The herald., 1897-10-17
written for The Herald.)

about what was said and, done at the
Hampton Road conference has created
no little interest in the minds of TWO
classes Of persons. First, those who de-
sire posterity to read history as 1t ac-
tually occurred, without addition or
diminution, and. second, those who
seemingly delight in keeping alive the
scenes and animosities of a struggle
that ought to be forgotten. Whether
President Lincoln, or anyone else, pro-
posed at the Hampton Road conference,
or anywhere else, to remunerate the
south for the liberation of the slave pop
ulation, is matter, at this day, of no
practical Importance. 1t Is merely in
teresting as historical fact, if it be a
fact. and, only valuable as an instrument
to fan the fires of sectional prejudice, or
to tickle the fancies or quicken the men,
ories Of an annual assemblage of scar
covered and battle-seamed veterans,
who will soon follow the cause they
loved SO well, to where it was consigned
with the honors of war.
On the 9th day of April 1865, at Apo
mattox C. H., the army of General
Lee surrendered to General Grant under
remarkably liberal terms of capitula
ton. This took place sixtysix days at
ter the celebrated Hampton Road Con-
ference" in which President Lincoln
and Secretary Seward. represented the
north while the south was represented
by Mr.. Stephens, Mr.. Hunter and Judge
Campbell.
1t is a matter of history, about which
there is no controversy, that the Hamp-
ton Road conference, which took place
on the Sd day of February, 1865, lasting
about four hours, was attended with no
practical results, F. P. Blair, ST., desir-
ing, doubtless, the blessing vouchsafed
to the peacemaker, conceived the idea
of bringing representative men of both
sections Of the country together, to dis
cuss the possibilities and measures for
arresting the further effusion of blood,
and to restore peace and the union
1t was laudable movement. but the
conception would have merited, greater
praise and been productive of
results Of happy character had
it occurred earlier In the war.
and before the confederate states
were in articulo mortis At the very
time Of the meeting of this conference,
nothing short Of the direct interpostion
of providence could have averted the
doom Of the confederacy. 1t was as
ial walls of Belshazzar. Mr.. Stephens
saw it, and upon his return from the
"conference' he invited Mr.. Garland
to go home with him. saying that the
end was nigh at hand, 1t did come IN
sixty-sx days, and the south lost an
opportunity.
At the outset Of this conference 1t was
apparent that it would be barren of re-
suits. because 1t was handicapped with
instructions that precluded all posi-
billty of agreement.
First-The federal representatives de-
manded that the south lay down their
arms and. return to their former allegi
ance. and then the terms and conditions
of peace were to be discussed. The idea
uppermost in the minds of Lincoln and
Seward was the preservation of the
union at any hazard and at any cost.
AS an inducement, and as far as they
were concerned they were ready and
willing to advocate, eventual compensa-
tory emancipation of the slaves. The
idea Of paying for the slaves was pro-
mulgated in the south long before the
war, but it was hazardous to talk it'
in the south. There was, at the time of
the conference. nothing to lose, but a
possibility of saving hundreds of mil
lions of dollars, which imbecility and
obstnacy lost.
Second-The confederate representa-
tives were instructed to treat for peace
upon the basis of the autonomy of the
"confederate states." which involved a
recognition of their political status AND
their independence. The north could
not but refuse this coed and the
south would rot accept the federal offer.
and consequently the conference was a
failure.
These are historical facts, about which
there is no dispute among farmin 6ed
men. But, at this late day, there seems
to be question connected with the
Hampton road conference which calm
and dispassionate advocates of the truth
of history desire to be settled. Every
now and then aspiring politicians. who
are reluctant to remember that the war
ended thirty odd years ago, and that
this is happy, prosperous and reunited
country, are seemingly er,deavoring to
besmirch the pages of history, either for
Ulterior purposes or through an isnor-
ance Of facts.
Precisely why, at the confederate re-
union held, in Nashville, Tenn. Ju6,ge
Reagan, in a public address before that
body should see proper to revive what
trawspired at the Hampton road, con-
ference, and after all the actors engaged
therein, have passed away. without tes-
tifying or protesting, Is beyond the COM
prehension of reasonable men What
good purpose was there to suhserve? L?
1t has given rise to a controversy that
can produce, nothing of beeaafit to the
country or posterity, and as to the de-
tails of this short, informal meeting,
either side may be honestly mistaken as
to what was actually saits and done in
so brief and exciting a period. Ali are
agreed that the conference accomplished,
eDthing Now, what was really said?
That is the question! IfJudge Rsagan's
version is true. what good to the country
or TO himself? He was neither mem-
ber nor present at the meeting. What
he says was derived from others. If
Colone, Watterson is correct, what harm
to a cause that was lost when the al
legged proposition was presented and
Ignored?
In the absence of positive evidshce,
-'s must have recourse to such circum-
stances as are calculated to throw light
upon the subject, with reasonable GER
tainty, and to current history and COM
mon report accepted as true, and not
denied at the time promulgated.
Hon. A. X. Mcclure of Philadelphia.
dfCt FV7r t-l,1 =