The Role of the State Legislatures in the Confederacy (review)

374CIVILWAR HISTORY Indiana's influence in national politics outweighed her actual importance in the nation. The most outstanding figure was Oliver P. Morton who, as governor, guided Indiana dirough the war and later, as a United States senator, played a significant role in shaping the Radical reconstruction program . No less important were Caleb Blood Smith, John P. Usher, Hugh McCulloch, and Richard Thompson, all of whom held cabinet posts between 1860 and 1880. One Indianian, Schuyler Colfax, was Vice President during Grant's first term while another, Thomas Hendricks, was the Democratic nominee for Üiat position in 1876. This reviewer notes with satisfaction Üiat Professor Thornbrough gives proper attention to the role of the Negro in Indianae history. Too often the Negro is treated as an appendage or completely ignored. However, considering Miss Thombrough's interest in Negro history and her previous work on the Negro in Indiana, she achieves balance in her presentation of the Negro's role. The amount of detail included in this book is at times overpowering. It seems to this reviewer Üiat it was not necessary to spend over twenty pages delineating die various military units from Indiana in the Civil War and the battles in which they served. Also, the discussion of the development of almost every railroad line between 1850 and 1880 and its financial status made for tedious reading. Despite these criticisms, Indiana in the Civil War Era is an informative and readable study. Its detail proved Üiat a prodigious amount of work went into this book, Eugene H. Berwanger Colorado State University The Role of the State Legislatures in the Confederacy. By May Spencer Ringold. (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1967. Pp. viii, 141. $5.00.) Mrs. Ringold delineates and traces the problems that faced the Confederate State governments from 1861 to 1865. Her research is obviously very diorough and her story is an interesting one. The difficulties that confronted the seceded states were enormous. New state relationships had to be rapidly evolved in a revolutionary atmosphere. To be sure, die old guidelines that had operated under the old United States regime were useful, but new functions must be assumed, and untried adjustments had to be made in a new situation, while the exigencies of war with a powerful and determined foe must be faced. When consideration is taken of the overwhelming problems that faced these states, one can only wonder at the measure of success that they attained. Patriotic fervor undoubtedly accounts for the earlier successes. It was but natural that much of this early enthusiasm would be dissipated in the realities of defeat and frustration. Then dissatisfaction, ennui, and confusion would assist in eroding the political viability of these states. For BOOK REVIEWS375 inherent in the concept of secession itself was the principle of noncooperation with the Confederate government as well as with one another. This fact has been ably demonstrated by the late Professor Frank Owsley in his States Rights and the Confederacy. If the Confederacy had any chance at all for survival, it would have to be the result of foreign intervention or the maximum cooperation of the various states of which it was composed . The very philosophical foundation upon which the Confederacy was based in effect precluded the latter possibility. Such governors as Zebulon Vance of North Carolina and Joseph Brown of Georgia were loyal to the Confederate regime. Indeed, any accusation of noncooperation Üiat may be made against them is the direct result of the fact Üiat they interpreted the states rights dogma too literally, and attempted to practice its tenets. This is not to say that the states rights dogma might not have been more effective and less harmful if the Confederate revolution could have been achieved without war. Much may be said for a political doctrine of particularism Üiat allows a maximum political autonomy. Certainly the maximum degree of contentment for minorities can be realized in Üiat manner. The problem with which the Confederate states were faced was the fact that the revolution was not allowed to be peaceful. In such a circumstance, the attempt to apply a particularistic political philosophy may well be fatal. Mrs. Ringold shows how the impact of problems...