網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

On July 30, 1865, the Middle Military Division was abolished and the Middle Military Department was constituted, with Hancock in command, headquarters being in Baltimore. On July 26, 1866, Hancock received his appointment as major general in the regular army. The month following he was sent to command the Department of the Missouri, with headquarters at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. In the fall of that year began the trouble with the turbulent and warlike Cheyennes, with whom were associated the Kiowas and the Arapahoes. The depredations and outrages of these tribes, irritated by the progress of the Pacific Railroad, increased during the winter of 1866-'67 until travel across the plains was nearly suspended. In March of the latter year Hancock moved from Fort Riley with a force of all arms about fourteen hundred strong, reaching Fort Larned, near the Arkansas River, in April. It was hoped by this demonstration to overawe the discontented and prevent the spread of insurrection. But by this time the Indians of the plains had become very generally involved in hostilities. No decisive action took place prior to September, when Hancock, by order of the President, proceeded to New Orleans to assume command of the Fifth Military District, comprising Louisiana and Texas.

It was while in command at New Orleans that Hancock came into collision with those who were directing the course of reconstruction in the lately

insurgent States.

The following is the text of the

celebrated General Order No. 40, with which he as

sumed his new command:

[ocr errors]

"HEADQUARTERS, FIFTH MILITARY DISTRICT,

"NEW ORLEANS, I A., November 29, 1867.

"General Orders No. 40.

"I. In accordance with General Orders No. 81, Headquarters of the Army, Adjutant General's Office, Washington, D. C., August 27, 1867, Major-General W. S. Hancock hereby assumes command of the Fifth Military District and of the department composed of the States of Louisiana and Texas.

"II. The general commanding is gratified to learn that peace and quiet reign in this department. It will be his purpose to preserve this condition of things. As a means to this great end he requires the maintenance of the civil authorities and the faithful execution of the laws as the most efficient under existing circumstances.

"In war it is indispensable to repel force by force, to overthrow and destroy opposition to lawful authority; but when insurrectionary force has been overthrown and peace established, and the civil authorities are ready and willing to perform their duties, the military power should cease to lead and the civil administration resume its natural and rightful dominion. Solemnly impressed with these views, the general announces that the great principles of American liberty are still the inheritance

of this people, and ever should be.

The right of liberty of the

trial by jury, the habeas corpus, the press, the freedom of speech, the natural rights of persons, and the rights of property must be preserved.

"Free institutions, while they are essential to the prosperity and happiness of the people, always furnish the strongest inducements to peace and order. Crimes and offenses committed in this district must be left to the consideration and judgment of the regular civil tribunals, and those tribunals. will be supported in their lawful jurisdiction.

"Should there be violations of existing laws which are not inquired into by the civil magistrates, or should failures in the administration of justice be complained of, the cases will be reported to these headquarters, when such orders may be made as may be deemed necessary.

"While the general thus indicates his purpose to respect the liberties of the people, he wishes all to understand that armed insurrection or forcible resistance to the law will be instantly suppressed by arms."

After telling the story of so many battles, as has been done in this volume, it will not be necessary to fight over again here the Battle of Reconstruction. In the situation existing in 1866 and 1867 it was inevitable that widely different views should be held

by equally intelligent and patriotic men as to the proper method of treating communities composed of those who had lately been in rebellion. The two policies of generosity and trustfulness on the one hand, of distrust and repression on the other, were certain to find adherents, each in great numbers, among those who had been perfectly united and agreed so long as a single soldier of the Confederacy remained in arms. Nor was the line of separation between the two parties to this question drawn. solely according to temperament, character, and prevailing bent of mind. Personal ambitions, political affiliations, accidents as to the point of view or as to individual observation or experience, the influence of recognized leaders of public opinion-all these would surely enter to affect the adhesion of citizens to one or the other of the two policies of reconstruction, so that men of the meanest and most grudging nature should be found among the advocates of generosity and trustfulness in the treatment of the South; while, on the other hand, men whose whole lives had been but an expression of tolerance, charity, and benignity should be earnest in holding that rashly to restore the lately insurgent communities to their former political privileges and to intrust them at once with the self-control which is taken for granted by our form of government, would be alike to endanger the Union and betray the helpless freedmen.

Moreover, it was a matter of moral certainty that either policy, so far as it should be tried would in some degree be disappointing to its friends and would, on some occasion at least, give its opponents the opportunity to point the finger of scorn. The policy of generosity and trust surely would, sooner or later, there if not here, meet with ingratitude more strong than traitors' arms"; while, on the other hand, those who held by the policy of repression would at times be startled to find how empty of all restorative and reparative virtue were the measures in which they had delighted; how completely it was true that the malignant elements they had kept under lock and key were still in undiminished vigor, never to yield the smallest fraction of their deadly potency save under the beneficent chemistry of free institutions, personal rights, and equal laws.

The difficult situation of 1866 and 1867 was profoundly complicated by the obtrusion of several strong, rank, highly offensive personalities. Some of these belonged to men who during the long struggle with the slave power had borne themselves heroically, but who, when the institution of slavery rushed to its downfall, were found painfully or even ludicrously unfit to deal with questions of readjustment or reconstruction. Their stubborn tempers, their aggressive dispositions, their fearless courage had made them leaders and champions in the

« 上一頁繼續 »