I may have never stumbled across this book on my own. I give thanks to the author, James M. Ridgway, Jr., who sent me a copy. Perhaps sensing my views of some of the historical figures might not align with his own. I apologize to James for having taken over a year to read the book in its entirety. It wasn’t that I didn’t find it interesting. On the contrary, I knew early on it was well-researched and that I would learn a lot about the Civil War. It was a matter of finding the time to digest the material while setting aside my preconceived notions.
“Apprentice Killers” follows six integral figures, three on each side, that shaped the outcome of the Civil War and thus our nation. They were the two Presidents; Abraham Lincoln of the hardly United States and Jefferson Davis of the Confederacy. Union Generals George B. McClellan and Ulysses S. Grant, and Joseph E Johnston, and Robert E. Lee for the South. I had firm convictions about two of them; Lincoln and Davis. I came away with a greater appreciation for Lincoln, and I’ll respectfully disagree with the author about Jefferson Davis.
It is impossible to underestimate my appreciation for the research undertaken by Mr. Ridgway. “Apprentice Killers” isn’t a summary of the Civil War but takes us through the details and individual decisions and mistakes that determined the outcome. We see how close we came to an entirely different outcome and that if not for bad weather and indecisiveness, the South could have won the war early and captured Washington DC after the First Battle of Bull Run.
An enduring theme is the politicization of war. Politicians perpetually hounded the Presidents on both sides to arrive at an outcome satisfactory to their beliefs. This trickled down to the selection of generals, military goals, and timing of attacks. Judging by more recent conflicts in Viet Nam, Iraq, and elsewhere around the globe. We seem to have learned nothing about placing competency over political expediency. I’d be curious to know Mr. Ridgway’s opinion on that.
My strongest disagreement with the book is the characterizations of Lincoln, Davis, and Lee. All were presented as honorable men who were sometimes forced by politics or other circumstances to do less than honorable things. An example would be Lincoln wrestling with emancipation.
Except for the loud minority of abolitionists, the people of the North cared no more about living equally among large numbers of Negroes than their Southern cousins. Lincoln had pondered this dilemma long before the eruption of fighting. He had concluded that the only way out of the predicament was to find some mechanism for colonizing the Negroes outside the country, as they gained their freedom. What he had in mind was a gradual plan of emancipation in which slave owners would be compensated for their loss, the Federal Government covering the cost, as well as the expenses of establishing colonies in Central America or Liberia.
The Lincoln of the book was a good man forced to consider options he should not if he truly believed all men were created equal. I have no evidence that Lincoln ever held those views regarding enslaved Black men and women. In the highly revered but seldom cited Lincoln/Douglas debates, Lincoln often states his view of the social and political inferiority of the enslaved. Before the war, he was quite content to support the institution of slavery. I think the good intentions Mr. Ridgway attributes to Lincoln don’t stand up to his stated views and actions.
What next? Free them, and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not. Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judgment, is not the sole question, if, indeed, it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether well or ill-founded, cannot be safely disregarded. We cannot, then, make them equals. It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation might be adopted; but for their tardiness in this, I will not undertake to judge our brethren of the South. — Abraham Lincoln
Lincoln was serious about his plan to export the freedmen. When he ended enslavement in the District of Columbia in 1862, he paid owners $300 per enslaved person to compensate them for their losses. He also paid $100 each for any enslaved person willing to leave the country permanently. Black leaders like Frederick Douglas were consulted, but they shot down the plan. Douglas later had this to say:
It must be admitted, truth compels me to admit, even here in the presence of the monument we have erected to his memory, Abraham Lincoln was not, in the fullest sense of the word, either our man or our model. In his interests, in his associations, in his habits of thought, and in his prejudices, he was a white man.
He was preeminently the white man’s President, entirely devoted to the welfare of white men. He was ready and willing at any time during the first years of his administration to deny, postpone, and sacrifice the rights of humanity in the colored people to promote the welfare of the white people of this country. — Frederick Douglass
My opinion about Lincoln coincides with Douglas’s that Lincoln was solely vested in serving the interests of white men. The Emancipation Proclamation was designed to keep Britain and France from partnering with the Confederacy and was shaped not to offend any state where enslavement was permitted that didn’t secede from the Union. I’m afraid I have to disagree with James Ridgway’s perception of Lincoln, yet I have a greater appreciation for his circumstances and choices based on the information Ridgway presents. Still, proclamations like, “Lincoln hated slavery as much as the most radical of his party, but the nation came first” ring false to me. Lincoln, at best, was personally opposed to slavery, yet he would have let it continue forever given a chance.
Setting aside my disagreement about Lincoln, I found the book a fascinating retelling of details of the war with which I was unfamiliar. Ridgway correctly points out the inability of leaders on both sides to grapple with the war’s primary cause, which was slavery. He also brings to light the number of poor decisions on both sides and shows how close we came to a different outcome. The book is more about war than politics, yet politics shaped the war. It’s a fascinating read without regard to how you feel about the individuals focused on.
The title, “Apprentice Killers,” highlights that many of the participants were novices at war. There is a part where Lincoln went to the Library of Congress to study war tactics to become an expert through his private studies. Some lessons could be applied to all wars that haven’t been learned. What we have yet to learn is how to avoid war. It seems there will always be factions that need was to profit from it. I encourage anyone to read this book, even if you have no interest in the Civil War. It might influence your views on present conflicts and those who encourage them.
Apologies again to James Ridgway, Jr. in that I took so long to read your book, now in its second edition. The loss was mine in not having completed it sooner. The book can be found on Amazon or through Cannonade Press.
—
This post was previously published on williamspivey.medium.com.
***
You Might Also Like These From The Good Men Project
—
Photo credit: Chris Chow on Unsplash
