Why Were The Radical Republicans Radical?

[Eva Elisabeth]

(05-01-2013 04:41 PM)Liz Rosenthal Wrote:  

(05-01-2013 02:43 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Liz, surely Lincoln provided the necessary will, and from the very beginning he wanted to bring in the full power of the North against the rebellions. But if he had been more successfull in urging and pressing his generals during 1861/62, do you think the war would have come to an earlier end? And what would have happened to slavery then? (Certainly there might have been and still be endless speculation on this, but I'm curious on personal opinions.)

It might have come to an earlier end... and the great question is, as you stated, would slavery have remained intact? In a way, General McClellan did Lincoln, the abolitionists and the slaves a great favor in being such a timid military leader. If the war had ended in mid-1862, Lincoln wouldn't have had the authority, as Commander-in-Chief, to issue the Emancipation Proclamation as a war measure. Meanwhile, he was trying to persuade the border states to get rid of the institution, but wasn't getting any cooperation.

The most that might have happened was Lincoln ensuring that slavery did not spread to the territories, which is the reason he came to political prominence in the first place.

I'm just speculating here, but perhaps, if Lincoln had been luckier with his generals earlier, the war might have ended a year or two sooner, but not necessarily in 1862. After all, success in Virginia may or may not have led the rebel government to surrender. In that case, Lincoln would still have needed his troops in the West to move eastward, conquering the rebel army as they went. That was going to take time. So, while Lincoln might have issued his Emancipation Proclamation, there might have been little chance to push for the 13th Amendment.

By the way, Eva, I just finished reading Tad Lincoln's Father, which I'm sure you'll love. In fact, anyone interested in gathering genuine snatches of Lincoln's personality would love this book. It's unfortunate, though, that the author, Julia Taft Bayne, who wrote the book as a senior citizen sometime in the 1920s (I believe), still used much of the terminology to refer to African-Americans that people had done in the mid-19th century. The book contained many references to "darkies," and she even referred to one of her family's black servants as "our yellow girl," by which I assume she meant a light-skinned black woman. So, if one can get past that cringe-worthy stuff, the book is quite an enjoyable read.

One more comment on Tad Lincoln's Father, though. I wonder how accurate a lot of the dialog among the children really was. For one thing, Julia gave Tad such a starring role that you would have thought he was the cleverest and most loquacious kid around! As he was only about eight years old at the time, and spoke with a severe impediment, I question whether Tad said all the things that Julia had him saying. I would have thought brother Willie, with his gifted intellect and more mature age, might have been the one to offer most of the entertaining observations. But I suppose that's a minor quibble; presumably, the incidents described in the book really happened, regardless of who did he talking.

Liz, you were right, I really enjoyed reading "Tad Lincoln's father". The title might be a bit misleading since the book is as much about J.T.'s life. But she reveals some interesting insights about her education and (social) habits, e.g. I was amazed that monolingual foreign language teaching (students were only allowed to speak French at school) had already been practised in those days. I suppose Mary's education had been about the same, what a difference to A.L.'s poor frontier schooling!
I was also pleased with the (uncommmon) point of view on Mary, whom J.T. first of all introduces and presents as a lovable, likable character. Whatever positive I had read about Mary before, her skills and abilities had always been stated in a way an attorney defends an dafendant, but none of this had suggested truely lovable character traits.
Back to school(ing). J.T. mentions that during wartime no schools were open in Washington (p.65). Is this true? As far as I know, Washington was only once (in July 1864)seriously threatened, so why? Was it due to the risk of passing on epidemic deseases? Were the buildings used as military hospitals or did the teaching staff have to serve as nurses or soldiers?
Finally, what do the 3"R's" in "we formed some acquaintance with the '3R's'" (p.22) stand for? (Whoever could give a hint,please help!)