29, “The Shadows of Coming Events.”
It might have saved many of us a thousand ills, both in public and private life, had we been more observing of the times so as to have hidden from foreseen evils. Coming events do cast their shadow before them, and a proper regard for the warning they are intended to vive, would have found many of us quite differently situated to-day.
What do the shadows of coming events now clearly indicate? We have published Mr. Stanton’s order under the Confiscation Act of the late Congress. Our readers cannot have tried to see that whether wisely or unwisely, the border slave States, Tennessee included, are exempt from its sweeping provisions. We are not at a loss to divine whys this exemption was made. Like the forbearance of the All Father [sic] towards his rebellious children, it was intended to lead those States to repentance and obedience. In part of those states, the most sanguinary battles have been fought, and hitherto, except by unscrupulous individuals, the most sacred regard to private rights has been maintained by the Federal army. Guards have protected fences and families and property of all kinds, slaves especially, and most severe punishment has been meted [sic] out against the lawless ones who have disobeyed orders, until the complaining of fathers and brothers at home, have extorted from Congress the Confiscation Act, which Mr. Lincoln hesitates to enforce against our State and other semi-loyal States.
When we regard Mr. Lincoln’s policy in these exceptions, as wise or otherwise, we are compelled to accord him the best of motives. He desires that the latent unionism of the States shall have time and occasion to develope [sic], and that whatever may be the future necessities of the war, or the future calamites which it may entail upon us, he has given us timely warning, and abundant opportunity to escape them.
Our readers cannot suppose that under every; possible contingency, this order of things will continue. If within these States, guerrilla bands are organized and fostered; if the navigation of the river and the use of the railroads shall continue to be impeded, by the open consent and co-operation of our own citizens; if information to our enemies be systemically conveyed; if, in short, such shall be the developments of the future as to clearly prove that a considerable portion of our citizens yet adhere to the fortunes of the rebels, then will this forbearance cease, and the inevitable consequences be the more sweeping and devastating because of the continued long suffering and forbearance of the Federal authorities.
That this is a “coming event” the unmistakable “shadows” around us declare. We do not draw out conclusions from the tone of the Tribunes and Independents of the North, alone, but from the tone no less of the hitherto conservative papers, and the conservative citizens whom business has called to our city, and last, but not least, from men in the army who have spent a life time at home, in battling as they call it, for southern rights and southern institutions, and who entered the army a year ago or less, with the most settled purpose to leave it whenever the war should assume what they would pronounce a vindictive or unconstitutional policy against their “southern brethren.”
These are now the most clamorous for what they denominate a “war policy.” The speech of Major Gen. Wallace at Washington himself a life-long Democrat, and violent opposer of the party in power, is tame compared with the sentiments. More privately uttered by men of like home antecedents, now occupying high position in the army. The campaignings of a year, and personal intercourse with rebels, and with psuedo-Union men have educated [sic] them to a point of desperation, from which they would have shrunk a year ago, as the self-complacent Assyrian King did, when he indignantly said: Is thy servant a dog that he should do this great thing?” We could give names familiar to our citizens, but we need not.
The sufferers from the presence of the army complain, and not unjustly, that lawless gangs of soldiers pillage their gardens hereabouts, and that now and then a negro comes up missing, and that the satisfaction received from the authorizer is not commensurate with the loss sustained. That is undoubtedly true. Neither did they, in the piping times of peace, get compensation for such things lost at the hands of lawless men. These losses are of the same character, though probably more numerous now than then. But our losses are insignificant compared with those incurred over the river under the act of Congress. There everything is swept away -- and it is all due according to the law within our own State, by giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the government: Or shall we by inaction ever and by that neutrality which is itself the vilest treason, court it?
As one of those instructive shadows of coming events, we clip the following from the Louisville Journal of the 25th. It will be seen that this influential paper does not merely acquiesce in the more vigorous war policy, but demands it. It says:
We have not struck this rebellion as we should save struck. We have not put a quarter of our strength into our blows. Henceforth we must put the whole. What’s the use of being a giant if we don’t act like one?
Comment is unnecessary. We ask citizens to consider the best line of policy to be adopted. Can we not by an unbroken front of loyalty to the Federal government, meet the policy of the administration in the spirit which has dictated the leniency above referred to, or shall we provoke the rigors of the law until confiscation and its consequent devastation shall leave our vicinity the dreadful waste it is making elsewhere. As yet we have realized but a few horrors of war. Let the shadows of coming events warn us that the substance may yet be averted.
Memphis Union Appeal, July 29, 1862.
It might have saved many of us a thousand ills, both in public and private life, had we been more observing of the times so as to have hidden from foreseen evils. Coming events do cast their shadow before them, and a proper regard for the warning they are intended to vive, would have found many of us quite differently situated to-day.
What do the shadows of coming events now clearly indicate? We have published Mr. Stanton’s order under the Confiscation Act of the late Congress. Our readers cannot have tried to see that whether wisely or unwisely, the border slave States, Tennessee included, are exempt from its sweeping provisions. We are not at a loss to divine whys this exemption was made. Like the forbearance of the All Father [sic] towards his rebellious children, it was intended to lead those States to repentance and obedience. In part of those states, the most sanguinary battles have been fought, and hitherto, except by unscrupulous individuals, the most sacred regard to private rights has been maintained by the Federal army. Guards have protected fences and families and property of all kinds, slaves especially, and most severe punishment has been meted [sic] out against the lawless ones who have disobeyed orders, until the complaining of fathers and brothers at home, have extorted from Congress the Confiscation Act, which Mr. Lincoln hesitates to enforce against our State and other semi-loyal States.
When we regard Mr. Lincoln’s policy in these exceptions, as wise or otherwise, we are compelled to accord him the best of motives. He desires that the latent unionism of the States shall have time and occasion to develope [sic], and that whatever may be the future necessities of the war, or the future calamites which it may entail upon us, he has given us timely warning, and abundant opportunity to escape them.
Our readers cannot suppose that under every; possible contingency, this order of things will continue. If within these States, guerrilla bands are organized and fostered; if the navigation of the river and the use of the railroads shall continue to be impeded, by the open consent and co-operation of our own citizens; if information to our enemies be systemically conveyed; if, in short, such shall be the developments of the future as to clearly prove that a considerable portion of our citizens yet adhere to the fortunes of the rebels, then will this forbearance cease, and the inevitable consequences be the more sweeping and devastating because of the continued long suffering and forbearance of the Federal authorities.
That this is a “coming event” the unmistakable “shadows” around us declare. We do not draw out conclusions from the tone of the Tribunes and Independents of the North, alone, but from the tone no less of the hitherto conservative papers, and the conservative citizens whom business has called to our city, and last, but not least, from men in the army who have spent a life time at home, in battling as they call it, for southern rights and southern institutions, and who entered the army a year ago or less, with the most settled purpose to leave it whenever the war should assume what they would pronounce a vindictive or unconstitutional policy against their “southern brethren.”
These are now the most clamorous for what they denominate a “war policy.” The speech of Major Gen. Wallace at Washington himself a life-long Democrat, and violent opposer of the party in power, is tame compared with the sentiments. More privately uttered by men of like home antecedents, now occupying high position in the army. The campaignings of a year, and personal intercourse with rebels, and with psuedo-Union men have educated [sic] them to a point of desperation, from which they would have shrunk a year ago, as the self-complacent Assyrian King did, when he indignantly said: Is thy servant a dog that he should do this great thing?” We could give names familiar to our citizens, but we need not.
The sufferers from the presence of the army complain, and not unjustly, that lawless gangs of soldiers pillage their gardens hereabouts, and that now and then a negro comes up missing, and that the satisfaction received from the authorizer is not commensurate with the loss sustained. That is undoubtedly true. Neither did they, in the piping times of peace, get compensation for such things lost at the hands of lawless men. These losses are of the same character, though probably more numerous now than then. But our losses are insignificant compared with those incurred over the river under the act of Congress. There everything is swept away -- and it is all due according to the law within our own State, by giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the government: Or shall we by inaction ever and by that neutrality which is itself the vilest treason, court it?
As one of those instructive shadows of coming events, we clip the following from the Louisville Journal of the 25th. It will be seen that this influential paper does not merely acquiesce in the more vigorous war policy, but demands it. It says:
We have not struck this rebellion as we should save struck. We have not put a quarter of our strength into our blows. Henceforth we must put the whole. What’s the use of being a giant if we don’t act like one?
Comment is unnecessary. We ask citizens to consider the best line of policy to be adopted. Can we not by an unbroken front of loyalty to the Federal government, meet the policy of the administration in the spirit which has dictated the leniency above referred to, or shall we provoke the rigors of the law until confiscation and its consequent devastation shall leave our vicinity the dreadful waste it is making elsewhere. As yet we have realized but a few horrors of war. Let the shadows of coming events warn us that the substance may yet be averted.
Memphis Union Appeal, July 29, 1862.
29, “Take a Drink”Among the many excellent drinking saloons now flourishing in our midst, ”The Cumberland,” opposite the Adams Express Office, is not to be “snubbed.” The proprietors, Messrs. Gettel & Fulgham, are both young gentlemen of the finest business qualifications, and withal genteel, polite and attentive to all who extend their custom. Their stock of Wines, Liquors, Cigars, Tobacco, etc., is not to be excelled by any; house in the city, and those who are partial to a pure drink or a genuine smoke, will hardly fail to call at the Cumberland. That superb beverage, “Walker’s Cream Ale.” should of itself attract a large patronage. A fresh cask always on hand.
Nashville Daily Press, July 29, 1863
Nashville Daily Press, July 29, 1863
29, Report on Feminine Retribution at Martin’s Creek
A Woman's Revenge.
The Nashville Times publishes a letter from a young woman, who tells how she pursued and shot a rebel to avenge the murder of her lover. The scene of the tragedy was Martin's Creek, Tenn. The woman's lover was a Dr. Sadler, whose Union principles had rendered him obnoxious to the rebel inhabitants, three of whom hunted him down, and killed him. The manner of his death is thus narrated by the young woman.
I had met Peteet, Gordenhire, and Turner on the road, and told my brother there that they were searching for Dr. Sadler to kill him. Sure enough they went to the house where he was; and strange to me, after his warning, he permitted them to come in. They met him apparently perfectly friendly, and said they had come to get some brandy from Mr. Yelton, which they obtained; and, immediately after drinking, they all three drew their pistols and commenced firing at Sadler.
He drew his, but it was snatched away from him; he then drew his knife, which was also taken from him. He then ran round the house and up a stairway, escaping out of their sight. They followed, however, and searched till they found him, and brought him down and laid him on a bed, mortally wounded. He requested some of his people to send for Dr. Dillin to dress his wounds. It is strange to me why, but Sadler's friends had all left the room, when Turner went up and put his pistol against his temple, and shot him through the head. They all rejoiced like demons, and stood by till he made his last struggle. They then pulled his eyes open, and asked him in a loud voice if he were dead. They then took his horse and saddle and pistols, and robbed him of all his money, and otherwise insulted and abused his remains.
The young woman (whose initials "L. J. W." are only given) determined on revenge, but kept her resolution to herself lest she should be prevented; and on a subsequent day proceeded to a house where she learned Turner (against whom she seems to have especially directed her revenge) was stopping, and deliberately shot him dead. She thus tells the story:
I asked Mrs. Christian if Turner was gone. She pointed to him at the gate, just leaving. I looked at the clock, and it was just 4 ½ o'clock, P.M. I then walked out into the yard, and as Turner was starting called to him to stop. He turned, and saw I was preparing to shoot him. He started to run. I fired at a distance of about twelve paces, and missed him. I fired again as quickly as possible, and hit him in the back of the head, and he fell on his face and knees. I fired again and hit him in the back, and he fell on his right side. I fired twice more, only one of these shots taking effect. By this time I was within five steps of him, and stood and watched him until he was dead. I then turned round and walked toward the house, and met Mrs. Christian, and her sister, his wife, coming out.
They asked me what I did it for. My response was, "You know what that man did the 13th of December last—murdered a dear friend of mine. I have been determined to do this deed ever since, and I shall never regret it." They said no more to me, but commenced hallooing and blowing a horn. I got my horse and started home, where I shall stay or leave as I choose, going where I please, and saying what I please."
New Orleans Daily Picayune, July 29, 1864.
A Woman's Revenge.
The Nashville Times publishes a letter from a young woman, who tells how she pursued and shot a rebel to avenge the murder of her lover. The scene of the tragedy was Martin's Creek, Tenn. The woman's lover was a Dr. Sadler, whose Union principles had rendered him obnoxious to the rebel inhabitants, three of whom hunted him down, and killed him. The manner of his death is thus narrated by the young woman.
I had met Peteet, Gordenhire, and Turner on the road, and told my brother there that they were searching for Dr. Sadler to kill him. Sure enough they went to the house where he was; and strange to me, after his warning, he permitted them to come in. They met him apparently perfectly friendly, and said they had come to get some brandy from Mr. Yelton, which they obtained; and, immediately after drinking, they all three drew their pistols and commenced firing at Sadler.
He drew his, but it was snatched away from him; he then drew his knife, which was also taken from him. He then ran round the house and up a stairway, escaping out of their sight. They followed, however, and searched till they found him, and brought him down and laid him on a bed, mortally wounded. He requested some of his people to send for Dr. Dillin to dress his wounds. It is strange to me why, but Sadler's friends had all left the room, when Turner went up and put his pistol against his temple, and shot him through the head. They all rejoiced like demons, and stood by till he made his last struggle. They then pulled his eyes open, and asked him in a loud voice if he were dead. They then took his horse and saddle and pistols, and robbed him of all his money, and otherwise insulted and abused his remains.
The young woman (whose initials "L. J. W." are only given) determined on revenge, but kept her resolution to herself lest she should be prevented; and on a subsequent day proceeded to a house where she learned Turner (against whom she seems to have especially directed her revenge) was stopping, and deliberately shot him dead. She thus tells the story:
I asked Mrs. Christian if Turner was gone. She pointed to him at the gate, just leaving. I looked at the clock, and it was just 4 ½ o'clock, P.M. I then walked out into the yard, and as Turner was starting called to him to stop. He turned, and saw I was preparing to shoot him. He started to run. I fired at a distance of about twelve paces, and missed him. I fired again as quickly as possible, and hit him in the back of the head, and he fell on his face and knees. I fired again and hit him in the back, and he fell on his right side. I fired twice more, only one of these shots taking effect. By this time I was within five steps of him, and stood and watched him until he was dead. I then turned round and walked toward the house, and met Mrs. Christian, and her sister, his wife, coming out.
They asked me what I did it for. My response was, "You know what that man did the 13th of December last—murdered a dear friend of mine. I have been determined to do this deed ever since, and I shall never regret it." They said no more to me, but commenced hallooing and blowing a horn. I got my horse and started home, where I shall stay or leave as I choose, going where I please, and saying what I please."
New Orleans Daily Picayune, July 29, 1864.
No comments:
Post a Comment