VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Maitland Westbrook <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 5 Mar 2003 02:11:22 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (123 lines)
Anne:

The following is from a web site that has an article about the election.
Whereas many of Lincoln's actions during the war were highly 'illegal' and
uncontitutional, this just fits in line.

As I have just moved from the US to the UK and my 'library' (however samll
it may be) is in storage and I'm unable to be more specfic at the meoment.
 I'll see what I can find, but for now, this will have to do.

"During the War between the States Lincoln was known to instruct his
military commanders to furlough registered Republicans while keeping
Democrats (and any others) in the field, where they could not vote. In
border states like Maryland, where there was powerful opposition to the
war, federal soldiers flooded the cities on election days and were
instructed to vote, even though they were not residents of those states.

"Federal soldiers also intimidated voters into voting Republican by
menacing them at the polls. As Lincoln biographer David Donald has
written, "Under the protection of Federal bayonets, New York went
Republican by seven thousand votes" in 1864.

"The Republican Congress even created three new states -- Kansas, West
Virginia, and Nevada -- to help rig the 1864 election in favor of Lincoln,
so concerned were they over pervasive antiwar sentiment and massive
desertions from the federal army."

I did a quick search under 'election 1864 fraud' and came up with many
sites citing the fraud involved in the election.  This insert comes from
http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=554&amp;month=26

While not inclusive, this sums it for now - the elections of 1864 were
marred by corruption and fraud not seen before, or much since (except
maybe the election of Hayes in defeating Grant).

Hope this helps for now..and when I find a site that offers a better
examination of the elections, I'll forward it to you.

Maitland


--- Anne Pemberton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Maitland,
>
>          Can you recommend a better site?
>
>          Actually, the site opens with remarks about the fact that the
> nation at war, and divided in the war, held an orderly election. The
> site
> says that the election occurred with "relatively little corruption".  In
> looking at the scope and purpose of the overall site, it perhaps
> suggests
> that whatever "fraud" took place was not as significant as in other
> elections ????
>
>          I think Lincoln was realistic. He was not the picture of a
> president, and did not subscribe to the "polite" conventions of the "PC"
> folks of his time. To paraphrase Davey Crockett (or his spin doctors),
> "he
> was sure he was right, then went ahead." It took some courage to agree
> to
> his nomination before Sherman did in Atlanta, but he had that courage,
> and
> it paid off.
>
>          Unless you know of better sites, I'll probably add this link to
> my
> student link pages. It's a useful source for students and teachers
> seeking
> information on the presidential elections, even if it has inadequacies
> for
> history majors.
>
>                                          Anne
>
>
>
>
>
> At 07:30 AM 3/4/03 -0800, you wrote:
> >The site refered to is a softshoe approach to the election of '84.  It
> >doesn't cover the fraud, etc in the elections and under plays the role
> of
> >Sherman's actions in the Southeast.  This site is designed to preach to
> >the choir and the PC minded of today and glosses over the full impact
> of
> >the election, most noteworthy due to the fact that for the first time a
> >country at war actually held elections, and the great amount of fraud
> that
> >took place.
> >
> >Even Lincoln thought he would lose and only felt good about the
> election
> >after Atlanta fell.
> >
> >M. Westbrook
> >
> >--- Anne Pemberton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > war expectations for the south than Lincoln did. Check out
> > > http://elections.harpweek.com/4Overview/overview-1864-1.htm and
> other
> > > sites
>
> Anne Pemberton
> [log in to unmask]
>
> http://www.erols.com/stevepem
> http://www.educationalsynthesis.org
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html



__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US