Question of the Week: 6/20-6/26/22
Do you know of some unpublished primary sources that are historical treasures? Can you give us a little explanation or preview in the comments?
Do you know of some unpublished primary sources that are historical treasures? Can you give us a little explanation or preview in the comments?
my personal primary source treasure is the personal papers, memorabilia, photographs, uniforms, and personal and official correspondence of Vice Admiral (VADM) William Ward Smith … VADM Smith, while not a Civil War vet, graduated from the Naval Academy in 1909, served in both world wars, and retired in 1949 … what makes Admiral Smith’s material rather interesting is that he was Admiral (ADM) Kimmell’s Chief of Staff from February to December 1941 … ADM Kimmell was, of course, commander in chief of the United States Pacific Fleet when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
Fortunately, Smith survived the post-Pearl Harbor personnel “purges”, was promoted to Rear Admiral and commanded Cruiser Task Force Eleven during the battles of the Coral Sea and Midway … Smith later commanded Cruiser Division Nine during the campaign in the Northern Pacific to take the Aleutian Islands from the occupying Japanese forces.
Smith finished the war as a Vice Admiral (3 star) commanding Service Force Pacific Fleet which comprised hundreds ot tankers, supply and ammo ships, and repair vessels … and while perhaps not the most glamorous job, Smith’s logistics ships were instrumental in the highly successful “island hopping” campaigns that defeated the Japanese … as General Omar Bradley remarked, ” … amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics … ”
i purchased Smith’s collection from a friend who got from the Admiral’s granddaughter who simply didn’t want it anymore … among it’s many treasures, is Smith’s two-star Admiral’s Flag … this flag would have flown in USS ASTORIA, Smith’s flagship, during the Coral Sea and MIdway campaigns.
A very much suppressed primary source letter is one written to Lincoln on July 15, 1862. The letter is written by seven border slave State legislators, warning Lincoln in no uncertain terms that the seceded States have offered to free the slaves in hopes of gaining French and British alliance in their second war for independence:
“…the leaders of the Southern rebellion have offered to abolish slavery amongst them as a condition to foreign intervention in favor of their independence as a nation. If they can give up slavery to destroy the Union; We can surely ask our people to consider the question of Emancipation to save the Union.”
https://www.loc.gov/resource/mal.1713000/?r=-0.818,-0.749,2.636,3.213,0
These border slave State legislators had just met with Lincoln three days prior on July 12, 1862, and certainly discussed with him what they adamantly formalized in their letter only days later. These men called the offer a “ fact, now become history.” They were certainly in a position to know about this highly secret CS offer to free all the slaves in the seceded States because these legislators were being constantly lobbied by Confederate leaders to join the CS cause. Someone in the CS leadership spilled the beans. And the border State legislators assured Lincoln that the offer was a “fact;” something they would never have claimed to their President in a time of war about such an important strategic matter if they had not confirmed it to be true. Lincoln was certainly convinced by what they told him in that July 12 meeting, because the very next day he sat down and penned his Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation; something heretofore he had resolutely resisted doing for fear that without a colonization plan in place, the freed slaves might migrate North – god forbid! Lincoln proved why secrecy on the part of the CS was vital by attempting to head-off and preempt CS emancipation with that of his own.
There is abundant evidence that the CSA diplomats that were taken captive on The Trent, were carrying the CS emancipation offer to Europe. For when they were finally released and landed in England, that very week the following leaked word made print in the very anti-South British newspaper called “The Spectator” which list some detailed points in the treaty:
“THE SPECTATOR: THE SOUTHERN BID.
January, 25, 1862
‘It is understood, in that indirect but accurate way in which great facts first get abroad, that the Confederacy have offered England and France a price for active support. It
is nothing less than a treaty securing free trade in its broadest sense for fifty years, the complete suppression of the import
of slaves, and the emancipation of every negro born after the date of the signature of the treaty.
In return they ask, first, the recognition of their independence; and, secondly,
such an investigation into the facts of the blockade as must, in their judgment, lead to its disavowal.’
Later on, multiple European papers would report that a CSA offer to end slavery was on the table. One called the “Independence Belge asserts that the object of Lavulette’s recent visit to England was to induce England to consent to a common intervention in American affairs. England agreed on condition that the Roman question be first settled.”
Lavulette was France’s diplomat to Rome and was brought to England to convince the Brits that the “Roman Problem” would not be a military distraction. Both England and France were willing to accept the CS offer to end slavery in exchange for military support! But England would wait until France’s involvement in “the Roman Problem” was over. The Brits did not want its ally against the North to be mired in a possible military conflict in Italy. Unfortunately for the CSA, “the Roman Problem” was not somewhat resolved until 1871, and not fully resolved until the Lateran Treaty in 1929.
Even the diary of Lincoln’s Union diplomat in England, Charles Francis Adams, mentions that:
“February 1862
Monday 17th
London
A visit from Bishop McIlvaine, who came to tell me the result of a conversation he had held at breakfast with Sir Culling Eardley this morning, that gentlemen had apprised him of the existence of rumors that Mr Mason had brought with him authority to make large offers towards emancipation if Great Britain would come to the aid of the confederates. He even specified their nature, as for example, the establishment of the marriage relation, the restoration of the right of manumission, and the emancipation of all born after a certain time to be designated. He had further intimated that these views were received favorably here and were the topic of discussion between the religious classes here and on the continent.”
Sir Culling Eardley was a member of the British Parliament; obviously word was leaking out about this secret treaty offer in Europe also. The “Mr. Mason” mentioned is one of the Trent affair diplomats who arrived in England the very week word of the CS emancipation offer broke in the British press.
All this is either not known, or is a carefully guarded secret by modern historians who have too much invested in the narrative that the Confederacy seceded and fought to “preserve and extend slavery.” These above mentioned documents, along with others not mentioned, expose the fabrication of that popular PC narrative! Not to mention the account of the Duncan Kenner mission which would later up the ante of the CS offer of gradual emancipation to immediate emancipation in hopes of gaining foreign support in its war for independence from the Union. Any such emancipation was not going to be easy, and risked a humanitarian disaster for the slaves and a societal/economic disaster for the South given that Northern continental segregation meant the South would have to absorb all those freed within the South’s borders alone. But a note written by Judah Benjamin, explaining the Kenner mission to the CS diplomats in Europe, says why the South was willing to risk such a difficult effort:
“The sole object for which we would ever have consented to commit our all to the hazards of this war, is the vindication of our right to self-government and independence… For that end no sacrifice is too great, save that of honour.” (Judah Benjamin to John Slidell, Dec 27, 1864.)
Southern newspapers had previously echoed this Southern sentiment:
“Slavery was the mere occasion and not the object or end of this war. The South is fighting for National independence and freedom from Yankee domination. The people are willing sacrifice all the slaves to the cause of freedom.” Richmond Inquirer, 1863.
“Property in negro labor should not be a barrier to our independence. If it is found in the way, if it proves an insurmountable object to the achievement of our independence and separate nationality, away with it, let it perish.” Jackson Mississippean, 1864.
The history discipline would be well served if historians would consider facts more important than agenda, and believe President Jefferson Davis’ words when he said in an interview with two Northern reporters that:
(Davis): “We are not fighting for Slavery. We are fighting for independence, and that or extermination we will have… (Interviewers): “And Slavery, you say, is no longer an element in the contest?” (Davis): “No it is not, it never was an essential element. It was only a means of bringing other conflicting elements to an earlier culmination. It fired the musket which was already capped and loaded.” Jefferson Davis as interviewed by Messrs. Jaques and Gilmore, 1864
https://www.nytimes.com/1864/08/18/archives/peace-prospects-south-interesting-narrative-of-the-mission-of.html
There is a lot that needs to be said and printed that simply cannot be allowed to see the light of day. Where is honesty?