Minutes

February 2010 Meeting

By Travis Fuqua with photos by Bob Batten

            On February 17, 2010, the SDCWRT was honored to have Joseph Wagner, M.D. present on Medicine in the Civil War. Dr. Wagner was an assistant clinical professor in the department of orthopedic surgery at the University of California Los Angeles and is a member of the Los Angeles Civil War Round Table.

Dr. Wagner Beginning His Presentation

            Another common procedure in the nineteenth century was amputation. What would constitute repairable injuries today such as shattered bones, amputation was seen as the only option. The focus was to amputate as quickly as possible, because there was no anesthesia and a quick operation would save the patient pain and facilitate recovery. There was a Scottish surgeon by the name of Sir Robert Liston (1794-1847) who was famed for the rapidity of his amputations, some only taking a half minute. In one case, there was a man with an injury on his upper thigh near the hip. Liston was so quick at his amputation that he cut the fingers off his assistant, the coat tails off a spectator, and more things than that poor man’s leg. The amputees died of gangrene and the spectator died of fright—perhaps the only operation with a 300 per cent mortality rate.

            By the second third of the nineteenth century, medicine made a great leap forward with the advent of anesthesia. For centuries, man had endeavored for a solution to pain. In 1845, a Harvard dentist by the name of Gardner Q. Colton (1814-1898) gave a public demonstration in which he used nitrous oxide (laughing gas). At this demonstration, he noticed one of the participants had a leg injury, but did not feel the pain because of the gas. Another doctor, Horace Wells (1815-1848), was present and saw the effects of the nitrous oxide. He later had Dr. Colton use nitrous oxide to remove his tooth later that year and he felt nothing. Wells was convinced he had discovered the solution to pain and convinced another doctor, John Collins Warren (1778-1856) to try it at a medical demonstration at Massachusetts General Hospital. On January 20, 1845, Wells gave nitrous oxide to one of Warren’s students who needed a tooth extracted, but when Warren went to extract the tooth, the student felt every part and cried out in pain. The experiment was a failure and Wells was discredited. Although nitrous oxide does have some strength, it makes for weak anesthetic. 

            A former associate of Wells by the name of William Thomas Green Morton (1819-1868) was also working on an anesthetic and discovered the effects of ether. In September 1846, Morton performed a painless tooth extraction using ether. A Boston doctor named Henry Jacob Bigelow (1818-1890), a leader in hip anatomy and for whom the “ligament of Bigelow” is named, was impressed with Morton’s work and invited him to use his either in another demonstration by Dr. Warren at the Massachusetts General Hospital. On October 16, 1846, Morton used his ether and Warren removed a tumor of the unconscious patient in the first demonstration of general anesthesia in history. From that point on, anesthesia spread throughout the western world. In Great Britain, the infamous Dr. Liston immediately began using ether. A Scottish obstetric doctor by the name of Sir James Young Simpson (1811-1870) soon discovered chloroform’s use as an anesthetic and used it in childbirth. The Church of England objected stating that it was against the will of God, but this question was solved when Her Majesty, Queen Victoria used chloroform given by Dr, John Snow in the delivery of her eighth child, Prince Leopold in April of 1853. In the next year, Dr. Snow discovered the connection between polluted water and the cholera further adding to medical science.

            Another advancement made before the Civil War was the concept of hygiene and antiseptics. Although it was conceived in the 1840s and was likely one of the most important medical advancements in history, the concept of hygiene was not yet accepted in the 1860s. In 1847, an Austrian obstetric doctor in Vienna by the name of Ignaz Semmelweis (1818-1865) made the connection between the doctor’s dirty hands and childbed fever. He noted how the midwives washed their hands and few women died under their care, but the doctors did not wash their hands and childbed fever was common amongst women in their care. When he suggested to his colleagues that they should wash their hands in a chlorinated lime solution, they were insulted for they did not believe that as doctors and gentlemen they could not carry disease with them. Semmelweis began to have those in his clinic wash their hands and the mortality rates dramatically fell. Semmelweis did not know why dirty hands caused childbed fever for Louis Pasteur’s work on the germ theory did not come out until after the Civil War.

            By the time of the Civil War in the 1860s, medical science at least had the benefit of anesthesia. Chloroform and ether were in common use by both armies where it was available and in 15,000 surgeries in the Confederacy made with anesthesia, there were no deaths and is comparable to modern standards. Chloroform was preferred over weaker ether. At the beginning of the war at First Bull Run, General “Stonewall” Jackson was shot in the middle finger and it was fractured (perhaps he was being impolite). When he was taken to the field hospital, the doctor wanted to amputate the finger which was unacceptable to Jackson. He went to a second doctor, Hunter Holmes McGuire, who placed the finger in a splint and it later healed. Also early in the war, it was decided between the two sides not to take doctors prisoner as their services were too important.

            In 1862, the medical director of the Army of the Potomac, Dr. Jonathan Letterman, introduced the modern army medical corps. He later became known as the “Father of Battlefield Medicine”, although many of his efforts were begun by D.-J. Larrey a half century before. Ambulances, which had only recently been fitted with springs, were removed from the quartermaster and placed under the medical director. In addition, officers were forbidden under penalty of punishment, from using ambulances for their own use—ambulances were for the sick and for medical goods only.

Dr. Wagner Explaining Civil War Medicine

            Although pain was no longer a concern in the medicine of the Civil War, hygiene was a major problem and many soldiers still died of disease. Although disease was not as great a concern as in the Mexican War, it was still prevalent, but would continue to decrease over time. Bacteria had been known since the seventeenth century, but knowledge of their potentially harmful nature remained a couple of decades away. During the Civil War, the best explanation for the spread of disease was “bad air”, but sometimes this was true in the case of malaria. The only treatment for malaria was quinine, of which nineteen tons were used in the war. During the war, doctors found that dressings for amputees made from horsehair seemed to have fewer infections than those of cotton. This was because the cotton was not usually washed, but the stiff horsehair was boiled to soften it and unbeknownst to the doctors it was also sterilized.

            Vaccination proved to be useful during the war, especially the vaccine for smallpox. The smallpox vaccine had been invented by the English doctor, Edward Jenner (1749-1823) in 1796. Jenner discovered that milkmaids who had the less fatal cowpox did not catch smallpox and thus he came up with the idea to inoculate people with cowpox. Vaccination against smallpox was dangerous, however, as the needles used were not cleaned. By the time of the Civil War, a great majority of the white population was immune to the pox and it was mandatory in both armies, but blacks were not immune and many died of the disease as well as the measles. In addition, President Lincoln was not immune either as he caught smallpox after Gettysburg. When the office seekers would not leave him alone even in sickness, he said that he finally had something to give all of them. Tetanus was also a problem during the war as it was found in horse manure (which was more than plentiful) and was a very painful disease. Vaccines for these diseases were some years away. Cholera and dysentery were common as soldiers often got their water from the same place into which their latrines emptied.

            Amputations were still very common during the war and several limbs were amputated when the bones were shattered or mangled as the lack of hygiene would cause gangrene and death. Thus, the only solution was amputation. Luckily, most of these were done with anesthesia. The amputations of the war also led to the introduction of blood transfusions. Scientists were not to discover the blood types and the troubles arising from mismatched blood types until the early twentieth century. In one case, a private was injured in the leg and it as amputated. He received a pint of blood through a gutta percha syringe and survived. Another private was injured at Petersburg in 1864 and the blood of a “strong, healthy German” was used and the private went from his deathbed to recovery.

            Surprisingly, 95 per cent of soldiers in Federal hospitals survived. Thus medicine in the Civil War was both modern and ancient—where modern techniques of anesthesia and modern knowledge of anatomy were beginning to come into use, but ancient ideas of bad air and the rejection of antiseptics and hygiene still hindered the care of the wounded. It would not be until World War II that soldiers would have most modern benefits—anesthesia, antiseptics, and antibiotics, but the Civil War was indeed a significant beginning stage for the advancement of medical science.

January 2010 Meeting by Travis Fuqua

Before the presentation on January 20, 2010, SDCWRT Preservation Chairperson, Carla Schwartz provided more information on the Wilderness in Virginia and Fort Gaines in Alabama, to both of which, the SDCWRT voted in September 2009 to send money for preservation.

Wilderness, Va.

Preservationists are trying to get Wal-Mart to move its proposed site for a Superstore to a nearby site elsewhere in the county. In the meantime, in September of last year, a lawsuit has been filed against the Orange County Board of Supervisors, who made a decision to approve a special use permit for a Wal-Mart Supercenter and associated development. While litigation is never a preferable outcome, the preservation community feels strongly that when an irreplaceable national treasure is at risk, it is our duty to exhaust all reasonable means of opposition before surrendering a site to sprawl. The Board failed to obtain critical information about the historic importance of the Wal-Mart site.  It relied exclusively of analysis provided by Wal-Mart, without securing independent review of those findings. The proposed Wal-Mart site, which would also include 100,000 square feet of other commercial development, is unprotected land within the historic boundaries of the Wilderness Battlefield and is immediately adjacent to the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park.

Fort Gaines, Ala.
            In the Civil War Preservation Trust’s list of the most endangered battlefields, Fort Gaines remains in the top ten.

In addition to the information about the Wilderness and Fort Gaines, Mrs. Schwartz added that the SUVCW, Sgt. William Pittenger Camp 21, is collecting money to erect a State Historical Marker near Lake Henshaw, commemorating the “Civil War Affair at Minter’s Ranch”. They have asked for support from the Civil War community.

Acting upon the information, Mrs. Schwartz made the motion to have the SDCWRT send a check for $600.00 to the Civil War Preservation Trust, with the directive that $300.00 go to preservation efforts at The Wilderness, and $300.00 go to Fort Gaines. In addition, the SDCWRT will give $300.00 for the erecting of a State Historical Marker at Lake Henshaw. The motion was passed unanimously. 

Later in the evening, Mr. Dave Tooley gave a presentation on bookbinding and preservation. He has many years’ experience in bookbinding and preservation. He began with a brief history of how the book and later printing came to be. The book was invented in the western world in the Roman Empire when it was discovered that codices—the bound book as we know it today—was far easier for recording large works than scrolls which could stretch for hundreds of yards. During this time, most books were made of parchment, a stretched animal skin that is limed but not tanned; or vellum, a more refined and expensive stretched animal skin.

Moveable type was invented in the West by Johannes Gutenberg in middle of the fifteenth century. Moveable type was an advancement over hand writing for it was possible to cast individual letters in metal and then arrange them in a tray to make a page and multiple copies far more easily. It was possible to make anything with moveable type as the letters could be arranged for one page and then rearranged for another, and another. This process had been invented in China during the Ch’ing-li period (1041-1048).

Hardbound books are printed on large sheets of paper on which a number of pages in the book are printed on the same sheet. These large sheets are then folded to make a section of a book which is called a signature and may consist of 4, 8, 16, 32, or more pages of the book. A book which consists of 320 pages, for example, may consist of 10 signatures of 32 pages each. The pages in a signature are then sewn together and the other edges cut. The signatures are then placed together in order, and then cords are placed across their backs and then the signatures and cords are sewn together to make the book and the edges are evened out. It may be noticed in old books that there are a number of straps across the spine. These straps are the cords. The backs of the books are rounded to make opening easier. Finally a piece of cloth, such as muslin, is cemented over the back of the book covering the cords. Some modern books are not sewn, but glued together like a writing pad. Original hide glue will dry out, crack thus causing the book to fall apart over time. Additionally, this hide glue is silverfish food. 

With the pages in the book together, it is necessary to make the cover. Folded sheets of paper—the endpapers—are added to forward and end of the book. Endpapers may be marbleized paper which is produced by floating the paper over water filled with dyes. The endpapers are then glued to the cover boards. The spine is best attached to the ends of the cover boards and not the back of the book itself, because when the book is opened, the spine will not move with the pages and this will assist in the longevity of the spine. When the spine is glued to the back of the book, it will move when the book is opened and an old spine will crack and disintegrate when the book is opened. It is best in old books of this design to open the books as narrowly and as little as possible.

With the cover and spine completed, it is necessary to cover the book in leather or similar material. There is almost no limit to the materials that can be used to cover a book. High-quality books use leather and similar animal materials while lesser-quality and high-use books may use a cloth cover. There are several hybrids with cloth and other material as well as leather scraps cemented together. With the book covered in leather, or other material, the title and other information is pressed in the book with gold leaf. Cheaper books may use brass, etc. The title may also be placed on a separate piece of leather and then cemented to the book. With the title completed and impressed upon the book, the book is complete. 

Mr. Tooley also spoke of the various materials used in the bookmaking process. For cement, Mr. Tooley uses a modern compound that is designed to last for centuries. He does not use the more original hide glue for it draws insects and other creatures which likely contributed to the book’s poor condition in the first place.

The paper in the book changed after the advent of moveable type. Paper made of animal skins were of high-quality, but impractical for mass production and were relegated to high-quality books. Beginning in the seventeenth century, rags were soaked until they became soft and then pressed together to make paper. Rag paper is of good quality and many still retain their original color. In the Industrial Revolution, more books were required and printers turned to wood-based paper. This mid-nineteenth century to early twentieth century paper is of notoriously poor quality, because when it was produced, the makers used acid and did not thoroughly wash the paper allowing the acid to disintegrate the pages over time. Many books made in the nineteenth century have suffered such a fate and their pages are very brittle today. Modern paper is a mixture of wood and rags and is treated with chemicals which should not cause their degradation.

The boards used in the cover of a book may be of any material, such as wood and card paper, but most older books are made of a mixture of straw, wood scraps, etc. cemented together. Many other aspects of the books were made from animal products.

With the advent of half-tone printing—using various concentrations of dots to show shading instead of continual shading—photographs could be placed in books as separate plates. In some old books, it may be noted that there is a piece of tissue paper in front of the plates. This is done to prevent the very strong inks used in the production of plates from bleeding through to the other pages.

As for the preservation of books, Mr. Tooley said that the worst enemy of a book is moisture. Also, gravity is not kind to books when they are on shelves and he advises that large “coffee table” size books be laid flat, not stood as usual. When books are made and when Mr. Tooley preserves them, a large press is used when cementing the various parts together. Mr. Tooley also showed several examples of books which he had restored, or was in the process of restoring, to illustrate the process of bookbinding. Some books which are not restored to preserve originality are placed in specially made boxes. It was later revealed that the oldest book Mr. Tooley has restored was from the year 1510 and two of the examples present at the meeting were from the mid-eighteenth century. There were, of course, several examples relating to the Civil War. Such a presentation was essential to anyone who is interested in collecting books from the time of the Civil War and no one is more qualified than Mr. Tooley to present on antiquarian books.

The author would like to extend his gratitude to Mr. Tooley for his invaluable assistance in the compilation of the article.

December 2009 Meeting by Travis Fuqua

The San Diego Civil War Round Table would like to welcome its newest member, Sally Down of San Diego

This month’s presentation was a show and tell and various members of the Civil War Round Table brought their Civil War artifacts, books, and stories relating to Christmas. Below is a list and description of those who presented.

1. Sharon Tooley: a book entitled “Music and Musket: Bands and Bandsmen of the American Civil War” by Kenneth Olson. The book contained many stories about music in the war, but there was no mention of Christmas. There was, however, a very interesting story about a drummer boy in the war by the name of Johnny Clem. Clem was only ten when the war began and tried unsuccessfully to enlist as a drummer boy until he was accepted in the 22^nd Michigan in 1862. There exists a story where he was at the Battle of Shiloh and he was nearly killed and his drum destroyed. He also showed bravery during the Battle of Chickamauga and after the war, he continued with the Army. He advanced in rank until he retired in 1916, the last active duty officer to have served in the Civil War. He died in 1937 at the age of 85. Another interesting story was the one of Henry J. White who was a drum major in the early part of the war. His story was exceptional in the fact that he was 89 years old and was still as vigorous as the 20-year-old men around him!
2. Al Haun: an answer to the question about shipping containers for goods during the Civil War. As a re-enactor, Mr. Haun has the advantage of not only knowing the history but living it out as well. One might ask what was used to package Christmas packages being sent to the soldiers in the Civil War. At first one might think wooden crates would be the answer, and they would, but wood is heavy and since freight is charged by weight, it would be prohibitively expensive to mail goods in this manner, especially when the goods being sent are lighter than the packaging. The answer was cardboard, which is much lighter than wood. It is true that cardboard boxes were used during the Civil War, but not the corrugated kind we are used to today, but heavy card paper layered and cemented together which looks similar to the cardboard used in old book covers. This worked well as long as the package did not get wet. To illustrate his example, Mr. Haun had a cardboard box from the Second World War, but such was the same as those during the Civil War. Shipping in the 1860s was done by railroad and could take between a week and two months depending upon the destination.
3. Curtis Dryer: two poems from the Civil War relating to Christmas. The first poem was by Confederate soldier named William Gordon McCabe (Aug. 4, 1841-Jun. 1, 1920) and was about the recollection of the joys of being home for Christmas. He fondly illustrates how joyous it would be to go home instead of fighting in the war and how the halls would be decorated and his mother would be very glad to see him. He added that his friends also long to go home, but there is no home for him as he only has the bivouac (his army encampment). The second poem was by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and was entitled “Christmas Bells” and was written in 1864. This poem was about the misfortune of the joyous the sounds of peaceful church bells being drowned out by cannon fire. Longfellow then called for peace on Earth and an end to conflict and hatred. He ended with the fact that good will prevail.
4. Kathleen Bell: a Christmas poem by the Poet Laureate of the Confederacy, Henry Timrod (Dec. 8, 1828-Oct. 7, 1867). In the beginning of the war, Timrod had been an avid patriot whose patriotic poems roused the emotions of young men in the Confederacy to join the Confederate Army. He himself could not fight for long due to an illness, but he seems to have done his part with his inspirational patriotic poems. As the war wore on, his son died and later his youthful vigor gave way to depression. He wrote a poem entitled “Christmas” during this time and the theme is peace. Owing to his depression, the poem is depressed and written in a more formal English of older times.
5. Dave Tooley: an account of slaves during Christmas in the war after Lincoln’s Proclamation from a book, “The Civil War Song and Story” (1892) by Frank Moore. The account began early in the day with the slaves rising and gathering with one wearing a red coat. They then sang songs about salvation and manage to give correct lyrics despite the fact they were illiterate. Their quotations of scripture are also strikingly accurate and when asked how they could accomplish such without reading, they said they heard it once and repeated it over again until the learned the verse. In the end, they all looked forward to their pending freedom.
6. Bill Cooper: a story set in modern times that could easily apply to all soldiers in all wars. The story began with Santa Claus descending the chimney to find the house empty except for a young man sleeping on the floor. Santa was perplexed by such a situation and later found out that the soldier had served in the current Iraq War and he slept in such an austere manner for it was his wish and an honor to those still overseas. Santa then realized that today—as much as in the 1860s—we owe the fact that we can have a Merry Christmas to those who are fighting wars to maintain peace, democracy, &c.

November 2009 Meeting by Travis Fuqua

This month’s presentation was a show and tell and various members of the Civil War Round Table brought their Civil War artifacts, books, and stories. Below is a list and description of those who presented.

1. Phil Binks: Two Civil War-era revolvers. The first one was a .36 caliber Colt 1851 Navy Revolver. This was one of the most common guns of the time with about a quarter of a million being made between 1851 and 1873. The gun weighs only two pounds ten ounces. The cylinder features an engraving of two ships in battle. The .36 caliber of the gun became associated with the Navy. Mr. Bink’s particular gun was one of the forty thousand made in London. The other revolver was a Savage and North. This gun is rather unwieldy and heavy. It is of a more unique design in that there are two triggers—one to press the cylinder against the barrel and the second to fire. Since this gun was expensive (at $19), heavy, and slow to reload, there are not as many and fewer were produced. This gun was, however, was used in the West after the war. Both revolvers did not have fixed cartridges and thus required a cap, ball, and power to load. Mr. Bink’s also had holsters and other accessories.
2. Gene Armistead: A deed to land at the Gettysburg battlefield. Mr. Armistead acquired a deed to one square foot of land at the Gettysburg battle site when he was a young man in 1963 as part of a fund raising effort by the national park service for the centennial of the Battle of Gettysburg. In the deed, Mr. Armistead was only able to own the land for a set period of time and today, the land has since been returned to the Federal Government.
3. Curtis Dryer: Thirty-seven letters from a Civil War soldier by the name of Byron to his sister Sophia. Mr. Dryer read one of the letters in which this soldier went riding with some men to visit the church in which General Washington was supposedly married in 1759. This church was Falls Church in Virginia. There was also a reference to Issing Glass which was a kind of nineteenth century crude plastic. The letter was addressed from Miner’s Hill in Virginia and was dated November 5, 1862.
4. Al Haun: A book entitled “Eagles and Empire” by David Clary and copyrighted in 2009. This book is about the Mexican War and although its relation to the Civil War may seem dubious at first, it was in this war that several officers of the Civil War got their start, such as Generals Grant and Lee and even the future Confederate President Davis. In addition, the United States gained valuable experience in modern war with steamships and other nineteenth century inventions. Mr. Haun then read an excerpt about the colorful General Santa Anna who was leader of Mexico during the war and also during the Texan War of Independence. General Santa Anna was leader of Mexico on seven different occasions over twenty two years from 1833 to 1855.
5. Karen Hasman: Her great grandfather, George M. Bass, was a soldier in the Civil War. He was born in 1845 and enlisted at seventeen on August 14, 1862. He was a private in Company C of the 103 Regiment of Illinois. He later fought in General Sherman’s army in his March to the Sea. Private Bass fought at: Ritaches River, Miss. (1863); Jackson, Miss. (Jul. 6, 1863); Resaca, Ga. (May 13, 1864); Dallas, Ga. (May 23, 1864), New Hope Church, Ga. (Jun. 1, 1864); bayonet charges at Kennesaw Mountain, Ga. (Jun. 15^th and 25^th 1864), Battle of Atlanta (Jul. 22^nd and 28^th 1864); Jonesborough, Ga. (Aug. 31, 1864); and finally a bayonet charge at Lovejoy Station (Sep. 2, 1864). Sergeant Bass was later discharged June 21, 1865 and later died in 1918 at the age of 73.
6. Mike Schooling: He is a member of both the Sons of Confederate Veterans and Sons of Union Veterans. With the Sons of Confederate Veterans there is a Southern Legal Resource Center. The purpose of this center is to provide support for modern southerners who have had their rights violated. Mr. Schooling made a point that the right to display images and to believe in the Confederacy is a right that is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, regardless of how objectionable it may seem. He illustrated a point in which a southern girl wore a shirt with the Confederate flag to school and was punished heavily as a result. Another instance was when two schoolgirls had purses with the Confederate flag taken from them. This is contrary to the fact that other students are able to wear shirts and display images of figures such as Malcolm X whose actions destabilized the nation.
7. Father Dennis Mikulanis: Two Bibles from the Civil War era. Father Mikulanis had two pocket Bibles that were printed in the years preceding the Civil War and one was the entire Bible and the other was only the New Testament. The New Testament had writing in the front from a Civil War soldier from Massachusetts that indicated who it was from and a little history of the soldier’s history.
8. Mark Shapiro: A book by General Abner Doubleday entitled” Reminiscences of Forts Sumter and Moultrie”. The book was published by Harper and Brothers in 1876. Dr. Shapiro was impressed by the book as it was a great example of early scholarship on the Civil war and was written by a man who was actually involved in the war. Dr. Shapiro added that such a connection was important as the book acts more like a primary source than many of the books that we read today by modern historians removed from the war by nearly a century and a half.
9. Dave Tooley: Several antique books related to the Civil War. The first two were a cartoon history of President Lincoln and reflected the contemporary and sometimes unfavorable view of Lincoln. The second book was the first volume of Francis Miller’s “Photographic History of the Civil War, in Ten Volumes” of 1911. This was an especially unique version as it was number 178 of 1000 in a special leather-bound edition. The next book was another of Francis Miller’s entitled “Portrait Life of Lincoln” from 1910. Mr. Tooley spent several years looking for this rare book. The last book Mr. Tooley brought was “The Century War Book” which is an 1894 book with a collection of grand lithographs that were later reproduced in many other books on the war.
10. Bill Cooper: A collection of artifacts relating to a relative who fought in the Civil War. The artifacts belonged to Mrs. Cooper’s great-great-grandfather Robert Horan of Illinois. There were also items relating to his brother John, but there is little about this relative as he died early in the war. Although the items belonged to Robert, there were, however, few pictures of him but many of John. One item was a campaign ribbon of President Lincoln and Vice President Hannibal Hamlin from 1860. The next item was a book entitled “Military Records of Robert Horan” and featured every campaign that Mr. Horan participated in. Another item was a book entitled “History of the 90^th Illinois” to which Mr. Horan contributed his diary to provide a realistic account of that unit from the soldiers’ perspective. There were also photographic albums with famous personalities such as Generals Sherman and Grant. Lastly there was a poster commemorating Mr. Horan’s induction into the Grand Army of the Republic. There were also artifacts that Mr. Horan actually used in the war. One such item was a leather cartridge bag which was preserved in all of its original magnificence. The top still opened and the leather was still flexible, almost as if as new. The other item was a cap box. The leather cap box was in excellent condition and as looked as if new. It still had almost every item in it that would have been present when Mr. Horan used it in battle 145 years ago. Another item was a canteen that still held its color and looked as new. Mr. Horan’s belt was also present with the buckle and the original leather belt was still wide and did not shrink greatly as leather tends to do over time. Lastly there was Mr. Horan’s rifle from the war. The rifle had been decorated sometime after the war, perhaps as a memento of Mr. Horan’s service, but also included the original bayonet. All of these items, especially the leather, were in museum quality condition and appeared as if they were a few decades old rather than a century and a half.

October 2009 Meeting by Travis Fuqua

            Mark Shapiro presented The Curious Case of Ambrose Bierce on October 21, 2009. Ambrose Bierce was a soldier in the Civil War who later went on to have a colorful literary career. His wirings show his contempt for the leadership during the Civil War as well as the horrors of battle told in all of its brutality and other stories told in great realism.

            Bierce was born in Ohio on June 24, 1842 and was the tenth of thirteenth children. He was not close to his father and he had had a very poor relationship with his mother. His parents were poor, but literate and wished him to take an interest in books and writing, which he would later develop after the war. Upon the outbreak of war, he enlisted with the Federal army soon after President Lincoln’s call for volunteers, and was one of the first to do so in his county. He saw extensive service in the war and fought in several battles. He was involved in the Battle of Shiloh and in Sherman’s March and on June 23, 1864, he was shot in the left temple by a Confederate sniper. Luckily for him, considering the medicine of the time, he survived, but the bullet remained in his temple and he suffered severe headaches for the rest of his life and even the slightest exertion would make them worse. His head wound ended his fight in the Civil War.

Amrose Bierce and "the Skull of a Former Freind"

         After the war, he continued in the army and went out to San Francisco where he later resigned with the rank of brevet major. He remained in California in San Francisco where he married in 1871. He had two sons and a daughter, of whom he outlived the sons and divorced his wife in 1904 after her questionable conduct several years before. His headaches were further complicated by his constant asthma.

            After settling in California, Bierce began his literary career. Around that time, he made friends with Mark Twain with whom he was about as close as possible for a man with his personality.  An early piece that brought him to prominence was an editorial he wrote in 1887 as a response to the Secretary of War’s efforts to return captured Confederate flags to their owners. Many objected, but Bierce did not see the need of the hatred and support the return, stating it was his place to voice and opinion as he helped to capture the said flags. Such editorials brought him to the attention William Randolph Hurst and he later went to work for his paper, the San Francisco Examiner where he wrote a regular editorial.

            Bierce was very confrontational and had a distaste for authority figures such, editors, despite being for a time. His dislike of authority figures was reflected in his writings. Bierce often attacked other writers, politicians, and even those who tried to be close to him. He even attacked Oscar Wilde and his work when the he visited San Francisco. Wilde and the public did not pay attention and Wilde remained vastly popular with the locals. Although his attacks were usually at people and might be seen as humorous by some, other writings were very discriminatory, such as one piece which was strongly anti-Semitic. His harsh criticisms earned him several nicknames including “Diabolical Bierce” and the most popular, “Bitter Bierce”, and his favorite, “The Wickedest Man in San Francisco”.

            Bierce’s work about the war was quite shocking for its day and remains so today. He described the battles very vividly and described all the horrors of battle. One description that distinguished Bierce was his description of the Battle of Shiloh. Bierce began writing about the war at a time when scholars were just beginning to take interest in the war, since it had only ended a couple of decades before. Another piece by Bierce that gained notoriety was An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge which was published in 1891. In the story, a Confederate sympathizer is about to be hanged for the sabotage of a railroad bridge for which he was not responsible. As he was to be hanged, the rope broke and he was able to escape under fire. He manages to make it back home undetected, but when he arrives, he feels a strong pain in his neck and all goes black. It turns out that he never escaped and was actually hanged in reality. This twist ending has become famous and has been repeated numerous times. It has been said that this story is a precursor of post-modern literature.

            Another famous work by Bierce is the Devil’s Dictionary which he complied over several years. This book takes the form of a regular dictionary, but its definitions are a satire. Below are some sample definitions:

1. Acquaintance, n. A person whom we know well enough to borrow from, but not well enough to lend to. A degree of friendship called slight when its object is poor or obscure, and intimate when he is rich or famous
2. Education, n. That which discloses to the wise and disguises from the foolish their lack of understanding.
3. Mayonnaise, n. One of the sauces that serve the French in place of a state religion.
4. Politician, n. An eel in the fundamental mud upon which the superstructure of organized society is reared. When he wriggles he mistakes the agitation of his tail for the trembling of the edifice. As compared with the statesman, he suffers the disadvantage of being alive.

            Bierce’s personality led to several clashes and his severe criticisms of other writers led their own against him. He took to carrying a loaded pistol with him at all times and on his desk he kept a human skull which he said came from a former friend. He was not close to many people and as a person would become closer to him, he would push them away again. One writer who was fond of Bierce received severe criticism from him. The author was Stephen Crane and his book, The Red Badge of Courage, was about the adventures and troubles of a soldier in the Civil War. Crane wrote realistically about war despite having been born after the war and never having been in combat. This fact and the fact he became more famous than the genuine veteran Bierce’s realistic descriptions gained Crane severe criticism from the former.

            Bierce was well known amongst authors for his literary work, but with the public, he was better known for his editorials as this was the days of sensational yellow journalism. One of his poems did, however, gain him national attention, albeit negative. In 1900, the governor of Kentucky was shot and killed and Bierce published an editorial in Hearst’s paper about the event. In the editorial, Bierce wrote that no one could find the bullet that killed the governor as it was on its way to killing President McKinley. There was little stir at the time, but when McKinley was shot and killed the following year, there was outrage against Hearst and his paper. The poem ended Hearst’s efforts to become president, but despite the setback. Hearst did not reveal Bierce as the author nor did he apologize for the incident. In actuality, Bierce’s poem was meant to show dismay rather than a call to kill McKinley.

Dr. Shapiro Speaking About the Life of Ambrose Bierce

            Bierce’s death was perhaps one of the most interesting events in literary history. In his seventy-first year in 1913, Bierce made a tour of his former battle sites from the Civil War and then headed to Mexico to observe Pancho Villa (before his murderous rampage in New Mexico in 1916) and watch the Mexican Revolution as it happened. He was not heard from again after December of 1913 and his fate remains unknown. Some say that he came back to kill himself at the Grand Canyon and others state that he was a spy for the Federal Government on Mexico—neither of which seem plausible nor have been proven.

            Bierce was one of the most controversial writers of his generation, but his realistic writing style foreshadowed that in the years after his death. He was a major influence on Ernest Hemmingway, both of whim did not like their mothers and were wounded in battle. In retrospect, many scholars argue that Bierce’s writings about his experiences in the Civil War are among the best on war, even better than those of Hemmingway and Stephen Crane’s work of fiction.

June Meeting by Travis Fuqua

The SDCWRT was honored to have author Larry Tagg present on his book, The Unpopular Mr. Lincoln on June 17, 2009. His book is amongst the first of its kind to discuss the popularity of President Lincoln during his presidency. For those who grew up and were educated in the years after the Civil War, not a day goes by where we do not encounter the image of Lincoln, the demi-god. He is on our currency, in our monuments, and even in many of our hearts as among the best presidents we ever had—perhaps second only to the great General Washington himself. During his presidency, however, he was one of the most reviled men in the nation. His unpopularity in the Confederacy is a given, but he was no more popular in the North. The following is an account of the public’s perception of Mr. Lincoln in the North as seen mostly through newspaper editorials and other written accounts.

Mr. Tagg Presenting on His Book "The Unpopular Mr. Lincoln"

            President Lincoln’s unpopularity began long before his time in the White House. It begins with the manner in which presidential candidates were selected in the years before 1972. In those days, there were no primary elections as there are now, but party bosses would gather and select a candidate who would in turn be that party’s nominee for the presidency. In the days before the Civil War, the nation was ablaze with the question of slavery and many parties found it difficult to nominate the famous candidates as their opinions on slavery would cause more controversy. This led to many mediocre candidates and presidents such as Franklin Pierce and James Buchannan, who has often been called the worst president ever for his handling of the secession crisis of 1860-1861. By the time of the 1860 election, many were cynical about the mediocrity of the candidates. The Republicans picked a relatively unknown candidate by the name of Abraham Lincoln who was a lawyer and had been in the House of Representatives some years ago and an unsuccessful candidate for the Senate. The only image that people had of him was the “rail splitter” and rural “man of the people” image that had been circulated. He did not speak during the campaign and did not actively campaign either, but nonetheless, he was elected in November of 1860. His unknown status was the first issue people had with him.

            The Election of 1860 had two candidates who split the Democratic vote along with a third independent candidate almost ensuring Lincoln’s victory. He only won with 39.8 percent of the vote, which is worse than the loser in many other presidential elections. As soon as he won, the South panicked and there were fears of what Lincoln would do as president. Many in the South feared that he would fill the government with abolitionists through the spoils system and then use these people to bring about greater pressure to end slavery. Others feared that Lincoln would be the culmination of the mediocre presidents of the previous decade and lead the United States to a path of decline. There were even others still who derided his appearance saying that he was too tall, too thin, to awkward, and even too ugly. People called him a “huge skeleton in clothes”. They criticized his posture, movements, and even the size of his hands and feet. There was little in the new president that people liked. To make matters worse, Lincoln did not take much care in his appearance and his clothes were often unkempt and people never failed to take note of such. This and his manners alienated the educated and cultured people of the East. The harsh comments about his appearance would be unthinkable today and make the editorials of today’s newspapers look sedate.

            By the beginning of 1861, President-Elect Lincoln had many obstacles before him other than the public’s perception of him. Several states in the Deep South had seceded from the union and President Buchanan’s actions (or lack of them) worsened the situation by the day. By the time Lincoln made it to office, the nation was very near to shattering and it needed another George Washington, not Lincoln, who they perceived as utterly incompetent. Lincoln’s popularity took an even further dip when he came to the City of Washington for the inauguration and slipped into the city under cover the of darkness to avoid a potential assassination plot. Even at that time, he was unpopular enough to have to worry about assassins. Many saw this secrecy as cowardice and many more editorials derided Lincoln for slipping into Washington. Upon his inauguration, Lincoln was just as unpopular coming into the office as President Nixon was upon resigning the office in the fallout of the Watergate Scandal.

            The war did not help with Lincoln’s popularity. The failure of many Federal campaigns cost him even more in popularity and many people openly felt that he was completely incompetent and unable to properly preside over the nation during the time of crisis. Following the Federal victory at the Battle of Antietam in September of 1862, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. It was obviously poorly received in the South, but it was just as poorly received in some areas of the North. Many felt that the war had been over the status of the union and not really slavery, but Lincoln’s attempt at emancipating the slaves would further drive the Confederate states away and further drive the nation apart. In addition, many people feared that such a declaration during a century when the president’s power was limited would undoubtedly lead to further despotism by Lincoln. The Emancipation Proclamation and further military losses later in the year were a blow to Lincoln and the Republicans as they lost many seats in Congress during the midterm election in November of 1862.

            When President Lincoln made the Emancipation Proclamation official on January 1, 1863, the divide became even greater. Many states in the North that relied upon slavery and the South began to question Lincoln and openly considered joining the Confederacy. Lincoln was threatened with the loss of many Midwestern states to the Confederacy and much of their support for the war effort dried up. This divide in the North allowed for the Democratic Copperheads to rise in power and question the Republicans’ management of the war. Also, due to a lack of manpower as a result of the Midwestern states lack of support, Lincoln had to create a draft program, which caused the Draft Riots in New York City in July of 1863. It may have seemed that the division of the nation in 1861 was the greatest danger to the country, but now many considered Lincoln was the greater threat. They saw his removal of rights and liberties as a threat to the Constitution and they feared that the nation and its Constitution would fracture and fail. Lincoln was only saved by the Federal victory at Gettysburg in July of 1863.

            Lincoln’s reprieve would not last. Following the reversals during the Wilderness Campaign in May of 1864 and others, Lincoln’s popularity dipped again. The nation began to fear that the war would never end. As the election neared, the Wade-Davis Manifesto was issued which spoke out against the despotism of Lincoln. Lincoln was re-nominated at the Republican Convention, though, but it was through his manipulation of the spoils system that he obtained such. His competition in the election was General George McClellan who called for peace. Lincoln began to worry about his chances of winning the election and August of 1864 was perhaps his lowest point. The fall of Atlanta in September of 1864 helped morale and helped Lincoln immensely. He was still worried about his chances of winning and helped Nevada join the union as it was loyal to him. It was feared that their state constitution would not reach Washington in time for the election if it was sent overland. Just over a week before the 1864 election, Nevada had its 16,500-word constitution telegraphed to Washington at the cost of $4,300, making it one of the longest and costliest telegraph transmissions ever. By the time of the election, however, conditions had changed for President Lincoln and Nevada’s impact on the election was negligible. In addition, for the first time, soldiers in the field were allowed to cast votes for president in some states and their votes greatly assisted Lincoln as he had gained their support with the draft. Lincoln ended up winning the election with a little over half of the votes.

            The beginning of 1865 began to look brighter for Lincoln and there were many signs that the war would end sooner than later. People began to attribute the turnaround to Lincoln, but there were those who did not. There were even those who feared another four years of Lincoln and began to call for ways to get rid of him—even through assassination. The war did finally end beginning on April 9, 1865 with General Lee’s surrender and Lincoln’s popularity began to rise. His moderate views on Reconstruction in the heated times did not help his popularity however. On April 14, 1865, President Lincoln was shot in the head by southern sympathizer John Wilkes Booth and died at 7:22 the next morning. He was the first president to be assassinated. Even in death, Lincoln was hated by some as they were happy he was gone so they could proceed with their more harsh Reconstruction schemes while others were glad the tyrant was dead.

            President Lincoln was largely unpopular throughout the whole of his presidency. He was saved by his assassination which caused people to see him as a martyr. They saw him along with Moses not being able to see the Promised Land of a free and reunited nation. In one popular print he was supposedly lifted to heaven by the great General Washington. Lincoln came to symbolize freedom while his southern assassin came to represent treachery. His funeral train back to Springfield, Illinois became a symbol of the fanaticism of Victorian mourning. Only then did Lincoln become the president that we adore today as a savior of our country and a symbol of freedom. Lincoln was a capable president according to Mr. Tagg, because he did more with the least political capital than any president before or since. He truly was a great politician.

Mr. Cooper Presenting Mr. Tagg with a Certificate of Appreciation After His Presentation

May Meeting by Travis Fuqua

Gene Armistead

Gene Armistead presented Equines in the Civil War on May 20, 2009. This month’s presentation was about the roles that equines—horses, mules, and donkeys—played in the Civil War from the cavalry charge to the quartermaster’s wagon train. When we think of horses and war, we often think of romantic and daring cavalry charges, but equines played a far more important role in the war. The Civil War, of course, took place in the days before automobiles, trucks, and tanks, and thus everything that could not be moved on the limited railroad network had to be moved by equines. Men had to charge into battle on the backs of horses.

As mentioned before, the most famous image of equines is that of the cavalry. The cavalry in the Civil War was harsh as the horses and the men were constantly in the line of fire. Generals often had more than one horse to ensure that a fresh one was always ready for him. Sometimes, an officer lost a horse in battle and had to find a replacement and sometimes, he could even loose several horses in battle. The life of cavalry horses was very harsh and their survival rate was only about four months. Given this and the number of cavalry regiments, there was a need for almost two and a half million cavalry horses during the war.

Another important use of horses in the war was that of artillery horse. Some artillery horses pulled the artillery pieces to the field of battle and the others pulled the supplies necessary for the field pieces. Artillery horses often found themselves under fire as it was a sure method to cripple the enemy’s artillery by immobilizing it. Artillery horses fared better than their cavalry counterparts and lasted an average of seven and a half months. Given this expectancy and the number of artillery units on both sides, there was a need for almost a half a million artillery horses.

Gene Armistead talking Civil War equines up

Perhaps the most important use of equines in the war was in supplying the army. The quartermaster needed tremendous numbers of mules to supply the armies and the ratio of mules to men varied depending on the roads and the severity of the campaign, but by 1864, the Federal army overall needed one animal for every two men. The horses themselves also had great supply needs for feed and water. Mules were found to be better than horses as they could work better with cheaper and less feed. Horses were also used to pull ambulances and pharmacies and mules were even used to carry wounded soldiers when an ambulance was unavailable or inconvenient. The Civil War created a need for almost four million horses and mules. This is compared to the combined Federal and Confederate army of three and a quarter million men.

Paying for and supplying the animals was another question. Most horses and mules ranged in price form about one hundred dollars to two hundred. Sometimes, wartime inflation and the fame of the horse could drive the price as high as $4,600, which was the appraised price of General Lee’s famous horse, Traveller. By the end of the war, the Federal Army had spent 130 million dollars on horses and mules. Each side always needed more horses than it could ever hope to obtain. There were no specific breeding programs given the sudden nature of the war and neither side was particular about the breed of horse it required, although certain units specified certain colors or types of horses, but mostly for a dramatic effect.

The Federal government set up six horse depots throughout the country to obtain and distribute horses, but there were notorious cases of corruption and incompetence and many horses that were acquired by the Federal government were unusable. When the supply depots could not manage, men often had to scour the countryside and take whatever equines they could find. Confederate forces had even more difficulty given that Confederate officers were supposed to supply their own horses in addition to the general lack of resources in the Confederacy. Whenever Confederate forces were in the north and took northern farm animals, they found that they were better suited for pulling plows rather than riding.

Bill Cooper presenting Appreciation Certificate to Gene Armistead

Many horses and men in the war developed a relationship and other horses became almost as famous as their masters. The aforementioned horse, Traveller, of General Lee began its life before the war named after a Mississippi Congressmen by the name of Jefferson Davis. “Jeff Davis” later ended up with Lee after a series of owners and was renamed Traveller. He died in 1871 and his skeleton was placed on display before being buried in the 1970s. Some other general’s horses from both sides of the war have either been entirely stuffed or have had parts stuffed and are currently on display. One could argue that these stuffed remains are the last survivors of the Civil War. The horses that served in the war were in some ways equally as brave as those who rode them into the field of battle.

April Meeting by Travis Fuqua

Pedro Garcia’s presentation “Lee, Stuart, and the Road to Perdition” from April 15, 2009

Pedro Garcia

April’s presentation was about a somewhat controversial topic, J. E. B. “Jeb” Stuart and how his actions affected the Battle of Gettysburg. Stuart has long been a controversial figure. In the spring of 1863 General Lee told the Confederate government that the best military policy was for the Confederacy to become the aggressor and take the war to Federal soil. In order to accomplish his goal, Lee had to first march through the Virginian mountain and remain undetected long enough to position his army. Not long before Lee was due to depart, Federal cavalry caught Confederate cavalry off guard at Brandy Station in northern Virginia. General Stuart was successful in getting the Federal army to quit the field, but he won at a great cost. Not only did he lose many men, but he was humiliated for being surprised and he was constantly under attack by the Confederate press.

Pedro Garcia presenting "Lee, Stuart, and the Road to Perdition"

After his surprise at Brandy Station, Stuart was placed in charge of protecting Lee’s army from Federal forces as they crossed the Potomac River into Maryland. Stuart did well in this capacity and the Federal army lost track of Lee for nine days until he was in Pennsylvania. Lee’s orders for Stuart are a source of speculation as Lee told Stuart to guard the Confederate army and to later cross the Potomac River and then meet with General Ewell’s right flank in Federal territory. The controversy in Lee’s orders is over the route that Stuart should have taken as there seems to have been ambiguity. Since Stuart was in search of glory and rehabilitating his reputation after Brandy Creek, he decided to march east through the lines of the Federal army and then go through Maryland and meet with Confederate forces in Pennsylvania. His route to the east was contrary to what Lee had intended him to do.

Stuart and his three brigades left Salem, Virginia on June 25, 1863, but he soon met the south east part of the Federal army under General Hancock. This forced him to the east even more and Lee was without both cavalry and the ability to scout Maryland. Upon meeting and defeating Hancock at Haymarket, Stuart sent a portion of his cavalry after him, but when that detachment later came back to meet Stuart, he was gone. The detachment then assumed that Stuart had gone to the northwest across the Blue Ridge Mountains as Lee had and they left in that direction. Stuart, meanwhile, had crossed into Maryland and captured a Federal wagon train, consisting of 125 wagons laden with supplies and mule teams near Rockville. Soon after, Stuart came dangerously close to the City of Washington, but did not enter on account of his tired horses. As Stuart continued through Maryland, he added to the supplies, but the slow mule teams and the long wagon train turned into a hindrance as it halved the distance that Stuart could travel in a day and stretched out his forces. On June 30th, Stuart met Federal cavalry in Hanover, Pennsylvania and was defeated and retreated to Dover, which he reached on July 1st as the Battle of Gettysburg began. Stuart then went north to Carlisle, Pennsylvania, hoping to find Ewell there and reunite with him as per Lee’s orders, but he found out that Lee was thirty miles to the south at Gettysburg. Stuart raced southward and arrived at Gettysburg on July 2nd. At Gettysburg, Stuart was supposed to help hold Confederate lines, but he was defeated by General Custer. The wagon train that had been a hindrance to Stuart proved useful in the retreat from Gettysburg.

Stuart was used as a scapegoat for the Confederate failure at Gettysburg and he was scolded heavily by General Lee, but he was never formally disciplined. Historians have often debated about the role that Stuart may or may not have played in the Battle of Gettysburg. In the end, Stuart was killed the following year. Mr. Garcia notes that he was more like a knight of the days of old than a modern general.

Bill Cooper presenting Speakers Award to Pedro Garcia

April Minutes

This is the minutes from the previous meeting