The Peninsula Campaign and Emancipation

I recently finished reading Glenn David Brasher’s new study of 1862′s Peninsula Campaign for a book review that will appear in The Register of the Kentucky Historical Society. It is entitled, The Peninsula Campaign & the Necessity of Emancipation: African Americans & the Fight for Freedom (UNC Press, 2012). It is a terrific book and one I hope will receive much deserved critical praise and awards. If your book budget is tight like mine, Brasher’s book is well worth making a priority buy.

So why am I singing the praises of this book? First, because it combines the best of traditional military history with the newer social history of the Civil War. Brasher studies one of the pivotal campaigns of the American Civil War, George McClellan’s unsuccessful effort to flank Richmond’s main defenses by making an amphibious landing south of the city on the peninsula between the James and York rivers. The story of the failed Peninsula Campaign is well known, so I will not repeat it here yet again. What sets apart Glenn David Brasher’s study is how he restores African Americans to their central place in the history of the campaign, as a logistical force multiplier for both armies, and makes a case for how Union defeat on the Peninsula proved pivotal in shifting public opinion in the North in favor of emancipation. As he writes, “The contributions that African Americans had made to both armies, coupled with the failure of McClellan’s Peninsula Campaign, played a role in turning many Northerners in favor of emancipation” (191).

Just as important is Brasher’s trenchant analysis of contemporary accounts of African Americans fighting for the Confederacy during the Peninsula Campaign. As a responsible scholar, he does not accept the fantasy promoted by modern neo-Confederates that tens or even hundreds of thousands of African Americans fought as soldiers for the Confederacy. But wisely, neither does he reject these stories outright. I too have come across them in other contexts early in the Civil War, particularly in the aftermath of First Bull Run, and have written about them extensively in this blog (see July 27, July 28, August 1, and August 17 of 2011).

Indeed, one of the most useful contributions of The Peninsula Campaign & the Necessity of Emancipation is the intelligent and insightful analysis that Brasher makes about the stories at the time of armed blacks in Confederate service, placing them in the larger context of the debate over emancipation in the North during the spring and summer of 1862. His basic point here, in a nutshell, is while some armed black men probably were scattered across the Confederate forces on the Peninsula and probably fired their weapons against Union forces, their numbers were quite small, as the Confederate government at the time and until the last days of the war rejected arming slaves or even free blacks. But their existence or stories of their existence was used and exaggerated by supporters of immediate abolition and enlisting black men in the Union army. It was in abolitionists’ interest to maximize the perceived value of African Americans to the Confederacy, Brasher argues credibly, to convince white Northerners that they should have African Americans as soldiers in the Union army and free them and other people of their race without delay. He writes:

Obviously there were exaggerations and fabrications in these accounts, but the evidence does suggest that early in the war at least some blacks were observed fighting in Confederate ranks. Most were probably body servants, and while some may have been caught up in the thrill of combat, it is more likely that they were forced into service, deceived by their masters’ tales of the designs of the evil Yankees, or motivated by a desire to demonstrate their loyalty to their owners when it was unclear who would win the war (53).

An important reason Glenn David Brasher’s interpretation in this regard is credible is that it makes sense of Frederick Douglass’ heretofore puzzling comment in Douglass’ Monthly in September 1861, accepting black Confederate soldiers as an established fact. Evidently, Douglass was inclined to believe these accounts because they bolstered his argument in favor of enlisting African Americans in the Union Army and immediate emancipation. According to Brasher, it was an argument that Douglass and other abolitionists would make and continue to make until the Lincoln administration finally embraced emancipation and African Americans as soldiers.

Still, The Peninsula Campaign & the Necessity of Emancipation is not without blemish. Brasher takes his interpretation a little too far, arguing that had McClellan triumphed on the Peninsula in 1862 that emancipation likely would not have occurred. Clearly, Brasher accepts the idea that had Richmond fallen that year the Confederacy would have fallen with it, before enough white Northerners had accepted emancipation as a military necessity, allowing slavery to survive the war. This idea is flawed. While the Richmond’s fall in 1862 would have been a hard blow for the South, it is likely the Confederate government and army would have survived. Psychologically and logistically, in 1862, the Confederacy was not ready for defeat, and still had the will and means to continue to resist, even without Richmond. The city was not the Confederacy’s center-of-gravity. That belonged with the Confederate army and more broadly with the white population of the South. It would take three more years, and the hard war of Grant, Sherman, and other Union commanders to break the Confederacy.

So, Glenn David Brasher, like many scholars before him, tries to squeeze a little too much significance out of his argument, but this flaw does not diminish the overall highly insightful quality of The Peninsula Campaign & the Necessity of Emancipation.  I very much recommend it. Indeed, it is my present candidate thus far for best book of 2012 on the American Civil War (prize committees please take note).

Remembering Memorial Day

Happy Memorial Day from Civil War Emancipation.

Enjoy the holiday but please do not forget what it is about.

A Black Veteran’s Story

Charles Franklin Crosby

This being the Memorial Day weekend, it is a nice moment to share a small treasure from my research on black Civil War Veterans, done for my books, After the Glory: The Struggles of Black Civil War Veterans (2004) and (with Elizabeth Regosin) Voices of Emancipation: Understanding Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction through the U.S. Pension Bureau Files (2008).

The following is a deposition of Charles Franklin Crosby (pictured above) made in June 1914 in support of his claim for a Civil War pension. Crosby’s deposition is interesting both for his detailed account of his military service and colorful postwar life. Born a slave in Kentucky, by the outbreak of the Civil War, Charles Nunn, as he was then known, was enslaved on the Florida/Alabama border. He joined the Union Army in 1863, seeing combat, especially during the successful assault on Fort Blakely, Alabama, in April 1865. After the war, he worked as a cowboy in Texas, and then resided for many years in Mexico, marrying a Mexican women. To the detailed account of his life, particularly Crosby’s military service, we can thank his relatively late pension application, which combined with his name change (he took his father’s last name after the war–a common step of ex-slaves), prompted the U.S. Pension Bureau to put his case under “Special Examination.” Federal bureaucrats wanted to reassure themselves that Crosby really was a Civil War veteran. It also explains the photo, which was solicited from Crosby to circulate among verified comrades who had served with him, so they might provide a positive identification.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Deposition of Charles Franklin Crosby (see photograph on page xii), June 19, 1914, Civil War Pension File of Frank Nunn (alias Charles Franklin Crosby), 86th USCI, RG 15. (Also appearing on pp. 152-57 of Voices of Emancipation.)

I reckon I am about 67 years old. I do not know my age but that is as near as I can get at it. My address is Box 289, Eagle Pass, Texas. I am a laborer.

I served in the civil war in Cos. A & K, 86th La. Inf. as they called it in those days. I never served in any other company or regiment and was never in the navy.

I am claiming a pension on account of said service.

I was born in Kentucky as well as I remember. They told me I was born in Lexington, Ky. I was raised in Florida near Geneva, Ala. I enlisted in Barrancas, Fla. I was a slave. My owner was Eli Nunn. No, the name was not Nearn, it was Nunn. He lived in Florida near the Alabama line and Geneva, Ala. was his nearest town. He is dead and had no children. I am satisfied all his family are dead and he had no children. Q. Who were in the family? A. Just his wife. Her name was Polly. No sir, they had no children nor any white children with them. My mother’s name was Jane and she was called Jane Nunn because she belonged to the Nunns. My father’s name was John Crosby and he lived in the town of Geneva, Ala. Both my parents are dead. I had two brothers and one sister. They were Nelson Nunn and George Nunn and they may have changed their names to Crosby too for they were my father’s children and Martha Ann who was unmarried the last I knew of her. All these were still near Geneva Ala. (on the Florida side) the last I knew of them but that was before I enlisted. No sir, I have not heard from them since except that I have heard in some way they are dead.

I enlisted in 1863 and I think it was in the fall of the year. I enlisted under the name Frank Nunn. That was the name I had been known by all the time. My father and mother did not live together an I was known by master’s name.

I was not free at the time of my enlistment. I ran away and enlisted. No sir they did not examine me much. Just asked me my age and I told them I was eighteen but I was not that old. I told them that because I wanted to get into the army. Q. How old were you at that time? A. Somewhere between twelve and thirteen years of age but I was big for my age. I can’t tell how tall I was but not near as tall as I am now. I do not know how tall I am now. (Looks to be about five feet, 10 or 11 inches. F. C. Spl. Exmr) I was pretty dark in color and had black hair and eyes. I was kind of on the tall order but was a kind of big husky boy too. I had no marks or scars by which I might be known or remembered. I have never been able to read or write. I had a photograph but I sent it to Washington. I don’t know to whom I sent it, the Pension Commissioner, I think. It was a recent photograph. I have no old ones.

They swore me in and gave me my blue uniform and gun and drilled me. That was at Barrancas. My gun was a Springfield. When I was discharged, I turned it in. It used a cap and ball and we had to bite the end off the cartridge. I cannot tell how long we stayed at Barrancas. I had been in the service probably one week when we had a battle. It was at a place called Pollard, Ala. That was not much of a fight, just kind of brush but after we started back to Barrancas, we had a fight that lasted two hours and a half at Pine Bairn, a creek. I do not know, but I was told that there were only 1200 of the enemy and that we killed 800 of them, including their general, Clanton. We had only about five killed and wounded, I do not know how many of each. No sir, we lost no officers then. We went back to Barrancas from Pine Bairn. I cannot tell how long we stayed but when we left there we went to Ft. Blakely on the Alabama River in the rear of Mobile. We went there to take the fort and we took it. It took us a week to take the fort. We started against it—that is, started our attack—at six o’clock one Sunday morning and at four o’clock the next Sunday afternoon, we charged the place and took it. I cannot tell what our losses were at Ft. Blakely. I think we lost a good many men there. One officer, Major Mercer or Murcher or some such name, was killed. I do not remember whether any officers were wounded there or not.

From Ft. Blakely, we went by steamboat to Montgomery, Ala. intending to attack and take it and we had got our pontoon bridges put down across the Alabama river and were getting ready to cross and attack when they ran up the white flag and surrendered. No, we did not take any prisoners. They had evacuated the town and when we got over there there was nobody there to fight with.

Then we came back down to Mobile and lay in camp for quite a time, but I cannot tell how long. Then we were sent to Ft. Morgan Ala. to take charge of that place relieving some soldiers that were there but I do not know what organization it was. We did nothing there but guard duty and drilling. We stayed there quite a while and were ordered back to Mobile where we stayed awhile and then to Fort Gaines, Ala. and stayed there until we were ordered to Mobile to be mustered out and then we went to New Orleans and were discharged at Greenville, La. and I cannot tell whether that was in 1865 or 1866 but I think it was in April. Yes sir, when we went to Louisiana to be discharged, is the first time I had ever been in La.

Capt. Jenkins was my captain all the way through. Other officers were Col. Yarrington. We had no lieutenants in our company. I don’t know why. Our 1st Sgt was . . . Wright; there was sgt Mabrum Jones, corporal George Rice and there was a captain of another company named McCloan, of B company. I remember him because he was an Irishman and used to have a good deal of fun with the men. I do not know where any of these men are nor whether or not they are living.

I can remember the names of some members of the company but the Pension Bureau tells me they are dead. The Bureau sent me the addresses of some men of the company and they could remember me they wrote, but I couldn’t remember them. I was a private all through my service. I have no discharge certificate, it got lost at New Orleans by my having left my grip with some people where I roomed and when I came back they had moved and I never found them nor my grip nor my discharge certificate. I don’t remember their name.

Q. I will now read you the surnames of some men from this list. Tell me whether you remember them and if so, what sort of looking men they were:

Alfred Adams? A. I don’t remember him.

Q. Hogans? A. Yes sir. First name is Stephen. I have had some correspondence with him and says he recognizes me. Mr. Bonnet now says he sent him my picture but I did not know that until just now. Q. Roberts. A. Don’t remember him. Q. Edward Washington and Nelson Williams? A. No sir, don’t remember them. I recall Frank Cecil who used to take care of the colonels horse. No, I don’t know whether he is living or not. Ido not know where any of my comrades are if living, except those whose names the Bureau sent me.

Q. How long were you in the army? A. I think it was three years. I enlisted in 1863 and was discharged in 1865 or 1866.

Q. What is your correct name in full?

A. My correct name in full is Charles Franklin Crosby.

Q. By what name are you known here [in Eagle Pass, Texas]?

A. By Charley Crosby, only. The people here do not know that I was ever known by any other name. I did not know what was my father’s name until after the war and I learned it by writing to my brothers at Geneva, Ala. and they told me my real name was Crosby and I commenced using that name instead of Nunn. I had always known that my name was Charley Franklin but they called me Frank instead of Charley. So when I took the name of Crosby, I went to the Charley part too so the whole name would be right. I was not sick nor injured or wounded in the service.

After discharge I lived in New Orleans, La. until 1867 and then came to Texas and lived around about New Braunfels and worked for the German farmers up there and in and out of there until 1886 or 1887 when I went to old Mexico and have lived there ever since until last June when I came to this place and have lived here ever since.

Q. Can you name any person anywhere that has known you by both Nunn and Crosby? A. No sir. I made the change in New Orleans and I cannot now name anyone who knew me there.

I am married. My wife is a Mexican and had not been married before she married me. Her maiden name was Francisca Robia. We were married in Victoria, Mex. by a magistrate that they call a civil judge. I think it was in 1892 that we were married. I had not been married before. Yes sir I was old enough to have been married before but that was my first marriage. I had lived with a woman, Easter Eatons, in San Antonio before this but we were not married and we separated. I had no children by Easter. Franscisca and I have lived together without separation or divorce ever since our marriage. We have had six children. But four of them are living. They are Guillerma Crosby, born Feb. 10, 1891; Carlos Crosby, born Feb. 18, 1893; Albina Crosby born just about two years and two months later but I cannot give the date; and Adela Crosby born—I forget when but she is going on 13 years of age. No sir, none of these children was born before my marriage and if the dates show that, I have made some mistake but I can’t tell what it is. No, I can’t say whether I was married earlier than 1891 or not.

I have no attorney. In 1900, I was living in Monterey, Mex. In 1890, somewhere in Mexico. In 1880, I was in Texas but was not permanent anywhere as I was engaged in driving cattle to market before they began shipping them to market on the railroads. I used to drive from Texas to Kansas. In 1870, I was probably up about New Braunfels, Texas, but I cannot tell with whom I was staying at that time. Q. Did you ever live in Georgia? A. No sir, not that I know of. If I did it was before my recollection.

I have heard my statement read. I heard from my brothers after I came out from the army but not after I left New Orleans.

Stephen Hogans was a kind of brown-skinned fellow as I remember him medium height and little on the slender order.

My name on the [army] rolls was Frank Nunn. No sir, it was not Frank Nearn. If that is on the rolls anywhere it is a mistake made by the two names sounding so much alike.

I have heard the above and foregoing read, I fully understand its contents and my answers and statements are correctly written.

Lincoln Rebukes David Hunter

On May 9, 1862, Gen. David Hunter, in command of Union forces in coastal South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, on his own authority freed the slaves in those states. Hunter’s action was meant to bolster his position by encouraging pro-Union sentiment among the slaves, and to put pressure on President Abraham Lincoln to embrace immediate, uncompensated emancipation, instead of the gradual, compensated emancipation the President had advocated back in March.

Lincoln was not cowed. Ten days later, on May 19, 1862, he issued a proclamation countermanding Hunter’s emancipation. It read:

Whereas there appears in the public prints, what purports to be a proclamation, of Major General Hunter, in the words and figures following, to wit:

Head Quarters Department of the South, 
Hilton Head, S.C.  May 9, 1862.

General Orders N^o 11.–The three States of Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, comprising the military department of the south, having deliberately declared themselves no longer under the protection of the United States of America, and having taken up arms against the said United States, it becomes a military necessity to declare them under martial law.  This was accordingly done on the 25^th day of April, 1862.  Slavery and martial law in a free country are altogether incompatible; the persons in these three States–Georgia, Florida and South Carolina–heretofore held as slaves, are therefore declared forever free.

(Official)  David Hunter, 
Major General Commanding.

Ed. W. Smith,
   Acting Assistant Adjutant General.

And whereas the same is producing some excitement, and misunderstanding; therefore

I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, proclaim and declare, that the government of the United States, had no knowledge, information, or belief, of an intention on the part of General Hunter to issue such a proclamation; nor has it yet, any authentic information that the document is genuine–  And further, that neither General Hunter, nor any other commander, or person, has been authorized by the Government of the United States, to make proclamations declaring the slaves of any State free; and that the supposed proclamation, now in question, whether genuine or false, is altogether void, so far as respects such declaration.

I further make known that whether it be competent for me, as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, to declare the slaves of any State or States, free, and whether at any time, in any case, it shall have become a necessity indispensable to the maintenance of the government, to exercise such supposed power, are questions which, under my responsibility, I reserve to myself, and which I cannot feel justified in leaving to the decision of commanders in the field.  These are totally different questions from those of police regulations in armies and camps.

On the sixth day of March last, by a special message, I recommended to Congress the adoption of a joint resolution to be substantially as follows:

Resolved, That the United States ought to co-operate with any State which may adopt a gradual abolishment of slavery, giving to such State pecuniary aid, to be used by such State in its discretion, to compensate for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such change of system.

The resolution, in the language above quoted, was adopted by large majorities in both branches of Congress, and now stands an authentic, definite, and solemn proposal of the nation to the States and people most immediately interested in the subject matter.  To the people of those States I now earnestly appeal–  I do not argue, I beseech you to make the arguments for yourselves–  You can not if you would, be blind to the signs of the times–  I beg of you a calm and enlarged consideration of them, ranging, if it may be, far above personal and partizan politics.  This proposal makes common cause for a common object, casting no reproaches upon any–  It acts not the pharisee.  The change it contemplates would come gently as the dews of heaven, not rending or wrecking anything.  Will you not embrace it?  So much good has not been done, by one effort, in all past time, as, in the providence of God, it is now your high privilege to do.  May the vast future not have to lament that you have neglected it.

It is not surprising that Lincoln countermanded Hunter’s emancipation order. He had taken the same action the previous September, when Gen. John C. Frémont had tried to free Missouri’s slaves of disloyal owners on his own authority. As commander-in-chief, Lincoln could not allow himself to be defied by general officers, which would threaten the principle of civilian control of the military.

Yet things were different with David Hunter in May 1862 than with John C. Frémont in September 1861. By Spring 1862, Lincoln was committed to emancipation. He merely disagreed with Hunter on the means.  It is worth noting that in the last paragraph of his May 19 declaration, President Lincoln urged (begged really) the southern states to embrace his proposal for gradual, compensated emancipation, subtlety intimating at the end that his support for this idea was not open-ended. Clearly, Abraham Lincoln realized that his friend, David Hunter, might be right about the means by which emancipation might have to occur, even if Lincoln was not quite ready to embrace the idea of immediate, uncompensated emancipation. But the time was fast approaching.

Source: http://www.history.umd.edu/Freedmen/hunter.htm.

Robert Smalls and the Escape of the Planter, Part 3

Andy Hall, over at Dead Confederates has made a series of interesting posts related to Robert Smalls and the escape of the CSS Planter since his first post about this topic on May 13. They are all well worth reading. The subsequent posts include:

“The Black Confederate Who Stole The Steamboat Planter.” (May 16, 2012) Which discusses Robert Smalls’ associate William Morrison, who also escaped aboard the Planter.

“Suck to Be You, Lieutenant.” (May 17, 2012) Features the letter of Confederate Bvt. Lt. F. G. Ravenel, who had the unenviable task of writing the official Confederate report on the Planter‘s escape.

“‘. . . to be divided between Robert Smalls and his associates.’” (May 18, 2012) Discusses the efforts to award Smalls and crew members of the Planter that escaped with him naval prize money.

Enjoy!

Robert Smalls and the Escape of the Planter, Part 2

I was not surprised to see other bloggers noting the 150th anniversary of Robert Smalls’s escape from Charleston harbor aboard the Planter, as I did in my post yesterday. It is a feel good moment in a war with precious few.

I have never been of the opinion that my word is the last on any issue, so I thought I would share two particularly good pieces on this notable event in the American Civil War. They are:

1. “Robert Smalls’s Great Escape,” by Blain Roberts and Ethan J. Kytle in Disunion in the New York Times.

2. “‘Disgusting negligence and treachery,” by Andy Hall in his fine blog, Dead Confederates.

Enjoy!

Robert Smalls and the Escape of the Planter

Many slaves had harrowing stories of their escape from slavery during the American Civil War, most which were never written down and hence are lost to history. At least one, however, became famous, even legendary: the escape of Robert Smalls and the Planter. Born a slave in Beaufort in South Carolina’s Sea Islands region, Smalls was sent to Charleston as a preteen, where he developed a love for the water, rising to wheelman, piloting ships around Charleston Harbor and nearby waters.

By 1862, Robert Smalls was a married family man and wheelman aboard the CSS Planter, a sidewheel steamer, serving as a Confederate dispatch boat and transport. His position put him into the elite of Charleston’s slave community. But despite his exalted status, like other slaves he wanted to be free, and his position as wheelman of the Planter gave him the means. Smalls waited until a night when the ship’s three white crew members elected to sleep ashore. When that night finally came, he and most of the black crewmen, and their families, quietly boarded the ship in wee hours of May 13, 1862, and brazenly steamed past the Confederate harbor fortifications, and surrendered themselves and the Planter to the Union blockading fleet keeping station outside Charleston.

Robert Smalls daring act made him an overnight hero in the North. The New York Times noted in its May 16 edition:

Among the vessels in port [at Port Royal, S.C.] was the rebel steamer Planter, a rebel vessel, which had been brought in by ROBERT SMALLS, a contraband pilot. The crew, with their families, who were on board, brought with them Charleston papers of May 12. There were on the vessel seven heavy guns and one 8-inch rifled cannon, which were to have been mounted on Fort Ripley, a work in course of construction in Charleston harbor.

His escape proved a great embarrassment to the Confederacy. The Charleston Daily Courier reported the day after the escape:

THE STEAMER PLANTER.— Our community was intensely agitated Tuesday morning by the intelligence that the steamer Planter, for the last twelve months or more employed both in the State and Confederate service, had been taken possession of by her colored crew, steamed up and boldly run out to the blockades. The news at first was not credited, and it was not until, by the use of glasses, she was discovered, lying between the federal frigates, that all doubt on the subject was dispelled. A great variety of rumors and surmises were circulated in reference to the parties concerned, and the number of fugitives on board the steamer. The most authentic particulars that we could gather are as follows:

Between three and four o’clock Tuesday morning, the steamer left Southern wharf, having, it is supposed, on board five negroes, namely three engineers, one pilot and a deck hand. Upon leaving the wharf the usual whistle signal was given by those on board, and the usual private signals given when passing Fort Sumter. The officer of the watch at the latter post was called, as usual, but observing the signals and supposing all right, allowed her to proceed. She ran immediately out to the blockading vessels.

The Planter had on board four large guns destined for one of our new fortifications, and were as follows: one rifled forty-two pounder lately put in splendid condition at the foundry of EASON & BROTHERS, and said to be a splendid piece; two eight-inch Columbiads, and one thirty-two pounder. In addition to these, she had on board her own armament, which consisted of one thirty-two pounder and one twenty-four pounder, making six guns in all taken out to the fleet.

The escape led to Confederates to change procedures for ships traversing Charleston Harbor. The Daily Courier reported on May 15, “SPECIAL ORDER No. 35. NO STEAM BOAT, SMALL BOAT, OR VESSEL OF any description whatever, will be allowed to pass Fort Sumter, by day or night, without a report in person of the Captain thereof at said fort.” (A typical case of closing the barn door after the horse has escaped.)

Besides presenting the federal government with the Planter, Smalls provided Union forces with valuable intelligence on Confederate activities in Charleston. He was given a substantial share of the reward money for the ship’s capture and received an audience with President Lincoln, who wished to congratulate Smalls personally. Robert Smalls became captain of the now USS Planter, and with breaks to raise funds in the North for charitable work in the Sea Islands, remained in that position for the rest of the war, seeing considerable action in support of Union forces in coastal South Carolina.

After the Civil War, Robert Smalls became an important black leader in South Carolina and nationally. During Reconstruction he served in the South Carolina legislature and then in the U.S. Congress. After Reconstruction, Smalls lost his congressional seat, but remained an influential figure, especially in the Sea Islands, where he made his home. His continued support of the Republican Party won him the position of Collector of Customs in Beaufort in 1889, which he filled until a few years before his death in 1915. In short, an extraordinary career built on a legendary act 150 years ago today.

Sources: 1) http://www.robertsmalls.org/newspapers/N.%20Y.%20Times.5.16.62.htm; 2) http://www.robertsmalls.org/newspapers/CHARLESTON%20DAILY%20COURIER.5.14.62doc.htm; 3) http://www.robertsmalls.org/newspapers/CHARLESTON%20DAILY%20COURIER.5.15.62.htm.