John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A CritiqueWilson, Hill Peebles
History
John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A Critique
Wilson, Hill Peebles
Brown, John, 1800-1859
Referring, with undisguised impatience, to the irrelation of the
"Constitution and Ordinances" to his conception of what Brown's purposes
were, or to what he desires the historian to declare Brown's purposes to
have been, he says, that "it actually contemplates not merely the
government of forces in armed insurrection against sovereign States,"
but that it "actually goes so far as to establish courts, a regular
judiciary and a Congress." And, "as if that were not enough it provides
for" such heresies in guerrilla warfare as "schools for that same
training of the freed slaves in manual labor which is today so widely
hailed as the readiest solution of the negro problem. Churches too were
to be 'established as soon as may be'--as if anything could be more
inconsistent with his fundamental plan"; which Mr. Villard then
magisterially states was to "break his forces up into small bands hidden
in mountain fastnesses, subsisting as well as possible off the land, and
probably unable to communicate with each other. At this and at other
points," he says, "the whole scheme forbids discussion as a practical
plan of government for such an uprising as was to be carried out by a
handful of whites and droves of utterly illiterate and ignorant blacks,
and may stand as a chief indictment of Brown's saneness of judgment and
of his reasoning powers"; admitting however, that "as a chart for the
course of a State about to secede from the Union and to maintain itself
during a regular revolution, the document was also not without its
admirable features."
Commenting upon the condition of Brown's mind at the time he wrote this
paper, Mr. Villard says that it was "fanatical, concentrated on one idea
to the danger point, but still it remained a mind capable of expressing
itself with rare clearness and force, focussing itself with intense
vigor on the business in hand and going straight to the end in
view."[299]
The preceding clause is in itself a refutation of the author's
criticism. If it be true that when Brown drew up this paper "his mind
was capable of expressing itself with clearness, focussing itself with
vigor on the business in hand and of going straight to the end in view,"
then it must be admitted that the document which he penned was not
intended to serve a purpose so trifling as a _raid_, but that it was
what it purported to be--a form of government or charter for a state
during a period of revolution.
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