



Produced by V. L. Simpson, Josephine Paolucci and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net.
(This file was produced from images generously made
available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)







John Brown

Soldier of Fortune

A Critique

[Illustration: John Brown]




JOHN BROWN

SOLDIER OF FORTUNE

_A Critique_

BY

HILL PEEBLES WILSON

[Illustration]

      _Mr. Vallandigham_: Mr. Brown, who sent you here?

      _John Brown_: No man sent me here; it was my own prompting
      and that of my Maker, or that of the Devil, whichever you
      please to ascribe it to. I acknowledge no master in human
      form.

                              _Post, 313_

THE CORNHILL COMPANY
BOSTON

Copyright, 1913

HILL PEEBLES WILSON


Copyright, 1918

THE CORNHILL COMPANY

TO THE MEMORY OF
MRS. SARA T. D. ROBINSON
OF KANSAS




PREFACE


The writer of this book is not an iconoclast, neither has he prejudged
John Brown. In 1859 the character was impressed upon his attention in a
personal way. An older brother, Joseph E. Wilson, was a member of the
company of marines that made the assault on the engine-house at Harper's
Ferry, on the morning of October 18th; and from him he heard the story
of the fight, and about Brown.

In 1889 the Topeka (Kansas) _Daily Capital_ took a poll of the members
of the Kansas Legislature on the question: "Who was the most
distinguished Kansan?" or something to that effect. At that time the
writer held the opinion that the public services rendered by John Brown
in Kansas Territory, were of paramount importance in the settlement of
the Free-State contention; and since the course which the nation was at
that time pursuing had been arrested by the result of that contention,
and diverted into the path which led to the marvelous achievements of
the succeeding years; he, therefore, over his signature cast his vote in
favor of John Brown; saying, among other things, in his little
panegyric, that Brown is the only Kansan whose fame was immortal.

In 1898 he reformed his opinions concerning Brown's character and
conduct, and the importance of his public services in Kansas. The change
came about through an effort on his part to write a sketch of his life
for a work entitled "Eminent Men of Kansas." In good faith, and with
much of the confidence and enthusiasm characteristic of Brown's
eulogists, he began an investigation of the available historical data
relating to the subject; when he found to his surprise, and disgust,
that the history of Brown's career contained nothing to justify the
public estimate of him.

Reporting to his associate that he would not write the sketch, he said
that he "could find but little in the record of his life which gave him
creditable distinction, and that he did not wish to write the
discreditable things about him which it contained."

Later he gathered up the threads of Brown's life and has woven them,
conscientiously, into the web of history. The story reveals little which
is creditable to Brown or worthy of emulation and much that is
abhorrent. But he indulges the hope that he has made it clear that his
conceptions of the character have not been inspired by "prejudice,"
"blind" or otherwise, for he has examined the records in the case; an
examination which has led him through all the existing testimony
concerning Brown; except, that he has not explored the writings which
have been put forth by those who have sought, viciously, to attack
Brown's character. The opinions therefore which he has set forth are
convictions resulting from serious investigation and thought.

In conclusion, the author takes great pleasure in acknowledging the deep
sense of his obligation to the late Mrs. Sara T. D. Robinson, wife of
Charles Robinson of Kansas, whose generosity, and deep interest in the
history of our country, made the publication of this book possible.

Also, he desires to express his gratitude to Dr. William Watson Davis,
of the University of Kansas, for the cordial encouragement which he
received from him while preparing the work, and for his kindly
assistance in molding the text into its present form. Also, to Dr.
William Savage Johnson, and to Professor William Asbury Whitaker, Jr.,
both of the University of Kansas, he wishes to return his thanks for
many valuable suggestions.

Lawrence, Kansas, April 15, 1913.




CONTENTS


I THE SUBJECT MATTER                                 15

II THE MAN                                           26

III KANSAS--A CRISIS IN OUR NATIONAL HISTORY         55

IV HIS PUBLIC SERVICES                               72

V ROBBERY AND MURDER ON THE POTTAWATOMIE             95

VI BLACK JACK                                       135

VII OSAWATOMIE                                      154

VIII HYPOCRISY                                      181

IX A SOLDIER OF FORTUNE                             223

X THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT                        243

XI THE SHUBEL MORGAN PLUNDER COMPANY                259

XII MOBILIZING THE PROVISIONAL ARMY                 283

XIII THE FIASCO                                     296

XIV A PERVERSION OF HISTORY                         323

XV HIS GREAT ADVENTURE                              341

XVI A SOLDIER OF THE CROSS                          364

XVII "YET SHALL HE LIVE"                            395


APPENDICES

I CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE LATE D. W.
WILDER CONCERNING JOHN BROWN                        411

II RECOLLECTIONS OF JOHN BROWN AT HARPER'S
FERRY BY ALEXANDER BOTELER, A VIRGINIAN
WHO WITNESSED THE FIGHT                             414

III CONSTITUTION AND ORDINANCE FOR THE PEOPLE
OF THE UNITED STATES                                417

IV JOHN BROWN'S AUTOBIOGRAPHY                       431





ILLUSTRATIONS


JOHN BROWN                                 Frontispiece

      Steel engraving made from a photograph compared with a
      photogravure. The photograph was taken about 1859. Original
      in the Kansas State Historical Society. The photogravure is
      from Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard's book: John Brown--A
      Biography Fifty Years After.

JOHN BROWN                                  facing page 98

      Steel engraving, made as above. The photograph was copied
      from a daguerreotype taken in 1856. Original in the Kansas
      State Historical Society.




CHAPTER I

THE SUBJECT MATTER

_Truth, crushed to earth shall rise again;_

                         --BRYANT


The object of the writer, in publishing this book, is to correct a
perversion of truth, whereby John Brown has acquired fame, as an
altruist and a martyr, which should not be attributed to him.

The book is a review of the historical data that have been collected and
published by his principal biographers: Mr. James Redpath, Mr. Frank B.
Sanborn and Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard. It is also a criticism of these
writers, who have sought to suppress, and have suppressed, important
truths relating to the subject of which they wrote, and who have
misinformed and misled the public concerning the true character of this
figure in our national history; and have established in its stead a
fictitious character, which is wholly illogical and inconsistent with
the facts and circumstances of Brown's life.

Mr. Redpath, his first and most lurid biographer, was a newspaper
correspondent of the type now generally called "yellow." He was a
"Disunionist," and seems to have been a malcontent, who went to Kansas
Territory to oppose the policy which the Free-State men had adopted for
a safe and sane solution of the Free-State problem; and who sought to
thwart their efforts to create a free state by peaceable means. He
said:[1]

      I believed that a civil war between the North and South
      would ultimate in insurrection and that the Kansas troubles
      would probably create a military conflict of the sections.
      Hence, I left the South, and went to Kansas; and endeavored
      personally, and by my pen, to precipitate a revolution.

After Brown's spectacular fiasco in Virginia, and tragical death, his
cultured partisans, in most conspicuous eloquence proclaimed him to have
been a philanthropist--an altruistic hero; and placed a martyr's crown
upon his brow. Mr. Redpath's purpose, in putting forth his work, was to
make Brown over to fit the part; to make his life appear to conform with
the extravagant attributes of his improvised estate. In pursuance
thereof he sought to conceal the facts concerning the actions and
purposes of his life, rather than to develop them; and to blind the
trails leading to the facts with masses of sentimental rubbish; and to
divert public attention away from them. Upon the publication of his
book, _The Public Life of Captain John Brown_, Mr. Charles Eliot Norton,
in a review of the work, expressed his disapproval of it in vigorous
language. He said:[2]

      It would be well had this book never been written. Mr.
      Redpath has understood neither the opportunities opened to
      him, nor the responsibilities laid upon him, in being
      permitted to write the "authorized" life of John Brown. His
      book, in whatever light it is viewed--whether as the
      biography of a remarkable man, as an historic narrative of
      a series of important events, or simply as a mere piece of
      literary job-work--is equally unsatisfactory....

      There never was more need for a good life of any man than
      there was for one of John Brown.... Those who thought best
      of him, and those who thought the worst, were alike
      desirous to know more of him than the newspapers had
      furnished, and to become acquainted with the course of his
      life, and the training which had prepared him for Kansas
      and brought him to Harper's Ferry. Whatever view be taken
      of his character, he was a man so remarkable as to be well
      worthy of study....

      In seasons of excitement, and amid the struggles of
      political contention, the men who use the most extravagant
      and the most violent words have, for a time, the advantage;
      but, in the long run, they damage whatever cause they may
      adopt; and the truth, which their declamations have
      obscured or their falsehoods have violated, finally asserts
      itself.... Extravagance in condemnation has been answered
      by extravagance in praise of his life and deeds.

Twenty-five years later, when Mr. Sanborn published his book, _Life and
Letters of John Brown, Liberator of Kansas, and Martyr of Virginia_, Mr.
John F. Morse, Jr., voiced the disappointment felt by discriminating
persons, in an article published in February, 1886.[3] He said:

      So grand a subject cannot fail to inspire a writer able to
      do justice to the theme; and when such an one draws Brown,
      he will produce one of the most attractive books in the
      language. But meantime the ill-starred "martyr" suffers a
      prolongation of martyrdom, standing like another St.
      Sebastian to be riddled with the odious arrows of fulsome
      panegyrists. With other unfortunate men of like stamp, he
      has attracted a horde of writers, who, with rills of
      versicles and oceans of prose, have overwhelmed his simple
      noble memory beneath torrents of wild extravagant
      admiration, foolish thoughts expressed in appropriately
      silly language, absurd adulation inducing only protest and
      a dangerous contradictory emotion. Amid this throng of ill
      advised worshippers, Mr. Sanborn, by virtue of his lately
      published biographical volume, has assumed the most
      prominent place.

Referring to the opinions expressed by these writers, Mr. Villard, in
the preface to his book, _John Brown, A Biography Fifty Years After_,
says: "Since 1886 there have appeared five other lives of Brown,[4] the
most important being that of Richard J. Hinton, who, in his preface
gloried in holding a brief for Brown and his men." Concerning his book
he says:

      The present volume is inspired by no such purpose, but is
      due to a belief that fifty years after the Harper's Ferry
      tragedy, the time is ripe for a study of John Brown, free
      from bias, from the errors of taste and fact of the mere
      panegyrist, and from the blind prejudice of those who can
      see in John Brown nothing but a criminal. The pages that
      follow were written to detract from or champion no man or
      set of men, but to put forth the essential truths of
      history as far as ascertainable, and to judge Brown, his
      followers and associates, in the light thereof. How
      successful this attempt has been is for the reader to
      judge. That this volume in no wise approaches the
      attractiveness which Mr. Morse looked for, the author fully
      understands. On the other hand no stone has been left
      unturned to make accurate the smallest detail; the original
      documents, contemporary letters and living witnesses, have
      been examined in every quarter of the United States.
      Materials never before utilized have been drawn upon, and
      others discovered whose existence has heretofore been
      unknown....

Under this broad pledge of personal fidelity to the subject, this
historian introduced his volume, and has asked the public to give him
its full confidence and to accept his work as a faithful and complete
record of the ascertainable truths of history relating to the subject.
For the ardor which he has exhibited, and for the great labor which he
has expended in his compilation, and for much material of minor
importance, which he has uncovered, the student of history will not fail
to acknowledge to Mr. Villard the sense of his obligation. In these
respects, and in the scholarly features characteristic of the writings,
it is an interesting and dramatic contribution to this literature. But,
he will not be stampeded by protestations of zeal, and by professions of
integrity, to accept it as a presentation of the ascertainable truth.
The work is more conspicuous for the absence from its pages of important
historical truths, and for the contradiction of others which have been
authenticated, than it is for the great volume of trivial facts which
it presents. A line of derelictions conspicuously prevailing throughout
the pages of the book, amply justify the charge that it was not written,
primarily, for an historical purpose--"to put forth the truths of
history as far as ascertainable, and to judge Brown and his followers in
the light thereof." The true purpose seems to be ulterior to that which
is effusively proclaimed in the prefatory declarations. He has written
into the history of our country a concept of the character of John Brown
which is incongruous with the actions and circumstances of Brown's
life. He has created a semi-supernatural person--"a complex
character"--embodying the virtues of the "Hebrew prophets" and
"Cromwellian Roundheads" with the depraved instincts and practices of
thieves and murderers. He presents a man who, for righteous purposes,
"violated the statute and moral laws"; whose conduct was vile, but whose
aims were pure; whose actions were brutal and criminal, but whose
motives were unselfish.

If this author had redeemed the pledge which he solemnly gave to the
public, to put forth the truths of history as far as ascertainable, and,
judging Brown and his followers in the light of them, had justified his
"terrible violation of the statute and moral laws," the nature of this
criticism would be different; it would be directed against his
discrimination or, perhaps, against his intelligence. But that is not
the case. The author referred to has sifted the truths of this history,
and from the fragments has framed an hypothetical case; and has judged
Brown and his followers in the light of that creation. "How may the
killings on the Pottawatomie, this terrible violation of the statute and
the moral law be justified? This is the question that has confronted
every student of John Brown's life since it was definitely established
that Brown was, if not actually a principal in the crime, an accessory
and an instigator,"[5] is not the language of an impartial historian;
but it is consistently the language of an advocate who writes for a
specious, for an ulterior purpose. Why should an historian seek to
justify a crime? Why should this author, if he intended to write
impartially, seek for evidence to justify this horror? It was the desire
to justify the crime that impelled the author to seek for pretexts for
justification of it among the surviving criminals, and to garble the
historical facts concerning it.

The crime was the theft of a large number of horses; to accomplish it,
and to safeguard the loot, it was necessary to kill the owners thereof.
It was a premeditation. The plans for it were laid several weeks before
it was executed, and during a time of profound peace. The principals
were John Brown; his unmarried sons; Henry Thompson, his son-in-law;
Theodore Weiner, and four confederates: Jacob Benjamin, B. L. Cochrane,
John E. Cook and Charles Lenhart, whose names are herein associated with
this crime for the first time in history. These confederates received
from Brown's party the horses which belonged to the men whom they
murdered, and ran them out of the country; leaving with Brown a number
of horses, "fast running horses," which they had stolen in the northern
part of the Territory. That is the crime which this author seeks to
justify; he has concealed these truths, and has suppressed the evidence
concerning them. Pretending to put forth the "exact facts as to the
happenings on the Pottawatomie," he has suppressed the evidence
concerning the most important of the happenings, and has added no
material fact concerning them which James Townsley had not, years
before, put forth in his confession.

The public should know that as early as April 16, 1856, John Brown and
his unmarried sons planned to abandon Kansas and the Free-State Cause
and had disbanded the Free-State company to which they belonged, the
"Liberty Guards," of which John Brown was captain; also, that the
"Pottawatomie Rifles" had been organized in its stead, with John Brown,
Jr., as captain; and that neither John Brown nor his unmarried sons
belonged to it. They were "a