海角大神

A biography of a no-nonsense lawyer/bureaucrat has inherent challenges. But Edwin聽Stanton was no ordinary paper-pusher 鈥� he was a force to be reckoned with. Capable of being rude, duplicitous, and mercurial, he most often was able, patriotic, and obsessively hard-working.

Stanton聽served in two key cabinets posts for three presidents: among America鈥檚 worst in James Buchanan and Andrew Johnson, as well as for Abraham Lincoln, whom he helped to win the Civil War. His nine years of service to his country almost certainly hastened his death.聽

Stanton鈥檚 name is not well known today despite a handful of previous biographies, but as Lincoln鈥檚 secretary of war, he was instrumental to the outcome of the Civil War. He grasped immediately the importance of railroads, which he insisted on nationalizing, and the telegraph, to modern warfare. Never one to stay within bureaucratic boundaries, he appropriated the task of being war publicist, disseminating battle reports to the nation鈥檚 newspapers 鈥� information he edited to put the best face on things. Union casualty estimates might be omitted, for example.聽

滨苍听Stanton: Lincoln鈥檚 War Secretary,聽Walter Stahr, who wrote a biography of Lincoln鈥檚 secretary of state, William Seward, brings Edwin聽Stanton聽out of the historical shadows and presents him as arguably the third-most-important figure in the outcome of the Civil War, after General Ulysses S. Grant and Lincoln.

In doing so, Stahr does not stint on the details: For example, an account of聽Stanton鈥檚 brief vacation on Nantucket after the war is included as well as his feuds, consequential and otherwise, with various rivals and critics. This is a weighty book, both figuratively and literally, and Civil War buffs will gobble it up like a multi-course gourmet meal. Others may experience, in spots, mild TMI indigestion.聽

But make no mistake, this is an important book about perhaps the most consequential decade in American history. The elections of 1860, 1864, and 1868 could easily have gone the other way (fewer than 2 in 5 Americans voted for Lincoln in 1860), and as late as July 1864, rebel troops were prowling the outskirts of Washington, D.C.聽Stanton聽played a critical role in Lincoln鈥檚 reelection by granting leave to soldiers from key states to go home and vote (the men in blue overwhelmingly supported the incumbent and absentee voting was not permitted in some states).聽

In addition to getting soldiers to the polls and ably supplying General Ulysses Grant et al,聽Stanton聽weighed in on larger policy issues as well. A lifelong Democrat who opposed Lincoln initially, he became the most radical Republican in the war cabinet, advocating for the Emancipation Proclamation and the Freedmen鈥檚 Bureau as well as arming former slaves and paying them the same as white solders. Some 179,00 African-Americans, one tenth of the Union army, battled the Confederacy, and nearly 40,000 died in the struggle.聽

When Confederate president Jefferson Davis announced in 1863 that captured black soldiers and their white officers would be tried under the laws of southern states for, of all things, "insurrection" 鈥� a likely death sentence 鈥� Stanton聽urged a tit-for-tat policy toward rebel captives. In reality, surrendering or captured black soldiers often were executed on the spot. Nonetheless,聽Stanton聽did not win this argument.聽

And when many questioned whether African-Americans could make capable combatants and should be recruited to fight for their country,聽Stanton聽pointed to the battles of Port Hudson and Milliken鈥檚 Bend: 鈥淸T]hey have proved themselves among the bravest of the brave in fighting for the Union, performing deeds of daring and shedding their blood with a heroism unsurpassed by soldiers of any other race.鈥� 聽

The author presents his subject in his all his many-splendored complexity 鈥� flaws and all, of which he had many. After largely agreeing with a contemporary of聽Stanton鈥檚 who termed him 鈥渁rbitrary, capricious, tyrannical, vindictive, hateful, and cruel,鈥� Stahr weighs in with his own conclusion: 鈥淵et聽Stanton聽was a great man and a great secretary of war.鈥澛�

One wishes Stahr had waxed more analytical throughout. He is better at the 鈥渨hat, where and when鈥� of history than the 鈥渨hy,鈥� and there are places where a bit more context would be welcome.

For example, when Lincoln is assassinated, the frenetic聽Stanton聽immediately fills the power vacuum, making himself, in effect, the acting president. He questioned witnesses to the shooting, oversaw the investigation, and sent directives to government departments. The unaddressed question here is where was vice-president Andrew Johnson and what did he make of his irrelevance.

This is no small omission since聽Stanton聽served in Johnson鈥檚 cabinet and the two were often at loggerheads 鈥� indeed, the issue of whether聽Stanton聽should stay or go led to Johnson鈥檚 impeachment.聽

Johnson, of course, had been blithering drunk a month earlier at his own swearing-in, and as president he would declare the leaders of Congress from northern states who opposed his policies (and who would eventually impeach him) equivalent to the treasonous leaders of the Confederacy. Extreme presidential rhetoric, however unwise, is nothing new.