Civil War Exodus: The Jews and Grant's General Orders No. 11

By

STEPHEN V. AsH·

THE popular mind commonly envisages the Civil War in images

of battlefield heroics and exalted statesmanship to the exclusion of the more petty manifestations of the human spirit-greed, hatred, prejudice. But the lauer were epidemic

in America in the I 86Os, spawned and nurtured by the virulent nature of the world 's first modem war. An event in late I 862-the forced removal of innocent Jewish families from Paducah , Kentucky- exemplifies this ugly phenomenon dearly and brings to light some less familiar aspects of America's experience during those years. Though historians have nol ignored this episode altogether, they have not yet fully accounted for it. This essay, examining sources never before used in this connection. explores the background of events in Paducah to show that the incident, far (rom being fortuitous, was in fact the climax to a story of evolving social turmoi l in wartime America.

In mid-December 1862, the world seemed a cheerless place to Ulysses S. Grant. The more the general reflected upon the exasperating circumstances in which he found himself, the more disconsolate he became. In a letter to his sister Mary he allowed himself an uncharacteristic moment of self-pity ... For a consciencious[ sic] person. and I profess to be one," he said, " this is a most slavish life."1

Grant was writing from his headquarters in Oxford, Mississippi, the farthest point of advance in his firsl campaign down the Mississippi Valley against the Confederate stronghold at Vicksburg. While General William T . Sherman massed a second force upriver in preparation fora surprise amphjbious assaulL on the city, Gran( and his men found themselves alone, advancing more and more deeply into RebeJ territory along a fragi le railroad line in Lhe hope of decoying the main body of the enemy away from the Vicksburg defenses. Confederate cavalry under

-The author is currenlly working toward a doctor,,1 degree in Histot)', at the University of Tennessee. Knox\'ille_

lGram to Mary Grant. 15 December 1862. in John Y. Simon. ed ,. The Papers oj UJyssess S. Grant. 8 vols. 10 datf' (CarbondaJe and Edwardsville. fJlinois . 1967-),7: 44 .

505

The Historian

Nathan BedJord Forrest and Earl Van Dorn flitted annOYingll'y;:,~~~~~; the fl anks of the army, popping up a t inopportune n Swarms of " contraband" slaves trailed behind the blue-clad creating extra problems of administration and supply. To add Grant 's woes, he was the object of swelling criticism' from the vi(:to:rv. starved Northern public for the a lleged shortcomi ngs of his >u,.'elffi publicly he sloughed off these attacks, but privately he admitted " mortification" they caused him.' And as though these vexations not enough to keep him overworked and miserable, Grant was deal daily with another problem so thorny and maddening that it made a ll the rest seem facile by contrast. This was the question of w llolloj

There were those who claimed that cotton was what the war really all about. Whether Ibis is true or not, it is certain that became a crucial issue aIter the conflict began. At the heart of the was the fact that the South had cotton and much of the rest of the wanted it. Abraham Lincoln tried at first to deny the Rebels the bel'eli~: of foreign trade by keeping all of the cotton in the South, but he had to reconsider the mauer. Certain industries and Europe and America depended heavily on the cotton trade and worked vigorously to persuade the president to lift his strict embairgq Border sta tes, particularly Kentucky, wanted trade with the open, and Lincoln, at least early in the war, was afraid to risk o,ffendillll them . Furthermore, his own armies needed limited amounts of for such articles as lenLS. The necessity for compromise between opposing demands of war and politics soon became obvious to. ';:,~.~ ~~~~ Within a few weeks after Fon Sumter, (he president and ., Secretary Salmon P. Chase resolved to relax the land bl(JC~,adle .,nc.u!:h a llow limited trade in those parts of the Confederacy in U that is, as Chase phrased it, they decided "to let commerce flag. " This policy was welcomed at first by sympathetic who recognized that destitute Southerners in occupied nothing of value left in the world but a few bales of COllon. K'''UrIClUOD

were gradually lifted so that by the summer of 1862 mi litary aUl1l10lfi",,"

were under orders to provide "a ll possible facil ities" 'nrnlOViTlVrn",,,, out, and in September alone 14 ,000 bales worth three million were shipped up the Mississippi .'

2/bid. 'Samuel R. Cureis co Henry W. Halleck. 10 Augusl 1862. The War of tlieR.bd,'ioTI

A Compilation 01 the Official R u ords of II/(~ U1I io1l and Confederate Annies. 70 vols. 128 (Washinglon . 1880-1901 ), ser. I. \'0 1. 13. 552-53 (ht'n-afU'rt'ilt-d as OR ); Halleck Cr<tnl. 2 August 1862. ibid .. \'01. 17. pI. 2. 150; Roben F. FUlreil. "Fcderd l Trade wid! Confederate Scales, 1861-1865: A Sludy ofCo\'crnmcntal Policy" (Ph.D. . University. 1950),98 . The compl ica ted hislory of f(-dera l collon policy . which briefly sketched here. is mo re ful ly examim-d in the fo llowingsourccs: Allan Nevins.

506

U.S. Grant and Jews

This measure remedied certain problems but unfortunately begat a multitude of others. The whole policy was probably as mismanaged as oy government operation of the war. The worst mistake was that, in ~e great tradition of American free enterprise, no one ever considered granting the government a monopoly of the cotton trade. Instead, private individuals were licensed to follow the armies and deal in cotton. In 1862, as Northern troops marched into the heart of the Cotton Belt and the commodity'S price skyrocketed to three or four times its prewar value, hopeful buyers !locked to the occupied towns, hot on the scent of collon deals. Official regulations governing the trade were "ague and often contradictory and no one was even sure whether the armY or the Treasury Department had ultimate authority. Chase himself conceded that the whole problem was "exceedingly arduous and perplexing," and nearly impossible to resolve salisfacLorily.4

Worst of all, the burgeoning trade attracted a good number of menof dubious character; and the enormous profits to be made seduced others who had begun honestly, so that the whole aHair rapidly degenerated into something close to an orgy of corruption. The scene in the Mississippi Valley in 1862 tends to aHirm the assertion of one Southerner that cotton made " more damn rascals on both sides than everything else" during the war. A scandalized correspondent of the ' Chicago Tribune described the spectacle at Grant's supply base in Mississippi in December. "If ever a community were insane, orafflicled with a disgusting moral malady, it is the crowds of speculators and vagrants which have congregated at Holly Springs to deal in cOllon­they have' cotton' on the brain-every one of them. "~

Grant and his generals fumed bitterly about the necessity of tolerating and even abetting this carnival of greed while trying to carry on the war. Army headquarters was constantly besieged by speculators importuning the commanding general for permits and transportation. Even worse, traders travelling back and forth through the lines carried vital military intelligence to the enemy, or so Grant believed, as well as passing gold to the Confederates with which they could purchase war

lVar for the U nion. 4 vols. (New York , 1959·71). 3: 346-64: E. Merton Coulter. "EHt'('"ISO£ S<'«'SSion upon the Commerce o£ the Mississippi Valley," Mississippi Valley Hi.\"torica l R~·;ew 3 (1916-17): 275-300; Coulter. "Commercial Inlercourse with the Con£ederacy in the Mississippi Valley , 1861-1865." Mississippi Vallry Historical Rroinu 5 (1918-19): 377-95: A. Sellew Roberts. "The Federal Go\'ernmenl and Con£ederdte Couon," America" Histarit"at Rroiew 32 ( 1926-27): 262-75; Thomas H. O'Connor. "Lincoln and the Colton Trade," Cil ,i/ War Hi.ftOry 7 ( 1961): 20-35: Ludwell H. Johnson, Red River Campaign: Politics and Colton in the Civil War (Baltimore. 1958), passim; and Futrell. "Federal Trade," passim.

'Nevins, War for the Union, 3: 350. 5Fmrell , "Federal Trdde," 460; Chicago Tribune. 18 DecembeT 1862.

507

The Hislo rian

supplies abroad. Grant was a lso con vi nced tha t i t dem(JraJized, troops to be used to protect this trade for the benefit of raIJa<:ious i unscrupulous civilians whose " patriotism is measured by cents. " 1<1 will venture that no honest man has made money in T ennessee in the las t year," he declared in 1863, ··whilst many have been made there." Sherman was equa lly incensed. " We carry o n war and trade wi th a people a t the same lime, It he "',on,hI " Of course our lives are no thing in the sca les of profit with commercia l people. "6

Inevitably some mili tary men were themselves lured into the the dazzling vision of a quick (ortune. A War Department agent from Memphis, wi th some hyperbole, tha t "every colonel, cal)taioj quan ermasler is in secret partnership with some operator in every soldier dream s of adding a bale o f cotton to his monthly New York T im es correspondent on the Mississippi wrote that mel officers " who, six months ago, could scarcely ra ise sufficient to buy a clean shirt , but who to-clay have a ·c1ean ' ha lf

T he resentment felt within the army toward the cotton tradeanll avaricious agents was na tura l and understandable. But this general animosity was a malevo]ent stra in o f bigo lry. A gooolmi o f the cotton speculators hounding the a rmy were Jewish. (wha tever their actua l p roportion among the traders) the Jews epi tomize in the eyes o f G rant and his men the wors t ch,aralct'7i.!,tic a ll the specula tors. T he terms J ew and trader were in fact olten syno nymo usly. Virtua lly every dia tribe delivered against speculators by army offi cers o r o thers in the . Valley in betrayed a core o f anti-Semitism . Sherman ha bitually and specula tors" in the same brea th and G rant ordered o [J·irt'Tsd ... ,ll with traders to take special precautions with the " !srea tites" T reasu ry Department agent informed Secretary Chase in May booming cotton business was draw ing ';swarms of J ews and a man y white men. " Newspaper correspondents with the army inlected by th is pervasive p rej udice; they sent regular reports to

'U lysS('s S. G rant . P~rsonal Memoirs 0/ U. S. Grant. 2 \'o ls. (New York. 1885), 400; Granito Mary Cran! . 15 December 1862, in Simon, ro .. Papers 0/ Grant, to Salmon P. Chase. 31 j uly 1862. ibid .,S: 255: Benjamin P. T homas, ro .. TI,,,,, Y • ..",. Grant, as R u alled by War COrTespmlder,t SylvariUs Cadwallader (New CranlloChas(',21 J ul y 1863. OR. ser. l . \'01. 24 , p l.3, 538;Sherman toJohnA. july 1862. ibid .. \'01. 17. pI. 2. 140-41 ; Sherman 10 his \vife. 31 July 1862, in M . A . Howe. ed .• Hom~ Letters 0/ Gt!11t!Tal Sherman (New York, 1909), 229-30. See also Calion. C ran/ M Ol'i!S Sou.th (Boston. 1960). 347-50.

7CharlcsA. Dana 10 Edw;n M. St3n1on,21 j anuaT)' 1863,OR,ser. I , \'01. 52. pl. I New York T imes. 25 December 1862.

508

U.S. Grant and Jews

rcaders back ho me about the nefarious activities of the " pork-haling descendants of Abraham" and the "oleaginous children o f IsraeL'"

The fact is tha t the J ews were neither the most numerous nor the roost iniquitous of the legion o f sharpers following the a rmy; lheir peccadilloes were certainly no grea ter lhan the misdeeds of any number of crooked Yankees, Treasu ry agents, and a rmy officers. But the J ews were active, and in a largely TUral , o ld-slock population lhey were easily identifia ble by lheir manners, accents, and surnames. And, too, lhey bore the burden of ancient slereotypes. The Jews thus became for Granl and his harassed officers a convenient symbol of alllhe fruslralions and annoyances wilh which they were contending. By lale 1862 Grant's army was operating in an atmosphere of growing intolerance which would lead ultima lely lO tragic consequences.

As Grant began his Mississippi campaign in November, he was reconciled La the necessity of permitting trade but determined to exercise strictly what liule discretion he retained in the matler. He was authorized lO regulale the traders in his military department (which included northern Mississippi, the western pans of Kenlucky and Tennessee, and CaiTO, Illinois), and soon lhere issued fTOm his headquarlers a series of orders requiring licenses for lrading, forbidding the use of government transportation to haul colton, and designating the areas where the license holders could travel and do business. During the next weeks, Granl energelically enforced these edicts and others from the Treasury Depanment, frequently availing himself of his prerogative to e,:,pei violators [rom his deparunent.9 He thus went as far as he could lO check the worSl abuses, but he still felt constrained by the letter of government instructions. When the provoked post commander at Holly Springs promulgated a sweeping order in early December designed to banish all traders from the town, Grant was forced, though reluctant, to overru le il. IO

aSherman to his wife. 31 July 1862, in H owe. ed .. H ome L ettnso/ Gt'tl t"TaIS hermatl , 229-30; Gran tloSlephen A. Hurlbut. 9 November 1862. in Simon.ed .. Papers ofGranl.6: 283; W. P. Mellen to Chase,27 May 1862, P ress Copies o f Leuers Sem. vol. 30, Records of the Genera l Agenl, Miscellaneous Records of Civil War Special Agencies, U.S. Trt"dsury Depanrnent. Record Grou p 366. National Archives (hereafter ci ted as RG 366, NA ); New York T£m es, 25, 26 December 1862. See a lso Simon. ed ., Papers of Grant. 7: 51-52n.

9Genera l Orders No. 8, 19 November 1862 . ibid., 6: 333-34n; Grant 10 Charles A. Reynolds, 10 December 1862, ibid .. 7: 9n.; Grant 10 T heodore S. Bowers. 11 December 1862. Leiters Sent. Department of the Tennessee. U.S. War Department, Record Group 59~ . National Archives(hereaflcrcited as RG 393, NA); GranlloChristopher P . Wolcott, 17 December 1862, in Simon, ed .• Papers 0/ Grant, 7: 56-57; and ibid .. 52n.

IOJoseph Lebowich. " General U lysses S. Gram and the Jev.'s," Publications 0/ the American Jewish H istoricalSocit'ly, no. 17 (1909), 77 (hcreailcrciledasPAjHS );Granl to John V. D. DuBois, 9 December 1862, in Simon, ed., Paperso/Granl , 7:8; General Orders No.2. Post of Holly Springs, 8 December 1862. ibid .. 9n .

509

The Historian

BUI compiailll s about the specula lUrs a nd repon s o f cominucd to pOllr into ht'arlquarll'l"s. As 1I5wtllheS(" reporls en"pha the miscreancy of lilt' J ews. and Gran!, predisposed to bf'li"ve allegations. was so~n emirely convinced tha i the Jew s were the indeed the only. perpetrators. H e drew a dist.inction between LIte and o ther traders. ca lled them a n " inlOl erable nuisance, ,. and instructed his subordinates to endeavor to keep them out department altogelher.1I His disposition was not improved learned that his own father had fo rmed a colton specu lating Dartn, ... in Cincinnati with a group or Jewish merchanlsand had com"d'Jw river to wheedle a trading license from his 50n . 12

By mid-December, as Gran! sat writing his sisterand bemc.an,U " slavish hfe," his spirits had reached low ebb. The military had been proceeding at a n irritating craw l; the Northern public had become increasingl y querulous and the speculators bothersome. The climax cam e on December 17 . As Grant recalled the mail that evening brought a ba tch of complaints about the his deparunent, forwarded (0 him from army \Vashington_ There m ay a lso have been some implicit reprimand for a llowing their mischief to continue_I! At any had had enough. Hastily he wrote out or dictated General II:

I __ The Jews. as a class, violating every regu lation of m,d,,.,,,,11>I by the Treasury Department, and a lso DepanmenL orders, expeJled from the Department.

fl .. Within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this o rder Commanders, they wil l see that all of this class of people an, hun,isl.ed

"Grdnt to Hu rlbut . 9 No\'t'mber 1862. ibid .. 6: 283; Gra nl La J ost'ph D. November 1862. ibid .. 283n.: Grdnt to WOIeOIl . 17 Dt"Ct'mber 1862. ibid .. L56-57::G. Shennan . 5 December 1862, ibid .. 6: 393 -95 .

'2Cauon. Grallt MoIJt!s South. 352-53. CaLlon 's <lsscrtio n that Gram's unsuccessful in his mission is contradicted by an article in the New l' ork. lJaily 19 September 1872, describing a lawsuit la ter broughl b)' the ddt'r Grant erstwhil e partners. That on al kast one previolls occasion G rant had Ust-d h;" p<.nl secure a pennit for a friend is shown i.n Mellen 10 Chas(', 7 October 186 1. Leiters Sem . \'01. .30, Records o f the Genera l Agent. RG 366. NA_ Set' .. Iso Papers of Cra,ll. 7: 5.3n.

" Granl 'S comments on the incident ate found in four JX>s lwarpu bl;" . ,u"", .... l1 tex t o f hi s inlen'iew wilh Rabbi E.R.M. Browne. 27 August 1875. in American Jewry and the Civil Wa r( 195! ; Ncw York . 1970),279n.; Grdlll to l September 1868. N~ York T imes,.30 November 1868; Rawlins 10 Lewis N. Mal' 1868. New York. H ero.ld,2g June 1868; Adam Badea u toSimon Wo lf, 22 ApriJ Simon Wolr. The Presidents I Have Kn own from 1860-/ 918 (Washington. 1918), Gralll does nOI refer to the incidelll in hi s memoirs. No writtcn reprimand such mentioned has been loca ted among his papers or in arm y headquarters records.

510

U.S. Grant and Jews

passes and required to leave, and anyone returning after such notification, will be arrested and held in conrinement until an opportunity occurs of sending them out as prisoners unless furnished with permits from these Head Quarters.

III. . No penni IS will be given these people to visit Head Quarters (or the purpose of making personal applkalion for trade penni15.

By Order of Maj . Genl. U.S. Grant.1t

As the order was being copied and sent out, Grant's chief of staff, John A. Rawlins, raised objections to its discriminatory intent. But Grant was adamant. "Well, they can countermand this from Washington if they like," he declared, " but we will issue it anyhow.""

Undoubtedly, as Grant later claimed, the order was in great part the product of haste, petulance, and thoughtlessness. The strain of weeks of campaigning and public attacks on him may have warped Grant's judgment. Yet, at the same time, General Orders No. II was a logical cu lm_ination of the history of anti-Semitism in Grant's army and his own intensifying bigotry, a culmination shaped by the penchant of the soldier for quick and decisive remedies based on military considerations alone. "During war limes-these nice distinctions were disregarded," Grant explained some years afterwards; "We had no time to handle things with kid gloves.""

'''S imon, {'d .. PQPeT5 of Grant, 7: SO. The proper numerical designation of this order has ht't'n a mailer of somt' confusion which is now clariried in the most recently published \'olumco[ Ihe PaprrsofGrant. Originally issuroasNo. II , theorderwassoon afterallt'red 10 12 in a ll Iht· offi c...;al records because a No. II had been promulgaled some weeks previously in regard to a COUT( martial proceeding. By the lime Ihe error was detected, howen'r. tht, misnoOln No. II hadgaint'tl currency and has5incestuck; it wasperpt'lUaled in OR and in Ihf' standard account of the order in Korn , Amnican lnJJry and the Civil War. The roilor of the Papers of Grant establishes thai No. 12 is the u~clmjcally corroci appdla tion but chooses n('\'(;'rthe less 10 call thl' order No. II . apparently to a \loid m nfusion: and it will be 50 designated in this essay. Readers should be cautioned, hO\\'t·\'l·r. thai Ih(' order appears as No. 12 in virtually all contemporary official dommt'lIls. St'(' Simon. ro .. Papers of Grant. 7: SO-S in.

I~Jam t'S H. Wilson. The Li/~ 01 101m A. Rawlins . .. (New York. 1916),96. Hilnt(·I'\·i(,w with Rabbi f..B.M. Brownf', 27 August 1875, in Korn, American lewry

and lh~ Cit .il War. 279n. At the.' tim(' and in Iht' yt"ars si(1("(;'. a number of alternate explanacions or Grant's

anion has lx't'n offered by his sympathizers and detrdctors both . and the ensuing debate multJ lx'lhl' SUbjl'C·t o f a whole essay. Grant's enemi('S claimed thaI he had been pre\'ailed ulx>n by g't'llr ill' sp<'nrlalOJ's who wt're3ltt'mpling loromer Ihecollon market by removing Jt'w ish mmlx'iition. Somt' went so far as to arcuse Grant himself of complicity in SPl'C'll itllion. Thl'S(' Wl'!'t' ooSt·lt-ss accusations for which no real t"·ideoce has ever been oift'tl'tL Somt· of Grdnt's admirt'rs (riro 10 show that Ihe order was really written by a sulxKlrimlll' in Gram's abSt'nct' and without his knowledge, or thai Gram did wrile the ord('" hUI was lIsing ,hl' It' rm " Jt'\\," loost'ly 10 refer 10 al l traders. The most persistent story

511

The Historian

G rant 's men did not need to be reminded that kid g loves unnecessary, and in the vicinity of the army they began to carry order with a lacrity. Jews were singled out and given nOlice La without de lay, One group in Holly Springs was even refused transportation and had to trudge fo rty miles toMemphison foot. one of the group, Lazerus Silberman of Chicago, tried to tel'egJlII Grant's headquarters for confirmation of the order, he was clapped into jail , and forced to cool his heels overnight. officers, no doubt relishing the long-a wa ited chance to rid the this scourge, did no t waste Lime considering mitiga ting ci'Y'cum"ram in individual cases; the fact of a man 's ] ewishness was enough. hapless Northern J ews who had been detained in the Confederacy the start of the war and had a t last been permitted to leave were their way towards Grant's lines; unluckily, they arrived in O"fo,I1I, December 18; they were arrested, dispossessed of their baggage, and buggy, and sent on their way north with a graluiLOus w;mlio,1>' return . Reponedl y. some Jews who were legitima te residents of were sent packing a long with the rest. 11 Gentile speculators were

of all was that Grein! had H't:ei,'oo rrom W ashin glOnon Dl'ttmi>er 17 a d ircrlord('r the j t·ws, All o f tht,S(, assertions <Ire contradicted by the w(' ig h t o f the-t'vidence, cOlllem,xmu) ' con"espondellu' and la ter remark s. which a re .. 11 very cons is tent. thaltheordef Wasaim("Ciat j ewsa lo nean d was issut-d by him and 0 11 hi s own ini'ia,;~., o rder h"Om Washingto n has c\'cr been found (nor did Grant h imst'lf ('\,('r 53yor then' was ol1e), Wlull the- facIs do show p lainl y is tha t G ran t wascOIwinced lhal am o ng Iht· tf<ld(' rs wt'rt' a nuisanc(' a nd a da nger to me a rmy. a nd tha t his Del;' COOl"

an ion was to remove' I hem,

Tht, various pit'res of evidt'nce bearing o n this whoit' qu(>stion '":;"~')~~~~;~,~'~: asS('sS(-d in h om , Amn;cQ11 J I'Wry and t lu' Cit ,jJ War, 138.ot2, 154·55: l l ' lysst's S, Grant a nd tht, Jews," 71-;9: Cal ton. Grant MOI'('.f SOlllh , 354-55: Williams. I.mculn F inds a Gennol, 5 \"ols, (New York, 19£)6), 'I: 178-79.5 1 Lt'w is, I. f'ltf'f.~ Jrom 1. /oyd L~i.\" ,..,'howillg Stf'P,{ ;11 111 (' R ('sf'ou'h /0>' H i .. J~ ",g"'/J'~Y ,"', (;rollf (Boslon , 1950 ).20-21 .24-25: Simon. t-d,. I'aprrs oj (;1"0,,1 , 7: 51

S, l\kFt't'i), (;ranl: A BIograph )' (Nt'w York , 1981), 123-24, Tht'St'authms:~~'1~:~3 idt'llIicCl J u mdusions, Com on finds GroWl gu ilty on l} o r loose: wordi ng , ' I(( ('P' Iht, ("OIlI('Olpomry H' ports which da inwd Ihallht'ordcroriginalt-d in ( though Ilu ',,(' n 'lxIII s Sl't ' lll 10 h.I\'(' more: Iht'chan.ctt"for arm )" rumo r and Ix lfli!kln

Iha n of hard t" 'idt'Il(t,), Ko rn dOt's impl~I, hOWt" 'l'r , lhat wh it l G ralll I'('("t·jn't!

ht"t'n ()nl ~ .. slIggt'!<ol iull r..uht' l Ihan a dir('t'tin' and thaI. in .10), ('\'('11 1. Ih(' , m'("(I('l1 nu proddi ng , LdXlWic'h. Willia ms, Simon, and McFt'(' ly gi"t· 1(~IXll1 l1i hi li l y 1111" ( ;('Ilt'ral Ordt'/":> No, II , Will ia ms, howl'\'N, fails 10 an,,,,,;,,,,,, gl'm "!"aI '!'> pn'jlldin' aga inst till" .Il'Wl'> and Ihl' \'t'I")' n'al dislinction hl ' d n '\\" I.',w,,'n,h'd allli Ulh, ... lI"adt' rs, Simon sugg,t'SIS iIIul M cFn'iy agn't"S. Ih'lI Granl 's ~,'''' "d)"" f;I IIll"I" !oo ill\'o ln'nu-1l1 w ilh Iht, j(,wish 1I~ldtn " pro\'ides a p sychologica l "'1'1"",.,;"", Iht ' Ollie"!'>. Ihu ugh hardl Y'1 j Ul'>li li« u inn:'

1;1,IT(U'IiIt> (Cinnnllati ), 2 january I Hfi3: J t>wish M es.w:"ger (fIokw York ). 9 IXfi3: 1\.0 1"11 , Amni('(11/ J t'wry (lI1el lit,. C iI'iI (1Io r, 123-24,

512

u.s. Grant and Jews

molested, and their lucrative activities continued unabated." (Ironically, many would see their fortunes literally go up in smokea few days later when Van Dorn's cavalry made a surprisealtack on the base at Holly Springs and destroyed it, cotton and all. )

The remarkable thing is that the whole affair very nearly ended here. The terms of the order included Grant 's entire depanment. but outside the immediate environs of the main body of the army there was almost no attempt at enforcement. Though Jewisb speculators were trading at many towns along the river, local commanders apparently were not annoyed by their presence, or they interpreted the order to apply only to the area around army headquarters. Perhaps, as was reponed of General Jeremiah Sullivan at Jackson, Tennessee, some thought the directive was unjust and simply refused to comply with it. Others may never have received the order in the confusion following the Holly Springs raid. Whatever the reasons, outside of northern Mississippi the order was practically a dead letter.'9 BUl there was one conspicuous exception, and what bappened there brought the whole matter to the attention of the nation and vividly illustrated the intolerance and batred emerging in the Mississippi Valley under tbe stress of war.

The dissemination of orders from Grant's femote headquarters was slow, and it was not until late December that General Orders No. II reached the desk of Provost Marshal L.J Wardell at Paducah, in western Kentucky fifty miles up the Ohio River from its confluence with the Mississippi. But whereas others had ignored the order, Wardell

IlI'J'his is indicated in a December 22 letter [rom an army correspondent 10 the Daily Missouri Democrat (St. Louis). 5 January 1863, which mentions the continued presence of speculators. See also J . Russell Jones to Elihu Washburne. 21 December 1862. Elihu Washburne Papers, Manuscript Division, Library o f Congress, (hereafter cited as Washburne Papers). Jones was an old friend of Grant who was following the army and speculating in cotton.

19This is based on my examination in the National Archives of headquarters' and provost marshals ' records of the various subdistricts and posts in Grant's department, none of which indicates any cognizance of the order. Also. contemporary J ewish newspapers report the expulsion of specific individuals only in northern Mississippi and Paducah. Kentucky (to be discussed below), though they received infonnation from many sources. II is possible that Jews were removed quietly in other places, however, and in fact the Israelite of 23 January 1863 says that despite GeneralSuHivan's refusal to carry out the order " he was forced after 4 days to enforce it." A historian of the Jews of Memphis states flatly thaI none was removed there, bUi offers no explanation of why nOl; Korn is in error in saying thai it was because Memphis was not part ofGrant'scommand.See Rabbi James A. Wax, "The Jews of Memphis: 1860· 1865," West Tennessee HistOTical Society Papers, no. 3 (1949), 74; Korn, American Jewry and the Civil War, 281n. The editor of Grant's papers concludes that the order was generally enforced in Grant 's department butotes no Specific removals outside of Mississippi and Paducah. See Simon, ed .• Papers 0/ Grant. 7: 53n.

513

The Historian

determined LO enforce it with a vengeance, and here Grant's haste bore its bitterest fruil. Bad as the order was, Grant had .... "u • • " ..

apply only lO Jewish cotton speculalOrs following the army" considered wording was not explicit. Seizing on this te<::hr.iall Captain Wardell set about to remove from Paducah every Jewish \voman, and child living there. Terse oUicial noticesw,,,ed,,,p'IlCh~ the thirty or so Jewish heads of families, commanding them "to the city of Paducah , Kentucky, within nventy·four hours after this ordeL" That most of these Jews were well-established and residents , that none was involved with calLOn speculation in Grant'oJ on army, and that at least two had served in the Union army, consideration" Hurriedly these people locked up their homes and embarked on a river steamer going up the Ohio . Cincinnati, almost abandoning a baby in the pandemonium. sick women were allowed to stay behind.20

Why Paducah? What can account for the extraordinary events in this town, alone among all in Grant's command? original intent of the order could have become so pervened probably due less to the individual prejudice or unthinking ohedi.ei of Provost Marshal Wardell than lo the volatile situation that had unfolding in Paducah during the war. Paducah was a microcosm wanime Mississippi Valley. In it can be discerned, in a pe'cu1w. intensified form , all the instability, tension, and convulsed the whole region during the turbulent war years. As so happens, growing social, political, and economic pressures in would find an outlet in actions against a helpless minority.

Any reasonably perceptive observer in 1861 might bave anUClIl10l

the turmoil that Paducah would experience in the coming years. the slave Slate of Kentucky was saved for the Union, political in Paducah was deeply divided, as it was in many river commercial ties to the lower South. The city was first o~~~::; September 1861 by a small force under Grant, who noted e of Rebel flags and flagrant acts of disloyalty. A biller contest between the unionist and secessionist factions for political conn",," Paducah; some believed that only the federal military prevented outright violence. The rroops did in fact ensure thaI

mrhe Paducah POSl records for lhis period in Lhe National Archi \'es are fralgm<Dl and Lhe sLOry of even lS there must be reconstrucled [rom other sources. See Kaske1 . Cincinnati Daily Enquirer. 2 Ja nuary 1863; speech or Senalor January 1863, Corlgressiorlal Globe, .37Lh Cong .. 3rd sess .. 245-46 possess ion oC wriuen testimony from Paducah residenLS): and Kom. An"r;ca" },""',.,. the Cillil War, 123. The poSl commander al Paducah was Colonel Silas Noble, removed shortly aft.er this incident but for reasons nm connected wiLh it.

514

U.S. Grant and Jews

unionists would prevail in Paducah; but pro·Southern sympathy remained widespread (probably even preponderant) and the conflict simmered throughout 1862. Friction was aggravated by the influx into Ibe city of hundreds of pro·Union refugees [rom Tennessee, resentful at finding themselves in less than hospitable surroundings. Furthermore, even within the dominant political coalition, harmony was ephem~al; the army, local unionists, and federal civilian au Lhori ties all competed for power and frequently clashed.

The political strife spilled over into the economic sphere. Paducah in the antebellum perioo was a prosperous and important entrepOL in the Mississippi-Ohio River trade, but wiLh the war Southern sources and markets were cut off, trade declined, and competition among Paducah 's merchants fOT the remaining commerce intensified. In the autumn of 1861 the federal government declared western Kentucky to be under " insurrectionary influence" and the Treasury Department took control of all trade in the region to prevent commercial intercourse wilh Ibe Confederacy. In Paducah a board of loyal merchants was empowered to rule on the [itness of others who applied for the required trade permits; needless to say. political allegiance was the prime consideration, and policy was explicitly directed toward favoring loyal citizens at the expense of secessionists. The unionists' political and economic hegemony was thus established, but their hold was tenuous and their uneasiness did not diminish.

A third complicating and unsettling factor in Paducah was the presence there of a growing number of runaway slaves; confrontations cropped up frequently between citizens and the army over the return of these contra bands. Though the forthcoming Emancipation Proclamation would not legally apply to Kentucky, all Paducahans could sense the specter of social upheaval that the war had inevitably raised.21

In this environment, cupidity, suspicion, and fear found fertile soil and flourished . Accusations of treachery. corruption, and malfeasance.

21Evidence of the political, economic. and social turmoil in Paducah is found in the following sources: Grant to John C. Fremonl, 6 September 1861. in Simon. ed .. PapeTs of Grant,2: 196; S. Ledyard Phelps 10 Andrew H . Foote. 30 December 1861 . ibid., 3: 425-26; Fred G. Neuman, Story of Paducah (Paducah, 1920). 37-39; O . P_ Weigart 10 Andrew Johnson. 3 June 1862. in LeRoy P. Graf and Ralph W. Haskins. eds .• The Papers of Andrew Johnson. 5 vols. 10 date (Knoxvi lie. 1967-). 5: 435-37; Alvin Hawkins toJohnson , 14 December 1863 . Andrew Johnson Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress; MeJlen to Chase. 5 November 1861 , Press Copies of Letters Sent. \ '01. 30. Records of the General Agent, RG 366, NA; John E. L Robertson. " PaduQh: Origins loSecondClass," Kmtucky Historica l Society R egisteT 66 (1968): 123-26; Silas Noble to Elihu Washburne. 25, .31 December 1862. Washburne Papers. LC; Isaac W. Bernheim, History of the S~ltlemt71t of Jews in Paducah and the Lower Ohio Valley (Paducah. 1912).3 1-33; Chase

515

The Historian

often linked to personal animosities or economic rivalries. town. The Treasury Department worried that the Paducah trade members, who were all merchants themselves, would be resist the tempta tion to use their power to enhance lheir own The government thus endeavored to keep a close watch over activities; "Too many checks cannot be established," w" med Mellen , the Treasury Department's special agent for the The board of trade in its lum accused the Treasury D.,p"r"mem'sclr.; collector in Paducah o( ignoring its recommendations in order special privileges to a select group of merchants, " who are U nion men so long as it a ffords exclusive benefits"; one of the establishrnen Ls was the same dry-goods store where the deputy was employed as a cJerk .

In April 1862, a New York firm complained to 'the SP,rTP'''V

Treasury that it was anxious to engage in some tobacco Paducah bUI knew for a fact thaI the Treasury official in was himself illicitly trading in tobacco. That summer the entered the fray by charging the same official with willfully pell1J1i/j large quantities of salt to go into Rebel territory through the some nOLOriousl y disloyal characters, in return for va luable Slaples. Some months earlier the military had itself been the vilification. A cabal of ambitious junior officers and Paducah undertook to discredit and unseat the town's military cOJruruuj arraigning him in anonymous leners LO the incompetence, disloyalty, and overly lenient treaUOent of S"lV'~')1d \'Vashington was apprised of these " undergTound workings," and a n informa l army investigation confirmed the c~,~:::!~ contention that it was all a " base conspiracy." But another took command at Paducah la ter in the year was not so lucky. victim to a ttacks from another camp when local denounced him as an abobtionist for his reluctance to return slaves and succeeded in securing his removal. That officer in damned his accusers as "secesh and negro Union men." a fterward Paducahans divided acrimoniously over the issue of of trade member , accused by one faction of outright s",:essio>l'iI bribery, and favoritism.22

To some extent this epidemic of suspicion and reocrimlimni,an: Paducah remained genera] and diffuse, turning everyone

to Mellen. 10 September 1861. Letters Received: Secretary of the Treasury, Records General Agent, RG 366 NA; Chase to Mel len, 12 November 186 1. ibid.; Chase Thornberry. II October 1861 . ibid.; l\'lellen to R . K. Williams. 25 December 1861. Received: General. ibid.

:!2Mellen to Chase. 25 September 1861. Press Copies of Letlf'rs Senl, ib id.; Mellen. 20 Novem ber 1861. endosing J . H . Gardner to Chase, 13 November 1861.

5 16

U.S. Gram and J ews

veryone else. But, as the accu sations were increasingly aimed in a sing le ~jrection . one common theme did emerge. T he J ews in Paduca h soon beCame the focus for a ll the ha tred and misrrustthatthe war had created and unleashed in the city.

The relations be tween Paducah 's gentiles a nd its sma ll but growing Jewish community had been amkable before the war. But in the [fDubled months following the occupa tion, the Jews became increasingl y suspec t. Agent Mellen of the Treasury Department advised in October 1861 tha t continued government regulation of trade was absolutely necessary in Paducah to conuo] the «rasca lly conduct" of secessionisLS and J ews. A nava l lieutenant pa trolling the Ohio River the following December declared that the siza ble smuggling opera tio ns sti ll carried on between Paducah and the North were being perpetrated " as usual chiefl y by Jews." The town 's J ews as a whole were a lmost universa lly assumed to be disloyal (though one was in fact vice­president of the local Union League) and several were openly challenged a nd forced to swear an oath of allegiance. The board of trade decided in advance that J ewish merchants, as known traitors and smugg lers. would not be granted permits. One board m ember informed them when they objected to this policy that if they were not willing to enlist in the army they should not be a llowed to trade. a nd Mellen gloated tha t he would allow Lbe J ews to " Slew a while" under this rreatmenL Given this pre-existing popular and official Slate of mind in Paducah with regard to the Jews. the events of December 1862 are compre h ensibl e if noneth e less inexcusable. M a nifestly. the unconscionable enforcement there of Genera l Orders No. 11 was nOL a mere coincidence, but rather the tragic culmina tion o f longstanding attitudes. 23

The rem oval of the J ews was an accomplished fact by December 29. but it was not to go uncballenged. To their everlasting credit. Lbe J ews

Received: Secretary of the T reasu ry. ibid.; George H arrington to Mellen. 12 April 1862. ibid.: George H arri ngton to Mellen . 20 August 1862, enclosing E. A. Paine 10 Chase. JO Augu st 1862. ibid. ; John Lellyel to Johnson. H Janu3r)' 1862. in Graf and Haskins. cds., Papers of Andrau j oJmsml, 5: 97-98. 980.; Halleck 10 Lorenzo Thomas. 15 January 1862, OR, ser. I , vol. 7, 929; Catton, Grant M OlJt:sSoulh , 87-89; Noble (0 Washburne, 25, 31 December 1862. Washburne Papers; Paducah Papers: Case of William Grief. 1863, Records of the General Agent, RG 366, NA.

zlRobenson, "Padu cah ," 124; Bernheim, " H istory of theSenlement of Jews," 23-25; Mell en 10 Chase, 6 October 1861 , Press Copies of Leners Sent. Records of (he General Agent. RG 366, NA; Phelps 10 Foole, 30 December 1861. inSimon.ed .. PapersoJG ranl. 3: 425-26: POSt of Paducah, Kentucky: Names of Secessionists and SUSpt."Cled Persons Who Have lot Taken lheOath. Elc(September 1862). RG393. NA; Morris U.Schappes,ed., A Documentary H istory oj the I tws in lilt:UnitedStates, 1654-1875(New York, 197 1), 703n.; Mellen 10 Chase. 19 October..5 N ovembeT 1861 • Press Copies o f Letters Sent, Records of the Genera l Agem, RC 366, NA. It is significa nt that a lthough a few Paducah genti les

517

The Historian

of Paducah rose 10 the occasion and refused to submit humbly to fale. While hurriedly making preparations to leave the city. a Paducah's Jewish merchants, including Cesar and ].W. Kaskel Wol[[ brothers, dispatched an indignant telegram to President Li condemning the order as an "enormous outrage on all law humanilY" and begging for the president 's "immediate i Beyond this they look steps LO communicate with the larger congregations up the Ohjo River, to publicize the aUair. and to emissaries directly to \Vashington seeking revocation of the order. December 30, while aboard a steamboat on the Ohio, Cesar Kaskel OUl a report of the events in Paducah and saw that it was publ me newspapers. Pausing in CincinnaLi long enough to eoUeel recommendation from influential J ews. he then Washington, followed by one of the Wolff brothers. Another merchant, Abraham Goldsmith , SlOpped at Louisville, aroused the Jewish community. and then travelled on La '-""L""'dl', help organize a protest delegation there. \ViLhin a few days of expulsion of their Paducah coreiigionists. Jews all along Lhe River had been stirred to action. 2<1

Meanwhile Cesar Kaskel was hurrying to \Vashington, where arrived on Saturday, January 3. He wasted no time in presenting leners of introduction and explaining his mission to Crln!~r<,ssllll John A. Gurley of Cincinnati. Together Lhe tW&.1T1en then went to White House, where Kaske1 related his slOry to the president observed that Lincoln 's initial disbelief turned to amazement when was shown a copy of General Orders No. ) I along with the written for Kaske1 's dismissal [rom Paducah. The president's re';prln'''' unhesitating. Instantly he forwarded a countermand to

Chief of the Army Henry W. Halleck, who also expressed d~~~!~,:~~ Kaske1 's report until the same proof was offered. Halleck 's order went out to Grant the next day, January 4:

A paper purporting to be General Orders, No. ] I, issued l}y December 17, has been presented here. By ils tenns it expels all Jews your department. If such an order has been issued. it will be i' , nrr.edi.t,e1 revoked.

Perhaps by this time Grant's temper had cooled and he had begun

prott'Sted Ill{" ex pulsion of Lht'ir Jewish felluw· towllspt'Op le. no ward or ,-on, men I. w""" recorded by lhe city muncil. See spet"Ch ofS('na lor Powdl. 9 Jan uary 1863. CO"I5"e.ui~ Globt! . 37Lh Gong .. 3rd st'ss .. 245-46; Robenson. ··PaduC<lh ." 12'1.

2~Cesar F. Kaskel. 1'/ al .. 10 Lincoln. 29 Dt'C('m lx'r 1862, OR . S(·T. I, \'0 1. (a lso in Simon, ed .• PapeTs of Gmnt. 7: 54-55n.); SchaplX's. ed .. Documt!ntary H;"n~'

the J ew.f. 703n.: Cincinnati Gail)' Enqui.,-t:r. 2 January 1863: Israrlitl'. 16,23 J a nuary

518

U.S. Grant and J ews apprecia te what he had wrought. \V[lhoUI a murmur, he revoked his "infamous order" o n J a nuary 6.2 !1

Given the palent injustice of Grant 's order, Lincoln could hardl y have done otherwise than to a nnul il, o nce it was brought to his attention . But he wenlLO some pa ins lO expla in hi s feelings later in the ,\leek vl hen the J ewish de lega lions from Louisvi lle a nd Cincinnati fina lly arrived and o bta ined an a udience. To these gemiemen the preside~ t re il~ra led how as tonished he ha? been [0 lea rn o f meorder and sla led hiS belIef thai " to condemn a class IS, to say the least , lO wrong the good wilh the bad. I do nOllike 10 hear a dass or natio na lilY condemned on account o f a few sinners." H e added thal he felt no prejudice agai nst Jews himself and would nOllOl erale il in olhers. Theassemblage, which included Isaac ,"V ise, editor of the Cincinnati Israelite a nd later revered as Ihe " founder of America n Juda ism," leCI Lhe ha lf-hour conference deeply impressed by the president 'S o bvio us fra nkness and si n ceri ly,26

Disliking the idea of directly overruling a genera l he had come LO

admire a nd trying to ensure Ihat the incident would not disrupt their good rela tionship, Lincoln felt lhaL some exp la na lion was also due LO

Grant. On the day foll o wing Halleck's countermand , army headq ua n ers quietly sent a short "unofficia l" no te to Grant poin ting oUllha l his o rder en compassed all Jews ralher tha n "cen a in obnoxious individua ls" and reminding him tha t some of the men in his o,,,n army wert' J ews, as well as o ne of the loya l Sla lcgovernors.27 Aboutlwo weeks laler H a lleck sem him a s imilar lelLer (Ihis one perhaps for public

~"I bid . Ha ll eck's tt' lt'gr<lIn is in OU. St'r. I , "0 1. 17 , pt . 2. 530. and in Simon, L..:L l'a/H'n 0/ (;","t, 7: 53n . Granc's I'(· \'()(.uion is in ibid .. 54 n. Additiona l int eresting d~ l ai ls

on Rask(' I's :Jnivitit,s (I re found in Isaac Markt'ns. " Lincoln <lnd the J t' \\·s. ·' PAjHS , no. 17 (19O'J ). 118-19, wh ich unfonullalt'1 y c il t's no source.

Wh ilt- Linc'oln was no do ubt u nawa re o f Grellll 's <I(·, ion ulllil lhe mft"ling wit h Raskt·1. Hal lt'('k was almost ('('n ;linl y f{'igning ignorance in ordt.·r loa\'oid t.'mbarrassm~llI . • 4.ml) h,'adqualwrs l'('Cords show Ihal on D('Ccmocr 3 1 HaliL'Ck had reu'in'd the origina l 1t' lt'gr.lm of pl"Otl'Sl fmm Kaskt'l and Ihl' oc hers in Paducah bUllha l he had merel y endorsed il and 5(' 111 it o n 10 Grelnt by mai l for itl"{·pon . There is no r{'Cord in Linco ln 's pa lX'rsof h is hal'ing S{"l'n Ihi ll It"iegrdm , tho ugh it W.IS addresSf"d to him; it was probably roul('fJ roulim'ly to army headquan {'rs. St.'t· Simon, t.-d., Paper.{ 0/ GratH, i : 54-55n . Thert' is a lso no rt.'(·ord of a wrillt.·n count('rm .. lIld from Linmln to Ha llock-it m ay ha"(' ix't'n rt'ia},('d through Kaskel .

~"'hra~Ii'" , 16. 2.3 J ellluary 1863, For informal ion o n Wist'. st'e J <tmes G . H ell t.'r , I,~aac

M. II' i.\,.: Hi,~ L,/,., Work . and Th ough ,( N(',,· York . 1965 ). and J amb R. Marcus, Studi,.", i1/ Am,.ncan j t'wisli I-li.~lor)': S'ud,,.s ami Ad(/rt's.W·s b)' j amb U . Marnls(C incin nati. 1969). 180·91 .

2;John C, Kt'lton toGrant .5 J a nuClry 1863. Rt.'gisu·rof Lt., It ~rsRl'("t·in-d , Depanm{'111 of tlU'Tt.'IlIlt"SSl,('. RG 39.3, NA ('llso in Simon, {xL Pap,.r!. u/Cra" t, 7: 54 n.). Therekrenc(' is pll'Sumabl y 10 Governor Edward S. Sa lomon of \Vi sconsin who was widel}' Ixlie\'Lxl to be J ewish. though he was in faci a Pl"Uss ian- born Lutheran , Sec- Will iam Fletcher Thompson. cd .. The History 0/ Wi.fl:onsin , 2 vols. 10date(Madison . 197.3·,. 2:310.361.62.

5 19

The Historian

consumption) which again expressed disapproval of discrinlir'atiQ against ]e\.vs as a class but added reassuringly Lhallhe president had objection to your I:xpelling traders & jt'w pedlars, which I suppose the object of your order. "2t1

Cooler heads had thus prevailed, wrongs had been righted, and Jews re turned to their homes and businesses. But as word of th," epj,1OI spread, thoughtful people, J ew and gentile alike, condemnation. Most vociferous, understandably enough, was th,,. ..... but art icu late Northern Jewish community. Jewish protests 1O')k""' ....

forms - meetings and resolutions, leners to the government and newspapers. and edi torials in Jewish journals. Their most contJl1MI theme was the iniquity of a n y decree which proscribed an religious group because of the misbehavior of a few. Frequent was made a lso of the machinations of the Yankee cotton speCUliHC1I'S 1

comparison with whom the Jews were practically innocent, and outstanding patriotism of the Jews as a whole, some of whom "offered up.lheir blood on the altar of their country." Many A.neriall Jews were recent refugees from Old World persecution and this did not escape them. "[s this country the much-boasted home free? ," one Jew demanded; ··Can it now be truthfully Slated America is the 'asylum of the oppressed'?" Contrasting L::~~: liberalism with the actions of Grant and his officers, a nother e: confidence tha t ··he who seLS the s laves free will not permit [others) bring the J ews back into bondage. " Persona l atLacks on Crant plentiful and often vitriolic, ranging [rom demands for an apology

his removal to denunciations of him as a " liar," ann~,~'~~~;~.:~~~:::;' dealings, and one of a company of "indolent, " room Generals." "A day of reckoning will surely come," one e<lIJU~ darkly prophesied; ···U lysses S. Grant is a marked man." The outburst of a n Indianapolis Jew revealed how he a nd m"n!1 oth."sm.1II have felt as they apprehensively sensed the growing intolerance in Mississippi Va lley: " [n the name of justice. in the name of co,mll14. sense, and in the name of a ll that is true and righteous. when will contemptible outrages cease?"29

2tiHaiiock lO Grant. 21 Jetnuary 1863, in Simon. ed .. Papt!TsofGra7l1, 7: 540. a lso in OR. ser. I. "01. 21 , pI. 1. 9. whert' "" lraders" is I"(·ndt.·rro incorrectly as' a lso Washbumt· lO Gra nt. 8 Januall' 1863. in Simo n. t'd .. Papers of Grant, 7:

n prolt'SI meelings in SI. Louis and Nt'\\" York aTe nOled in Ihe Chicago Tn' ....... '

January 1863. and Ihe j ew;shMt:sstmger. 9 Januall' 1863. O lhers were held in Ct,;a<gO,aa Philade lphia, besides lheCincinnali and Louis" illl' m('('(ingsalready m,·n";onro. or prolf:SI 10 Lhe government are reprinted in Simon. ed .• Papers of Grant, 7: Quotations al"(' £!"Om lht' Ci'lc;mwti Da ily E'lqll;rer, 2. 9 January 1863; Daily Dt:mocrtl t, 5 January 1863: Jewish M t:.umgt!T. 16 J anuary 1863: Israelite, '" .la"'u,'1 Orner examples an' in Iht' Israelite. 2. 23. 30 J anuary 1863: Jewi.~h Mf'sse'lger" Jan,_ 1863: Washington Dail}1 Moming Chronicle. 8 January 1863 .

520

U.s. Grant and Jews

Much of the non-Jewish press took up the cause of the Jews, adducing similar arguments although somewhat more dispassionately and without the tirades against Grant. The Philadelphia Public Ledger condemned the order and reminded its readers of the many contributions of Jews from ancient times to the present. The New York Times attacked the order first for its "atrocious disregard" for the rules of English grammar and then went on lOassert that the war had brought out in many a gentile " degrees of rascality ... that might put the inost accomplished Shylocks to the blush." The Times also expressed regret that the " freest nation on earth ,. had experienced "3 mornen tary revival of the spirit of the medieval ages," and on a practical note warned that the order might have the effect of affronting certain powerful European jews."

Through all of this Lincoln maintained a policy of silence, obviously hoping that the disagreeable affair would blow over as quickly as possible. Though he had willingly expressed his humanitarian sentiments in private. his political instinct would nOllet him do so publicly, for that might beconstruedasa rebuke lOGrant. He did not censure Grant's action (beyond the reproach implicit in his overruling of it) and he did not oblige the general to make a public apology as some had demanded. But others were not quite ready lO let the matter die, for Lincoln's political foes saw here a splendid opportunity to embarrass the administration by castigating a general so closely identified with it. Before long the issue began to take on a distinctly political flavor. Within the jewish community a split was evident between the friends of the administration, who applauded Lincoln 's decisive action and were gratified at the mauer's speedy resolution. and an anti-administration element which look a more militant stand and threatened political re taliation against the Republicans. Gentile sentiment seemed also to divide along party lines. Democratic newspapers were loudest in their excoriation of Lhe order. while Republican journals sought to ignore or minimize it, or even in some instances to vindicate its author ouuight. The Washington Republican scoffed at warnings of Jewish political reprisals by decla ring that Grant was "worth more to the cause than th.e votes of the whole Jewish nation resident in our midst. " The Daily Morning Chronicle in the same city furnished its readers with a detailed history of the malefactions of the jews in Grant's department and concluded that "jf lhere was no good reason, there was, at least, some excuse" for the order.3 ]

MJPhi(adtdph io Public- L~dgeT. J 3 January 1863. quoted in ISToelite. 30 January 1863; NroJ York Times. 18 January 1863.

"Schappes. ed .. Documentary H istory of the Jews. 472-73, 702-3n.; Washington Republican quOit'd in Kom. Amnican J ewry and the Civ il War, 128; Washington Daily MorniPlg Chronirle. 6 January 1863.

521

The Historian

As it happened. Congress was in session; thus, during the week of j an uary, Capitol Hill became the focal poim of the debate over Gram 's culpability, In the H ouse George H , P"ndllel:oa Ohjo, a leader of the Peace Democrats, proposedd~;a~~;;~:~ condemning both the o rder a nd Pres ident Lincoln as .~ chief. Th is was quickly tabled by a 56-53 vote after Elihu Illino is, Gram 's o ld friend and sponsor, o bjected tha t it "censures.oQ o ur best genera ls without a hearing," (Washburne, who kept well informed on a ffa irs in Grant's army, had the previous day privately Lo Lincoln to dissuade him from countermanding Orders No, II , lauding it as the " wisest order ye t made by a command,") In the Senate a simi lar resolutjon (minus the celnS\~ Lincoln) was o ffered by Lazarus W , Powell of Kentucky, accompa nied i t with a dramatic account of me events in Paducah windy harangue against miJiLary interference in civi lian affairs. Lincoln had taken office, Powell had cu lti va ted the image o f a Democratic wa tchdog of civi l righ ts; a nd here he reached new ' indigna Lion, professing to have seen citizens ' rights "stricken down a nd trodden under foot" a nd calling for a rel>Uk~1 Grant to serve as a warning (Q others. But his oratory feB senatoria l ears. Republicans ra ised Lhe same objeClion W· 'ashllUJne made in the House and the resolution was easi ly tabled by a JOpSI,dfdB 7 vote. 32

In both houses party politics ma inl y determined the electoral Democrats voted ovenvhelmingly to pass m e resolutions, R,epub,lit,.. to shelve them , With secu re Republican majori ties in both H,ou: •• ,,'" Senate, Gram was safe from a potentia lly damaging cenSlJre

Lincoln from political discomfiture, If the Democrats had ;i~~~~~= to deliver from a ll of this a lively political issue, they were di a t the stillbirth, Republicans were more than g lad to let the

In fac t, as Grant, Lincoln , and the Repubtican party were gratiIied to o bserve, the whole a ffair o f General Orders No, I I itself out rather quick ly and wiLhout serious political co,nsieq[u<'1ICl Outside of J ewish circles it was nOllongdiscussed; Wash ' popular press soon moved on to more exciLing issues. the inciden t was actua lly more widespread during campaign , wh en Democra ts dredged it up in another a ttempt jx>b tica I capital and concemed j ews called on Gram explanation" ) Most j ews seemed mollified, if not completely satjsfia

12Congussiol1(l/ Globt'. 37th Cong .. 3rd st'ss .. 184 . 222. 24546: W,,,hbu,,.. Lin(·oln. 6 J an ll:'II)' 1863. CIUOlt'CI in john Y .Simon. " From Ga lena lo Appomat lox: and Washburnt':' )oumaf 01 the IIli llOis Slatt' fI istorieal Socit'ly 58 (1965): 177.

"~For a disnlssion of {;rilll" s o rder <I S an issu(' in 1868 st"l' Kurn . A »!{' ricatl j rwry lilt' eil ' ;/lI'or, 1 32-3~. a nd j oakim Isa;Jcs. " Candidatt' Cralll a nd tht· jews." jf'UI ;.~" Ardl il'{',\ Ii (1965 ): 3- 16.

522

U.S Grant and Jews

by the outcome of the affair and did not desert the Republicans on account of it. The incident did not perceptibly impede Grant's rising star; his military campaign went on, despite setbacks, to eventual victOry at Vicksburg (though cotton speculators, Jew and gentile both, continued to plague him to the end o f the war).

But the significance of the event transcends its limited contemporary impact. If one explores the history of the General Orders No. II episode, and similar events occurring elsewhere. one gains insights into the interaction of the social. economic. political, mililaTy. and psychological aspects of America's Civil War and sees that the lofty deeds of statesmanship and arms deemed to be the decisive acts of the war occurred within a context of inglorious societal turbulence. General Orders No. 11 was not an isolated instance. for the rraumalic nature of the Civil War generated an undercurrent of anxiety and conflict which could and did surface frequent ly in a somewhat familiar pattern of animosity and bigotry. Repeatedly the targets were Jews, although the grisly experience of innocent blacks in the New York City draft riots of 1863 and the bloody Memphis and New Orleans race riots of 1866 proved that other scapegoats could easily be found. To a great extent, however, all of these occurrences represented but a brief spasm of mindless hostility which subsided once the strains of war had eased. Ironically, Paducah, Kentucky, where wartime tensions were so dramatically translated into anti-Semitism, would in 1871 elect a Jewish mayor.34

3tRoberlson. "Paducah," 124. 129·31 . Kom, Americanjewry and lhe Civil Way, 154-88, offers numerous other examples of Northern and Southern anti-Semitism. He was the £irst historian to explore these outbreaks in depth and to explain them as a renection of underlying wartime tension; his work endures as the standard account of the Jewish experience in the Civil War. Other historians who ha\'e examined the whole history of anti·Semitism in America generally conclude that it was not pre\'alent until the socia l uph~aval of the late nineteenth cenlury gave birth 10 it, thoug h they usually nOle the Civil War years as a signi£icant cxctption.

It is interesting to nOle thai Grant himselC, after the war, never again showed any anti-Semitic prejUdice. He was in facl friendly with many Jews and helpful 10 them as president. See Lebowich, "General Ulysses S. Granl and the Jews," 79; Kom, American Jewry and the Civil War, 144·46; and Evelyn L.Greenberg, "An 1869 Pelition on Behalfor Russian Jews," American }twish H istorica l Quarterly 5-4 (1964-65): 278-95.

Historians of Amcrican Judaism ha\'e emphasized the significance of the General Orders No, II episode in the development of the Jewish community _ See PhilipS. Foner, The } twS in American H istory, J65f -JB65 (Ne\\: York. 1945), 74n., and Kom, American Jtwry and the Civil War, 217· 19. Many have also noted in the same connection the importance of the other m~jor controversy involving Jews during the Civil War, i.e .. the creation of a Jewish chaplaincy. See Kom, 56·97, for a full discussion.

523