The pictorial history of the great Civil War : its causes, origin, conduct and results ... containing carefully prepared biographies of the leading generals and naval commanders of both the North and the South

Front matter

973.7

I

i[

Preface

IN oflfering to the public a new History of the Great Civil War, a few words of explanation are necessary. Of histories, general and special, relating to the late struggle a number have been published, but they were nearly all written at a ’ period so close to the war that the writers were unconsciously biassed by the strong feelings which they shared in common with their fellow-citizens during the occurrence of the events they relate. Time had not softened their prejudices sufficiently to enable them to write with the judicial calmness necessary to the proper treatment of such a subject. It is hoped that in the long years that have elapsed since the return of peace enough has been made plain, and sufficient calmness has been gained, to enable the writer to prepare a history which shall do impartial justice to the struggle itself and to the actors engaged in it.

It has been my aim to present a continuous narrative covering the entire area of operations, both military and naval, and free from those interruptions which in general history are unavoidable. I have endeavored to carry the reader with me over sea and land, wherever the sounds of war were heard, and to present to him in a series of vivid and faithful pictures the events which marked the progress of the great struggle. Of the movements of the hostile forces, and of the commanders under whom at different times and at different places these movements were made, I have expressed my opinion with great freedom, awarding praise or ^ blame as truth or justice seemed to call for the one or the other. I do not expect ^ that my judgments will find favor from all classes of readers, but I know that ^ they are the judgments of an unbiassed mind, solicitous for the truth and con- I strained only by the irresistible logic of facts.

^ My information I have drawn from sources too numerous to be mentioned in ^ Retail. Contemporary magazines and pamphlets, private letters and documents of various kinds which have been kindly placed at my disposal, — all have been consulted with more or less profit. In cases of doubt, where testimony was absent or confiicting, I have corresponded with some of the principal leaders in the

IV

PREFACE.

strife ; and the information thus derived from both Northern and Southern sources has been to me of incalculable value. Of the results of the labors of others in the same field, it is hardly necessary to say, I have taken full advantage. To the exhaustive history of the war by Dr. Lossing, and to the scarcely less exhaustive, but in some respects more philosophical, work of Dr. Draper, I confess myself under great obligations. I have perused with profit and with pleasure Prof. William Swinton’s ** Decisive Battles of the War and in his “ Campaigns of the Army of the Potomac ” I have found much with which to illumine and adorn these pages. Of the ‘‘ History of the Civil War in America,^’ by the Comte de Paris, so far as it has advanced, I cannot speak too highly ; and in the preparation of some of the earlier chapters of this work I have found it a useful book of reference. In terms of similar praise I desire to speak of the “ Memoirs of General Sherman ” and of Badeau's “ Military Life of General Grant.” From among the many other works which I have consulted with advantage, and to which I cannot refuse to admit my indebtedness, I would mention the “ Bebellion Kecord,” '‘The Great Civil War” by Tomes and Smith, “Grant and his Campaigns” by Dr. Henry Copp^e, Tenney’s “Military and Naval History of the Rebellion,”

“ The Battle of Gettysburg ” by Samuel P. Bates, Pollard’s “ Lost Cause,” and “ Chancellorsville ” by Hotchkiss and Allan.

As it is, this work is now given to the public ; and if it shall be found that, while doing reasonable justice to all the parties concerned, I have in any degree been able to render such disastrous struggles impossible for the future, I shall feel , that the hours spent over these pages have not been spent in vain.

J. L. W.

V

0.^

If.

■■tTv"

.if v'l;

4f T.

I'rli f V'Vv'

PICTORIAL HISTORY

OF

THE GKEAT CIYIL WAR.

Chapter I

The Aim and Object of this History. — The Causes of the War. — State Eights. — The Tariff and Slavery. — Diverging Interests of North and South. — Effect of the Abolition of Slavery in the British Colonies on American Sentiment. — The Missouri Compromise. — The Fugitive Slave Bill. — Repeal of the Missouri Compromise. — Formation of the Republican Party. — Kansas Struggle. — Triumph of the Anti-Slavery Party. — The Campaign of 1856. — Buchanan elected President. — The Kansas-Nebraska Struggle. — Buchanan’s Unfortunate Administration.—The Dred Scott Decision. — The John Brown Raid. — The Sale of Arms to the South. — Secession and Organization of the Confederacy. — Election and Inauguration of President Lincoln. — His Address. — The Firing upon Fort Sumter.

In many respects the American Civil War was the most momentous struggle that ever marked the history of the world. Not only did it employ larger armies and fleets than were ever called for by other combatants; not only did it exceed the immortal campaigns of Frederick and Napoleon in the magnitude and brilliancy of its operations; not only did its theatre comprise an area larger than the whole continent of Europe, embracing as many varieties of climate, and presenting as many natural obstacles to be overcome ; not only did it inaugurate a new era and a new mode of warfare, — but it also served to develop the strength and resources of the country it was supposed to be wasting, and to make plain to the world the true character, the immense resources, and the especial genius for war of the American people, and to offer a convincing proof of the imperishable nature of free institutions when entrusted to the keeping of a race of men trained to understand and value them — men willing and resolved to maintain them even at the cost of their lives. The magnitude and grandeur of the events of this great struggle give to them a picturesqueness, so to speak, which must make a faithful account of them deeply interesting to our people.

To write the history of such a struggle must be no easy task, for while lauding the glory of the conqueror the virtues of the vanquished must not be forgotten. In such a task passion and prejudice, sectional pride and intolerance of opposition, have no place; the faithful historian must record events as they occurred. Such a task we propose to ourselves in the work now before us.

In the following pages it will be our

CAUSES OF THE WAR.

aim and endeavor to carry the reader with us, as we follow the contending armies and mark the progress of the conflict ; to halt, from time to time, as the embattled hosts confront each other, listening to the roar of battle and witnessing the wild work of war — the devastation of fields, the desolation of homes, the carnage, the slaughter, the tortured agony of the wounded, and the ghastly features of the dead ; to rejoice with the triumphant defenders of the right, without being ungenerous to the erring and the vanquished ; and finally, to point out the blessed results which flowed out of the terrible struggle, not to the United States alone, but to all nations and to all peoples.

Preliminary to this, however, and in order to enable the reader intelligently to .follow us in our descriptions of the different battle scenes, it is necessary to recount briefly, but clearly and impartially, the remote and proximate causes of the rebellion and the events which immediately preceded the outbreak of hostilities. The antao^onism between North and South which came the secession of South Carolina from the Union was not new. It was old almost as the Union itself. It had its roots deep down in the nation’s history. It might be interesting, if it lay within the scope of this work, to show how much of this antagonism was due to race, how much was due to climate, how much was due to interest, and the pursuits of life. In all these particulars, it could be easily shown, there was difference between North and

South. But to enter into these details with any degree of fulness would be foreign to our plan. From the very commencement of our national history difference of opinion prevailed as to the nature of the bond which held the States together. It was held by one class of statesmen, that the Federal Union was a league or confederation which might be dissolved at will by any of the States. It was held by another class of statesmen that the Federal Union constituted a nation, with a national government, and that no one State could secede from the Union without .the consent of all the others. This was the radical difference out of which ultimately grew tlie rebellion.

It was not until certain material questions arose that any serious j^ractical point was given to this difference of opinion. In course of time such questions did arise. Chief among these * were those which related to the tariff and to slavery. The South, which depended on the products of the soil, demanded free trade. The North, which derived its wealth from the manufacturing industries, called for protection. And while great statesmen advocated these conflicting views, Congress witnessed many a stormy scene. The question, however, which was a permanent source of division, and on which agreement was found to be impossible, was that of slavery.

At the time of the formation of the Union, slavery was more or less common in all the States. It was more common in the South than in the North, but it existed in all the States. The invention

THE MISSOUKI COMPROMISE, of the cotton-gin by Whitney, in 1793, rendering, as it did, the cultivation of cotton the leading branch of Southern industry, largely increased the demand for slave labor. While slavery, for a variety of reasons, had ceased to be a source of v^ealth in the North, and was gradually dying out, it had become a source of great wealth to the Southern planters and a conspicuous feature of Southern life. In the year 1860, the negro population of the Southern States had increased to about four millions. In the North, slavery had completely died out, and in the States of the Northwest, which were now being rapidly fdled up with free immigrants, it never found a place. Slavery was thus found to be a root of bitterness. It determined and rendered permanent the natural antagonism between North and South. Year by year the gulf was Avidening; and it became more and more apparent that if the South were not to l)e allowed to maintain its peculiar and favorite institution, and would not be permitted to secede, a gigantic civil Avar Avas one of the certainties of the not distant future.

The slavery question, as we have said, was a cause of division from the beginning of our history. The anti- [ la very agitation in England, and the passing of the memorable law in 1807, cabolishing the slave trade in the Britisli colonies, had naturally enough a powerful influence on this side of the Atlantic. It helped to determine the purpose of the North, and it infused neAV life into all those who were in favor of abolition. It was not, however, until about the year 1820 that the real political struggle began. With the famous Missouri Compromise began that political contest out of which grew the civil war. It was the first of a series of steps which led up to the act of secession and the firing on Fort Sumter. The Missouri Compromise, it was supposed, was a complete and satisfactory settlement of the dispute between the North and the South. It turned out to be a great source of trouble. Its history is as follows : Missouri formed part of the Louisiana purchase. After the organization of the ‘‘ Territory of Orleans,” in 1803, Missouri formed part of the “District of Louisiana.” Later it took the name of “ Missouri Territory.” The State of Missouri was a part of that Teri’itory. In 1820, Missouri applied to Congress for admission into the Union as a State. It was proposed that the application be granted only on condition that slaA^ery be prohibited in the new State. The pro-slaA^ery party were indignant. Both in and out of Congress party feeling ran high. The discussion, which was conducted with great bitterness, resulted in what was called a compromise. It Avas agreed that slavery be allowed in Missouri, but prohibited in all the territory of the United States north and AA^est of the northern boundary of Arkansas. On these terms Missouri entered the Union as a State. The compromise, from which so much Avas expected, settled nothing. The Southern people continued to feel and act as if they had been hindered in the exercise of their rights. In 1850, they succeeded in passing the

CAUSES OF THE WAR.

Fugitive Slave Bill, whicli enabled masters to recover their slaves who might have escaped to a free State. This act gave gi*eat umbrage to the North. In 1854 the South gained another triumph by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. This act, which had for its object the organization of a territorial government in Kansas and Nebraska, pi’ovided that the people of the Territories should be at liberty to adopt or exclude slavery, as they thought lit. State Bights were thus again in the ascendant; and the Southern planters were left at li])erty to establish their favorite institutions all over the Southwest. At this juncture was formed the Bepublican party — a 'party whose principal doctrine was opposition to the extension of slavery. The organization of the Bepublican party made it plain to all the world that the struggle between the South and the North — between the pro-slavery party on the one hand and the anti-slavery party on the other — meant war to the knife. A truce was now no longer possible.

These preliminary remarks would be incomplete without a passing reference to what is known as the Kansas struggle. Kansas, like Missouri, originally formed part of that immense territory which went by the name of Louisiana. It will be remembered by the reader that the Missouri Compromise left the southwestern provinces open for the introduction of slavery. The repeal of that act by Mr. Douglas’s bill did not destroy the hopes of the southern planters with regard to Kansas. From the date of the Missouri Compromise it had been the battle-ground of the two contending parties. Both the pro-slavery party and the anti-slavery party did their best to colonize it. From the East and the Northwest freemen poured into the new territory, and emigrant aid societies” were formed in all the Free States to lend the freemen a helping hand. The South was not less industrious in its elforts. “ Border ruffians,” as they were called, rushed in from the neighboring State of Missouri, and a reign of violence ensued almost if not entirely unparalleled in the history of the country. The Kansas struggle, as can easily be imagined, deeply embittered feeling on both sides, and had a powerful influence in hastening the “irrepressible conflict.” At last, after some years of weary fighting, the anti-slavery party triumphed, and Kansas was admitted a free State 30th January, 1861. While this struggle was at its height, took place the presidential election of 1856. It was one of the keenest contests in the history of the country. Mr. Fremont, the Bepublican candidate, polled a large number of votes; but the Democrats carried the day, and Mr. Buchanan, a warm friend of the South, came into power. The election of a Democratic president was more an apparent than a real gain to the South. Mr. Buchanan, with all his immense influence, could not hinder the admission of Kansas as a free State ; and the settlement of the Kansas difficulty was justly regarded as an anti-slavery triumph. “ The Kansas-Nebraska struggle,” as Dr. Draper well jmts it, “ marks an epoch in the great contro-

BUCHANAN’S ADMINISTRATION.

versy between the North and the South. It closes the period of parliamentary or congressional debate between them, and introduces one of violence and open war. The South clearly perceived that nothing more was to be hoped for from peaceful measures, and that, if it were its intention to perpetuate or even to protect African slavery, it could do so only by force.”

The history of the next four years is the history of a war of opposing views and conflicting aims. The South was becoming more embittered, the North more resolute. The Buchanan administration was in fact a great misfortune to the country. Of all the public men of his time, he was perhaps least fitted for the stern duties which devolved upon the chief of the State. Men like Cromwell or Napoleon or General Jackson would have been equal to the situation ; but Buchanan was neither a Cromwell nor a Napoleon, nor is he to be mentioned in the same breath with General Jackson. Admirably adapted for the high position in times of peace, he was altogether unequal to the stirring times in which he found himself. A strong hand would have seized the helm and acted with decision. The prospect (J war unnerved him; he hesitated, and the vessel floated to destruction. His term of office was marked by four great events — the Dred Scott decision in 18') 7 ; tile John Brown laid in the fall of 1850; the sale of arms to the South, and the oi-ganization and retirement from the Union of the Southern Confederacy. The Dred Scott decision was very properly regarded in tlie

North as the virtual establishment of slavery throughout all the States of the Union, and converting it from a local into a national institution. Accoixlimr to the decision given by Judge Tanev of the Supreme Court in this case, a slave owner might carry his slaves with him into any State of the Union. Some of the Northern States resented this decision by yiassing Personal Liberty Laws,” declaring freedom to every slave who came within their borders. The bitter feelings engendered on both sides by the Dred Scott affair were aggravated by the John Brown I'aid. It was no doubt a foolish affair, which never had the appi’oval of any large or influential section of the Northern people ; but it was felt by the South to be a demonstration of Northern sentiment, and it was treated accordingly. The execution of Brown and his associates was no doubt justified by the law of the land, but it was nevertheless a gi’eat blunder. It exalted a foolish filibustering raid into the character of a crusade for liberty, and it transformed a crazy old man into a hero and a martyr. Blood had now been shed, and reconciliation had become impossible.

In the midst of the heat and excitement occasioned by the Dred Scott decision and the John Brown raid, the South was secretly and busily ])re])aring for war. Through the indifference of the government at Washington, and through the treachery of the secretary of war, lai’ge stores of arms and ammunition were transferred to the South; and while the North was dreaming of war only as a prol)ability, the South

CAUSES OF THE WAR.

t was armed to the teeth. Such was the condition of things North and South when the time came to nominate a candidate for the presidency in the spring of 1860. The people were divided into four parties. Each party had its own candidate, and each candidate had his own platform. The candidates were Breckenridge, of the Southern Democracy ; Douglas, of the Northern Democracy ; Lincoln, of the Kepublican party; and Bell, of the Union Constitutional party. On the platform that “there is no law for slavery in the Territories, and no power to enact one ; and that Congress is bound to prohibit it in or exclude it fi’om every Federal Territory,” the Bepublicans carried the day. The elec- Nov. Lincoln on the 6th of No-

vember, 1860, crushed the hopes of the South. It was the signal for secession. South Carolina was the first to move. At a special convention, held Dec. on the 20th of December, I860-, 20* her connection with the Union was dissolved by an unanimous vote. The example of South Carolina was promptly followed by Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana, and later by Texas. As Buchanan held the opinion that neither he nor Congress had the right to coerce a State into submission, nothing was done to hinder the progress of secession. On the 4th of February, 1861, a Feb. convention of the seceded States 4* was held at Montgomery, Alabama; and there a constitution was adopted and a government organized, under the name of the Confederate States of

America. Jefferson Davis, late United States senator from Mississippi, was elected president, and Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia vice-president. The seceders took possession of all the forts, arsenals, custom-houses, ships, and all other Federal property within their boundaries. In the South, in the possession of the United States there remained only Fort Sumter, in Charleston Harbor, Fort Pickens, near Pensacola, and the forts off the southern extremity of Florida.

On Marcli 4th, 1861, Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated. In his ad- j^jar. di •ess, the president declared it to 4. be his duty to “hold, occupy and possess the places and property ” belonging to the Federal government in the South. This was accepted by the Southern leaders as a declaration of war. Several of the southern-born officers in the United Stares army and navy, who had not yet declared themselves, now entered the Confederate service. Without delay, General Beauregard was placed at the head of the forces, about four thousand men, who were already investing Fort Sumter, in Charleston Harbor. Fort Sumter Avas held by a garrison of about eighty men under Major Anderson, whose name will be memorable in American history. At the time of the secession of South Carolina, in December, 1860, Anderson was stationed at Fort Moultrie, but for greater security he removed to Fort Sumter. It was known that the garrison was reduced to great straits, and must soon surrender, unless supplies and reinforcements came from Washing-

CHARLESTON HARBOR.

ton. It was believed that the president and his advisers were disposed to with- 'draw the garrison. Early in April, however, it became known that the government had decided to send a fleet with supplies to Major Anderson and his garrison. Beauregard received instructions from the authorities at Montgomery to demand the surrender of the fort; and, if his demand was not complied with, he was to reduce it by force. On the afternoon of the April 11th of April, 18^1, the demand to surrender was made. Major Anderson refused to comply. Early on the following morning the threat which was made was carried out, and Are was opened on Fort Sumter by the Confederate land batteries. The American Civil War had commenced.

Chapter II

Charleston Harbor — Fort'Sumter, — Gardiner and Floyd, — Major Anderson. — Adjutant-General Cooper. — Evidence of Conspiracy. — Transfer of Arms from Northern to Southern Arsenals. — Jefferson Davis’ “Little Bill,” — Captain Foster's Workmen. — General Scott becoming alarmed. — Conspirators in the Cabinet. — Anderson moves from Fort Moultrie into Fort Sumter. — Great Excitement ail over the Country. — Indignation in the South. — Kesignation of Floyd. — Action of the Secession Convention. — Castle Pinckney and Fort Moultrie occupied by the Secessionists. — Seizure of the Custom House and Post-Office. — The Southern Commissioners in Washington. — Their Extraordinary Demands Defused. — President Buchanan Aroused. — More Energy on the part of the Government. — The Star of the West. — Preparations for Attacking Fort Sumter, — The Star of the West seen in the Outer Harbor — Fired upon — Compelled to Betire. — Anderson called upon to Surrender Fort Sumter. — Secession Spreading. — The Peace Conference. — Election of Lincoln. — His Journey to Washington.— His Life in Danger, — His Inauguration. — His Address. — Anderson more Hopeful. — Disappointment. — Lincoln “Putting His Foot Down Firmly.” — The Belief Squadron. — Anderson again called upon to Surrender the Fort. — His Beply. — The First Shot. — The Bombardment. — The Belief Squadron Sighted. — Hope. — The Garrison Deduced to Extremities. — Bed-Hot Shot. — Fort Sumter in Flames. — The Last Three Cartridges. — The Flag Staff Shot Down. — The notorious Wigfall. — Wigfall’s Deception Discovered. — Anderson Indignant. — Surrenders on his own Terms. — Anderson and his Men safe on board the Baltic.

Before the close of 1860, public attendon was centered on Charleston Harbor. It was here that the first indications of actual war were revealed. The harbor of Charleston is one of the finest on the South Atlantic seaboard. During the years of peace and prosperity, great care had been taken of it by the State and Federal authorities ; and when South Carolina, yielding to the fierce impulses of reiiellion, took the bold step of retiring from the Union, it was one of the best guarded harbors in the States. It had the advantage of four powerful fortresses— Castle Pinckney, Fort Moultrie, Fort Johnson, and Fort Sumter- Castle Pinckney was situated upon the soutliern extremity of a tract of marshy land known as, Shute’s Folly Island, and was near the city of Charleston. Fort Moultrie stood on Sullivan’s Island, distant from Charleston between three and four miles, and not far removed

FORT SUMTER.

from the famous little palmetto-log fort of that name, made memorable during the War of Independence by its heroic defiance of the British fleet in 1776. Fort Johnson stood on James Island, and to the west of Fort Sumter. As a fortification it was of comparatively little account. Fort Sumter was by far the lai’gest and most important of these strongholds. Its position gave it an immense advantage over all the others. It was built in the middle of the entrance to the harbor prope ■; and its walls of defiance towered up on the southwestern edge of the ship channel. Fort Sumter was about three and a half miles from the city. A truncated pentagonal in form, its walls were of solid brick and concrete masonry. The island on which the fort was erected rested on a mud bank. The materials of which the island was composed were chips of granite from the quarries of New England. In the conveyance of these materials and in the construction of the island ten years were consumed, and the actual cost amounted to over half a million of dollars. The fort itself cost another half million. The walls, which were sixty feet high and from eight to twelve feet thick, were pierced for three tiers of guns on the north, east and west sides. The two lower tiers were under bomb-proof casemates. The first tier was intended for forty-two-pounder Paixhans, the other two were intended for eight and ten-inch columbiads. The full complement of guns was one hundred and forty, but when the war broke out there were only seventy-five guns in the work.

In 1860 Colonel Gardiner was commander in Charleston Harbor. A variety of circumstances encouraged the belief that Gardiner was in league with the enemy. The strange conduct of War Secretary Floyd and the cunning efforts of Jefferson Davis to secure arms for the South, had created a spirit of watchfulness, and Gardiner havins: revealed an inordinate amount of anxiety to have his supply of ammunition increased, incurred the displeasure of the government and was removed. The vacant place was filled without delay by Major Eobert Anderson, a native of Kentucky, and an oificer who had won some distinction in the Mexican campaigns. On the 20th November Anderson arrived and assumed the com- 20. mand, his head-quarters being at Fort Moultrie. It would have been strange if a man of his discernment had been deceived by the peculiar state of things which prevailed all around him. Anderson was not deceived. On the 23d of November he wrote to Adjutant-General Cooper, describing 23. the situation. In that letter he uses the following remarkable words : “That there is,” he says, “a settled determination to leave the Union and to obtain possession of this fort is apparent to all.” All the forts in the harbor, he assured General Cooper, were in a wretched condition, Foi*t Moultrie particularly inviting attack by its weakness. “ Fort Sumter and Castle Pinckney,” he went on to say, “must be garrisoned immediately, if the government determines to keep command of this harbor.” Major Anderson’s letter to

SALE OF AKMS TO THE SOUTH.

General Cooper, which contained much more to the same effect, must ever be legarded as one of the most impoibant official documents connected with the early history of the Civil War.

Anderson did not know — did not even suspect — that the ears to which he addressed his appeals were deaf, and that the heart which he hoped to touch was callous, by reason of rank treason. Adjutant-General Cooper, who w'as a native of the State of New York, but who had married a sister of Senator Ma-on of Virginia, was already sold to the Confederate cause. At the very moment that Major Anderson was writing his memorable letter. Cooper was making use of his position to obtain and communicate valuable information to the autliorities at Southern headquarters. Three months later, he left his office at Washington, hastened to Montgomery, Alabama, and was made adjutant -general of the Confederate forces, then busily preparing for war. Cooper, howevei', was not alone in his iniquity. The national capital had become a hotbed of treachery. Weak, undecided, and in the last months of his four years of office, the president would do nothing. The people of the North little imagined that the entire machinery of the government at Washington had been worked for an entire year in the interests of the Southern Doc. malcontents. On the 31st of December. Senator Wilson of Massachusetts offered a resolution in the Senate, asking the secretary of war to furnish information concerning the disposition of arms manufactured in the national armories or purchased for the use of the government during the past year. Mr. Holt tvas now at the head of the War Department, and the needed information was not long delayed. From the report submitted to the Senate, it appeared that as early as the 2Dth of December, 1859, Sec- ^ retary Floyd had ordered the transfer of seventy-five thousand percussion muskets, forty thousand muskets altered to percussion, and ten thousand percussion rifles from the armory at Springfield, Massachusetts, and the arsenals at Watervliet, New York, and Watertown, Massachusetts, to the arsenals at Fayetteville in North Carolina, Charleston in South Carolina, Augusta in Georgia, Mount Vernon in Alabama, and Baton Rouge in Louisiana. These arms, it appeared, were distributed in the spring of 1860. Only eleven days after this order had been issued by Floyd, Jefferson Davis introduced into the Senate a bill “ to authorize the sale of public arms to the sevei*al States and Territories, and to regulate the appointment of superintendents of the national armories.” The real object of this bill was not at first or at all generally perceived. It was not until the Senate was asked by Davis, on Feb. the ’21st of February, to take up 21. what he called a little bill,” which he hoped would ‘‘excite no discussion,” that treachery began to be suspected. On the 23d, two days afterward, Mr. Feb. Fessenden, senator from Maine, 23. asked for some explanations on the subject. Davis was i-eady with his reply. “The secretary of war,” he said, “ had