Jefferson Davis: US Secretary of War/ Confederate President

CSA Pres Davis: Helped or Hurt by having been US Secy of War?

  • Helped;

    Votes: 27 50.0%
  • Hurt;

    Votes: 2 3.7%
  • Jefferson Davis was beyond help;

    Votes: 14 25.9%
  • Hmm.. That's a good one. One the one hand... then again...

    Votes: 11 20.4%

  • Total voters
    54
Recently read a book that supposes that Davis lucked into the nomination. Seems that the only serious contenders were Davis, Cobb, Toombs, and Stephens. Of Cobb and Toombs, one got repulsively drunk the night before the nomination vote, the other was thoroughly disliked. Stephens had a great mind encased in a small, somewhat unattractive, body whereas Davis was tall and good looking.

Having held office and being a war "hero" didn't hurt him either.
 
Count me as one who has always believed that Jefferson Davis's ability and experience as an administrator, particularly his term as Franklin Pierce's Secretary of War, had been a vast boon to the Confederacy. He used this expertise to build up the Confederate fighting machine from the ground and gave it a solid functional basis.The problem is that once setting up the military, he continued throughout his term as president to be the Secretary of War. He reduced his in office Secretary of War to the level of a clerk, passing papers back and forth, while he had his hands on the entire running of the department. This proved too much for all the various men who held this office. In other words, during the time of war that existed throughout almost the entire length of his presidency, he ran two extremely important and demanding offices, each which required the full energy and attention, and sapped the strength, of one man itself. Consequently, by being unable to delegate, he wore himself out, thus depriving the Confederacy of his best services in either office.

It's probably a misfortune that he named an inexperienced, though by all accounts learned man, who had no military knowledge or expertise (Leroy Pope Walker) to the position initially. Walker tried, but couldn't cope, he had no experience as an administrator after all, and the Confederate military had to be started from scratch and as rapidly as humanly possible. So from the getgo, this was Davis's baby, oh, and besides that other stuff of making a functional national government and all.

So why did Davis pick Walker? To round out the representation of Confederate states in the cabinet, true. But was this not his most inportant position to fill? i think it was because he meant from the beginning to run it himself, and Walker would take direction from him with little resistance. But in so doing, he blunted the utility of the office, and in the end, proved to be a disservice to the Confederacy. The best man actually for the office was Jefferson Davis, just not President Jefferson Davis.

So had Davis been the actual Secretary of War, the question is- could he work with a president not Jefferson Davis? Which again begs the question of who did the South have better to fill the office of presidency than Jefferson Davis?
 
Excellent analysis, ewc. It gives many thought-provoking situations.

Who, indeed, did the south have if not Davis? His national exposure was not equal to Lincoln's, but he was certainly known in the south. His virtual retirement to Brierwood did not keep him in southern counsciousness. There were plenty of governors and senators, but I don't see them as southern figureheads. There was certainly one among them that could have risen to national prominence as did Lincoln. (If this a subtle indictment of southern rejection of party politics?)

I think Davis was an example of the phenomenom we've come to expect: you can't know what kind of president you're going to get when you elect him. Some are naturally good, some are a disappointment, and some rise to the test. Davis proved to be a disappointment. Without the war, he might have developed into the job, but his unwillingness to delegate might have gotten him in any event.

It kind of reinforces the rumor I reported earlier: that Davis lucked(?) into the job.

Again, thanks for the post. Ole
 
Thank you for the kind words, ole. As I see it, though the South had many prominent politicians and statesmen, what they had no more was a John Calhoun- one formidable leader above the fold. They did have Alexander Stephens, but he was lukewarm at best to secession, and they did have Sam Houston, who was more than lukewarm, he was intransigent against secession. Toombs and Cobb and Yancey, all considered objectionable to a great part of the newly free states, and Jeff Davis, also objectionable to a large section of the Southern delegates. So it really looks like a matter of choosing the lesser evil, or least objectionable, leader. William Davis has an excellent analysis of this in his book, A Country of Our Own. His impression is Georgia hurt herself in having the presidency because they had too many candidates- Cobb, Toombs, & Stephens, and sat back expecting to get the office while different factions were out electioneering against certain Georgians (including the hapless Georgian TRR Cobb undermining both Toombs and Stephens), thus losing out to those pushing for Davis, by no means a majority of the delegates in Montgomery.

Personally i think Toombs would have been the best choice, of those to choose from. All in all, Stephens would have been the best man.
 
Do not forget Zebulon B Vance. Personally I think he'd have been perfect as president. Your points are well taken Ed.
 
Hillbilly,
Vance was a competent individual but he was a pain in the butt to the Confederate cause.He was mainly concerned with North Carolina ,but as president he could have taken a different turn.I hate Stephens as did many others ,but he did have a nice brain.I wish they could've somehow elected temporary Confederate leaders and then once the other states seceded have chosen permament leaders.Davis was a good man ,but he rubbed a lot of poeple the wrong way.Limiting the Confederate leadership and cabinets to the original seceding states eliminated many of the South's best statesmen.They had to get started with the government obviously but I don't think we selected the best man , and in particular the best cabinet.Davis was probably the most well known of the available candidates at the time.Toombs showing up drunk doomed his chances.Lincoln was smart as well as vile,but had he been the Confederate President the war would still have ended in defeat in my opinion.I like Breckenridge if he could've been chosen maybe Kentucky swings our way, assuming Lincoln doesn't arrest the state legislature which is a big if.There certainly wasn't a Calhoun figure around then though for everyone to rally around.I like Breckenridge and Bell as his vice President just from a public relations standpoint in the border states and the North.Of course Davis was no Yancey or Rhett so my thinking may be in error.
Ashley
 
This is just wild brainstorming but I wonder if Claiborne Fox Jackson would have served as a good President, leaving Jefferson Davis as his very competent Secretary of War.

Jackson was born in Kentucky. He served in the Black Hawk War. He was elected Governor of Missouri, after serving many years in its legislature. He also served in the Missouri banking bureaucracy, which experience probably would have been most useful for the Confederacy.

From wikipedia:
In May, 1861, [Governor] Jackson ordered the state militia to assemble outside St. Louis for six days of training. Jackson's order was legal according to the Missouri state constitution. On June 12, Jackson called out militia units and appointed secessionists to command the various Missouri State Guard divisions. He choose not to overtly join the Confederacy, as he knew there were too many Federal troops in Missouri to seceede. The situation in Missouri went horribly wrong when Major Nathaniel Lyon, the aide to the Federal commander in Missouri, disobeyed orders and overstepped his authority and led an illegal attack on the State Guard's camp. The US commanding General reprimanded Lyon, and freed the militiamen to go home. But Abraham Lincoln, either misinformed or intentionally ignorant of the situation, relieved the General and appointed Lyon as commander in Missouri.

When President Lincoln called on the states to provide troops to put down the "Rebellion", Governor Jackson declared that Missouri would not support the Federal war effort. Jackson angrily responded,


Sir: Your dispatch of the 15th instant, making a call on Missouri for four regiments of men for immediate service, as been received. There can be, I apprehend, no doubt that the men are intended to form a part of the President's army to make war upon the people of the seceded states. Your requisition, in my judgment, is illegal, unconstitutional, and revolutionary in its object, inhuman, and diabolical and cannot be complied with. Not one man will the State of Missouri furnish to carry on any unholy crusade.

I say his plusses include electablity, some military experience, and states of origin (Kentucky and Missouri), which would possibly influence those states' ideas on secession.

He actually died Dec. 6, 1862 of stomach cancer, but as long as I'm indulging in fantasy, I will declare that the activities and self esteem of being President of a new nation prevented him from getting sick and he survived the war.
 
Sockknitter,
This whole concept is using fanciful thinking ,but it is still very entertaining to think about.I've never thought about Jackson before.How well known was he outside of Missouri?Missouri may and I emphasize may have ended up differntly had Union troops not been in the state and the state under martial law.The Germans were certainly pro-Union while most of the militia seemed to favor the Confederacy.
Mobileboy
 
Jefferson Davis-the worst American President

By actual conduct, Jefferson Davis was the worst American president there ever was. (I'm including the U.S. Presidents and include J. Davis as an American)

If you look at his military and political experience, did anyone have a greater background, other than George Washington.
Jefferson Davis graduated from West Point; officered in the Mexican War; was a U.S. Senator; was the U.S. Secretary of War.

Was there anyone, who was so clueless about the Civil War and its necessities, than Jefferson Davis. He was so adequately prepared for the past with its more limited manpower and logistics, but never made the trip to the future, even if it was only a year away.

[1/1/08]

Jefferson Davis was truly living in the past; his past in charge of U.S. war making ability. He had no clue how it would change. He little understood how industry would make the defeat of Confederacy possible. He seemed not to understand the use of steamboats and railroads would defeat the Confederacy. That the U.S. would go into debt to defeat the Confederacy. It was probably Davis' experience as U.S. Senator and U.S. Secretary of War, that made him so unfit to accurately judge the future.
The Confederacy seemed not to understand that secession meant war, and that the Confederacy was capable of winning only a short war. Capable of extending a war into years, but not winning a war past the first year. By mid-1862 and mid-1863, the Confederacy would be incapable of holding certain Confederate territory. And Jefferson Davis's experience left him unprepared for such a happening.
 
Having been the Secretary of War beforehand gave Davis the confidence to believe he knew what he was doing, and therefore didn't need anybody's advice. This, combined with his very real desire to be a general himself commanding troops in the field, made him a stubborn, overconfident, meddler in the details of the army.
This irrevocably crippled him as a President in a war.
Lincoln, on the other hand, knew his limitations.
 
Lincoln himself would have found it difficult, if not impossible, to pull the Confederate states into anything like a nation. The deck was stacked against a mediocre player.
Ole
 
Jefferson Davis: US Secretary of War/Confederate President

Much food for thought here. One suggestion sparked my interest. In an Ideal World, Alexander Stephens as President and Davis as Sec'y of War has much to recommend it.
If, as I believe, the Confederate gov't would have evolved, rather quickly into a carbon copy of the gov't in Washington D.C. without the countervailing requirements of slavery as the reason for strict observance of the State Rights theory. Then, Stephens as the exemplar of the strict constructionist school of State Rights would be needed to resist the temptation to sacrifice the very reason that the south was engaged in a bloody civil war in the first place (as Stephens suspected Davis would, if it came to a choice between slavery and independence).
Davis, as Sec'y of War would, IMO, be dilligent and much more innovative, when removed from the vagaries of political compromises, required for a President.
I do not believe, that such a combination would have won the War or made it any longer, the odds were just too great.
 
Lincoln himself would have found it difficult, if not impossible, to pull the Confederate states into anything like a nation. The deck was stacked against a mediocre player.
Ole

I should like you always to hold such opinions, and spew such WISDOM whenever the mood should strike.

That way, you may always be known by those who truly do know.

Lincoln is greater than Davis. Keep on alleging this. Don't ever stop.

Let the people know your complete and total knowledge of the CIVIL WAR.

THANK YOU, ALWAYS.

SIR

BEOWULF
 
Much food for thought here. One suggestion sparked my interest. In an Ideal World, Alexander Stephens as President and Davis as Sec'y of War has much to recommend it.
If, as I believe, the Confederate gov't would have evolved, rather quickly into a carbon copy of the gov't in Washington D.C. without the countervailing requirements of slavery as the reason for strict observance of the State Rights theory. Then, Stephens as the exemplar of the strict constructionist school of State Rights would be needed to resist the temptation to sacrifice the very reason that the south was engaged in a bloody civil war in the first place (as Stephens suspected Davis would, if it came to a choice between slavery and independence).
Davis, as Sec'y of War would, IMO, be dilligent and much more innovative, when removed from the vagaries of political compromises, required for a President.
I do not believe, that such a combination would have won the War or made it any longer, the odds were just too great.

Had the true Confederate South been in any way involved in Lincoln's murder, the guest list would have looked very different from those who actually were on it, and Lincoln would have been second on that list. SECOND.

First... would have been Stephens.

Beowulf
 
Having been the Secretary of War beforehand gave Davis the confidence to believe he knew what he was doing, and therefore didn't need anybody's advice. This, combined with his very real desire to be a general himself commanding troops in the field, made him a stubborn, overconfident, meddler in the details of the army.
This irrevocably crippled him as a President in a war.
Lincoln, on the other hand, knew his limitations.

So you don't see Lincoln as a micro-manager, himself?

Davis wanted to HEAD the army. He had no desire to be president, but was APPOINTED.

"Your generosity has bestowed upon me an undeserved distinction... one which I neither sought, nor desired..." (office of the president).



Beowulf
 
I should like you always to hold such opinions, and spew such WISDOM whenever the mood should strike.

That way, you may always be known by those who truly do know.

Lincoln is greater than Davis. Keep on alleging this. Don't ever stop.

Let the people know your complete and total knowledge of the CIVIL WAR.

THANK YOU, ALWAYS.

SIR

BEOWULF

pot/kettle/black.

Unionblue
 
So you don't see Lincoln as a micro-manager, himself?

Davis wanted to HEAD the army. He had no desire to be president, but was APPOINTED.

"Your generosity has bestowed upon me an undeserved distinction... one which I neither sought, nor desired..." (office of the president).



Beowulf

Beowulf,

One can only read history and see the results of such.

Davis lost.

Lincoln won.

Unionblue
 
Back
Top