Can Benjamin Butler be redeemed?

So historic reputations, once made, are set in stone? Sorry, that is just not realistic. New information does come to light. Bias all to often is used to bolster or destroy reputations. Lee's reputation is a perfect example. For years he was the marble man, nearly perfect in every way. Today, no serious student of the war believes this. He was human, and made mistakes. His reputation underwent a well deserved and long delayed honest assessment, without the political passions of his time getting in the way. The same can be true of any historic figure.
What new information has came to light that dispells his connections to corruption or heavy handed treatment of civilians?

The main thing that has changed is politics today, so I would think one should be cautious in "re interpretations" today could very well fall victim to catering to modern politics. Because using the buzzword of "context" the political views of his era are more relevant then ours today.

Pretty sure even today an order to treat protestors as ladies of the evening wouldn't fly.....nor have i seen many suggesting today his military acumen was brilliant.
 
What new information has came to light that dispells his connections to corruption or heavy handed treatment of civilians?

The main thing that has changed is politics today, so I would think one should be cautious in "re interpretations" today could very well fall victim to catering to modern politics. Because using the buzzword of "context" the political views of his era are more relevant then ours today.

Pretty sure even today an order to treat protestors as ladies of the evening wouldn't fly.....
Pretty sure condeming a lawyer for poor word choice is a very weak argument. The anti union affronts stopped as a result and women were indeed tossed into prison. KNOWING Butler would follow through proved to be as much of a deterent as actions.
Kind of recall this being a time of war when Jeff Davis left NO to flail around on its own.
Even with the rabid citizens of NO Butler had to hang, under orders from Genl Dix, only 1 person...not 500...1 (one)
 
Pretty sure condeming a lawyer for poor word choice is a very weak argument. The anti union affronts stopped as a result and women were indeed tossed into prison. KNOWING Butler would follow through proved to be as much of a deterent as actions.
Kind of recall this being a time of war when Jeff Davis left NO to flail around on its own.
Even with the rabid citizens of NO Butler had to hang, under orders from Genl Dix, only 1 person...not 500...1 (one)
Again it doesn't change American ideal of law, nor change links to corruption, nor change lack of military accumen.......

I suppose one could argue if we took brutal or heavy handed actions to protestors today it likely would decrease public protest. Are you advocating it as policy?

His argument of looking at policy such as treatment of women through modern politics instead of then, doesn't change it wouldn't be accepted today. So hardly makes it more excusable.

As I said earlier it's not even as if he had only one negative factor, it's multiple ones. So even if one wished to "reinterpet" or overlook one.......the others remain.
 
What new information has came to light that dispells his connections to corruption or heavy handed treatment of civilians?

The main thing that has changed is politics today, so I would think one should be cautious in "re interpretations" today could very well fall victim to catering to modern politics. Because using the buzzword of "context" the political views of his era are more relevant then ours today.

Pretty sure even today an order to treat protestors as ladies of the evening wouldn't fly.....nor have i seen many suggesting today his military acumen was brilliant.
A reputation encompasses many different facets. Butler, like everyone else in the world, has good points and bad points. Some want to focus exclusively on the bad points because that feeds their preconceived needs. Others prefer looking at the whole man to get a more balanced view. For what its worth, heavy handed treatment of civilians who are flaunting the law or decent behavior does not upset me.

No one is saying he is a Marble man, btw. He had many faults. Like most people.
 
A reputation encompasses many different facets. Butler, like everyone else in the world, has good points and bad points. Some want to focus exclusively on the bad points because that feeds their preconceived needs. Others prefer looking at the whole man to get a more balanced view. For what its worth, heavy handed treatment of civilians who are flaunting the law or decent behavior does not upset me.

No one is saying he is a Marble man, btw. He had many faults. Like most people.
I tend to think the opposite is true of ...........
Some want to focus exclusively on the bad points because that feeds their preconceived needs. Others prefer looking at the whole man to get a more balanced view.
Generally links to corruption is a serious negative. As is poor generalship of a military figure. The poor administration of civil/military law standards and principles as well controversial politics are lesser negatives. It would seem folly to suggest the multiple negatives could be separated from "a more balanced view" in context of suggesting "redemption" as the OP suggests.

A balanced view in my opinion would not suggest "redemption" or "reinterpretation" from a flawed figure. As I certaintly agree he was no where near a Marble man, and a balanced view would still conclude multiple negatives.
 
Last edited:
As I recall, John Bell Hood's insurance business failed and he, his wife and one child died of yellow fever in the 1878-79 epidermic, leaving 10 children to be parceled out to willing families.
I think yellow fever was more of a post Civil War problem.
General Butler's clean up campaign seems to have been aimed more at cholera. Both Old England and New England were aware by 1862 of the linkage between cholera and unsanitary water. Thus Butler was trying to give New Orleans the benefit of what was initially working in Boston.
1679270612435.png


p.23 https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1860/preliminary-report/1860e-03.pdf
 
The best part of opinions is that we all have them and they all stink. Mine have the advantage of 1st hand accounts and Butlers own letters.
Now, if you wish to say Andrew was corrupt, ok. If you wish to suggest Ben was being paid to look the other way I would say post the factual details.
I wont argue for Andrews salvation
Corruption was endemic in 1861. And if Andrew was corrupt I wonder who was helping him? Its hard to be corrupt without partners and associates.
 
To be clear, turning a blind eye to your relative and subordinate's self-dealing is absolutely a form of corruption. But I've never really seen anything other than innuendo suggesting Butler was pocketing anything from New Orleans himself.
What was Andrew doing? Was he stealing cotton? Was he buying cotton at the farm price and selling it at the New York price? I suspect the latter, and that there were Louisianans glad to get some federal cash for their cotton. In that decade, corruption was often a matter of who was benefitting.
 
1679277033265.png

from:
Bruce Catton's Uncivil War on Benjamin Butler
Paul C. Palmer, Nancy Carol Carter
Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Summer, 1995), pp. 261-275

That quote alone demands a more balanced assessment of the man. Not a whitewashing, but an honest reexamination of the historical record.
 
I am not sure who the intended target was, but apparently chamberpots were a favorite tool of protest in the city.

The pots where so popular that as an early fundraiser the NO museum had them made and publicly sold
 
Again it doesn't change American ideal of law, nor change links to corruption, nor change lack of military accumen.......

I suppose one could argue if we took brutal or heavy handed actions to protestors today it likely would decrease public protest. Are you advocating it as policy?

His argument of looking at policy such as treatment of women through modern politics instead of then, doesn't change it wouldn't be accepted today. So hardly makes it more excusable.

As I said earlier it's not even as if he had only one negative factor, it's multiple ones. So even if one wished to "reinterpet" or overlook one.......the others remain.
Going by this logic then no military man would pass your bar. They ALL had warts and based on our own prejedices we maximize some, invent a few and overlook others.
We need to deal in whole cloth here not snippets
 
I tend to think the opposite is true of ...........

Generally links to corruption is a serious negative. As is poor generalship of a military figure. The poor administration of civil/military law standards and principles as well controversial politics are lesser negatives. It would seem folly to suggest the multiple negatives could be separated from "a more balanced view" in context of suggesting "redemption" as the OP suggests.

A balanced view in my opinion would not suggest "redemption" or "reinterpretation" from a flawed figure. As I certaintly agree he was no where near a Marble man, and a balanced view would still conclude multiple negatives.
i value your opinion and i am glad that there is this format for you to vent. We wont change eachothers viewpoints on how powerful Butler was as an administrator. Did you know that when he left NO the Butler policies actually produced a revenue surplus back to DC.
We will never know if The Big Guy got 10%
He sure never needed it, especially when he owned the Cape Ann Granite works, the bunting company and The Union Cartridge Co...aside from being a pretty fair lawyer
 
With respect to Hood, I agree.
Again, cholera as well as any pestilence associated with filthiness was an issue for Butler, but the threat of yellow fever was and always has been a major source of panic in the Crescent City and its surrounding areas.

Here are a secondary sources that corroborate what I am saying (Dufour's passages merely represent the constant fear yellow fever played in the minds of the population of New Orleans):

Winters, John D. The Civil War in Louisiana. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1991.

pg 127 "Fearing for the health of his men, General Butler ordered an immediate cleanup campaign. Corps of men were hired to scour the streets, to flush sewers, and to clean out the stagnant canals. In addition, Butler insisted upon sanitary conditions in both private and public premises and enforced a rigid yellow-fever quarantine against all incoming ships. As a result, New Orleans, for awhile, became one of America's healthiest cities."

pg 128-129 "The strict quarantine maintained by Butler to guard against yellow fever delayed foreign commerce and brought many complaints to his head quarters from the foreign consuls."

pg 130 "One of the most potent weapons was the threat of yellow fever.One diarist stated: 'The People of the town are frightening them terribly with tales of yellow fever.' So effective was the method that General Butler reported, 'A panic seized many of my officers.' Many of them began to apply for furlough and sick leave to escape the terrors of the dread scourge. To reassure his men, the general enforced rigid sanitation rules and a strict quarantine below the city."

Hearn, Chester G. When the Devil Came Down to Dixie: Ben Butler in New Orleans. Baton Rouge: Louisiana History Press, 1997.

pg 96 "Since his days at Waterville College, Butler had looked into the epidemiology of yellow fever, the tropical disease that killed his father. Aware that the pestilence visited the city about once every three years, he knew it would be overdue during the summer of 1862. His men knew it too, and some became panic-stricken, constantly hounding him for permission to go home. The only known prevention was a rigid quarantine of incoming vessels. Butler researched the disease and became convinced that filth, ore than anything else, had propagated the city's worse epidemics."

Dufour, Charles. The Night the War Was Lost. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1960.

pg 25 "Each year, after yellow fever season, when the first cool weather signaled the retreat of the Bronze John to his pest-laden swamps, wealthy planters from all over the South arrived at New Orleans."

"The good health that had been noted in New Orleans in the summer still prevailed in the fall, and the fact that the blockade had kept out yellow fever was implicit in the vital statistics for 1861, which showed that May to October--the normal yellow-fever season--there were 913 fewer deaths in the city than for the same period in 1860."

"'People of New Orleans are talking confidently of an ally soon to join them in the defense of the city against the Union invaders--Bronze John, Yellow Jack, yellow fever. People everywhere--in the streets, on the exchanges, at the clubs, at home--speak of the approaching yellow-fever season and the effect it will have on the unacclimated Northern soldiers. The Delta predicted: ' Warm weather is rapidly approaching, and the deadly heat of the Gulf and Lake coasts, combined with pestilence, will soon commit more ravages than a dozen bottles." The other newspapers have picked up the idea and state that if the Federals are going to strike at New Orleans they had better hurry before yellow fever strikes first."

Bell, Andrew McIlwaine. Mosquito Soldiers: Malaria, Yellow Fever, and the Course of the American Civil War . Louisiana State University Press. Kindle Edition.

In New Orleans, for example, Major General Benjamin Butler watched in frustration as a number of officers in his occupation force were "frightened home by fear of yellow fever."

Even so, the rebellious spirit of the city was alive and well six days later, when an army of fifteen thousand bluecoats under the command of Major General Benjamin F. Butler arrived to take control. Butler's troops encountered the same menacing stares and angry insults that Farragut's men had endured. But while the residents of New Orleans were enraged over the Yankee occupation, they also held out hope that nature, or perhaps nature's God, might intervene on their behalf.1 They had good reason to be hopeful. Yellow fever outbreaks had swept through New Orleans nearly every year since 1817, killing more than forty thousand people and establishing the city's reputation as one of the unhealthiest places to live in the United States. The decade just before the Civil War was especially sickly. Back-to-back epidemics in 1853, 1854, and 1855, followed by another one in 1858, produced a staggering eighteen thousand casualties and virtually wiped out the city's nonimmune immigrant population. New Orleans natives knew that when "yellow jack" appeared in their midst, newcomers were especially susceptible to its ravages, giving rise to one of the malady's more fitting sobriquets, "Stranger's Disease." The thousands of Union soldiers tasked with maintaining order in the city were the perfect target for the virus because none of them had ever lived through an epidemic. Yellow fever might succeed where the Confederate military had failed and rid the city of its occupiers.

Butler was certainly worried about yellow fever. He believed the locals were intentionally creating unsanitary conditions in the city in order to increase the likelihood of an epidemic, a scenario that made his men nervous as well. Residents preyed upon these fears. The city's schoolchildren chanted blood-curdling nursery rhymes in the streets about how the pestilence would soon wreak havoc on the Yankees, while parishioners with southern sympathies were said to be praying in the pews for the disease to arrive. Two locals even went so far as to measure and record the height of a group of soldiers; when asked to explain their behavior, they claimed to be taking measurements for the coffins that would become necessary once yellow fever burned through the Union ranks.

Butler's two-pronged approach ultimately proved successful; only two yellow fever deaths occurred within the city of New Orleans during the 1862 sickly season. His stringent sanitation policy eliminated many of the places where Aedes aegypti mosquitoes preferred to breed, such as rain-filled receptacles and stagnant pools, and the quarantine he enacted isolated infected insects and men. The Massachusetts general believed these actions preserved the health of the city, but residents were convinced that their enemies had simply gotten lucky.

Here are some excerpts from Volume XV of the Official Records as well:

Butler's September 1, 1862 letter to General Halleck (pg 558):

"....I learn by the secession newspapers that I am to be relieved of this command. If that be so, might I ask that my successor be sent as early as possible, as my own health is not the strongest, and it will seem but fair that he should take some part in the yellow fever season."

Butler in a letter to Secretary Stanton in reference to the quarantine measures he put into effect in New Orleans to ward off yellow fever on June 17, 1862 (pg 478)

"At the opening of the port, Havana receiving the news first, there was an immediate clearance thence of vessels for New Orleans. But the yellow fever is at Havana, so that I must maintain strict quarantine. The desire for forestalling the market makes all the vessels very uneasy under quarantine regulations, so that I have all manner of complaint and trouble with the foreign consuls representing their countrymen in that regard, but I shall maintain quarantine at all hazards."


Cholera struck anywhere because of its nature. The men from the North were familiar with it, but yellow fever was a completely different animal in their eyes. Butler gave yellow fever as much attention as he possibly could throughout his time in the city.
 
i value your opinion and i am glad that there is this format for you to vent. We wont change eachothers viewpoints on how powerful Butler was as an administrator. Did you know that when he left NO the Butler policies actually produced a revenue surplus back to DC.
We will never know if The Big Guy got 10%
He sure never needed it, especially when he owned the Cape Ann Granite works, the bunting company and The Union Cartridge Co...aside from being a pretty fair lawyer
No venting, just noting he has done nothing to have changed his reputation.

As the previous poster said Butler is certainly no marble man. He wasn't 150 years ago, he isn't today. So not seeing what's "redeemed".

His warts then, remain today.
 
No venting, just noting he has done nothing to have changed his reputation.

As the previous poster said Butler is certainly no marble man. He wasn't 150 years ago, he isn't today. So not seeing what's "redeemed".

His warts then, remain today.
Its rare that dead people do anything to change their reps. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

As you said, take him with warts and all. I think the redemption is about recognizing that he was successful in certain aspects of his career and people are looking at his whole career now. I know growing up I viewed him as a complete disaster with no redeeming values, and know I now that was a cartoon vision and he actually did have some important successes, and yes, still some warts.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top