Category Archives: Parker family

01/1/12

The American Idea

     I have  mentioned before that I often ask visitors to White Haven: What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the word “American”? Invariably they answer “freedom.” It’s as if the word “American” and the word “freedom” are synonymous.

     In 1850, eight years before Abraham Lincoln famously contended with Steven Douglas in a series of debates that focused on the institution of slavery in America, a decade before Lincoln was elected President and the country split into warring sections, and thirteen years before Lincoln gave one of the most profound and well-known speeches in American history, Theodore Parker addressed the New England Anti-Slavery Convention in Boston. In his speech he contended:

     Now, there are two opposite and conflicting principles recognized in the political action of America: at this moment, they contend for mastery, each striving to destroy the other.

     There is what I call the American idea. I so name it, because it seems to me to lie at the basis of all our truly original, distinctive and American institutions. It is itself a complex idea, composed of three subordinate and more simple ideas, namely: the idea that all men have unalienable rights; that in respect thereof, all men are created equal; and that government is to be established and maintained for the purpose of giving every man an opportunity for the enjoyment and development of all these unalienable rights. This idea demands, as the proximate organization thereof, a democracy, that is, a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people; of course, a government after the principles of eternal justice, the unchanging law of God; for shortness sake, I will call it the idea of Freedom.

     That is one idea; and the other is, that one man has a right to hold another man in thralldom, not for the slave’s good, but for the master’s convenience; not on account of any wrong the slave has done or intended, but solely for the benefit of the master. This idea is not peculiarly American. For shortness’ sake, I will call this the idea of Slavery. It demands for its proximate organization, an aristocracy, that is, a government of all the people by a part of the people – the masters; against a part of the people – the slaves; a government contrary to the principles of eternal justice, contrary to the unchanging law of God. These two ideas are hostile, irreconcilably hostile, and can no more be compromised and made to coalesce in the life of this nation, than the worship of the real God and the worship of the imaginary Devil can be combined and made to coalesce in the life of a single man. You can read the entire speech here.

    Lincoln’s law partner William Herndon carried on a correspondence with Parker in the 1850s. Herndon gave Parker’s speeches to Lincoln, who read and annotated them.

     Contrast Parker’s vision of America with that of Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States in 1861:

     The prevailing ideas….at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically….Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.”…..Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth……

    Many Governments have been founded upon the principles of certain classes; but the classes thus enslaved, were of the same race, and in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature’s laws. The negro by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite-then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is the best, not only for the superior but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in conformity with the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances or to question them. For His own purposes He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made “one star to differ from another in glory.”

   The great objects of humanity are best attained, when conformed to his laws and degrees [sic], in the formation of Governments as well as in all things else. Our Confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders “is become the chief stone of the corner” in our new edifice. Read more here.

     I am not one to argue over the “purposes of the Creator.” I do, however, believe that Parker was correct in his contention that “freedom” was and continues to be an “American idea.” Stephens believed that the Northern “crusade against our institutions [slavery] would ultimately fail.” In that, he was incorrect. The last few days there has been quite an exchange of comments at Brooks Simpson’s Crossroads. He has drawn the ire of some people who still, after nearly 150 years, refuse to acknowledge that the American idea triumphed in the Civil War, and, despite their hatred of it, the American idea will continue long after they are gone.

12/12/11

Theodore Parker

 

Theodore Parker 1855

    I discovered a cousin, John G. Parker III, online a few years ago while doing some genealogy research. We share the same great-great-grandparents, John and Elmira Parker. He has followed our Parker family line back to England, and has discovered some interesting people in the Parker family tree along the way. He tells me that one of those Parkers is the Rev. Theodore Parker, the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) New England abolitionist. From the book The Inner Civil War: Northern Intellectuals and the Crisis of the Union by George M. Frederickson:

     The foremost spokesman for the use of force in the righteous cause was Theodore Parker. Parker found it easy to be a rebel against authority because he was steeped in the traditions of the American Revolution. His grandfather had led the minutemen on Lexington Green, and Parker never forgot this; he kept Captain Parker’s musket hanging over his desk as a constant reminder. When efforts were made in the early 1850′s to recapture fugitive slaves in Massachusetts under the new federal law, Parker came to the conclusion that the slave code had been brought to New England and that a revolutionary state existed. Once again the time had come for citizen resistance to unjust laws. Parker became chairman of the Boston Vigilance committee and directed the forcible attempts to rescue fugitive slaves from the authorities. His principle lieutenant was Thomas Wentworth Higginson…It was Higginson, fresh from a meeting addressed by Parker, who led the anti-slavery mob which attempted to free Anthony Burns by assaulting the Boston Courthouse in 1854…For Parker, the revolutionary creed of the Declaration of Independence had the dual sanction of tradition and conscience…Slavery was wrong, and a form of tyranny: One had an historical justification, a natural right, and a moral duty to use any means to bring down its destruction.    

     Higginson would go to Kansas and involve himself in the Kansas-Missouri border war after the passage of the Nebraska Bill. Parker was too old and unhealthy by that time but he helped finance arms sent to the free-staters. Parker and Higginson later became the leading figures of the group of Northern abolitionists known by some as the Secret Six, who financed John Brown’s raid at Harper’s Ferry in 1859. Parker had left the country in search of better climate for his failing health when he received the news of Brown’s failed expedition. He sent a lengthy letter from Rome in 1860 in which he carefully elaborated his views:

     1. A man held against his will as a slave has a natural right to kill everyone who seeks to prevent his enjoyment of liberty.  This has long been recognized as a self-evident proposition coming so directly from the Primitive Instincts of Human Nature,  that it neither required proofs nor admitted them.

    2. It may be a natural duty of the slave to develop this natural right in a practical manner [and themselves ?]  kill all those who seek to prevent his enjoyment of liberty.  For if he continue patiently in bondage: First, he entails the foulest of curses on his children; and, second, he encourages other men to commit the crime against nature which he allows his own master to commit. It is my duty to preserve my own body from starvation. If I fail thereof through sloth, I not only die, but incur the contempt and loathing of my acquaintances while I live. It is not less my duty to do all that is in my power to preserve my body and soul from Slavery; and if I submit to that through cowardice, I not only become a bondman, and suffer what thraldom inflicts, but I incur also the contempt and loathing of my acquaintance. Why do freemen scorn and despise  a slave? Because they think his condition is a sign of his cowardice, and believe that he ought to prefer death to bondage. The Southerners hold the Africans in great contempt, though mothers of their children. Why? Simply because the Africans fail to perform the natural duty of securing freedom by killing their oppressors.

    3. The freeman has a natural right to help the slaves recover their liberty, and in that enterprise to do for them all which they have a right to do for themselves. This statement, I think, requires no argument or illustration.

    4. It may be a Natural Duty for the freeman to help the slaves to the enjoyment of their liberty, and as means to that end, to aid them in killing all such as oppose their natural freedom. If you were attacked by a wolf, I should not only have a Right to aid you in getting rid of that enemy, but it would be my DUTY to help you in proportion to my power. If it were a murderer, and not a wolf, who attacked you, the duty would be still the same. Suppose it is not a murderer who would kill you, but a kidnapperwho would enslave, does that make it any less my duty to help you out of the hands of your enemy? Suppose it is not a kidnapper who would make you a bondman, but a slaveholder who would keep you one, does that remove my obligation to help you?

    5. The performance of his duty is to be controlled by the freeman’s power and opportunity to help the slaves. The Impossible is never the Obligatory.  

     Parker included this observation in his letter also:

     Such insurrections [as Brown's] will continue as long as Slavery lasts, and will increase, both in frequency and in power, just as the people become intelligent and moral. Virginia may hang John Brown and all that family, but she cannot hang the Human Race; and until that is done, noble men will rejoice in the motto of that once magnanimous State—” Sic  semper Tyrannis! ” “Let such be the end of every oppressor.” It is a good Anti-Slavery picture on the Virginia shield: – a man standing on a tyrant and chopping his head off with a sword; only I would paint the sword-holder black and the tyrant white to show the immediate application of the principle.

     You can find the entire document here.  Did Parker make his case? Should his philosophy be applied to other injustices?

     In the midst of the turbulent 1960′s, historian Bertram Wyatt-Brown published an essay entitled Abolitionism: Its Meaning For Contemporary Reform in which he examined the various interpretations historians have assigned to the abolitionists and asked what abolitionism contributed to American reform movements. He wrote:

     Old historical traditions do not die easily. One of them holds that abolitionists  plunged the nation into civil war simply to gratify their own bloodlusts. Black Reconstruction was the result. Scholars may claim their emancipation from this apology for the Old South, but regional folklore remains in unswept corners of the most sophisticated minds. A similar interpretation was expressed by the late James G. Randall, whose biography of Abraham Lincoln reflected his sympathy for a conservative approach to slavery. Moreover, Randall, like some other historians writing between the two world wars, considered violent conflict an ineffectual and immoral means to settle national and international disputes. In consequence, he held that war, not slavery, was the compelling sin of mid-nineteenth-century America. Abolitionists, therefore, were harpies of destruction rather than prophets of freedom. Another tradition has grown out of Charles A. Beard’s theory of American history, which, with its emphasis upon class and economic issues, undercut the moral significance of the abolitionists’ role. By implication at least, they became apologists for wage-slavery and Yankee industry. Despite their oversimplifications, these familiar interpretations have colored our attitudes toward the movement.  

     Although it has been forty-five years since Wyatt-Brown’s essay was written, these interpretations of abolitionists still have currency. Wyatt-Brown also opined that the “vital contribution of abolitionism has been its help in the development of our guilty conscience about race.” Is this still true? And how helpful is guilt? I wrote about this in an early post.

 

 

04/6/11

Standing In The Presence Of The Past

     When my wife and I visited Shiloh a couple of years ago we had this song playing as we entered the park. As we passed the first few monuments, Sue had tears rolling down her cheeks. It was a beautiful day and it is a beautiful place. I have mentioned before that I had two ancestors in the 29th Indiana who fought there (see here).

      Darryl Worley is from Savannah, right across the river, which is where Grant had his headquarters (the house is still there in private hands).

     I like this song, but I have a little trouble with the line, “hell, nobody really won.”

03/5/11

An Abolitionist Ancestor

     I have written in earlier posts that my 19th century ancestors were at least anti-slavery, and possibly abolitionist. There is an important distinction there which many people today are unaware of. Many people in the antebellum period thought slavery was wrong for various reasons; often not from any humanitarian concern for enslaved people, as my posts on Gratz Brown and free labor ideology have been discussing. Many of these people only thought slavery should end at some unknown time in the future. Others wanted to stop slavery’s spread into new territories and states, but thought the Constitution protected it in states where it already existed. Abolitionists thought slavery was a sin and should be abolished, hence the term. Despite this belief, however, many abolitionists only agitated for gradual emancipation, rather than immediate emancipation. If all of this seems confusing now, to some people it was then, also. In addition, pro-slavery people often accused anti-slavery people of being abolitionists – a charge they often vehemently denied. Abolitionism carried with it the fear of the consequences of emancipation – social and political equality, and the intermixing of the races. Strident abolitionists were considered fanatics.

     Here is more evidence of abolitionism in my family tree. Obed Dickinson was born in Massachusetts, December 8, 1782. He married Experience Smith and they began to have children – eleven children between 1805 and 1829. The last child born was christened Julia Ann Dickinson on July 21, 1829. Interestingly, her father, Obed Dickinson, had died on October 28, 1828. Counting the months would lead one to believe that Julia’s mother, Experience, may not have even known she was pregnant when her husband died.**See update below.** At any rate, for Julia, the role of father was assumed by one of her older brothers. This brother, born on June 15, 1818, had been named after their father.

Obed Dickinson 1818-1892, from "Obed Dickinson's War Against Sin In Salem 1853-1867" by Egbert S. Oliver

   The younger Obed Dickinson moved to Branch County, Michigan in 1836. How many of the other Dickinsons moved with him, I don’t know, but I do know that Julia Ann moved there because in 1849 she married Cyrus Gray Luce, the future Governor of Michigan. Obed went to Marietta College; then Andover Theological Seminary where he became an ordained Congregationalist minister. In November 1852 Obed and his new wife Charlotte migrated from Michigan to Oregon with seven other couples sent by the American Missionary Society to minister on the frontier. Obed and Charlotte ended their journey in Salem, Oregon in early 1853 and organized a Congregational Church. The following is from Salem Online History:

      “Reverend Obed Dickinson of the First Congregational Church and his wife Charlotte were fervent abolitionists and advocates of black equality. Rev. Dickinson welcomed African-Americans into his church; former slaves Robin and Polly Holmes were among several who became members. Because most former slaves were illiterate, Charlotte Dickinson taught four black women in her home for two hours every evening, “with a fifth as often as her mistress will allow.” One was a grown woman with a family, and at least two were servant girls.

In his writings, Obed Dickinson lamented that Salem had “closed the doors of all our schools against the children of these black families dooming them to ignorance for life.” He described a William P. Johnson, who worked as a painter for $5 a day and looked “nearly white.” His daughter-in-law had grown up in slavery and never been to school, so Johnson offered to give $500 to one of the Salem schools so that she could learn to read and write. His offer was refused. Dickinson also described a boy “so ignorant he hardly knew his right hand from his left” who was accused of theft, captured by a “gang of men,” whipped and hanged nearly to death until he confessed. He was jailed two months before his trial, and was finally acquitted.

On January 1, 1863, Rev. Dickinson officiated the wedding of America Waldo and Richard Bogle and hosted the wedding reception. A black wedding taking place in a white church and a party attended by both blacks and whites was apparently too much for some people to handle. The event provoked nasty comments from Asahel Bush, first in his private letters and then in the Oregon Statesman; eventually, the incident made the newspapers as far away as the Portland Oregonian and the San Francisco Bulletin.”

     The Salem Pioneer Cemetery (where Obed and Charlotte are buried) records indicate that Obed had “confronted the liquor interests and he had advocated more taxes for schools in the face of opposition and indifference, but facing the question of equality and civil rights for Negroes brought his ministry to a climax.” He resigned his pastorate and entered the seed business in 1867.

     Later in his life, 1879, Obed read a paper at a Congregationalist meeting insisting that the Sabbath should be the last day of the week, not the first. His fellow Congregationalists did not agree, and Obed left to start the Seventh Day Adventist church in Salem.   

     You can read more about Obed Dickinson here and about his wife Charlotte here.

     I don’t know where Obed got his abolitionist beliefs; perhaps from his parents, but I would think it very likely that he had tremendous influence over the little sister he helped raise, Julia Ann Dickinson Luce, my ggg-grandmother, and the wife of Cyrus G. Luce.

**Update** It seems that the Obed Dickinson obituary from Salem Pioneer Cemetery may be in error. A historian of Gilead, Michigan, where Obed, Sr and Experience, Obed Dickinson’s parents, died and are buried tells me that Obed, Sr died in 1838, not 1828. That would make his son Obed, the subject of this post, about 20 years old and his daughter Julia Ann, about 9 at his passing.

 

02/10/11

The Parker Brother Twins in the Civil War

    

Steuben County, Indiana Civil War Monument

One of my gg-grandfathers, John G. Parker, had six brothers. At least four, all younger than John, served in Indiana units during the Civil War. Their names are enshrined on the Civil War monument that is in the center of the Angola, Indiana town square. They hailed from Orland, which is in Steuben County; Angola is the county seat.

Edward A. Parker

     Two of them were twins, Edwin L. and Edward A. Parker. Together, Edward and Edwin volunteered for service on September 6, 1861 at the age of 21. Edwin survived the war, Edward did not. They were initially mustered into the 29th Indiana Infantry, Company A, as privates. Evidently they were not identical twins. Edwin is described as 5’ 7”, with a light complexion, blue eyes, and sandy hair. Edward was slightly shorter at 5’ 5 ¾”, with dark complexion, dark eyes, and brown hair. Edward’s occupation is listed as “printer,” Edwin’s “drover.”

     The 29th left Indiana on October 9th, 1861 and took part in action at Bowling Green, Kentucky in February, 1862.

 Marching with McCook’s division of the Army of the Ohio under Don Carlos Buell, the Parker twins arrived at Pittsburg Landing, Tennessee on the evening of the first day of the Battle of Shiloh. On April 7, 1862, the second day of the battle, the 29th was held in reserve until noon, at which time they were moved front and center of the Union lines and endured two hours of heavy fighting. Both Edward and Edwin survived, and the 29th continued to see action. The twins participated in the siege of Corinth, but then seem to have

29th Indiana Monument at Shiloh

parted ways. Edward stayed with the 29th which fought at Stone’s River, where it took heavy losses. Edward was apparently serving as a nurse during this time and was promoted to Sgt. in April 1863.  Edwin was hospitalized in Dec. 1861, sick on furlough Jan. ’62, then on recruiting duty by order of Gen. Buell Aug. ‘62. In September, Edwin was discharged from the 29th “with a view to promotion” and in September 1862, was enrolled in the 5th Cavalry, Co. M, as a 2nd Lieutenant. He was mustered out of the 5th by act of Congress in May of 1863, and then appears to have joined the 6th Indiana Cavalry.

     Edward, still with the 29th in September 1863, was captured at Chickamauga, and eventually ended up at Andersonville Prison. He died there of diarrhea, on July 27, 1864. The final nine months of his life could not have been pleasant. After the war Edwin apparently enlisted in the regular Army because his obituary states: “Lieutenant Parker also served in the U.S. Army, enlisting as a private, promoted to Corporal Sargeant [sic] then to Lieutenant in battle of Sandy Creek, Colorado, with Sioux and Cheyennes, where over five hundred Indians were killed.” I do not think this is the infamous “Sand Creek Massacre” because there were no regular army units there. There was another fight at Big Sandy Creek in 1868, although there does not appear to have been “five hundred Indians killed.” Interestingly, this battle involved Buffalo Soldiers. Could Edwin have been an officer of a black unit? Perhaps, the writer of the obituary had the two incidents confused? The information here provided is based primarily on the Parker twins’ Combined Military Service Records. Obviously, more research needs to be done. I do not have pension records yet.

Edwin L. Parker

It is unlikely that I will ever know exactly why these young men chose to enlist. I know that they lived in a town that was a stop on the Underground Railroad, where men with strong anti-slavery convictions resided. I know their older brother’s father-in-law, Cyrus G. Luce, helped found the Republican Party, and was anti-slavery, possibly even an abolitionist. I know there was tremendous peer pressure, and community pressure, and pressure from the young ladies. Did they think it would all be a grand adventure? Sadly, I don’t have a diary or even letters that might help me know their thoughts. But, I do know the results of the war they fought, and in which one of them died. For that I am thankful.

I will have more on the other Parker brothers in another post.

02/3/11

John G. Parker’s Department Store

J.G. Parker Store circa 1910, a few years after John Parker's passing.

    John Parker operated his department store in Orland, Indiana for nearly forty years. Like most 19th Century American towns, Orland wanted a railroad. A railroad put a town “on the map” and was expected to bring growth and economic prosperity. John’s obituary stated:

“Mr. Parker was one of the promoters of the railroad for Orland, an event he had looked forward to many, many years. It gives an added touch of sadness that he could not have lived to see the realization of his hopes.”

J.G. Parker Store circa 2006. The stone inset at the top of the building still reads J.G. Parker.

     The railroad came (see here), but apparently it was not the panacea John had hoped for, as Orland never grew. Today it is a town of about three hundred residents. John Parker’s brick department store still dominates the small ”downtown.”

J.G. Parker Department Store advertisement from an Orland newspaper, 1903.

02/3/11

My Own 19th Century American History

The Parker House, Orland, Indiana. The Parkers, from left to right, Grace, Howard, Bernice, Elmira Jane, Effie (the maid), John G. Parker. The little girl in front is my great-grandmother, Florence Belle. She was born in 1884, so this photo probably dates to about 1890.

     John G. Parker was born in Hillsboro, New Hampshire in 1838. Like many 19th Century American families, Matthew and Ismena Parker had a large family.

1850 census, Hartford, Vermont, once part of New Hampshire.

John was the fifth of nine children born to Matthew and Ismena, who had seven sons and two daughters. In 1852, John Parker moved to Steuben County, Indiana, where he went to work on the farm of Charles Luce, a brother of Cyrus G. Luce. According to John’s obituary, while working on the Luce farm,

    “he met with an accident that totally disabled him for agricultural work. About this time gold fever was running high in the West, and he grasped the idea of freighting it through Colorado and Montana. Not finding all true to his expectations, he came back to Tama City, Iowa, where he engaged for a time in the mercantile business.

John Gibson Parker 1838-1907

Selling out, he returned to Orland [Indiana] and in 1868 he went into business with his brother James. In about two years he bought out his brother’s interest, commenced for himself and here remained until his death, March 10, 1907.” 

     John Parker apparently spent most of the Civil War years in the west. Likely, his farming accident had disqualified him not only for agricultural work, but also for military service. However, at least four of John’s brothers served in Indiana units. I will write more about them later.

      In 1870 John G. Parker married a daughter of Cyrus G. Luce, Elmira Jane. They lived in a beautiful two story Victorian home in Orland (see above), where they raised four children, the youngest of which was Florence Belle, my great-grandmother.

Elmira Jane Parker 1850-1913. Daughter of Michigan Governor Cyrus G. Luce

     Orland was a hotbed of abolitionist activity and the house is pictured at this website as a stop on the Underground Railroad.

     I was able to visit Orland in 2006. A sign in the house window indicated that it had been built in 1859. What I have not been able to ascertain is who built the house and who lived in it before John and Elmira married. On the website linked above, it is identified as the Ernsberger House, but the Ernsbergers owned the house in the twentieth century, after the Parkers. I think that possibly the house was built by the Luces, but I have not been able to verify that. From what I know about the Luces, it would not surprise me to learn that they would hide escaping slaves.