states that, from
rumors that had reached the board, they were apprehensive that the
commander of the fort might be annoyed by lawless and disorderly
characters approaching the walls of the fort, and they proposed to
send a guard of perhaps two hundred men to station themselves on
Whetstone Point, of course beyond the outer limits of the fort, with
orders to arrest and hand over to the civil authorities any
evil-disposed and disorderly persons who might approach the fort. The
letter further stated that this duty would have been confided to the
police force, but their services were so imperatively required
elsewhere that it would be impossible to detail a sufficient number,
and this duty had therefore been entrusted to a detachment of the
regular organized militia of the State, then called out pursuant to
law, and actually in the service of the State. It was added that the
commanding officer of the detachment would be ordered to communicate
with Captain Robinson. The letter closed with repeating the assurance
verbally given to Captain Robinson in the morning that no disturbance
at or near the post should be made with the sanction of any of the
constituted authorities of the city of Baltimore; but, on the
contrary, all their powers should be exerted to prevent anything of
the kind by any parties. A postscript stated that there might perhaps
be a troop of volunteer cavalry with the detachment.

General Robinson continues:

     "I did not question the good faith of Mr. Howard, but
     Commissioner Davis verbally stated that they proposed to send the
     Maryland Guards to help protect the fort. Having made the
     acquaintance of some of the officers of that organization, and
     heard them freely express their opinions, I declined the offered
     support, and then the following conversation occurred:

     "_Commandant._ I am aware, sir, that we are to be attacked
     to-night. I received notice of it before sundown. If you will go
     outside with me you will see we are prepared for it. You will
     find the guns loaded, and men standing by them. As for the
     Maryland Guards, they cannot come here. I am acquainted with some
     of those gentlemen, and know what their sentiments are.

     "_Commissioner Davis._ Why, Captain, we are anxious to avoid a
     collision.

     "_Commandant._ So am I, sir. If you wish to avoid a collision,
     place your city military anywhere between the city and that
     chapel on the road, but if they come this side of it, I shall
     fire on them.

     "_Commissioner Davis._ Would you fire into the city of Baltimore?

     "_Commandant._ I should be sorry to do it, sir, but if it becomes
     necessary in order to hold this fort, I shall not hesitate for
     one moment.

     "_Commissioner Davis_ (excitedly). I assure you, Captain
     Robinson, if there is a woman or child killed in that city, there
     will not be one of you left alive here, sir.

     "_Commandant._ Very well, sir, I will take the chances. Now, I
     assure you, Mr. Davis, if your Baltimore mob comes down here
     to-night, you will not have another mob in Baltimore for ten
     years to come, sir."

Mr. Davis is a well-known and respected citizen of Baltimore, who has
filled various important public offices with credit, and at present
holds a high position in the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company.
According to his recollection, the interview was more courteous and
less dramatic than would be supposed from the account given by General
Robinson. Mr. Davis says that the people of Baltimore were acquainted
with the defenseless condition of the fort, and that in the excited
state of the public mind this fact probably led to the apprehension
and consequent rumor that an attempt would be made to capture it. The
police authorities believed, and, as it turned out, correctly, that
the rumor was without foundation; yet, to avoid the danger of any
disturbance whatever, the precautions were taken which are described
in the letter of Mr. Howard, and Mr. Davis went in person to deliver
it to Captain Robinson.

His interview was not, however, confined to Captain Robinson, but
included also other officers of the fort, and Mr. Davis was hospitably
received. A conversation ensued in regard to the threatened attack,
and, with one exception, was conducted without asperity. A junior
officer threatened, in case of an attack, to direct the fire of a
cannon on the Washington Monument, which stands in the heart of the
city, and to this threat Mr. Davis replied with heat, "If you do
that, and if a woman or child is killed, there will be nothing left of
you but your brass buttons to tell who you were."

The commandant insisted that the military sent by the board should not
approach the fort nearer than the Roman Catholic chapel, a demand to
which Mr. Davis readily assented, as that situation commanded the only
approach from the city to the fort. In the midst of the conversation
the long roll was sounded, and the whole garrison rushed to arms. For
a long time, and until the alarm was over, Mr. Davis was left alone.

General Robinson was mistaken in his conjecture, "when it seemed to
him that for hours of the night mounted men from the country were
crossing the bridges of the Patapsco." There was but one bridge over
the Patapsco, known as the Long Bridge, from which any sound of
passing horsemen or vehicles of any description could possibly have
been heard at the fort. The sounds which did reach the fort from the
Long Bridge during the hours of the night were probably the market
wagons of Anne Arundel County passing to and from the city on their
usual errand, and the one or two companies from that county, which
came to Baltimore during the period of disturbance, no doubt rode in
over the Long Bridge by daylight.

General Robinson, after describing in his paper the riot of the 19th
of April and the unfortunate event of the killing of Mr. Davis, adds:
"It is impossible to describe the intense excitement that now
prevailed. Only those who saw and felt it can understand or conceive
any adequate idea of its extent"; and in this connection he mentions
the fact that Marshal Kane, chief of the police force, on the evening
of the 19th of April, telegraphed to Bradley T. Johnson, at
Frederick, as follows: "Streets red with Maryland blood; send
expresses over the mountains of Maryland and Virginia for the riflemen
to come without delay. Fresh hordes will be down on us to-morrow. We
will fight them and whip them, or die."

The sending of this dispatch was indeed a startling event, creating a
new complication and embarrassing in the highest degree to the city
authorities. The marshal of police, who had gallantly and successfully
protected the national troops on the 18th and 19th, was so carried
away by the frenzy of the hour that he had thus on his own
responsibility summoned volunteers from Virginia and Maryland to
contest the passage of national troops through the city. Different
views were taken by members of the board of police. It was considered,
on the one hand, that the services of Colonel Kane were, in that
crisis, indispensable, because no one could control as he could the
secession element of the city, which was then in the ascendant and
might get control of the city, and, on the other, that his usefulness
had ceased, because not only had the gravest offense been given to the
Union sentiment of the city by this dispatch, but the authorities in
Washington, while he was at the head of the police, could no longer
have any confidence in the police, or perhaps in the board itself. The
former consideration prevailed.

It is due to Marshal Kane to say that subsequently, and while he
remained in office, he performed his duty to the satisfaction of the
Board. Some years after the war was over he was elected sheriff, and
still later mayor of the city, and in both capacities he enjoyed the
respect and regard of the community.

It may with propriety be added that the conservative position and
action of the police board were so unsatisfactory to many of the more
heated Southern partisans, that a scheme was at one time seriously
entertained by them to suppress the board, and transfer the control of
the police force to other hands. Happily for all parties, better
counsels prevailed.

On Sunday, the 21st of April, with three prominent citizens of
Baltimore, I went to Washington, and we there had an interview with
the President and Cabinet and General Scott. This interview was of so
much importance, that a statement of what occurred was prepared on the
same day and was immediately published. It is here given at length:

                                                BALTIMORE, _April 21_.

     Mayor Brown received a dispatch from the President of the United
     States at three o'clock A. M. (this morning), directed to himself
     and Governor Hicks, requesting them to go to Washington by
     special train, in order to consult with Mr. Lincoln for the
     preservation of the peace of Maryland. The mayor replied that
     Governor Hicks was not in the city, and inquired if he should go
     alone. Receiving an answer by telegraph in the affirmative, his
     Honor, accompanied by George W. Dobbin, John C. Brune and S. T.
     Wallis, Esqs., whom he had summoned to attend him, proceeded at
     once to the station. After a series of delays they were enabled
     to procure a special train about half-past seven o'clock, in
     which they arrived at Washington about ten.

     They repaired at once to the President's house, where they were
     admitted to an immediate interview, to which the Cabinet and
     General Scott were summoned. A long conversation and discussion
     ensued. The President, upon his part, recognized the good faith
     of the city and State authorities, and insisted upon his own. He
     admitted the excited state of feeling in Baltimore, and his
     desire and duty to avoid the fatal consequences of a collision
     with the people. He urged, on the other hand, the absolute,
     irresistible necessity of having a transit through the State for
     such troops as might be necessary for the protection of the
     Federal capital. The protection of Washington, he asserted with
     great earnestness, was the sole object of concentrating troops
     there, and he protested that none of the troops brought through
     Maryland were intended for any purposes hostile to the State, or
     aggressive as against the Southern States. Being now unable to
     bring them up the Potomac in security, the President must either
     bring them through Maryland or abandon the capital.

     He called on General Scott for his opinion, which the General
     gave at length, to the effect that troops might be brought
     through Maryland without going through Baltimore, by either
     carrying them from Perryville to Annapolis, and thence by rail to
     Washington, or by bringing them to the Relay House on the
     Northern Central Railroad [about seven miles north of the city],
     and marching them to the Relay House on the Washington Railroad
     [about seven miles south-west of the city], and thence by rail to
     the capital. If the people would permit them to go by either of
     these routes uninterruptedly, the necessity of their passing
     through Baltimore would be avoided. If the people would not
     permit them a transit thus remote from the city, they must select
     their own best route, and, if need be, fight their own way
     through Baltimore--a result which the General earnestly
     deprecated.

     The President expressed his hearty concurrence in the desire to
     avoid a collision, and said that no more troops should be ordered
     through Baltimore if they were permitted to go uninterrupted by
     either of the other routes suggested. In this disposition the
     Secretary of War expressed his participation.

     Mayor Brown assured the President that the city authorities would
     use all lawful means to prevent their citizens from leaving
     Baltimore to attack the troops in passing at a distance; but he
     urged, at the same time, the impossibility of their being able to
     promise anything more than their best efforts in that direction.
     The excitement was great, he told the President, the people of
     all classes were fully aroused, and it was impossible for any one
     to answer for the consequences of the presence of Northern troops
     anywhere within our borders. He reminded the President also that
     the jurisdiction of the city authorities was confined to their
     own population, and that he could give no promises for the people
     elsewhere, because he would be unable to keep them if given. The
     President frankly acknowledged this difficulty, and said that the
     Government would only ask the city authorities to use their best
     efforts with respect to those under their jurisdiction.

     The interview terminated with the distinct assurance on the part
     of the President that no more troops would be sent through
     Baltimore, unless obstructed in their transit in other
     directions, and with the understanding that the city authorities
     should do their best to restrain their own people.

     The Mayor and his companions availed themselves of the
     President's full discussion of the day to urge upon him
     respectfully, but in the most earnest manner, a course of policy
     which would give peace to the country, and especially the
     withdrawal of all orders contemplating the passage of troops
     through any part of Maryland.

     On returning to the cars, and when just about to leave, about 2
     P. M., the Mayor received a dispatch from Mr. Garrett (the
     President of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad) announcing the
     approach of troops to Cockeysville [about fourteen miles from
     Baltimore on the Northern Central Railroad], and the excitement
     consequent upon it in the city. Mr. Brown and his companions
     returned at once to the President and asked an immediate
     audience, which was promptly given. The Mayor exhibited Mr.
     Garrett's dispatch, which gave the President great surprise. He
     immediately summoned the Secretary of War and General Scott, who
     soon appeared with other members of the Cabinet. The dispatch was
     submitted. The President at once, in the most decided way, urged
     the recall of the troops, saying he had no idea they would be
     there. Lest there should be the slightest suspicion of bad faith
     on his part in summoning the Mayor to Washington and allowing
     troops to march on the city during his absence, he desired that
     the troops should, if it were practicable, be sent back at once
     to York or Harrisburg. General Scott adopted the President's
     views warmly, and an order was accordingly prepared by the
     Lieutenant-General to that effect, and forwarded by Major Belger,
     of the Army, who also accompanied the Mayor to this city. The
     troops at Cockeysville, the Mayor was assured, were not brought
     there for transit through the city, but were intended to be
     marched to the Relay House on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad.
     They will proceed to Harrisburg, from there to Philadelphia, and
     thence by the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal or by Perryville, as
     Major-General Patterson may direct.

     This statement is made by the authority of the Mayor and Messrs.
     George W. Dobbin, John C. Brune and S. T. Wallis, who accompanied
     Mr. Brown, and who concurred with him in all particulars in the
     course adopted by him in the two interviews with Mr. Lincoln.

                                              GEO. WM. BROWN, _Mayor_.

This statement was written by Mr. Wallis, at the request of his
associates, on the train, and was given to the public immediately on
their return to the city.

In the course of the first conversation Mr. Simon Cameron called my
attention to the fact that an iron bridge on the Northern Central
Railway, which, he remarked, belonged to the city of Baltimore, had
been disabled by a skilled person so as to inflict little injury on
the bridge, and he desired to know by what authority this had been
done. Up to this time nothing had been said about the disabling of the
bridges. In reply I addressed myself to the President, and said, with
much earnestness, that the disabling of this bridge, and of the other
bridges, had been done by authority, as the reader has already been
told, and that it was a measure of protection on a sudden emergency,
designed to prevent bloodshed in the city of Baltimore, and not an act
of hostility towards the General Government; that the people of
Maryland had always been deeply attached to the Union, which had been
shown on all occasions, but that they, including the citizens of
Baltimore, regarded the proclamation calling for 75,000 troops as an
act of war on the South, and a violation of its constitutional rights,
and that it was not surprising that a high-spirited people, holding
such opinions, should resent the passage of Northern troops through
their city for such a purpose.

Mr. Lincoln was greatly moved, and, springing up from his chair,
walked backward and forward through the apartment. He said, with great
feeling, "Mr. Brown, I am not a learned man! I am not a learned man!"
that his proclamation had not been correctly understood; that he had
no intention of bringing on war, but that his purpose was to defend
the capital, which was in danger of being bombarded from the heights
across the Potomac.

I am giving here only a part of a frank and full conversation, in
which others present participated.

The telegram of Mr. Garrett to me referred to in the preceding
statement is in the following words: "Three thousand Northern troops
are reported to be at Cockeysville. Intense excitement prevails.
Churches have been dismissed and the people are arming in mass. To
prevent terrific bloodshed, the result of your interview and
arrangement is awaited."

To this the following reply to Mr. Garrett was made by me: "Your
telegram received on our return from an interview with the President,
Cabinet and General Scott. Be calm and do nothing until you hear from
me again. I return to see the President at once and will telegraph
again. Wallis, Brune and Dobbin are with me."

Accordingly, after the second interview, the following dispatch was
sent by me to Mr. Garrett: "We have again seen the President, General
Scott, Secretary of War and other members of the Cabinet, and the
troops are ordered to return forthwith to Harrisburg. A messenger goes
with us from General Scott. We return immediately."

Mr. Garrett's telegram was not exaggerated. It was a fearful day in
Baltimore. Women and children, and men, too, were wild with
excitement. A certainty of a fight in the streets if Northern troops
should enter was the pressing danger. Those who were arming in hot
haste to resist the passage of Northern troops little recked of the
fearful risk to which they were exposing themselves and all they held
dear. It was well for the city and State that the President had
decided as he did. When the President gave his deliberate decision
that the troops should pass around Baltimore and not through it,
General Scott, stern soldier as he sometimes was, said with emotion,
"Mr. President, I thank you for this, and God will bless you for it."

From the depth of our hearts my colleagues and myself thanked both the
General and the President.

The troops on the line of the Northern Central Railway--some 2400 men,
about half of them armed--did not receive their orders to return to
Pennsylvania until after several days. As they had expected to make
the journey to Washington by rail, they were naturally not well
equipped or supplied for camp life. I take the following from the
_Sun_ of April 23d: "By order of Marshal Kane, several wagon-loads of
bread and meat were sent to the camp of the Pennsylvania troops, it
being understood that a number were sick and suffering for proper food
and nourishment.... One of the Pennsylvanians died on Sunday and was
buried within the encampment. Two more died yesterday and a number of
others were on the sick list. The troops were deficient in food,
having nothing but crackers to feed upon."

The Eighth Massachusetts Regiment, under command of General Butler,
was the next which passed through Maryland. It reached Perryville, on
the Susquehanna, by rail on the 20th, and there embarked on the
steamboat _Maryland_, arriving at Annapolis early on the morning of
the 21st. Governor Hicks addressed the General a note advising that he
should not land his men, on account of the great excitement there, and
stated that he had telegraphed to that effect to the Secretary of War.

The Governor also wrote to the President, advising him to order
elsewhere the troops then off Annapolis, and to send no more through
Maryland, and added the surprising suggestion that Lord Lyons, the
British Minister, be requested to act as mediator between the
contending parties of the country.

The troops, however, were landed without opposition. The railway from
Annapolis leading to the Washington road had, in some places, been
torn up, but it was promptly repaired by the soldiers, and by the 25th
an unobstructed route was opened through Annapolis to Washington.

Horace Greeley, in his book called "The American Conflict," denounces
with characteristic vehemence and severity of language the proceedings
of the city authorities. He scouts "the demands" of the Mayor and his
associates, whom he designates as "Messrs. Brown & Co." He insists
that practically on the morning of the 20th of April Maryland was a
member of the Southern Confederacy, and that her Governor spoke and
acted the bidding of a cabal of the ablest and most envenomed
traitors.

It is true that the city then, and for days afterwards, was in an
anomalous condition, which may be best described as one of "armed
neutrality"; but it is not true that in any sense it was, on the 20th
of April, or at any other time, a member of the Southern Confederacy.
On the contrary, while many, especially among the young and reckless,
were doing their utmost to place it in that position, regardless of
consequences, and would, if they could, have forced the hands of the
city authorities, it was their conduct which prevented such a
catastrophe. Temporizing and delay were necessary. As soon as passions
had time to cool, a strong reaction set in and the people rapidly
divided into two parties--one on the side of the North, and the other
on the side of the South; but whatever might be their personal or
political sympathies, it was clear to all who had not lost their
reason that Maryland, which lay open from the North by both land and
sea, would be kept in the Union for the sake of the national capital,
even if it required the united power of the nation to accomplish the
object. The telegraph wires on the lines leading to the North had been
cut, and for some days the city was without regular telegraphic
connection. For a longer time the mails were interrupted and travel
was stopped. The buoys in the harbor were temporarily removed. The
business interests of the city of course suffered under these
interruptions, and would be paralyzed if such isolation were to
continue, and the merchants soon began to demand that the channels of
trade should be reopened to the north and east.

The immediate duty of the city authorities was to keep the peace and
protect the city, and, without going into details or discussing the
conduct of individuals, I shall leave others to speak of the manner in
which it was performed.

Colonel Scharf, in his "History of Maryland," Volume III, p. 415, sums
up the matter as follows: "In such a period of intense excitement,
many foolish and unnecessary acts were undoubtedly done by persons in
the employment of the city, as well as by private individuals, but it
is undoubtedly true that the Mayor and board of police commissioners
were inflexibly determined to resist all attempts to force the city
into secession or into acts of hostility to the Federal Government,
and that they successfully accomplished their purpose. If they had
been otherwise disposed, they could easily have effected their
object."




CHAPTER VI.

     SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. -- REPORT OF THE BOARD OF
     POLICE. -- SUPPRESSION OF THE FLAGS. -- ON THE 5th OF MAY,
     GENERAL BUTLER TAKES POSITION SEVEN MILES FROM BALTIMORE. -- ON
     THE 13TH OF MAY, HE ENTERS BALTIMORE AND FORTIFIES FEDERAL HILL.
     -- THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY WILL TAKE NO STEPS TOWARDS SECESSION. --
     MANY YOUNG MEN JOIN THE ARMY OF THE CONFEDERACY.


On the 22d of April, Governor Hicks convened the General Assembly of
the State, to meet in special session at Annapolis on the 26th, to
deliberate and consider of the condition of the State, and to take
such measures as in their wisdom they might deem fit to maintain peace
and order and security within its limits.

On the 24th of April, "in consequence of the extraordinary state of
affairs," Governor Hicks changed the meeting of the Assembly to
Frederick. The candidates for the House of Delegates for the city of
Baltimore, who had been returned as elected to the General Assembly in
1859, had been refused their seats, as previously stated, and a new
election in the city had therefore become necessary to fill the
vacancy.

A special election for that purpose was accordingly held in the city
on the 24th instant. Only a States Rights ticket was presented, for
which nine thousand two hundred and forty-four votes were cast. The
candidates elected were: John C. Brune, Ross Winans, Henry M.
Warfield, J. Hanson Thomas, T. Parkin Scott, H. M. Morfit, S. Teackle
Wallis, Charles H. Pitts, William G. Harrison and Lawrence Sangston,
well-known and respected citizens, and the majority of them nominated
because of their known conservatism and declared opposition to violent
measures.

This General Assembly, which contained men of unusual weight and force
of character, will ever remain memorable in Maryland for the courage
and ability with which it maintained the constitutional rights of the
State.

On the 3d of May, the board of police made a report of its proceedings
to the Legislature of the State, signed by Charles Howard, President.
After speaking of the disabling of the railroads, it concludes as
follows:

     "The absolute necessity of the measures thus determined upon by
     the Governor, Mayor and Police Board, is fully illustrated by the
     fact that early on Sunday morning reliable information reached
     the city of the presence of a large body of Pennsylvania troops,
     amounting to about twenty-four hundred men, who had reached
     Ashland, near Cockeysville, by the way of the Northern Central
     Railroad, and was stopped in their progress towards Baltimore by
     the partial destruction of the Ashland bridge. Every intelligent
     citizen at all acquainted with the state of feeling then
     existing, must be satisfied that if these troops had attempted to
     march through the city, an immense loss of life would have ensued
     in the conflict which would necessarily have taken place. The
     bitter feelings already engendered would have been intensely
     increased by such a conflict; all attempts at conciliation would
     have been vain, and terrible destruction would have been the
     consequence, if, as is certain, other bodies of troops had
     insisted on forcing their way through the city.

     "The tone of the whole Northern press and the mass of the
     population was violent in the extreme. Incursions upon our city
     were daily threatened, not only by troops in the service of the
     Federal Government, but by the vilest and most reckless
     desperadoes, acting independently, and, as they threatened, in
     despite of the Government, backed by well-known influential
     citizens, and sworn to the commission of all kinds of excesses.
     In short, every possible effort was made to alarm this community.
     In this condition of things the Board felt it to be their solemn
     duty to continue the organization which had already been
     commenced, for the purpose of assuring the people of Baltimore
     that no effort would be spared to protect all within its borders,
     to the extent of their ability. All the means employed were
     devoted to this end, and with no view of producing a collision
     with the General Government, which the Board were particularly
     anxious to avoid, and an arrangement was happily effected by the
     Mayor with the General Government that no troops should be passed
     through the city. As an evidence of the determination of the
     Board to prevent such collision, a sufficient guard was sent in
     the neighborhood of Fort McHenry several nights to arrest all
     parties who might be engaged in a threatened attack upon it, and
     a steam-tug was employed, properly manned, to prevent any hostile
     demonstration upon the receiving-ship _Alleghany_, lying at
     anchor in the harbor, of all which the United States officers in
     command were duly notified.

     "Property of various descriptions belonging to the Government and
     individuals was taken possession of by the police force with a
     view to its security. The best care has been taken of it. Every
     effort has been made to discover the rightful owners, and a
     portion of it has already been forwarded to order. Arrangements
     have been made with the Government agents satisfactory to them
     for the portion belonging to it, and the balance is held subject
     to the order of its owners.

     "Amidst all the excitement and confusion which has since
     prevailed, the Board take great pleasure in stating that the good
     order and peace of the city have been preserved to an
     extraordinary degree. Indeed, to judge from the accounts given by
     the press of other cities of what has been the state of things in
     their own communities, Baltimore, during the whole of the past
     week and up to this date, will compare favorably, as to the
     protection which persons and property have enjoyed, with any
     other large city in the United States."

Much has been said in regard to the suppression of the national flag
in Baltimore during the disturbances, and it is proper that the facts
should here be stated.

General Robinson, in his description of the occurrences which took
place after the 19th of April, says that meetings were held under the
flag of the State of Maryland, at which the speeches were inflammatory
secession harangues, and that the national flag disappeared, and no
man dared to display it. Whether or not this statement exactly
represents the condition of things, it at least approximates it, and
on the 26th of April, an order was issued by the board of police
reciting that the peace of the city was likely to be disturbed by the
display of various flags, and directing that no flag of any
description should be raised or carried through the streets. On April
29th, the city council passed an ordinance, signed by the Mayor,
authorizing him, when in his opinion the peace of the city required
it, to prohibit by proclamation for a limited period, to be designated
by him, the public display of all flags or banners in the city of
Baltimore, except on buildings or vessels occupied or employed by the
Government of the United States. On the same day I, in pursuance of
the ordinance, issued a proclamation prohibiting the display of flags
for thirty days, with the exception stated in the ordinance, and on
the 10th of May, when I was satisfied that all danger was over, I
issued a proclamation removing the prohibition. The only violation of
the order which came under my notice during the period of suppression
was on the part of a military company which had the Maryland flag
flying at its headquarters, on Lexington street near the City Hall. On
my directing this flag to be taken down, the request was at once
complied with.

General Robinson says that "the first demonstration of returning
loyalty was on the 28th day of April, when a sailing vessel came down
the river crowded with men, and covered from stem to stern with
national flags. She sailed past the fort, cheered and saluted our
flag, which was dipped in return, after which she returned to the
city." He then adds: "The tide had turned. Union men avowed
themselves, the stars and stripes were again unfurled, and order was
restored. Although after this time arrests were made of persons
conspicuous for disloyalty, the return to reason was almost as sudden
as the outbreak of rebellion. The railroads were repaired, trains ran
regularly, and troops poured into Washington without hindrance or
opposition of any sort. Thousands of men volunteered for the Union
Army. Four regiments of Maryland troops afterwards served with me, and
constituted the Third Brigade of my division. They fought gallantly
the battles of the Union, and no braver soldiers ever marched under
the flag."

The tide indeed soon turned, but not quite so rapidly as this
statement seems to indicate. On the 5th of May, General Butler, with
two regiments and a battery of artillery, came from Washington and
took possession of the Relay House on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad
at the junction of the Washington branch, about seven miles from
Baltimore, and fortified the position. One of his first proceedings
was highly characteristic. He issued a special order declaring that he
had found well-authenticated evidence that one of his soldiers had
"been poisoned by means of strychnine administered in the food brought
into the camp," and he warned the people of Maryland that he could
"put an agent, with a word, into every household armed with this
terrible weapon." This statement sent a thrill of horror through the
North, and the accompanying threat of course excited the indignation
and disgust of our people. The case was carefully examined by the city
physician, and it turned out that the man had an ordinary attack of
cholera morbus, the consequence of imprudent diet and camp life, but
the General never thought proper to correct the slander.

On the evening of the 11th of May, General Butler being then at
Annapolis, I received a note from Edward G. Parker, his aide-de-camp,
stating that he had received intimations from many sources that an
attack by the Baltimore roughs was intended that night; that these
rumors had been confirmed by a gentleman from Baltimore, who gave his
name and residence; that the attack would be made by more than a
thousand men, every one sworn to kill a man; that they were coming in
wagons, on horses and on foot, and that a considerable force from the
west, probably the Point of Rocks in Maryland, was also expected, and
I was requested to guard every avenue from the city, so as to prevent
the Baltimore rioters from leaving town.

Out of respect to the source from which the application came, I
immediately sent for the marshal of police, and requested him to throw
out bodies of his men so as to guard every avenue leading to the Relay
House. No enemy, however, appeared. The threatened attack proved to be
merely a groundless alarm, as I knew from the beginning it was.

On the night of the 13th of May, when the city was as peaceful as it
is to-day, General Butler, in the midst of a thunderstorm of unusual
violence, entered Baltimore and took possession of Federal Hill, which
overlooks the harbor and commands the city, and which he immediately
proceeded to fortify. There was nobody to oppose him, and nobody
thought of doing so; but, for this exploit, which he regarded as the
capture of Baltimore, he was made a Major-General. He immediately
issued a proclamation, as if he were in a conquered city subject to
military law.

Meantime, on the 26th of April, the General Assembly of the State had
met at Frederick. "As soon as the General Assembly met" (Scharf's
History of Maryland, Vol. III, p. 444), "the Hon. James M. Mason,
formerly United States Senator from Virginia, waited on it as
commissioner from that State, authorized to negotiate a treaty of
alliance offensive and defensive with Maryland on her behalf." This
proposition met with no acceptance. On the 27th, the Senate, by a
unanimous vote, issued an address for the purpose of allaying the
apprehensions of the people, declaring that it had no constitutional
authority to take any action leading to secession, and on the next day
the House of Delegates, by a vote of 53 to 12, made a similar
declaration. Early in May, the General Assembly, by a vote in the
House of 43 to 12, and in the Senate of 11 to 3, passed a series of
resolutions proclaiming its position in the existing crisis.

The resolutions protested against the war as unjust and
unconstitutional, and announced a determination to take no part in its
prosecution. They expressed a desire for the immediate recognition of
the Confederate States; and while they protested against the military
occupation of the State, and the arbitrary restrictions and
illegalities with which it was attended, they called on all good
citizens to abstain from violent and unlawful interference with the
troops, and patiently and peacefully to leave to time and reason the
ultimate and certain re-establishment and vindication of the right;
and they declared it to be at that time inexpedient to call a
Sovereign Convention of the State, or to take any measures for the
immediate organization or arming of the militia.

After it became plain that no movement would be made towards
secession, a large number of young men, including not a few of the
flower of the State, and representing largely the more wealthy and
prominent families, escaped across the border and entered the ranks of
the Confederacy. The number has been estimated at as many as twenty
thousand, but this, perhaps, is too large a figure, and there are no
means of ascertaining the truth. The muster-rolls have perished with
the Confederacy. The great body of those who sympathized with the
South had no disposition to take arms against the Union so long as
Maryland remained a member of it. This was subsequently proved by
their failure to enlist in the Southern armies on the different
occasions in 1862, 1863 and 1864 when they crossed the Potomac and
transferred the seat of war to Maryland and Pennsylvania, under the
command twice of General Lee and once of General Early.

The first of these campaigns ended in the bloody battle of Antietam.
The Maryland men, as a tribute to their good conduct, were placed at
the head of the army, and crossed the river with enthusiasm, the band
playing and the soldiers singing "My Maryland." Great was their
disappointment that the recruits did not even suffice to fill the gaps
in their shattered ranks.




CHAPTER VII.

     CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY AND THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. -- A UNION
     CONVENTION. -- CONSEQUENCE OF THE SUSPENSION OF THE WRIT. --
     INCIDENTS OF THE WAR. -- THE WOMEN IN THE WAR.


The suspension of the writ of _habeas corpus_, by order of the
President, without the sanction of an Act of Congress, which had not
then been given, was one of the memorable events of the war.

On the 4th of May, 1861, Judge Giles, of the United States District
Court of Maryland, issued a writ of _habeas corpus_ to Major Morris,
then in command of Fort McHenry, to discharge a soldier who was under
age. Major Morris refused to obey the writ.

On the 14th of May the General Assembly adjourned, and Mr. Ross
Winans, of Baltimore, a member of the House of Delegates, while
returning to his home, was arrested by General Butler on a charge of
high treason. He was conveyed to Annapolis, and subsequently to Fort
McHenry, and was soon afterwards released.

A case of the highest importance next followed. On the 25th of May,
Mr. John Merryman, of Baltimore County, was arrested by order of
General Keim, of Pennsylvania, and confined in Fort McHenry. The next
day (Sunday, May 26th) his counsel, Messrs. George M. Gill and George
H. Williams, presented a petition for the writ of _habeas corpus_ to
Chief Justice Taney, who issued the writ immediately, directed to
General Cadwallader, then in command in Maryland, ordering him to
produce the body of Merryman in court on the following day (Monday,
May 27th). On that day Colonel Lee, his aide-de-camp, came into court
with a letter from General Cadwallader, directed to the Chief Justice,
stating that Mr. Merryman had been arrested on charges of high
treason, and that he (the General) was authorized by the President of
the United States in such cases to suspend the writ of _habeas corpus_
for the public safety. Judge Taney asked Colonel Lee if he had brought
with him the body of John Merryman. Colonel Lee replied that he had no
instructions except to deliver the letter.

     _Chief Justice._--The commanding officer, then, declines to obey
     the writ?

     _Colonel Lee._--After making that communication my duty is ended,
     and I have no further power (rising and retiring).

     _Chief Justice._--The Court orders an attachment to issue against
     George Cadwallader for disobedience to the high writ of the
     Court, returnable at twelve o'clock to-morrow.

The order was accordingly issued as directed.

A startling issue was thus presented. The venerable Chief Justice had
come from Washington to Baltimore for the purpose of issuing a writ of
_habeas corpus_, and the President had thereupon authorized the
commander of the fort to hold the prisoner and disregard the writ.

A more important occasion could hardly have occurred. Where did the
President of the United States acquire such a power? Was it true that
a citizen held his liberty subject to the arbitrary will of any man?
In what part of the Constitution could such a power be found? Why had
it never been discovered before? What precedent existed for such an
act?

Judge Taney was greatly venerated in Baltimore, where he had formerly
lived. The case created a profound sensation.

On the next morning the Chief Justice, leaning on the arm of his
grandson, walked slowly through the crowd which had gathered in front
of the court-house, and the crowd silently and with lifted hats opened
the way for him to pass.

Roger B. Taney was one of the most self-controlled and courageous of
judges. He took his seat with his usual quiet dignity. He called the
case of John Merryman and asked the marshal for his return to the writ
of attachment. The return stated that he had gone to Fort McHenry for
the purpose of serving the writ on General Cadwallader; that he had
sent in his name at the outer gate; that the messenger had returned
with the reply that there was no answer to send; that he was not
permitted to enter the gate, and, therefore, could not serve the writ,
as he was commanded to do.

The Chief Justice then read from his manuscript as follows:

     I ordered the attachment of yesterday because upon the face of
     the return the detention of the prisoner was unlawful upon two
     grounds:

     1st. The President, under the Constitution and laws of the United
     States, cannot suspend the privilege of the writ of _habeas
     corpus_, nor authorize any military officer to do so.

     2d. A military officer has no right to arrest and detain a person
     not subject to the rules and articles of war, for an offense
     against the laws of the United States, except in aid of the
     judicial authority and subject to its control; and if the party
     is arrested by the military, it is the duty of the officer to
     deliver him over immediately to the civil authority, to be dealt
     with according to law.

     I forbore yesterday to state the provisions of the Constitution
     of the United States which make these principles the fundamental
     law of the Union, because an oral statement might be
     misunderstood in some portions of it, and I shall therefore put
     my opinion in writing, and file it in the office of the clerk of
     this court, in the course of this week.

The Chief Justice then orally remarked:

     In relation to the present return, it is proper to say that of
     course the marshal has legally the power to summon the _posse
     comitatus_ to seize and bring into court the party named in the
     attachment; but it is apparent he will be resisted in the
     discharge of that duty by a force notoriously superior to the
     _posse_, and, this being the case, such a proceeding can result
     in no good, and is useless. I will not, therefore, require the
     marshal to perform this duty. If, however, General Cadwallader
     were before me, I should impose on him the punishment which it is
     my province to inflict--that of fine and imprisonment. I shall
     merely say, to-day, that I shall reduce to writing the reasons
     under which I have acted, and which have led me to the
     conclusions expressed in my opinion, and shall direct the clerk
     to forward them with these proceedings to the President, so that
     he may discharge his constitutional duty "to take care that the
     laws are faithfully executed."

It is due to my readers that they should have an opportunity of
reading this opinion, and it is accordingly inserted in an Appendix.

After the court had adjourned, I went up to the bench and thanked
Judge Taney for thus upholding, in its integrity, the writ of _habeas
corpus_. He replied, "Mr. Brown, I am an old man, a very old man" (he
had completed his eighty-fourth year), "but perhaps I was preserved
for this occasion." I replied, "Sir, I thank God that you were."

He then told me that he knew that his own imprisonment had been a
matter of consultation, but that the danger had passed, and he warned
me, from information he had received, that my time would come.

The charges against Merryman were discovered to be unfounded and he
was soon discharged by military authority.

The nation is now tired of war, and rests in the enjoyment of a
harmony which has not been equalled since the days of James Monroe.
When Judge Taney rendered this decision the Constitution was only
seventy-two years old--twelve years younger than himself. It is now
less than one hundred years old--a short period in a nation's
life--and yet during that period there have been serious
commotions--two foreign wars and a civil war. In the future, as in the
past, offenses will come, and hostile parties and factions will arise,
and the men who wield power will, if they dare, shut up in fort or
prison, without reach of relief, those whom they regard as dangerous
enemies. When that period arrives, then will those who wisely love
their country thank the great Chief Justice, as I did, for his
unflinching defense of _habeas corpus_, the supreme writ of right, and
the corner-stone of personal liberty among all English-speaking
people.

In the Life of Benjamin R. Curtis, Vol. I, p. 240, his biographer
says, speaking of Chief Justice Taney, with reference to the case of
Merryman, "If he had never done anything else that was high, heroic
and important, his noble vindication of the writ of _habeas corpus_
and the dignity and authority of his office against a rash minister of
State, who, in the pride of a fancied executive power, came near to
the commission of a great crime, will command the admiration and
gratitude of every lover of constitutional liberty so long as our
institutions shall endure." The crime referred to was the intended
imprisonment of the Chief Justice.

Although this crime was not committed, a criminal precedent had been
set and was ruthlessly followed. "My lord," said Mr. Seward to Lord
Lyons, "I can touch a bell on my right hand and order the imprisonment
of a citizen of Ohio; I can touch a bell again and order the
imprisonment of a citizen of New York; and no power on earth, except
that of the President, can release them. Can the Queen of England do
so much?" When such a power is wielded by any man, or set of men,
nothing is left to protect the liberty of the citizen.

On the 24th of May, a Union Convention, consisting of fourteen
counties of the State, including the city of Baltimore, and leaving
eight unrepresented, met in the city. The counties not represented
were Washington, Montgomery, Prince George, Charles, St. Mary's,
Dorchester, Somerset, and Worcester. The number of members does not
appear to have been large, but it included the names of gentlemen well
known and highly respected. The Convention adopted Resolutions which
declared, among other things, that the revolution on the part of
eleven States was without excuse or palliation, and that the redress
of actual or supposed wrongs in connection with the slavery question
formed no part of their views or purposes; that the people of this
State were unalterably determined to defend the Government of the
United States, and would support the Government in all legal and
constitutional measures which might be necessary to resist the
revolutionists; that the intimations made by the majority of the
Legislature at its late session--that the people were humiliated or
subjugated by the action of the Government--were gratuitous insults to
that people; that the dignity of the State of Maryland, involved in a
precise, persistent and effective recognition of all her rights,
privileges and immunities under the Constitution of the United States,
will be vindicated at all times and under all circumstances by those
of her sons who are sincere in their fealty to her and the Government
of the Union of which she is part, and to popular constitutional
liberty; that while they concurred with the present Executive of the
United States that the unity and integrity of the National Union must
be preserved, their view of the nature and true principles of the
Constitution, of the powers which it confers, and of the duties which
it enjoins, and the rights which it secures, as it relates to and
affects the question of slavery in many of the essential bearings, is
directly opposed to the views of the Executive; that they are fixed in
their conviction, amongst others, that a just comprehension of the
true principles of the Constitution forbid utterly the formation of
political parties on the foundation of the slavery question, and that
the Union men will oppose to the utmost of their ability all attempts
of the Federal Executive to commingle in any manner its peculiar views
on the slavery question with that of maintaining the just powers of
the Government.

These resolutions are important as showing the stand taken by a large
portion of the Union party of the State in regard to any interference,
as the result of the war or otherwise, by the General Government with
the provisions of the Constitution with regard to slavery.

After the writ of _habeas corpus_ had been thus suspended, martial
law, as a consequence, rapidly became all-powerful, and it continued
in force during the war. That law is by Judge Black, in his argument
before the Supreme Court in the case of _ex parte_ Milligan,[14] shown
to be simply the rule of irresponsible force. Law becomes helpless
before it. _Inter arma silent leges._

[Footnote 14: 4 Wallace Sup. Court R. 2.]

On May 25, 1862, Judge Carmichael, an honored magistrate, while
sitting in his court in Easton, was, by the provost marshal and his
deputies, assisted by a body of military sent from Baltimore, beaten,
and dragged bleeding from the bench, and then imprisoned, because he
had on a previous occasion delivered a charge to the grand jury
directing them to inquire into certain illegal acts and to indict the
offenders. His imprisonment in Forts McHenry, Lafayette, and Delaware,
lasted more than six months. On December 4, 1862, he was
unconditionally released, no trial having been granted him, nor any
charges made against him. On June 28, 1862, Judge Bartol, of the Court
of Appeals of Maryland, was arrested and confined in Fort McHenry. He
was released after a few days, without any charge being preferred
against him, or any explanation given.

Spies and informers abounded. A rigid supervision was established.
Disloyalty, so called, of any kind was a punishable offense. Rebel
colors, the red and white, were prohibited. They were not allowed to
appear in shop-windows or on children's garments, or anywhere that
might offend the Union sentiment. If a newspaper promulgated disloyal
sentiments, the paper was suppressed and the editor imprisoned. If a
clergyman was disloyal in prayer or sermon, or if he failed to utter a
prescribed prayer, he was liable to be treated in the same manner, and
was sometimes so treated. A learned and eloquent Lutheran clergyman
came to me for advice because he had been summoned before the provost
marshal for saying that a nation which incurred a heavy debt in the
prosecution of war laid violent hands on the harvests of the future;
but his offense was condoned, because it appeared that he had referred
to the "Thirty Years' War" and had made no direct reference to the
debt of the United States, and perhaps for a better reason--that he
had strong Republican friends among his congregation.

If horses and fodder, fences and timber, or houses and land, were
taken for the use of the Army, the owner was not entitled to
compensation unless he could prove that he was a loyal man; and the
proof was required to be furnished through some well-known loyal
person, who, of course, was usually paid for his services. Very soon
no one was allowed to vote unless he was a loyal man, and soldiers at
the polls assisted in settling the question of loyalty.

Nearly all who approved of the war regarded these things as an
inevitable military necessity; but those who disapproved deeply
resented them as unwarrantable violations of sacred constitutional
rights. The consequence was that friendships were dissolved, the ties
of blood severed, and an invisible but well-understood line divided
the people. The bitterness and even the common mention of these acts
have long since ceased, but the tradition survives and still continues
to be a factor, silent, but not without influence, in the politics of
the State.

History repeats itself. There were deeds done on both sides which
bring to mind the wars of England and Scotland and the border strife
between those countries. There were flittings to and fro, and
adventures and hairbreadth escapes innumerable. Soldiers returned to
visit their homes at the risk of their necks. Contraband of every
description, and letters and newspapers, found their way across the
border. The military lines were long and tortuous, and vulnerable
points were not hard to find, and trusty carriers were ready to go
anywhere for the love of adventure or the love of gain.

The women were as deeply interested as the men, and were less
apprehensive of personal consequences. In different parts of the city,
not excepting its stateliest square, where stands the marble column
from which the father of his country looked down, sadly as it were, on
a divided people, there might have been found, by the initiated,
groups of women who, with swift and skillful fingers, were fashioning
and making garments strangely various in shape and kind--some for
Northern prisons where captives were confined, some for destitute
homes beyond the Southern border, in which only women and children
were left, and some for Southern camps where ragged soldiers were
waiting to be clad. The work was carried on not without its risks;
but little cared the workers for that. Perhaps the sensation of danger
itself, and a spirit of resistance to an authority which they refused
to recognize, gave zest to their toil; nor did they always think it
necessary to inform the good man of the house in which they were
assembled either of their presence or of what was going on beneath his
roof.

The women who stood by the cause of the Union were not compelled to
hide their charitable deeds from the light of day. No need for them to
feed and clothe the soldiers of the Union, whose wants were amply
supplied by a bountiful Government; but with untiring zeal they
visited the military hospitals on missions of mercy, and when the
bloody fields of Antietam and Gettysburg were fought, both they and
their Southern sisters hastened, though not with a common purpose, to
the aid of the wounded and dying, the victims of civil strife and
children of a common country.




CHAPTER VIII.

     GENERAL BANKS IN COMMAND. -- MARSHAL KANE ARRESTED. -- POLICE
     COMMISSIONERS SUPERSEDED. -- RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY THE GENERAL
     ASSEMBLY. -- POLICE COMMISSIONERS ARRESTED. -- MEMORIAL ADDRESSED
     BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO CONGRESS. -- GENERAL DIX IN
     COMMAND. -- ARREST OF MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, THE MAYOR
     AND OTHERS. -- RELEASE OF PRISONERS. -- COLONEL DIMICK.


On the 10th of June, 1861, Major-General Nathaniel P. Banks, of
Massachusetts, was appointed in the place of General Cadwallader to
the command of the Department of Annapolis, with headquarters at
Baltimore. On the 27th of June, General Banks arrested Marshal Kane
and confined him in Fort McHenry. He then issued a proclamation
announcing that he had superseded Marshal Kane and the commissioners
of police, and that he had appointed Colonel John R. Kenly, of the
First Regiment of Maryland Volunteers, provost marshal, with the aid
and assistance of the subordinate officers of the police department.

The police commissioners, including the mayor, offered no resistance,
but adopted and published a resolution declaring that, in the opinion
of the board, the forcible suspension of their functions suspended at
the same time the active operation of the police law and put the
officers and men off duty for the present, leaving them subject,
however, to the rules and regulations of the service as to their
personal conduct and deportment, and to the orders which the board
might see fit thereafter to issue, when the present illegal
suspension of their functions should be removed.

The Legislature of Maryland, at its adjourned session on the 22d of
June, passed a series of resolutions declaring that the
unconstitutional and arbitrary proceedings of the Federal Executive
had not been confined to the violation of the personal rights and
liberties of the citizens of Maryland, but had been so extended that
the property of no man was safe, the sanctity of no dwelling was
respected, and that the sacredness of private correspondence no longer
existed; that the Senate and House of Delegates of Maryland felt it
due to her dignity and independence that history should not record the
overthrow of public freedom for an instant within her borders, without
recording likewise the indignant expression of her resentment and
remonstrance, and they accordingly protested against the oppressive
and tyrannical assertion and exercise of military jurisdiction within
the limits of Maryland over the persons and property of her citizens
by the Government of the United States, and solemnly declared the same
to be subversive of the most sacred guarantees of the Constitution,
and in flagrant violation of the fundamental and most cherished
principles of American free government.

On the first of July, the police commissioners were arrested and
imprisoned by order of General Banks, on the ground, as he alleged in
a proclamation, that the commissioners had refused to obey his
decrees, or to recognize his appointees, and that they continued to
hold the police force for some purpose not known to the Government.

General Banks does not say what authority he had to make decrees, or
what the decrees were which the commissioners had refused to obey; and
as on the 27th of June he had imprisoned the marshal of police, and
had put a provost marshal in his place, retaining only the subordinate
officers of the police department, and had appointed instead of the
men another body of police, all under the control of the provost
marshal; and as the commissioners had no right to discharge the police
force established by a law of the State, and were left with no duties
in relation to the police which they could perform, it is very plain
that, whatever motive General Banks may have had for the arrest and
imprisonment of the commissioners, it is not stated in his
proclamation.

One of the commissioners, Charles D. Hinks, was soon released in
consequence of failing health.

On the day of the arrest of the police commissioners the city was
occupied by troops, who in large detachments, infantry and artillery,
took up positions in Monument Square, Exchange Place, at Camden-street
Station and other points, and they mounted guard and bivouacked in the
streets for more than a week.

On July 18th, the police commissioners presented to Congress a
memorial in which they protested very vigorously against their
unlawful arrest and imprisonment.

On the 23d day of July, 1861, the mayor and city council of Baltimore
addressed a memorial to the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States, in which, after describing the condition of affairs in
Baltimore, they respectfully, yet most earnestly, demanded, as matter
of right, that their city might be governed according to the
Constitution and laws of the United States and of the State of
Maryland, that the citizens might be secure in their persons, houses,
papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures; that
they should not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due
process of law; that the military should render obedience to the
civil authority; that the municipal laws should be respected, the
officers released from imprisonment and restored to the lawful
exercise of their functions, and that the police government
established by law should be no longer impeded by armed force to the
injury of peace and order. It is perhaps needless to add that the
memorial met with no favor.

On the 7th of August, 1861, the Legislature of the State, in a series
of resolutions, denounced these proceedings in all their parts,
pronouncing them, so far as they affected individuals, a gross and
unconstitutional abuse of power which nothing could palliate or
excuse, and, in their bearing upon the authority and constitutional
powers and privileges of the State herself, a revolutionary subversion
of the Federal compact.

The Legislature then adjourned, to meet on the 17th of September.

On the 24th of July, 1861, General Dix had been placed in command of
the Department, with his headquarters in Baltimore. On that day he
wrote from Fort McHenry to the Assistant Adjutant-General for
re-enforcement of the troops under his command. He said that there
ought to be ten thousand men at Baltimore and Annapolis, and that he
could not venture to respond for the quietude of the Department with a
smaller number. At Fort McHenry, as told by his biographer, he
exhibited to some ladies of secession proclivities an immense
columbiad, and informed them that it was pointed to Monument Square,
and if there was an uprising that this piece would be the first he
would fire. But the guns of Fort McHenry were not sufficient. He built
on the east of the city a very strong work, which he called Fort
Marshall, and he strengthened the earthwork on Federal Hill, in the
southern part, so that the city lay under the guns of three powerful
forts, with several smaller ones. Not satisfied with this, on the 15th
of September, 1862, General Dix, after he had been transferred to
another department, wrote to Major-General Halleck, then
Commander-in-Chief, advising that the ground on which the earthwork on
Federal Hill had been erected should be purchased at a cost of one
hundred thousand dollars, and that it should be permanently fortified
at an additional expense of $250,000. He was of opinion that although
the great body of the people were, as he described them, eminently
distinguished for their moral virtues, Baltimore had always contained
a mass of inflammable material, which would ignite on the slightest
provocation. He added that "Fort Federal Hill completely commanded the
city, and is capable, from its proximity to the principal business
quarters, of assailing any one without injury to the others. The hill
seems to have been placed there by Nature as a site for a permanent
citadel, and I beg to suggest whether a neglect to appropriate it to
its obvious design would not be an unpardonable dereliction of duty."

These views were perhaps extreme even for a major-general commanding
in Baltimore, especially as by this time the disorderly element which
infests all cities had gone over to the stronger side, and was engaged
in the pious work of persecuting rebels. General Halleck, even after
this solemn warning, left Federal Hill to the protection of its
earthwork.

The opinion which General Dix had of Baltimore extended, though in a
less degree, to a large portion of the State, and was shared, in part
at least, not only by the other military commanders, but by the
Government at Washington.

On the 11th of September, 1861, Simon Cameron, Secretary of War,
wrote the following letter to Major-General Banks, who was at this
time in command of a division in Maryland:

                                "WAR DEPARTMENT, _September 11, 1861_.

     "_General._--The passage of any act of secession by the
     Legislature of Maryland must be prevented. If necessary, all or
     any part of the members must be arrested. Exercise your own
     judgment as to the time and manner, but do the work effectively."

On the 12th of September, Major-General McClellan, Commander-in-Chief
of the Army of the Potomac, wrote a confidential letter to General
Banks reciting that "after full consultation with the President,
Secretary of State, War, etc., it has been decided to effect the
operation proposed for the 17th." The 17th was the day fixed for the
meeting of the General Assembly, and the operation to be performed was
the arrest of some thirty members of that body, and other persons
besides. Arrangements had been made to have a Government steamer at
Annapolis to receive the prisoners and convey them to their
destination. The plan was to be arranged with General Dix and Governor
Seward, and the letter closes with leaving this exceedingly important
affair to the tact and discretion of General Banks, and impressing on
him the absolute necessity of secrecy and success.

Accordingly, a number of the most prominent members of the
Legislature, myself, as mayor of Baltimore, and editors of newspapers,
and other citizens, were arrested at midnight. I was arrested at my
country home, near the Relay House on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad,
by four policemen and a guard of soldiers. The soldiers were placed in
both front and rear of the house, while the police rapped violently on
the front door. I had gone to bed, but was still awake, for I had some
apprehension of danger. I immediately arose, and opening my bed-room
window, asked the intruders what they wanted. They replied that they
wanted Mayor Brown. I asked who wanted him, and they answered, the
Government of the United States. I then inquired for their warrant,
but they had none. After a short time spent in preparation I took
leave of my wife and children, and closely guarded, walked down the
high hill on which the house stands to the foot, where a carriage was
waiting for me. The soldiers went no farther, but I was driven in
charge of the police seven miles to Baltimore and through the city to
Fort McHenry, where to my surprise I found myself a fellow-prisoner in
a company of friends and well-known citizens. We were imprisoned for
one night in Fort McHenry, next in Fort Monroe for about two weeks,
next in Fort Lafayette for about six weeks, and finally in Fort
Warren. Henry May, member of Congress from Baltimore, was arrested at
the same time, but was soon released.

Col. Scharf, in his "History of Maryland," Volume III, says: "It was
originally intended that they (the prisoners) should be confined in
the fort at the Dry Tortugas, but as there was no fit steamer in
Hampton Roads to make the voyage, the programme was changed."[15]

[Footnote 15: See also the "Chronicles of Baltimore" by the same
author.]

The apprehension that the Legislature intended to pass an act of
secession, as intimated by Secretary Cameron, was, in view of the
position in which the State was placed, and the whole condition of
affairs, so absurd that it is difficult to believe that he seriously
entertained it. The blow was no doubt, however, intended to strike
with terror the opponents of the war, and was one of the effective
means resorted to by the Government to obtain, as it soon did, entire
control of the State.

As the events of the 19th of April had occurred nearly five months
previously, and I was endeavoring to perform my duties as mayor, in
obedience to law, without giving offense to either the civil or
military authorities of the Government, the only apparent reason for
my arrest grew out of a difficulty in regard to the payment of the
police appointed by General Banks. In July a law had been passed by
Congress appropriating one hundred thousand dollars for the purpose of
such payment, but it was plain that a similar expenditure would not
long be tolerated by Congress. In this emergency an intimation came to
me indirectly from Secretary Seward, through a common acquaintance,
that I was expected to pay the Government police out of the funds
appropriated by law for the city police. I replied that any such
payment would be illegal and was not within my power.

Soon afterwards I received the following letter from General Dix,
which I insert, together with the correspondence which followed:

               "HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA,
                                 "BALTIMORE, MD., _September 8, 1861_.

     "TO HON. GEO. WM. BROWN, _Mayor of the City of Baltimore_.

     "_Sir_:--Reasons of state, which I deem imperative, demand that
     the payment of compensation to the members of the old city
     police, who were, by a resolution of the Board of Police
     Commissioners, dated the 27th of Jane last, declared 'off duty,'
     and whose places were filled in pursuance of an order of
     Major-General Banks of the same date, should cease. I therefore
     direct, by virtue of the authority vested in me as commanding
     officer of the military forces of the United States in Baltimore
     and its vicinity, that no further payment be made to them.

     "Independently of all other considerations, the continued
     compensation of a body of men who have been suspended in their
     functions by the order of the Government, is calculated to bring
     its authority into disrespect; and the extraction from the
     citizens of Baltimore by taxation, in a time of general
     depression and embarrassment, of a sum amounting to several
     hundred thousand dollars a year for the payment of nominal
     officials who render it no service, cannot fail by creating
     widespread dissatisfaction to disturb the quietude of the city,
     which I am most anxious to preserve.

     "I feel assured that the payment would have been voluntarily
     discontinued by yourself, as a violation of the principle on
     which all compensation is bestowed--as a remuneration for an
     equivalent service actually performed--had you not considered
     yourself bound by existing laws to make it.

     "This order will relieve you from the embarrassment, and I do not
     doubt that it will be complied with.

     "I am, very respectfully,
                            "Your obedient servant,
                                                         "JOHN A. DIX,
                                         "_Major-General Commanding_."


                     "MAYOR'S OFFICE, CITY HALL,
                                      "BALTIMORE, _September 5, 1861_.

     "Major-General JOHN A. DIX, _Baltimore, Md._

     "_Sir_:--I was not in town yesterday, and did not receive until
     this morning your letter of the 3d inst. ordering that no further
     payment be made to the members of the city police.

     "The payments have been made heretofore in pursuance of the laws
     of the State, under the advice of the City Counsellor, by the
     Register, the Comptroller and myself.

     "Without entering into a discussion of the considerations which
     you have deemed sufficient to justify this proceeding, I feel it
     to be my duty to enter my protest against this interference, by
     military authority, with the exercise of powers lawfully
     committed by the State of Maryland to the officers of the city
     corporation; but it is nevertheless not the intention of the city
     authorities to offer resistance to the order which you have
     issued, and I shall therefore give public notice to the officers
     and men of the city police that no further payments may be
     expected by them.

     "There is an arrearage of pay of two weeks due to the force, and
     the men have by the law and rules of the board been prevented
     from engaging in any other business or occupation. Most of them
     have families, who are entirely dependent for support on the pay
     received.

     "I do not understand your order as meaning to prohibit the
     payment of this arrearage, and shall therefore proceed to make
     it, unless prevented by your further order.

     "I am, very respectfully,
                            "Your obedient servant,
                                                      "GEO. WM. BROWN,
                                               "_Mayor of Baltimore_."


              "HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA,
                                 "BALTIMORE, MD., _September 9, 1861_.

     "HON. GEO. WM. BROWN, _Mayor of the City of Baltimore_.

     "_Sir_:--Your letter of the 5th inst. was duly received. I
     cannot, without acquiescing in the violation of a principle,
     assent to the payment of an arrearage to the members of the old
     city police, as suggested in the closing paragraph of your
     letter.

     "It was the intention of my letter to prohibit any payment to
     them subsequently to the day on which it was written.

     "You will please, therefore, to consider this as the 'further
     order' referred to by you.

     "I am, very respectfully,
                            "Your obedient servant,
                                                        "JOHN A. DIX,
                                         "_Major-General Commanding_."


                   "MAYOR'S OFFICE, CITY HALL,
                                     "BALTIMORE, _September 11, 1861_.

     "Major-General JOHN A. DIX, Baltimore.

     "_Sir_:--I did not come to town yesterday until the afternoon,
     and then ascertained that my letters had been sent out to my
     country residence, where, on my return last evening, I found
     yours of the 9th, in reply to mine of the 5th instant, awaiting
     me. It had been left at the mayor's office yesterday morning.

     "Before leaving the mayor's office, about three o'clock P. M. on
     the 9th instant, and not having received any reply from you, I
     had signed a check for the payment of arrears due the police, and
     the money was on the same day drawn out of the bank and handed
     over to the proper officers, and nearly the entire amount was by
     them paid to the police force before the receipt of your letter.

     "The suggestion in your letter as to the 'violation of a
     principle' requires me to add that I recognize in the action of
     the Government of the United States in the matter in question
     nothing but the assertion of superior force.

     "Out of regard to the great interests committed to my charge as
     chief magistrate of the city, I have yielded to that force, and
     do not feel it necessary to enter into any discussion of the
     principles upon which the Government sees fit to exercise it.

     "Very respectfully,
                       "Your obedient servant,
                                                      "GEO. WM. BROWN,
                                                            "_Mayor_."

The reasons which General Dix assigned for prohibiting me from paying
the arrearages due the police present a curious combination. First,
there were reasons of State; next, the respect due to the Government;
third, his concern for the taxpayers of Baltimore; fourth, the danger
to the quiet of the city which he apprehended might arise from the
payment; and, finally, there was a principle which he must protect
from violation, but what that principle was he did not state.

A striking commentary on these reasons was furnished on the 11th of
December, 1863, by a decision of the Court of Appeals of Maryland in
the case of the Mayor, etc., of Baltimore _vs._ Charles Howard and
others, reported in 20th Maryland Rep., p. 335. The question was
whether the interference by the Government of the United States with
the Board of Police and police force established by law in the city of
Baltimore was without authority of law and did in any manner affect or
impair the rights or invalidate the acts of the board. The court held
that, though the board was displaced by a force to which they yielded
and could not resist, their power and rights under their organization
were still preserved, and that they were amenable for any dereliction
of official duty, except in so far as they were excused by
uncontrollable events. And the court decided that Mr. Hinks, one of
the police commissioners, whose case was alone before the court, was
entitled to his salary, which had accrued after the board was so
displaced.

Subsequently, after the close of the war, the Legislature of the State
passed an act for the payment of all arrearages due to the men of the
police subsequent to their displacement by the Government of the
United States and until their discharge by the Government of the
State.

It will be perceived that General Dix delayed replying to my letter of
the 5th of September until the 9th; that his reply was not left at the
mayor's office until the tenth, and that in the meantime, on the
afternoon of the 9th, after waiting for his reply for four days, I
paid the arrears due the police, as I had good reason to suppose he
intended I should.

A friend of mine, a lawyer of Baltimore, and a pronounced Union man,
has, since then, informed me that General Dix showed him my letter of
the 5th before my arrest; that my friend asked him whether he had
replied to it, and the General replied he had not. My friend answered
that he thought a reply was due to me. From all this it does not seem
uncharitable to believe that the purpose of General Dix was to put me
in the false position of appearing to disobey his order and thus to
furnish an excuse for my imprisonment. This lasted until the 27th of
November, 1862, a short time after my term of office had expired, when
there was a sudden and unexpected release of all the State prisoners
in Fort Warren, where we were then confined.

On the 26th of November, 1862, Colonel Justin Dimick, commanding at
Fort Warren, received the following telegraphic order from the
Adjutant-General's Office, Washington: "The Secretary of War directs
that you release all the Maryland State prisoners, also any other
State prisoners that may be in your custody, and report to this
office."

In pursuance of this order, Colonel Dimick on the following day
released from Fort Warren the following State prisoners, without
imposing any condition upon them whatever: Severn Teackle Wallis,
Henry M. Warfield, William G. Harrison, T. Parkin Scott, ex-members of
the Maryland Legislature from Baltimore; George William Brown,
ex-Mayor of Baltimore; Charles Howard and William H. Gatchell,
ex-Police Commissioners; George P. Kane, ex-Marshal of Police; Frank
Key Howard, one of the editors of the Baltimore _Exchange_; Thomas W.
Hall, editor of the Baltimore _South_; Robert Hull, merchant, of
Baltimore; Dr. Charles Macgill, of Hagerstown; William H. Winder, of
Philadelphia; and B. L. Cutter, of Massachusetts.

General Wool, then in command in Baltimore, issued an order declaring
that thereafter no person should be arrested within the limits of the
Department except by his order, and in all such cases the charges
against the accused party were to be sworn to before a justice of the
peace.

As it was intimated that these gentlemen had entered into some
engagement as the condition of their release, Mr. Wallis, while in New
York on his return home, took occasion to address a letter on the
subject to the editor of the New York _World_, in which he said: "No
condition whatever was sought to be imposed, and none would have been
accepted, as the Secretary of War well knew. Speaking of my
fellow-prisoners from Maryland, I have a right to say that they
maintained to the last the principle which they asserted from the
first--namely, that, if charged with crime, they were entitled to be
charged, held and tried in due form of law and not otherwise; and
that, in the absence of lawful accusation and process, it was their
right to be discharged without terms or conditions of any sort, and
they would submit to none."

Many of our fellow-prisoners were from necessity not able to take this
stand. There were no charges against them, but there were imperative
duties which required their presence at home, and when the Government
at Washington adopted the policy of offering liberty to those who
would consent to take an oath of allegiance prepared for the occasion,
they had been compelled to accept it.

Before this, in December, 1861, the Government at Washington, on
application of friends, had granted me a parole for thirty days, that
I might attend to some important private business, and for that time I
stayed with kind relatives, under the terms of the parole, in Boston.

The following correspondence, which then took place, will show the
position which I maintained:

                                           "BOSTON, _January 4, 1862_.

     "MARSHAL KEYS, _Boston_.

     "_Sir_:--I called twice to see you during this week, and in your
     absence had an understanding with your deputy that I was to
     surrender myself to you this morning, on the expiration of my
     parole, in time to be conveyed to Fort Warren, and I have
     accordingly done so.

     "As you have not received any instructions from Washington in
     regard to the course to be pursued with me, I shall consider
     myself in your custody until you have had ample time to write to
     Washington and obtain a reply.

     "I desire it, however, to be expressly understood that no further
     extension of my parole is asked for, or would be accepted at this
     time.

     "It is my right and my wish to return to Baltimore, to resume the
     performance of my official and private duties.

     Respectfully,
                                                     "GEO. WM. BROWN."


                        "DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
                                       "WASHINGTON, _January 6, 1862_.

     "JOHN S. KEYS, Esq., U. S. Marshal, _Boston_.

     "_Sir_:--Your letter of the 4th inst., relative to George W.
     Brown, has been received.

     "In reply, I have to inform you that, if he desires it, you may
     extend his parole to the period of thirty days. If not, you will
     please recommit him to Fort Warren and report to this Department.

     "I am, sir, very respectfully,
                                 "Your obedient servant,
                                                        "F. W. SEWARD,
                                        "_Acting Secretary of State_."


                                          "BOSTON, _January 10, 1862_.

     "MARSHAL KEYS, _Boston_.

     "_Sir_:--In my note to you of the 4th inst. I stated that I did
     not desire a renewal of my parole, but that it was my right and
     wish to return to Baltimore, to resume the performance of my
     private and official duties.

     "My note was, in substance, as you informed me, forwarded to Hon.
     W. H. Seward, Secretary of State, in a letter from you to him.

     "In reply to your communication, F. W. Seward, Acting Secretary
     of State, wrote to you under date of the 6th inst. that 'you may
     extend the parole of George W. Brown if he desires it, but if
     not, you are directed to recommit him to Fort Warren.'

     "It was hardly necessary to give me the option of an extension of
     parole which I had previously declined, but the offer renders it
     proper for me to say that the parole was applied for by my
     friends, to enable me to attend to important private business,
     affecting the interests of others as well as myself; that the
     necessities growing out of this particular matter of business no
     longer exist, and that I cannot consistently with my ideas of
     propriety, by accepting a renewal of the parole, place myself in
     the position of seeming to acquiesce in a prolonged and illegal
     banishment from my home and duties.

     Respectfully,
                                                     "GEO. WM. BROWN."

On the 11th of January, 1862, I returned to Fort Warren, and on the
14th an offer was made to renew and extend my parole to ninety days
upon condition that I would not pass south of Hudson River. This offer
I declined. My term of office expired on the 12th of November, 1862,
and soon afterwards I was released, as I have just stated.

It is not my purpose to enter into an account of the trials and
hardships of prison-life in the crowded forts in which we were
successively confined under strict and sometimes very harsh military
rule, but it is due to the memory of the commander at Fort Warren,
Colonel Justin Dimick, that I should leave on record the warm feelings
of respect and friendship with which he was regarded by the prisoners
who knew him best, for the unvarying kindness and humanity with which
he performed the difficult and painful duties of his office. As far as
he was permitted to do so, he promoted the comfort and convenience of
all, and after the war was over and he had been advanced to the rank
of General, he came to Baltimore as the honored guest of one of his
former prisoners, and while there received the warm and hearty
greeting of others of his prisoners who still survived.




CHAPTER IX.

A PERSONAL CHAPTER.


I have now completed my task; but perhaps it will be expected that I
should clearly define my own position. I have no objection to do so.

Both from feeling and on principle I had always been opposed to
slavery--the result in part of the teaching and example of my parents,
and confirmed by my own reading and observation. In early manhood I
became prominent in defending the rights of the free colored people of
Maryland. In the year 1846 I was associated with a small number of
persons, of whom the Rev. William F. Brand, author of the "Life of
Bishop Whittingham," and myself, are the only survivors. The other
members of the association were Dr. Richard S. Steuart, for many years
President of the Maryland Hospital for the Insane, and himself a
slaveholder; Galloway Cheston, a merchant and afterwards President of
the Board of Trustees of the Johns Hopkins University; Frederick W.
Brune, my brother-in-law and law-partner; and Ramsay McHenry, planter.
We were preparing to initiate a movement tending to a gradual
emancipation within the State, but the growing hostility between the
North and the South rendered the plan wholly impracticable, and it was
abandoned.

My opinions, however, did not lead me into sympathy with the abolition
party. I knew that slavery had existed almost everywhere in the world,
and still existed in some places, and that, whatever might be its
character elsewhere, it was not in the Southern States "the sum of all
villainy." On the contrary, it had assisted materially in the
development of the race. Nowhere else, I believe, had negro slaves
been so well treated, on the whole, and had advanced so far in
civilization. They had learned the necessity, as well as the habit, of
labor; the importance--to some extent at least--of thrift; the
essential distinctions between right and wrong, and the inevitable
difference to the individual between right-doing and wrong-doing; the
duty of obedience to law; and--not least--some conception, dim though
it might be, of the inspiring teachings of the Christian religion.
They had learned also to cherish a feeling of respect and good will
towards the best portion of the white race, to whom they looked up,
and whom they imitated.

I refused to enlist in a crusade against slavery, not only on
constitutional grounds, but for other reasons. If the slaves were
freed and clothed with the right of suffrage, they would be incapable
of using it properly. If the suffrage were withheld, they would be
subjected to the oppression of the white race without the protection
afforded by their masters. Thus I could see no prospect of maintaining
harmony without a disastrous change in our form of government such as
prevailed after the war, in what is called the period of
reconstruction. If there were entire equality, and an intermingling of
the two races, it would not, as it seemed to me, be for the benefit of
either. I knew how strong are race prejudices, especially when
stimulated by competition and interest; how cruelly the foreigners, as
they were called, had been treated by the people in California, and
the Indians by our people everywhere; and how, in my own city,
citizens were for years ruthlessly deprived by the Know-Nothing party
of the right of suffrage, some because they were of foreign birth,
and some because they were Catholics. The problem of slavery was to me
a Gordian knot which I knew not how to untie, and which I dared not
attempt to cut with the sword. Such a severance involved the horrors
of civil war, with the wickedness and demoralization which were sure
to follow.

I was deeply attached to the Union from a feeling imbibed in early
childhood and constantly strengthened by knowledge and personal
experience. I did not believe in secession as a constitutional right,
and in Maryland there was no sufficient ground for revolution. It was
clearly for her interest to remain in the Union and to free her
slaves. An attempt to secede or to revolt would have been an act of
folly which I deprecated, although I did believe that she, in common
with the rest of the South, had constitutional rights in regard to
slavery which the North was not willing to respect.

It was my opinion that the Confederacy would prove to be a rope of
sand. I thought that the seceding States should have been allowed to
depart in peace, as General Scott advised, and I believed that
afterwards the necessities of the situation and their own interest
would induce them to return, severally, perhaps, to the old Union, but
with slavery peacefully abolished; for, in the nature of things, I
knew that slavery could not last forever.

Whether or not my opinions were sound and my hopes well founded, is
now a matter of little importance, even to myself, but they were at
least sincere and were not concealed.

There can be no true union in a Republic unless the parts are held
together by a feeling of common interest, and also of mutual respect.

That there is a common interest no reasonable person can doubt; but
this is not sufficient; and, happily, there is a solid basis for
mutual respect also.

I have already stated the grounds on which, from their point of view,
the Southern people were justified in their revolt, and even in the
midst of the war I recognized what the South is gradually coming to
recognize--that the grounds on which the Northern people waged
war--love of the Union and hatred of slavery--were also entitled to
respect.

I believe that the results achieved--namely, the preservation of the
Union and the abolition of slavery--are worth all they have cost.

And yet I feel that I am living in a different land from that in which
I was born, and under a different Constitution, and that new perils
have arisen sufficient to cause great anxiety. Some of these are the
consequences of the war, and some are due to other causes. But every
generation must encounter its own trials, and should extract benefit
from them if it can. The grave problems growing out of emancipation
seem to have found a solution in an improving education of the whole
people. Perhaps education is the true means of escape from the other
perils to which I have alluded.

Let me state them as they appear to me to exist.

Vast fortunes, which astonish the world, have suddenly been acquired,
very many by methods of more than doubtful honesty, while the fortunes
themselves are so used as to benefit neither the possessors nor the
country.

Republican simplicity has ceased to be a reality, except where it
exists as a survival in rural districts, and is hardly now mentioned
even as a phrase. It has been superseded by republican luxury and
ostentation. The mass of the people, who cannot afford to indulge in
either, are sorely tempted to covet both.

The individual man does not rely, as he formerly did, on his own
strength and manhood. Organization for a common purpose is resorted to
wherever organization is possible. Combinations of capital or of
labor, ruled by a few individuals, bestride the land with immense
power both for good and evil. In these combinations the individual
counts for little, and is but little concerned about his own moral
responsibility.

When De Tocqueville, in 1838, wrote his remarkable book on Democracy
in America, he expressed his surprise to observe how every public
question was submitted to the decision of the people, and that, when
the people had decided, the question was settled. Now politicians care
little about the opinions of the people, because the people care
little about opinions. Bosses have come into existence to ply their
vile trade of office-brokerage. Rings are formed in which the bosses
are masters and the voters their henchmen. Formerly decent people
could not be bought either with money or offices. Political parties
have always some honest foundation, but rings are factions like those
of Rome in her decline, having no foundation but public plunder.

Communism, socialism, and labor strikes have taken the place of
slavery agitation. Many people have come to believe that this is a
paternal Government from which they have a right to ask for favors,
and not a Republic in which all are equal. Hence States, cities,
corporations, individuals, and especially certain favored classes,
have no scruple in getting money somehow or other, directly or
indirectly, out of the purse of the Nation, as if the Nation had
either purse or property which does not belong to the people, for the
benefit of the whole people, without favor or partiality towards any.

In many ways there is a dangerous tendency towards the centralization
of power in the National Government, with little opposition on the
part of the people.

Paper money is held by the Supreme Court to be a lawful substitute for
gold and silver coin, partly on the ground that this is the
prerogative of European governments.[16] This is strange
constitutional doctrine to those who were brought up in the school of
Marshall, Story, and Chancellor Kent.

[Footnote 16: Legal Tender Case, Vol. 110 U. S. Reports, p. 421.]

The administration of cities has grown more and more extravagant and
corrupt, thus leading to the creation of immense debts which oppress
the people and threaten to become unmanageable.

The national Congress, instead of faithfully administering its trust,
has become reckless and wasteful of the public money.

But, notwithstanding all this, I rejoice to believe that there is a
reserve of power in the American people which has never yet failed to
redress great wrongs when they have come to be fully recognized and
understood.

A striking instance of this is to be found in the temperance movement,
which, extreme as it may be in some respects, shows that the
conscience of the entire country is aroused on a subject of vast
difficulty and importance.

And other auspicious signs exist, the chief of which I think are that
a new zeal is manifested in the cause of education; that people of all
creeds come together as they never did before to help in good works;
that an independent press, bent on enlightening, not deceiving, the
people, is making itself heard and respected; and that younger men,
who represent the best hopes and aspirations of the time, are pressing
forward to take the place of the politicians of a different school,
who represent chiefly their own selfish interests, or else a period of
hate and discord which has passed away forever.

These considerations give me hope and confidence in the country as it
exists to-day.

Baltimore is the place of my birth, of my home, and of my affections.
No one could be bound to his native city by ties stronger than mine.
Perhaps, in view of the incidents of the past, as detailed in this
volume, I may be permitted to express to the good people of Baltimore
my sincere and profound gratitude for the generous and unsolicited
confidence which, on different occasions, they have reposed in me, and
for their good will and kind feeling, which have never been withdrawn
during the years, now not a few, which I have spent in their service.




APPENDIX I.


The following account of the alleged conspiracy to assassinate Abraham
Lincoln on his journey to Baltimore is taken from the "Life of Abraham
Lincoln," by Ward H. Lamon, pp. 511-526:

"Whilst Mr. Lincoln, in the midst of his suite and attendants, was
being borne in triumph through the streets of Philadelphia, and a
countless multitude of people were shouting themselves hoarse, and
jostling and crushing each other around his carriage-wheels, Mr.
Felton, the President of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore
Railway, was engaged with a private detective discussing the details
of an alleged conspiracy to murder him at Baltimore. Some months
before, Mr. Felton, apprehending danger to the bridges along his line,
had taken this man into his pay and sent him to Baltimore to spy out
and report any plot that might be found for their destruction. Taking
with him a couple of other men and a woman, the detective went about
his business with the zeal which necessarily marks his peculiar
profession. He set up as a stock-broker, under an assumed name, opened
an office, and became a vehement secessionist. His agents were
instructed to act with the duplicity which such men generally use; to
be rabid on the subject of 'Southern Rights'; to suggest all manner of
crimes in vindication of them; and if, by these arts, corresponding
sentiments should be elicited from their victims, the 'job' might be
considered as prospering. Of course they readily found out what
everybody else knew--that Maryland was in a state of great alarm; that
her people were forming military associations, and that Governor Hicks
was doing his utmost to furnish them with arms, on condition that the
arms, in case of need, should be turned against the Federal
Government. Whether they detected any plan to burn bridges or not, the
chief detective does not relate; but it appears that he soon deserted
that inquiry and got, or pretended to get, upon a scent that promised
a heavier reward. Being intensely ambitious to shine in the
professional way, and something of a politician besides, it struck him
that it would be a particularly fine thing to discover a dreadful plot
to assassinate the President-elect, and he discovered it accordingly.
It was easy to get that far; to furnish tangible proofs of an
imaginary conspiracy was a more difficult matter. But Baltimore was
seething with political excitement; numerous strangers from the far
South crowded its hotels and boarding-houses; great numbers of
mechanics and laborers out of employment encumbered its streets; and
everywhere politicians, merchants, mechanics, laborers and loafers
were engaged in heated discussions about the anticipated war, and the
probability of Northern troops being marched through Maryland to
slaughter and pillage beyond the Potomac. It would seem like an easy
thing to beguile a few individuals of this angry and excited multitude
into the expression of some criminal desire; and the opportunity was
not wholly lost, although the limited success of the detective under
such favorable circumstances is absolutely wonderful. He put his
'shadows' upon several persons whom it suited his pleasure to suspect,
and the 'shadows' pursued their work with the keen zest and the cool
treachery of their kind. They reported daily to their chief in
writing, as he reported in turn to his employer. These documents are
neither edifying nor useful: they prove nothing but the baseness of
the vocation which gave them existence. They were furnished to Mr.
Herndon in full, under the impression that partisan feeling had
extinguished in him the love of truth and the obligations of candor,
as it had in many writers who preceded him on the same subject-matter.
They have been carefully and thoroughly read, analyzed, examined and
compared, with an earnest and conscientious desire to discover the
truth, if, perchance, any trace of truth might be in them. The process
of investigation began with a strong bias in favor of the conclusion
at which the detective had arrived. For ten years the author
implicitly believed in the reality of the atrocious plot which these
spies were supposed to have detected and thwarted; and for ten years
he had pleased himself with the reflection that he also had done
something to defeat the bloody purpose of the assassins. It was a
conviction which could scarcely have been overthrown by evidence less
powerful than the detective's weak and contradictory account of his
own case. In that account there is literally nothing to sustain the
accusation, and much to rebut it. It is perfectly manifest that there
was no conspiracy--no conspiracy of a hundred, of fifty, of twenty, of
three--no definite purpose in the heart of even one man to murder Mr.
Lincoln at Baltimore.

"The reports are all in the form of personal narratives, and for the
most relate when the spies went to bed, when they rose, where they
ate, what saloons and brothels they visited, and what blackguards they
met and 'drinked' with. One of them shadowed a loud-mouthed drinking
fellow named Luckett, and another, a poor scapegrace and braggart
named Hilliard. These wretches 'drinked' and talked a great deal, hung
about bars, haunted disreputable houses, were constantly half drunk,
and easily excited to use big and threatening words by the faithless
protestations and cunning management of the spies. Thus Hilliard was
made to say that he thought a man who should act the part of Brutus in
these times would deserve well of his country; and Luckett was induced
to declare that he knew a man who would kill Lincoln. At length the
great arch-conspirator--the Brutus, the Orsini of the New World, to
whom Luckett and Hilliard, the 'national volunteers,' and all such,
were as mere puppets--condescended to reveal himself in the most
obliging and confiding manner. He made no mystery of his cruel and
desperate scheme. He did not guard it as a dangerous secret, or choose
his confidants with the circumspection which political criminals, and
especially assassins, have generally thought proper to observe. Very
many persons knew what he was about, and levied on their friends for
small sums--five, ten and twenty dollars--to further the Captain's
plan. Even Luckett was deep enough in the awful plot to raise money
for it; and when he took one of the spies to a public bar-room and
introduced him to the 'Captain,' the latter sat down and talked it all
over without the slightest reserve. When was there ever before such a
loud-mouthed conspirator, such a trustful and innocent assassin! His
name was Ferrandini, his occupation that of a barber, his place of
business beneath Barnum's Hotel, where the sign of the bloodthirsty
villain still invites the unsuspecting public to come in for a shave.

"'Mr. Luckett,' so the spy relates, 'said that he was not going home
this evening; and if I would meet him at Barr's saloon, on South
street, he would introduce me to Ferrandini. This was unexpected to
me; but I determined to take the chances, and agreed to meet Mr.
Luckett at the place named at 7 P. M. Mr. Luckett left about 2.30 P.
M., and I went to dinner.

"'I was at the office in the afternoon in hopes that Mr. Felton might
call, but he did not; and at 6.15 P. M. I went to supper. After supper
I went to Barr's saloon, and found Mr. Luckett and several other
gentlemen there. He asked me to drink, and introduced me to Captain
Ferrandini and Captain Turner. He eulogized me very highly as a
neighbor of his, and told Ferrandini that I was the gentleman who had
given the twenty-five dollars he (Luckett) had given to Ferrandini.

"'The conversation at once got into politics; and Ferrandini, who is a
fine-looking, intelligent-appearing person, became very excited. He
shows the Italian in, I think, a very marked degree; and, although
excited, yet was cooler than what I had believed was the general
characteristic of Italians. He has lived South for many years, and is
thoroughly imbued with the idea that the South must rule; that they
(Southerners) have been outraged in their rights by the election of
Lincoln, and freely justified resorting to any means to prevent
Lincoln from taking his seat; and, as he spoke, his eyes fairly glared
and glistened, and his whole frame quivered; but he was fully
conscious of all he was doing. He is a man well calculated for
controlling and directing the ardent-minded; he is an enthusiast, and
believes that, to use his own words, "murder of any kind is
justifiable and right to save the rights of the Southern people." In
all his views he was ably seconded by Captain Turner.

"'Captain Turner is an American; but although very much of a
gentleman, and possessing warm Southern feelings, he is not by any
means so dangerous a man as Ferrandini, as his ability for exciting
others is less powerful; but that he is a bold and proud man there is
no doubt, as also that he is entirely under the control of Ferrandini.
In fact, he could not be otherwise, for even I myself felt the
influence of this man's strange power; and, wrong though I knew him to
be, I felt strangely unable to keep my mind balanced against him.

"'Ferrandini said, "Never, never, shall Lincoln be President!" His
life (Ferrandini's) was of no consequence; he was willing to give it
up for Lincoln's; he would sell it for that abolitionist's; and as
Orsini had given his life for Italy, so was he (Ferrandini) ready to
die for his country and the rights of the South; and said Ferrandini,
turning to Captain Turner, "We shall all die together: we shall show
the North that we fear them not. Every man, Captain," said he, "will
on that day prove himself a hero. The first shot fired, the main
traitor (Lincoln) dead, and all Maryland will be with us, and the
South shall be free; and the North must then be ours. Mr. Hutchins,"
said Ferrandini, "if I alone must do it, I shall: Lincoln shall die in
this city."

"'Whilst we were thus talking, we (Mr. Luckett, Turner, Ferrandini and
myself) were alone in one corner of the bar-room, and, while talking,
two strangers had got pretty near us. Mr. Luckett called Ferrandini's
attention to this, and intimated that they were listening; and we went
up to the bar, drinked again at my expense, and again retired to
another part of the room, at Ferrandini's request, to see if the
strangers would again follow us. Whether by accident or design, they
again got near us; but of course we were not talking of any matter of
consequence. Ferrandini said he suspected they were spies, and
suggested that he had to attend a secret meeting, and was apprehensive
that the two strangers might follow him; and, at Mr. Luckett's
request, I remained with him (Luckett) to watch the movements of the
strangers. I assured Ferrandini that if they would attempt to follow
him, we would whip them.

"'Ferrandini and Turner left to attend the meeting, and, anxious as I
was to follow them myself, I was obliged to remain with Mr. Luckett to
watch the strangers, which we did for about fifteen minutes, when Mr.
Luckett said that he should go to a friend's to stay over night, and I
left for my hotel, arriving there at about 9 P. M., and soon retired.'

"It is in a secret communication between hireling spies and paid
informers that these ferocious sentiments are attributed to the poor
knight of the soap-pot. No disinterested person would believe the
story upon such evidence; and it will appear hereafter that even the
detective felt that it was too weak to mention among his strong
points, at that decisive moment when he revealed all he knew to the
President and his friends. It is probably a mere fiction. If it had
had any foundation in fact, we are inclined to believe that the
sprightly and eloquent barber would have dangled at a rope's end long
since. He would hardly have been left to shave and plot in peace,
while the members of the Legislature, the Police Marshal, and numerous
private gentlemen, were locked up in Federal prisons. When Mr. Lincoln
was actually slain, four years later, and the cupidity of the
detectives was excited by enormous rewards, Ferrandini was totally
unmolested. But even if Ferrandini really said all that is here
imputed to him, he did no more than many others around him were doing
at the same time. He drank and talked, and made swelling speeches; but
he never took, nor seriously thought of taking, the first step toward
the frightful tragedy he is said to have contemplated.

"The detectives are cautious not to include in the supposed plot to
murder any person of eminence, power, or influence. Their game is all
of the smaller sort, and, as they conceived, easily taken--witless
vagabonds like Hilliard and Luckett, and a barber, whose calling
indicates his character and associations.[17] They had no fault to
find with the Governor of the State; he was rather a lively trimmer,
to be sure, and very anxious to turn up at last on the winning side;
but it was manifestly impossible that one in such an exalted station
could meditate murder. Yet, if they had pushed their inquiries with an
honest desire to get at the truth, they might have found much stronger
evidence against the Governor than that which they pretend to have
found against the barber. In the Governor's case the evidence is
documentary, written, authentic--over his own hand, clear and
conclusive as pen and ink could make it. As early as the previous
November, Governor Hicks had written the following letter; and,
notwithstanding its treasonable and murderous import, the writer
became conspicuously loyal before spring, and lived to reap splendid
rewards and high honors, under the auspices of the Federal Government,
as the most patriotic and devoted Union man in Maryland. The person to
whom the letter was addressed was equally fortunate; and, instead of
drawing out his comrades in the field to 'kill Lincoln and his men,'
he was sent to Congress by power exerted from Washington at a time
when the administration selected the representatives of Maryland, and
performed all his duties right loyally and acceptably. Shall one be
taken and another left? Shall Hicks go to the Senate and Webster to
Congress, while the poor barber is held to the silly words which he
is alleged to have sputtered out between drinks in a low groggery,
under the blandishments and encouragements of an eager spy, itching
for his reward?

[Footnote 17: Mr. Ferrandini, now in advanced years, still lives in
Baltimore, and declares the charge of conspiracy to be wholly absurd
and fictitious, and those who know him will, I think, believe that he
is an unlikely person to be engaged in such a plot.]

                "'STATE OF MARYLAND,
                          "'EXECUTIVE CHAMBER,
                                      "'ANNAPOLIS, _November 9, 1860_.
     "'Hon. E. H. WEBSTER.

     "'_My Dear Sir_:--I have pleasure in acknowledging receipt of
     your favor introducing a very clever gentleman to my acquaintance
     (though a Demo'). I regret to say that we have, at this time, no
     arms on hand to distribute, but assure you at the earliest
     possible moment your company shall have arms; they have complied
     with all required on their part. We have some delay, in
     consequence of contracts with Georgia and Alabama ahead of us. We
     expect at an early day an additional supply, and of first
     received your people shall be furnished. Will they be good men to
     send out to kill Lincoln and his men? If not, suppose the arms
     would be better sent South.

     "'How does late election sit with you? 'Tis too bad. Harford
     nothing to reproach herself for.

                             "'Your obedient servant,
                                                    "'THOS. H. HICKS.'

"With the Presidential party was Hon. Norman B. Judd; he was supposed
to exercise unbounded influence over the new President; and with him,
therefore, the detective opened communications. At various places
along the route Mr. Judd was given vague hints of the impending
danger, accompanied by the usual assurances of the skill and activity
of the patriots who were perilling their lives in a rebel city to save
that of the Chief Magistrate. When he reached New York, he was met by
the woman who had originally gone with the other spies to Baltimore.
She had urgent messages from her chief--messages that disturbed Mr.
Judd exceedingly. The detective was anxious to meet Mr. Judd and the
President, and a meeting was accordingly arranged to take place at
Philadelphia.

"Mr. Lincoln reached Philadelphia on the afternoon of the 21st. The
detective had arrived in the morning, and improved the interval to
impress and enlist Mr. Felton. In the evening he got Mr. Judd and Mr.
Felton into his room at the St. Louis Hotel, and told them all he had
learned. He dwelt at large on the fierce temper of the Baltimore
secessionists; on the loose talk he had heard about 'fireballs or
hand-grenades'; on a 'privateer' said to be moored somewhere in the
bay; on the organization called National Volunteers; on the fact that,
eavesdropping at Barnum's Hotel, he had overheard Marshal Kane
intimate that he would not supply a police force on some undefined
occasion, but what the occasion was he did not know. He made much of
his miserable victim, Hilliard, whom he held up as a perfect type of
the class from which danger was to be apprehended; but concerning
"Captain" Ferrandini and his threats, he said, according to his own
account, not a single word. He had opened his case, his whole case,
and stated it as strongly as he could. Mr. Judd was very much
startled, and was sure that it would be extremely imprudent for Mr.
Lincoln to pass through Baltimore in open daylight, according to the
published programme. But he thought the detective ought to see the
President himself; and, as it was wearing toward nine o'clock, there
was no time to lose. It was agreed that the part taken by the
detective and Mr. Felton should be kept secret from every one but the
President. Mr. Sanford, President of the American Telegraph Company,
had also been co-operating in the business, and the same stipulation
was made with regard to him.

"Mr. Judd went to his own room at the Continental, and the detective
followed. The crowd in the hotel was very dense, and it took some time
to get a message to Mr. Lincoln. But it finally reached him, and he
responded in person. Mr. Judd introduced the detective, and the latter
told his story over again, with a single variation: this time he
mentioned the name of Ferrandini along with Hilliard's, but gave no
more prominence to one than to the other.

"Mr. Judd and the detective wanted Lincoln to leave for Washington
that night. This he flatly refused to do. He had engagements with the
people, he said, to raise a flag over Independence Hall in the
morning, and to exhibit himself at Harrisburg in the afternoon, and
these engagements he would not break in any event. But he would raise
the flag, go to Harrisburg, 'get away quietly' in the evening, and
permit himself to be carried to Washington in the way they thought
best. Even this, however, he conceded with great reluctance. He
condescended to cross-examine the detective on some parts of his
narrative, but at no time did he seem in the least degree alarmed. He
was earnestly requested not to communicate the change of plan to any
member of his party except Mr. Judd, nor permit even a suspicion of it
to cross the mind of another. To this he replied that he would be
compelled to tell Mrs. Lincoln, 'and he thought it likely that she
would insist upon W. H. Lamon going with him; but, aside from that, no
one should know.'

"In the meantime, Mr. Seward had also discovered the conspiracy. He
dispatched his son to Philadelphia to warn the President-elect of the
terrible plot into whose meshes he was about to run. Mr. Lincoln
turned him over to Judd, and Judd told him they already knew all about
it. He went away with just enough information to enable his father to
anticipate the exact moment of Mr. Lincoln's surreptitious arrival in
Washington.

"Early on the morning of the 22d, Mr. Lincoln raised the flag over
Independence Hall, and departed for Harrisburg. On the way Mr. Judd
'gave him a full and precise detail of the arrangements that had been
made' the previous night. After the conference with the detective, Mr.
Sanford, Colonel Scott, Mr. Felton, railroad and telegraph officials,
had been sent for, and came to Mr. Judd's room. They occupied nearly
the whole of the night in perfecting the plan. It was finally
understood that about six o'clock the next evening Mr. Lincoln should
slip away from the Jones Hotel, at Harrisburg, in company with a
single member of his party. A special car and engine would be provided
for him on the track outside the depot. All other trains on the road
would be 'side-tracked' until this one had passed. Mr. Sanford would
forward skilled 'telegraph-climbers,' and see that all the wires
leading out of Harrisburg were cut at six o'clock, and kept down until
it was known that Mr. Lincoln had reached Washington in safety. The
detective would meet Mr. Lincoln at the West Philadelphia Depot with a
carriage, and conduct him by a circuitous route to the Philadelphia,
Wilmington and Baltimore Depot. Berths for four would be pre-engaged
in the sleeping-car attached to the regular midnight train for
Baltimore. This train Mr. Felton would cause to be detained until the
conductor should receive a package, containing important 'Government
dispatches,' addressed to 'E. J. Allen, Willard's Hotel, Washington.'
This package was made up of old newspapers, carefully wrapped and
sealed, and delivered to the detective to be used as soon as Mr.
Lincoln was lodged in the car. Mr. Lincoln approved of the plan, and
signified his readiness to acquiesce. Then Mr. Judd, forgetting the
secrecy which the spy had so impressively enjoined, told Mr. Lincoln
that the step he was about to take was one of such transcendent
importance that he thought 'it should be communicated to the other
gentlemen of the party.' Mr. Lincoln said, 'You can do as you like
about that.' Mr. Judd now changed his seat; and Mr. Nicolay, whose
suspicions seem to have been aroused by this mysterious conference,
sat down beside him and said: 'Judd, there is something _up_. What is
it, if it is proper that I should know?' 'George,' answered Judd,
'there is no necessity for your knowing it. One man can keep a matter
better than two.'

"Arrived at Harrisburg, and the public ceremonies and speechmaking
over, Mr. Lincoln retired to a private parlor in the Jones House, and
Mr. Judd summoned to meet him Judge Davis, Colonel Lamon, Colonel
Sumner, Major Hunter and Captain Pope. The three latter were officers
of the regular army, and had joined the party after it had left
Springfield. Judd began the conference by stating the alleged fact of
the Baltimore conspiracy, how it was detected, and how it was proposed
to thwart it by a midnight expedition to Washington by way of
Philadelphia. It was a great surprise to most of those assembled.
Colonel Sumner was the first to break silence. 'That proceeding,' said
he, 'will be a damned piece of cowardice.' Mr. Judd considered this a
'pointed hit,' but replied that 'that view of the case had already
been presented to Mr. Lincoln.' Then there was a general interchange
of opinions, which Sumner interrupted by saying, 'I'll get a squad of
cavalry, sir, and _cut_ our way to Washington, sir!' 'Probably before
that day comes,' said Mr. Judd, 'the inauguration-day will have
passed. It is important that Mr. Lincoln should be in Washington that
day.' Thus far Judge Davis had expressed no opinion, but 'had put
various questions to test the truthfulness of the story.' He now
turned to Mr. Lincoln and said, 'You personally heard the detective's
story. You have heard this discussion. What is your judgment in the
matter?' 'I have listened,' answered Mr. Lincoln, 'to this discussion
with interest. I see no reason, no good reason, to change the
programme, and I am for carrying it out as arranged by Judd.' There
was no longer any dissent as to the plan itself; but one question
still remained to be disposed of. Who should accompany the President
on his perilous ride? Mr. Judd again took the lead, declaring that he
and Mr. Lincoln had previously determined that but one man ought to
go, and that Colonel Lamon had been selected as the proper person. To
this Sumner violently demurred. '_I_ have undertaken,' he exclaimed,
'to see Mr. Lincoln to Washington.'

"Mr. Lincoln was hastily dining when a close carriage was brought to
the side door of the hotel. He was called, hurried to his room,
changed his coat and hat, and passed rapidly through the hall and out
of the door. As he was stepping into the carriage, it became manifest
that Sumner was determined to get in also. 'Hurry with him,' whispered
Judd to Lamon, and at the same time, placing his hand on Sumner's
shoulder, said aloud, 'One moment, Colonel!' Sumner turned around, and
in that moment the carriage drove rapidly away. 'A madder man,' says
Mr. Judd, 'you never saw.'

"Mr. Lincoln and Colonel Lamon got on board the car without discovery
or mishap. Besides themselves, there was no one in or about the car
but Mr. Lewis, General Superintendent of the Pennsylvania Central
Railroad, and Mr. Franciscus, superintendent of the division over
which they were about to pass. As Mr. Lincoln's dress on this occasion
has been much discussed, it may be as well to state that he wore a
soft, light felt hat, drawn down over his face when it seemed
necessary or convenient, and a shawl thrown over his shoulders, and
pulled up to assist in disguising his features when passing to and
from the carriage. This was all there was of the 'Scotch cap and
cloak,' so widely celebrated in the political literature of the day.

"At ten o'clock they reached Philadelphia, and were met by the
detective and one Mr. Kinney, an under official of the Philadelphia,
Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad. Lewis and Franciscus bade Mr.
Lincoln adieu. Mr. Lincoln, Colonel Lamon and the detective seated
themselves in a carriage which stood in waiting, and Mr. Kinney got
upon the box with the driver. It was a full hour and a half before the
Baltimore train was to start, and Mr. Kinney found it necessary 'to
consume the time by driving northward in search of some imaginary
person.'

"On the way through Philadelphia, Mr. Lincoln told his companions
about the message he had received from Mr. Seward. This new discovery
was infinitely more appalling than the other. Mr. Seward had been
informed 'that about _fifteen thousand men_ were organized to prevent
his (Lincoln's) passage through Baltimore, and that arrangements were
made by these parties to _blow up the railroad track, fire the
train_,' etc. In view of these unpleasant circumstances, Mr. Seward
recommended a change of route. Here was a plot big enough to swallow
up the little one, which we are to regard as the peculiar property of
Mr. Felton's detective. Hilliard, Ferrandini and Luckett disappear
among the 'fifteen thousand,' and their maudlin and impotent twaddle
about the 'abolition tyrant' looks very insignificant beside the
bloody massacre, conflagration and explosion now foreshadowed.

"As the moment for the departure of the Baltimore train drew near,
the carriage paused in the dark shadows of the depot building. It was
not considered prudent to approach the entrance. The spy passed in
first and was followed by Mr. Lincoln and Colonel Lamon. An agent of
the former directed them to the sleeping-car, which they entered by
the rear door. Mr. Kinney ran forward and delivered to the conductor
the important package prepared for the purpose; and in three minutes
the train was in motion. The tickets for the whole party had been
procured beforehand. Their berths were ready, but had only been
preserved from invasion by the statement that they were retained for a
sick man and his attendants. The business had been managed very
adroitly by the female spy, who had accompanied her employer from
Baltimore to Philadelphia to assist him in this, the most delicate and
important affair of his life. Mr. Lincoln got into his bed
immediately, and the curtains were drawn together. When the conductor
came around, the detective handed him the 'sick man's' ticket, and the
rest of the party lay down also. None of 'our party appeared to be
sleepy,' says the detective, 'but we all lay quiet, and nothing of
importance transpired.'... During the night Mr. Lincoln indulged in a
joke or two in an undertone; but, with that exception, the two
sections occupied by them were perfectly silent. The detective said he
had men stationed at various places along the road to let him know 'if
all was right,' and he rose and went to the platform occasionally to
observe their signals, but returned each time with a favorable report.

"At thirty minutes after three the train reached Baltimore. One of the
spy's assistants came on board and informed him in a whisper that all
was right. The woman [the female detective] got out of the car. Mr.
Lincoln lay close in his berth, and in a few moments the car was
being slowly drawn through the quiet streets of the city toward the
Washington Depot. There again there was another pause, but no sound
more alarming than the noise of shifting cars and engines. The
passengers, tucked away on their narrow shelves, dozed on as
peacefully as if Mr. Lincoln had never been born....

"In due time the train sped out of the suburbs of Baltimore, and the
apprehensions of the President and his friends diminished with each
welcome revolution of the wheels. At six o'clock the dome of the
Capitol came in sight, and a moment later they rolled into the long,
unsightly building which forms the Washington Depot. They passed out
of the car unobstructed, and pushed along with the living stream of
men and women towards the outer door. One man alone in the great crowd
seemed to watch Mr. Lincoln with special attention. Standing a little
on one side, he 'looked very sharp at him,' and, as he passed, seized
hold of his hand and said in a loud tone of voice, 'Abe, you can't
play that on me.' The detective and Col. Lamon were instantly alarmed.
One of them raised his fist to strike the stranger; but Mr. Lincoln
caught his arm and said, 'Don't strike him! don't strike him! It is
Washburne. Don't you know him?' Mr. Seward had given to Mr. Washburne
a hint of the information received through his son, and Mr. Washburne
knew its value as well as another. For the present the detective
admonished him to keep quiet, and they passed on together. Taking a
hack, they drove towards Willard's Hotel. Mr. Lincoln, Mr. Washburne
and the detective got out into the street and approached the ladies'
entrance, while Col. Lamon drove on to the main entrance, and sent the
proprietor to meet his distinguished guest at the side door. A few
minutes later Mr. Seward arrived, and was introduced to the company
by Mr. Washburne. He spoke in very strong terms of the great danger
which Mr. Lincoln had so narrowly escaped, and most heartily applauded
the wisdom of the 'secret passage.' 'I informed Gov. Seward of the
nature of the information I had,' says the detective, 'and that I had
no information of any large organization in Baltimore; but the
Governor reiterated that he had conclusive evidence of this.'...

"That same day Mr. Lincoln's family and suite passed through Baltimore
on the special train intended for him. They saw no sign of any
disposition to burn them alive, or to blow them up with gunpowder, but
went their way unmolested and very happy.

"Mr. Lincoln soon learned to regret the midnight ride. His friends
reproached him; his enemies taunted him. He was convinced that he had
committed a grave mistake in yielding to the solicitations of a
professional spy and of friends too easily alarmed. He saw that he had
fled from a danger purely imaginary, and felt the shame and
mortification natural to a brave man under such circumstances. But he
was not disposed to take all the responsibility to himself, and
frequently upbraided the writer for having aided and assisted him to
demean himself at the very moment in all his life when his behavior
should have exhibited the utmost dignity and composure.

"The news of his surreptitious entry into Washington occasioned much
and varied comment throughout the country; but important events
followed it in such rapid succession that its real significance was
soon lost sight of; enough that Mr. Lincoln was safely at the Capital,
and in a few days would in all probability assume the power confided
to his hands."




APPENDIX II.

     EXTRACT FROM THE OPINION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED
     STATES, DELIVERED BY CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY IN THE CASE OF DRED
     SCOTT _vs._ SANDFORD, 19 HOW. 407.


"It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in
relation to that unfortunate race" (the African) "which prevailed in
the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the
Declaration of Independence, and when the Constitution of the United
States was framed and adopted.

"But the public history of every European nation displays it in a
manner too plain to be mistaken.

"They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an
inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race,
either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that
they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that
the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his
benefit."




APPENDIX III.

     THE HABEAS CORPUS CASE EX PARTE JOHN MERRYMAN, CAMPBELL'S
     REPORTS, P. 246. -- OPINION OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED
     STATES.


    _Ex parte_     }      Before the Chief Justice of the Supreme
    JOHN MERRYMAN. }      Court of the United States, at Chambers.

The application in this case for a writ of _habeas corpus_ is made to
me under the fourteenth section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which
renders effectual for the citizen the constitutional privilege of the
writ of _habeas corpus_. That act gives to the courts of the United
States, as well as to each justice of the Supreme Court and to every
district judge, power to grant writs of _habeas corpus_ for the
purpose of an inquiry into the cause of commitment. The petition was
presented to me at Washington, under the impression that I would order
the prisoner to be brought before me there; but as he was confined in
Fort McHenry, in the city of Baltimore, which is in my circuit, I
resolved to hear it in the latter city, as obedience to the writ under
such circumstances would not withdraw General Cadwallader, who had him
in charge, from the limits of his military command.

The petition presents the following case:

The petitioner resides in Maryland, in Baltimore County. While
peaceably in his own house, with his family, it was, at two o'clock on
the morning of the 25th of May, 1861, entered by an armed force
professing to act under military orders. He was then compelled to
rise from his bed, taken into custody and conveyed to Fort McHenry,
where he is imprisoned by the commanding officer, without warrant from
any lawful authority.

The commander of the fort, General George Cadwallader, by whom he is
detained in confinement, in his return to the writ, does not deny any
of the facts alleged in the petition. He states that the prisoner was
arrested by order of General Keim, of Pennsylvania, and conducted as
aforesaid to Fort McHenry by his order, and placed in his (General
Cadwallader's) custody, to be there detained by him as a prisoner.

A copy of the warrant or order under which the prisoner was arrested
was demanded by his counsel and refused. And it is not alleged in the
return that any specific act, constituting any offense against the
laws of the United States, has been charged against him upon oath; but
he appears to have been arrested upon general charges of treason and
rebellion, without proof, and without giving the names of the
witnesses, or specifying the acts which, in the judgment of the
military officer, constituted these crimes. Having the prisoner thus
in custody upon these vague and unsupported accusations, he refuses to
obey the writ of _habeas corpus_, upon the ground that he is duly
authorized by the President to suspend it.

The case, then, is simply this: A military officer, residing in
Pennsylvania, issues an order to arrest a citizen of Maryland upon
vague and indefinite charges, without any proof, so far as appears.
Under this order his house is entered in the night, he is seized as a
prisoner and conveyed to Fort McHenry, and there kept in close
confinement. And when a _habeas corpus_ is served on the commanding
officer, requiring him to produce the prisoner before a justice of the
Supreme Court, in order that he may examine into the legality of the
imprisonment, the answer of the officer is that he is authorized by
the President to suspend the writ of _habeas corpus_ at his
discretion, and, in the exercise of that discretion, suspends it in
this case, and on that ground refuses obedience to the writ.

As the case comes before me, therefore, I understand that the
President not only claims the right to suspend the writ of _habeas
corpus_ himself at his discretion, but to delegate that discretionary
power to a military officer, and to leave it to him to determine
whether he will or will not obey judicial process that may be served
upon him.

No official notice has been given to the courts of justice, or to the
public, by proclamation or otherwise, that the President claimed this
power, and had exercised it in the manner stated in the return. And I
certainly listened to it with some surprise; for I had supposed it to
be one of those points of constitutional law upon which there was no
difference of opinion, and that it was admitted on all hands that the
privilege of the writ could not be suspended except by act of
Congress.

When the conspiracy of which Aaron Burr was the head became so
formidable and was so extensively ramified as to justify, in Mr.
Jefferson's opinion, the suspension of the writ, he claimed on his
part no power to suspend it, but communicated his opinion to Congress,
with all the proofs in his possession, in order that Congress might
exercise its discretion upon the subject, and determine whether the
public safety required it. And in the debate which took place upon the
subject, no one suggested that Mr. Jefferson might exercise the power
himself, if, in his opinion, the public safety demanded it.

Having therefore regarded the question as too plain and too well
settled to be open to dispute, if the commanding officer had stated
that upon his own responsibility, and in the exercise of his own
discretion, he refused obedience to the writ, I should have contented
myself with referring to the clause in the Constitution, and to the
construction it received from every jurist and statesman of that day,
when the case of Burr was before them. But being thus officially
notified that the privilege of the writ has been suspended under the
orders and by the authority of the President, and believing, as I do,
that the President has exercised a power which he does not possess
under the Constitution, a proper respect for the high office he fills
requires me to state plainly and fully the grounds of my opinion, in
order to show that I have not ventured to question the legality of his
act without a careful and deliberate examination of the whole subject.

The clause of the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of _habeas corpus_ is in the ninth section of
the first article.

This article is devoted to the legislative department of the United
States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive
Department. It begins by providing "that all legislative powers
therein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States,
which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives"; and
after prescribing the manner in which these two branches of the
legislative department shall be chosen, it proceeds to enumerate
specifically the legislative powers which it thereby grants, and at
the conclusion of this specification a clause is inserted giving
Congress "the power to make all laws which shall be necessary and
proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other
powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United
States, or in any department or office thereof."

The power of legislation granted by this latter clause is by its words
carefully confined to the specific objects before enumerated. But as
this limitation was unavoidably somewhat indefinite, it was deemed
necessary to guard more effectually certain great cardinal principles
essential to the liberty of the citizen, and to the rights and
equality of the States, by denying to Congress, in express terms, any
power of legislation over them. It was apprehended, it seems, that
such legislation might be attempted under the pretext that it was
necessary and proper to carry into execution the powers granted; and
it was determined that there should be no room to doubt, where rights
of such vital importance were concerned, and accordingly this clause
is immediately followed by an enumeration of certain subjects to which
the powers of legislation shall not extend. The great importance which
the framers of the Constitution attached to the privilege of the writ
of _habeas corpus_ to protect the liberty of the citizen, is proved by
the fact that its suspension, except in cases of invasion or
rebellion, is first in the list of prohibited powers--and even in
these cases the power is denied and its exercise prohibited, unless
the public safety shall require it. It is true that in the cases
mentioned, Congress is of necessity the judge of whether the public
safety does, or does not, require it; and its judgment is conclusive.
But the introduction of these words is a standing admonition to the
legislative body of the danger of suspending it, and of the extreme
caution they should exercise before they give the Government of the
United States such power over the liberty of a citizen.

It is the second article of the Constitution that provides for the
organization of the Executive Department, and enumerates the powers
conferred on it, and prescribes its duties. And if the high power over
the liberty of the citizen now claimed was intended to be conferred
on the President, it would undoubtedly be found in plain words in this
article. But there is not a word in it that can furnish the slightest
ground to justify the exercise of the power.

The article begins by declaring that the executive power shall be
vested in a President of the United States of America, to hold his
office during the term of four years, and then proceeds to prescribe
the mode of election, and to specify in precise and plain words the
powers delegated to him, and the duties imposed upon him. The short
term for which he is elected, and the narrow limits to which his power
is confined, show the jealousy and apprehensions of future danger
which the framers of the Constitution felt in relation to that
department of the Government, and how carefully they withheld from it
many of the powers belonging to the Executive Branch of the English
Government which were considered as dangerous to the liberty of the
subject, and conferred (and that in clear and specific terms) those
powers only which were deemed essential to secure the successful
operation of the Government.

He is elected, as I have already said, for the brief term of four
years, and is made personally responsible by impeachment for
malfeasance in office. He is from necessity and the nature of his
duties the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, and of the militia
when called into actual service. But no appropriation for the support
of the Army can be made by Congress for a longer term than two years,
so that it is in the power of the succeeding House of Representatives
to withhold the appropriation for its support, and thus disband it,
if, in their judgment, the President used or designed to use it for
improper purposes. And although the militia, when in actual service,
is under his command, yet the appointment of the officers is reserved
to the States, as a security against the use of the military power for
purposes dangerous to the liberties of the people or the rights of the
States.

So, too, his powers in relation to the civil duties and authority
necessarily conferred on him are carefully restricted, as well as
those belonging to his military character. He cannot appoint the
ordinary officers of Government, nor make a treaty with a foreign
nation or Indian tribe, without the advice and consent of the Senate,
and cannot appoint even inferior officers unless he is authorized by
an Act of Congress to do so. He is not empowered to arrest any one
charged with an offense against the United States, and whom he may,
from the evidence before him, believe to be guilty; nor can he
authorize any officer, civil or military, to exercise this power; for
the fifth article of the Amendments to the Constitution expressly
provides that no person "shall be deprived of life, liberty or
property without due process of law"--that is, judicial process. Even
if the privilege of the writ of _habeas corpus_ were suspended by Act
of Congress, and a party not subject to the rules and articles of war
were afterwards arrested and imprisoned by regular judicial process,
he could not be detained in prison or brought to trial before a
military tribunal; for the article in the Amendments to the
Constitution immediately following the one above referred to--that is,
the sixth article--provides that "in all criminal prosecutions the
accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an
impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have
been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained
by law; and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;
to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory
process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the
assistance of counsel for his defense."

The only power, therefore, which the President possesses, where the
"life, liberty, or property" of a private citizen is concerned, is the
power and duty prescribed in the third section of the second article,
which requires "that he shall take care that the laws be faithfully
executed." He is not authorized to execute them himself, or through
agents or officers, civil or military, appointed by himself, but he is
to take care that they be faithfully carried into execution as they
are expounded and adjudged by the co-ordinate branch of the Government
to which that duty is assigned by the Constitution. It is thus made
his duty to come in aid of the judicial authority, if it shall be
resisted by a force too strong to be overcome without the assistance
of the executive arm. But in exercising this power he acts in
subordination to judicial authority, assisting it to execute its
process and enforce its judgments.

With such provisions in the Constitution, expressed in language too
clear to be misunderstood by any one, I can see no ground whatever for
supposing that the President, in any emergency or in any state of
things, can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of
_habeas corpus_, or the arrest of a citizen, except in aid of the
judicial power. He certainly does not faithfully execute the laws if
he takes upon himself legislative power by suspending the writ of
_habeas corpus_, and the judicial power also, by arresting and
imprisoning a person without due process of law. Nor can any argument
be drawn from the nature of sovereignty, or the necessity of
Government for self-defense in times of tumult and danger. The
Government of the United States is one of delegated and limited
powers. It derives its existence and authority altogether from the
Constitution, and neither of its branches, executive, legislative or
judicial, can exercise any of the powers of Government beyond those
specified and granted. For the tenth article of the Amendments to the
Constitution in express terms provides that "the powers not delegated
to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Indeed, the security against imprisonment by executive authority,
provided for in the fifth article of the Amendments to the
Constitution, which I have before quoted, is nothing more than a copy
of a like provision in the English Constitution, which had been firmly
established before the Declaration of Independence.

Blackstone states it in the following words:

"To make imprisonment lawful, it must be either by process of law from
the courts of judicature or by warrant from some legal officer having
authority to commit to prison" (1 Bl. Com. 137).

The people of the United Colonies, who had themselves lived under its
protection while they were British subjects, were well aware of the
necessity of this safeguard for their personal liberty. And no one can
believe that, in framing a government intended to guard still more
efficiently the rights and liberties of the citizen against executive
encroachments and oppression, they would have conferred on the
President a power which the history of England had proved to be
dangerous and oppressive in the hands of the Crown, and which the
people of England had compelled it to surrender after a long and
obstinate struggle on the part of the English Executive to usurp and
retain it.

The right of the subject to the benefit of the writ of _habeas
corpus_, it must be recollected, was one of the great points in
controversy during the long struggle in England between arbitrary
government and free institutions, and must therefore have strongly
attracted the attention of the statesmen engaged in framing a new,
and, as they supposed, a freer government than the one which they had
thrown off by the Revolution. From the earliest history of the common
law, if a person were imprisoned, no matter by what authority, he had
a right to the writ of _habeas corpus_ to bring his case before the
King's Bench; if no specific offense were charged against him in the
warrant of commitment, he was entitled to be forthwith discharged; and
if an offense were charged which was bailable in its character, the
Court was bound to set him at liberty on bail. The most exciting
contests between the Crown and the people of England from the time of
_Magna Charta_ were in relation to the privilege of this writ, and
they continued until the passage of the statute of 31st Charles II,
commonly known as the Great _Habeas Corpus_ Act. This statute put an
end to the struggle, and finally and firmly secured the liberty of the
subject against the usurpation and oppression of the executive branch
of the Government. It nevertheless conferred no new right upon the
subject, but only secured a right already existing. For, although the
right could not justly be denied, there was often no effectual remedy
against its violation. Until the statute of 13 William III, the judges
held their offices at the pleasure of the King, and the influence
which he exercised over timid, time-serving and partisan judges often
induced them, upon some pretext or other, to refuse to discharge the
party, although entitled by law to his discharge, or delayed their
decision from time to time, so as to prolong the imprisonment of
persons who were obnoxious to the King for their political opinions,
or had incurred his resentment in any other way.

The great and inestimable value of the _habeas corpus_ act of the 31st
Charles II. is that it contains provisions which compel courts and
judges, and all parties concerned, to perform their duties promptly in
the manner specified in the statute.

A passage in Blackstone's Commentaries, showing the ancient state of
the law on this subject, and the abuses which were practised through
the power and influence of the Crown, and a short extract from
Hallam's "Constitutional History," stating the circumstances which
gave rise to the passage of this statute, explain briefly, but fully,
all that is material to this subject.

Blackstone says: "To assert an absolute exemption from imprisonment in
all cases is inconsistent with every idea of law and political
society, and, in the end, would destroy all civil liberty by rendering
its protection impossible.

"But the glory of the English law consists in clearly defining the
times, the causes and the extent, when, wherefore and to what degree
the imprisonment of the subject may be lawful. This it is which
induces the absolute necessity of expressing upon every commitment the
reason for which it is made, "that the court upon a _habeas corpus_
may examine into its validity, and, according to the circumstances of
the case, may discharge, admit to bail, or remand the prisoner.

"And yet, early in the reign of Charles I, the Court of King's Bench,
relying on some arbitrary precedents (and those, perhaps,
misunderstood), determined that they would not, upon a _habeas
corpus_, either bail or deliver a prisoner, though committed without
any cause assigned, in case he was committed by the special command of
the King, or by the Lords of the Privy Council. This drew on a
Parliamentary inquiry and produced the Petition of Right--3 Charles
I.--which recites this illegal judgment, and enacts that no freeman
hereafter shall be so imprisoned or detained. But when, in the
following year, Mr. Selden and others were committed by the Lords of
the Council, in pursuance of His Majesty's special command, under a
general charge of 'notable contempts, and stirring up sedition against
the King and the Government,' the judges delayed for two terms
(including also the long vacation) to deliver an opinion how far such
a charge was bailable. And when at length they agreed that it was,
they, however, annexed a condition of finding sureties for their good
behavior, which still protracted their imprisonment, the Chief
Justice, Sir Nicholas Hyde, at the same time declaring that 'if they
were again remanded for that cause, perhaps the court would not
afterwards grant a _habeas corpus_, being already made acquainted with
the cause of the imprisonment.' But this was heard with indignation
and astonishment by every lawyer present, according to Mr. Selden's
own account of the matter, whose resentment was not cooled at the
distance of four-and-twenty years" (3 Bl. Com. 133, 134).

It is worthy of remark that the offenses charged against the prisoner
in this case, and relied on as a justification for his arrest and
imprisonment, in their nature and character, and in the loose and
vague manner in which they are stated, bear a striking resemblance to
those assigned in the warrant for the arrest of Mr. Selden. And yet,
even at that day, the warrant was regarded as such a flagrant
violation of the rights of the subject, that the delay of the
time-serving judges to set him at liberty upon the _habeas corpus_
issued in his behalf excited universal indignation of the bar. The
extract from Hallam's "Constitutional History" is equally impressive
and equally in point:

"It is a very common mistake, and that not only among foreigners, but
many from whom some knowledge of our constitutional laws might be
expected, to suppose that this statute of Charles II. enlarged in a
great degree our liberties, and forms a sort of epoch in their
history. But though a very beneficial enactment, and eminently
remedial in many cases of illegal imprisonment, it introduced no new
principle, nor conferred any right upon the subject. From the earliest
records of the English law, no freeman could be detained in prison,
except upon a criminal charge, or conviction, or for a civil debt. In
the former case it was always in his power to demand of the Court of
King's Bench a writ of _habeas corpus ad subjiciendum_, directed to
the person detaining him in custody, by which he was enjoined to bring
up the body of the prisoner with the warrant of commitment, that the
court might judge of its sufficiency, and remand the party, admit him
to bail, or discharge him, according to the nature of the charge. This
writ issued of right, and could not be refused by the court. It was
not to bestow an immunity from arbitrary imprisonment--which is
abundantly provided for in _Magna Charta_ (if, indeed, it is not more
ancient)--that the statute of Charles II. was enacted, but to cut off
the abuses by which the Government's lust of power, and the servile
subtlety of the Crown lawyers, had impaired so fundamental a
privilege" (3 Hallam's "Const. Hist.," 19).

While the value set upon this writ in England has been so great that
the removal of the abuses which embarrassed its employment has been
looked upon as almost a new grant of liberty to the subject, it is not
to be wondered at that the continuance of the writ thus made effective
should have been the object of the most jealous care. Accordingly, no
power in England short of that of Parliament can suspend or authorize
the suspension of the writ of _habeas corpus_. I quote again from
Blackstone (1 Bl. Com. 136): "But the happiness of our Constitution is
that it is not left to the executive power to determine when the
danger of the State is so great as to render this measure expedient.
It is the Parliament only, or legislative power, that, whenever it
sees proper, can authorize the Crown, by suspending the _habeas
corpus_ for a short and limited time, to imprison suspected persons
without giving any reason for so doing." If the President of the
United States may suspend the writ, then the Constitution of the
United States has conferred upon him more regal and absolute power
over the liberty of the citizen than the people of England have
thought it safe to entrust to the Crown--a power which the Queen of
England cannot exercise at this day, and which could not have been
lawfully exercised by the sovereign even in the reign of Charles I.

But I am not left to form my judgment upon this great question from
analogies between the English Government and our own, or the
commentaries of English jurists, or the decisions of English courts,
although upon this subject they are entitled to the highest respect,
and are justly regarded and received as authoritative by our courts of
justice. To guide me to a right conclusion, I have the Commentaries on
the Constitution of the United States of the late Mr. Justice Story,
not only one of the most eminent jurists of the age, but for a long
time one of the brightest ornaments of the Supreme Court of the United
States, and also the clear and authoritative decision of that court
itself, given more than half a century since, and conclusively
establishing the principles I have above stated.

Mr. Justice Story, speaking in his Commentaries of the _habeas corpus_
clause in the Constitution, says: "It is obvious that cases of a
peculiar emergency may arise which may justify, nay, even require, the
temporary suspension of any right to the writ. But as it has
frequently happened in foreign countries, and even in England, that
the writ has, upon various pretexts and occasions, been suspended,
whereby persons apprehended upon suspicion have suffered a long
imprisonment, sometimes from design, and sometimes because they were
forgotten, the right to suspend it is expressly confined to cases of
rebellion or invasion, where the public safety may require it. A very
just and wholesome restraint, which cuts down at a blow a fruitful
means of oppression, capable of being abused in bad times to the worst
of purposes. Hitherto no suspension of the writ has ever been
authorized by Congress since the establishment of the Constitution. It
would seem, as the power is given to Congress to suspend the writ of
_habeas corpus_ in cases of rebellion or invasion, that the right to
judge whether the exigency had arisen must exclusively belong to that
body" (3 Story's Com. on the Constitution, Section 1836).

And Chief Justice Marshall, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme
Court in the case of _ex parte_ Bollman and Swartwout, uses this
decisive language in 4 Cranch 95: "It may be worthy of remark that
this Act (speaking of the one under which I am proceeding) was passed
by the first Congress of the United States, sitting under a
Constitution which had declared 'that the privilege of the writ of
_habeas corpus_ should not be suspended unless when, in cases of
rebellion or invasion, the public safety might require it.' Acting
under the immediate influence of this injunction, they must have felt
with peculiar force the obligation of providing efficient means by
which this great constitutional privilege should receive life and
activity; for if the means be not in existence, the privilege itself
would be lost, although no law for its suspension should be enacted.
Under the impression of this obligation, they give to all the courts
the power of awarding writs of _habeas corpus_."

And again, on page 101: "If at any time the public safety should
require the suspension of the powers vested by this Act in the courts
of the United States, it is for the Legislature to say so. That
question depends on political considerations, on which the Legislature
is to decide. Until the legislative will be expressed, this court can
only see its duty, and must obey the laws."

I can add nothing to these clear and emphatic words of my great
predecessor. But the documents before me show that the military
authority in this case has gone far beyond the mere suspension of the
privilege of the writ of _habeas corpus_. It has, by force of arms,
thrust aside the judicial authorities and officers to whom the
Constitution has confided the power and duty of interpreting and
administering the laws, and substituted a military government in its
place, to be administered and executed by military officers. For, at
the time these proceedings were had against John Merryman, the
district judge of Maryland, the commissioner appointed under the Act
of Congress, the district attorney and the marshal, all resided in the
city of Baltimore, a few miles only from the home of the prisoner. Up
to that time there had never been the slightest resistance or
obstruction to the process of any court or judicial officer of the
United States in Maryland, except by the military authority. And if a
military officer, or any other person, had reason to believe that the
prisoner had committed any offense against the laws of the United
States, it was his duty to give information of the fact, and the
evidence to support it, to the district attorney; it would then have
become the duty of that officer to bring the matter before the
district judge or commissioner, and if there was sufficient legal
evidence to justify his arrest, the judge or commissioner would have
issued his warrant to the marshal to arrest him, and upon the hearing
of the case would have held him to bail, or committed him for trial,
according to the character of the offense as it appeared in the
testimony, or would have discharged him immediately, if there was not
sufficient evidence to support the accusation. There was no danger of
any obstruction or resistance to the action of the civil authorities,
and therefore no reason whatever for the interposition of the
military. Yet, under these circumstances, a military officer stationed
in Pennsylvania, without giving any information to the district
attorney, and without any application to the judicial authorities,
assumes to himself the judicial power in the District of Maryland;
undertakes to decide what constitutes the crime of treason or
rebellion; what evidence (if, indeed, he required any) is sufficient
to support the accusation and justify the commitment; and commits the
party without a hearing, even before himself, to close custody in a
strongly garrisoned fort, to be there held, it would seem, during the
pleasure of those who committed him.

The Constitution provides, as I have before said, that "no person
shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of
law." It declares that "the right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures shall not be violated, and no warrant shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be
seized." It provides that the party accused shall be entitled to a
speedy trial in a court of justice.

These great and fundamental laws, which Congress itself could not
suspend, have been disregarded and suspended, like the writ of _habeas
corpus_, by a military order, supported by force of arms. Such is the
case now before me, and I can only say that if the authority which the
Constitution has confided to the judiciary department and judicial
officers may thus upon any pretext or under any circumstances be
usurped by the military power at its discretion, the people of the
United States are no longer living under a government of laws, but
every citizen holds life, liberty and property at the will and
pleasure of the army officer in whose military district he may happen
to be found.

In such a case my duty was too plain to be mistaken. I have exercised
all the power which the Constitution and laws confer upon me, but that
power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome. It
is possible that the officer who has incurred this grave
responsibility may have misunderstood his instructions and exceeded
the authority intended to be given him. I shall therefore order all
the proceedings in this case, with my opinion, to be filed and
recorded in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of
Maryland, and direct the clerk to transmit a copy, under seal, to the
President of the United States. It will then remain for that high
officer, in fulfilment of his constitutional obligation, to "take care
that the laws be faithfully executed," to determine what measures he
will take to cause the civil process of the United States to be
respected and enforced.

                                                          R. B. TANEY,
                               _Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
                                                of the United States_.




APPENDIX IV.


On the 12th of July, 1861, I sent a message to the First and Second
Branches of the City Council referring to the events of the 19th of
April and those which followed. The first paragraph and the concluding
paragraphs of this document are here inserted:

                    "THE MAYOR'S MESSAGE.

     "TO THE HONORABLE THE MEMBERS OF THE
      FIRST AND SECOND BRANCHES OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

     "_Gentlemen_:--A great object of the reform movement was to
     separate municipal affairs entirely from national politics, and
     in accordance with this principle I have heretofore, in all my
     communications to the city council, carefully refrained from any
     allusion to national affairs. I shall not now depart from this
     rule further than is rendered absolutely necessary by the
     unprecedented condition of things at present existing in this
     city....

     "After the board of police had been superseded, and its members
     arrested by the order of General Banks, I proposed, in order to
     relieve the serious complication which had arisen, to proceed, as
     the only member left free to act, to exercise the power of the
     board as far as an individual member could do so. Marshal Kane,
     while he objected to the propriety of this course, was prepared
     to place his resignation in my hands whenever I should request
     it, and the majority of the board interposed no objection to my
     pursuing such course as I might deem it right and proper to
     adopt in view of the existing circumstances, and upon my own
     responsibility, until the board should be enabled to resume the
     exercise of its functions.

     "If this arrangement could have been effected, it would have
     continued in the exercise of their duties the police force which
     is lawfully enrolled, and which has won the confidence and
     applause of all good citizens by its fidelity and impartiality at
     all times and under all circumstances. But the arrangement was
     not satisfactory to the Federal authorities.

     "As the men of the police force, through no fault of theirs, are
     now prevented from discharging their duty, their pay constitutes
     a legal claim on the city from which, in my opinion, it cannot be
     relieved.

     "The force which has been enrolled is in direct violation of the
     law of the State, and no money can be appropriated by the city
     for its support without incurring the heavy penalties provided by
     the Act of Assembly.

     "Officers in the Fire Alarm and Police Telegraph Department who
     are appointed by the mayor and city council, and not by the board
     of police, have been discharged and others have been substituted
     in their place.

     "I mention these facts with profound sorrow, and with no purpose
     whatever of increasing the difficulties unfortunately existing in
     this city, but because it is your right to be acquainted with the
     true condition of affairs, and because I cannot help entertaining
     the hope that redress will yet be afforded by the authorities of
     the United States upon a proper representation made by you. I am
     entirely satisfied that the suspicion entertained of any
     meditated hostility on the part of the city authorities against
     the General Government is wholly unfounded, and with the best
     means of knowledge express the confident belief and conviction
     that there is no organization of any kind among the people for
     such a purpose. I have no doubt that the officers of the United
     States have acted on information which they deemed reliable,
     obtained from our own citizens, some of whom may be deluded by
     their fears, while others are actuated by baser motives; but
     suspicions thus derived can, in my judgment, form no sufficient
     justification for what I deem to be grave and alarming violations
     of the rights of individual citizens of the city of Baltimore and
     of the State of Maryland.

     "Very respectfully,
                                            "GEO. WM. BROWN, _Mayor_."




APPENDIX V.


As a part of the history of the times, it may not be inappropriate to
reproduce an account, taken from the Baltimore American of December 5,
1860, of the reception of the Putnam Phalanx of Hartford, Connecticut,
in the city of Baltimore. At this time it still seemed to most men of
moderate views that the impending troubles might be averted through
concessions and compromise. In the tone of the two speeches, both of
which were, of course, meant to be friendly and conciliatory, there is
a difference to be noted which was, I think, characteristic of the
attitude of the two sections; in the one speech some prominence is
given to the Constitution and constitutional rights; in the other,
loyalty to the Union is the theme enforced:

"The Putnam Phalanx of Hartford, Connecticut, under the command of
Major Horace Goodwin, yesterday afternoon reached here, at four
o'clock, by the Philadelphia train, _en route_ for a visit to the tomb
of Washington. A detachment of the Eagle Artillery gave them a
national salute.

"The Battalion Baltimore City Guards, consisting of four companies,
under the command of Major Joseph P. Warner, were drawn up on
Broadway, and after passing in salute, the column moved by way of
Broadway and Baltimore and Calvert streets to the old Universalist
church-building.

"As soon as the military entered the edifice and were seated, the
galleries were thrown open to the public, and in a few minutes they
were crowded to overflowing.

"Captain Parks introduced Major Goodwin to Mayor Brown, who was in
turn introduced to the commissioned officers of the Phalanx. Major
Goodwin then turned to his command and said: 'Gentlemen of the
Phalanx, I have the honor of introducing you to the Mayor of the city
of Baltimore.' Mayor Brown arose, and after bowing to the Battalion,
addressed them as follows:

"MAYOR BROWN'S SPEECH.

"'_Mr. Commander and Gentlemen_:--In the name and on behalf of the
people of Baltimore, I extend to the Putnam Phalanx a sincere and
hearty welcome to the hospitalities of our city. The citizens of
Baltimore are always glad to receive visits from the citizen-soldiers
of sister States, because they come as friends, and more than
friends--as the defenders of a common country.

"'These sister States, as we love to call them, live somewhat far
apart, and gradually become more and more separated by distance, just
as sisters will be as the children marry and one by one leave the
parent homestead.

"'But, gentlemen, far or near, on the Connecticut or Potomac, on the
Gulf of Mexico or the great lakes, on the Atlantic or Pacific, they
are sisters still, united by blood and affection, and the holy tie
should never be severed. (Applause.)

"'Let me carry the figure a step further, and add what I know will
meet with a response from the Putnam Phalanx, with whose history and
high character I am somewhat acquainted--that a sisterhood of States,
like separate families of sisters living in the same neighborhood, can
never dwell together in peace unless each is permitted to manage her
own domestic affairs in her own way (applause); not only without
active interference from the rest, but even without much fault-finding
or advice, however well intended it may be.

"'Maryland has sometimes been called the Heart State, because she lies
very close to the great heart of the Union; and she might also be
called the Heart State because her heart beats with true and warm love
for the Union. (Loud applause.) Nor, as I trust, does Connecticut fall
short of her in this respect. And when the questions now before the
country come to be fairly understood, and the people look into them
with their own eyes, and take matters into their own hands, I believe
that we shall see a sight of which politicians, North and South,
little dream. (Applause.) We shall see whether there is a love for the
Union or not.

"'But there are great national questions agitating the land which must
now be finally settled. One is, Will the States of the North keep on
their statute-books laws which violate a right of the States of the
South, guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the United States? No
individuals, no families, no States, can live in peace together when
any right of a part is persistently and deliberately violated by the
rest. Another question is, What shall be done with the national
territory? Shall it belong exclusively to the North or the South, or
shall it be shared by both, as it was gained by the blood and treasure
of both? Are there not wisdom and patriotism enough in the land to
settle these questions?

"'Gentlemen, your presence here to-day proves that you are animated by
a higher and larger sentiment than that of State pride--the sentiment
of American nationality. The most sacred spot in America is the tomb
of Washington, and to that shrine you are about to make a pilgrimage.
You come from a State celebrated above all others for the most
extensive diffusion of the great blessing of education; which has a
colonial and Revolutionary history abounding in honorable memorials;
which has heretofore done her full share in founding the institutions
of this country--the land of Washington--and which can now do as much
as any other in preserving that land one and undivided, as it was left
by the Father of his Country. I will not permit myself to doubt that
your State and our State, that Connecticut and Maryland, will both be
on the same side, as they have often been in times past, and that they
will both respect and obey and uphold the sacred Constitution of the
country.' (Shouts of applause.)

"As soon as the Mayor concluded, Major Goodwin arose; but it was some
time before he could be heard, such was the tremendous applause with
which he was greeted. The Major is nearly ninety years of age, and is
one of the most venerable-looking men in the country. Dressed in the
old Revolutionary uniform, a _fac-simile_ of that worn by General
Putnam, and with his locks silvered with age, we may say that his
appearance electrified the multitude, and shout after shout shook the
very building. Major Goodwin expressed himself as follows:

"'Mr. Mayor and gentlemen of the Baltimore City Guards, permit me to
introduce to you our Judge Advocate, Captain Stuart.'

"Captain Stuart arose and spoke as follows:

"SPEECH OF CAPTAIN STUART.

"'Your Honor, Mayor Brown: For your kind words of welcome, and for
your patriotic sentiments in favor of the Union, the Putnam Phalanx
returns you its most cordial thanks. I can assure you, sir, that when
you spoke in such eloquent terms of the value and importance of a
united country, you but echoed the sentiments of the whole of our
organization; and let me say, it is with great pleasure, upon a
journey, as we are, to the tomb of the illustrious Washington; that we
pause for a while within a city so famed for its intelligence, its
industry, its general opulence and its courtesy, as is this your own
beautiful Baltimore.

"'We opine, nay, we know from what you have yourself, in such fitting
terms, just expressed, that you heartily appreciate the purpose which
lies at the foundation of our organization, that purpose being the
lofty one of commemorating, by our military attire and discipline, the
imposing foundation-period of the American Republic, of attracting our
own patriotic feeling, and that of all who may honor us with their
observation, to the exalted virtues of those heroic men who laid the
foundations of our present national prosperity and glory--men of whom
your city and State furnished, as it pleasantly happens, a large and
most honorable share.

"'We come, sir, from that portion of the United States in which the
momentous struggle for American freedom took its rise, and where the
blood of its earliest martyrs was shed; from the region where odious
writs of assistance, infamous Courts of Admiralty, intolerable
taxation, immolated charters of government and prohibited commerce
were once fast paving the way for the slavery of our institutions;
from the region of a happy and God-fearing people--from the region,
sir, of Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill and Croton Heights, of
ravaged New London and fired Fairfield and Norwalk and devastated
Danbury and sacked New Haven. And we come, Mr. Mayor, to a city and
State, we are proudly aware, which to all these trials and perils of
assaulted New England, and to the trials and perils of our whole
common country, during "the times that tried men's souls," gave ever
the meed of its heartfelt sympathy, and the unstinted tribute of its
patriotic blood and treasure; which, with a full and clear
comprehension of all the great principles of American freedom, and a
devotion to those principles that was ever ardent and exalted,
signalized themselves by their wisdom in council and their prowess on
the field.

"'When the devoted metropolis of New England began to feel the awful
scourge of the Writ Bill, Maryland it was that then contributed most
liberal supplies for its suffering people, and with these supplies
those cheering, ever-to-be-remembered, talismanic words: "The Supreme
Director of all events will terminate this severe trial of your
patriotism in the happy confirmation of American freedom."

"'When this same metropolis soon after became the seat of war,
Maryland it was that at once sent to the camp around Boston her own
companies of "dauntless riflemen," under her brave Michael Cresap and
the gallant Price, to mingle in the defense of New England firesides
and New England homes. She saw and felt, and bravely uttered at the
time, the fact that in the then existing state of public affairs there
was no alternative left for her, or for the country at large, but
"base submission or manly resistance"; and, Mr. Mayor, at the
memorable battle of Long Island she made this manly resistance, for
there she poured out the life-blood of no less than two hundred and
fifty-nine of her gallant sons, who fought in her own Smallwood's
immortal regiment; and elsewhere, from the St. Lawrence to the banks
of the Savannah, through Pennsylvania, Virginia and both the
Carolinas--devoted the best blood within her borders, and the flower
of her soldiery, to the battlefields of the Union.

"'Sir, we of this Phalanx recall these and other Revolutionary
memories belonging to your city and State with pride and satisfaction.
They unite Connecticut and Maryland in strong and pleasant bonds. And
we are highly gratified to be here in the midst of them, and to
receive at your hands so grateful a welcome as that which you have
extended.

"'Be assured, Mr. Mayor, that in the sentiments of devotion to our
common country which you so eloquently express, this Phalanx
sympathizes heart and soul. You may plant the flag of the Union
anywhere and we shall warm to it. And now, renewedly thanking you for
the present manifestation of courtesy, we shall leave to enjoy the
hospitality which awaits us in pleasant quarters at our hotel.'

"Captain Stuart was frequently interrupted by applause."




APPENDIX VI.


On the 19th of April, 1880, a portion of the members of the Sixth
Massachusetts Regiment again visited Baltimore, and an account of its
reception, taken from the Baltimore Sun and the Baltimore _American_,
seems to be a fitting close to this paper:

"Thirty-nine members of the Association of Survivors of the Sixth
Massachusetts Union Regiment came to Baltimore yesterday afternoon, to
celebrate the nineteenth anniversary of their march through Baltimore,
April 19, 1861, which gave rise to the riot of that day. The visitors
were met, on landing from the cars at President-street Depot, by
Wilson, Dushane and Harry Howard Posts, Grand Army of the Republic, in
full uniform, with band and drum corps. The line was up Broadway to
Baltimore street, to Barnum's Hotel. A file of policemen, with
Marshals Gray and Frey, kept the street open for the parade. The
streets were crowded with people. The Massachusetts men wore citizen's
dress and badges."

Wilson Post No. 1, of the Grand Army of the Republic, received the
visitors in their hall, Rialto Building, at two o'clock. Commander
Dukehart, of Wilson Post, welcomed the guests in a brief speech, and
then introduced Comrade Crowley, of the old Sixth, who said:

"'Nineteen years ago I was but a boy. A few days before the 19th of
April, the militia of Middlesex County were summoned for the defense
of the National Capital. We left workshops, desk and family, to come
to the defense of the capital. We thought we were coming to a picnic;
that the people of South Carolina were a little off their balance,
and would be all right on sober second thought. A few miles out from
Baltimore the Quartermaster gave us each ten rounds of ammunition. We
had been singing songs. The Colonel told us he expected trouble in
Baltimore, and impressed on each man not to fire until he was
compelled to. The singing ceased, and we then thought we had serious
business before us, and that others besides South Carolina had lost
their balance. When we reached the Baltimore Depot some of the cars
had gone ahead, and four companies--young men--were in the cars
unconscious of what was going on outside. We thought the people of
Baltimore and Maryland were of the same Government, and if not they
ought to be. (Cheers and applause.) That they had the same interest in
the Government, the best ever devised; that Maryland at least was
loyal. A man knocked on the car-door and told us they were tearing up
the track. Our Captain said, "Men, file out!" The order was given and
we marched out. The Captain said, "March as close as you possibly can.
Fire on no man unless compelled." We marched through railroad iron,
bricks and other missiles. We proved ourselves brave soldiers--proved
that we could wait, at least, for the word of command. We were pelted
in Baltimore nineteen years ago. We lost some of our comrades, and
others were disabled for life. But we went to Washington. We don't
claim to be the saviors of the capital; we take no great credit for
what we did; but we did the best we could, and the result is shown.
The success of our march through Baltimore to-day is as indelibly
fixed and will ever be as fresh as that of nineteen years ago, and our
reception will remain in our hearts and minds as long as life lasts.
My father had six sons, and five were at the front at the same time.
I had learned to think that if Maryland, South Carolina or Virginia
was to declare independence the Government would be broken up, and
that we would have no country, no home, no flag. We were not fighting
for Massachusetts, for Maryland or for Virginia, but for our
country--the United States (cheers and applause)--remembering the
declaration of the great statesman, "Liberty and Union, now and
forever, one and inseparable." This country went through four years of
carnage and blood. Few families, North or South, but have mourning at
their firesides; but it was not in vain, for it has established the
fact that we are one people, and are an all-powerful people.
(Prolonged cheers.) Our reception to-day has convinced us that the war
has ended, and that there are Union men in Maryland as in
Massachusetts; that we are brothers, and will be so to the end of
time; that this is one great country; and that the people are marching
on in amity and power, second to none on the face of the globe.'
(Cheers.)

"In the evening there was a banquet at the Eutaw House, and Judge Geo.
William Brown, who was Mayor of Baltimore in 1861, presided. Nearly
two hundred persons were at table. After the dinner was over, Judge
Brown said:

"'This is the 19th of April, a day memorable in the annals of this
city, and in the annals of the country. It is filled in my mind with
the most painful recollections of my life, and I doubt not that many
who are here present share with me those feelings. I shall make but
brief allusions to the events of that day. The city authorities of
Baltimore of that time have mostly passed away, and I believe I am the
only one here present to-night. In justice to the living and the dead
I have to say that the authorities of Baltimore faithfully endeavored
to do their duty. It is not necessary for me, perhaps, to say so in
this presence. (Applause.) It was not their fault that the
Massachusetts Sixth Regiment met a bloody reception in the streets of
Baltimore. The visit of that regiment on both occasions has a great
and important significance. What did it mean in 1861? It meant civil
war; that the irrepressible conflict which Mr. Seward predicted had
broken out at last, and that, as Mr. Lincoln said, a house divided
against itself cannot stand. A great question then presented itself to
the country. When war virtually began in Baltimore, by bloodshed on
both sides, it meant that the question must be settled by force
whether or not the house should stand. It took four years of war,
waged with indomitable perseverance, to decide it, because the
combatants on both sides were sustained by deep and honest
convictions. It is not surprising, looking back coolly and calmly on
the feelings of that day, that they found vent as they did. I am not
here to excuse or to apologize, but to acknowledge facts. That was the
significance of the first visit of the Massachusetts Sixth Regiment,
in response to the call of the President of the United States. After
the war there was peace. But enforced peace is not sufficient in a
family of States any more than in a household. There must be among
brothers respect, confidence, mutual help and forbearance, and, above
everything, justice and right. After nineteen years the visit of
survivors of the Sixth Massachusetts is, I hope, significant of more
than peace. It is, I hope, significant of the fact that there is a
true bond of union between the North and the South (applause), and
that we are a family of States, all equal, all friends; and if it be,
there is no one in the country who can more fervently thank God than
myself that the old house still stands.' (Applause.)

"Judge Brown offered as a toast: 'The Sixth Regiment of Massachusetts:
Baltimore extends to her fraternal greeting.'"




INDEX.


   A

  Acton, regiment mustered in, 42.

  Allen, E. J., dispatches addressed to, 131.

  _American, The_, on the Baltimore riot of 1861, 65;
    account of the Putnam Phalanx in Baltimore, 160-167;
    on the reception of the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment in
      Baltimore, 167-170.

  Andrew, Gov. J. A., correspondence with Mayor Brown, 54, 55.

  Arkansas, secession of, 33.


  B

  Baltimore, unjust prejudice against, 13, 19;
    supposed conspiracy in, 14, 15, 120;
    slaveholders in, 30;
    Sixth Massachusetts Regiment in, 42-53, 167-170;
    excitement on 20th April, 60, 61, 64;
    defense of, 63;
    apprehension of bloodshed in, 75;
    armed neutrality, 77;
    Gen. Butler's entrance into, 84;
    Gen. Dix's headquarters in, 100, 101;
    Mayor's message to City Council, 157-159;
    reception of Putnam Phalanx in, 160-166.

  Banks, Gen. N. P., in command, 97;
    arrests police commissioners of Baltimore, 98, 99;
    Secretary Cameron's letter to, 102;
    General McClellan's letter to, 102.

  Bartol, Judge, imprisonment of, 94.

  Belger, Major, comes to Baltimore, 73.

  Bell, Presidential vote for, 25.

  Black, Judge, on martial law, 93.

  Blackstone on the right of imprisonment, 147, 149.

  Bond's, Judge, errand to Lincoln, 57, 61.

  Boston, slave-traffic in, 20;
    regiment mustered in, 42.

  Brand, Rev. William F., efforts for emancipation, 113.

  Breckinridge, Presidential vote for, 25.

  Brown, Geo. Wm., meets the Massachusetts Sixth in Baltimore, 48, 49;
    Captain Dike on, 54;
    correspondence with Gov. Andrew, 54, 55;
    speech to the excited public, 56;
    writes to President Lincoln about passage of troops through
      Baltimore, 57, 61, 62;
    interview with President Lincoln, 71-75;
    General Butler's letter to, 83, 84;
    petitions Congress to restore peace to city, 99;
    arrest of, 102, 103, 108;
    correspondence with General Dix, 104-108;
    parole offered to, 110, 111;
    anti-slavery principles of, 113;
    opposed to secession, 115;
    on the tendencies of the age, 117, 118;
    message to City Council, 157-159;
    speech to the Putnam Phalanx, 160-163;
    speech to the survivors of the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment, 169, 170.

  Brown, John, reverence for in the North, 21.

  Brune, Frederick W., efforts for emancipation, 113.

  Brune, John C., message to President Lincoln, 57, 61;
    accompanies Mayor to Washington, 71;
    elected to General Assembly, 79.

  Bush River Bridge partially burned to prevent ingress of troops, 58, 59.

  Butler, Gen., and the Eighth Massachusetts Regiment, 76;
    at the Relay House, 83;
    rumor of an attack on his camp, 83, 84;
    enters Baltimore, 84;
    arrests Ross Winans, 87.

  Byrne, Wm., denounces the North, 38.


  C

  Cadwallader, General, and the writ of _habeas corpus_, 88, 140.

  Cameron, Simon, advice to Governor Hicks to restrain Maryland, 40;
    on the obstruction of Northern Central bridge, 73;
    letter to Gen. Banks, 102.

  Carmichael, Judge, assaulted and imprisoned, 93.

  Carr, W. C. N., speaks at States Rights meeting, 38, 39.

  Cheston, G., efforts for emancipation, 113.

  Christison, Wenlock, a Quaker, owns slaves, 21.

  Clark, John, advances money for defense of city, 61.

  Crawford, William, Kane's letter to, 40.

  Crowley, Comrade, of the Massachusetts Sixth, speech in
    Baltimore, 1880, 167.

  Curtis, Benj. R., Life of, quotation about Judge Taney, 91.

  Cutter, B. L., release from arrest, 109.


  D

  Davis, Jefferson, elected President of the Confederacy, 32.

  Davis, John W., police commissioner of Baltimore, 35, 49;
    errand to Fort McHenry, 66, 67, 68.

  Davis, Judge, doubts the rumors of conspiracy, 132, 133.

  Davis, Robert W., killed, 52.

  De Tocqueville, on public opinion in America, 117.

  Dike, Capt. J. H., company attacked in Baltimore, 46;
    testifies as to the conduct of Baltimore civil authority
      during the riot, 53, 54.

  Dimick, Col. J., releases prisoners from Fort Warren, 108;
    kind treatment of prisoners, 111.

  Dix, General, headquarters in Baltimore, 101;
    correspondence with Mayor Brown, 104-108.

  Dix, Miss, relates a Confederate plot, 13.

  Dobbin, Geo. W., errand to Lincoln, 57, 61;
    accompanies the Mayor to Washington, 71.

  Douglas, S. A., Senatorial campaign, 22;
    Presidential vote for, 25.

  Dred Scott Case, 138.


  E

  Evans, H. D., his code for Liberia, 31.


  F

  Felton, C. C., on the "Baltimore Plot," 18.

  Felton, Samuel M., on the supposed conspiracy, 13-18, 129-133;
    advises Massachusetts Sixth to load their guns, 43;
    engages spies, 120.

  Ferrandini, Captain, suspected of conspiracy to assassinate
    President Lincoln, 122-129.

  Follansbee, Capt., company attacked in Baltimore, 46, 49.

  Fort McHenry, apprehended attack on, 66, 69.

  Fort Sumter, bombardment of, 32.

  Franciscus, in the car with Lincoln, 133.


  G

  Garrett's, John W., dispatch to Mayor Brown concerning advance of
    troops to Cockeysville, 73, 74, 75.

  Gatchell, Wm. H., police commissioner of Baltimore, 35;
    release from arrest, 109.

  Giles, Judge, issues writ of _habeas corpus_ to Major Morris, 87.

  Gill, George M., meets the Massachusetts Sixth, 48;
    counsel for John Merryman, 87.

  Goodwin, Major Horace, commands Putnam Phalanx, 160;
    his appearance, 163.

  Greeley, Horace, on the conduct of the Baltimore authorities, 76, 77.

  Groton, regiment mustered in, 42.

  Gunpowder River Bridge partially burned, 58.


  H

  _Habeas corpus_ case, 87, 139-156.

  Hall, Thomas W., release from arrest, 109.

  Hallam's Constitutional History, extract from, 151.

  Halleck, Gen., in Baltimore, 101.

  Harris, J. Morrison, errand to the Capital, 63.

  Harrison, Wm. G., elected to General Assembly, 80;
    released from arrest, 108.

  Hart, Capt., company attacked in Baltimore, 46.

  Herndon, Wm. H., comments on Lincoln's senatorial campaign speech, 23;
    reports of plot furnished to, 122.

  Hicks, T. H., Governor of Maryland, 34;
    proclamation of, 40;
    speech before excited public, 56;
    writes to Lincoln not to pass troops through Baltimore, 57, 61;
    suggests mediation between North and South by Lord Lyons, 76;
    convenes General Assembly, 79;
    letter to E. H. Webster, 128.

  Hilliard, suspected of conspiracy, 122, 123.

  Hinks, Chas. D., police commissioner of Baltimore, 35;
   released from arrest, 99.

  Hopkins, Johns, advances money for city defense, 61.

  Howard, Charles, police commissioner of Baltimore, 35;
    apprehends attack on Fort McHenry, 66, 67;
    report on the state of city, 80, 81;
    release from arrest, 108.

  Howard, F. K., release from arrest, 109.

  Huger, General, made Colonel of 53d Regiment, 66.

  Hull, Rob't, release from arrest, 109.

  Hyde, Sir Nicholas, on the writ of _habeas corpus_, 150.


  J

  Jefferson, Thomas, and writ of _habeas corpus_, 141.

  Johnson, Capt. B. T., arrives in Baltimore, 64;
    hasty dispatch from Marshal Kane, 69, 70.

  Jones, Col. Edmund F., passage through Baltimore, 43;
    on the Massachusetts Sixth in Baltimore, 46, 47, 48, 51;
    letter to Marshal Kane, 54.

  Judd, N. B., with Lincoln in Philadelphia, 16;
    hears of conspiracy in Baltimore, 128-133.


  K

  Kane, Marshal George P., investigates supposed plot, 15;
    head of Baltimore police, 35;
    letter to Crawford, 40;
    keeps order at Camden Station, 48;
    attempts to quell Baltimore mob, 51, 53;
    Col. Jones's gratitude to, 54;
    hasty dispatch to Johnson, 69, 70;
    after the war elected Sheriff and subsequently Mayor, 70;
    arrest of, 97;
    release from arrest, 109.

  Keim, Gen., arrests John Merryman, 87, 140.

  Kenly, John R., supersedes Marshal Kane, 97.

  Kennedy, Anthony, errand to the Capital, 63.

  Kennedy, John P., on the attitude of Border States, 31, 32.

  Kentucky, temporary neutrality of, 34.

  Keys, John S., letter from Mayor Brown to, 110, 111.

  Kinney, Mr., receives Lincoln in Philadelphia, 134.


  L

  Lamon, Colonel W. H., on Lincoln's midnight ride, 19, 120-137;
    on Lincoln-Douglas campaign, 22;
    ride with Lincoln, 133.

  Latrobe, John H. B., President of Maryland Colonization Society, 31.

  Lawrence, Massachusetts, regiment mustered in, 42.

  Lee, Colonel, on Gen. Cadwallader's errand to Judge Taney, 88.

  Lewis, Mr., in the car with Lincoln, 133.

  Lincoln, President, alleged conspiracy against, in
      Maryland, 11-15, 121-137;
    midnight ride to Washington, 17, 19, 120;
    Senatorial campaign with Douglas, 22;
    differs from Seward, 24;
    election to Presidency, 25;
    calls out the militia, 32;
    letter to Gov. Hicks, 62;
    Mayor Brown writes to, concerning passage of troops through
      Baltimore, 57, 61;
    Mayor Brown's interview with, 71-75.

  Lowell, Massachusetts, regiment mustered in, 42.

  Luckett, suspected of conspiracy, 122-127.

  Lyons, Lord, suggested as mediator between North and South, 76;
    Secretary Seward's boast of his authority to, 91.


  M

  Macgill, Dr. Charles, release from arrest, 109.

  Marshall, Chief Justice, on _habeas corpus_, 153, 154.

  Maryland, rumors of conspiracy in, 11, 12, 13;
    slavery in, 20, 30;
    Lincoln's call for militia, how received in, 33;
    excitement, 40, 41.

  Mason, James M., sent from Virginia to negotiate with Maryland, 84.

  Massachusetts, Minute Men, 11;
    slavery in, 20;
    Eighth Regiment, 76;
    Sixth Regiment, 42, 167-170.

  May, Henry, M. C., arrest of, 103.

  McClellan, General, letter to General Banks, 102.

  McComas, Sergeant, removes obstruction from railway track in
    Baltimore, 49.

  McHenry, Ramsay, efforts for emancipation, 113.

  Merryman, John, arrest of, 87, 88, 154;
    charges against unfounded, 90.

  Morfit, H. M., elected to General Assembly, 79.

  Morris, Major, refuses to obey writ of _habeas corpus_, 87.


  N

  Negro. _See_ Slavery.

  Newport, slave-traffic in, 20.

  Nicolay, George, on Lincoln's midnight ride, 132.

  North Carolina, secession of, 33.


  O

  O'Donnell, Columbus, advances money for city defense, 61.


  P

  Parker, Edward P., General Butler's aide-de-camp, 83.

  Patapsco Dragoons, arrival in Baltimore, 64.

  Pemberton, Major, leads U. S. Artillery through Baltimore, 86.

  Pennsylvania troops in Baltimore, 44, 53;
    at Cockeysville, 75.

  Phillips, Wendell, on States Rights, 26.

  Pickering, Captain, company opposed in Baltimore, 46.

  Pikesville, arsenal taken possession of, 65.

  Pitts, Charles H., elected to General Assembly, 80.

  Putnam Phalanx of Hartford in Baltimore, 160-166.

  Putnam's Record of the Rebellion, quotation from, 38.


  R

  Revolution, right of, 26-29.

  Robinson, Dr. Alex. C., Chairman of States Rights Convention, 38.

  Robinson, General John C., on Baltimore in 1861, 66, 69, 81, 82, 83.


  S

  Sanford, plans Lincoln's midnight ride, 131.

  Sangston, L., elected to General Assembly, 80.

  Scharf's History of Maryland quoted, 35, 37, 78, 103.

  Scott, General, on the passage of troops through Baltimore, 62, 72, 75.

  Scott, T. Parkin, sympathizes with the South, 38, 39;
    elected Judge after the war, 39;
    elected to General Assembly, 79;
    release from arrest, 108.

  Seward, Secretary, position before Presidential Convention, 24;
    boasts of his authority, 91;
    sends news of supposed conspiracy to Lincoln, 130, 134.

  Slavery, compromises of Constitution in regard to, 20-22;
    Geo. Wm. Brown opposed to, 113;
    some good effects of, 114.

  Small, Colonel, leads Pennsylvania regiment, 42.

  South Carolina, secession of, 31.

  Steuart, Dr. Richard S., efforts for emancipation, 113.

  Story, Justice, on _habeas corpus_, 152, 153.

  Stuart, Captain, speech in Baltimore, 163-166.

  Sumner, Colonel, offers to accompany President Lincoln to
    Washington, 132, 133.

  _Sun, The_, on the offer of service by colored people, 65, 66;
   on the suffering of Pennsylvania troops in Baltimore County, 76;
   Reception of 6th Massachusetts Regiment in Baltimore, 167-170.


  T

  Taney, Chief Justice, on negro rights, 21, 138;
   _habeas corpus_ case _ex parte_ John Merryman, 87-93, 139-156.

  Tennessee, secession of, 33.

  Thomas, Dr. J. Hanson, elected to General Assembly, 79.

  Trimble, Colonel I. R., defense of Baltimore, 63.

  Trist, N. P., news of conspiracy communicated to, 14.

  Turner, Capt., suspected of conspiracy, 124-126.


  U

  Union Convention called, 92.


  V

  Virginia, secession of, 33;
    sends Mason to negotiate with Maryland, 84.


  W

  Wallis, S. Teackle, legal adviser to Baltimore police commission, 35;
    speech to the excited public, 56;
    accompanies the Mayor to Washington, 71;
    elected to the General Assembly, 79;
    release from arrest, 108, 109.

  Warfield, Henry M., elected to General Assembly, 79;
    release from arrest, 108.

  Warner, Major J. P., commands Baltimore City Guards, 160.

  Washburne, Mr., meets President Lincoln at Washington Depot, 136.

  Watson, Major, company attacked in Baltimore, 45.

  Webster, E. H., Gov. Hicks's letter to, 128.

  Whitefield, the Calvinist, owns slaves, 21.

  Williams, George H., counsel for John Merryman, 87.

  Winans, Ross, denounces passage of troops through Baltimore, 37;
    elected to General Assembly, 79;
    arrested by Gen. Butler's order, 87.

  Winder, Wm. H., release from arrest, 109.

  Wood, Fernando, tries to make New York a free city, 31.

  Wool, General, checks arbitrary arrest, 109.

  Worcester, regiment mustered in, 42.




Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science.

HERBERT B. ADAMS, Editor.


PROSPECTUS OF FIFTH SERIES.--1887.

The Studies in Municipal Government will be continued. The Fifth
Series will also embrace Studies in the History of American Political
Economy and of American Co-operation. The following papers are ready
or in preparation:

  =I-II. City Government of Philadelphia.= By EDWARD P. ALLINSON,
     A. M. (Haverford), and BOIES PENROSE, A. B. (Harvard). January
     and February, 1887. _Price 50 cents._ 72 pp.

  =III. City Government of Boston.= By JAMES M. BUGBEE. March,
     1887. _Price 25 cents._ 60 pp.

  =City Government of Baltimore.= By JOHN C. ROSE, B. L.
     (University of Maryland, School of Law). _In preparation._

  =City Government of Chicago.= By F. H. HODDER, Ph. M. (University
     of Mich.) Instructor in History, Cornell University.

  =City Government of San Francisco.= By BERNARD MOSES, Ph. D.,
     Professor of History and Politics, University of California.

  =City Government of St. Louis.= By MARSHALL S. SNOW, A. M.
     (Harvard), Professor of History, Washington University.

  =City Government of New Orleans.= By HON. W. W. HOWE.

  =City Government of New York.= By SIMON STERNE and J. F. JAMESON,
     Ph. D., Associate in History, J. H. U.

  =The Influence of the War of 1812 upon the Consolidation of the
     American Union.= By NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER, Ph. D. and Fellow of
     Columbia College.

  =The History of American Political Economy.= Studies by R. T.
     ELY, WOODROW WILSON, and D. R. DEWEY.

  =The History of American Co-operation.= Studies by E. W. BEMIS,
     D. R. RANDALL, A. G. WARNER, _et al._


FOURTH SERIES.--Municipal Government and Land Tenure.--1886.

  =I. Dutch Village Communities on the Hudson River.= By IRVING
     ELTING, A. B. (Harvard). January, 1886; pp. 68. _Price 50 cents._

  =II-III. Town Government in Rhode Island.= By WILLIAM E. FOSTER,
     A. M. (Brown University).--=The Narragansett Planters.= By EDWARD
     CHANNING, Ph. D. and Instructor in History (Harvard University).
     February and March, 1886; pp. 60. _Price 50 cents._

  =IV. Pennsylvania Boroughs.= By WILLIAM P. HOLCOMB, Ph. D. (J. H.
     U.), Professor of History and Political Science, Swarthmore
     College, April, 1886; pp. 51. _Price 50 cents._

  =V. Introduction to the Constitutional and Political History of
     the Individual States.= By J. F. JAMESON, Ph. D. and Associate in
     History, J. H. U. May, 1886; pp. 29. _Price 50 cents._

  =VI. The Puritan Colony at Annapolis, Maryland.= By DANIEL R.
     RANDALL, A. B. (St. John's College). June, 1886; pp. 47. _Price
     50 cents._

  =VII-VIII-IX. History of the Land Question in the United States.=
     By SHOSUKE SATO, B. S. (Sapporo), Ph. D. and Fellow by Courtesy,
     J. H. U. July-September, 1886; pp. 181. _Price $1.00._

  =X. The Town and City Government of New Haven.= By CHARLES H.
     LEVERMORE, Ph. D. (J. H. U.), Instructor in History, University
     of California. October, 1886; pp. 103. _Price 50 cents._

  =XI-XII. The Land System of the New England Colonies.= By
     MELVILLE EGLESTON, A. M. (Williams College). November and
     December, 1886. _Price 50 cents._


THIRD SERIES.--Maryland, Virginia, and Washington.--1885.

  =I. Maryland's Influence upon Land Cessions to the United
     States.= With minor papers on George Washington's Interest in
     Western Lands, the Potomac Company, and a National University. By
     HERBERT B. ADAMS, Ph. D. (Heidelberg). January, 1885; pp. 102.
     _Price 75 cents._

  =II-III. Virginia Local Institutions:--The Land System; Hundred;
     Parish; County; Town.= By EDWARD INGLE, A. B. (J. H. U.).
     February and March, 1885; pp. 127. _Price 75 cents._

  =IV. Recent American Socialism.= By RICHARD T. ELY, Ph. D.
     (Heidelberg), Associate in Political Economy, J. H. U. April,
     1885; pp. 74. _Price 50 cents._

  =V-VI-VII. Maryland Local Institutions:--The Land System;
     Hundred; County; Town.= By LEWIS W. WILHELM, Ph. D. (J. H. U.),
     Fellow by Courtesy, J. H. U. May, June, and July, 1885; pp. 130.
     _Price $1.00._

  =VIII. The Influence of the Proprietors in Founding the State of
     New Jersey.= By AUSTIN SCOTT, Ph. D. (Leipzig), formerly
     Associate and Lecturer, J. H. U.; Professor of History, Political
     Economy, and Constitutional Law, Rutgers College. August, 1885;
     pp. 26. _Price 25 cents._

  =IX-X. American Constitutions; The Relations of the Three
     Departments as Adjusted by a Century.= By HORACE DAVIS, A. B.
     (Harvard). San Francisco, California. September and October,
     1885; pp. 70. _Price 50 cents._

  =XI-XII. The City of Washington.= By JOHN ADDISON PORTER, A. B.
     (Yale). November and December, 1885; pp. 56. _Price 50 cents._


SECOND SERIES.--Institutions and Economics.--1884.

  =I-II. Methods of Historical Study.= By HERBERT B. ADAMS, Ph. D.
     (Heidelberg). January and February, 1884; pp. 137.*

  =III. The Past and the Present of Political Economy.= By RICHARD
     T. ELY, Ph. D. (Heidelberg). March, 1884; pp. 64.*

  =IV. Samuel Adams, The Man of the Town Meeting.= By JAMES K.
     HOSMER, A. M. (Harvard), Professor of English and German
     Literature, Washington University, St. Louis. April, 1884; pp.
     60. _Price 35 cents._

  =V-VI. Taxation in the United States.= By HENRY CARTER ADAMS, Ph.
     D. (J. H. U.), Professor of Political Economy, University of
     Michigan. May and June, 1884; pp. 79.*

  =VII. Institutional Beginnings in a Western State.= By JESSE
     MACY, A. B. (Iowa College); Professor of Historical and Political
     Science, Iowa College. July, 1884; pp. 38. _Price 25 cents._

  =VIII-IX. Indian Money as a Factor In New England Civilization.=
     By WILLIAM B. WEEDEN, A. M. (Brown Univ.). August and September,
     1884; pp. 51. _Price 50 cents._

  =X. Town and County Government in the English Colonies of North
     America.= By EDWARD CHANNING, Ph.D. (Harvard); Instructor in
     History, Harvard College. October, 1884; pp. 57.*

  =XI. Rudimentary Society among Boys.= By JOHN JOHNSON, A B. (J.
     H. U.); Instructor in History and English, McDonogh Institute,
     Baltimore Co., Md. November, 1884; pp. 56. _Price 50 cents._

  =XII. Land Laws of Mining Districts.= By CHARLES HOWARD SHINN, A.
     B. (J. H. U.), Editor of the _Overland Monthly_. December, 1884;
     pp. 69. _Price 50 cents._


FIRST SERIES.--Local Institutions.--1883.

  =I. An Introduction to American Institutional History.= By EDWARD
     A. FREEMAN, D. C. L., LL. D., Regius Professor of Modern History,
     University of Oxford. With an Account of Mr. Freeman's Visit to
     Baltimore, by the Editor.*

  =II. The Germanic Origin of New England Towns.= Read before the
     Harvard Historical Society, May 9, 1881. By H. B. ADAMS, Ph. D.
     (Heidelberg), 1876. With Notes on Co-operation in University
     Work.*

  =III. Local Government in Illinois.= First published in the
     _Fortnightly Review_ By ALBERT SHAW, A. B. (Iowa College),
     1879--=Local Government in Pennsylvania.= Read before the
     Pennsylvania Historical Society, May 1, 1882 By E. R. L. GOULD,
     A. B. (Victoria University, Canada), 1882. _Price 30 cents._

  =IV. Saxon Tithingmen in America.= Read before the American
     Antiquarian Society, October 21, 1881. By H. B. ADAMS. 2d
     Edition. _Price 50 cents._

  =V. Local Government in Michigan and the Northwest.= Read before
     the Social Science Association, at Saratoga, September 7, 1882.
     By E. W. BEMIS A. B. (Amherst College), 1880. _Price 25 cents._

  =VI. Parish Institutions of Maryland.= By EDWARD INGLE, A. B.
     (Johns Hopkins University), 1882. _Price 40 cents._

  =VII. Old Maryland Manors.= By JOHN JOHNSON, A. B. (Johns Hopkins
     University), 1881. _Price 30 cents._

  =VIII. Norman Constables in America.= Read before the New England
     Historical & Genealogical Society, February 1, 1882. By H. B.
     ADAMS. 2d Edition. _Price 50 cents._

  =IX-X. Village Communities of Cape Ann and Salem.= From the
     Historical Collection of the Essex Institute. By H. B. ADAMS.*

  =XI. The Genesis of a New England State (Connecticut).= By
     ALEXANDER JOHNSTON, A. M. (Rutgers College), 1870; Professor of
     Political Economics and Jurisprudence at Princeton College.
     _Price 30 cents._

  =XII. Local Government and Free Schools in South Carolina.= Read
     before the Historical Society of South Carolina, December 15,
     1882. By B. J. RAMAGE.


The first annual series of monthly monographs devoted to History,
Politics, and Economics was begun in 1882-1883. Four volumes have thus
far appeared.

The separate volumes bound in cloth will be sold as follows:

  VOLUME I.--Local Institutions. 479 pp. $4.00.
  VOLUME II.--Institutions and Economics. 629 pp. $4.00.
  VOLUME III.--Maryland, Virginia, and Washington. 595 pp. $4.00.
  VOLUME IV.--Municipal Government and Land Tenure. 610 pp. $3.50.

     _The set of four volumes will be sold together for $12.50 net._

  VOLUME V.--Municipal Government and Economics. (1887.)

     _This volume will be furnished in monthly parts upon receipt of
     subscription price, $3; or the bound volume will be sent at the
     end of the year 1887 for $3.50._


EXTRA VOLUMES OF STUDIES.

In connection with the regular annual series of Studies, a series of
Extra Volumes is proposed. It is intended to print them in a style
uniform with the regular Studies, but to publish each volume by
itself, in numbered sequence and in a cloth binding uniform with the
First, Second, Third, and Fourth Series. The volumes will vary in size
from 200 to 500 pages, with corresponding prices. Subscriptions to the
Annual Series of Studies will not necessitate subscriptions to the
Extra Volumes, although they will be offered to regular subscribers at
reduced rates.

  =EXTRA VOLUME I.--The Republic of New Haven: A History of
     Municipal Evolution.= By CHARLES H. LIVERMORE, Ph. D., Baltimore.

     This volume, now ready, comprises 350 pages octavo, with various
     diagrams and an index. It is sold, bound in cloth, at $2.00.

  =EXTRA VOLUME II.--Philadelphia, 1681-1887. A History of
     Municipal Development.= By EDWARD P. ALLINSON, A. M. (Haverford),
     and BOIES PENROSE, A. B. (Harvard).

     The volume will comprise about 300 pages, octavo. It will be
     sold, bound in cloth, at $3.00; in law-sheep, at $3.50.

  =EXTRA VOLUME III.--Baltimore and the Nineteenth of April, 1861.=
     By GEORGE WILLIAM BROWN, Chief Judge of the Supreme Bench of
     Baltimore, and Mayor of the City in 1861. Price $1.00.

       *       *       *       *       *

All communications relating to subscriptions, exchanges, etc., should
be addressed to the PUBLICATION AGENCY OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS
UNIVERSITY, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND.

The following table of contents will serve to indicate the scope and
character of the topics treated in Mr. Levermore's History of New
Haven:

  CHAPTER I. THE GENESIS OF NEW HAVEN. -- Davenport and Eaton. --
     Formation of a State. -- Town-Meetings. -- Fundamental Agreement.
     -- Davenport's Policy. -- Theophilus Eaton.

  CHAPTER II. THE EVOLUTION OF TOWN GOVERNMENT. -- Social Order. --
     Town Courts. -- The Quarters. -- Military Organization. -- The
     Watch. -- The Marshal. -- The Town Drummer. -- Minor Offices. --
     Roads. -- Fences. -- Cattle. -- Supervisors. -- Doctor. --
     School-Teacher. -- Viewers and Brewers. -- The Townsmen. --
     Currency and Taxation.

  CHAPTER III. THE LAND QUESTION. -- Official Control over
     Alienations and Dwellings. -- Divisions of the Outland. -- New
     Haven a Village Community. -- Evolution of Subordinate Townships.
     -- The Delaware Company.

  CHAPTER IV. THE UNION WITH CONNECTICUT. THE BIRTH OF NEWARK. -- A
     New Party within the Colony. -- Terms of Admission of Strangers.
     -- Increasing Importance of Townsmen. -- The Village Question. --
     New Haven and the Restored Stuart. -- Hegira to New Jersey.

  CHAPTER V. THE WORK OF THE COURTS IN JUDICATURE AND LEGISLATION.
     -- Drunkenness. -- Sabbath-breaking. -- Spiritual
     Discouragements. -- Quakers and Witches. -- Lewdness. -- Methods
     of Civil Procedure. -- Legislation concerning Trade and Prices.
     -- Arbitration. -- Magisterial Interest in Trade. -- Revival of
     the Common Law and English Usage.

  CHAPTER VI. NEW HAVEN A CONNECTICUT TOWN, 1664-1700. -- Changes
     in Constitution. -- Hopkins Grammar School. -- Minister's Tax. --
     Tithingmen. -- Justice of the Peace. -- Divisions of Land. --
     Indian Reservations. -- The Village Controversy. -- Public
     Benevolence. -- Indian Wars. -- Villages again. -- Tyranny of
     Andros. -- Local Enactments. -- Intemperance. -- Funeral Customs.

  CHAPTER VII. NEW HAVEN A CONNECTICUT TOWN, 1700-1784. -- The
     Quarrel with East Haven. -- Yale College. -- The Walpolean
     Lethargy. -- Sale of the Town's Poor. -- First Post-Office. --
     First Oyster Laws. -- Sketch of the Town's Commerce. -- The
     Approach of the Revolution. -- New Haven during the War. --
     Committees. -- Articles of Confederation. -- Treatment of Tories.
     -- Final Division of the Township. -- The Church the Germ of the
     Town.

  CHAPTER VIII. THE DUAL GOVERNMENT. TOWN AND CITY. 1784-1886. --
     Town-Born _vs._ Interloper. -- First Phases of City Politics. --
     First Charter. -- Description of the City. -- Municipal
     Improvements. -- Fire Department. -- Adornment of the Green. --
     Public Letters to the Presidents and Others. -- Downfall of
     Federalism. -- Slavery and Abolition. -- Municipal Growth. --
     Sects. -- Administrative Changes. -- Windfall from Washington. --
     Liquor Traffic. -- Light in the Streets. -- High School. -- Era
     of Railways. -- Needs of the Poor. -- The City Meeting. --
     Charter of 1857. -- Town Officers. -- City Improvement. -- Police
     and Fire Departments. -- In the Civil War. -- Recent Charters. --
     Conservative Influences in the Community.

  CHAPTER IX. THE PRESENT MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION. -- School
     District. -- Town Government. -- Town-Meeting. -- Consolidation.
     -- City Government. -- City Judiciary. -- City Executive. -- City
     Legislature. -- Legislative Control over the Commissions. --
     Conduct of Commissions. -- Executive Organization. --
     Administrative Courts. -- Frequent Elections. -- Board of
     Councilmen. -- Choice of Aldermen.

       Appendix A.--Mr. Pierson's Elegy.
       "        B.--The Town of Naugatuck.
       "        C.--Dr. Manasseh Cutler's Diary.
       "        D.--A Town Court of Elections. New Haven, A. D. 1656.

The volume now ready comprises 350 pages octavo, with various diagrams
and an index. It will be sold, neatly bound in cloth, at $2.00.
Subscribers to the STUDIES can obtain at reduced rates this new
volume.




PHILADELPHIA

1681-1887:

A History of Municipal Development.

BY

EDWARD P. ALLINSON, A. M., AND BOIES PENROSE, A. B., OF THE
PHILADELPHIA BAR.


While several general histories of Philadelphia have been written,
there is no history of that city as a municipal corporation. Such a
work is now offered, based upon the Acts of Assembly, the City
Ordinances, the State Reports, and many other authorities. Numerous
manuscripts in the Pennsylvania Historical Society, in Public
Libraries, and in the Departments at Philadelphia and Harrisburg have
also been consulted, and important facts found therein are now for the
first time published.

The development of the government of Philadelphia affords a peculiarly
interesting study, and is full of instruction to the student of
municipal questions. The first charter granted by the original
proprietor, William Penn, created a close, self-elected corporation,
consisting of the "Mayor, Recorder and Common Council," holding office
for life. Such corporations survived in England from medieval times to
the passage of the Reform Act of 1835. The corporation of Philadelphia
possessed practically no power of taxation, and few and extremely
limited powers of any kind. As a rapidly growing city required greater
municipal powers, the legislature instead of increasing the powers of
the corporation which, being self-elected, was held in distrust by
the citizens, established from time to time various independent
boards, commissions, and trusts for the control of taxation, streets,
poor, etc. These boards were subsequently transformed into the city
departments as they exist to-day. The State and municipal legislation,
extending over two centuries, is extremely varied and frequently
experimental. It affords instruction illustrative of almost every form
of municipal expedient and constitution.

The development of the city government of Philadelphia has been
carefully traced through many changes in the powers and duties of the
mayor, in the election and powers of the subordinate executive
officers, in the position and relation of the various departments, in
the legislative and executive powers of councils, in the frequently
shifting distribution of executive power between the mayor and
councils, and in the procedure of councils. _In 1885 an Act of
Assembly was passed providing for a new government for Philadelphia
which embodies the latest ideas upon municipal questions._

The history of the government of the city thus begins with the
medieval charter of most contracted character, and ends with _the
liberal provisions of the Reform Act of 1885_. It furnishes
illustrations of almost every phase of municipal development. The
story cannot fail to interest all those who believe that the question
of better government for our great cities is one of critical
importance, and who are aware of the fact that this question is
already receiving widespread attention. The subject had become so
serious in 1876 that Governor Hartranft, in his message of that year,
called the attention of the Legislature to it in the following
succinct and forcible statement: "_There is no political problem that
at the present moment occasions so much just alarm and is obtaining
more anxious thought than the government of cities._"

The consideration of the subject naturally resolves itself into five
sharply-defined periods, to each of which a chapter has been devoted,
as indicated by the following summary, which, while not exhaustive,
will suggest the general scope.

  CHAPTER I. FIRST PERIOD, 1681-1701. -- Founding of the city. --
     Functions of the Provincial Council. -- Slight but certain
     evidence of some organized city government prior to Penn's
     Charter.

  CHAPTER II. SECOND PERIOD, 1701-1789. -- Penn's authority. --
     Charter of 1701. -- Attributes of the Proprietary Charter; its
     medieval character. -- Integral parts of the corporation. --
     Arbitrary nature and limited powers. -- Acts of Legislature
     creating independent commissions. -- Miscellaneous acts and
     ordinances. -- The Revolution. -- Abrogation of Charter. --
     Legislative government. -- Summary.

  CHAPTER III. THIRD PERIOD, 1789-1854. -- Character of Second
     Charter. -- Causes leading to its passage. -- A modern municipal
     corporation. -- Supplements. -- Departments. -- Concentration of
     authority. -- Councils. -- Bicameral system adopted. -- Officers,
     how appointed or elected. -- Diminishing powers of the mayor. --
     Introduction of standing committees. -- Finance. -- Debt. --
     Revenue. -- Review of the period.

  CHAPTER IV. FOURTH PERIOD, 1854-1887. -- Act of consolidation. --
     Causes leading to its passage. -- Features of New Charter. --
     Supplements. -- Extent of territory covered by consolidation. --
     Character of outlying districts. -- New Constitution. -- Relation
     of city and county. -- Summary of changes effected. --
     Twenty-five _quasi_-independent departments established. --
     Encroachment of legislative upon executive powers. -- Resulting
     Citizens' Reform movement. -- Committee of one hundred. --
     Contracts. -- Debt. -- Delusive methods of finance. -- Reform
     movement in councils. -- Causes leading to the passage of the
     Bullit Bill. -- Review of the period.

  CHAPTER V. FIFTH PERIOD. -- Text of the Act of 1885. -- History
     of the passage of the Bullit Bill. -- Changes by it effected in
     the organic law. -- Conclusions.


PRICE.

The volume will comprise about 300 pages, octavo, and will be sold,
bound in cloth, at $3; in law-sheep at $3.50; and at reduced rates to
regular subscribers to the "Studies."

Orders and subscriptions should be addressed to THE PUBLICATION,
AGENCY OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND.





