From the Field--

“The Advent of a Hero”
DEDICATING JOHN BROWN’S TANNERY

by H. Scott Wolfe

For the sake of experimentation, I once purchased an immense butterfly net – with which I sought to capture a random sample of one hundred innocent, unsuspecting citizens. This sampling was totally unbiased – consisting of male and female; hyperactive and sedentary; corpulent and cadaverous; of all political persuasions…in fact, all races, creeds and prior conditions of servitude.

Once successfully netted, I would not allow these victims to regain their freedom until they answered the following query: “Who was John Brown, and what is his enduring contribution to American history?”

I recollect being sadly disappointed with the results. Most knew nothing of the Old Man. Only a smattering said that he may have had something to do with slavery. Another small segment proclaimed that he had something to do with a song…whose lyrics concerned either a mouldering body or a soul that kept marching. The Anglophiles assured me that he was the personal servant and court favorite of Queen Victoria (for which they received both their freedom and a valuable consolation prize). 

Well, the butterfly net is gone – smashed beyond recognition in pursuit of a cecropia moth (who wouldn’t have known much about John Brown anyway). But the overall results linger. I continue to experience great difficulty in locating people who can provide me with a succinct exposition of the Old Man and his historical import.

Which makes it all the more amazing to me that on the first Saturday in August, in the year 1935, over five hundred members (I said MEMBERS) of the “John Brown Memorial Association” converged upon a wooded grove and picnic ground in New Richmond, Crawford County, Pennsylvania to dedicate the surviving ruins of John Brown’s tannery. Today, I could carefully bait a trap with six cases of Hershey’s M&Ms and a pair of winning lottery tickets…and still not capture five hundred people who are even aware of John Brown – let alone his Pennsylvania tannery. Back in those palmy days of ‘35, his memory still both mouldered AND marched.

******

These pilgrims came to dedicate “a bronze tablet and a plaque, memorializing the famous abolitionist of pre-Civil War days, who once lived on the farm there and built the tannery, the walls of which are still standing.” The bronze plaque, bearing an image of the Old Man, had been mounted upon a substantial boulder on the southwest side of the property…its inscription reading:

JOHN BROWN

OF

OSSAWATOMIE

AND

HARPERS FERRY

1800  1859

And the bronze tablet, mounted on the cut stone of the ruin itself, reads:

THIS IS THE

FOUNDATION WALL

OF A TANNERY

BUILT AND

OPERATED BY

JOHN BROWN

1826 TO 1835

To the northeast was placed “a cannon mounted on a boulder, with a pyramid of cannon balls on either side, which were presented to the Association by the United States War Department.” (Quite a bit of irony here…as certain uniformed representatives of that same War Department had long ago killed and captured the Old Man and his men at Harpers Ferry.)

The Memorial Association had invested $2000 toward beautification of the site – including the tuckpointing of the tannery wall; construction (by the Depression-era WPA) of a stone wall and gate along the adjacent road; the grading of the lawn; and the planting of numerous shade trees. The Association’s President, Mrs. Bess Heath Olmstead of Washington, D.C., presided at the dedicatory ceremonies.

Following an ample noon dinner served by the New Richmond Ladies’ Aid Society, the program commenced. There was music – a brisk performance by the Corry Drum and Bugle Corps – appropriate songs by the Seminary Quartette of Nashville, Tennessee – and a duet’s rendition of “Indian Love Call,” an American “household staple” first performed on Broadway in 1924. Following these artful performances, a collection was taken – amounting to the princely sum of $19.35.

The Honorable Thomas J. Prather, the Master of Ceremonies, then introduced the Speaker of the Day, John Elmer Reed, President of the Erie County (PA) Historical Association. That distinguished gentleman spoke “on the characteristics of John Brown” and declared that “the farm at New Richmond is a constant reminder and inspiration to what John Brown lived and worked for.” He noted that “it has been shown many times that Nature works many centuries preparing for the advent of a hero, and it is believed this is the case with John Brown.” The Old Man “was a great man because he was possessed of a great idea.” Reed spoke for over an hour, but “everyone seemed deeply interested to the end, because it contained much about John Brown which was new to the audience.”

Following the brief appearance of the aging warrior Logan L. Dyke of Union City, “a Civil War veteran who was in the regiment that met the enemy on the ground where John Brown gave up his life at Harpers Ferry,” Mr. Prather noted that “John Brown had lived in five states, and that five states have erected monuments in his memory – Pennsylvania being the fifth. The other states are Ohio, New York, Connecticut and Kansas.”**

The John Brown Association also took pains to express “its gratefulness to Joseph Desmond, Frank A. Loveland and Guy D. Heath of Corry, and Frank Allsben of New York City, who purchased the tannery site 10 years ago for $200 and presented it with the deed.” And following the placement of a floral wreath beneath the bronze image of John Brown, the crowd dispersed…having spent an enjoyable and eventful day.

******

My day had been not quite so enjoyable. Despite the calendar showing late April, it had been a questionable trip across western New York and northern Pennsylvania. The higher elevations were beset with blowing snow…the lower, foggy and rain drenched. But as we sped down Route 77 in the direction of Meadville, the sun broke through and every pine bough and blade of grass seemed dripping with diamonds.

The junction sign was inconspicuous…hidden in shade…and rapidly oxidizing. “John Brown Road,” it declared. Turning left, we found ourselves on an unpaved lane…ending amidst a pond-pocked, mixed hardwood/coniferous woods…on the hill above, a farmhouse bravely venting columns of sweet-scented wood smoke. 

Our first symbol of historical importance was a blue and yellow-painted historical marker (which had first been placed on Route 77 in the fall of 1946). In dappled light I read:

JOHN BROWN’S TANNERY

On the side road, a short

distance south, are the 

remains of the tannery and

home built by the noted

abolitionist of Harper’s 

Ferry fame. Here, he lived

and worked from 1825 to

1835, employing as many as

15 men in producing leather.

Nearby, on a primitive kiosk of decaying wood, was a telephone number – and an offer of tours and a John Brown “museum.” I set the bitter half to calling, but…instead of being an exciting link to antebellum history, it was a mundane 21st century answering machine. “Alas!,” I blurted.

But my disappointment was short-lived as, to my right, stood the grove and ruins that had drawn that huge concourse back in ’35. It was difficult to imaginatively recreate the strains of “Indian Love Call” filtering through the pine needles. In fact, all was bucolic stillness…an occasional cricket chirping among the stones…a pair of agitated blue birds…the lowing of cattle in a nearby fenced pasture…the gurgle of running water on the adjacent hillside.  It seemed that the ceremonies were no longer under the charge of Mrs. Bess Heath Olmstead of Washington, D.C….they were supervised by Mother Nature herself.

I had the usual dry notes and statistics with me…The structure was 55 feet in length, 22 feet in width, and 9 feet in height…The foundations extend 5 feet below ground level…A fire destroyed the building in 1907…Prior to that time the structure had served as a tannery, cheese factory, jelly factory, grist mill and a residence…Frank Penfield Brown, of Erie, had designed the portrait plaque…Professor Russell D. McCommons, of the Art Department at Edinboro State Teachers’ College, prepared the model…It had been cast by the Bronze Metal Company…Ad infinitum.

But, immersed in the springtime sunlight, I thought little of statistical data. The physical environment…the sights, sounds, smells…had taken possession of me. I heard the grinding bark…the jingling traces of horses…the shouts of children. I saw John Brown, the successful entrepreneur, postmaster, pillar of the church. I also saw John Brown, agonized husband and parent, as he solemnly buried wife and son on the distant ridge.

The place had cast its magic upon me. Within the hour we were in bustling, hustling Meadville. At least our vehicle was there. My spirit was still in New Richmond, Crawford County, Pennsylvania.

******  

Author’s note: Besides my own questionable recollections, the sources consulted for this heroic essay were: 1) back issues of the Titusville (PA) Herald from August, 1935; and 2) The National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form for the “John Brown Tannery Site.”


* H. Scott Wolfe is the Historical Librarian of the Galena, Illinois, Public Library District and now a regular correspondent and contributor to this blog. He has devoted many years of grassroots research on John Brown, the Harper's Ferry raiders, and related themes.

**Prather failed to note that John Brown also lived in Springfield, Massachusetts, from 1846-1849.  There is no monument there in his honor, but he is remembered at the Connecticut Valley Historical Society and museum. [--Ed.]  

Also see: "A Visit to John Brown's Pennsylvania Home," 31 May 2006

News and Views--


Grave Marker of John Brown's Son is Recovered

Owen Brown's grave stone:
recovered and secure

To my knowledge, the first journalist to break the news of the recovery of Owen Brown's grave marker was Karin Bugge of the Altadena Patch.  Her report, dated August 24, notes that Paul Ayers of the organization, Save Altadena Trails, has acknowledged the simple gravestone has been found after having disappeared in 2004.  Owen Brown, one of the surviving Harper's Ferry raiders and third son of John Brown (born 1824) died in 1889, and his burial site on "Little Round Top" overlooks the city of Altadena, California.  According to Bugge's report, the disappearance of the grave stone was part of a controversy between the present owner of the land where Brown's body is interred and trail advocacy groups.  This conflict was well known, even to us on the east coast, who were dismayed to hear reports about the inaccessibility of the site due to the disagreeable position of the land owner--although it has never been made clear whether this man's scruples are antagonistic to Brown, or simply hostile toward people walking on his property.  Not having much information, we have assumed that this man removed the stone, and it was feared that it had been destroyed.  Whether or not this is what happened, we are happy to learn that the grave stone was found by a local man and his son and is secure.  According to Bugge, the Save Altadena’s Trails group intends "to 'take all necessary legal and logistical steps necessary to restore the grave stone to its rightful place.'"

Source: Karin Bugge, "Owen Brown's Grave Marker Has Been Found,"Altadena Patch (24 Aug.2012)
=============

The Quindaro Remembrance

The Statue at Quindaro:
"Erected to the Memory of John
Brown By A Grateful People"

KANSAS CITY, KANSAS--According to a number of reports, the Old Quindaro Museum and Information Center, Inc., in Kansas City was scheduled to host a John Brown Statue 101 year anniversary and recognition event this past Saturday, August 25.  According to Bettse Folsom of the Greater Kansas City Examiner, the museum's coordinator, Jesse Hope, spoke of the Old Quindaro Museum as offering information about families like his own--many of them being descendants of formerly enslaved blacks who still reside around the Quindaro community.  Folsom reports that Hope "wrote a book entitled Quindaro," and the museum is recognized by the National Park Service "Underground Railroad Freedom Act" of March 16, 2012.

The recognition event reportedly was to feature musical artists well-known in the Blues circuit, and a "Gospel Hour" held "in remembrance of our ancestors who found freedom [and to] witness it through song and praise." Hope said their ancestors thanked God as they looked back over the Missouri River at the land of their enslavement.  The Old Quindaro Museum has a website at http://www.oldquindaro.org/.

Source: Bettse Folsom, "John Brown's Statue 101 Year Anniversary," Examiner.com [Clarity Digital Group], 24 August, 2012.

===========

Elijah Lovejoy and John Brown

Historian and author Brian Dunphy recently published an article in Alton (Illinois) Telegraph about the historical link between antislavery editor Elijah Lovejoy and John Brown.  Dunphy is the author of Abolitionism and the Civil War in Southwestern Illinois. It is most interesting that Dunphy's article recounts the Lovejoy-Brown link in an online publication based in the very town where Lovejoy was killed while defending his printing press in 1837.  Lovejoy, a "New School" Presbyterian minister, devoted his life to writing against slavery, and was persecuted for his radical stance.  After a number of his printing presses were thrown into the water by racist mobs, Lovejoy took his final stand in a warehouse.  Much to the dismay of William Lloyd Garrison and other non-violent abolitionists, however, Lovejoy had armed himself and actually died in the exchange of gun fire against the mob.  Students of Brown's life are quite familiar with the impact that Lovejoy's death had upon the strongly independent Ohio abolitionist, and while Garrison and others expressed dismay and disappointment in Lovejoy, Brown saw him as a virtuous figure and martyr for the antislavery cause.  A prayer meeting convened in Brown's town of Hudson, Ohio, became the famous occasion of the abolitionist's public oath to fight slavery--a promise he fulfilled in ever increasing measures over the next twenty-two years.  Dunphy does a nice job of recapping Brown's life, tracing Brown's development in Springfield, Massachusetts and finally as a Kansas guerilla.  He recounts Brown's role in the Pottawatomie killings without indulging in the usual claptrap about "terrorism."  While Dunphy conveys the questionable but popular notion that Brown intended to take the weapons from the Harper's Ferry armory, nevertheless he provides a neat, concise and thoughtful sketch of Brown's life flowing out of the Lovejoy moment.

Brown as Union Man--
Black Painter David Bustill
Bowser's 1865 Portrait
(Bridgman Art Library,
Philadelphia History Museum)

"Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859," Dunphy concludes, pointing out that African American churches throughout the North designated it as "Martyr's Day," holding memorial services on behalf of Brown and his captured raiders.  In fact, "Martyr's Day" was a prominent day of remembrance in the black community well into the early 20th century.  Fortunately, the development of black history and the growth of black scholarship has allowed the African American community more substantial celebration of black history, and a rich history of black heroes and martyrs in their own right.  That Brown is more marginal to black consciousness and liberation activity 150 years later is not a mark of digression, but rather of progress.  Yet we should not fail to remember that in 1859, Brown stood shoulder to shoulder with black people as a liberation figure in the community--and he would in a sense link seminal black freedom fighters like Nat Turner with later activists in the post-Reconstruction era, when African Americans found themselves betrayed and once more locked in mortal struggle against white supremacy.  Brown was a conscious figure on the horizon of memory for blacks fleeing west from klan terrorism and other white supremacist assaults after the fall of Reconstruction. Despite the diminishment of John Brown in the popular memory of African Americans, he is not forgotten nor unappreciated in the annals of the struggle for justice against white supremacy.  Indeed, for the most part, it is still the appreciative consensus of the black community that offsets the prejudiced and unsympathetic voice that often characterizes the popular view among whites, who see him as a terrorist and trouble maker. 

Dunphy nicely concludes that the "victory of the North in the Civil War accomplished what John Brown couldn’t — the destruction of slavery. His soul indeed marched on with the victorious Union troops!"  This is probably no more true than of the noble African American men in blue who fought for the freedom of their own people, while so many whites were only fighting for the Union.  In a real sense, these were the Old Man's soldiers--the armed black warriors who proved him right in the final reel.  John Brown knew black men would fight valiantly for freedom if given the opportunity.  As history would have it, his tactical failure at Harper's Ferry did not prevent the grand vision from coming to reality.  When journalist William Phillips told him that blacks were too benign and inoffensive to fight for their freedom, the Old Man curtly marked his error.  "You have not studied them right,"Brown said, "and you have not studied them long enough. Human nature is the same everywhere."  John Brown was heavily influenced by the abolitionists, just as he was inspired by Lovejoy.  But unlike many of the white abolitionists, Brown had "studied" black people as people.  In contrast to southern propaganda, he knew that they were neither willing servants nor contented wards of their oppressors.  Yet in contrast to the prejudiced assumptions of the northern white man, he knew that black people--if given the opportunity and arms--would fight valiantly.  

He did not live to see it, but he was right.

See: John J. Dunphy, "Lovejoy’s murder led to John Brown’s war against slavery," The Telegraph [Alton, Ill.], 24 Aug. 2012.

From the web--
The John Brown Tannery Site in Northwestern Pennsylvania

17620 John Brown Rd., Guys Mills, Pa., 16327-1452; Phone: 814-967-2099; e-mail

John Brown Tannery Site is a historic archaeological sitelocated at Richmond Township, Crawford County, Pennsylvania. The tannery was built in 1825, by famed abolitionist John Brown(1800–1859). The site includes the ruins of the tannery; a one-story, rectangular structure measuring 55 feet by 22 feet. A fire destroyed the building in 1907. It is open to the public as the John Brown Farm, Tannery & Museum.

It was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1978.

John Brown Tannery Site
U.S. National Register of Historic Places
Location:	500 feet south of the junction of Pennsylvania Route 77 and John Brown Road [17620 John Brown Rd.], Richmond Township, Pennsylvania
Coordinates:	41°43′8.5″N 79°57′3″WCoordinates: 41°43′8.5″N 79°57′3″W
Area:	0.5 acres (0.20 ha)
Built:	1825
Built by:	Brown, John
Governing body:	Local
NRHP Reference#:	78002383[1]
Added to NRHP:	December 14, 1978

Source: Wikpedia: "John Brown Tannery Site"

"In Pre-Civil War Crawford County, Pennsylvania, the farm of the great abolitionist John Brown played a strategic role in the Underground Railroad. Disbursing "depots" in the area, John Brown aided in the passing of an estimated 2,500 slaves. In the town of New Richmond, his farm and tannery was a major stop on the Railroad, marking its place in history from 1825 to 1835. The farm, now a museum, proves to be an educational, exhilarating experience as you learn more about this great man of history and his many heroic efforts. Tour the remnants of the tannery and take a walking path to the cemetery. (Wear comfortable walking shoes.) Plan a visit during the first weekend in May, and you can share in the "Spirit of Freedom" picnic, a community celebration in honor of John Brown's birthday (May 9). There is also a gift shop allowing visitors to take a piece of that experience with them to cherish for a lifetime. Open from April 15 to October 15, and in the winter by appointment only."  Source: "John Brown Farm and Tannery Museum," Visitpa.com

Osawatomie Notebook--
John Brown, "Presentism," and the Notion of "Terrorism"

Grady Atwater

John Brown is either labeled a terrorist or a freedom fighter, and Brown’s choice to utilize violence to work to abolish slavery in the United States is central to the debate over whether he was a terrorist or a freedom fighter. It is important to note that the word "terrorist" is mainly a modern term that is commonly used today to describe a private citizen who utilizes violence to combat a real or perceived evil in society. John Brown was not viewed necessarily as a terrorist by his contemporaries, but slave holders and proslavery advocates primarily viewed John Brown as a violent bandit; peaceful abolitionists viewed Brown as a morally incorrect extremist, and Brown’s supporters viewed him as a freedom fighter.

“Presentism” is a term that means applying the standards of the present to the people and situations of the past, and to label John Brown a terrorist is to use a mainly modern term to describe John Brown’s 19th century abolitionist crusade. Certainly, John Brown’s militant abolitionist crusade was condemned by slaveholders and proslavery advocates, but Brown was viewed as more of a violent bandit than a terrorist by his contemporary detractors.

Peaceful abolitionists worked to end slavery via political means, and when John Brown engaged in violence against slaveholders and their supporters, he brought unwanted negative press and the militant wrath of proslavery militia down on them in Kansas Territory. Peaceful abolitionists constantly tried to convince Brown to cease his violence against slaveholders and their supporters. Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, Va., was the final death knoll for the peaceful abolitionist’s efforts to abolish slavery, and thus peaceful abolitionists viewed Brown as a morally incorrect extremist when he utilized violence as part of his abolitionist crusade.

The author Grady Atwater, is
a life time scholar & lecturer
on the John Brown theme

John Brown’s admirers viewed his militant abolitionist crusade as a morally justifiable action because he was committing violence against slaveholders and proslavery advocates, who in the moral view of Brown’s admirers, were so obstinately morally corrupt that violence against them was morally justifiable. Brown’s admirers believed that the only way to convince slaveholders and their supporters to give up their slaves and the idea that slavery was a morally viable concept was via intimidation and violence. Therefore, when John Brown engaged in violence against slaveholders and their supporters, Brown’s admirers viewed him as a freedom fighter.

John Brown was not a terrorist by the standards of his day. To label John Brown a terrorist is to view a 19th century militant abolitionist by 21st century standards. Whether or not John Brown’s use of violence during his abolitionist crusade was morally correct was and is a fair debate, but to label John Brown a terrorist is a presentist error that fails to address the reality that John Brown’s world and the present world are different, and it is invalid to label Brown a terrorist.

— Grady Atwater is the John Brown State Historic Site Administrator in Osawatomie, Kansas.  This article was originally published in The Osawatomie Graphic, 8 Aug. 2012, under the title, "Brown--Terrorist or Freedom Fighter?"   It is used by kind permission of the author.--Ed.

Forthcoming--

The Tubman-Brown Story in
3D Animation Film

Erden Zikibay

Congratulations to Erden Zikibay, a brilliant animation and graphics professional, who has recently completed his Masters of Fine Arts thesis, and is finishing his 3D animation film, "Wishful: The Story of Harriet Tubman and John Brown."  On his website, Zikibay.com, he describes his film:

"Based on the story of American militant abolitionist John Brown and his pre-Civil War attempt to start a slave liberation movement in the Southern United States, this film deals with the controversial themes of American history: race, religion, and revolution.  When is resistance to an oppressive rule justified? Can religion inspire both liberation and tyranny? Does the right to resist differ from one group to another?  And what meaning does the connection and mutual work of three friends, Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass, and John Brown, have in the larger context of American and world history?"

We are looking forward to the completion of this film project and certainly appreciate Erden's efforts to use this medium to bring such a central story in U.S. history alive for contemporary viewers.

YouTube--

"The Old Man"

Kevin Fountain

History Note--

They Sang "John Brown"

"Late in the afternoon our scouts were driven in and sharp picket-firing was heard, at the same time a cloud of dust was seen coming down the road.  The colored troops immediately took arms and sang 'John Brown' for ten minutes in expectation of an attack. . . ."

Report of Col. Alonzo G. Draper, 36th U.S. Colored Troops, Point Lookout, Maryland, June 22, 1864

 "There are a number of good Colored families on the ground; most of whom I visited. I can think of no place where I think I would sooner go; all things considered than to live with those poor despised Africans to try, & encourage them; & show them a little so far as I am capable how to manage." 

John Brown, to his father, Owen Brown, January 10, 1849

Family Photo--

Mary Buster, Adair Family Descendant

Mary Buster, direct descendant of Florella Adair (half sister of John Brown) at the John Brown Photo Chronology exhibition opening July 27 at the Watkins Museum in Lawrence, Kansas. Photo by Judy Sweets, one of the authors of the exhibition catalog. 

Mary will be reenacting her ancestor at the Freedom Festival in Osawatomie on September 15th at 11:00 a.m.

--Jean Libby

Mary Buster with Brown portrait (Photo by Judy Sweets)

Osawatomie Notebook--
Atwater: John Brown was Sane and Just in an Age of Flagrant Racism

John Brown was, and is often accused of being “crazy,” and was declared to be insane primarily because he believed in the equality of African-Americans and European-Americans, and was willing to fight and die for the abolition of slavery during a historical era when African-Americans were regarded as subhuman by most European-Americans. . . .  The reality is that John Brown was a sane man who held a genuine belief that all people were equal in the eyes of God, and that African-Americans were entitled to social, legal and economic equality in the United States. Brown was a pioneer in the civil rights movement who was willing to act on his abolitionist beliefs, despite the disapproval of the majority of Americans during his lifetime.

Grady Atwater is the John Brown State Historic Site Administrator at Osawatomie, Kansas

Excerpted from Grady Atwater, “Shocking behavior was normal for Brown,” Osawatomie Graphic, 1 Aug. 2012.  Click here to read the entire article.

Historical Note-

Brown’s Flaws, and the Flaws of His Critics Too

Our friend, Grady Atwater, the administrator of the John Brown historic site in Osawatomie, Kansas, has written an interesting piece in the Osawatomie Graphic (July 18), providing a sympathetic but frank discussion about John Brown’s most famous character flaw, his domineering personality. 

I.  No Angel Wings

Atwater makes good use of a letter written by Brown’s Kansas associate, George B. Gill, to another Brown associate (and later biographer), Richard J. Hinton.  Gill’s letter, written on July 7, 1893 (held by the Kansas State Historical Society) provides a retrospective and criticism of Brown.  Pointing out that “a man is never a hero to his valet,” Gill wrote that “a person with good motives can be an imperfect person.”  Referring to Brown, he added that despite his ability to do great good, such a man might also “be personally absolutely offensive.”   Atwater continues:

Gill stated that John Brown was domineering and wrote, “My intimate acquaintance with Brown demonstrated to me that he was very human; the angel wings were so dim and shadowy as to be almost unseen. Very superstitious, very selfish and very intolerant with great self esteem, he could not brook a rival. . . .  He was intolerant in little things and little ways, for instance, his drink was tea, others wanted coffee. He would wrangle and compel them to drink tea or nothing, as he was the cook and would not make coffee for them.”

Atwater likewise points out Gill’s observation that Brown could offend his most loyal followers, such as Aaron Stevens (who ultimately shared a jail cell with Brown at Charlestown, Va., and followed his leader to the gallows) sometimes raised “merry hell when the old man would get too dictatorial.”

Atwater concludes that “Brown was a human being and had faults and weaknesses like any other person,” and that he admitted that he had these domineering inclinations all of his life, and “worked to control that aspect of his personality all of his life.”  

II.  True Enough

Atwater is correct.  Brown’s sibling once referred to this attitude in him as “a king against whom there is no rising up,” and his life story includes episodes, great and small, of clashes with family members and associates.  He could be extremely hardheaded and despite his willingness to ask for advice, often decided to follow his own mind.  Atwater recognizes that “Brown’s detractors have sometimes utilized this as a means to discredit the sincerity of Brown’s abolitionist beliefs,” while pro-Brown writers have “glossed over this aspect of his personality or mollified it as part of his dedication to the abolitionist cause.”   Atwater concludes that despite the fact that John Brown’s personality could irritate some people, “his fealty to his abolitionist beliefs was genuine, and he was willing to fight and die for the abolitionist cause.”

It is important to recognize this trait in John Brown, for it is an essential element of his biography and, as Atwater recognizes, to overlook it is to misrepresent the man as he really was in his humanity.  It may also mean failing to recognize how this trait gave shape to various aspects of Brown’s life and work, sometimes for better and also for the worst.  Certainly, Brown’s critical delay at Harper’s Ferry was due in large part to this tendency to disregard what others said.  It is also true that he clashed with other leaders and colleagues at times.  The same George Gill elsewhere recalls how Brown insisted on being the cook for the whole company of his men and fugitives from slavery that he assisted in late 1858-early 1859 in going from Missouri to Canada.  Brown clashed repeatedly with Jane Harper, one of the liberated people, over food preparation and would not tolerate Harper’s insistence that she could cook better.  Apparently their feud, though somewhat comical, was real enough to display Brown’s imperious attitude in even small things.  In short, Brown was something of a control freak.  Many years ago, I asked the late Edwin Cotter Jr., longtime researcher on Brown and caretaker of the John Brown Farm in Lake Placid, N.Y., if he would want to meet the Old Man.  He surprised me when he said that he wouldn’t necessarily want to do so since Brown was so hard to get along with.   I don’t agree with that assessment, but I can understand Cotter’s point, even though I think it was a bit one-sided.

George B. Gill: His 1893 Description of
John Brown is Not Entirely Trustworthy
(Kansas State Historical Society #53529)

III.  Consider the Source

Notwithstanding the fact of Brown’s domineering ways, this is hardly sufficient in addressing the Gill reminiscence.  Nor should we let the description of Brown’s imperious, hardheaded manner stand by itself as the last word on his personal profile.

It is important to consider George Gill’s 1893 letter in which he made this blunt description of Brown.  The year in which it was written is important because it was written well over thirty years after Gill’s involvement with Brown in Kansas.  Recall that Gill was one of Brown’s Kansas freedom fighters and followed him as far as the Chatham convention in Ontario in May 1858.  But after Brown’s plans for the raid went awry due the betrayal of Hugh Forbes, Brown’s mercenary military advisor (and another hardheaded individual), his men were dispersed until the Virginia plan could be reactivated.  After this hiatus, however, some of Brown’s men, including Gill, did not rejoin him and were not participants in the Harper’s Ferry raid.

This hardly discredits Gill’s reminiscence overall, which is valuable to Brown’s biography.  Yet the fact that Gill’s remarks, as presented by Grady Atwater, were written in 1893 is important because apparently by this time the former had become somewhat jaded and resentful toward Brown as a result of his own personal evolution.  

IV.  Changes

It is obvious enough that often people change over time in general.  Over two or three decades, people may change politically, religiously, or in some other way.  Furthermore, there was a significant shift in the political sentiments of the United States from the Civil War era to the later part of the 19^th century.  Reconstruction fell prey to this shift, particularly as white society reassessed its priorities and decided that enough energy had been spent on black freedom.  As the old anti-slavery radicals and so-called “Black Republicans” began to disappear from the scene, others moved to the right.  Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, began as a utopian leftist and antislavery man in the antebellum era but after the Civil War his views shifted to accommodation to the changing priorities of white society.  Even the sentiments of John Brown’s surviving son, Salmon, became tainted with racist remarks in the early 20^th century.  It was in the later 19^th century that a number of Brown’s former allies in the free state movement also published screeds and attacks, denigrating his name and reputation.  It would be a mistake to read Gill’s 1893 remarks outside of this context.

V.  Gill's Agenda

While Gill did not later reassess his basic belief that John Brown was an antislavery hero, his sentiments were tainted with personal prejudice. As a matter of fact, Hinton, to whom Gill wrote his 1893 letter, recognized Gill’s prejudice.  Hinton even made editorial comments on this letter, pointing out that although Gill was honest, his view of John Brown was temperamental like him.  Hinton further pointed out that Gill was a Mason and did not believe in divine revelation.  In fact, he was agnostic and rationalistic (my source for this document is Katherine Mayo’s transcription in the George B. Gill folder, Box 8, John Brown – Oswald G. Villard Papers, Columbia University Rare Book and Manuscript Collection).  Actually, it seems that Gill had grown old and crotchety by 1893, and his ego and prejudice tended to color the way he portrayed Brown.  This is particularly true as it pertained to Brown’s religious views, which Gill came to despise.

For instance in the same 1893 letter, Gill castigates Brown’s “God idea,” by which he meant his belief in the God of the Bible, and the biblical idea that divine providence may raise up people for a special purpose.  In another section that Atwater does not quote, Gill recounts an episode when a pro-slavery thug (and probably a murderer) was captured by some of Brown’s men, apparently in Brown’s absence.  The thug was handed over to free state leader James Montgomery.  “Montgomery gave him a trial and he was released by general consent as not meriting punishment,” Gill recalled.  “When we returned Brown was furious because the man had not been shot.  His Calvinism and general organism would have treated Servetus as Calvin did.”

This is an interesting statement first because Gill, looking back nearly forty years, remembered Brown’s disgust when a man that he believed was guilty, was set free.  Since we do not have the full information on this case (Gill wasn’t even sure of the man’s name), we should not conclude that Brown was simply bloodthirsty.  Gill does not say that the man was not guilty, but that Montgomery’s drum court did not find him meriting punishment.  Brown evidently believed otherwise.  Since the drum trial took place in his absence, it may be that Brown had evidence that Montgomery did not know.  Regardless, this episode is harked by Gill quite conveniently to portray John Brown, as he put it, essentially as having been “vindictive in his nature.”

But notice that Gill’s own religious bias is working strongly in this old reminiscence.  He deliberately connects Brown’s desire to see the prisoner executed with his religion.  Gill quite pointedly associates a “vindictive nature” with Calvinism, and then compares this episode with the historical Reformation episode when the heretical physician Michael Servetus was burned to death in Geneva, Switzerland, which at the time was under the religious auspices of John Calvin.

VI.  Necessary Detour: Calvin and Servetus

For those unfamiliar with this latter episode, Servetus the heretic unfortunately lived before the time of “separation of church and state.”  In European societies, government and state religion were inseparable, a reality that often led to war, persecution, and executions.  Servetus was equally odious to Roman Catholics and Protestants because he did not believe in Trinitarian Christianity (historic catholicity).  In fact, Servetus was first sentenced to death for heresy by the Roman Catholic Church, but managed to escape.  While endeavoring to escape to Eastern Europe, he passed through Switzerland, where his identity became known in the Protestant city of Geneva.  Some historians have pointed out that Servetus was reckless in letting his identity be known within Geneva, and perhaps there was a measure of defiance in his failure to move through Geneva incognito.  He and Calvin had previous correspondence, so Servetus knew that making an audacious public appearance could jeopardize his life as much in a Protestant city as in a Roman Catholic city.   When Servetus was apprehended, he was a prisoner of the Genevan authorities, not John Calvin.  The charge against him was not heresy but treason, since Geneva was a Protestant city-state by constitution.  We should be reminded that freedom of religion and “separation of church and state” did not exist in either Protestant or Roman Catholic states.  Although Calvin finally approved of Servetus’ execution, the Reformer tried to win over the heretic, and failing to do so, sought to see his capital punishment commuted.  Calvin has often been blamed for Servetus’ death, but the heretic’s death was not in his hands since he was an enemy of the state.

I have gone on this detour of history to point out that many people, even to this day, tend to blame Calvin for Servetus’ death, as if Servetus was Calvin’s victim.  If Calvin finally approved of Servetus’ execution, he did not initially press for it, nor was it in his hands to kill or save him.  In fact, Servetus fell prey to a real political crisis: the most fervent “Calvinists” in Geneva actually wanted to spare Servetus as a way of sticking it to the Roman Catholic Church, since Servetus would have been killed by the Roman church had he not escaped.  Other Protestants in Geneva felt that to spare Servetus was to allow heresy to go unpunished, and would prove deleterious to the reputation of the Reformation in Switzerland.  By all accounts, what to do with Servetus was no easy issue, and it is absolutely unfair to pin his death on Calvin alone.

VII.  Not at Face Value

Furthermore, “Calvinism” in the context of John Brown is typically represented as a distorted, angry, and dysfunctional religion based upon a cruel and angry God.  Most of Brown’s biographers have failed to correctly describe Calvinism, especially in describing Brown’s expression of it.  Even celebrated biographies by writers like Oates fail to correctly explain Brown’s Calvinistic evangelicalism by describing it in skewed, distorted ways. This is exactly how George Gill treats Brown in his 1893 letter to Hinton.  He accuses Brown of having a “vindictive nature” and then makes the flawed and forced comparison with Calvin and Servetus, when it is neither historically nor theologically sound. 

George Gill’s description of Brown thus cannot be taken at face value.  Our friend Grady Atwater does a good job of pointing out that Brown is distinguished for his loyalty to the struggle for justice, whatever else were his personal flaws.  I agree, except that he does not critically evaluate Gill’s remarks.  (Atwater is not alone in this oversight, since Stauffer and Trodd did the same thing with this document.)  In short, Gill was in Kansas with Brown in the 1850s and his 1893 statement is important, but it must be received critically and carefully.  Gill despised Brown’s evangelical Christian faith, belittled his belief in the Bible, and disdained his Calvinistic heritage in particular.  Gill was also an ardent Mason and Brown left the Masonic Lodge in the 1830s and was always highly critical of the worthy brotherhood and made no secret of his contempt of the Lodge.  So it is understandable why an older, jaded, and resentful Gill would provide a tainted portrayal of Brown in 1893.

VIII.  Gill: An Earlier Reminiscence

If anyone doubts this criticism, then consider that earlier reminiscences of Brown by Gill also exist.  In the Villard Collection at Columbia University, for instance, there is a transcript of Gill’s description of Brown made somewhat earlier, around the 1870s.  In this earlier statement, Gill described Brown accordingly: “Tenacious of his own opinions and purposes, yet liberal and tolerant towards the opinions of others, justice was the cornerstone of all his thoughts and theories, kindness was the prevailing characteristic of the man.”  Gill even recalled that once while camping at Little Sugar, in Linn County, Kansas, Brown shared the little food that he had with a hungry dog that was hanging around the camp because, with Brown, “all living things had a right to comfort and humane treatment."  Writing earlier, Gill pointed out that Brown rejected the Masonic order because he believed brotherhood embraced the whole human race, "both bond and free."  Finally, Gill concluded:  “No man was ever more averse to giving pain then he was, yet [if] it was necessary in the interests of justice to do so, could cut a man's head off, without disturbing in the least his own nervous equilibrium.” ("Testimony of Geo. B. Gill; What was his general appearance and what [sic] his characteristics," in George B. Gill folder, Box 8, Villard Papers)

"Justice was the cornerstone of all his thoughts and theories, kindness was the prevailing characteristic of the man.”

These words are distinctly different from Gill’s later resentful and biased reminiscence of 1893.  In the 1870s, Gill made a fair evaluation of Brown’s ability to strike the guilty without flinching, and even pointed out that despite his personal gentility, the abolitionist could strike down another man in the interests of justice.  This is certainly what happened in the Pottawatomie killings of 1856, when Brown led his men to kill five pro-slavery conspirators intent upon doing harm to his family and other free state people.  Yet Gill’s earlier—and more honest—treatment of Brown bears none of his 1893 anti-Christian and pro-Masonic bias, nor was it framed in the cultural reversals that characterized white society in the late 19^th century when other of Brown’s associates betrayed his memory.

Conclusion

George Gill’s reminiscences of Brown are very important and should be used wholistically as a valuable historical resource.  But taken as a whole, they reveal that George Gill himself, not John Brown, had the more vindictive character; his 1893 reminiscence alone cannot be trusted.

From the Field-- 

"SOUTHERN SMOKE": THOUGHTS ON LUKE, DIXIE, HAYWARD AND THE BACKWARDS ENGINE HOUSE

                                                by H. Scott Wolfe *

         As promised in your faithful correspondent’s posting of April [27th] 2011, I recently returned to Harpers Ferry National Historic Park for my annual inspection tour.

The celebrated Dr. DeCaro's book in the
window of the Harpers Ferry bookstore
(photo by the celebrated Dr. DeCaro)

            Customarily, my first stop is the park bookstore on Shenandoah Street…where I sprint to the “John Brown shelf” to make sure that ample copies of Fire From the Midst of You are displayed for sale. (There were several.) I then, nonchalantly, amble to the checkout counter, where I discretely inform the clerks that I am personally acquainted with Dr. Louis DeCaro, Jr., celebrated author of that aforementioned volume. And then, finally, I retreat to a distant corner of the shop, where I eagerly absorb their admiring glances. This exercise never fails to elevate my self-esteem.

The view from the balcony, with the "Secret Six 

Tavern" menu (photo by H. Scott Wolfe)

            My next stop was the “Secret Six Tavern” on High Street…for having, earlier in the day, marched many miles on the Antietam battlefield, my stomach was growling louder than the report of a Sharps rifle on the plains of eastern Kansas. The weather being quite fine, we were escorted to their outdoor seating…a wooden balcony overlooking the now restored Harpers Ferry railroad station.

            After ordering a pint of dark beer, (necessary for proper brain function), I set to the momentous task of deciding between the “Union Burger” or the “Confederate Burger” as my luncheon entrée. As a native Wisconsinite with abolitionist tendencies, I felt compelled to order the former. And while awaiting its delivery from the crematorium, we amused ourselves by gazing at the flocks of Harpers Ferry vultures (this is NOT a metaphor) hovering over Maryland and Loudoun Heights…and by commiserating with the occupants of vehicles unable to find parking spaces on Potomac Street below.

            And then I noticed it…a sizable knot of people at the base of a nearby stairway…all closely examining what appeared to be a gray granite monument.

            “Do you remember that stone down there?,” I inquired of my bitter half. I heard only a subdued mumble, for she was half buried in her Grecian salad.

            “I’m going to have to check it out,” a ketchup-daubed strand of raw onion waving merrily as I spoke.

            Following our repast, we headed for the monument in question. Of course we passed the nearby “John Brown Wax Museum,” the Old Man still peering, gun in hand, through the gauzy curtains in the front window. I am convinced that this place has been in business since well before October of 1859. I once patronized it…many moons ago…and can still remember Brown’s motorized neck muscles (needing a bit of oil), as he strained to see me prior to mounting the scaffold. To this very day I still reflect upon this visit…especially when I take the car in for servicing.

            We had soon descended to Potomac Street…and there it was! Something novel since my last sojourn! It was, indeed, a brand-spanking-new memorial…placed ever so strategically between the bright red and yellow baggage car of the “Southern Smoke BBQ and Grill” and two green waste barrels. The historical ambience was most impressive. It was the monument to Private Luke Quinn…casualty of the U.S. Marine assault upon “John Brown’s Fort.” (See on this blog the posting entitled: “The Unlucky Irishman Gets a Monument.” [16 Jun. 2011)

The monument to Private Luke Quinn

(photo by H. Scott Wolfe)

            Of course, the monument to Private Quinn is nowhere near the site of his fatal wounding…that spot sits beneath thirty feet of B&O railroad fill. But I did take personal comfort in the fact that it reposes quite near its namesake…”Private Quinn’s Pub”…a local establishment dedicated to pious libation and intellectual discussion. “Cheers, Private Quinn!”

            The memorial itself is quite substantial…a 7-foot, 3,500 pound mass of polished granite…which now resides on “a spit of donated land abutting the sidewalk on Potomac Street.” Upon its face, standing at parade rest, is the image of a generic mid-19^th century U.S. Marine…and, upon the base, is inscribed a brief biographical sketch of Private Quinn…which is a full 94% correct. (His birth year of 1835 is mistakenly given as his year of immigration to the United States.)

            This monument was the brainchild of local military veterans, led by James L. “Dixie” Wiltshire…himself a U.S. Marine during the Korean conflict. (An interesting note: The foreman of the jury that convicted John Brown was a gentleman named John C. Wiltshire.) The granite was donated by a Martinsburg, West Virginia firm…and the Harpers Ferry/Bolivar area veterans raised more than $2,800 toward its creation. But despite their spirited efforts, these warriors encountered a problem…that being: Where shall we locate our igneous ode to Private Quinn?

            “I went to the Park Service first, and then I went to the Town Council, but I was turned down both places,” said “Dixie.” Harpers Ferry Mayor Jim Addy suggested that the monument be “placed on the hill where the engine house stood during the raid” (that is, the “hill” created later by the B&O railroad). This plan was squelched by Park Superintendent Rebecca Harriett, who, in classic bureaucracy-speak, declared that “the monument’s design would not fit in with the planned transformation of the site where Brown’s fort stood and its proposed cultural landscape.” She went on to say that “placing a monument on Federal park property is a very involved process,” and “would also need the permission of the Director of the National Park Service.”

            Poor Ms. Harriett. She is caught in a troublesome pickle. The truth is that the last thing the National Park Service wants at Harpers Ferry is the installation of another memory of John Brown’s raid…particularly one relating to the killing of a United States Marine. And doubly so, in this day and age, when the powers that be seek to conjure up a terrorist on every citizen’s doorstep. It’s enough to give a Park Superintendent a nightmare…a really scary one…consisting of a shimmering image, properly illuminated by a raging thunderstorm, of the monument to Hayward Shepherd.

            We all know Hayward Shepherd, the free black/Harpers Ferry baggageman, who was the tragic first casualty of Brown’s incursion. Back in the 1930s, a monument in his memory was erected on Potomac Street…a mere couple of blocks from Private Quinn. This chunk of gray granite was championed by the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Its inscription recognizes Shepherd, “an industrious and respected colored freeman,” who was “mortally wounded by John Brown’s raiders in pursuance of his duties as an employee of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company.”

The monument to Hayward Shepherd

(photo by H. Scott Wolfe)

            It is a memorial to the subservient Negro, whose idyllic life was shattered by the Civil War and the issuance of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. Its purpose: “exemplifying the character and faithfulness of thousands of negroes who, under many temptations through subsequent years of war, so conducted themselves that no stain was left upon a record which is the peculiar heritage of the American people.” A “peculiar heritage” all right….as in “peculiar institution.”

            The NAACP launched a protest and W.E.B. DuBois penned an inscription for a “counter-monument:”

Here/John Brown/Aimed at human slavery/A Blow/That woke a guilty nation./With him fought/Seven slaves and sons of slaves/And 4,000,000 freemen/Singing/”John Brown’s body lies a mouldering in the grave/But his Soul goes marching on!/In gratitude this Tablet is erected/The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People/May 21, 1932

            The Hayward Shepherd monument was briefly removed during the 1980s, “during renovations.” But as they say in the movies: “It’s ba-a-a-a-ck!”…and the controversy continues. During the Sesquicentennial of Brown’s Raid in 2009, a press release, issued by The Army of Northern Virginia--Sons of Confederate Veterans, announced that they would hold their annual meeting at “the Block House” (John Brown’s Fort). The purpose of the gathering was “to announce that October 16 will be known as HAYWARD SHEPHERD DAY, honoring the unfortunate black citizen who met his death as John Brown’s first victim 150 years ago…murdered in furtherance of John Brown’s nefarious scheme to capture the arsenal in that famous city.” A “Mr. Richard Hines, a well-known historian from Alexandria, Virginia” was to “discuss the real John Brown.” The release ended by noting that: “Many today try to whitewash Brown’s crimes and call him a martyr. Mr. Hines will discuss Brown’s true motivations…”

Wax recreation of the dying Hayward Shepherd 

at the John Brown Wax Museum 

(RoadsideAmerica.com)

            Does Park Superintendent Harriett want to replay this record by erecting a memorial to a slain Marine within the bounds of her bailiwick? I think not. It’s enough to give a bureaucrat the heebie-jeebies.

*****

            In my posting which followed last year’s visit to Harpers Ferry, I expressed the personal belief…and received some critical comments thereby…that the National Historic Park at that place seeks to minimize its interpretation of Brown’s raid in favor of a varied array of less controversial topics. In light of the positioning of the monument to Private Quinn, I hold to my original opinion.

The "backwards" John Brown's Fort

(photo by H. Scott Wolfe)

            Really…when you think about it…how is John Brown and “The Raid” represented at Harpers Ferry National Historic Park?  There is the Hayward Shepherd monument. There is the old “John Brown’s Fort” obelisk set atop the railroad embankment. And, of course, there is “The John Brown Story,” the small museum which, like most of its contemporaries, contains a handful of artifacts…along with the ubiquitous video screens and interactive toys deemed essential for the edification of our suburban youth.

            And then there is the peripatetic Engine House itself…reduced in size, having shed several museum cabinets-full of souvenir bricks…its bell residing, since 1892, in Marlborough, Massachusetts…and the entire structure, unbeknownst to most park visitors, inexplicably reconstructed BACKWARDS. After its long, historic journey…from the armory grounds…to Chicago’s Columbian Exposition…to the pasture of the Murphy Farm…to the campus of Storer College…it now unabashedly stands near the Harpers Ferry “Point,” a reversed image of its true self.  The “true John Brown’s Fort” can only be viewed by female visitors…their backs to the building…while adjusting their makeup and peering into their pocket mirrors.

            The backwards Engine House. Now this IS a metaphor…for the interpretation of John Brown at Harpers Ferry… and perhaps for the century-and-a-half of historical and biographical writing since the rope tightened around his neck at Charlestown.

            Sleep well, Superintendent Harriett…Private Quinn is beyond the boundary, awash in “Southern Smoke.”

Note: In regard to the creation of the monument to Private Luke Quinn, I have quoted several items first appearing in the Hagerstown (MD) Herald-Mail. Also, I failed to say that the “Union Burger” was quite tasty.

History Comes Alive: July 4, 2012, the bellicose Col. Wolfe

accomplishes his annual task of firing the Civil War 

cannon in Galena's Grant Park. Huzzah!

* H. Scott Wolfe is the Historical Librarian of the Galena, Illinois, Public Library District and now a regular correspondent and contributor to this blog. He has devoted many years of grassroots research on John Brown, the Harper's Ferry raiders, and related themes.