Stanton: the Life and Times of Lincoln's Secretary of War (review)

Abstract

342CIVIL WAR HISTORY by this procedure are the larger questions posed by the conduct of war in a democratic society. What, for example, are the responsibilities of the generalin -chief of an army, or those of a commander of a principal army, to the chief of state? What are the legitimate functions of die representatives of the sovereign people who sit in the Congress or cabinet during wartime? It is hardly sufficient to label some of them "Radicals" or "Jacobins," as Hassler does, and then imply that they were troublemakers or self-seeking politicians at worst, and misguided or incompetent meddlers at best. The problems and nature of military command in a democratic society will not be fully understood until scholars who can match the energy and learning displayed by Professor Hassler have probed more deeply into the tangled field of civil-military relations. Until then this evaluation of the commanders of the Army of the Potomac is the best we have and we are very much indebted to its author for a genuine contribution to the history of the Civil War. Davm S. Sparks University of Maryland Stanton: the Life and Times of Lincoln's Secretary of War. By Benjamin P. Thomas and Harold M. Hyman. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962. Pp. 643. $8.50.) This book is difficult to appraise. It is well written, and its first part is abundandy documented and nonpartisan; but with the outbreak of the Civil War the author, like some beginners, cannot control his growing fondness for his hero, and his statements become less and less trustworthy. There is nothing controversial in Stanton's early life. We leam of his intimate family affairs, and this information, not found in previous books on Lincoln's secretary of war, is a real contribution to American history. The first crack in Hyman's judicious attitude occurs in his report on the famous Reaper case. He thinks it "quite possible" that Stanton knew nothing of the gross chicanery by which he won a favorable verdict. Then why did he make his assistant Peter Watson, who master-minded die fraud, an assistant secretary of war, make A. E. H. Johnson, who had performed confidential service in the case his personal clerk, and bestow on the executor of the swindle, William Wood, tiie rank of colonel, besides endowing him with the lucrative position of warden of the Capitol Prison? The non-curious author records Stanton's reward to Watson and Johnson without comment, but of the unsavory Wood's future relationship widi Stanton he makes no mention at all. Hyman tries to minimize any criticism against Stanton by frequently omitting happenings which might influence the reader adversely. He neglects to quote, for instance, the silly principle on which the new secretary of war proposed to win: "Much has been said of . . . organizing victory . . . who can organize victory? . . . battles are to be won in the only manner they were won in any age—by boldly pursuing and striking the foe." On page 181 the author comes out in earnest as Stanton's champion. When the war minister displayed his well-known cowardice at the time of the Merrimac panic, Hyman excuses it on the ground that "this was not a situation Book Reviews343 calling for physical courage." And when Stanton made die admittedly ridiculous choice of General Hitchcock as acting head of the army, Hyman calls it "a gesture of folly." Is an accomplished folly a gesture? On April 3, 1862, Stanton closed all recruiting offices, just when McClellan began his Peninsular campaign, and Hyman considers it one of the colossal blunders of the war. "When Stanton stopped recruiting," we are assured, "it was through bad judgment, not treachery." This might have been so, had not Stanton tried to make die stoppage permanent by ordering the government property of the recruiting stations auctioned off. But you will not find tiiis part of the order in Hyman's book. Most people will be disappointed when they reach the chapters on Lincoln 's assassination. First of all they will note that Hyman is not too well informed on the subject. He misspells the name of Paine, and suggests that the accuracy...