A Crisis of Republicanism: American Politics during the Civil War Era (review)

BOOK REVIEWS69 he can be forgiven, for although he deals, as he must, with the Army of Tennessee's campaigns and battles, they are not his subject as such and hence he inevitably relied on those works which focus on that subject. Tennessee's Forgotten Warriors (actually not so much forgotten as less famous than their Virginia counterparts) is written in a clear, crisp style; it is thoroughly researched and amply documented, and its analyses are cogent and intelligent. In sum, its author, who according to the dust jacket was or is a high school teacher, has produced a first-rate scholarly book that can be read with pleasure by non-academic non-specialists and which is valuable contribution to Civil War, Southern, and Tennessee history. Albert Castel Western Michigan University A Crisis of Republicanism: American Politics during the Civil War Era. Edited by Lloyd E. Ambrosius. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1990. Pp. iv, 144. $23.50.) To honor the contributions of James A. Rawley to Civil War scholarship, the University of Nebraska History Department sponsored a panel discussion featuring other reknown historians of the Civil War period— Thomas B. Alexander, John Niven, Phillip S. Paludan, Harold M. Hyman, and Hans L. Trefousse. These papers, plus an introduction by Lloyd E. Ambrosius and a conclusion by Joel H. Silbey, are the contents of A Crisis of Republicanism. None of the pieces are definitive; rather, each author offers a new perspective and hopes to stimulate further research. John Niven investigates the failure of Salmon Portland Chase to win the presidential nominations of 1856 and 1860. Niven argues that Chase lacked personal charisma and made political enemies by placing his ambitions before party considerations. Niven's characterizations of Chase's faults are essentially true. Yet, Chase hardly failed to obtain high political office; he was a two-time governor of Ohio, United States senator, secretary of the treasury, and chief justice of the Supreme Court. That was quite a record for a man with no political friends, and such a performance begs an explanation. Hans Trefousse compares Abraham Lincoln with Andrew Johnson, stressing the differences between the two. In particular, he finds a chasm between Lincoln and Johnson on the matter of race—Lincoln becoming more receptive to black initiatives, Johnson never outgrowing the instincts of the Tennessee slaveholder he once was. Johnson's hostility to black aspirations foreclosed the possibility of a racially progressive reconstruction program. Few people at this date will contest Trefousse's conclusions. 70CIVIL WAR HISTORY Phillip Paludan provides an interpretation of Lincoln informed by "hermeneutics and political philosophy," subjects in which he feels he is only a "journeyman" (74). Approaching Lincoln from this angle, Paludan makes two points. First, Lincoln believed that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were engaged in a continuous "conversation" (75) over the appropriate standards for a just society. Second, Paludan argues that early in his political life Lincoln adopted an analytical style, but as he grew older he resorted to the narrative— to story-telling—to explain the meaning of the Civil War. Paludan's claims are intelligently put forward, but they are highly conjectural. Thomas Alexander probes the importance of the Free-Soil party to the party system by using quantitative methods. He guides the reader through a maze of statistical assumptions before arriving at an appropriate methodology; this discussion is worth review by quantitative political historians. Among his conclusions are: Free-Soilers generally came from poorer agricultural counties and so had a material interest in the dispute over slavery's expansion into the West; Whig and Democratic defections to the Free-Soilers were most clearly associated with distance from southern borders; in order to triumph, Republicans had to have attracted a considerable number of Democrats; the KansasNebraska Act touched off a northern reaction that was similar to the Free-Soil revolt; and the Kansas-Nebraska Act was the crucial event that led to party disintegration. Some Civil War scholars will find Alexander's pronouncements about the centrality of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, without a thorough analysis of the Know-Nothings, startling. Harold Hyman discusses the intentions of antislavery legalists in fashioning the Civil War amendments and the reasons...