Ohio History Journal

OHIO STATE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL

SOCIETY

REVIEWS, NOTES AND COMMENTS

BY THE EDITOR

DR. THOMAS CORWIN MENDENHALL

Dr. Thomas Corwin Mendenhall died at his home

in Ravenna Saturday, March 22. He was a member

of the first faculty of the Ohio State University and a

life member of the Ohio State Archaeological and His-

torical Society. A brief sketch of his life was pub-

lished in the QUARTERLY of the Society for October,

1921. He delivered the annual address at the meet-

ing of the Society on September 19, 1923. This appears

in the October QUARTERLY for that year.

Dr. Mendenhall was one of the leading educators of

Ohio. His reputation was international. He lived to

the ripe age of more than eighty-two years. He was

born at New Garden, Columbiana County, Ohio, October

4, 1821. He was intellectually alert and active almost

to the last day of his life.

We hope in a future issue to publish an extended

sketch of Dr. Mendenhall that will place before the

readers of the QUARTERLY the personality and achieve-

ments of this eminent educator and scientist and most

worthy and respected Ohioan.

(215)

216     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

REV. PURLEY A. BAKER

On March 30 Rev. P. A. Baker died at his home in

Westerville, Ohio. He was born in Jackson County,

Ohio, April 10, 1858. He was prominently identified

with the work of the Anti-saloon League almost from

its beginning. This organization like many other move-

ments, began in Ohio in 1893 and extended to every

state of the Union. Its founder was Rev. Howard H.

Russell who is still living in Westerville. Rev. P. A.

Baker was in charge of the Cleveland district of the

League in 1896. He became its state superintendent in

1897 and in 1903 he was chosen general superintendent

of the Anti-saloon League of America, a position that

he held to the date of his death.

Soon after he became prominently identified with the

League his ability as an organizer and an executive was

recognized and felt. During his administration amend-

ments prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxi-

cating liquors were added to the constitutions of a

number of states and finally became a part of the con-

stitution of the United States.

There have been and still are differences of opinion

in regard to prohibition.  Some citizens consider it

still in the experimental stage. There can be no ques-

tion, however, in regard to the magnitude and progress

of the movement in the United States, and if it achieves

even approximately what its friends with confidence

claim for it, Rev. Baker will in the future be accorded

high rank among the reformers of his generation.

Reviews, Notes and Comments             217

A LATE ESTIMATE OF JOHN BROWN

The time will never come, perhaps, when there will

not be conflicting opinions in regard to John Brown

and his mission. It is remarkable, however, how well,

without any special advocate, his character stands the

test of time. In spite of the critical portions of the

biography written by Oswald Garrison Villard and the

severe attack, occupying an entire volume, by Hill

Peebles Wilson, written for a consideration said to have

been $5,000, the fame of the old anti-slavery warrior

survives. In a carefully written survey of his life by

Gamaliel Bradford, in his recent volume entitled

Damaged Souls, after considering all the evidence to

date, the author concludes with this interesting estimate:

Something magnetic in his obsession touched men of the

most diverse temperaments and powers, roused them to think

and feel and work as he did.

Take his immediate followers, take that group of boys, or

little more than boys, who gathered about him with unquestioning

loyalty in the last desperate venture. They were not especially

religious. Even Brown's own sons did not adopt his orthodox

interpretation of the Bible. But every man of the company had

imbibed the spirit of sacrifice, every man was ready to give his

life for the cause their leader had preached to them, every man

believed that what he said should be done must be done. "They

perfectly worshiped the ground the old fellow trod on," said a

Southern observer who had no sympathy with them except in the

admiration of splendid courage.

Nor was it only over those who came under his immediate

command that Brown exercised the magnetism of inspiration and

stimulus. After his capture and during his imprisonment he

was surrounded by bitter enemies. But they grew to respect

him and some apparently to have a personal regard for him.

Even when they condemned his cause, they esteemed his spirit

of sacrifice and his superb singleness of purpose. In the years

before the crisis came he met some of the keenest and most

intelligent men in the United States and they saw and felt in

him a man of power, a man of will, a man of ideals above and

218       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

beyond the common average and level of trivial earthliness.

"No matter how inconsistent, impossible, and desperate a thing

might appear to others, if John Brown said he would do it, he

was sure to be believed. His words were never taken for empty

bravado," wrote Frederick Douglass.  That enthusiasts like

Gerrit Smith should be carried away was perhaps natural. But

Emerson was not an enthusiast, Thoreau was not, Theodore

Parker was not. All these men spoke of Brown as one gifted

for some divine purpose beyond mortality. All of them thanked

the humble farmer and shepherd for that thrill of exaltation

which is one of the greatest forces that can touch the heart.

No one will call John A. Andrew an enthusiast. He was a

practical man of the world, versed in the hard conduct of every-

day affairs. Yet Andrew said: "Whatever might be thought of

john Brown's acts, John Brown himself was right."

And the influence of such a man and such a life and such

a death flowed out and on beyond the men who obeyed him,

beyond the men who met him, to those who never knew, him

and had hardly even heard of him, to the whole country, to the

wide world. The song that carries his name inspired millions

throughout the great Civil War, it has inspired millions since,

and John Brown's soul and sacrifice were back of the song. That

is what Brown meant when he said, "I am worth inconceivably

more to hang than for any other purpose." That is what men

of his type achieve by their fierce struggle and their bitter self-

denial and their ardent sacrifice. They make others, long years

after, others who barely know their names and nothing of their

history, achieve also some little or mighty sacrifice, accomplish

some vast and far-reaching self-denial, that so the world, through

all its doubts and complications and perplexities, may be lifted

just a little towards ideal felicity. Whatever their limitations,

their errors, whatever taint of earthly damage has infected their

souls, it may justly be said that "these men, in teaching us how

to die, have at the same time taught us how to live."

MYTHICAL EXPOSITION OF A "MYTH"

We not infrequently hear from those "who speak

with authority" that history is not written as in former

years; that the old method of placing before the reader

the record of the past has materially changed; that the

productions in this department bearing dates a decade

Reviews, Notes and Comments        219

or two antecedent to our own time have been consigned

to the discard by competent critics of today; that a new

school has arisen with its canons to which all must

subscribe who would presume to contribute even a

modest monograph devoted to an episode or event of

the past.

Any contribution, therefore, written by a disciple

of the modern school fully equipped for his work is

worthy of more than passing attention.

We have before us a contribution entitled The John

Brown Myth by Leland H. Jenks. By reference to a

biographical note accompanying this contribution to

The American Mercury of March, we find that Mr.

Jenks is associate professor of history at Amherst. We

are told that "he is a Kansan and is a graduate of

Columbia;" that "for three years he was Amherst

Memorial Fellow in London."

Assuredly with such an equipment of nativity and

the learning of the schools Mr. Jenks should be able

to handle his subject with authority and according to

the latest approved form of historical literature.

In reading his contribution casually the eye lingers

on a number of assumptions set forth as unquestioned

facts. Here is one:

Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Samuel Howe, who invented

the sewing-machine, the sweat-shop and philanthropy, and Theo-

dore Parker, a pulpit orator with an obsession for blood, were

among the amateurs haute politique whom Brown met.

These are spoken of as a "sort of Board of Direc-

tors to back his (John Brown's) enterprises."

The sentence that we have quoted, all will agree,

is not without merit. The climax, "the sewing-machine,

220      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

the sweat-shop and philanthropy" has a beautiful

cynical incongruity that arrests attention with all the

pleasing effect of a carefully constructed paradox; while

the expression haute politique gives it a scholarly set

off that is an earnest for the learning of the author.

It may be a little diverting, however, to some readers

of the old school to see the statement that Samuel Howe

invented the "sewing-machine, the sweat-shop and

philanthropy."  The man who actually invented the

sewing-machine was Elias Howe, who was something

of a philanthropist as was Samuel G. Howe, the friend

of John Brown.    It is not recorded, however, that

Elias had anything to do with the so-called "board of

directors" that backed the enterprises of John Brown.

Elias Howe was considered a patriotic and useful

citizen as well as inventor, when patriotism had not

fallen victim to the modern scholarly sneer. He en-

listed in the Union army, in spite of the great wealth

that he acquired from his invention, and insisted upon

serving as a private. It is said on authority that has

not been questioned that he made a good soldier. Of

course we have now reached the time when it is seriously

questioned whether there is or ever was such a thing

as a "good soldier."

Again, in a previous paragraph, in which some

sturdy blows are delivered at the "myth," we run across

this illuminating sentence:

This is the Brown whose effigy a grateful legislature has

caused to be shrined in the Hall of Atrocities at Washington as

one of the two great Kansans.

From the biographical note already quoted we learn

that Professor Jenks is himself a Kansan. It is as-

Reviews, Notes and Comments       221

sumed of course that he knows all about Kansas and

that he knows who represent that state in the Hall of

Statuary at Washington, which he with brilliant and

withering ascription denominates the "Hall of Atro-

cities."

Now as a matter of fact the state of Kansas is

represented in the hall of statuary by the "effigies" of

Honorable George W. Glick, who served Kansas as

governor, and Honorable John J. Ingalls, who acquired

fame as a distinguished United States senator from

that state. By the way, in passing it may be worthy

of note that Senator Ingalls, in a public address on the

struggle for the abolition of slavery, said:

The three men of this era who will loom forever against

the remotest horizon of time, as the pyramids above the voiceless

desert, or mountain peaks over the subordinate plains are

Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant and Old John Brown of

Ossawatomie.

Of course Ingalls is to be excused for this statement

because he did not have the opportunity to read "The

John Brown Myth."    The sentence quoted from this,

while in error as to the actual presence of the "effigy"

of John Brown in our national capitol, has a pleasing

literary tang that is attractive to the modern reader

who enjoys things iconoclastic and flings at vulnerable

statuary.

Other quotations might be made to show that the

author of "The John Brown Myth" is not concerned

about such trivial matters as old-fashioned facts. He

tells us that "one doubts indeed that Brown knew fact

from fiction, truth from falsehood, actuality from hal-

lucination." After reading his contribution one can

222      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

hardly think that Professor Jenks would find serious

fault with old John Brown because he did not know

"fact from fiction." It is assumed of course that Mr.

Jenks discriminates carefully between the two but the

quotations already made show that he does not care to

be bound by anything so annoying as facts. Indeed

we may assume that what he says about "The John

Brown Myth" is intended as literature rather than

history -- a work of the creative imagination which is

the mark of true genius.

Mr. Jenks delights in referring to John Brown as

a horse thief. Here is his testimony on this branch

of the "Myth:"

Brown led a raid from Kansas into Missouri, stole eleven

negro slaves from several plantations and seized ten head of

horses, three yoke of oxen, eleven mules, bedding, clothing,

provisions, "in short, all the loot available and portable. He took

the negroes to Canada, where they were put to work, and sold

the swag to pay the expenses of the trip."

Although John Brown is accused of horse stealing

more than once the author states in another paragraph

that "as a horse thief it must be confessed his (Brown's)

operations were not extensive; they did not attract much

attention in eastern Kansas."

Mr. Jenks is probably in error as to the net results

of the raid into Missouri, but historians are agreed

that Brown took the negroes and some of the property

belonging to their masters, including horses. He did

this openly and stated that he took the property because

it had been earned by the slaves whom he was liberat-

ing. There was an addition to this "stolen property"

as Old Brown proceeded northward. A river filled

Reviews, Notes and Comments       223

with floating ice impeded his progress. A posse headed

by one Dr. Wood of Lecompton pursued Brown for

the purpose of arresting him and his band. Reinforced

by a number of men from Atchison, the posse, now ag-

gregating sixty or seventy persons all told, advanced

upon Brown's company encamped near the river. To

their surprise, the old captain and his men emerged

from the woods and opened fire. Panic spread among

the ranks of the company sent to capture him and they

departed as rapidly as their horses could carry them.

Brown captured a few of the men and a number of their

horses and proceeded on his northward journey. Later

he permitted the prisoners to return but kept the horses.

After he reached Canada and liberated the slaves he

proceeded to Cleveland, Ohio, and sold the horses at

auction.  In offering them  for sale he stated that

legally there might be a defect in the title to the animals

and told how he had acquired them. It is said that in

conclusion he declared that they were "abolition horses."

"How do you know that?" asked someone from the

crowd.

"I know it," answered Brown, "because I converted

them."

The horses brought a very satisfactory price in

spite of the defective title. Now, if John Brown was

a horse thief, it must be admitted that his method of

disposing of the horses was somewhat original and that

the bit of humor attributed to him in offering them for

sale was so rare as almost to entitle him to a place

among modern writers.

Mr. Jenks must be given full credit for a recognition

of the mighty influence of "The John Brown Myth"

224     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

in Civil War time, for he says that "soon a hundred

thousand men were singing 'And his soul goes marching

on.'"

It was the singing of this song by thousands of the

boys in blue that inspired Julia Ward Howe, the wife

of Samuel G. Howe, the financial supporter of John

Brown, to write The Battle Hymn of the Republic,

a poem that still has its appeal to those who have not

come completely under the spell of "the new literature."

The world seems to be finding it difficult to forget

John Brown. As trains approach Harper's Ferry the

passengers begin to talk about the famous raid and the

old man who led it. He is the subject of more dis-

cussions than the sanity of Hamlet, but his name seems

destined to endure while the Blue Ridge Mountains

stand and the Potomac rolls through them to the sea.

GEORGE KENNAN

We regret to chronicle the death of an Ohioan who

had attained an enviable reputation as traveler, author,

lecturer and newspaper correspondent. George Kennan

was born at Norwalk, Ohio, February 16, 1845. He was

the son of John and Mary Ann (Morse) Kennan. He

was educated in the public schools of his native town,

early manifested interest in telegraphy and became an

operator before he reached his majority. In 1865 he

went to northeastern Siberia as an explorer and tele-

graph engineer where later he superintended the con-

struction of a portion of the Russo-American telegraph

line. In 1870 he began the exploration of the mountain

region of eastern Caucasus and Daghestan. Here he

spent almost two years after which he returned to

America and devoted himself to journalism and the

Reviews, Notes and Comments       225

lecture platform until 1877 when he became night man-

ager of the Associated Press at Washington, D. C. In

this position he continued eight years.

In 1885 accompanied by G. A. Frost, an artist, he

started on a journey through Russia and Siberia to

investigate the Russian exile system. He visited all the

mines and prisons "between the Ural Mountains and

the headwaters of the Amur." He traveled 15,000

miles and published in 1891 as a result of his observa-

tions the work that made him famous, Siberia and the

Exile System. This had appeared serially in the Cen-

tury Magazine, 1889-1890. He lectured frequently on

the exile system in Great Britain and the United States.

The results of his contributions on this subject went

far toward creating a pronounced public opinion op-

posed to the government of the Czar and especially to

the exile system.

In 1898 during the war with Spain he visited

Cuba and contributed interesting articles to the Out-

look of New York.

In 1901 he went to Russia to visit Count Tolstoy.

He was arrested by the Minister of the Interior in

Russia and deported from the empire.

In 1902 he accompanied some American scientists

and explored Mount Pelee, on the Island of Martinique,

after the eruption of that volcano. In 1904 he was

correspondent of the Outlook in the Far East through

the Russo-Japanese War including the siege of Port

Arthur which he personally observed with the Japanese

Army. After the close of the war he remained about

two years in the Far East traveling through Japan,

China, Manchuria and Korea. In 1906-1907 he was

Vol. XXXIII--15.