Autographa--
Two John Brown Letters to be Auctioned in October

One of the leading auction houses for historical manuscripts, Heritage Auctions of Dallas, Texas, is currently advertising two John Brown letters to be sold between October 16-18, 2013.  Probably coincidentally, the letters will be sold during the 154th anniversary of the Harper's Ferry Raid (or as some of us Browniacs like to call it, "Independence Day").

The most notable letter, starting at $4000, is written from Brown to his half-sister and brother-in-law, Florella ("Florilla") and Samuel Lyle Adair on April 22, 1856.  Brown wrote the letter from his sons' settlement, known as "Browns Station," to the Adairs in the burgeoning free state center of Osawatomie. (Brown later earned the sobriquet, "Osawatomie Brown" engaging the proslavery enemy at that place; the enemy identified Osawatomie as a target of assault because it, following the town of Lawrence, was distinguished for its anti-slavery stance.)  The Adairs met at Oberlin College and Samuel was an ordained Congregational minister; they went to Kansas in advance of all the Brown family to establish missions work, and were also expressly anti-slavery.  Brown's letter to the Adairs reports events preceding the attempted coup by proslavery terrorists--including the proslavery courts that endeavored to prosecute free state activists, especially abolitionists like the Browns.  Brown was particularly mindful of a proslavery Judge named Cato, who was intimidated the previous day when Brown and his men showed up at court unarmed to oversee the hearing.  "The Court is thoroughly Bogus," Brown wrote, but the Judge had not the nerve to avow it openly."  Brown also mentions the arrival of a relative, Orson Day, the oldest brother of his wife, Mary Day Brown, who answered the free state call and migrated to Kansas; the Browns labored to prepare a dwelling for Orson in advance of his arrival. 

A little over a month after this letter was written, Brown, some of his sons, and a number of local allies, struck a preemptive blow against proslavery neighbors involved in a plot to eliminate the abolitionist element in their vicinity.  The strike resulted in the deaths of five proslavery men, including a man and his two sons, both young adults.  Unfortunately, this so-called "Pottawatomie massacre" has been consistently portrayed in a one-sided manner--as if Brown were the originator of terrorism in the U.S., and as if the attack were simply an act of malice, retaliation, or gratuitous political violence.  Most popular narratives continue to present a one-sided approach and do not take into consideration the evidence that abolitionists in that locale were literally in danger of an imminent assault by invading proslavery forces, and that the proslavery assault was enabled and guided by local proslavery people--including the unfortunate "victims" of Brown's assault.  Initially, Brown had gone to Kansas to protect his family and support the free state cause against militant assault; a genuine study of the evidence will show that Brown would not have taken such harsh action were it not considered a matter of necessity, not only by him, but by others in the vicinity.

Of additional interest is a bonus: an older letter from Samuel Adair to Florella, only months before their marriage in 1841.  Adair wrote from Oberlin, Ohio, but speaks of being called to pastoral positions.  He answered one such call in a Congregational Church in Sandyville, Ohio, where he was pastoring at the time he married John Brown's younger, half-sister Florella (born 1816).  Florella first met Samuel while studying at Oberlin College, notable in history for both its anti-slavery and coeducational stance, as well as its heterodox "Perfectionist" doctrine, especially espoused by evangelist Charles G. Finney, who divided his time between Oberlin and New York City.   

As for the Brown-Adair letter of 1856, it is not unknown to me, although this is the first time in recent years (as far as I'm aware) that it has come up for sale.  In the mid-20th century, the Rev. Clarence S. Gee, a Brown documentarian and genealogist of the Brown family, obtained a copy of the letter, which today can be found in the Gee Papers at the notable Hudson Library and Historical Society in Hudson, Ohio.   Prior to that, Katherine Mayo (who did the greater part of the research work for biographer Oswald Garrison Villard) made an excellent transcription of the letter in 1909, now available in Villard Papers of Columbia University's Rare Book and Manuscript Collection.

The second letter is not signed by Brown, but represents business correspondence of the firm of Perkins and Brown, which the abolitionist founded with Simon Perkins, Jr. of Akron, Ohio.  The letter, dated May 1, 1851, is less interesting to many people, who are mainly focused upon Brown's controversial abolitionist activities.  However, for a few enthusiasts like me, it is always exciting to see any document in Brown's hand, including those offering insights into his earlier life.  The letter, written to one of Perkins and Brown's clients named Beall, pertains to matters of an overdrawn account.  The letter reflects the extensive business loose ends and concerns that plagued Brown following the folding of their wool commission operation in 1849; that spring, Brown had moved his family to the Adirondacks, but he was obligated to make frequent and extensive trips to Springfield, Mass., the site of their former operation, to deal with legal and business matters over the next few years.  Conventional writing on Brown's wool business has greatly exaggerated his role as a "bad businessman" in the failure of the wool commission house.  While there is some truth in the portrayal, it is also true that Brown's efforts to support wool growers met with unified opposition and counter-tactics (including surveillance and subterfuge) by powerful manufacturers in New England.  He also found it difficult to work with the wool growers themselves, who had not yet evolved as a community in regard to their collective interests.  Their refusal to work cooperatively for the greater good in preparing wool for market, as well as their ongoing demand for immediate results from Perkins and Brown, proved a great disadvantage in addition to the opposition of manufacturers.  As a last measure, Brown tried to circumvent the powerful manufacturers by proposing partnerships with European firms in Belgium and France.  However,  ultimately he found them unreliable, particularly when they could purchase cheaper wools from their own colonial wool growers.  More often than not, Brown was left holding the (wool) bag, and bears the blame for the Perkins and Brown failure.  Yet a half-century later, the wool growers of the same region finally formed a coalition and accomplished many of the things that Brown had sought to realize in the 1840s.  It seems that Brown was a multi-faceted visionary.

The letter from Perkins and Brown is entirely in John Brown's handwriting but does not have his signature, rather being signed, "Perkins & Brown."  It was previously put for sale by Signature House Auctions (Bridgeport, West Va.) in 2010, and either was not sold at the time, or is now being resold by Heritage Auctions with a starting price of $1,500.

Interested in purchasing these letters?  Visit the Heritage Auction site at:
http://www.ha.com/c/search-results.zx?N=793+794+791+792+2088+0&chkNotSold=0&Ntk=SI_Titles&Nty=1&Ntt=%22John+Brown%22&ic=homepage-search-

  

John Brown Legend

ca. 1945

William H. Johnson

oil on board

38 5/8 x 36 1/4 in. (98.2 x 92.2 cm)

Smithsonian American Art Museum

Gift of the Harmon Foundation

1967.59.1145

Link--

Osawatomie battle in Brown's own words

by Grady Atwater, 28 Aug. Osawatomie Graphic

Take Note--  EQUALITY WEEKEND COUSINS OF REFORM: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Gerrit Smith     By Norman K. Dann, PhD Women's Equality Day Program Sunday, August 25, 2013 2pm Gerrit Smith Estate National Historic Landmark 5304 Oxbow Road Peterboro, NY 13134 $3 Adults Free for Students www.gerritsmith.org info@gerritsmith.org 315-280-8828    Elizabeth Smith Miller In the Kitchen Tea Celebrate the namesake of our favorite costume Amelia Bloomer Tea catered by The Copper Turret of Morrisville Hosts dressed in 1951 Bloomer costumes    September 22, 2013 - 12:30 pm Smithfield Community Center Peterboro, NY    Reservations needed - $35 by September 1, $40 by September 15    Mail checks to: Smithfield Community Association, PO Box 72, Peterboro, NY 13134 or www.inthekitchentea.com National Abolition Hall of Fame and Museum 2013 Induction Weekend         Jonathan Walker Myrtilla Miner Elijah Lovejoy John Rankin    Saturday, October 19, 2013 Abolition Symposia 1 pm - Elijah Lovejoy presented by Ary J. Lamme III 2 pm - Myrtilla Miner presented by Christopher Anglim 3 pm - John Rankin presented by Dr. John R. Kaufman-McKivigan 4 pm - Jonathan Walker presented by Alvin F. Oickle 5 pm - 19th century Antislavery Dinner, catered by the Copper turret of Morrisville, NY (Reserve) 7 pm - Induction Ceremony with 19th century Readings and Music, directed by Hugh C. Humphreys Sunday, October 20, 2013 9 am - Heritage Sites Open 9:30 am - Guided Tour Gerrit Smith Estate National Historic Landmark 10:30 am - Guided Tour National Abolition Hall of Fame and Museum Harriet Tubman 2013 Commemorative Year 1 pm - Harriet Tubman: Myth, Memory, and History by Milton C. Sernett, PhD 2 pm -North of the Law by Linda Robertson (Video about Sarah Bradford, Tubman biographer) 3 pm - Beyond the Underground Railroad: Harriet Tubman, Moses of her People by Tubman relatives  REGISTER BY OCTOBER 7, 2013 www.nationalabolitionhalloffameandmuseum.org Quick Links    www.gerritsmith.org Peterboro Mercantile National Abolition Hall Of Fame and Museum     Civil War Weekend  About Us    The Peterboro Mercantile, a community heritage shop, the Gerrit Smith Estate National Historic Landmark (GSENHL), and the National Abolition Hall of Fame and Museum (NAHOF) are open Saturdays and Sundays from 1-5 pm beginning Saturday, May 19 and ending Sunday September 23, for special events and tours, and by appointment. The GSENHL is a site on the National Park Service Network to Freedom (national Underground Railroad trail) and both sites are on the Heritage NY Underground Railroad Trail, a program of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation. Adult admission is three dollars. Students and 2013 Stewards are free. The projects are recruiting volunteers for the 2013 season.  For more information and the check updates on programs:    315-280-8828. www.gerritsmith.org National Abolition Hall Of Fame and Museum

A Novel Approach--
The Color of Historical Fiction: James McBride Spoofs the John Brown Story in The Good Lord Bird

I'm never really sure of how I feel about historical fiction in general, especially when it takes on themes that are dear to me.  The only work of fiction about the Old Man that I have both enjoyed and actually read from cover to cover is Terry Bisson's Fire on the Mountain, which is an amazingly thoughtful effort that engages counter-factual history (which is fiction) in a manner that is moving and multi-perspectival.   I would recommend Fire to anyone and everyone, and I keep it with my John Brown books.  While Russell Banks' widely praised Cloudsplitter (which I keep behind my John Brown books) illustrates the author's great ability as a novelist, I never read it all the way through.  I just got tired of watching the author telling me a story that was not the story I knew to be true, period.  Like the late Boyd Stutler, the godfather of John Brown studies, I'm just not that fond of historical fiction--and frankly there's already too much to read in terms of history to spend more time reading someone else's fictive portrayal of the Old Man. (Still, I have promised to read Marilynne Robinson's Gilead, which has been fervently recommended to me.) Now there's James McBride's The Good Lord Bird.

. . . it seems a lot of people think that they can engage in meaningful historical reflection by reading novels about real people.  

Before noting The Good Lord Bird, let me add: what annoys me about historical fiction is that it seems a lot of people think that they can engage in meaningful historical reflection by reading novels about real people.  And I think that reflects both error and laziness.  We already live in a culture and generation that is virtually ahistorical and intellectually lazy when it comes to history.  In John Brown's case, it's worse, because lots of people are already grossly misinformed and prejudiced in their thinking due to terrible high school texts, bad TV documentaries, and lots of prejudiced talking heads.  A work of fiction about Brown (even if it is basically friendly) is absolutely the last place that one ought to start thinking about Brown in historical terms.  Yet, inevitably, many will do so, as the following comment reveals from a reader on Goodreads:

Was John Brown a terrorist, martyr, hero, lunatic, saint or deluded fool? After reading The Good Lord Bird I would still hesitate to give a straight answer, although James McBride does appear to be leaning toward a heroic, almost saint-like depiction of the raider of Harper’s Ferry toward the end of this rollicking ride through the latter part of Brown’s life.

I would hope you would hesitate, lady.  I wonder how many biographies of Brown she's read?  Now, this may be something that just happens to John Brown, especially among whites, too many of which presume he is "complicated" and "troubling," and have this big historical problem in their minds about the Old Man that drives them to the latest novel.  Maybe it happens to Lincoln or Henry Ford or Richard Nixon, too, but I doubt it.  It seems to me that whenever someone writes fictional work about John Brown, it is forced to carry water for historical inquiry. Nevertheless, why the *&%! did this reader think she was going to get "a straight answer" about a historical figure from someone's fictional rendition?  Frankly, it's kind of stupid, yet this is the issue that always comes up with another work of historical fiction about John Brown.

As I said, I am a biographer and historian, and I teach history and theology.  I can never read enough across the disciplines in which I teach and research, so the idea of reading novels is pretty much out of the question.  Furthermore, to unwind by reading a novel completely misses the point for me.  That's what movies are for.  However, the fact that I have little use for fiction (yes, I know there are good arguments for "the power of story," etc.), I know many others love novels and sometimes historical fiction is a starting point for people who want to read history.  To each his own.

Now that I've done my song and dance about fiction, here's some info on The Good Lord Bird, and you can decide for yourself whether you want to read it:

Publishers Weekly

"Musician and author McBride offers a fresh perspective on abolitionist firebrand John Brown in this novel disguised as the memoir of a slave boy who pretends to be a girl in order to escape pre–Civil War turmoil, only to find himself riding with John Brown’s retinue of rabble-rousers from Bloody Kansas to Harpers Ferry. “I was born a colored man and don’t you forget it,” reminisces Henry Shackleford in a manuscript discovered after a church fire in the 1960s. Speaking in his own savvy yet naïve voice, Henry recounts how, at age 10, his curly hair, soft features, and potato-sack dress cause him to be mistaken for a girl—a mistake he embraces for safety’s sake, even as he is reluctantly swept up by Brown’s violent, chaotic, determined, frustrated, and frustrating efforts to oppose slavery. A mix-up over the meaning of the word “trim” temporarily lands Henry/Henrietta in a brothel before he rejoins Brown and sons, who call him “Onion,” their good-luck charm. Onion eventually meets Frederick Douglass, a great man but a flawed human being, Harriet Tubman, silent, terrible, and strong. Even more memorable is the slave girl Sibonia, who courageously dies for freedom. At Harpers Ferry, Onion is given the futile task of rousting up slaves (“hiving bees”) to participate in the great armed insurrection that Brown envisions but never sees. Outrageously funny, sad, and consistently unflattering, McBride puts a human face on a nation at its most divided."

James McBride

New York Times Book Review

"A MAGNIFICANT NEW NOVEL by the best-selling author James McBride…a brilliant romp of a novel…McBride—with the same flair for historical mining, musicality of voice and outsize characterization that made his memoir 'The Color of Water,' an instant classic -- pulls off his portrait masterfully, like a modern-day Mark Twain: evoking sheer glee with every page."


Library Journal

"McBride continues exploring the long history of America's color line, begun in his landmark memoir, The Color of Water. A young slave in the Kansas Territory, Henry Shackleford must flee with abolitionist John Brown after Brown clashes with Henry's master. Complicating matters: Brown thinks Henry is a girl, a disguise Henry maintains up to the bold raid on Harpers Ferry."

Kirkus Reviews

"In McBride's version of events, John Brown's body doesn't lie a-mouldering in the grave--he's alive and vigorous and fanatical and doomed, so one could say his soul does indeed go marching on. The unlikely narrator of the events leading up to Brown's quixotic raid at Harper's Ferry is Henry Shackleford, aka Little Onion, whose father is killed when Brown comes in to liberate some slaves. Brown whisks the 12-year-old away thinking he's a girl, and Onion keeps up the disguise for the next few years. This fluidity of gender identity allows Onion a certain leeway in his life, for example, he gets taken in by Pie, a beautiful prostitute, where he witnesses some activity almost more unseemly than a 12-year-old can stand. The interlude with Pie occurs during a two-year period where Brown disappears from Onion's life, but they're reunited a few months before the debacle at Harper's Ferry. In that time, Brown visits Frederick Douglass, and, in the most implausible scene in the novel, Douglass gets tight and chases after the nubile Onion. The stakes are raised as Brown approaches October 1859, for even Onion recognizes the futility of the raid, where Brown expects hundreds of slaves to rise in revolt and gets only a handful. Onion notes that Brown's fanaticism increasingly approaches "lunacy" as the time for the raid gets closer, and Brown never loses that obsessive glint in his eye that tells him he's doing the Lord's work. At the end, Onion reasserts his identity as a male and escapes just before Brown's execution. McBride presents an interesting experiment in point of view here, as all of Brown's activities are filtered through the eyes of a young adolescent who wavers between innocence and cynicism."

Goodreads (four stars)

"Henry Shackleford is a young slave living in the Kansas Territory in 1857, when the region is a battleground between anti- and pro-slavery forces. When John Brown, the legendary abolitionist, arrives in the area, an argument between Brown and Henry’s master quickly turns violent. Henry is forced to leave town—with Brown, who believes he’s a girl.

Over the ensuing months, Henry—whom Brown nicknames Little Onion—conceals his true identity as he struggles to stay alive. Eventually Little Onion finds himself with Brown at the historic raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859—one of the great catalysts for the Civil War.

An absorbing mixture of history and imagination, and told with McBride’s meticulous eye for detail and character, The Good Lord Bird is both a rousing adventure and a moving exploration of identity and survival."

Metro

James McBride’s new novel, “The Good Lord Bird,” is his second in a row to explore the issue of slavery in the years just prior to the Civil War. It was while researching his last book, “Song Yet Sung,” that he became fascinated with the story of the abolitionist John Brown, who led the violent slave insurrection at Harpers Ferry, West Virgina.

“I’d heard John Brown’s name many times in the past but never really quite knew who he was,” McBride says. “When I started to research him, I became fascinated with his story. The challenge was to find a way to write about him that was interesting and funny.”

Given the dark subject matter of the time period and of Brown’s tragic final days, the humor is the most surprising element of “The Good Lord Bird.” The story is told through the eyes of Onion, a young slave boy who becomes a part of Brown’s crew under the mistaken assumption that he’s a girl. Over the next few years, he crosses paths with luminaries
like Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass, the latter depicted making drunken advances on the disguised Onion.

“My approach is to make fun of everybody,” McBride explains. “In real life, I admire Frederick Douglass. He was a great man, but he was flawed as well. The people who built this country weren’t gods. They were flawed people, and you often wonder if the women in their lives
had the chance to write the stories of these men, how their account would read.”

McBride himself was surprised at the opportunities for satire afforded by Onion’s disguise. “The business of identity – self identity, inner identity – always drives the outer story,” he says. “I wanted Onion’s identity issues to be strong enough to push him to freedom at the end
of the book. I really didn’t consider all of the factors that would go into this character playing a girl at the outset; I just thought it was funny. Then as the book evolved and he got into these situations where he had to pretend to be a girl, it thickened the plot and just became delicious.”

In the end, McBride came to admire his subject, despite the misguided violence of some of his actions. “I think John Brown was one of the greatest Americans that ever set foot in this land,” he says. “John Brown was a man who represented an ideal and was willing to die for
it. He was way ahead of his time. I admire his sense of religion, his sense of purpose, and his unwillingness to compromise on the issue of human rights.”

Source: Shaun Brady, "Forging a 'delicious' tale out of difficult history," Metro (15 Aug. 2013)

Review by Christine Brunkhorst in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, 17 Aug.
Review by Margaret Quamme in the Columbus Dispatch, 18 Aug.
Review by Kevin Nance in USA Today, 18 Aug.
Review by Joel Lyons, in New York Daily News, 21 Aug.

"Grandeur in a Degenerate Age": William F. M. Arny, New Mexico’s Link to John Brown

Here I am in the land of big sky and no humidity, New Mexico.  I love NM—it’s about as “far away” as you can travel without leaving the continental U.S.  There’s lots of history here, too.  And while the Old Man never made it this far to the southwest, there is a NM connection to the John Brown story, in the person of William Frederick Milton Arny.  Now, since I’m working on another project and writing in-between family and vacation time, what follows is a series of pasted items about Arny.

W. F. M. Arny
www.territorialkansasonline.org

William E. Connelley, A Standard History of Kansas and Kansans.  Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company, 1918.

“Kansas has produced no more eccentric, generous or beloved character than William F. M. Arny. Although not a native of the state, he was a son in all that stands for its independence and humanity. He was born in the District of Columbia, March 6, 1813, and after graduating from Bethany College, West Virginia, acted for a time as secretary for Alexander Campbell, the famous Disciple preacher. At the age of twenty eight he was on intimate terms with all of the leading men of the nation, especially with such as Abraham Lincoln and others of force and originality. In 1850 Mr. Arny settled in McLean County, Illinois; was active in the organization of the republican party, and in 1856 was a committeeman in that state appointed to raise money to settle Free State men in Kansas. In that year he made a trip of investigation to the territory, and its condition so appealed to him that in the spring of 1857 he settled in Anderson County. 

The people of Kansas, who had come thither to stay and build a real commonwealth of equals, accepted William F. M. Arny as a valuable accession to their forces, electing him both to the Leavenworth constitutional convention of 1858 and the House of Representatives of the First State Legislature, which assembled with the outbreak of the Civil war. At that time he was also closing his faithful stewardship of the relief fund and the goods entrusted to him in behalf of the sufferers from the grasshopper plague of 1857. He had been elected a delegate to the Grasshopper Falls convention soon after coming to Kansas, had handled thousands of dollars and over 9,000,000 pounds of relief goods. In 1861 President Lincoln appointed him secretary of the Territory of New Mexico. He was a great favorite with the Indians in that region, and, in the prosecution of his official duties, accomplished much in exploiting the mineral resources of New Mexico. But in that matter, as in all other measures with which he was identified and prominent, he did not profit financially; in fact, seemed always careless of personal gain. Naturally he died poor, albeit honored and deeply loved  which is better than to have died financially prosperous. On his return from a trip East he stopped off at Topeka, was taken ill and died suddenly September 18, 1881. A short time before, at the theater, he had been robbed of his money and passes, and a collection of $125 was taken up among his old Kansas friends to pay the expenses of his burial. His body was forwarded to Santa Fe, where funeral services were held in the palace.”

Tom Todd, historian of the Old West and the Civil War, from the Find-a-Grave website.

Arny's gravestone at the
Santa Fe National Cemetary

“New Mexico Territorial Secretary. He was well educated for the day, and notably religious. He was converted from the Baptist to the Disciples of Christ Church and formed a lifelong relationship with that church to the point of traveling widely and conducting revival meetings. In 1848 a split over church matters developed and he moved to Bloomington, Illinois where he became interested in scientific agriculture, printing, and teaching. A new dispute occurred and in 1856 he moved to Kansas, settling first in Lawrence and then in Hyatt. Again he became heavily involved in political turmoil and when his friend Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860 Arny sought a political appointment. He was named Indian Agent to the Utes and Jicarilla Apache of northern New Mexico, succeeding Kit Carson. He found the problems immense and the resources scarce and accomplished what was possible with the means at hand. In 1862 he was appointed Territorial Secretary of New Mexico, holding that position until 1867 and serving occasionally as acting governor. In 1867 he was appointed agent for two years for the mountain Utes in Abiquiu, New Mexico and for the Pueblos along the Rio Grande. In 1870 he became Special Agent for the Indians of New Mexico and he extended his concerns to the Mimbres and Mescalero Apaches, conferring with Victorio, Cochise and other noted Apache chiefs. In seven months he made a visit to every tribe in New Mexico, southern Colorado, and southeastern Arizona, took Indian census, evaluated their condition, and made a full report. His reappointment by President Ulysses S. Grant was strongly disputed in the 1872 Senate, but he was eventually confirmed. In the summer of 1873 he was named the Navajo agent where, again, disputes and complications hampered his efforts. In 1874 he took a large contingent of Navajos to Washington, DC but his difficulties could not be overcome and he submitted his resignation on July 22, 1875. His last six years in New Mexico were lived in financial impoverishment. In 1879 he learned that he had inherited a large fortune in England, but he arrived there too late to collect.”

William F. M. Arny examined by the Senate Investigation Committee on the Harper’s Ferry Raid (Washington, D.C.: 1860)  

Excerpts only

January 16, 1860.

William F. M. Arny affirmed and examined.

. . . .

Question. Were you acquainted with John Brown, who was mixed up with the troubles and difficulties in Kansas, and who has been recently executed in Virginia?

Answer. I was. With reference to that, I should like to say a few words.

The Chairman. Certainly; any explanation you please.

The Witness. As a member and general agent of the National Kansas Aid Committee, I became acquainted with some matters pertaining to John Brown's operations in Kansas, which may throw some light on his operations at Harper's Ferry; but before I give testimony in regard to it, I would prefer to be sent home for my books and papers, so that I can give a full and accurate statement of the amount placed in my hands by individuals and committees, and how it was appropriated, so as to show definitely what was given to John Brown as far as I know, by whose order, and for what purpose. If this investigation is designed for a full exhibition of the relation of other parties to John Brown, it will be impossible for me to testify accurately, and so as not to do injustice to persons who are absent, unless I can have access to my memoranda, records, and books kept at the time, in which were recorded the events, to some extent, as they transpired.

Question. Will you state when your acquaintance with John Brown commenced?

Answer. Between twenty and twenty-two years ago.

Question. When did you first see him in Kansas ; when was your acquaintance with him resumed there?

Answer. My first personal connection with him in Kansas was after the beginning of 1857. I saw him previous to that, however, but not in Kansas. . . . I last saw him in the fall of 1858. . . . During the summer and fall of 1858, I saw him some half dozen times.

Question. Where was he then; where did you see him?

Answer. I saw him in Lawrence, Kansas. I saw him at my own house once or twice; he spent a day or two with me there. I saw him down on the borders of Missouri while I was engaged in surveying a railroad there. I think these are all the places where I saw him in the Territory during that year.

Question. Did he tell you then, in any of those interviews, of any plans that he had in contemplation to make a descent on any of the Southern States with a view to incite insurrection amongst the slaves? 

Answer. In my conversation with him, growing out of a communication that I was requested to make to him by Mr. Richard Realf, he said some things in regard to a plan that he had, but gave me no details in regard to it.

Question. What was the character of the plan? You may give that without going into details. What sort of a plan was it?

. . . .

The Witness. It may be as well to state here that in all my conversations with Brown I opposed any project of even carrying off slaves, and my connection with him was more interposing to prevent him from getting means to accomplish anything of that kind.

. . . .

The Chairman. Well, you returned to Kansas. Now, you can go on.

The Witness. I think the first time I saw Brown after I got into the Territory was while I was engaged in surveying a road through Missouri and from Missouri to the Neosho valley, and during the time of the troubles in Linn county, Kansas. It was directly after what were termed the Marias-des-Cygnes murders, when Hamilton came over from Missouri and killed a lot of men, taking them from their farms in Linn county, on the borders of Linn. After speaking to Brown in regard to the position of things in the Territory at the time, I said to him that I understood that an organization was established in that county and neighborhood in which I was very glad to learn they had decided that no invasion should take place of the territory of the State of Missouri ; I then remarked to him that I had seen [Richard] Realf in New York. He was standing a little way off. He immediately came close up to me. He said, "I am glad to hear that, for I thought Realf was gone to England and had not attended to what we had appointed him." I then told him that Realf asked me to say to him that he did not know where to write to him, and that if I fell in with him to say to him that he had been engaged in the matter to which he was appointed, and that he could not learn definitely what Forbes was after, but that he had gone to Washington; that was about the substance of the message that Realf gave me. Brown then asked me if I knew who Forbes saw in Washington. I told him, no. Well, said he, you were in Washington. I said, yes. I then immediately remarked to Brown that I thought it very strange that he would be engaged in an enterprise such as Realf had intimated to me they were engaged in. ''Why strange,"' said he. Why, said I, "Brown, when I knew you twenty years ago over in Virginia, you professed to be an abolitionist, and an abolitionist of that class that are termed non-resistants, and you refused to use arms in any shape or form; even when you were opposed, you would not resist, and you were considered ultra on that subject at that time; how is it that you have changed?" He then referred to the fact that he had sent his sons into the Territory of Kansas in 1853 or 1854 with a lot of blooded cattle and other stock with the intention of settling. “You know they did settle on the Pottawatomie, and that after they settled there, part of their cattle was stolen; they were

notified to leave the country, and they had to sacrifice their cattle."

The Chairman. I do not think it important to know Brown's reasons for this thing. We want to get at the facts.

The Witness. I am only detailing the conversation I had with him. There were three conversations with him; he was at my house two days. 

. . . .

Question. You have said, as I understand, that Brown, in speaking of his plan, referred to some action taken by that committee, and that you were present when that action was taken. Now state what the action was that was taken, to which Brown referred?

Answer. Mr. Brown applied to that committee

Mr. Collamer. State when and where.

Answer. He applied sometime in the month of January, 1857, at a meeting of that committee, at the Astor House, in New York, for some arms, and other assistance, to organize a company of men and equip them, to repel the invasion in Kansas by Missourians. The action of the committee, to be short about it, was a refusal at that time to let him have the arms, and an agreement to let him have some other matters that would assist him in a peaceable settlement in the Territory of Kansas.

By Mr. Collamer:

Question. What were they? 

Answer. Clothing and other things.

By the Chairman:

Question. What do you mean by a peaceable settlement?

Answer. That he should settle there in the Territory of Kansas, and not go out. The policy of this committee was a policy of self-defense, and opposed to any attempt to invade the States or any Territory.

By Mr. Davis:

Question. Do you mean clothing for himself or for others?

Answer. Clothing for himself and others.

Question. For distribution?

Answer. Yes, sir; for persons that he was acquainted with and that he represented were in a destitute condition. 

By the Chairman:

Question. Was that the action that Brown referred to?

Answer. Yes, sir; he referred to that action, and 1 think I can give the exact words, after speaking of that action.

By Mr. Doolittle:

Question. Was this an application for the arms which were in Iowa at that time?

By the Chairman:

Question. You say that Brown told you of some plans that he had to arm a party of men for the purpose of stampeding slaves from the slave States, and in telling you of that plan he referred to the action taken by this committee at Buffalo, and you now tell us what that action was. That action was an application of Brown for certain arms for certain purposes, and a refusal of the committee to let him have those arms for those purposes, and a proposition by that committee to aid him in a peaceable settlement. I want to know how Brown referred to that action in connection with any plan of running off slaves. What had that to do with running off slaves?

Answer. In my conversation with him, I was finding fault with him for proposing a plan of that kind; and, in finding fault with him in regard to that matter, he classed me with the abolitionists, with the republican party, and with this committee, and he said we were all alike a set of cravens, that we all refused to give him assistance to carry the war into Africa.

Question. You spoke of applications he had made to some people in the East. What applications did he speak of there that he had made? 

Answer. After his application to the committee at the Astor House, in New York, in 1857, and a refusal by all who were there to do anything for him at that time, and after the settlement of the ownership of these arms, which was made afterwards at the same meeting, he then addressed a letter, a copy of which I have and can furnish to the committee if I have my papers, to the people of the States. 

Question. What States?

Answer. Of the free States, asking for aid.

Arny's signature from a John Brown document
excerpted from Gilder Lehrman image 

William Arny's Reminiscence at Brown’s grave, July 4, 1860

“I have known John Brown to give the last dollar from his scanty purse in Kansas to Free State men whom he met in a worse condition.  The life of him whose remains rest before us, is full and brimming with such deeds.  The record of that life he has left us, a solitary mark of grandeur in an otherwise degenerate age."  

Source: "Celebration at North Elba; The Fourth of July Among the Adirondacks," Liberator (27 July 1860): 1

Film--
Paul Giamatti, FX, will make "Midnight Rising" into a TV Mini-Series

According to Deadline Hollywood blogger, Dominic Patten, "Paul Giamatti and FX are in the early stages of a limited series on the spark that started the fire of the Civil War."  According to Patten, the yet untitled project on John Brown is based on Tony Horwitz’s 2011 book, Midnight Rising, which is centered upon the Harper's Ferry raid.  Patten says that Horwitz will serve as a consultant on the project, which is expected to be from six to eight hours total--which I guess is about three or four episodes.  Patten says that Gabriel Range, who helmed the faux documentary "Death Of A President" in 2006, is adapting Midnight Rising into a screenplay. Range will also serves as co-executive producer on the project.

Paul Giamatti

The John Brown community, particularly those scholars who have invested ourselves deeply into the study of the man and his legacy, are naturally excited as well as concerned by this news.  Over the past decade there have been rumors of John Brown films, from the never produced film version of Russell Banks' fiction, Cloudsplitter, to the apparently back-burnered American Film Company's proposed movie on the Harper's Ferry raid, as well as talk from Quentin Tarantino that he wanted to do a John Brown film.  There are currently other screenplay efforts underway, and it seems that sooner or later, some feature film will bring the Old Man to the screen.  Perhaps this time, it is far more likely that some interpretation of the John Brown story will finally reach the screen, albeit the television screen.  This is obvious good news for Tony Horwitz, although even he probably cannot predict how his work will be spun by Gabriel Range as a screenplay.  While I have considerable differences with Tony Horwitz on aspects of the John Brown story, the larger point of concern, however, is what "Hollywood" will do with the John Brown story vis-a-vis Midnight Rising.

Tony Horwitz

 Time will tell, although we certainly hope that we do not have the image of a violent religious fanatic John Brown, or a mentally disturbed terrorist John Brown brought to the screen.  Since too many people in this nation are too lazy to actually read history in a serious manner, they will take their history from film, just as they did in 1940, when "Santa Fe Trail" was released.  While there will be no more spinning of the Brown story to suit the whims of Southern romancers and "Lost Cause" types, it is possible that the themes of terrorism and religious fanaticism will be overdone by Hollywood.  It is hard enough for a post-Christian, secular writer to appreciate Brown's religious ideas, non-non-violence, and antislavery zeal.  It will be almost impossible for entertainment types to see Brown in a balanced light.

This is a story worthy of following and we'll do so.  At best, we hope that a television mini-series will get more attention for the John Brown story in schools and forums of real historical discussion and education.  We have good reason to believe that Mr. Giamatti, having shown respectable interest in early U.S. history, will likewise approach this theme with respect and consideration.  On the other hand, should our worst fears be raised, and this film lends itself to the lower appetites of popular culture, then most assuredly there will be, as Brown once put it, "all hell stirred from beneath" from our part.  We have come too far to see our 21st century understanding of Brown reduced to some misanthropic figure, whether on TV or in the movies.

Sidenote--

I'm Laughing AT YOU, not with You: Quick Review of Methodist Minister's Eyewitness Account, and a Lazy, Arrogant Amazon Reviewer

Samuel Vanderlip Leech was a Methodist minister who had occasion to meet John Brown during the incarceration of the abolitionist in 1859.  Fifty years later, Leech wrote a reminiscence of of the raid and an assessment of John Brown, entitled The Raid of John Brown at Harper's Ferry as I Saw It.  In my opinion, the work offers little of value except a brief vignette of the abolitionist's rejection of some pro-slavery ministers while in jail.  Unfortunately, he doesn't even date or sufficiently develop the more important episode of his little book.  Otherwise the work offers little of value to historians, except an old conservative compromiser's assessment after the fact, written at a time when white supremacy had been revised in 20th century terms.

At any rate, I made a brief comment on the book on Amazon, which you can read here.
http://www.amazon.com/Raid-Brown-Harpers-Ferry-ebook/dp/B004UJ12CC/ref=cm_rdp_product

What cracked me up, however, was the following Amazon "review" by a fellow named Geoffrey Sebesta, who gives this work four stars and writes:

"I read the pamphlet in the evening and found it lucid, revelatory, and delightful. The author is a cautious, cowardly liberal of the kind we all know and love, and his admiration for Brown is mixed with his horror at the sheer madness of the man and the impossibility of what he wanted. I learned a tremendous amount about the raid with very little expenditure of effort thanks to this book."

While I bear no malice toward Mr. Sebesta, I had to laugh at his "review" and let him know that I was laughing too.  But it's worth reporting here because it is very telling.  First he writes, with the typical arrogant presumption of many people in this nation, of "the sheer madness" of Brown and "the impossibility of what he wanted."   I need not go at length to say that, notwithstanding Tony Horwitz's baseless flirtation with alleged bipolar or manic disorder, there is no evidential basis for concluding that Brown suffered from mental illness.  The point is that Mr. Sebesta assumes Brown's madness with the same assurance that Mr. Sebesta assumes himself human, not a monkey.  This kind of assurance of truth regarding Brown is what typifies so many ignorant and arrogant people who typically bash Brown online.   The same applies for "the impossibility of what he wanted."  Very likely, Mr. Sebesta, like so many other Brown bashers out there, don't even really know what Brown "wanted."  And why should they, when no few number of historians and authors have so misrepresented Brown's goals?    Unfortunately, Mr. Sebesta is the product of an educational system and a historical prejudice, and his brief "review" is graphic in exposing the point.

The same applies for his grateful comment, that he had "learned a tremendous amount about the raid with very little expenditure of effort"!   Wow, this guy is a living illustration of the problems that John Brown studies face.  People who delight in putting forth little effort in studying, people who are historically lazy, so to speak, but want to have a "John Brown for Dummies" experience, and then walk away feeling he is both educated and qualified to speak on the subject.  He knows neither facts, context, or historiography, but he's absolutely delighted that he found a pamphlet that has taught him a "tremendous amount" without him having to expend very much effort.   This underscores the larger problem, that many people are too lazy to work hard at history, and to some degree history as a discipline suffers because of this laziness.  But John Brown--who is wrongly characterized so traditionally in white society and the mainstream media--especially suffers from lazy people who think this way.

Like I commented on his review, as a biographer of John Brown, I'm laughing.

:

From the Field--
Iowa and John Brown: A Road Trip Report from H. S. Wolfe

Greetings:

Mix your "From the Field"-man and a warm, July Saturday and what do you get? Why, a John Brown Road Trip...that's what!

Plaster from the Maxson Farm House (H. S. Wolfe)

My principal destination was the Herbert Hoover Presidential Library in West Branch, Iowa, where a special exhibit dealing with Iowa's role in the Civil War was my objective. But, lo and behold, the display began with John Brown himself. Besides a number of images and broadsides, a display case contained three artifacts: 1) a "John Brown Sharps" rifle, of the type stored in Iowa and carried to Harpers Ferry; 2) a faux "John Brown pike," which (this particular object has been floating around the Springdale, Iowa vicinity since the 19th century) shows not the least resemblance to the pikes carried to the Ferry; and 3) something new!  If you recall my epic article about Brown's soldiers at Springdale (see "Farmer Maxson's Newel Post"), I believe I mentioned that the men, before departing in April of 1858 for the Constitutional Convention in Chatham, C.W., signed their names on a wall of their winter quarters, the Maxson farmhouse. Here, today, I viewed a piece of plaster inscribed with the following: "Taken from wall where John Brown's men wrote their name in 1859    Springda  Io." Besides having the year wrong and cutting off the location, it provided me much excitement...for I had never seen such a souvenir before. 

Townsend's Traveler's Rest (H. S. Wolfe)

When departing West Branch, I paused to photograph the structure which once housed James Townsend's "Traveler's Rest." This roadside "inn/tavern" was, in 1856, patronized by John Brown...and described in a much published story popularized by Irving B. Richman's "John Brown Among the Quakers" (1894). An image is attached. Appreciate it...for I risked my life in oncoming traffic.

Upon arriving in Springdale, for a tour of the John Brown sites there, yours truly, the From the Fielder, was compelled (by issues of vanity) to pose beside the village sign on its western limits (see final image). Please note the red and white bib overalls. These were obtained by barter from Bozo the Clown...I get his pants and he gets an original pair of John Brown's leg irons.

DAR Maxson Family Monument (H. S. Wolfe)

Finally, I paused at the site of the Maxson farmhouse...in order to evaluate the condition of the 1924 DAR monument marking the same. Sadly, it still remains much neglected...although someone has cut a bit of the long grass masking its roadside face...and, perhaps the same someone, has placed three small American flags to honor the spot. Heavily shaded by a towering sycamore...and backed by corn already shoulder high...one requires a licensed guide, such as myself, to even locate the spot. But the stone remains...which we can claim as progress. 

Our correspondent marks the site,
as always, with panache  (H.S. Wolfe)

When one includes the pork and pepper sandwich at "Reid's Beans Cafe" in West Branch, it turned out to be a most interesting and enjoyable day. Perhaps, someday, the esteemed Dr. DeCaro himself will travel to the provinces for a personal tour. Nothing better than breathing Iowa dust while listening to the call of the dickcissel.

Yr obt srvt,

H.S. Wolfe...From the Field

We are grateful for yet another refreshing infusion of word and scene from Correspondent Wolfe, whose historical adventures range from deep in the archives to the breadth of the nation's plains and rolling hills.  Under the watchful survey of Mr. Wolfe, no rock is left unturned, no tome is too faded to be studied, no road is too dusty to be traveled, and no Civil War cannon too rusty to be fired off!  Of course, one burning question remains: What is a "dickcissel"?--LD  

Happily, we learn from a subsequent communication from Mr. Wolfe, concerning the aforesaid dickcissel:

"I take it as a symptom of an overextended exposure to concrete and urbanization that you are unfamiliar with the dickcissel. This glorious, avian forager of the fields of the hinterland...a member of the genus Spiza and family Cardinalidae...can be heard performing his musical lyrics along any country road in Ioway. Any John Brown research visit to the Maxson farm is accompanied by such melodious background music."

Two reasons why John Brown would not tolerate Paula Deen:

1. John Brown absolutely loathed butter.
2. John Brown absolutely loathed racism.

Chain, chain, chain--
John Brown's Alleged Leg Irons Sell at Auction

Today (Sat. Jun. 22) a set of leg irons allegedly worn by John Brown while imprisoned in Virginia in 1859 were sold today for $13,145 by Heritage Auctions in Dallas, Texas.  A number of internet news sources announced the sale with a report from The Associated Press:

DALLAS -- The leg irons used on abolitionist John Brown after his failed 1859 raid on the federal arsenal in Harpers Ferry, W.Va., sold at auction for $13,145 Saturday. The winning bidder declined to be identified at the Heritage Auctions event. 

Many scholars believe Brown and his raid hastened the start of the Civil War. The Connecticut native and some followers seized the arsenal, hoping to provide 100,000 weapons to slaves who never rose up as envisioned to join them. Brown later was hanged for treason, murder and inciting a rebellion.

Typically, reports of this nature convey one or more conventional errors based upon generations of misinformation and skewed representation.  In this case, the AP report erroneously says that Brown "seized the arsenal," which is at least imprecise.  Actually, Brown and his small army of raiders seized the town of Harper's Ferry and the entire government armory, which included the arsenal.

Second, the notion that Brown wanted to convey the "100,000 weapons" to enslaved blacks is also mistaken.  There is no evidence whatsoever that Brown attacked Harper's Ferry with the intention of seizing the arsenal weapons.  Yet is almost impossible to uproot this error because it has been repeated so often by so many different people that it has become accepted as a fact.  To the contrary, one or two people in Harper's Ferry, and some Virginia politicians said it after the fact.  But it is interesting to point out that Brown posted raiders at the arsenal--although it seems likely that they were placed there to prevent others from getting the weapons during their occupation of the town.  There is no evidence that Brown's men removed these weapons, even after staying so long (too long!) overnight on October 16-17, 1859.  Brown's men may have looked at a case or two of the weapons, but there were no guns removed from the arsenal and, as Brown said afterward, he brought better guns (Sharps repeating rifles) with him.  Of course, I don't expect too many people to believe me.  There are so many questionable "givens" about Harper's Ferry that I'm convinced only the minority of people who actually are willing to read are going to have their assumptions challenged.

If you believe this image is historically accurate, I have another pair of leg irons to sell you.  David H. Strother's propaganda cartoon in Harper's Weekly, Nov. 1859, pictured loyal enslaved men rallying behind the paternal slaveholder, ready to fight off John Brown and his men.  It was either this, or portray black men as fearful, lazy, simpletons.  This was all part of the lie that the "slaves never rose up to support John Brown."

Third, the AP's biggest fallacy is that the slaves "never rose up as envisioned to join" Brown.  Once more, the notion that local blacks did not respond is the version of the raid ingrained in the "American mind."  Few seem to realize that the notion that few or no enslaved people responded to John Brown is based upon the reports of southern newspapers and politicians, which had a vested interest in promoting the lie that enslaved blacks either were: (1) afraid and cowardly; (2) fiercely loyal to their masters; or (3) lazy and indifferent.  The "no response" nonsense was conveyed to the northern press and completely accepted in a bipartisan fashion--assumed as true by the Republicans as much as the Democrats.   Not only do we have evidence that local blacks were responsive (and would have been even more so had Brown not gotten bogged down in the town of Harper's Ferry), but we know that many local slave masters were quietly terrified and some didn't even sleep at their homes following the raid until they were assured there was no insurrection afoot.  The politicians' braggadocio claims of slave loyalty was disproved by the deep southern fear of insurrections as a reality.  It was also disproved by the contradictory claim that enslaved black men were afraid and terrified even to pick up a weapon, but would fight like lions in defense of their slave masters.  That the majority of whites still believe John Brown had no impact on the enslaved community is simply evidence that the great majority has an unrealistic, apolitical, and often ahistorical view of the past--especially as it involves chattel slavery.

Fear of What?

By the way, the auction description also includes this problematic statement:

The actions at Harper's Ferry, in contrast, raised the fear of servile insurrection and was viewed by slave-holders as the logical outcome to abolitionist agitation. It was this fear, beyond all others, that prompted southern states to withdraw from the Union following Lincoln's election in 1860. 

In retrospect, it is true that the raid (and the consequent number of enslaved people who actually fled Jefferson county and other parts of the South as a result) created great consternation among the supposedly self-assured slavemasters.  But to say that their fear of slave insurrection, "beyond all others," is what prompted the Southern rebellion is just utter nonsense.  The Southern states were not scared into secession.  They dove headfirst into their mad rebellion because they were intent on keeping 4 millions of black people in slavery's chains.  They were not afraid that Lincoln's election would lead to servile insurrection.  They were afraid that Lincoln's party would at least keep the slavemasters from expanding slave territory.  They only fear they had was fear of losing their precious "peculiar institution."   The truth is, the slavemasters rebelled against the Union for the same reason they rushed John Brown to the gallows.

Now, About those Leg Irons

As far as the well-sold "leg irons" go, I'm going to remain skeptical--or to put it another way, I'm not so sure that $13,145 was well spent.

The auction description says that these leg irons were in the same family from the 19th century, but admits that the history behind them is "murky" and fraught with "family lore and faulty, contradictory information posted online."  I'm not suggesting the auction house is deceptive, and I'm sure they did their homework.  But I am suggesting there simply isn't enough basis to be certain that these well sold leg irons were John Brown's leg irons.  While the Rickard marking certainly attests to the leg irons being a genuine specimen of that time and vicinity, there just is not enough proof that these were the ones worn by Brown.  Even if the leg irons were associated with the Charlestown jail, they may have been worn by Brown's raiders, or other prisoners, including enslaved people, who were kept in that jail when they were sold.  By the way, it is not at all clear from the evidence that "Brown's shackles were only removed when his wife came for one last visit and once again when he was escorted from the jail to the place of execution."   For now I'll just say, Brown and his jailer got along well.

Of course, it is true that during the Civil War and afterward, people collected relics of John Brown, and there is no question that Union soldiers might have looked for Brown's chains.  But no one would have been trying to grab John Brown's leg irons for months, if not years, following his death in December 1859.  So unless it can be proved that his leg irons were "retired" after he wore them, stories about a "red flannel" marking and an "elderly black lady" just aren't sufficient.

For the record, I'm not saying these leg irons are not Brown's leg irons.  I cannot disprove it, and really have no desire to do so.  I'm only saying the auction house cannot say with real certainty that these were the Old Man's leg irons based upon their description, and the person who spent $13,145 to buy them was very trusting indeed.  Certainly, if I had $13,000 to spend on Browniana, I would have bought one of his letters, with handwriting that could be analyzed.  Still, for some people, I guess, $13,000 is "fun money," and certainly buying "John Brown's leg irons" sounds like quite an experience.

Link--
"When the Park was a Battlefield"

"The importance of the Battle of Osawatomie is that John Brown’s stand worked to bolster morale for Free State advocates in Kansas Territory, and John Brown earned the nickname 'Osawatomie Brown' for his courage leading Free State forces during the battle. In addition, the Battle of Osawatomie was the largest battle during the Bleeding Kansas era of the state’s and nation’s history." 


Read the entire article at The Osawatomie Graphic, 19 June 2013!