John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A CritiqueWilson, Hill Peebles
History
John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A Critique
Wilson, Hill Peebles
Brown, John, 1800-1859
To poison the minds of the soldiery of the Union and to ripen them for
revolt against their colors, they planned to begin a campaign of
education; to publish and distribute in the army, a series of tracts,
for the instruction of the officers and enlisted men in public morals
and in patriotism. In the division of their labors, to Forbes was
assigned the Department of Literature. In pursuance of his duties, he
proceeded to prepare a "Manual of the Patriotic Volunteer," and a tract,
which was the first of what was to be a series of tracts, entitled "The
Duty of the Soldier."[274] The tract was headed in small type:
"Presented with respectful and kind feelings, to the Officers and
Soldiers of the United States Army in Kansas." Mr. Villard says[275] the
object of the tract was to win them from their allegiance to their
colors. That it does this indirectly by asking whether the "Soldiers of
the Republic" should be "vile living machines and thus sustain Wrong
against Right." That it contained "three printed pages of rambling and
discursive discussion of the soldiery of the ancient Republics and of
the princes of Antiquity, and a consideration of Authority, legitimate
and illegitimate--as ill-fitted as possible an appeal to the regular
soldier of 1857." Appended to the copy in his possession is a closing
remark in Brown's handwriting as follows:
It is as much the duty of the common soldier of the U. S.
Army according to his ability and opportunity, to be
informed _upon all subjects_ in any way affecting the
political or general welfare of his country; and to watch
with jealous vigilance, the course and management of all
public functionaries both civil and military: and to govern
his actions as a citizen Soldier accordingly: as though he
were President of the United States.
Respectfully yours,
A SOLDIER.
To one person at least, this literary performance was a serious matter.
In the promotion of it, John Brown was deeply, deadly in earnest. The
statement that "Forbes and not Brown, was the author of the tract"[276]
is not correct, and to characterize the paper as Forbes's attempt to
seduce the soldiery of the Union,[277] is equally misleading. The scheme
originated with Brown; he furnished the subject. To Forbes he assigned
the duty of preparing the text for publication. Writing to Rev. Theodore
Parker, from Boston, March 7, 1858, he said:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account