Response to Riots

Vandewater Street Corner of Frankfort Street

Junction of Canal and Walker Street, Near Centre Street

Process of Drafting in the 6th District

Provost Marshall’s Office, No 185 6th Ave

“The draft riots, as they are called, were supposed by some to be the result of a deep-laid conspiracy on the part of those opposed to the war, and that the successful issue of Lee’s invasion of Pennsylvania was to be the signal for open action. Whether this be so or not, it is evident that the outbreak in New York City on the 13th of July, not only from the manner of its commencement, the absence of proper organization, and almost total absence of leadership, was not the result of a general well-understood plot. It would seem from the facts that those who started the movement had no idea at the outset of proceeding to the length they did. They simply desired to break up the draft in some of the upper districts of the city, and destroy the registers in which certain names were enrolled,” wrote Joel Tyler Headley in The Great Riots of New York City.¹ But whether or not a conspiracy existed, New York newspaper editors were convinced one existed and wrote that one did.

The riots in the city’s streets became a battle among the city’s newspapers. ‘Immediately after the outbreak of the riot, the metropolitan press became engaged in a controversy as to who had provoked the affair,” wrote historian Sidney David Brummer. The Tribune, the Times, and the Post were arrayed against the World, the News, and the Express>, while the Herald berated both sides.”² Historian George Milton Fort wrote: “Except for the Daily News and the World, the press of the city bitterly reprehended the outrages. None more so than Horace Greeley, whose pen was doubly dipped in acid after the attempt to break into his office. Henry J. Raymond’s Times, the stoutest straight Administration organ in the city, took strong lines against the rioters. ‘The mob is not our master,’ thundered an editorial the day after Seymour’s speaking. ‘It is not to be compounded by paying blackmail. It is not to be supplicated and sued to stay its hand. It is to be defied, confronted, grappled with, prostrated, crushed.'”³ Raymond penned a vigorous attack on the rioters on the riot’s third day:

You may as well reason with the wolves of the forest as with these men in their present mood. It is quixotic and suicidal to attempt it. The duties of the executive officers of this State and city are not to debate, or negotiate, or supplicate, but to execute the laws. To execute means to enforce by authority. This is their only official business. Let it be promptly and sternly entered upon with all the means now available, and it cannot fail of being carried through to an overwhelming triumph of public order. It may cost blood, — much of it perhaps; but it will be a lesson to the public enemies, whom we always have and must have in our midst, that will last for a generation. Justice and mercy, this time, united in the same behest: Give them grape, and plenty of it.⁴

According to Seymour biographer Stewart Mitchell, the Tribune‘s Greeley “played up the riots for all they were worth in the pages of the Tribune. He became so excited on the subject that his journalistic rivals, who were never tired of poking fun at the peculiarities of his person, began to spread the story that the great editor had fled from the city during what his paper called the ‘bloody week.’ Bennett made so much sport of him on this score that he goaded Greeley into publishing a detailed account of his goings and comings during the three days of July 13 to 15.”⁵

And Herald editor James Gordon Bennett saw an opportunity to beat up on rival editor Horace Greeley. The Herald said that “the Tribune philosopher has not even acquired a reputation for ordinary bravery by his participation in the late exciting scenes. In vain he now talks of concealed riflemen and hand grenades and cannon, and threatens what he would have done if the rioters had only attacked his office again. This playing Bombastes Furioso after the fighting is over excites more ridicule than admiration….Kindly disposed as we are towards poor Greeley, we feel bound to say that his doughty deeds and heroic exploits will never furnish themes for the poet or historian, or subjects for the sculptor and the painter.”

Harry Houston Peckham, biographer of William Cullen Bryant, wrote: “Bryant’s Evening Post, like Greeley’s Tribune, condemned the Draft Riots in the most scathing terms, Without undertaking to pass judgment upon the merits of the Conscription Act, the Post denounced the ring-leaders of the mob as ‘a small band of cutthroats, pickpockets, and robbers’ who were amenable to no suasion but ‘an abundance of grape and cannister.’ And, of the cowardly policemen who had attempted to dispel the mob by firing of blank cartridges, it declared succinctly, ‘They ought to be shot.'”⁶ “Although no actual assault was made on the offices of the Post, it was thought necessary to barricade the doors for three days,” wrote Bryant biographer Curtiss S. Johnson.⁷ Henry J. Raymond wrote in The Times: “Were the conscription law to be abrogated tomorrow the controlling inspiration of the mob would remain the same. It comes from sources independent of that law, or of any other — from malignant hate toward those in better circumstances, from a craving for plunder, from a love of commotion, from a barbarous spite against a different race, from a disposition to bolster up the failing fortunes of the southern rebels.”⁸

“The administration papers rightly attributed blame for the riot to the Copperheads, and also accused the Democratic papers of encouraging the rioters,” wrote historian Sidney David Brummer. “The World retorted: ‘We charge it, therefore, plainly against the radical journals of this city that they, and chiefly they, have educated the people of New York to the pitch of passion and the extremes of desperate feeling which have gleamed out so luridly…in these last sad days.’ In the very midst of the riot, the World and the News assailed the conscription act and its execution. The more moderate of these, the World, said of the law: ‘A measure which could not have been ventured upon in England even in those dark days when the press-gang filled the English ships of war with slaves…was thrust into the statute book as one might say almost by force.”⁹

According to historian William B. Hesseltine, “The aftermath of the riot brought verbal confusion more clamorous than the mob. Everyone made capital of the situation — the Republican newspapers vied with on another in magnifying the horror of the riots and in counting the hundreds who died at the hands of the mob. The people of New York, inspired by the newspaper accounts, filed fabulous claims for damages against the city. And the Republican politicians, disguising partisanship as patriotism, dredged the sewers of their vocabulary for expletives against Seymour.”¹⁰

Bennett saw an opportunity to redress another grudge, according to Seymour biographer Stewart Mitchell: “James Gordon Bennett was a very practical man and whenever he failed to get what he wanted, he got nasty. In July, 1863, he had his own good reason for roasting Seymour, for the governor had refused to put their joint friend on the board of commissioners of the metropolitan police. The editor had asked for the appointment directly, and immediately after Seymour’s inauguration. He had pressed for favorable and speedy action. Thus, by the middle of the summer of 1863, both the Tribune and the Herald were sniping at Seymour.”¹¹

Clearly, that was the case among officials of the Lincoln Administration. Navy Secretary Gideon Welles wrote in his diary: “Governor Seymour, whose partisans constituted the rioters, and whose partisanship encouraged them, has been in New York talking namby-pamby. This Sir Forcible Feeble is himself responsible for the outrage.”¹² Assistant Secretary of War Charles Dana wrote a friend: “I had almost forgotten to say that the New York riots are over and cannot be repeated. Governor Seymour and the leaders of the copperhead Democracy were mostly at the bottom of the whole dreadful business Seymour had the idea of resisting the draft by the forces of the State, but is too great a coward to attempt the execution of the scheme with the large Federal force now concentrated in the city.”¹³

Seymour was hardly the only target of Republican conspiracy theorists. George Templeton Strong wrote in his diary of July 27 that he met with Collector of Customs Hiram Barney at the Union League Club: “He thinks that Fernando Wood, nasty little Tucker the Surrogate, [Samuel F.] Butterworth and McCunn, with others are at the head of a secret organization that did not fully shew itself in the late riots, but is held in reserve for a far more serious outbreak in aid of the rebellion, and that Fernandy Wood aims at being Doge or First Consul or something of New York. Barney is feeble and frightened, but we should be prepared for any violent, desperate move by Copperheads and Peace Democrats to get control of the city.”¹⁴

Presidential aide William O. Stoddard, who witnessed the riots firsthand, wrote later that the they were “nothing but the upsurging of the criminal classes of the great city. My small part in assisting the police in its control gave me opportunity for studying the frenzied mob at close range. I did not see it all, but I saw enough never to forget what a robbers’ mob might be, and the vision remained with me until years later when I wrote and published The Volcano Under the City.”¹⁵

New York businessman James R. Gilmore suggested to President Lincoln that he appoint his father-in-law, Judge John W. Edmonds, as a special commissioner to look into how the Draft Riots started. Gilmore maintained that Governor Seymour and Copperhead Democrats had been involved in the planning of the riot. Gilmore wrote the President on July 17 about information from a Democratic politician:

Gen’l [Richard] Busteed called yesterday at the Tribune office, and stated to Messrs Greeley, [Sidney Howard] Gay and myself, in the strictest confidence, the following:

That this riot was planned and set afoot by Govr Seymour, Fernando Wood, and a small coterie of leaders of their stripe, to inaugurate a revolution at the North, and overturn the present Government — when a peace was to be patched up with the South, and the two sections reunited in the interest of slavery-

That Seymour is now — at this present moment — the real leader of the rioters and in almost hourly communication with the ring leaders “in the field” — This latter statement seems incredible, but Andrews, the ruffian who was taken yesterday, has admitted that he had, within 24 hours, received instructions from Seymour-

Busteed states that he (B) has been a member of this coterie, and attended their meetings, from the first. Appalled at the turn things are taking he has given us this warning, under the strictest pledge that his name shall be kept secret, and we shall get the facts from other sources. His life would no doubt be in danger if he were known as informant— We shall take steps at once to get at the bottom of the thing, and one means of doing it is by keeping control of this man Andrews; and the main object of this letter is to beseech of you to see that he is, under no pretext, delivered up to the State or City authorities. In Govr Seymour’s or Judge McCunn’s hands, he will know he is in no danger, and his mouth will be shut.

I have written my friend, Judge Edmonds, who is now at Lake George, to come down and manage the investigation. It will need to be managed shrewdly, and should be done by a man who is not before the public as a strong party man, and therefore the Judge Edmonds is just the man. I think he will undertake it.

Mr Greeley is aware of my writing this, and approves of my doing so, but as he might be accused of political hostility to the parties implicated it is best that he should take no action in the matter.

Let me beg of you, my dear Mr Lincoln, to let no consideration induce you to let Andrews be given up. If you can succeed in establishing these things as facts, it will be a death blow to Copperheadism, and we shall bless God for this riot, which will then have fully unmasked our Northern traitors.

I have not confidence in Busteed, and the public would believe no statement, like this, on his unsupported authority; but circumstances seem to confirm what he says.

He states that the riot broke out three days before the appointed day, and therefore was not so formidable as it would have been had it worked according to programme.¹⁶

According to Lincoln biographer Carl Sandburg, Tribune Managing Editor Sidney Howard Gay and Gilmore “addressed a joint letter to President Lincoln recommending that Edmonds be appointed a special commissioner to investigate the origin of the riots and urging their belief that good results would follow. Gilmore then took a train to Lake George to tell Edmonds what had been done. The Judge said if he undertook the work his life would not be worth a bad half-dollar, that he would be shot on sight, but he was getting along in years and might do worse by the country. ‘You can tell Mr. Lincoln that I will accept the appointment.'”¹⁷

Receiving no word from the President, Gilmore went to Washington and was told: “Well, you see if I had said no, I should have admitted that I dare not enforce the laws and consequently have no business to be president of the United States. If I had said yes and had appointed the judge, I should — as he would have done his duty — have simply touched a match to a barrel of gunpowder. You have heard of sitting on a volcano. We are sitting upon two. One is blazing away already, and the other will blaze away the moment we scape a little loose dirt from the top of the crater. Better let the dirt alone, at least for the present. One rebellion at a time is about as much as we can conveniently handle.”¹⁸

Historian Philip S. Paludan wrote: “The attention of the nation was riveted on events in the city, on the vast homefront violence — it was the most murderous urban riot in the nation’s history. And it raised a vitally important question: how dedicated was the administration to upholding the draft law, or the rule of law itself? The New York City Republican elite demanded a draconian response. Members of the Union League Club urged Lincoln to declare martial law and to send regiments to control the city — preferably headed by Ben ‘Beast’ Butler — and to hang or shoot not only rioters but conservative Democratic politicians and journalists.”¹⁹

The draft did not disappear as a political issue. New York politicians of both parties were worried. A few days after the cessation of violence, Governor Seymour wrote President Lincoln: “At my urgent request the Hon Samuel J. Tilden goes to Washington for the purpose of stating to you my views and wishes with regard to affairs in this State. He is thoroughly acquainted with my opinions and purposes— I trust you will give him an oppertunity [sic] to Communicate with you at length— I shall also address a letter to you in the course of a few days “²⁰ From a letter which Seymour wrote Tilden on August 6, he didn’t place much stock in his effort to prevent the draft: “I am satisfied [that the Lincoln Administration]…means to go on in a spirit of hostility to this State; that it is governed by a spirit of malice in all things small and great.” But Seymour also seemed to see a political opening: “This conscription will make the administration odious and contemptible.”²¹ New York Attorney David Dudley Field urged President Lincoln to bring the issue before the courts:

There is a very prevalent impression among the persons liable to the draft, that the act is unconstitutional. [Their?] friends profess however entire willingness to abide by the decision of the courts— In consideration of these circumstances, I beg to add my recommendation to that of Govr. [John] Andrew, that the question should be brought before the courts, at the earliest practicable moment.

Mr. {Charles F} Blake, whom I beg leave to introduce to you, is the son in law of Genl {John A.] Dix & the bearer of this letter will explain Govr. Andrew’s views as to Massachusetts In respect to [N York?] I would suggest, that the question be brought before the circuit court of the United States In the mean time I would proceed with the draft of course; as it will be time enough to pause when the act is declared unconstitutional, an event which I do not think will ever take place— ²²

Iver Bernstein wrote: “During late July and the early weeks of August, Seymour tried to convince President Lincoln that the state’s draft quotas discriminated against Democratic counties, and that even if the quotas were adjusted, the draft measure was unconstitutional and unenforceable in New York City. In a bipartisan effort, Samuel Tilden and Edwin D. Morgan went to Washington to press Seymour’s arguments upon the President; if anyone could persuade Lincoln of the draft’s illegality, it was Tilden, the nervous but brilliantly articulate corporate lawyer. Lincoln rejected all Seymour’s appeals.”²³ Seymour also argued that the excess troops supplied by New York at the beginning of the war should be counted against current draft quotas. The New York Governor maintained that New York had not received sufficient credit for troops raised by former Governor Morgan.

Navy Secretary Welles reported in his diary of July 23: “I had a call on Monday morning from Senator Morgan and Sam J. Tilden of New York in relation to the draft. General [John] Cochrane was present during the interview and took part in it. The gentlemen seemed to believe a draft cannot be enforced in New York.”²⁴ The Daily News editorialized that ‘the masses must rely upon themselves and their State magistrates for protection. While the Judiciary remains firm and honest, and the Gubernatorial authority sustains the Judiciary, the 500,000 bayonets of despotism will not prevail. But there must be no wild exhibitions of passion, no rioting, no wasting of precious strength. Opposition to central tyranny will be most effective when conducted according to legal formula, and under the direction of the constituted State authorities….”²⁵

A day after Seymour sent his note to the President, former Senator Preston King wrote Mr. Lincoln: “I am requested by some very good men here to write to the President and protest against any abandonment or suspension of the draft — I have not supposed it would be abandoned or suspended— I regard it as essential to carry out the draft faithfully and impartially according to law even if every man called for may not be deemed absolutely necessary— Those who cheerfully go into the service under the draft have a right to expect equal and impartial justice at the hands of the Government — and the friends of the Government feel and say that it is better to have more men in the field than are absolutely required than not to have enough — There should be enough & margin enough to leave no doubt any where that there is enough— A full draft divides and lightens the burden and the labors of those who go and makes early and complete success over the insurgents certain — It will not do for the Government to yeild [sic] the execution of the law and its own declared purpose to apprehension or threats of violence or to solicitations from any quarter— The Public confidence in the justice and impartiality of the Government and in its power and confidence in itself must be maintained[.] The call by the draft shows the Government estimate of the force that it wanted — and there should not be any diminution of that force by the action or consent of the Government. The interest felt in the condition of public affairs and the state of the Country is intense and the operations of the draft carry home the feeling and discussions to every household-²⁶

According to historian Stewart Mitchell, “Seymour, like many Americans before and since, rationalized his dislike of a law into a conviction that it was contrary to the Constitution. He believed the draft was inexpedient and her persuaded himself that it was illegal. When he wrote Lincoln on August 8, he expressed his regret at the President’s refusal to suspend the draft. New York, he pointed out, had never been delinquent in supplying soldiers for the armies of the Union; the state could and would fill up its regiments more easily without federal interference.”²⁷

“The Democrats advocated abandoning conscription and renewed resort to volunteering,” wrote historian Sidney David Brummer. “Democratic common councils and boards of supervisors showed a tendency to get around the law by appropriating money to pay the commutation fee of those drafted, on the ground that the three-hundred dollar clause was the part of the act obnoxious to the poorer classes who felt it to be partial and unjust, and that by purchasing such exemptions future disturbances would be averted. Of course, such a proceeding, since it would furnish no men for the army, was contrary to the intent of the law. New York City had a Republican-Unionist mayor, Opdyke; and he promptly vetoed an ordinance providing for such payments, which had been introduced and adopted by the Common Council during the outbreak. Opdyke rightly declared that the measure was ‘calculated to nullify the law against which riotous resistance was made’ and that it was ‘a price offered to a lawless mob to desist from further assaults upon the lives and property of our citizens.'”²⁸

In a letter on July 30 General John A. Dix informed Governor Seymour of his decision to resume the draft in the near future. Seymour replied by promising a protest to President Lincoln. “Seymour saw no reason for a draft in New York, for according to his figures the state had a surplus of men to her credit. If the war department is to be believed, there was, in fact, a shortage. The scrambling for and the squabbling over manpower among the several states only added to Lincoln’s burden during the next eighteen months,” wrote Seymour biographer Stewart Mitchell.²⁹

On August 1, President Lincoln had already anticipated a letter from Seymour: “By what day may I expect your communication to reach me? Are you anxious about any part, except the City & vicinity?”³⁰ On August 3, Seymour telegraphed President Lincoln: “My letter will reach you on Wednesday— I wish all drafts delayed, particularly in New York & Brooklyn— ³¹ In his letter of August 3, Seymour complained that New York’s draft quotas were “glaringly unjust.” and suggested that constitutionality of the draft should be tested in the courts. He wrote: “I ask that the draft may be suspended in this State, as has been done elsewhere, until we shall learn the results of recruiting which is now actively going on.”³² The full text of Seymour’s letter was a long and complex explanation of past recruiting efforts:

At my request a number of persons have called upon you with respect to the draft in this State; more particularly as it affected the Cities of New York and Brooklyn. To avoid misapprehension I deem it proper to state my views and wishes in writing.

As the draft was one of the causes of the late riot in the City of New York and as that outbreak has been urged by some as a reason for its immediate execution in that City, it is proper that I should speak of that event. At the moment when the militia of the City were absent, in pursuance of your request, and when the forces of the General Government were withdrawn from its fortifications, leaving it defenceless against any attack from abroad or from riot within its limits, the Provost Marshal commenced the draft without consultation with the authorities of the State or of the City.

The harsh measure of raising troops by cumpulsion [sic] has heretofore been avoided by this Government, and is now resorted to from the belief, on its part, that it is necessary for the support of our arms. I know you will agree with me that justice and prudence alike demand that this lottery for life shall be conducted with the utmost fairness and openness, so that all may know that it is impartial and equal in its operations. It is the right of every citizen to be assured that in all public transactions there is strict impartiality. In a matter so deeply affecting the persons and happiness of our people this is called for by every consideration. I am happy to say that in many of the districts in this State the enrolled lists were publicly exhibited, the names were placed in the wheels from which they were to be drawn in the presence of men of different parties and of known integrity and the drawings were conducted in a manner to avoid suspicion of wrong. As the enrolments are made in many instances by persons unknown to the public, who are affected by their actions and who have no voice in their selection, care should be taken to prove the correctness of every step. Unfortunately this was not done in the district of New York where the drawing commenced. The excitement caused by this unexpected draft led to an unjustifiable attack upon the enrolling officers, which ultimately grew into the most destructive riot known in the history of our country. Disregard for law and the disrespect for judicial tribunals produced their natural results of robbery and arson, accompanied by murderous outrages upon a helpless race; and for a time the very existence of the commercial metropolis of our country was threatened. In the sad and humiliating history of this event it is gratifying that the citizens of New York, without material aid from the State or Nation, were able, of themselves to put down this dangerous insurrection. I do not underrate the value of the services rendered by the military or naval officers of the General Government, who were stationed in that City; for the public are under great and lasting obligations to them for their courage, their skill and their wise and prudent counsels. But they had at their command only a handful of Government troops, who alone were entirely unequal to the duty of defending the vast amount of National property which was endangered. The rioters were subdued by the exertions of the City Officials, civil and military, the people, the police and a small body, of only twelve hundred men, composed equally of the State and National forces, who availed themselves of the able advice and direction of the distinguished military men to whom I have alluded. It gives me a gratifying assurance of the ability of the greatest City of our continent to maintain order in its midst, under circumstances so disadvantageous, against an uprising so unexpected and having its origin in questions deeply exciting to the minds of the great masses of its population. The return from the war of some of the New York militia regiments restored peace and security to the City. I ordered troops from different parts of our State, but I could not get them to the City before the riot was quelled. Neither could the General Government give any substantial aid. It could not even man its own forts, nor had it the means to protect its own arsenals and navy yards against any of the vessels which at that time were engaged in burning the ships of our merchants almost within sight of our coast. For a time these very fortifications were the chief danger to the harbor of New York. One thousand men could have seized them all and have used their armaments for the destruction, of its shipping and of the City itself. At the time that this riot took place, I was engaged with Senator [Edwin D.[ Morgan and Comptroller Robinson, of this State, on the subject of harbor defences. I placed under the direction of General [John E.] Wool the unorganized bodies of National volunteers still under my command and I also ordered bodies of the militia from the interior of New York into fortifications, to be under his control; and I made arrangements with him for their reception: but on the twelfth instant, the day before the riot broke out, I was requested by General Wool to countermand my orders directing the militia to proceed to the harbor of New York. The reason for this, I understand, is that the rules of the service or the laws of the United States do not permit the War Department to accept of the services of troops for special or qualified purposes. The inability of the Government, at that moment, to defend its forts and public property or to give any substantial assistance in putting down a riot while the militia of the City were supporting the National cause, in another field, will best be shown by the following letter, which was communicated to my associates Messr: Morgan and Robinson and to myself the week before these outrages occured [sic]:
“Headquarters, Department of the East
New York City June 30. 1863
His Excellency, Horatio Seymour
Governor of the State of New York
Sir:
Allow me to call your attention to the defenceless condition of this City. I have only 550 men to garrison eight forts. One half of these cannot be called artillerists, being very imperfectly instructed in any part of artillery duty. The “Roanoake” is ordered to proceed to Hampton Roads, leaving no vessel of War in the harbor or at the dépt, that could be available in less than ten days. The militia of this City and Brooklyn have either been, or are being sent to protect and defend Pennsylvania, who is now paying dear for her neglecting to take care of herself by guarding her frontier. Is it wise for New York to follow her example by neglecting to protect the City of New York, the great emporium of the country, and of more importance at the present moment to the government, than all other cities under its control? If I had a sufficient number of men to man our guns, I might protect the City from ordinary ships of war, but not from iron clad steamers. In our present condition, from want of men to man our guns, the “Alabama” or any other vessel of her class, might without fear of injury enter our harbor, and in a few hours destroy one hundred millions of property.

I have done all in my power to guard against the present condition of the city, but I have thus far been unsuccessful. I have called the attention of the mayor, as well as others, again and again, to the defenceless condition of the City. The mayor can do but little from the fact that the militia have been ordered to defend Pennsylvania. We ought to have one or two iron clad steamers and several gun boats to guard the harbor. These, with men to man the guns of our forts, would be sufficient to protect & defend the City.

The company of Artillery, raised for the forts in this harbor, which I requested your Excellency to turn over to me, has been sent to Pennsylvania. The condition of the City is an invitation to rebels to make the effort to assail it.

I have the honor to be,
Very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
signed John E. Wool
Major General.

While this deplorable riot has brought disgrace upon the great City in which it occurred, it is due to the character of its population to say that they were able to put it down without aid from any other quarter; to save their City; and to rescue their own and the Government property from the violence of a mob, at a critical moment, when they had sent their armed men to save the National Capital from falling into the hands of hostile arms. For this patriotic service they have already received your thanks and the gratitude of the Nation. However much we may denounce and deplore the violence of bad or misguided men, it would be alike unjust and ungrateful to urge the execution of the draft in any spirit of resentment, or to show any unwillingness to see that the most exact justice is observed in the execution of the measure and in fixing the amount of the quotas. I am sure that you will unite with me in repelling any counsels suggested by excited passions or partisan prejudices. For you have on more than one occasion warmly acknowledged the generous and patriotic promptitude with which the City of New York has responded to calls made upon it by you in moments of sudden peril.

The act of Congress providing for the conscription directs that, in determining the quotas of men to be furnished by each State, regard shall be had to the number of volunteers and militia furnished by them respectively, since the commencement of the present rebellion; and that they shall be so assigned as to equalize the number among the districts of the several States, allowing for those already furnished and for the time of their service. I believe that New York is the only Atlantic State save Rhode Island which has furnished her full quota heretofore and has also furnished a surplus which entitles here to a credit upon the present draft. But the statement made at the office of the Provost Marshal General at Washington, of the amount of this credit does not agree with that claimed at the office of the Adjutant General of this State. I do not doubt the impartiality of Colonel [James B.] Fry; and I believe that the differences of these statements can be reconciled if an opportunity is given to compare the records of the two officers. I ask that this may be done. After a careful examination I am satisfied that the quotas now demanded from the Congressional districts in New York and Kings County are glaringly unjust. Either the names enrolled in those districts greatly exceed the true numbers or the enrolments in other parts of the State are grossly deficient. The practical injustice will be the same in either case. If regard is had to the numbers heretofore sent from the several districts, the records of our State show that New York and Brooklyn have furnished more than their proportion. These records were carefully kept under the administration of Governor Morgan. If the quotas now fixed upon these Cities are proportioned to the numbers enrolled, they suffer double wrong; for they do not get a due credit for the past, and the enrolments are excessive as compared with other sections of the State. I send you tables which show these results; and I will also state here a few facts. The quota for the fourth Congressional district, with a population of 131.854 is 5.881: That fixed upon the fifteenth Congressional district with a population of 132.232 is only 2.260. The quota upon the last named district should exceed that of the City district, for the census return shows that there is a larger population of females and of aliens in the City of New York than in the country. If the comparison is made by the number of voters instead of the population, taking the last election, when the vote was very full, it will be seen that the call upon the City district is 5.881 upon a vote of 12.363, while upon the country district it is only 2.260, upon a vote of 23.165. In two adjoining districts in the City of Brooklyn the discrepancies are equally striking. In that represented by Mr. [Moses] Odell with a population of 132.242, the quota is 2.697: In the adjoining district, represented by Mr. [Marvin] Kalbfliesch, with a population of 151.951, it is 4.146. Yet the voters are in Mr. Odell’s district 16.421, and in that of Mr. Kalbfliesch 15.967. The draft, as at present proposed, will throw upon the Eastern portion of the State, comprising less than one third of the Congressional districts, more than one half of the burthens of the conscription. This is particularly unjust towards New York and Brooklyn, for they have not only furnished their free proportions heretofore, without counting the numbers they have given to the navy of the country, but they have been the recruiting grounds for other States; and constant complaints are now made that Agents from other States are now employed for that purpose within those cities and are hiring persons there to act as substitutes, thus reducing, still more, the number of persons who will be compelled to meet this undue demand which obliges them to leave their families and their homes and to peril their lives, if they are less fortunate than others in their ability to pay the sum fixed, as a commutation. I earnestly request that you will direct that the enrolling officers shall submit to the State authorities their lists, and that an opportunity shall be given to me — , as Governor of this State, and to other proper State officials, to look into the fairness of these proceedings. Justice to the enrolling officers, to the honor and dignity of the Government, to the People who are so deeply affected and to the public tranquility, demands that the suspicions, which are entertained, shall be removed if they are unfounded. It is just to add that the administration owes this, to itself, as these inequalities fall most heavily upon those districts which have been opposed to its political views. I am sure that this fact will strengthen your purpose to see that justice is done. The enrolments are only completed in about one half of the districts. The results were sent to me at intervals during the month of July; but were only recently received by me, in consequence of my absence, at the City of New York. I am confident you will agree with me that the public interest in every respect will be promoted by affording the fullest evidence of the faithfulness and impartiality with which the conscription is conducted. In the meanwhile large numbers are availing themselves of the bounties offered by the State and National Governments, and are voluntarily enlisting, thus mitigating the distress which a compulsory draft necessarily carries into the homes of our people. The State of New York offers liberal bounties to those who enlist.

I believe it will be found that the abandonment of voluntary enlistment for a forced conscription will prove to be unfortunate as a policy; that it will not secure either so many or so effective men, as that system which one year since gave to this Government the largest army ever raised within so short a space of time by the voluntary action of any people.

I do not propose to discuss, in this connection, the reasons why the People withhold the support heretofore so cheerfully rendered. Hereafter I shall make that the subject of another communication. But assuming it to be due to the exhaustion of the number of those able to bear arms, it would only prove how heavily this new demand falls upon the productive interests and labor of our country, and it makes another reason why the heavy burthens of the conscription should be tempered by every act calculated to remove suspicions and to ally excitement. Above all it should induce every effort to get voluntary enlistments, which fall less heavily upon the domestic happiness and business arrangements of our citizens.

I ask that the draft may be suspended in this State, as has been done elsewhere, until we shall learn the results of recruiting which is now actively going on throughout the State, and particularly in the City of New York. I am advised that large numbers are now volunteering. Whatever credit shall hereafter be allowed to this State, it is certain that there is a balance in its favor. It is but just that the delinquent States should make up their deficiency before New York, which has so freely and generously responded, to the calls of the Government, shall be refused the opportunity to continue its voluntary support of the armies of the Union.

There is another point which profoundly excites the public mind, which has been brought to your attention by persons from this and other States. Our People have been taught that laws must be upheld and respected at every cost and every sacrifice; that the conscription act, which demands their persons and perhaps their lives must be promptly obeyed, because it is a statute of our Government. To support the majesty of law a million of men have gone forth from Northern homes to the battle fields of the South; more than three hundred thousand have been laid in bloody graves or have perished in lingering disease. The guilt of the rebellion consists in raising an armed hand against Constitutional or legal obligations. The soldier who has given up his life, the capitalist who has contributed his treasure, the mechanic and the laborer who have paid to the tax gatherer the earnings of their toil have cheerfully made these sacrifices, because they saw, in the power of laws, not only obligations to obedience but protection to their rights, to their persons and to their homes. It is this protection which alone gives value to Government. It is believed, by at least one half of the People of the loyal States, that the conscription act, which they are called upon to obey, because it stands upon the Statute book, is in itself a violation of the supreme Constitutional law. There is a fear and suspicion that while they are threatened with the severest penalties of the law, they are to be deprived of its protection. In the minds of the American People, the duty of obedience and the right to protection are inseparable. If it is therefore proposed, on the one hand, to exact obedience at the point of the bayonet, and upon the other hand, to shut off by military power, all approach to our judicial tribunals, and to deny redress for wrongs, we have reason to fear the most ruinous results. These disasters may be produced as well by bringing laws into contempt, and by a destruction of respect for the decisions of courts as by open resistance. This Government and our People have more to fear from an acquiescence in the disorganizing teachings that war suspends their legal rights or destroys their legal remedy than they have to fear from resistance to the doctrine that measures can be enforced without regard to the decisions of judicial tribunals. The refusal of Governments to give protection excites citizens to disobedience— The successfull [sic] execution of the conscription act depends upon the settlement, by judicial tribunals, of its constitutionality. With such decisions in its favor, it will have a hold upon the public respect and deference which it now lacks. A refusal to submit it to this test will be regarded as evidence that it wants legality and binding force. A measure so unusual in the history of this country, which jars so harshly with those ideas of voluntary action, which have so long prevailed in this community, and which have been so conspicuous in the conduct of this war, should go forth with all the sanctions of every department of our Government, the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial. With such sanctions it would overcome the hostility which it naturally creates in the minds of a People conscious of their patriotism and jealous of their rights. I earnestly urge that the Government interpose no obstructions to the earliest practicable judicial decision upon this point. Our accustomed procedures give to our citizens the right to bring all questions affecting personal liberty or compulsory service, in a direct and summary manner, to the Judges and courts of the State or Nation. The decisions which would thus naturally be rendered within a brief period, and after full and ample discussion, would make such a current of judicial opinion as would satisfy the public mind that the act is either valid or void. The right of this Government to enforce military service in any other mode than that pointed out by the Constitution cannot be established by a violent enforcement of the Statute. It must be determined ultimately by the judiciary. It should be determined, in advance of any enforcement which must be destructive to so many lives. It would be a cruel mockery to withhold such decision until after the irremediable injury of its execution upon — those who are unable to pay the sum demanded in lieu of their persons. Those who are able to commute might have their remedy by recovery of the money paid in commutation.

No evils are to be feared if the law should be pronounced unconstitutional. The submission of this Government to the decisions of our courts would give it a new and stronger hold upon the public confidence; it would add new vigor to our system of Government; and it would call forth another exhibition of voluntary offerings, of men and treasure, to uphold an administration which should thus defend and respect the rights of the People. The spirit of lawlessness in our land would be rebuked; respect for legal obligations in our land would be invigorated; confidence in our government would be strengthened; the dissentions and jealousies at the North, which now, weaken our cause, would at once be healed up, and your voice would be potential in calling forth the power and force of a united people. By what willing strength has done in the past, you may foresee what willing and united strength may accomplish in the future. It cannot be said of New York, — I believe it cannot be said of any Northern State, — that if the conscription act be declared unconstitutional, the Nation is thereby abandoned to weakness and paralysis. Be assured such a fate can never befall a Government which represents the convictions of the People, which works with the spirit and provisions of the Constitution. It is no more possible, under such circumstances, that the Nation should be left in helplessness, than that the strong man’s army should refuse to obey his will. If this bill which stands upon the assumed right of Congress to pass such an act, shall fall to the ground, there is still left the undisputed authority to call forth the armed power of the Nation in the manner distinctly set forth in the Constitution of our country.

I do not dwell upon what I believe would be the consequence of a violent, harsh policy before the Constitutionality of the act is tested. You can scan the immediate future as well as I. The temper of the People today you can readily learn, by consulting, as I have done, with men of all political parties, and of every profession and occupation. The Nation’s strength is in the hearts of the People. Estrange them; divide them; and the foundations fail: the structure must perish.

I am confident you will feel that acquiescence in my requests will be but a small concession for our Government to make to our People; and particularly that it should assure itself and them of the accordance of its subordinate laws with the supreme law of the land. It will be but a little price to pay for the peace of the public mind; it will abate nothing from the dignity, nothing from the sovereignty of the Nation to show a just regard for the majesty of the laws and a paternal interest in the wishes and welfare of our citizens.³³

Seymour sent President Lincoln a third communication on August 7: “On Monday last I sent you a communication with respect to the conscription act.1 I also sent some tables shewing the injustice of the enrollment. Tomorrow I will send you more full and accurate statements which will place the errors if they are not shameless frauds in a more clear and striking light— I think I have information as to the manner the Law has been perverted which may enable Government to bring some of the enrolling officers to justice— However much I may differ from you in my views of the policy of your Administration and although I may unconsciously to myself be influenced by party prejudices I can never forget the honor of my country so far as to spare any effort to stop proceedings under the Draft in this State (and more particularly in the Cities of New York and Brooklyn) which I feel will bring disgrace not only upon your Administration but upon the American name.”³⁴ President Lincoln replied to Governor Seymour’s earlier correspondence the same day:

Your communication of the 3rd. Inst. has been received, and attentively considered.

I can not consent to suspend the draft in New-York, as you request, because, among other reasons, time is too important.

By the figures you send, which I presume are correct, the twelve Districts represented fall into classes of eight, and four respectively. The disparity of the quotas for the draft, in these two classes is certainly very striking, being the difference between an average of 2200 in one class, and 4864 in the other. Assuming that the Districts are equal, one to another, in entire population, as required by the plan on which they were made, this disparity is such as to require attention. Much of it, however, I suppose will be accounted for by the fact that so many more persons fit for soldiers, are in the city than are in the country, who have too recently arrived from other parts of the United States and from Europe to be either included in the Census of 1860, or to have voted in 1862. Still, making due allowance for this, I am yet unwilling to stand upon it as an entirely sufficient explanation of the great disparity.

I shall direct the draft to proceed in all the Districts, drawing however, at first, from each of the four Districts, towit: the second, fourth, sixth, and eighth, only 2200, being the average quota of the other class. After this drawing, these four Districts, and also the seventeenth and twenty-ninth, shall be carefully re-enrolled, and, if you please, agents of yours may witness every step of the process. Any deficiency which may appear by the new enrollment will be supplied by a special draft for that object, allowing due credit for volunteers who may be obtained from these Districts respectively, during the interval. And at all points, so far as consistent, with practical convenience, due credits will be given for volunteers; and your Excellency shall be notified of the time fixed for commencing a draft in each District.

I do not object to abide a decision of the United States Supreme Court, or of the judges thereof, on the constitutionality of the draft law. In fact, I should be willing to facilitate the obtaining of it; but I can not consent to lose the time while it is being obtained. We are contending with an enemy who, as I understand, drives every able bodied man he can reach, into his ranks, very much as a butcher drives bullocks into a slaughter-pen. No time is wasted, to argument is used. This produces an army which will soon turn upon our now victorious soldiers already in the field, if they shall not be sustained by recruits, as they should be. It produces an army with a rapidity not to be matched on our side, if we first waste time to re-experiment with the volunteer system, already deemed by congress, and palpably, in fact, so far exhausted, as to be inadequate; and then more time, to obtain a court decision, as to whether a law is constitutional, which requires a part of those not now in the service, to go to the aid of those who are already in it; and still more time, to determine with absolute certainty, that we get those, who are to go, in the precisely legal proportion, to those who are not to go.

My purpose to be, in my action, just and constitutional; and yet practical, in performing the important duty, with which I am charged, of maintaining the unity, and the free principles of one common country.³⁵

Gideon Welles recorded in his diary that night: “The President read to us a letter received from Horatio Seymour, Governor of New York, on the subject of the draft, which he asks may be postponed. The letter is a party, political document, filled with perverted statements, and apologizing for, and diverting attention from, his mob,” Gideon Welles wrote in his diary on August 7. The President also read his reply, which is manly, vigorous, and decisive. He did not permit himself to be drawn away on frivolous and remote issues, which was obviously the intent of Seymour.”³⁶

Historian Sidney David Brummer observed: “Seymour’s letters to the President constituted in some respects a more partisan performance than anything of which complaint was made; and coming as they did when the riot was barely suppressed, they deserve severe condemnation. It might be thought that the sincerity of the Governor and the great pressure upon him from a certain element of the Democratic party and press to ward off in some manner the draft should excuse him from this judgment. A letter, however, written by him to Tilden, under date of August 6th, affords a key to his actions. He recognizes therein that forcible resistance would aid rather than embarrass the national government. But he thinks that ‘the conscription will make the administration odious and contemptible.” He states that he has just sent to the President a communication objecting to the draft, and adds regarding this letter, “It will do no good, except making up a record.” This, then, was the aim of Seymour’s lengthy correspondence with Lincoln — to make a record.”³⁷

Brummer wrote: “The Governor’s main contentions were: first, that the quota allotted to New York State should be reduced by about forty-two thousand because of excess troops furnished on previous calls; second, that within the State the quotas assigned to the different congressional districts were disproportionate, that the inequalities were partisan, to the disadvantage of democratic districts, and that the cities of New York and Brooklyn, far from being deficient in previous calls, had furnished more than their share; third, that in the cities, where the Democratic party was the stronger, men had been enrolled more than once; fourth, that the execution of the law providing for a draft should be postponed until a judicial decision as to its constitutionality could be obtained; and fifth, that the volunteer system should again be relied upon since it furnished more troops than drafting.³⁸ Seymour’s response to President Lincoln came quickly:

I received your communication of the 7th instant this morning. While I recognize the concessions you have made I regret your refusal to comply with my request to have the draft in this State suspended until it can be ascertained if the enrolments are made in accordance with the laws of Congress or with principles of justice. I know that our army needs recruits and for this among other reasons I regret a decision which stands in the way of a prompt and cheerful movement to fill up the thinned ranks of our regiments. New York has never paused in its efforts to send volunteers to the assistance of our gallant soldiers in the field. It has not only met every call heretofore made, while every other Atlantic and each New England State save Rhode Island was delinquent but it continued liberal bounties to volunteers when all efforts were suspended in many other quarters. Active exertions are now made to organize new and to fill up old regiments. These exertions would be more successful if the draft was suspended and much better men than reluctant conscripts would join our armies.

On the 7th instant I advised you by letter that I would furnish the strongest proofs of injustice if not of fraud in the enrolments of certain districts I now send you a full report made to me by Judge Advocate General Waterbury. I am confident when you have read it you will agree with me that the honor of the Nation and of your administration demands that the abuses it points out should be corrected and punished. You say that “we are contending with an enemy who as you understand drives every able bodied man he can reach into his ranks very much as a butcher drives bullocks into a slaughter pen”. You will agree with me that even this if impartially done to all classes is more tolerable than any scheme which shall fraudulently force a portion of the community into military service by a dishonest perversion of law. You will see by the report of Mr Waterbury that there is no theory which can explain or justify the enrolments in this state. I wish to call your attention to the tables on pages five, six, seven and eight which show that in the nine Congressional districts on Manhatten [sic], Long and Staten Islands the number of conscripts called for is 33,729 while in nineteen other district the number of conscripts called for is only 39,626! This draft is to be made upon the first class upon those between the ages of twenty and thirty five. It appears by the census of 1860 that in the first nine Congressional districts there are 164,797 males between twenty and thirty five. They are called upon for 33,729 conscripts. In the other nineteen districts with a population of males between twenty and thirty five of 270,786 only 39,626 conscripts are demanded. Again to show the partisan character of the enrolment you will find on the 20th page of Mr Waterbury’s report that in the first nine Congressional districts the total vote of 1860 was 151,243, The number of conscripts now demanded is 33,729. In the nineteen districts the total vote was 457,257, Yet these districts are called upon to furnish only 39,626 drafted men. Each of the nine districts gave majorities in favor of one political party. Each of the nineteen districts gave majorities in favor of the other party. You can not and will not fail to right these gross wrongs.³⁹

President Lincoln had little choice but to press the draft despite Seymour’s objections. “Of course Lincoln didn’t want any more mob outbreaks — it was terrible, he said, for working people to maul and murder other working people as they had in New York City.” biographer Stephen B. Oates wrote. However, the “Union need men to preserve its military successes and see this war through to victory; therefore the draft must continue in New York and everywhere else. And if he had to, Lincoln would enforce it with federal troops and state militia.”⁴⁰ Lincoln biographer David Donald’s wrote:, “In the showdown, the governor, not the President, blinked.”⁴¹ President Lincoln responded to Governor Seymour’s complaints in a letter sent on August 11:

Yours of the 8th with Judge Advocate General [Nelson] Waterbury’s report, was received to day. Asking you to remember that I consider time as being very important, both to the general cause of the country, and to the soldiers already in the field, I beg to remind you that I waited, at your request, from the 1st till the 6th Inst to receive your communication dated the 3rd. In view of it’s great length, and the known time, and apparent care, taken in it’s preparation, I did not doubt that it contained your full case as you desired to present it. It contained figures for twelve Districts, omitting the other nineteen, as I supposed, because you found nothing to complain of, as to them. I answered accordingly. In doing so, I laid down the principle to which I purpose adhering — which is, to proceed with the draft, at the same time employing infallible means to avoid any great wrongs. In with the communication received to day, you send figures for twentyeight Districts, including the twelve sent before, and still omitting three, from which I suppose the enrolments are not yet received. In looking over this fuller list of twentyeight Districts, I find that the quotas for sixteen of them are above 2000 and below 2700, while, of the rest, six are above 2700 and six are below 2000— Applying the principle to these new facts, the 5th and 7th Districts must be added to the four in which the quotas have already been reduced to 2200 for the first draft; and, with them, four others must be added to those to be re enrolled-

The corrected case will then stand:

The quotas of the 2nd 4th 5th 6th 7th & 8th Districts fixed at 2200. for the first draft

The Provost Marshal General informs me that the drawing is already completed in 16th 17th 18th 22nd 24th 26th 27thth 29th & 30th Districts-

In the others, except the three outstanding, the drawing will be made upon the quotas as now fixed-

After the first draft, the 2nd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 16th 17th 21st 25th 29th & 31st Districts will be re enrolled for the purpose, and in the manner stated in my letter of the 7th Inst The same principle will be applied to the now outstanding Districts when they shall come in— No part of my former letter is repudiated, by reason of not being restated in this, or for any other cause.⁴²

Preparations for the draft continued despite Seymour’s protests. “Years after the protest to Lincoln, General Fry wrote that Governor Seymour’s real object in sending his [August 8]letter to the President was not to correct the enrollment or equalize the execution of the draft, but to obstruct and postpone any federal demand for troops in New York. According to Fry it was only because Lincoln was conscious of the governor’s real motive that he made an arbitrary reduction of the quotas in certain districts in New York — a curious defense of his act, indeed,” argued historian Stewart Mitchell.⁴³ Fry reported to Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton on August 12:

I telegraphed the Provost Marshal General this morning that there ought to be ten thousand troops in this City & Harbor when the draft is resumed, and that with such a force it may be commenced on Monday. This force is the smallest estimated by any one as necessary to hold the forts, provide for the safety of the public property in the City and overawe resistance to the draft. Although Genl [Edward R. S.] Canby has 5000 men they are much scattered & not more than 2000 would be available for service in the City.

The interests the government has in this City, independently of the importance of preventing any open opposition to its authority, are too great to be put at hazard by want of adequate preparation; and I am constrained to believe that the whole moral influence of the Executive power of the State will be thrown against the execution of the law for enrolling and calling out the National forces, and a case may occur, in which the military power of the State will be employed to defeat it. If this case arises, or is likely to arise, I shall promptly declare martial law & suspend the civil authority.

In connexion with this subject it becomes of the gravest importance to consider the extent of the Presidents authority over the militia of this city and state. By the first section of the act of 29 July, 1861, Chap 25, the President is authorized to call forth the Militia of any or all the states whenever by reason of unlawful obstructions, combinations, &c, it is impracticable in his judgment to enforce the laws, &c. This and Sec. 2nd of the same act are substitutes for Secs 2 & 3, of the Act of Feb 28. 1795. Chap, 36. The Supreme Court of the U. S. 12 Wheaton, Martin v. Mott held that “the authority to decide whether the exigency has arisen belongs exclusively to the President and that his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.” Though not in the order of dates, I begin with this interpretation because it is applicable to all the cases that can arise for the exercise of the Presidents power under the acts authorizing him to call forth the militia.

In view of the difficulties existing here there is another question of pre eminent importance. Has the President authority to address his orders to particular officers of the militia to call out the troops under their command without a requisition upon the Governor of the State? or, to suppose a case for the exercise of the power — Can the President order Major General [Charles W.] Sanford to call out his command to resist unlawful obstructions to the execution of the act for enrolling & calling out the national forces? In the case of Houston v. Moore, 5th Wheaton, the Supreme Court of the U. S. by Mr Justice Washington said: “The Presidents orders may be given to the Chief Executive Magistrate of the State or to any militia officer he may think proper” This power is expressly given in the first section of the Act in cases of invasion or danger of invasion. The Court considered it applicable to the cases of insurrection & obstructions to the execution of the laws. It held that ” the Act of the 2d May 1792, which is re enacted almost verbatim by that of the 28 Feby, 1795, authorizes the President of the U. S. in case of invasion, or of imminent danger of it, or when it may be necessary, for executing the laws of the United States or to suppress insurrection, to call forth such numbers of the militia of the States, most convenient to the scene of action, as he may judge necessary, and to issue his orders for that purpose to such officers of the militia as he shall think proper.”

If I find it necessary to declare Martial law I may also find it necessary to ask the President to call Genl Sanford’s division into the service of the United States and to address the order directly to him. It may be the more important as intimations have been thrown out by persons officially connected with Governor Seymour that the Militia of the City may be used to protect its citizens against the draft in certain contingencies; and it is quite possible that such a contingency may arise in the progress of judicial proceedings instituted to release individuals from the operation of the act for enrolling & calling forth the militia.

That there is a wide spread disaffection in this city and that it has been greatly increased by Govr Seymour’s letters can not be doubted; and, in view of the disastrous effects at home and abroad of a successful resistance to the authority of the United States, I renew the request contained in my despatch of this morning to Col Fry, that five thousand more troops may be sent here. With this preparation I feel confident that rioters, as well as the more dangerous enemies of the public order — those who sympathize with the seceded States or are so embittered by party prejudice as to lose sight of their duty to the government and the Union — will be over awed, that the draft will be completed without serious disturbance, and the public authority effectually maintained.⁴⁴

President Lincoln was determined to enforce the draft and evidently prepared for trouble. He prepared a draft proclamation of martial law for New York:

Whereas, in the judgment of the President, it is necessary to use the Military force in the State of New York in order to suppress existing unlawful combinations against the enforcement of the laws of the United States.

Therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby command all persons acting against the enforcement of said laws, to disperse and return peaceably to their respective abodes, by and before … o’clock … M of this day.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington this … day of August in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty three and of the Independence of the United States of America the eighty eighty.⁴⁵

Meanwhile, President Lincoln responded to a request from Governor Seymour that volunteers hereafter recruited & mustered into the service of the United States shall be accepted as substitutes for such conscripts residing in the same Congressional districts whether now drawn or hereafter drawn, as may be designated by the state authorities”⁴⁶ :

Your despatch of this morning is just received; and, I fear I do not perfectly understand it.

My view of the principle is, that every soldier obtained voluntarily, leaves one less to be obtained by draft. The only difficulty is, in applying the principle properly. Looking to time, as heretofore, I am unwilling to give up a drafted man now, even for the certainty, much less for the mere chance, of getting a volunteer, hereafter.

Again, after the draft in any District, would it not make trouble to take any drafted man out, and put a volunteer in; for how shall it be determined which drafted man is to have the privilege of thus going out, to the exclusion of all the others?

And even before the draft in any District, the quota must be fixed; and the draft might be postponed indefinitely, if every time a volunteer is offered, the officers must stop and reconstruct the quota. At least I fear there might be this difficulty; but, at all events, let credits for volunteers be given up to the last moment which will not produce confusion or delay,

That the principle of giving credits for volunteers shall be applied by Districts, seems fair and proper, though I do not know how far, by present statistics, it is practicable.

When, for any Cause, a fair Credit is not given at one time, it should be given as soon thereafter as practicable,

My purpose is, to be just and fair; and yet to not lose time⁴⁷

George Templeton Strong wrote in his diary on August 17: “It’s said the draft is begin next Wednesday. General Dix publishes a discreet and vigorous address to the people, recommending submission to the law on high grounds of morality and patriotism and suggesting that there is enough grapeshot on hand to dispose of all who undertake riot or rebellion.”⁴⁸ The draft actually resumed on August 19. The draft now “met covert instead of open resistance. Tammany, Tweed, A Oakey Hall, Fernando Wood and his brother Ben, J.P. Morgan, the World, the Express, the Day Book, the Mercury, many scurrying politicians, examining physicians, and fixers, lawyers did their work. Upward of $5,000,000 was appropriated by the municipality of New York for draft-evasion purposes,” wrote Lincoln biographer Carl Sandburg.⁴⁹ But such funds were vetoed by Mayor Opdyke. Historian Philip S. Paludan wrote: “Troops were stationed unobtrusively throughout the town, but people knew they were there. Tammany leaders stood nearby as names were drawn, implicitly endorsing the process. The proceedings went ‘quietly and orderly as a New England Sabbath,’ one soldier observed.”⁵⁰

On August 26, 1863, President Lincoln wrote a letter to be read at a meeting of Union supporters in Springfield, Illinois: “Peace does not appear so distant as it did. I hope it will come soon, and come to stay; and so come as to be worth the keeping in all future time. It will then have been proved that, among free men there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet, and they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case and pay the cost.”⁵¹ The same day, President Lincoln sent Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton detailed instructions on how to notify Seymour of future conscription requirements:

In my correspondence with Govr. Seymour in relation to the draft, I have said to him, substantially, that credits shall be given for volunteers up to the latest moment, before drawing in any district, that can be done without producing confusion or delay. In order to do this, let our mustering officers in New York, and elsewhere, be at once instructed that whenever they muster into our service any number of volunteers, to at once make return to the War Department, both by telegraph and mail, the date of the muster, the number mustered, and the Congressional or enrolment District, or Districts, of their residences, giving the number separately for each District. Keep these returns diligently posted, and by them give full credit on the quotas, if possible, on the last day before the draft begins in any District.⁵²

Historian Philip S. Paludan concluded: “Despite his sweeping rhetoric of June when he had warned of ‘the man who stands by and says nothing when the peril of his government is discussed,’ Lincoln rejected the pressure to react with mere iron. He did not declare martial law or suspend the writ. Rather than sending in ‘the Beast’ he appointed John A Dix to the city command was a Democrat with strong ties to party leaders and links with Tammany Hall, which had cautioned calm and opposed the rioters even while protesting the draft. Dix used soldiers discretely, letting local leaders such as Archbishop John Hughes subdue passions by appeals to decency mixed with empathy, and politicians began to raise money for commutation and substitutes so that city workers could avoid compulsory service.” Paludan added: “This federal restraint allowed New York City to work out its own compromises with the pressures of war.”⁵³

Historian Brummer noted: “Previous to the next draft, a circular of November, 1863, directed that the boards of enrolment display in at least five places in each district printed alphabetical lists of those enrolled, with their residences, and that any one on the lists might appear before a board upon to the 20th of December to show that on account of alienage, non-residence, age or disability he was not liable to military duty. If this circular seems to justify to some extent the complaints of Seymour, it likewise shows a disposition on the part of the Washington authorities to satisfy the Governor where practicable. The difficulty of avoiding double enrolment was show by the indifference of those most interested in having their names stricken from the rolls when an opportunity to do so was given. Seymour, apparently, never made the slightest use of Lincoln’s offer that the Governor’s agents might witness every step in the process of making another enrolment in the disputed districts.”⁵⁴

When Governor Seymour next gave his annual message to the State Legislature in January 1864, he said: “If soldiers are to be raised by coercion…in a little time the mass of our armies will be made up of conscripts….[This] will tell directly upon the policy of the Government, as by the laws of several States they [the soldiers are invited to vote in local and general elections in distant fields, in ways adapted to their organized and military condition there. A new influence, acting in an unusual form, is thus created in the conduct of affairs….While the President, as Commander-in-Chief controls the army, the unanimous political action of the army will make the President.”⁵⁵

Footnotes

Joel Tyler Headley, The Great Riots of New York City, p. 145.
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 323.
George Fort Milton, Abraham Lincoln and the Fifth Column, p. 148.
Augustus Maverick, Henry J. Raymond and the New York Press for Thirty Years, p. 166.
Stewart Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York, p. 308.
Harry Houston Peckham, Gotham Yankee: A Biography of William Cullen Bryant, p. 154.
Curtiss S. Johnson, Politics and A Belly-full: The Journalist Career of William Cullen Bryant, p. 121.
Elmer Davis, History of The New York Times, 1851-1921, p. 60.
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 323.
William B. Hesseltine, Lincoln and the War Governors, p. 299.
Stewart Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York, p. 305.
Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Volume I, p. 373 (July 15, 1863).
James Harrison Wilson, The Life of Charles A. Dana, p. 249-250.
Allan Nevins, editor, Diary of the Civil War, 1860-1865: George Templeton Strong, p. 345 (July 27, 1863).
William O. Stoddard, Lincoln’s Third Secretary, p. 186-187.
Philip S. Paludan, The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln, p. 213-214.
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 333.
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from James R. Gilmore to Abraham Lincoln, July 17, 1863).
Carl Sandburg, Abraham Lincoln: The War Years, Volume III, p. 368.
Don E. and Virginia Fehrenbacher, editor, Recollected Words of Abraham Lincoln, p. 175 (from James R. Gilmore , Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War, p. 199).
Philip S. Paludan, The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln, p. 213.
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln [With Endorsement by Lincoln], July 19, 1863).
Stewart Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York, p. 344 (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Samuel Tilden, August 6, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from David D. Field to Abraham Lincoln, July 19, 1863).
Iver Bernstein, The New York City Draft Riots, p. 63.
Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Volume I, p. 380 (July 23, 1863).
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 324 (New York Daily News, August 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Preston King to Abraham Lincoln, July 29, 1863).
Stewart Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York, p. 345.
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 325-326.
Stewart Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York, p. 341.
Roy P. Basler, editor, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume VI, p. 361 (Letter to Horatio Seymour, August 1, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln, August 3, 1863).
Roy P. Basler, editor, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume VII, p. 370 (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln, August 3, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln, August 3, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln, August 7, 1863).
Roy P. Basler, editor, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume VII, p. 369-370 (Letter to Horatio Seymour, August 7, 1863).
Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Volume I, p. 395 (August 7, 1864).
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 329-330.
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 330.
Stephen B. Oates, With Malice Toward None, p. 358.
David Donald, Lincoln, p. 450.
Stewart Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York, p. 343 (See James B. Fry, LNew York and Conscription, pp. 35-36).
Allan Nevins, editor, Diary of the Civil War, 1860-1865: George Templeton Strong, p. 348 (August 17, 1863).
Carl Sandburg, Abraham Lincoln: The War Years, Volume III, p. 377.
Philip S. Paludan, The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln, p. 214.
Roy P. Basler, editor, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume VII, p. 410 (Letter to James C. Conkling, August 26, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln, August 8, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Abraham Lincoln to Horatio Seymour , August 11, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from John A. Dix to Edwin M. Stanton , August 12, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Abraham Lincoln, Proclamation, August 15, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Horatio Seymour to Abraham Lincoln , August 16, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Abraham Lincoln to Horatio Seymour, August 16, 1863).
Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress. Transcribed and Annotated by the Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College. Galesburg, Illinois. (Letter from Abraham Lincoln to Edwin M. Stanton, August 26, 1863).
Sidney David Brummer, Political History of New York State During the Period of the Civil War, p. 356.

Visit

John A. Dix
John A. Dix (Mr. Lincoln’s White House)
James Jacquess (Mr. Lincoln and Friends)
George Opdyke
Horatio Seymour
Gideon Welles (Mr. Lincoln’s White House)
Fernando Wood

New York Politics

Response to Riots