In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

456civil war history by Federal forces, held elections and chose Michael Hahn as governor. But this plan was not much of a success in eiuSer Louisiana or Arkansas, and Congress quickly developed its own scheme. The Wade-Davis Bill was promulgated and finally passed by bodi houses. It declared, among odier tilings, diat Reconstruction could not begin until armed resistance and rebellion had ended. And Congress was to be die agency to preside over die various steps. Naturally, Lincoln resented diis slap by die "Radicals"—who disagreed diat die President was die one to administer Reconstruction—and refused to sign die bill Wade and Davis issued a manifesto against Lincoln's "pocket veto" of dieir measure, but by utilizing die soldiers' votes, Lincoln's government in USe North was re-elected by a slim majority of USe popular votes in 1864. WiuSin a few weeks before die war's end, Lincoln seems to have revised again his plans for Reconstruction. He counseled Grant, Sherman, and Porter to give conciliation and forgiveness to the Rebels. He hinted diat legislatures in die SoutiSem states might be allowed to continue tiSeir operations if diey swore fealty to the Union. Although his several plans for Reconstruction never worked on a large scale, Lincoln remolded die United States into a stronger federal system and destroyed many of die state prerogatives. Some readers may think that Professor Hesseltine has dealt rather harshly widi Lincoln's motives and actions. This essay seems to represent, at times, the view which a Southerner might have had of Lincoln during the Civil War. However, Dr. Hesseltine has a firm foundation of incidents to bolster his diesis, and his conclusions will become an important interpretation of Lincoln 's motives in regard to Reconstruction. Wayne C. Temple Lincoln Memorial University The Fall of Richmond. By Rembert W. Patrick. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1960. Pp. ix, 144. $4.00.) a contemporary lithograph reproduced on USe dustjacket depicts Richmond as a mass of smoking ruins. Distortion and even error are evident in the picture, but most of die details of the scene are obscured by a dense pall of smoke. The jacket is singularly appropriate, for this book distorts and obscures the story of the fall of Richmond. Perhaps it is unfair to condemn the work of a particular historian because it exemplifies faults which mar many otiier histories. A graduate course in historical method would probably have left Homer hopelessly tongue-tied. But the fall of Richmond, like die fall of Troy, was an event of dramatic importance. The souls of men and women were tried in fire, and the story of their experiences should be literature of a high order. One cannot help comparing Professor Patrick's book witìS John Hersey's Hiroshima. About equal in lengtìi, each deals with people overwhelmed by war. The subjects are alike, but Hersey's narrative is clear and powerful, Book Reviews457 whereas Patrick's is confused and weak. To point out diat Hersey is a novelist and Patrick a historian is to state a fact, but that fact does not excuse poor writing. Research and documentation need not dirottle literary expression. Professor Patrick divides his story into three chapters, each dealing widi the events of a single day—April 2, 3, and 4, 1865. Unfortunately he allows his narrative to wander aimlessly; never does he bring die events of a day into sharp focus. One gets die impression diat he is stringing his notes togedier radier dian reconstructing die story of die fall of Richmond. Emphasis and proportion are lacking. Trivial incidents are stressed and major events are slighted. A single paragraph deals widi the extinguishing of the fire by die Union army, and General Edward H. Ripley, who had charge of the work, is not even mentioned in this connection, diough he is elsewhere reported to have an office in the city hall for no apparent reason. The audior seems to be unfamiliar widi Richmond and to have only a nodding acquaintance widi its citizens. On page 60 we are introduced to a nephew of the Reverend Moses Hodge [sic, Hoge], pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church and invited to...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 456-457
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.