I hereby bargain, sell and convey an absolute property to John Marshall for 70 pounds which I have this day received from him one Negro wench named Dixie with her child and do bend myself, my heirs execratory & administrators to warrant and defend a complete and totally unencumbered to the said slave and her issue.
John B Johnson July 3, 1787
VERSO
For the wither mentioned some of 70 pounds which I have received I bargain, sell the whither mentioned slaves to Jacquelin Ambler.
John Marshall
https://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/JNML-01-01-02-0171 [accessed 07 Jan 2021]
To The Editor Of The Nation:
Sir: The "Diary of a Public Man," as recently published by the North American Review, contains, amid much apocryphal gossip relating to the outbreak of our civil war, certain specific statements based on the assumption that the Administration of President Lincoln was brought, in the early days of its existence, to contemplate and accept the evacuation of Fort Sumter as a military necessity.
This purpose was unofficially announced a few days after the inauguration of Mr. Lincoln, but as the subsequent conduct of the Administration indicated a change of policy— if any such purpose had been formed—it has been common to resolve the public doubts under this head by questioning the existence of any such intention.
It may be proper, therefore, to say that, as one of the editors of the National Intelligencer in 1861, I was authentically informed of this purpose by Mr. Secretary Seward, not only for my guidance as a public journalist, but with the request that I should communicate the fact to the Hon. George W. Summers, the recognized leader of the Union majority in the Virginia ConvVention then sitting at Richmond.
Mr. Seward believed that intelligence of the fact would strengthen the hands of the Unionists in that body, and, concurring with him in this opinion, I hastened to write to Mr. Summers in the sense and to the purport of the Secretary's statements……I still have the reply of Judge Summers, from which the purport of my communication can be sufficiently gathered, as well as the effect it produced on the minds of the Virginia Unionists in the Convention, I subjoin it to this note as a slight contribution to the political literature of that troublous period.
The North American diarist says, under date of March 6, 1861, that Mr. Seward communicated the meditated purpose of the Administration to the Richmond Unionists through "a messenger enjoying the direct personal confidence" of the Secretary.
This may be true, but as the fact that I had written to Mr. Summers was an open secret both in Washington and Richmond at that time, it may be that the statement of the diarist is but an echo of the communication I was authorized to make.
As the statements made by Mr. Seward in the early days of March, 1861, with regard to the projected evacuation of Fort Sumter, when viewed in the light of subsequent events, have subjected him to the charge of duplicity in the premises, I beg leave to say that the charge, according to my knowledge of the facts, is entirely unfounded.
He honestly believed in the truth of his statements when he made them, and he had a right to believe in their truth, for they were made with the full knowledge and consent of Mr. Lincoln, and were supported by the military representations of General Scott—representations supposed at the time to be decisive of the question. And when, at a later day, Mr. Lincoln determined to send supplies of food to the famished garrison of Fort Sumter, "peaceably if he could, forcibly if he must," I have good reasons for believing that the resolution was concerted without the privity of Mr. Seward, though after the resolution had been taken, a sense of loyalty to his official chief combined with convictions of public duty to prevent him from replying to the suspicions brought upon him by his ill fated efforts to "keep the peace."
In order to appreciate the motives and conduct of Mr. Seward in this crisis, it is important to remember that his statements were made not at all in subservience to the wishes and claims of the Confederate politicians, but in deference to the wishes and sensibilities of the Union men in the Border States—men who were fighting a gallant political battle for the Union under circumstances which gave them a claim to his best consideration. He believed, moreover, that if these States could be retained within their normal orbits the Secession movement initiated by the Cotton States would either "die a natural death" or could be restricted within limits so comparatively narrow as to make it otherwise manageable by the power of the Federal Government. If the view was a mistaken one he should at least have the benefit of the candor and earnestness with which he held it.
When the truth of history in this matter shall be fully brought to light I incline to think that the facts in the case will prove to be substantially as follows: - that the evacuation of Fort Sumter was entertained by President Lincoln and his Cabinet as an inevitable military necessity during the earlier weeks of March, 1861;
- that this evacuation was never formally or finally resolved on by the President, although for a time he had no alternative plan in his mind;
- that during this time the statements in question were made by Mr. Seward not only in perfect good faith but by authority of the President;
- that when the announcement of the proposed evacuation excited, as we know it did, a profound feeling of disgust and indignation in the breasts of the "Stalwarts" of that day, the President was finally moved to accept the alternative proposition which was submitted to him, with the view of protecting himself from political odium, and at the same time maintaining the prestige of the National Government at the only two points where it was then possible to make a stand in the seceded States—Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens.
As the Hon. Montgomery Blair, a member of Mr. Lincoln's Cabinet, was understood at the time to be opposed to the meditated evacuation of Fort Sumter, and as the expedition to Charleston was placed under the command of his brother-in-law, Capt. G. V. Fox an ex-officer of the United States Navy, and subsequently Assistant Secretary of the Navy Department, it is reasonable to suppose that either or both of these distinguished gentlemen could shed valuable light on the motives and considerations which, beyond and besides those included in Mr. Lincoln's message of July 4th, 1861 may have led to the President’s final decision in this matter.
Yours most respectively,
James C. Welling
WELLING, James Clarke, educator, b. in Trenton, N. J., 14 July, 1825. He was graduated at Princeton in 1844, and, after studying law, renounced that profession in 1848 to become associate principal of the New York Collegiate School.
In 1850 he was secured by Joseph Gales and William W. Seaton as literary editor of the " National Intelligencer" at Washington, and he was afterward associated with them in the political conduct of that journal, becoming charged in 1856 with its chief management, for which post he was qualified by his accurate scholarship, his facility in writing, and his judicial temperament. His editorship continued through the crisis of the civil war.
Adhering to the old-line Whigs as against the Republican and the Democratic parties, he supported the Bell-Everett ticket for president and vice- president in 1860. Steadfastly resisting the disunion movement at the south in all its phases, he gave to the war for the Union his loyal support. He advocated Lincoln's proposition of emancipation with compensation to loyal owners, the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, and its abolition throughout the Union by constitutional amendment; but he questioned the validity of the emancipation proclamation, and strenuously opposed the constitutionality of military commissions for the trial of citizens in loyal states, which practice was subsequently condemned by the supreme court.
The discussions of the " Intelligencer' during this period often took the form of elaborate papers on questions of constitutional or international law, and exercised an acknowledged influence on public opinion. Some of them have been republished, and are still cited in works of history and jurisprudence.
Dr. Welling withdrew from journalism in 1865, and spent the following year travelling in Europe for health and study. He had been previously appointed a clerk of the U. S. court of claims, and served in that office till 1867, when he was chosen president of St. John's College, Annapolis, Md. During his presidency the number of students advanced from 90 to 250. In 1868 he received the honorary degree of LL. D. from Columbian College (now George Washington University).
In 1870 he was appointed professor of belles-lettres in Princeton, but he resigned the post in the following year to accept the presidency of George Washington University. Under his administration that institution has been enlarged, has received a new charter from congress, erected a building in the heart of Washington, added new professional schools, and laid the foundation of a free endowment.
At the same time he has been connected with many literary, historical, and scientific societies. As president of the board of trustees of the Corcoran Gallery of art since 1877 he has devoted much time to its development, visiting in 1887 the studios of the chief artists of Europe in its interest.
In 1884 he was appointed a regent of the Smithsonian Institution, and soon afterward he was elected chairman of its Executive Committee.
He was an active member of the Philosophical and Anthropological societies of Washington, was chosen in 1884 president of the former, and has contributed valuable memoirs to the published proceedings of both bodies.
He was president of the Copyright league of the District of Columbia. For many years he has been a contributor to periodicals.[i]
[i] (James Grant Wilson 1889) James G. Wilson was related to Dr. James Clarke Welling by marriage, Wilson had married Jane Cogswell, who was half-sister of Dr. Welling’s mother in-law, Elizabeth Lord Cogswell Dixon.
|
Lost & Found History
There are countless pieces of history scattered around the world, many of which are often overlooked or forgotten. Today, we are shining a spotlight on a particular piece that has been lost in the annals of time and recently rediscovered: a portrait on Ivory from the private collection of the Dixon-Welling family.
The portrait is a fascinating look into the past, serving as a snapshot of a time and place long gone. Crafted with intricate detail and a keen eye for aesthetics, it is a testament to the artistic skills and cultural sensibilities of its time.
The piece is signed on the back, or verso, with the names 'J Dalton' and 'J Sillett Pinx', and the date '1800'. This provides us with some tantalizing clues about its history and origin. The identity of J. Dalton is unknown, which adds a layer of mystery to the piece. However, we do know that the artist was James Sillett, a British miniaturist who was active during the 18th and 19th centuries.
James Sillett was known for his miniature portraits, which were often painted on ivory. His work is characterized by its meticulous detail and vibrant use of color. Despite the small size of the miniatures, Sillett was able to capture the personality and character of his subjects with remarkable accuracy. The Miniature on Ivory from the Dixon-Welling collection is no exception, demonstrating Sillett's exceptional skill and artistic vision.
Despite its age and the mystery surrounding its creation, the Portrait on Ivory has been preserved in excellent condition. It is currently part of the private collection of Miss Elizabeth Dixon Welling, who has graciously allowed it to be shared with the public. This remarkable piece of history is just one of the many treasures that can be found in private collections around the world.
The Portrait on Ivory is a testament to the power of art and the importance of preserving our historical artifacts. It serves as a reminder of the rich history that surrounds us and the stories that can be found in the most unexpected of places. As we continue to uncover these lost relics, we gain a deeper understanding of our past and the people who lived in it.
Lost & Found History
There are countless pieces of history scattered around the world, many of which are often overlooked or forgotten. Today, we are shining a spotlight on a particular piece that has been lost in the annals of time and recently rediscovered: a portrait on Ivory from the private collection of the Dixon-Welling family.
The portrait is a fascinating look into the past, serving as a snapshot of a time and place long gone. Crafted with intricate detail and a keen eye for aesthetics, it is a testament to the artistic skills and cultural sensibilities of its time.
The piece is signed on the back, or verso, with the names 'J Dalton' and 'J Sillett Pinx', and the date '1800'. This provides us with some tantalizing clues about its history and origin. The identity of J. Dalton is unknown, which adds a layer of mystery to the piece. However, we do know that the artist was James Sillett, a British miniaturist who was active during the 18th and 19th centuries.
James Sillett was known for his miniature portraits, which were often painted on ivory. His work is characterized by its meticulous detail and vibrant use of color. Despite the small size of the miniatures, Sillett was able to capture the personality and character of his subjects with remarkable accuracy. The Miniature on Ivory from the Dixon-Welling collection is no exception, demonstrating Sillett's exceptional skill and artistic vision.
Despite its age and the mystery surrounding its creation, the Portrait on Ivory has been preserved in excellent condition. It is currently part of the private collection of Miss Elizabeth Dixon Welling, who has graciously allowed it to be shared with the public. This remarkable piece of history is just one of the many treasures that can be found in private collections around the world.
The Portrait on Ivory is a testament to the power of art and the importance of preserving our historical artifacts. It serves as a reminder of the rich history that surrounds us and the stories that can be found in the most unexpected of places. As we continue to uncover these lost relics, we gain a deeper understanding of our past and the people who lived in it.