Read Ebook: Toy-Making in School and Home by Polkinghorne M I R Mabel Irene Rutherford Polkinghorne R K Ruby Kathleen

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 683 lines and 67451 words, and 14 pages

I THE SUBJECT MATTER 15

II THE MAN 26

IV HIS PUBLIC SERVICES 72

V ROBBERY AND MURDER ON THE POTTAWATOMIE 95

VI BLACK JACK 135

X THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT 243

APPENDICES

I CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE LATE D. W. WILDER CONCERNING JOHN BROWN 411

II RECOLLECTIONS OF JOHN BROWN AT HARPER'S FERRY BY ALEXANDER BOTELER, A VIRGINIAN WHO WITNESSED THE FIGHT 414

IV JOHN BROWN'S AUTOBIOGRAPHY 431

JOHN BROWN Frontispiece

Steel engraving made from a photograph compared with a photogravure. The photograph was taken about 1859. Original in the Kansas State Historical Society. The photogravure is from Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard's book: John Brown--A Biography Fifty Years After.

JOHN BROWN facing page 98

Steel engraving, made as above. The photograph was copied from a daguerreotype taken in 1856. Original in the Kansas State Historical Society.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

--BRYANT

The object of the writer, in publishing this book, is to correct a perversion of truth, whereby John Brown has acquired fame, as an altruist and a martyr, which should not be attributed to him.

The book is a review of the historical data that have been collected and published by his principal biographers: Mr. James Redpath, Mr. Frank B. Sanborn and Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard. It is also a criticism of these writers, who have sought to suppress, and have suppressed, important truths relating to the subject of which they wrote, and who have misinformed and misled the public concerning the true character of this figure in our national history; and have established in its stead a fictitious character, which is wholly illogical and inconsistent with the facts and circumstances of Brown's life.

Mr. Redpath, his first and most lurid biographer, was a newspaper correspondent of the type now generally called "yellow." He was a "Disunionist," and seems to have been a malcontent, who went to Kansas Territory to oppose the policy which the Free-State men had adopted for a safe and sane solution of the Free-State problem; and who sought to thwart their efforts to create a free state by peaceable means. He said:

I believed that a civil war between the North and South would ultimate in insurrection and that the Kansas troubles would probably create a military conflict of the sections. Hence, I left the South, and went to Kansas; and endeavored personally, and by my pen, to precipitate a revolution.

It would be well had this book never been written. Mr. Redpath has understood neither the opportunities opened to him, nor the responsibilities laid upon him, in being permitted to write the "authorized" life of John Brown. His book, in whatever light it is viewed--whether as the biography of a remarkable man, as an historic narrative of a series of important events, or simply as a mere piece of literary job-work--is equally unsatisfactory....

There never was more need for a good life of any man than there was for one of John Brown.... Those who thought best of him, and those who thought the worst, were alike desirous to know more of him than the newspapers had furnished, and to become acquainted with the course of his life, and the training which had prepared him for Kansas and brought him to Harper's Ferry. Whatever view be taken of his character, he was a man so remarkable as to be well worthy of study....

In seasons of excitement, and amid the struggles of political contention, the men who use the most extravagant and the most violent words have, for a time, the advantage; but, in the long run, they damage whatever cause they may adopt; and the truth, which their declamations have obscured or their falsehoods have violated, finally asserts itself.... Extravagance in condemnation has been answered by extravagance in praise of his life and deeds.

So grand a subject cannot fail to inspire a writer able to do justice to the theme; and when such an one draws Brown, he will produce one of the most attractive books in the language. But meantime the ill-starred "martyr" suffers a prolongation of martyrdom, standing like another St. Sebastian to be riddled with the odious arrows of fulsome panegyrists. With other unfortunate men of like stamp, he has attracted a horde of writers, who, with rills of versicles and oceans of prose, have overwhelmed his simple noble memory beneath torrents of wild extravagant admiration, foolish thoughts expressed in appropriately silly language, absurd adulation inducing only protest and a dangerous contradictory emotion. Amid this throng of ill advised worshippers, Mr. Sanborn, by virtue of his lately published biographical volume, has assumed the most prominent place.

The present volume is inspired by no such purpose, but is due to a belief that fifty years after the Harper's Ferry tragedy, the time is ripe for a study of John Brown, free from bias, from the errors of taste and fact of the mere panegyrist, and from the blind prejudice of those who can see in John Brown nothing but a criminal. The pages that follow were written to detract from or champion no man or set of men, but to put forth the essential truths of history as far as ascertainable, and to judge Brown, his followers and associates, in the light thereof. How successful this attempt has been is for the reader to judge. That this volume in no wise approaches the attractiveness which Mr. Morse looked for, the author fully understands. On the other hand no stone has been left unturned to make accurate the smallest detail; the original documents, contemporary letters and living witnesses, have been examined in every quarter of the United States. Materials never before utilized have been drawn upon, and others discovered whose existence has heretofore been unknown....

Under this broad pledge of personal fidelity to the subject, this historian introduced his volume, and has asked the public to give him its full confidence and to accept his work as a faithful and complete record of the ascertainable truths of history relating to the subject. For the ardor which he has exhibited, and for the great labor which he has expended in his compilation, and for much material of minor importance, which he has uncovered, the student of history will not fail to acknowledge to Mr. Villard the sense of his obligation. In these respects, and in the scholarly features characteristic of the writings, it is an interesting and dramatic contribution to this literature. But, he will not be stampeded by protestations of zeal, and by professions of integrity, to accept it as a presentation of the ascertainable truth. The work is more conspicuous for the absence from its pages of important historical truths, and for the contradiction of others which have been authenticated, than it is for the great volume of trivial facts which it presents. A line of derelictions conspicuously prevailing throughout the pages of the book, amply justify the charge that it was not written, primarily, for an historical purpose--"to put forth the truths of history as far as ascertainable, and to judge Brown and his followers in the light thereof." The true purpose seems to be ulterior to that which is effusively proclaimed in the prefatory declarations. He has written into the history of our country a concept of the character of John Brown which is incongruous with the actions and circumstances of Brown's life. He has created a semi-supernatural person--"a complex character"--embodying the virtues of the "Hebrew prophets" and "Cromwellian Roundheads" with the depraved instincts and practices of thieves and murderers. He presents a man who, for righteous purposes, "violated the statute and moral laws"; whose conduct was vile, but whose aims were pure; whose actions were brutal and criminal, but whose motives were unselfish.

The crime was the theft of a large number of horses; to accomplish it, and to safeguard the loot, it was necessary to kill the owners thereof. It was a premeditation. The plans for it were laid several weeks before it was executed, and during a time of profound peace. The principals were John Brown; his unmarried sons; Henry Thompson, his son-in-law; Theodore Weiner, and four confederates: Jacob Benjamin, B. L. Cochrane, John E. Cook and Charles Lenhart, whose names are herein associated with this crime for the first time in history. These confederates received from Brown's party the horses which belonged to the men whom they murdered, and ran them out of the country; leaving with Brown a number of horses, "fast running horses," which they had stolen in the northern part of the Territory. That is the crime which this author seeks to justify; he has concealed these truths, and has suppressed the evidence concerning them. Pretending to put forth the "exact facts as to the happenings on the Pottawatomie," he has suppressed the evidence concerning the most important of the happenings, and has added no material fact concerning them which James Townsley had not, years before, put forth in his confession.

The public should know that as early as April 16, 1856, John Brown and his unmarried sons planned to abandon Kansas and the Free-State Cause and had disbanded the Free-State company to which they belonged, the "Liberty Guards," of which John Brown was captain; also, that the "Pottawatomie Rifles" had been organized in its stead, with John Brown, Jr., as captain; and that neither John Brown nor his unmarried sons belonged to it. They were "a little company" by themselves. The public should also know that prior to that date, as early as April 7th, Brown and the members of his little company had decided to abandon their claims and leave the country; and further, that they desired a recrudescence of pro-slavery atrocities. Concerning Brown's character and his life in Kansas, as well as his relation to territorial affairs, and a correct understanding of the Pottawatomie affair, no more important letter was written by him than his letter of April 7th disclosing these facts, a letter which Mr. Villard, in furtherance of his purpose, has seen fit to sift from history and suppress. The public has a right to know what Henry Thompson meant when he wrote in May that "upon Brown's plans would depend his own 'until School is out.'" This biographer, who said that he had left no stone unturned to make accurate the smallest detail, interviewed Henry Thompson, and could have obtained from him a statement concerning the plans to which he intended to subordinate his conduct, which involved matters of so much importance as leaving the country. Salmon Brown and Henry Thompson could have told this historian why the "Liberty Guards" were disbanded and the "Pottawatomie Rifles" organized; and when, and for what purpose the "little company of six," which intended to leave the neighborhood, was formed; and he could have included the information in his statement of the "exact facts." Mr. Villard says it was organized May 23d; but that is not an "exact" statement; it is a contradiction of a statement which John Brown made over his signature concerning it. These men could have told Mr. Villard specifically why they abandoned their claims, whither they intended to go, and what they intended to do. And further, they could have told him where they were, and what they were doing, during the fifty days their "whereabouts" are by this biographer reported as being "unknown," and their actions unaccounted for. These matters are not trifling details in this history. In view of the author's fine panegyrics concerning Brown's devotion to the Free-State cause, his intention to abandon it, and quit the Territory as early as March, 1856, is of more striking consequence than his coming into it; and the disbanding of the "Liberty Guards" in March, 1856, was an act of greater significance than was the organization of the company in December, 1855.

Mr. Villard's treatment of the Pottawatomie incident, "without a clear appreciation of which a true understanding of Brown, the man, cannot be reached," must stand as an indictment, either of his discrimination or of the integrity of his purpose, concerning it. Not being a dull man, he could not have been imposed upon by the participants in this riot of robbery and blood whom he interviewed, and whose evasions he has certified to the world as the exact facts. It was not the happenings on the night of May 24, 1856, that determine "the degree of criminality, if any," "that should attach to Brown, for his part in the proceedings," for they were but the execution of the plans which had theretofore been laid for the adventure. Whatever the circumstances of the author's dereliction may have been, the fact remains, that the truths concerning this historical episode have been sifted, and such documents and concurrent evidence as tend to establish the fact that the motive for these murders was robbery, have been consistently suppressed from his exposition of it.

The derelictions concerning the history of the Pottawatomie are characteristic of Mr. Villard's treatment of the more vital episode of Brown's career: his attempt to incite a revolution in the Southern States and to establish over them the authority of a "provisional government." This Brown planned to precipitate and accomplish by an insurrection of the slaves, and a resulting indiscriminate assassination of the slave-holding population: such as the people of that generation, North and South, believed to be impending, if not imminent. This central truth Mr. Villard denies, and seeks to substitute for Brown's intentions, the invention that his movement was merely a transitory raid, the forerunner of a series of similar raids to be undertaken by "small bands hidden in the mountain fastnesses." This conception is gratituitous and illogical; a contradiction of history and inconsistent with the bold, intrepid, daring, courageous characteristics which he has, except in this sole instance, consistently ascribed to Brown's character.

Brown's purposes, at Harper's Ferry, are logically foreshadowed by every act of his life, beginning with March, 1857; and are written in letters of living light in the "Constitution and Ordinances for the People of the United States," and in "General Order, No. 1," dated:

"HEADQUARTERS WAR DEPARTMENT, PROVISIONAL ARMY.

"Harper's Ferry, October 10, 1859."

As a study of John Brown, Mr. Villard's book is misleading, and, in places, worthless. It is a jargon of facts and fancies; a juggling with the truths of history; a recital of the long list of Brown's minor peculations, and the bloody deeds which accent his career, interlarded with half-hearted denunciations of his moral obliquity and conspicuously fulsome panegyrics upon his character, and extravagantly illogical attributes concerning the nobility of his aims. The book seems to have been put forth not with reference to the truth, but to ennoble an ignoble character; to shroud the character in a mantle of mystery; to create in the twentieth century, a "complex" character: a mystic with a propensity to do wrong; wherein there is a compromise of virtue with vice. To the accomplishment of this end, this author has not only bent his energies in subordinating the truth, but, as a furtherance of his purpose, he has deemed it necessary to pass beyond the boundaries of historical research, and seek to strengthen his cause by inviting discredit upon the opinions of any who may venture to dissent from his inventions.

It may not be held to be a suspicious circumstance, but it certainly is not good form for an historian to presuppose that his statements of fact will be disbelieved, and that the logic of his conclusions concerning them will be challenged by any one. Nor should he seek to discredit hypothetical opinions by the cheap, or vulgar, assertion that such opinions have their origin in prejudice--"blind prejudice"; for jurors, and even judges, sometimes disagree; and it is possible for persons, who are conscientious, to receive divergent impressions in relation to the same subject. He would have preserved a better decorum if he had relied upon candor, and the supreme truthfulness of his narrative, and the clearness of his reasoning, whereby to supplant disbelief with faith, and to dispel prejudice by enlightening it.

The tree is better known by its fruits, than by any tag which the owner may attach to the trunk. An historian who conscientiously writes the truths of history, is not solicitous concerning the criticisms of any who may read his lines.

THE MAN

--MATTHEW, 7:21

The picturesque figure which has been presented to the public as John Brown is an historical myth--a fiction. The character, as it has been exploited, is a contradiction of the laws that govern in human nature. The material for it was furnished by partisans, who were unscrupulous writers of the times of strenuous political excitement and national unrest, in which Brown, by his deeds of violence, attracted public attention. Following the practice of partisans, these writers wrote with reckless disregard for the truth of their statements. Later, in the ultimate crisis that occurred in his fortunes, he was eulogized in surpassing eloquence by sincere people of high ideals, who were unaware of the real character of the object of their adoration. They were not informed concerning the criminal life which he had led, or of the shockingly brutal crimes which he had committed; neither did they understand that in his final undertaking he sought to involve a section of our fair land in a carnival of rapine and bloodshed exceeding in extent the horrors of San Domingo. They were misled and were moved, in their orations, solely by sentiment and misplaced sympathy. Instead of a grim and unscrupulous soldier of fortune, leading a band of desperate men in an effort to unloose in the Slave States the demon of insurrection, they could see in him only a religious devotee, whom their imaginations had created; whose life they believed had been a devotion to deeds of charity and benevolence; who for years had been the especial champion of the slave; and whose work in Kansas had been, as in the existing crisis, an heroic and consistent consecration to duty. This man now awaited execution for his immutability to a great cause. He appeared to them to be a reincarnation of the virtuous primitive Christian--an altruistic hero--who, willing to die for his convictions, had "dared the unequal"; and, after battling heroically, though vainly, for humanity, had offered himself a sacrifice, making "the gallows glorious like the cross." These original laudations attracted, as Mr. Morse has stated, a "horde of writers, who, with rills of versicles and oceans of prose have overwhelmed his memory beneath torrents of wild extravagant admiration."

Many persons therefore believe Brown to have been an exceptional person, a man of deep religious fervor, of unimpeachable veracity and of the strictest integrity. But a careful study of his life, as revealed by himself, and as it has been written by his personal friends and his friendly biographers, may well result in a different interpretation of the man's character and actions.

John Brown was born at Torrington, Connecticut, May 9, 1800; but he was not, as he claimed to be, "the sixth descendant of Peter Browne of the Mayflower." The Peter Brown to whom John Brown's ancestry has been traced, was born in Windsor, Connecticut, in 1632, as Mr. Villard shows in very scholarly fashion. The Peter Browne of the Mayflower left no male issue; nor does John Brown's name appear upon the rolls of the "Massachusetts Society of Mayflower Descendants." His grandfather was a captain in the Eighteenth Connecticut Infantry, in the Revolutionary Army. The father of John Brown--Owen Brown--was a faithful, industrious citizen who for a livelihood followed the occupation of shoemaker, tanner, and farmer. John learned the tannery trade and began work when he was fifteen, and for the greater part of the ensuing five years was employed as a foreman in his father's factory at Hudson, Ohio.

On June 21, 1820, he was married to Miss Dianthe Lusk, the daughter of his housekeeper. She became the mother of seven children; one of whom--Frederick--was killed at Osawatomie. Her death occurred August 10, 1832; three days after the birth of a son; mother and son being buried together. A second marriage was contracted on July 11, 1833, his bride being Miss Mary Anne Day, daughter of Charles Day of Whitehall, New York. Thirteen children were born of this union; seven of whom died in early childhood; two--Watson and Oliver--were killed at Harper's Ferry.

As a tanner, at Hudson, Brown was successful, but he gave up his business there and moved to Richmond, Pennsylvania, in May, 1825, where he established a tannery. He was appointed postmaster at Richmond in 1828, and held the office until he moved to Franklin Mills, Ohio, in 1835. He left Richmond "because of financial distress." At Franklin Mills, he secured a contract for building the Ohio and Pennsylvania Canal from there to Akron. The next year, he undertook some speculations in real estate, and in company with a Mr. Thompson, borrowed ,000 with which to buy a tract of one hundred acres, for an "addition to Franklin." During the same year, he, with others, organized the Franklin Land Company, and purchased the water power, mills, lands, etc., in both the "upper" and "lower" Franklin villages, combining the two water powers at a central town-site, which he and his associates laid out. In these, and other schemes, Brown became so deeply involved that he failed during the bad times of 1837; lost nearly all his property by assignment to his creditors, and was then not able to pay all his debts, some of which were never liquidated. His father also lost heavily through him.

The affair is explained by his son John as follows: "The farm father lost by endorsing a note for a friend. It was attached and sold by the Sheriff at the County seat. The only bidder against my father was an old neighbor, hitherto regarded as a friend, who became the purchaser. Father's lawyer advised him to hold the fort for a time at least, and endeavor to secure terms from the purchaser. There was, as I remember, an old shot gun in the house, but it was not loaded nor pointed at any one. No Sheriff came on the premises; no officer or posse was resisted; no threat of violence offered."

Brown was not so staid and prosaic in his daily walk and conversation as to be indifferent to the sports and amusements of life. He seems to have been simply an active man of the world, getting as much worldly enjoyment for himself out of his environment as possible. He was a horseman with a fancy for horse racing; and while at Franklin, indulged in the very interesting and sportsmanlike business, or diversion, of breeding "fast running horses for racing purposes." He bred from a well known horse of that time called "Count Piper"; and the name of another favorite sire was "John McDonald." He is said to have dismissed criticism of his conduct from a moral point of view, by the argument that "if he did not breed them some one else would."

From 1837 to 1841 Brown lived alternately at Franklin, and at Hudson, Ohio. In 1838 he became a "drover," and drove cattle from Ohio to Connecticut. In this business he had trouble with his associates, Tertius Wadsworth and Joseph Wells, who furnished the capital; and was sued by them for an accounting. In December, 1838, "he negotiated for the agency of a New York Steel Scythes house." And in January, 1839, he made his first venture in sheep, at West Hartford, Connecticut. He brought the sheep to Albany by boat, and drove them from there to Ohio. In June of that year he made his final drive to the east with cattle, and, while at New Hartford, committed a crime of unusual enormity. It appears that he proposed to the New England Woolen Company, of Rockville, Connecticut, to act as its agent in buying wool, and induced it to intrust to him ,800 with which to begin purchasing the wool. The negotiations for this money were a deception throughout, in pursuance of theft. Brown did not intend to buy any wool with the money which he sought to have intrusted to his keeping for that purpose; but did intend to convert it to his own use--to make "a much brighter day" in his affairs. He also deceived his wife, whom he caused to believe that he was trying to secure a loan. Nor did he hesitate to have the crime, which he was committing, called to the attention of the God whom he pretended to serve, but asked her to ask "God's blessing" upon him in his pursuit of this purpose. Greater hypocrisy and depravity hath no man than this. The letter which he wrote to his wife in relation to the transaction is as follows:

New Hartford, 12th June, 1839.

MY DEAR WIFE AND CHILDREN:

I write to let you know that I am in comfortable health, and that I expect to be on my way home in the course of a week should nothing befall me. If I am longer detained I will write you again. The cattle business has succeeded about as I expected, but I am now somewhat in fear that I shall fail in getting the money I expected on the loan. Should that be the will of Providence I know of no other way but we must consider ourselves very poor for our debts must be paid, if paid at a sacrifice. Should that happen I hope God who is rich in mercy, will grant us all grace to conform to our circumstances with cheerfulness and resignation. I want to see each of my dear family very much but must wait God's time. Try all of you to do the best you can, and do not one of you be discouraged--tomorrow may be a much brighter day. Cease not to ask God's blessing on yourselves and me. Keep this letter wholly to yourselves, excepting that I expect to start home soon, and that I did not write confidently about my success should any one enquire. Edmond is well and Owen Mills. You may show this to father but to no one else.

I am not without great hopes of getting relief, I would not have you understand, but things have looked more unfavorable for a few days. I think I shall write you again before I start.

Earnestly commending every one of you to God, and to his mercy, which endureth forever, I remain your affectionate husband and father, JOHN BROWN.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet