1996 Abstracts
Jim Bis, Ohio State University, “Samuel Medary and the Crisis: The Right to Dissent”
The Democratic party of Ohio was as divided as the rest of the nation on the eve of the War Between the States. The Democrats split into ttceeds the maximum allowable number of NOTs (10).[Data file ehree factions, consisting of the the war Democrats, who supported the war to save the Union and but not abolition or non-military policies of the Lincoln administration, the Unionist-Democrats who deserted the party to support the administration in all of its policies, and the peace Democrats or “Copperheads” who branded the war a failure, demanded an armistice, and berated the Lincoln administration for its abuses of civil liberties. It was the last group, the peace Democrats who gave Lincoln the most difficulty during the war, and as a result of their opposition the peace Democrats were often accused of obstructionism and treason. By the summer of 1863, they nevertheless had considerable influence in Ohio. One reason for their strength was the work of Samuel Medary, widely admired as the “Wheelhorse of the Ohio Democracy,” and the editor of the Crisis.
Medary had been a distinguished career as stalwart member of the party of Andrew Jackson. He published a number of papers in the state before the war and each one was a Democratic party organ. Medary held patronage positions in Democratic administrations before his founding of the Crisis in Columbus, Ohio, in January of 1861. In the years before the war he supported the Kansas-Nebra Act, and ska Act, and at the National Democratic convention in 1856 he worked for the nomination of Stephen A. Douglas. President Buchanan appointed him governor of Minnesota Territory (1857-1858) and of the Kansas Territory during the upheavals of 18heavals of 1858-1860, where he allied himself with the pro-slavery faction. In December of 1860 he returned to Columbus where he published the first issue of the Crisis on January 31, 1861.
The Crisis was a “scissors and paste pot” compilation of peace Democrat papers across the nation. Medary wrote few articles, but he did editorialize on a regular basis. He outlined his opposition to the war on three assumptions. First, the war would not achieve its aims by armed force because the nation bases it s policies on public opinion and persuasion. Second, it would create a national debt and bring misery on the Northern people. Finally, the war would probably result in perpetual armed struggle.
Medary caused much rancor and controversy much rancor and controversy in not only Columbus and Ohio, but in much of the middle west. He was not above race baiting and often his statements in regard to Union policy bordered on what many viewed as treason. He was arrested and scheduled for trial at the time of his death in November, 7 1861.
I will attempt to build on Reed Smith’s recent biography of Medary, Samuel Medary and the Crisis : Testing the Limits of Press Freedom (Columbus, 1995). The primary source materials used in the researce materials used in the research are the Samuel Medary and Clement Vallandigham Papers located as the Ohio Historical Society and a bound volume of the Crisis.