F: Farley through French

See below for annotated biographies of Free Soil Party leaders, members and supporters. Source: Scribner’s Dictionary of American Biography.

FARLEY, George F., Middlesex County, Massachusetts, political leader, Free Soil Party.

(Wilson, Henry, History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, Vol. 2.  Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1872, 345)


FAULK, ANDREW JACKSON (November 26, 1814-September 4, 1898), third governor of Dakota Territory. “Because of his opposition to the further extension of slavery in the territories, he became an advocate of Colonel Samuel Black's anti-slavery resolution in the Democratic state convention at Pittsburgh in 1849, and following its repudiation by the succeeding convention, he shifted from the Democratic to the newly formed Republican party.”

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 297-298;

FAULK, ANDREW JACKSON (November 26, 1814-September 4, 1898), third governor of Dakota Territory, was born at Milford, Pike County, Pennsylvania. In 1815 his parents, John and Margaret (Heiner) Faulk, moved to Kittanning, in Armstrong County, where Andrew received his education in the subscription schools and Kittanning Academy. Later he learned the printing trade, then studied law under Michael Gallagher and Joseph Buffington, though he was not admitted to the bar until 1866. In 1835 he married Charlotte McMath, of Washington County, Pennsylvania. Faulk essayed a crusader's role in local politics early in life, first through the medium of the Armstrong County Democrat, which he edited and published from 1837 to 1841, and then by means of various county offices which he held from 1840 to 1860. He attacked the Pennsylvania law permitting imprisonment for debt and gave active support to Thaddeus Stevens's free-school program. Because of his opposition to the further extension of slavery in the territories, he became an advocate of Colonel Samuel Black's anti-slavery resolution in the Democratic state convention at Pittsburgh in 1849, and following its repudiation by the succeeding convention, he shifted from the Democratic to the newly formed Republican party. In 1861 he was appointed by President Lincoln post trader to the Yankton Indian reservation, on the Missouri River, which at the time was the principal supply base for the military stations and Indian agencies in th!! upper Missouri country. His work at the post was important, for his tactful and honest policy in dealing with the professedly friendly Yankton Indians did much to prevent their alliance with the hostile Santee Sioux to make war on the whites while the federal troops were occupied in the Civil War. From 1864 to 1866 Faulk was again in Pennsylvania. There he assisted in organizing and superintending the Latonia Coal Company of New York, and promoted the Paxton Oil Company of Pittsburgh. In 1866 he returned to Dakota as territorial governor and superintendent of Indian-affairs, by virtue of President Johnson's appointment. During his two-year term of office he aided the geologist, E. N. Hayden, in calling attention to the mineral resources to be found in the Black Hills by bringing the Black Hills question before the territorial legislature, and by inducing that body to appeal to Congress for help in recovering the region from the Indians. As an advisory member of General Sherman's commission which negotiated the treaty of Fort Laramie, establishing the Indians west of the Missouri River, Faulk aided in opening the Black Hills to white settlers. His policy aimed at peace with the Indians and in achieving that end he showed an unusual knowledge of Indian affairs. After retiring from the governorship he continued to reside at Yankton until his death. He was at various times mayor and alderman of Yankton, United States court commissioner, clerk of the territorial courts for the second judicial district, and for many years president of the Dakota bar association.

[Press and Dakotan (Yankton, S. D.), September 8, 1898; (S. D.) Memorial and Biography Record (1897), pp. 223- 35; S. D. History Colls., I (1902), 135; Monthly South Dakotan, July 1898; House Journal ... of the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Dakota, 1866-69, passim.]

T. D. M. G.H.G.


FENTON, REUBEN EATON (July 4, 1819-August 25, 1885), United States senator, governor of New York, banker. He was sent to Congress in 1852 when the controversy arose over the Kansas-Nebraska Bill. His maiden address against this measure, marked his secession from the Democratic party on the slavery question. He was one of the leaders in the formation, and afterward in the conduct, of the Republican party, serving in 1855 as presiding officer of the first Republican state convention in New York. In 1854 he was defeated for Congress on the Know-Nothing ticket, but in 1856 he was elected as the Republican candidate, serving until 1864, when he resigned to become governor of New York. A Sketch of the Life of Governor Fenton (1866), a political pamphlet.

Biographical Dictionary of the U.S. Congress 1774-1927 (1928); Congressional Globe).

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 326-327;

FENTON, REUBEN EATON (July 4, 1819-August 25, 1885), United States senator, governor of New York, banker, was born in Carroll, Chautauqua County, New York, the youngest son of George W. and Elsie (Owen) Fenton. Forced to curtail his academic and legal studies at the age of seventeen when his father failed in business, he devoted himself assiduously to lumbering in a n effort to retrieve the family losses. For years his life was spent in the logging camps and in piloting his rafts down the Allegheny and Ohio rivers. At length, having paid his father's debts and secured a comfortable competence for himself, he entered upon a crowded political career, partly prefaced by a term of eight years as supervisor of Carroll, beginning in 1843. In 1849 he was elected to the Assembly as a Democrat. He was sent to Congress in 1852 when the controversy arose over the Kansas-Nebraska Bill. His maiden address against this measure (Congressional Globe, 33 Congress, 1 Session, pp. 156 ff.), marked his secession from the Democratic party on the slavery question. He was one of the leaders in the formation, and afterward in the conduct, of the Republican party, serving in 1855 as presiding officer of the first Republican state convention in New York. In 1854 he was defeated for Congress on the Know-Nothing ticket, but in 1856 he was elected as the Republican candidate, serving until 1864, when he resigned to become governor of New York. Nominated to head the state ticket in 1864, he fully appreciated the importance of vindicating the President by bringing about Governor Seymour's downfall, and was credited with a vigorous campaign. His vote exceeded that of Lincoln and he at once became a figure of national importance. In the campaign of 1866, despite many obstacles, he was reelected by a majority of over 13,000 (E. A. Werner, Civil List ... of the ... State of New York, 1888, p. 166). […].

[Biographical material is found in Obed Edson and Georgia Drew Merrill, History of Chautauqua County (1894); Chauncey M. Depew, Orations, Addresses, and Speeches (1910), I, 259 ff.; A Sketch of the Life of Governor Fenton (1866), a political pamphlet; obituary notices of August 26, 1885, in New York Times and New York World. Fenton's public papers as governor are found in State of New York, Messages from the Governors, vol. V (1909), ed. by Chas. Z. Lincoln. His political career is treated in Homer A. Stebbins, A Political History of the State of New York, I865-69 (1913), and De Alva S. Alexander, A Political History of the State of New York (1909), vols. II, III.]

R. B. M.


FESSENDEN, William Pitt, 1806-1869, lawyer, statesman, U.S. Congressman, U.S. Senator, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.  Elected to Congress in 1840 as a member of the Whig Party opposing slavery.  Moved to repeal rule that excluded anti-slavery petitions before Congress.  Strong leader in Congress opposing slavery.  Elected to the Senate in 1854.  He opposed the Kansas-Nebraska bill as well as the Dred Scott Supreme Court Case.  Co-founder of the Republican Party.  Prominent leader of the anti-slavery faction of the Republican Party in the U.S. Senate.  As U.S. Senator, voted for Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, abolishing slavery.

(Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, pp. 443-444; Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 368; American National Biography, Oxford University Press, New York, 2002, Vol. 7, p. 861; Biographical Dictionary of the U.S. Congress 1774-1927 (1928); Congressional Globe; Sewell, 1976; p. 310).

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 348-350;

FESSENDEN, WILLIAM PITT (October 16, 1806-September 8, 1869), lawyer, politician, financier, was the son of Samuel Fessenden and Ruth Greene, and a descendant of Nicholas Fessenden who came to America in the seventeenth century and settled at Cambridge, Massachusetts He was born out of wedlock at Boscawen, New Hampshire, and spent his early years in the home of his grandparents at Fryeburg, Maine, but when his father married in 1813 he became a member of the new household. He appears to have been a precocious boy and his entrance to college was delayed for some time on account of his extreme youth. He graduated from Bowdoin College, nevertheless, in 1823, although his diploma was withheld for a year on the ground that he had been "repeatedly guilty of profane swearing" and had "indicated a disorganizing spirit" and that "his general character and the bad influence of his example" called for punishment. Fessenden himself denied that he had been guilty of some of the alleged offenses. He was destined to receive the honorary degree of doctor of laws from Bowdoin in 1858 and to be a member of the governing boards of the college for the last twenty-six years of his life.

After graduation he studied law, with some interruptions, and was admitted to the bar in 1827. After two years at Bridgton he moved to Portland and except for a year in Bangor, maintained a residence there for the rest of his life. After his return from Bridgton he made his first appearance in public office when in 1831 he was elected to the legislature on the anti-Jackson ticket. He was engaged to Ellen, sister of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and her death before their marriage was a great blow to him. On April 23, 1832, he married Ellen Maria Deering, daughter of James Deering, a prominent Portland merchant. In 1835 he formed a partnership with William Willis which lasted until his election to the United States Senate almost twenty years later. He had by 1835 established a reputation as one of the able lawyers of the state. In a few years he was considered by many the equal of his father, then the leader of the Maine bar, against whom he frequently appeared in important litigation. He was active in the Whig party and in 1837 by special invitation accompanied Daniel Webster on a tour of several months in the western states. He was for many years on cordial terms with the great Whig leader, who had been his godfather in 1806, and with his family, but his letters show that he had some definite reservations as to Webster's political conduct and the chapter closed with Fessenden in opposition to his nomination for the presidency at the Whig convention of 1852.

In 1839 he was elected to another term in the Maine legislature, being a member of the judiciary committee and assisting in a revision of the statutes. The following year he was elected to Congress, where he remained a single term. His two years in the lower house were, naturally enough, without special distinction but some of his remarks in debate seem to have drawn favorable attention. His letters show that this first experience in Washington gave him certain unfavorable impressions of public life and participants in it, which he retained to the end. Unlike his abolitionist father, he was in the beginning conservative on the slavery issue, but a view of the situation at Washington aroused his contempt for "the mean subserviency of these northern hirelings" (Fessenden, post, I, 23), and in another letter he expressed admiration of John Quincy Adams for "his indomitable spirit and the uprighteousness of his soul." From that time on his hostility to the institution grew steadily and the following decade saw him among the active organizers of the new Republican party.

For twelve years following his retirement from Congress he held no important public office although he served two terms in the legislature in 1845-46 and 1853-54, was active in Whig party councils, and was several times an unsuccessful candidate for the national Senate and House. The growth of anti-slavery sentiment in Maine was decidedly to his advantage and on January 4, 1854, an anti-slavery combination in the legislature elected him to the United States Senate. He was sworn in on February 23, and on March 3 delivered the first great speech of his senatorial career, in opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska bill (Congressional Globe, 33 Congress, l Session, App., pp. 319- 24). For the next fifteen years he was one of the dominant figures in national affairs.

In 1857 he was assigned to the finance committee which, under existing rules, then handled both revenue and appropriation bills in the upper house. He had approximately ten years' service in the committee, more than half of this period as chairman, and, due to the responsibilities entailed by the Civil War, earned a permanent place among American public financiers. In 1857, when his most important work began, he suffered a severe loss in the death of his wife and his own health became permanently impaired. He is reported to have been one of the numerous victims of the mysterious epidemic said to have originated in the National Hotel. Thereafter he was inclined to be morose and unsociable in his habits and given to displays of irritability which would have been ruinous to any one but a man of commanding ability and high character. With a few friends, however, he was always on the best of terms and his letters to members of his family are hard to reconcile with his reputation for harshness and austerity. His constant references to his garden in Portland, or to fly-fishing on Maine trout streams, disclose a very different personality from the one appearing in speeches on the Morrill tariff, Reconstruction, and the Fourteenth Amendment.

As a leader of the opposition to the Buchanan administration he advanced steadily in prestige and he was now regarded as one of the greatest debaters who had yet appeared in Congress. Contemporaries sometimes found it hard to realize that a man of his slight physique, poor health, and unobtrusive manners was nevertheless one of the greatest intellectual forces in the government. In 1859 he was elected for a six-year term and was thus assured of a full share in the opportunities and responsibilities of the Civil War. "Let them stand firm like men and not tremble and shake before rebellion," he wrote when the final break impended, and his own conduct justified such advice.

When the Thirty-seventh Congress met in July 1861, he became chairman of the finance committee and carried a tremendous burden of work and responsibility in putting the finances of the country on a war footing. He did a great deal of the preliminary work in preparing bills and was in charge of their passage on the floor of the Senate. His reputation as a debater is seen to be well deserved by an examination of the debates on the great revenue and appropriation measures of the war period. His quick temper is equally apparent and even with the lapse of years the rasp of some of his comments can still be felt. He consistently tried, apparently, to confine expenditures to the legitimate outlays necessitated by the war, to avoid dangerous and wasteful precedents, to follow strictly the regular rules of procedure, and, as far as possible in view of extraordinary needs, to be economical and businesslike. "it is time for us to begin to think a little more about the money" he declared on one occasion early in the war, "the event of this war depends upon whether we can support it or not" (Congressional Globe, 37 Congress, 2 Session, p. 1038). Such a course inevitably meant opposition to a variety of personal and sectional projects and stirred the wrath of the proponents of a swarm of expensive, futile, but popular measures growing out of wartime conditions.

In general Fessenden supported: Secretary Chase's financial program and did much to secure its adoption by Congress. In the very important matter of the legal-tender notes, resorted to in 1862, he expressed disapproval and voted for the unsuccessful Collamer amendment striking this feature from the bill. His speech on the evils of irredeemable paper and the dangers of inflation is a classic on the subject (Ibid., pp. 762-67). He admitted, however, that the situation was without a parallel in the history of the United States and afterward stated that the legal tenders were probably the only resource available at the time. Later on, as secretary of the treasury, he stood firm against further inflation, and when the war was over assumed the offensive against greenback heresies. In one matter he had a clearer vision than most of his colleagues or Secretary Chase himself, namely, the need of a drastic taxing program, which was too long delayed by political cowardice and inertia. At the first war session he declared himself in favor of an income tax as best calculated to meet current needs (Ibid., 37 Congress, l Session, p.255).

On June 29, 1864, Secretary Chase resigned and President Lincoln promptly selected Fessenden as his successor, sending the nomination to the Senate while Fessenden himself was seeking a White House appointment to recommend Hugh McCulloch. He accepted the post reluctantly and with a definite understanding that he would be relieved as soon as the situation permitted. Faced at the beginning with an almost empty treasury, unpaid bills, including the army's pay, maturing loans, inadequate revenue, and countless difficulties in detail, he was able during his brief tenure to meet emergencies and to turn the department over to his successor in relatively sound condition. He raised the interest rate on government bonds and through the sales organization of Jay Cooke marketed another great loan, standing firmly against any further inflation of the currency. He had been reelected to the Senate for a third term on January 5, 1865, and his resignation as secretary took effect on March 3.

[…].

[Life and Public Services of William Pitt Fessenden, by his son Francis Fessenden (2 volumes, 1907), is the best source of information. While defective in arrangement and methods of presentation it gives a fair and comprehensive survey of his activities and contains personal correspondence and other material not available in official records. Brief sketches also occur in the following: G. H. Preble, "William Pitt Fessenden," New-England. History and Genealogical Register, April 1871; A. F. Moulton, Memorials of Maine (1916); L. C. Hatch, Maine: A History, volume II (1919), and History of Bowdoin College (1927). Biographical Dictionary of the U.S. Congress 1774-1927 (1928); Congressional Globe]

W.A.R.

R.G.C-I


FIELD, DAVID DUDLEY (February 13, 1805- April 13, 1894), lawyer, law reformer. He “broke vehemently with his party on two important issues,-the annexation of Texas, which he rightly declared meant war with Mexico; and the slavery question. In 1847 he was a delegate to the Democratic convention in Syracuse, where he introduced the ‘Corner-Stone" resolution, declaring "uncompromising hostility to the extension of slavery into territory now free, or which may be hereafter acquired by any action of the Government of the United States’”

(Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 359-360; Speeches, Arguments and Miscellaneous Papers (3 vols., 1884-90), ed. by A. P. Sprague; a Life by Henry Martyn Field (1898); Helen K. Hoy's biographical sketch in Lewis's Great American Lawyers (1908), V, 125-74; Sewell, 1976; pp. 146, 151, 154, 156, 224, 264).

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 359-360;

FIELD, DAVID DUDLEY (February 13, 1805- April 13, 1894), lawyer, law reformer, born at Haddam, Connecticut, was the eldest son of Reverend David Dudley Field [q.v.] and Submit (Dickinson) Field. On his mother's side he was descended from Captain Noah Dickinson who had served with General Putnam in the French war. He attended the Academy at Stockbridge, Massachusetts, and William’s College, from which he withdrew before the graduation of his class in 1825. He studied law with Harmanus Bleecker in Albany, and with the firm of Henry and Robert Sedgwick in New York. In 1828, he was admitted to the New York bar, and two years later became the partner of Robert Sedgwick on the retirement of Henry. He was married three times: first to Jane Lucinda Hopkins, who died in 1836; second, to Mrs. Harriet Davidson, who died in 1864; and third, to Mrs. Mary E. Carr, who died in 1876. Field attained some prominence in politics although his temperament was not such as to fit him for great success in that field. He was too rigid and unbending, and too likely to form and express opinions without regard to party leadership. He was Democratic nominee for election to the New York Assembly in 1841, but was defeated. Later, he broke vehemently with his party on two important issues,-the annexation of Texas, which he rightly declared meant war with Mexico; and the slavery question. In 1847 he was a delegate to the Democratic convention in Syracuse, where he introduced the "Corner-Stone" resolution, declaring "uncompromising hostility to the extension of slavery into territory now free, or which may be hereafter acquired by any action of the Government of the United States" (H. M. Field, post, p. 115). When the Republican party nominated Fremont for president, Field favored his candidacy; and when Lincoln spoke for the first time in New York City, Field was one of his supporters on the platform at Cooper Institute. Although not a delegate to the Chicago convention of 1860, Field attended, and his influence with Horace Greeley and others at the time when they had conceded the nomination to Seward, is thought by many to have been chiefly responsible for Lincoln's nomination. He was chairman of the New York delegation to the Peace Conference in Washington in 1861. After the assassination of Lincoln, he ceased to act with the Republicans. In 1876, at the suggestion of Tilden, he was elected to Congress to fill the two months' unexpired term of Representative Smith Ely, in order that he might participate in the Hayes-Tilden election contest.

Field's political activities, though important in themselves, were in reality mere episodes in a life devoted to law and law reform. He was prominent as a lawyer for sixty years and in the great cases litigated in the ten years following the Civil War was an outstanding figure. Many of these cases involved constitutional questions of the utmost importance, for example, the Milligan case, which was argued in 1867 before the United States Supreme Court on the part of the United States, by Attorney-General Stanbery and Benjamin F. Butler, and for Milligan by Field, Jeremiah S. Black and James A. Garfield. The decision upheld the contention that, since the civil courts were open, the military commission which had tried and convicted Lamdin P. Milligan was without jurisdiction in the case; and that, the period of suspension of the writ of habeas corpus having expired, a writ should be issued and Milligan discharged from custody.

Then followed the Cummings case in which Field and his associates convinced the United States Supreme Court of the invalidity of the Missouri constitutional provision requiring all citizens to take an oath of loyalty declaring that they had not been in armed hostility to the state or given aid and comfort to persons engaged in such hostility. The McCardle case of 1868 involved the constitutionality of the Reconstruction Act of 1867 under which military governments had been set up in states lately in rebellion. McCardle was being held for trial before a military commission in Mississippi on the charge of inciting to insurrection, disorder, and violence. On the hearing in the United States Supreme Court, eminent counsel including Charles O'Conor were associated with Field for McCardle, and the case was argued on its merits. Before a decision was rendered, the act of 1867 was amended, and subsequently McCardle was discharged. A fourth constitutional case argued by Field was the Cruikshank case (1875) in which the constitutionality of the Enforcement Act of 1870 was involved. The decision of the circuit court for Louisiana convicting Cruikshank of conspiring to prevent negroes from exercising their right to vote, was, upon reasoning adduced by Field, reversed by the United States Supreme Court.

A chapter in Field's professional life which was the subject of bitter controversy concerned the Erie Railroad litigation· of 1869. Field was counsel for Jay Gould and James Fisk [qq.v.] and was charged by Samuel Bowles and others with unprofessional conduct in having, it was alleged, in connection with a stockholders' meeting, engaged in a conspiracy to carry an election for Fisk and Gould by the use and abuse of legal process and proceedings. A large amount of controversial literature was produced, characteristic examples of which were by Charles Francis Adams (Chapters of Erie, 1871), by George Tick. nor Curtis (An In Inquiry into the Albany and Susquehanna Railroad Litigations of 1869), by Jeremiah S. Black (Galaxy, March 1872), and by Albert Stickney (North American Review, April 1871; Galaxy, October 1872). Field's conduct was considered by the Committee on Grievances of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, which presented a report "of such a character that the consequences to Mr. Field, if the recommendations had been adopted, would have been of the most serious character" (Theron G. Strong, Landmarks of a Lawyer's Lifetime, 1914, p. 192). No vote was taken on the recommendations. His opponents also put the worst construction on the fact that, from 1873 to 1878, he served as chief counsel for the defendant in the prosecution of "Boss" Tweed, who had become a director, along with Gould and Fisk, of the Erie Railroad.

Field's skill and learning as a lawyer were, however, never questioned. He served with distinction as counsel for Tilden in opposition to William M. Evarts, before the Hayes-Tilden Electoral Commission of 1876. As late as 1882, when he was seventy-seven years old, he argued for the plaintiff the case of New York vs. Louisiana before the United States Supreme Court. But while he was a leader among practising lawyers, the work in which he made for himself a permanent name was that of law reform, with special reference to codification, both of municipal a11d international law. He had been at the bar only eleven years when in 1839 he began an agitation from which he did not desist until his death. His purpose was to reduce to written form the whole body of law of New York, both substantive and adjective, and in the latter field to combine in one series of proceedings actions both at law and in equity. It was through his efforts that there were added to the New York State Constitution of 1846 provisions (Article I, Section 7, and Article VI, Section 24) directing the legislature to appoint three commissioners to " reduce into a written and systematic code the whole body of the law of this state, or so much and such parts thereof as to the said Commissioners shall seem practicable and expedient"; and three other commissioners "to revise, reform, simplify and abridge the rules, practice, pleadings, forms and proceedings of the courts of record." The legislature at its next session appointed the required commissions, of which Field became a member. Largely through his personal effort two procedural codes were prepared and reported to the legislature. The first commission to codify the substantive law produced no permanent result, and a new commission with Field as chairman was not appointed until 1857. Between 1860 and 1865, complete political, civil and penal codes were reported, but only one of them, the Penal Code (1881) was adopted by the legislature. The Civil Code was twice rejected by the Assembly and thrice passed by it, on two occasions receiving the assent of the Senate, but failing to obtain the approval of the governor. The concept of these codes was wholly Field's, and the execution of them almost equally so. With him on the commission were William Curtis Noyes and Alexander W. Bradford, but neither of them did any large part of the work of codification, which was done by Field with the assistance of Austin Abbott, Benjamin Vaughan Abbott and Thomas G. Shearman. The struggle for the adoption of the Civil Code was a battle royal between Field, almost single-handed, and the leaders of the New York bar. James C. Carter was appointed by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York to head the opposition, by means of arguments and addresses to the successive legislatures and governors. The struggle was not devoid of personal bitterness. "Few men," says Strong, "have been subjected to greater ridicule and abuse than David Dudley Field," but, he continues, "the Code of Civil Procedure ... is a monument to his legal capacity, untiring zeal and constructive force that will immortalize his name as the 'Father of the Code' " (Landmarks of a Lawyer's Life, p. 420). The Civil Procedure Code has been adopted in whole or in part by twenty-four states, as well as by several foreign nations. Almost equal recognition has been given to the Criminal Procedure Code. The state of California adopted all five of the "Field" codes.

The passion for codification was almost an obsession with Field, and so it came about naturally that while engaged in the struggle for the adoption of his New York Codes, he headed a movement for the codification of the law of nations. The drafting of the New York Codes was completed in 1865. The successful issue, during the next year, of his brother's attempt to lay the Atlantic cable stirred Field's imagination, and caused him to believe that a further bond be. tween nations might be forged ·by the preparation of an international code. At the Manchester meeting of the British Association for the Promotion of Social Science, in September 1866, he proposed the appointment of a committee to prepare the outline of such a code. The committee was appointed with Field as a member. When the work moved slowly because the widely separated members could not meet for conference, Field essayed the task alone. With the assistance of Austin Abbott, Howard P. Wilds, Charles F. Stone and President F. A. P. Barnard of Columbia College, he prepared, and published in 1872, a Draft Outline of an International Code, dealing with the relations between states in time of peace. The second edition, published in 1876, included Part II on War. An Italian translation of the first edition was published in 1874, and a French translation of the second edition, in 1881. From 1866 to his death, Field visited Europe nearly every year to attend conferences devoted to international affairs, before which he read many papers; and he was instrumental in the formation of the Association for the Reform and Codification of the Law of Nations, the first meeting of which was held in Brussels in October 1873.

Both as a lawyer and as a jurist, Field made a deep impression on his generation. His positive achievements were of a high order, such as could come only from a man of great natural ability and of extensive learning. At the same time, he was aggressive and relentless in the prosecution of his designs, strong in his feelings and passions, positive in his opinions, and combative in temperament. One of his maxims was, "The only men who make any lasting impression on the world are fighters." Therefore he made many enemies, and a few stanch friends. All found him stalwart and impressive. Some found him cold and forbidding, while others who professed to know him more intimately found in him a magnetic and sympathetic personality.

[The chief sources of information are Field's own writings contained in Speeches, Arguments and Miscellaneous Papers (3 vols., 1884-90), ed. by A. P. Sprague; a Life by Henry Martyn Field (1898); Helen K. Hoy's biographical sketch in Lewis's Great American Lawyers (1908), V, 125-74; and an article by S. Newton Fiero in New York State Bar Association Proc., 1895, XVIII, 177-93; F. C. Pierce, Field Genealogy (1901); American Law Review, May-June, 1894; New York Tribune, April 14, 1894; High Finance in the Sixties, ed. by Frederick C. Hicks (Yale University Press, 1929).)

F.C.H.


FISH, HAMILTON (August 3, 1808-September 6, 1893), anti-slavery statesman, opposed the opening of California and New Mexico territories to slavery and the repeal of the Missouri Compromise.

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 397-400; E. L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, 1,893, IV, 409-rn, 414; Adams, post, pp. 156-57, 160; Sewell, 1976; p. 257, 305).

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 397-400 ;

FISH, HAMILTON (August 3, 1808-September 6, 1893), statesman, the son of Nicholas [q.v.] and Elizabeth (Stuyvesant) Fish, was born in New York and received his primary education in the private school of M. Bancel. He graduated with highest honors from Columbia College in 1827 and, after studying law in the office of Peter A. Jay for three years, was admitted to the bar and formed a partnership with William B. Lawrence, editor of Wheaton's Elements of International Law. True to the Federalist principles of his father, he adhered to the Whig party and became its candidate for. the state assembly in 1834, failing to carry his Democratic district. His next candidacy, for Congress in 1842, was successful, but he was not returned for another term. He was defeated also in 1846 for the lieutenant-governorship of th estate by the opposition of the "anti-renters," whose attacks on the patroons' land-leasing system he had denounced. Next year, however, he was chosen for the office in a special election, and in 1848 he was elected governor. His administration was signalized by the passage of acts establishing free schools throughout the state and by extensions of the canal system. His attitude on the main national question of the time, as indicated by the declarations in his annual messages against the opening of California and New Mexico to slavery, was satisfactory enough to permit his selection for the treasury post in a reconstruction of the cabinet planned by President Taylor but cut off by his death (Autobiography of Thurlow Weed, 1883, p. 591).

Fish was not renominated for governor, but was supported by the Seward-Weed Whigs for the United States Senate in 1851. A deadlock in the legislature lasting over two months, caused by one Whig senator's dissatisfaction with his refusal to commit himself to the compromise measures of 1850, was only broken in his favor by a vote taken in the absence of two Democrats. In the Senate he achieved no special distinction. He followed his senior colleague, Seward, and his friend, Sumner, in their opposition to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, though he was not disposed to make slavery a dominant issue in politics. Regretting the demise of the Whig party, he finally joined the Republican as the one according most nearly with his principles, but did not enter very energetically into its earlier activities. After the expiration of his term as senator he took his family to Europe for a stay of two years. By the time he returned his convictions had crystallized sufficiently to warrant him in working for Lincoln's election and in advising the outgoing administration to adopt a firm policy toward South Carolina and the seceding states. He was concerned in the outfitting of the Star of the West for supplying Fort Sumter, and expressed to General Scott the opinion that the firing on the ship meant war. During the Civil War he served on the Union defense committee of his state and as a commissioner of the federal government for the relief of prisoners, contributing to the ultimate negotiation of the exchange agreement.

He had no special political or personal claim to a place in Grant's cabinet, although their acquaintanceship had extended to his entertainment of the General in his home. He had no desire for office and was unresponsive to suggestions of a ministerial post. When, after encountering several difficulties in early appointments, the President offered him the post of secretary of state, he promptly declined by telegraph, but followed his refusal by a reluctant acceptance through a personal mission of General Babcock (New York Tribune, January 25, 1879). He was commissioned March 11, 1869. Intending to serve only until the administration had become stabilized, he remained in office through both of Grant's terms, despite repeated offers of resignation. He became a pillar of the administration and an influence for moderation in all its policies. In his own department he was an efficient executive, introducing reforms in the organization of personnel and classification of records. He brought to bear upon his duties a calm and orderly legal mind, a generally cautious temperament, and a fund of patience in working toward his ends against discouraging odds.

Fish's conduct of foreign relations in general was greatly affected by the question of annexation of the revolution-torn Dominican Republic. He sanctioned a mission of General Babcock thither which, from an inquiry concerning the acquisition of a naval base at Samana Bay, developed into an irregular agreement with the government in power for annexation. Grant strongly favored the project, and Fish, though doubtful, authorized the negotiation of a formal treaty, concluded November 29, 1869, which failed of ratification by the Senate. Grant's attempt, in 1871, to put the measure through by joint resolution was likewise defeated, despite the removal of Senator Sumner, its powerful opponent, from his position as chairman of the foreign relations committee. The President's need of Fish's support in these efforts and his antipathy toward Sumner, which arose out of their failure, favored the success of the Secretary's policies in other fields, albeit the breach of Fish's friendship with Sumner, which he attempted vainly to avert, was a painful experience.

The most notable achievement of Fish's administration of his office was the settlement of the controversy with Great Britain over damages suffered by Northern commerce during the Civil War through the British government's conduct as a neutral. The central factor in this controversy was the havoc wrought by Confederate cruisers equipped or supplied in British ports; and, commemorating the most famous of these, the American demands became, as stated in the final treaty, "generically known as the 'Alabama claims.'" But behind these lay a mass of obscure grievances which in some minds extended to holding England's recognition of Confederate belligerency responsible for doubling the length of the war, with resulting liabilities which transcended monetary compensations and could only be extinguished by such a gesture as the cession of Canada. This view of the case was put, in part by implication, by Senator Sumner in the debate which led to rejection, in April 1869, of a convention concluded by the previous administration. Since the President inclined to the same view, Sumner's speech set the tone of Fish's official policy for nearly two years, as expressed in instructions to Motley, the minister in London, and conversations with Thornton, British minister at Washington

(Senate Executive Document 11, 41 Congress, 3 Session, pp. 2-5; Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, III, 1873, 329-36; E. L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, 1,893, IV, 409-rn, 414; Adams, post, pp. 156-57, 160). Informally, however, he let it be understood that he was disposed to accept much less drastic terms, and a personal exchange of views to this effect was begun with Sir John Rose, a Canadian commissioner in the confidence of the British government, in July 1869 (J. C. B. Davis, Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims, 1893, pp. 45-46). Not until November 1870, when Sumner's influence was waning through his opposition to the President's Dominican policy, did Fish intimate to the British minister the possibility of a settlement not including territorial compensation (Adams, post, p. 162). In January 1871 an understanding was reached through Rose for a joint high commission to arrange a settlement of the Alabama claims in connection with various questions regarding Canada at issue between the two governments boundaries, fishing rights, navigation, and trade (J. B. Moore, History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to which the United States Has Been a Party, I, 1898, 523-31). Sumner's now categorically expressed opinion, that a definitive settlement could be based only on "the withdrawal of the British flag ... from this hemisphere," was brushed aside. His removal from his committee chairmanship took place before the resulting agreement reached the Senate for ratification, but he did not then oppose it.

The commissioners began their work in March and on May 8, 1871, signed the Treaty of Washington, providing for arbitration of the Alabama claims under a set of definitions of neutral duties which held a neutral power bound to "use due diligence to prevent the fitting out, arming, or equipping" of belligerent cruisers in its ports. The arbitration conducted at Geneva encountered difficulties owing to the fact that, since the British government refused to admit in advance its neglect of these duties and its consequent liability, the American government refused to limit its claims, but put forward a number of indirect ones in addition to the damage directly inflicted by the Confederate cruisers. These were at last eliminated, in accordance with Fish's design, by the tribunal which, on September 14, 1872, rendered a decision on the direct claims against Great Britain, fixing the amount of damages at $15,500,000. A most disturbing controversy was thus honorably settled. Some of the Canadian questions dealt with in the treaty, such as fishing rights and arrangements regarding trade, dragged on; but the water boundary in the Strait of San Juan de Fuca was adjusted in favor of the United States by an arbitral decision of the German Emperor in October 1872.  […].

[C. F. Adams, Jr., Lee at Appomattox and Other Papers (1902), contains extracts from diaries and letters. See also A. E. Corning, Hamilton Fish (1918); Senator G. F. Edmunds, Proceedings of the Leg. of th e State of New York in Memory of Hon. Hamilton Fish, held ... April 5, 1894; J. V. Fuller, in American Secretaries of State and their Diplomacy, with bibliographical note, vol. VII (1928); De A. S. Alexander, A Political History of the Slate of New York, II (1906); New York Tribune, J an. 25, 1879, September 8, 1893; New York Times, September 8, 1893.]

J. V.F.


FLAGG, Azriah, 1790-1873, Orwell, Addison County, Vermont, newspaper editor, painter, political leader.  Soldier, veteran of the War of 1812.  Opponent of slavery.  Published The Republican newspaper in Plattsburg.  Secretary of State for New York, 1826, 1829.  Railroad president.  Member of the Free Soil Party.  Opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act.  Later active in Republican Party. 

(Foner, 1970, pp. 153, 154, 159, 160, 164; Raybeck, 1970, pp. 63, 66, 67, 75, 177, 206; Sewell, 1976; pp. 147, 148-149, 228, 263; Appletons’, Vol. II, p. 476; Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 447; De A. S. Alexander, A Political History of the State of New York, vols. I and II (1906); H. D. A. Donovan, The Barnburners (1925)

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 447;

FLAGG, AZARIAH CUTTING (November 28, 1790-November 24, 1873), editor, politician, traced his ancestry from Thomas Flegg, a member of an old Norfolk family, who, leaving Scratby, England, in 1637, settled at Watertown, Massachusetts, in 1641, and whose descendants apparently about 1700 changed their name to Flagg. His father, Ebenezer Flagg, married Elizabeth Cutting of Shoreham, Vermont, and resided at Orwell, Vermont, where he was born. When eleven years old he was apprenticed to a cousin of his father's, a printer in Burlington, Vermont, with whom he spent five years. In 1806 he entered the employ of a firm of publishers, where he found opportunities to remedy the deficiencies of his early education. In 1811 he moved to Plattsburg, New York, and on the outbreak of the War of 1812 was commissioned lieutenant and quartermaster in the 36th Regiment, New York militia. He was engaged in the defense of Plattsburg, being present at a number of engagements, and was rewarded by Congress for gallant service. In 1813 he joined the staff of the Plattsburg Republican, became its editor, and continued as such till 1825. Entering with ardor into the political field where DeWitt Clinton and Van Buren were the leading New York figures, he developed a capacity for vigorous writing and trenchant speaking which soon brought him to the front. In 1823 he was elected to represent Clinton County in the New York Assembly and subsequently was admitted to the inner circle of the "Albany regency." In 1826 Governor DeWitt Clinton appointed him secretary of state, an office which he held for seven years. He was elected by the legislature state comptroller under Governor Marcy in 1834, serving till 1839. In 1842 he was reelected and continued in the position until the state constitution of 1846 came into operation. During his nine years' tenure of this office he established himself as "an able, methodical, keen and sagacious financier" (Proctor, post), though his views regarding public improvements have been stigmatized as short-sighted. In 1842 the legislature adopted the "stop and tax policy" of suspending all public works and imposing a direct tax, pledging a portion of the Erie Canal revenues to provide a sinking fund for the extinguishment of the public debt. Flagg was not, as has been mistakenly asserted, the originator of the scheme, but he was active in its support. He was a strong opponent of the Bank of the United States.

In 1846 he removed to New York City where he took an active part in the organization of the "Barnburners' " faction of the Democratic party, becoming one of its most prominent leaders. In 1852, after the reunion of the Democratic party, he was elected comptroller of the city of New York, and, being reelected in 1855, held office till 1859, when he retired from public life. His political career was distinguished for his unassailable integrity, consistent adherence to principles, and an unwavering support of Van Buren throughout all the latter's vicissitudes. A believer in "Free speech, Free labor, and Free men," he vehemently combated the pro-slavery sentiment within his party. For fourteen years prior to his death he was totally blind, but this affliction did not affect his naturally high spirits and he continued to the end to take a keen interest in political events. He was a frequent contributor to newspapers on public questions of the day, and was also the author of "Internal Improvements in the State of New York," a series of articles which appeared in Hunt's Merchants' Magazine in 1851, and A Few Historical Facts Respecting the Establishment ... of Banks ... in the State of New York from 1777 to 1864 (1868). He was married to Phoebe Maria Coe on October 20, 1814.

[N. G. and L. C. S. Flagg, Family Records of the Descendants of Gershom Flagg (1907), p. 48; Ann. Reg., 1873, p. 291; L.B. Proctor, The Bench and Bar of New York (1870), p. 289; P. S. Palmer, History of Plattsburg, New York (1877); De A. S. Alexander, A Pol. History of the State of New York, vols. I and II (1906); H. D. A. Donovan, The Barnburners (1925); J. D. Hammond, Life and Times of Silas Wright (1848); New York Times, November 26, 1873; Flagg letters in the Tilden Library, New York Pub. Lib.]

H.W.H.K.


FLETCHER, Calvin, 1798-1866, Indianapolis, Indiana, banker, farm owner, state legislator the member of the Whig, Free Soil and, later, Republican parties.  Supported colonization movement in Indiana.  During Civil War, he promoted the organization of U.S. Colored Troops in Indiana.  (Diary of Calvin Fletcher)


FLETCHER, Ryland, governor of Vermont, born in Cavendish. Vermont, 18 February, 1799; died in Proctorsville, Vermont, 19 December, 1885, studied in the Norwich Military Academy, and became a farmer. He was active as an anti-slavery agitator, was chosen to the state senate, and lieutenant-governor of Vermont from 1854 till 1856, when he was elected governor of the state by the Free-Soil Party, serving until 1858. From 1861 till 1864 he was a representative in the legislature. In 1864 he was a presidential elector on the Republican ticket.  Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, p. 480.


FOGG, GEORGE GILMAN (May 26, 1813- October 5, 1881), lawyer, editor, diplomat. He was active in the Free-Soil movement, and in 1846 was appointed secretary of state for a term of one year. Later he took an active part in the organization of the new Republican party.

 Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 485-486; C. H. Bell, The Bench and Bar of N. H. (1894); J. O. Lyford, History of Concord, N. H. (1903); Sewell, 1976; p. 165)

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 485-486;

FOGG, GEORGE GILMAN (May 26, 1813- October 5, 1881), lawyer, editor, diplomat, the son of David and Hannah Gilman (Vickery) Fogg was born at Meredith Center, N. H. He attended New Hampton Academy, graduated from Dartmouth College in 1839, studied law at Harvard and in the office of Judge Warren Lovell in Meredith Village, and began practise at Gilmanton Iron Works in 1842. After four years he moved to Concord and maintained a residence there for the rest of his life. He never married. He was active in politics, being a pioneer in the Free-Soil movement, and in 1846 was chosen secretary of state for a term of one year. A few years later he took an active part in the organization of the Republican party. He was the founder of the Independent Democrat of Concord and from 1846 to 1861 devoted himself largely to journalism. Under his direction the paper became one of the most influential in the state, and his editorial utterances were widely quoted throughout New England. From 1855 to 1859 he was state law reporter and for some years state printer as well. As a delegate to the Republican Convention of 1860, he was a strong supporter of Lincoln and in 1861 was appointed minister to Switzerland, holding the post until Oct. 16, 1865. Switzerland offered few of the problems found at London or Paris where belligerent rights, neutral duties, and the ever present possibility of intervention required so much diplomatic activity. In July 1861, he reported that, "here . . . the rebels have no friends," and on the close of the war, that Lee's surrender caused almost as much rejoicing as though it had been a Swiss victory. The dispatches published in Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs show that his work was largely of routine character, but performed to the satisfaction of both countries. In 1864 he represented the United States at the Geneva conference on the amelioration of conditions for the sick and wounded in time of war.

In 1866-67 Fogg served out the unexpired term of Daniel Clark in the United States Senate. He resumed editorial work but was now on bad terms with several of his party leaders, due, in part at least, to his failure to secure another diplomatic post. Although he continued to be active in both journalism and party management for some years longer, his influence seems to have declined. He was interested in the New Hampshire Historical Society and many local organizations in Concord, and was a trustee of Bates College. For several years prior to his death he was broken in health and able to do little work. He was one of the ablest journalists in the history of the state, and it was as a newspaper editor that he made his chief contribution to political history.

[C. H. Bell, The Bench and Bar of N. H. (1894); J. O. Lyford, History of Concord, N. H. (1903); J. 0. Lyford, Life of Edward H. Rollins (1906); Concord Daily Monitor, October 6, 1881; the People and N. H. Patriot (Concord), Oct. 13, 1881.]

W.A. R.


FOLGER, CHARLES JAMES (April 16, 1818- September 4, 1884), jurist, secretary of the treasury, originally a Democrat, Folger joined the anti-slavery Republicans from the Free-Soil Party in 1854.

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 486-487; S. R. Harlow and S. C. Hutchins, Life Sketches of the State Officers, Senators. and Members of the Assembly of the State of New York in 1868, pp. 81-84; and in Chas. Andrews, An Address Commemorative of the Life of the Late Hon. Chas. J. Folger (1885). Homer A. Stebbins, A Political History of the State of New York, 1865-69 (1913); Chas. Z. Lincoln, The Constitutional History of New York, 5 vols. (1906); and De A. S. Alexander, A Pol. History of the State of New York, vol. III (1909).

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 486-487;

FOLGER, CHARLES JAMES (April 16, 1818- September 4, 1884), jurist, secretary of the treasury, son of Thomas Folger, was born on the island of Nantucket, from which, at the age of twelve, he removed with his parents to Geneva, New York. His ancestors for generations had been New England whalers, tracing their origin to John Folger who came over from Norfolk, England, in 1635. Folger attended Geneva (now Hobart) College, from which he was graduated with the highest honors of his class in 1836. He took up the study of law at Canandaigua, was admitted to the bar in Albany in 1839, and started practise in Lyons, Wayne County. After a year he returned to Geneva where he maintained his home throughout the remainder of his life. On June 17, 1844, he married Susan Rebecca Worth.

Folger assumed his first important public office at the age of twenty-six, when, in 1844, he was appointed judge of the court of common pleas of Ontario County, and soon after was made master and examiner in chancery. From 1851 to 1855 he served as county judge. While originally a Democrat, Folger passed into the Republican fold over the Free-Soil bridge in 1854. In 1861 he was elected to the state Senate and was reelected three times, serving until 1869, and acting for four years as president pro tempore, and, throughout the period, as chairman of the judiciary committee. In the latter capacity he was noted for his conservative course and his stanch resistance to any modification of the law of marriage and divorce (Geneva Courier, September 10, 1884), and to important reforms in criminal procedure (Autobiography of Andrew Dickson White, I, 137). Throughout these years Folger was one of the keenest critics of unsound legislation. “Whenever a bill was read a third time he watched it as a cat watches a mouse," wrote a contemporary (Ibid., p. 101). He consistently opposed the "accursed mildew of town bonding" (Geneva Courier, September IO, 1884), and was an uncompromising foe to stockjobbers. He attracted special attention during these years by his hostility to Governor Reuben E. Fenton of his own party and by his prominence in the legislative contest of 1868 between Vanderbilt and the New York Central and Gould and the Erie.

His most valued service to his state was rendered in the field of constitutional reform and interpretation. In the state convention of 1867 he was chairman of the judiciary committee, and to his efforts are attributed material changes in the judicial system. He was the foremost public sponsor of the proposed constitution, which was rejected by the people in 1869. He was elected an associate judge of the state court of appeals in 1870. The fact that he had been the choice of both the Republican and Democratic tickets in that election led to charges of a corrupt Tammany alliance (New York Times, May 17, 18, 1870). On the death of Chief Justice Church in 1880, Folger was designated by Governor Cornell to fill the unexpired term of that office. In November of that year he was reelected to the bench of the court of appeals, which he left shortly to take up his duties in the cabinet of President Arthur. In his term on the bench Folger rendered frequent opinions which revealed a valuable grasp of questions of constitutional law (see, for example, People ex rel. Lee vs. Chautaitqua County, 43 New York, 10; People vs. Bull, 46 New York, 57).

During this later period of his life Folger assumed a more active role in national politics. He was a prominent candidate for the United States senatorial nomination in 1867, but finally withdrew in favor of Conkling. In the following year he was active at the Republican National Convention at Chicago in demonstrating to other state delegations that New York was not solid for Reuben E. Fenton for Vice-President (New York Times, May 20, 1868). In 1869 he resigned from the state Senate to accept an appointment from President Grant as United States assistant treasurer in New York City, in which capacity he served for one year. Although he first refused the office of attorney-general in Garfield's cabinet, he finally accepted the treasury portfolio under President Arthur in 1881. Under his administration the public debt was reduced over $300,000,000, the largest reduction; which had ever been effected up to his time. During his administration offices in the Treasury Department were put in the classified service under Civil Service rules. His correspondence with James B. Butler, chief of the appointment division of the Treasury Department, reveals that even before these reforms, Folger attempted to maintain a high standard of personnel.

In 1882, through the joint efforts of President Arthur and Conkling, Folger was given the Republican nomination for governor, despite the stiff fight which Governor Cornell made for renomination in an administration-packed convention (New York Times, September 22, 23, 1882; Harper's Weekly, September 30, Oct. 21, 1882). His Democratic opponent was Grover Cleveland, who polled almost 200,000 votes more than Folger, the largest majority which had ever been scored in a contested election. Folger was a man of distinguished personal appearance, gentle in bearing, modest and even diffident, but withal an impressive speaker and conscientious in the execution of his public duties. His correspondence discloses the saving grace of a rich sense of humor.

[Outlines of Folger's career may be found in S. R. Harlow and S. C. Hutchins, Life Sketches of the State Officers, Senators. and Members of the Assembly of the State of New York in 1868, pp. 81-84; and in Chas. Andrews, An Address Commemorative of the Life of the Late Hon. Chas. J. Folger (1885). See also Homer A. Stebbins, A Pol. History of the State of New York, 1865-69 (1913); Chas. Z. Lincoln, The Constitutional History of New York, 5 vols. (1906); and De A. S. Alexander, A Pol. History of the State of New York, vol. III (1909). The New York Pub. Library has a collection of the unofficial correspondence of Secretary Folger with James B. Butler, 1881-84. Obituaries in New York Tribune, New York Times, and New York Evening Post, September 5, 1884; and Geneva Courier, September 10, 1884.]

R.B.M.


FOOT, SOLOMON (November 19, 1802-March 28, 1866), lawyer, politician. “He was strongly opposed to the Mexican policy of the administration and denounced the war which resulted. In 1850 he was elected to the United States Senate and served until his death sixteen years later, being at that time the senior member in point of continuous service. His opposition to the extension of slavery led him to join the new Republican organization when the Whig party finally disintegrated.”

Geo. F. Edmunds, in Addresses Delivered before the Vt. Historical Society, October 16, 1866 (1866); N. Seaver, A Discourse delivered at the Funeral of Hon. Solomon Foot (1866); L. Matthews, History of the Town of Cornwall, Vt. (1862); N. Goodwin, The Foote Family (1849); G. W. Benedict, in Hours at Home (New York), July 1866; W. H. Crockett, Vermont, V (1923), 368-69; Proceedings Vt. Historical Society for the Years 1919-1920 (1921);

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, pp. 498-499;

FOOT, SOLOMON (November 19, 1802-March 28, 1866), lawyer, politician, son of Solomon and Betsey (Crossett) Foot, was born at Cornwall, Vt. His father, a physician, died while he was still a child, but in spite of many difficulties and privations he secured an education, graduating at Middlebury College in 1826. For five years following graduation he engaged in teaching, most of the time as principal of Castleton Seminary, interrupted by one year (1827-28) as tutor at the University of Vermont. He studied law in the meantime, was admitted to the bar in 1831, and established himself in practise at Rutland. Though an able lawyer his early and long continued activity in public affairs prevented his attaining real prominence at the bar. In 1833 he was elected to the legislature as representative of Rutland. He was reelected in 1835, 1837, 1838, and 1847, and in each of the last three terms served as speaker. In the latter capacity, declared Senator Poland, "he first displayed that almost wonderful aptitude and capacity as the presiding officer of a deliberative assembly, which afterward made him so celebrated throughout the nation" (Congressional Globe, 39 Congress, 1 Session, p. 1908). He was a member of the constitutional convention of 1836 and prosecuting attorney of Rutland County from 1836 to 1842.

He was an active Whig and as such was elected to Congress in 1842, serving two terms until 1847 when he declined a renomination and returned to his legal practise. His service in the House was without special interest or distinction but he was strongly opposed to the Mexican policy of the administration and denounced the war which resulted. In 1850 he was elected to the United States Senate and served until his death sixteen years later, being at that time the senior member in point of continuous service. His opposition to the extension of slavery led him to join the new Republican organization when the Whig party finally disintegrated. During his first term in the Senate he also served for a year (1854-55) as president of the Brunswick & Florida Railroad Company, visiting England in connection with the sale of its securities and the purchase of material.

Foot was not distinguished as an orator and most of his remarks are brief and pointed interjections in the course of debate. His speech of March 20, 1858, on the proposed admission of Kansas under the Lecompton Constitution (Congressional Globe, 35 Congress, 1 Session, App., pp. 153-58) shows, however, that he was capable of sustained argument and close reasoning, had he wished to devote himself to long set addresses. It was as a presiding officer that he appears to have made the deepest impression on his contemporaries. He was president pro tempore throughout most of the Thirty-sixth Congress and all of the Thirty-seventh, besides being often called on to preside when the regular incumbents were not available. "He was perhaps more frequently called to the ... chair than any other Senator," said J. B. Grinnell of Iowa, who also declares that his services had left a permanent impress on the parliamentary decorum and methods of the Senate (Congressional Globe, 39 Congress, 1 Session, p. 1924). In parliamentary law Charles Sumner testified, "he excelled and was master of us all." Fessenden, Reverdy Johnson, and others paid similar tribute to his fine presence, fairness, courage, and dignity in the chair as well as to the personal qualities which made him one of the most popular members of the upper chamber. When his death was announced, the splenetic Gideon Welles, never given to flattery of his associates, and usually suspicious of senators in particular, wrote in his diary (Diary of Gideon Welles, 19n, II, 466) that he had been a firm friend of the Navy Department, was "pater senatus and much loved and respected." His most notable committee service was rendered as chairman of the committee on public buildings and grounds, in which capacity he was able, in spite of the stringency of the Civil War, to push forward the completion of the Capitol. Judged by occasional remarks in the course of debate on appropriation bills, he appears to have had certain ideals as to the future development of the government property in Washington not altogether common at that time. He was twice married: July 9, 1839, to Emily Fay; and April 2, 1844, to Mary Ann (Hodges) Dana. He died in Washington, D. C.

[Geo. F. Edmunds, in Addresses Delivered before the Vt. Historical Society, October 16, 1866 (1866); N. Seaver, A Discourse delivered at the Funeral of Hon. Solomon Foot (1866); L. Matthews, History of the Town of Cornwall, Vt. (1862); N. Goodwin, The Foote Family (1849); G. W. Benedict, in Hours at Home (New York), July 1866; W. H. Crockett, Vermont, V (1923), 368-69; Proc. Vt. Historical Society for the Years 1919-1920 (1921); Daily Morning Chronicle (Washington, D. C.), March 29, 30, April 2, 1866; Rutland Daily Herald, March 29-April 2, 1866; Burlington Times, March 31, April 7, 1866; Vt. Watchman & State Journal (Montpelier), April 6, 1866.)

W.A.R.


FOSTER, Lafayette Sabine, 1806-1880, statesman, Connecticut State Representative, Mayor of Norwich, Connecticut, U.S. Senator 1854-1867, Republican Party, opposed to slavery.  Voted for Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, abolishing slavery.

(Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, pp. 512-513; Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 553; Congressional Globe; Memorial Sketch of Lafayette S. Foster (privately printed, Boston; 1881); F. C. Pierce, Foster Genealogy (1889); F. M. Caulkins, History of Norwich, Connecticut (1866)

Biography from Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography:

FOSTER, Lafayette Sabine, statesman, born in Franklin, Connecticut, 22 November, 1806: died in Norwich, Connecticut, 19 September, 1880. His father, Captain Daniel, was an officer of the Revolution, who was descended on his mother's side from Miles Standish, and served with distinction at the battles of White Plains, Stillwater, and Saratoga. The son earned the means for his education by teaching, was graduated with the first honors at Brown in 1828, studied law, and was admitted to the Bar at Centreville, Maryland, while conducting an academy there in 1830. He returned to Connecticut, completed his legal studies in the office of Calvin Goddard, who had been his first preceptor, was admitted to the Connecticut Bar in November, 1831, and opened an office in Hampton in 1833, but in 1834 settled at Norwich. He took an active interest in politics from the outset of his professional life, was the editor of the Norwich " Republican," a Whig journal, in 1835, and in 1839 and 1840 was elected to the legislature. He was again elected in 1846 and the two succeeding years, and was chosen speaker. In 1851 he received the degree of LL. D. from Brown University. In 1851-'2 he was mayor of Norwich. He was twice defeated as the Whig candidate for governor, and in 1854 was again sent to the assembly, chosen speaker, and elected to the U. S. Senate on 19 May, 1854, by the votes of the Whigs and Free-Soilers. Though opposed by conviction to slavery, he resisted the efforts to form a Free-Soil Party until the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill. He delivered a notable speech in the Senate on 25 June, 1850, against the repeal of the Missouri compromise, and opposed the Lecompton Constitution for Kansas in 1858. He was a member of the Republican Party from its organization in 1856, and in 1860 was again elected to the Senate. In December, 1860, he spoke in approval of the Powell resolution to inquire into the distracted state of the country, though he was one of the few who at that time believed that the southern leaders would force a disruption of the Union, and was in favor of resisting the extension of slavery beyond the limits recognized in the constitution, even at the cost of Civil War. Mr. Foster was intimately connected with the administration, and was often a spokesman of Mr. Lincoln's views. On 11 March, 1861, he moved the expulsion of Senator Lewis T. Wigfall, of Texas. In 1863 he advocated an appropriation for the gradual manumission of slaves in Missouri. In 1864, on the question of the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act, he spoke in favor of preserving the earlier law of 1793, and thereby incurred the reproaches of the radical members of his party. He also opposed the bill granting the voting franchise to colored citizens of the District of Columbia without an educational qualification. He served on the committees on Indian affairs and land claims, and was chairman of the committee on pensions, and during the Civil War of that on foreign relations. In 1865 he was chosen president of the Senate pro tempore. After Andrew Johnson became president, Mr. Foster was acting vice-president of the United States. During the subsequent recess he travelled on the plains as member of a special commission to investigate the  condition of the Indians. His senatorial term of office expired in March, 1867, and he was succeeded by Benjamin F. Wade in the office of vice-president. On account of his moderate and conservative course in the Senate his re-election was opposed by a majority of the Republicans in the Connecticut Legislature, and he withdrew his name, though he was urged to stand as an independent candidate, and was assured of the support of the Democrats. He declined the professorship of law at Yale in 1869, but after his retirement from the bench in 1876 delivered a course of lectures on "Parliamentary Law and Methods of Legislation." In 1870 he again represented the town of Norwich in the assembly, and was chosen speaker. He resigned in June of that year in order to take his seat on the bench of the supreme court, having been elected by a nearly unanimous vote of both branches of the legislature. His most noteworthy opinion was that in the case of Kirtland against Hotchkiss, in which he differed from the decision of the majority of the court (afterward confirmed by the U. S. Supreme Court) in holding that railroad bonds could not be taxed by the state of Connecticut when the property mortgaged was situated in Illinois. In 1872 he joined the liberal Republicans and supported Horace Greeley as a candidate for the presidency. In 1874 he was defeated as a Democratic candidate for Congress. He was a judge of the Connecticut superior court from 1870 till 1876, when he was retired, having reached the age of seventy years, and resumed the practice of law. In 1878-'9 he was a commissioner from Connecticut to settle the disputed boundary question with New York, and afterward one of the three commissioners to negotiate with the New York authorities for the purchase of Fisher's Island. He was also a member of the commission appointed in 1878 to devise simpler rules and forms of legal procedure for the state courts. By his will he endowed a professorship of English law at Yale, bequeathed his library to the town of Norwich, and gave his home for the free academy there. See "Memorial Sketch" (printed privately. Boston, 1881).  Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, pp. 512-513.

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 553;

FOSTER, LAFAYETTE SABINE (November 22, 1806-September 19, 1880), Connecticut editor, judge, United States senator, was the eldest son of Daniel and Welthea Ladd Foster. His father, a descendant of Miles Standish, had been a captain in the Revolutionary War. Lafayette was born in Franklin, near Norwich, Connecticut. The family had slender means, and when he reached college age he was obliged to support himself. He attended Brown University, graduating with high honors in 1828. The following year he taught in an academy in Queen Annes County, Maryland, and then began the study of law in the office of Calvin Goddard of Norwich, who had been an active Federalist politician, and member of the Hartford Convention of 1814. In 1831 he was admitted to the New London County bar. Two years later he opened a law office in Hampton, in Windham County, but in 1835 returned to Norwich, which became his home thereafter. In 1835 he became editor of the Norwich Republican, a Whig journal (Caulkins, Norwich, pp. 582-83). On October 2, 1837, he married Joanna, daughter of James Lanman of Norwich, judge and United States senator. After her death in 1859, he married, October 4, 1860, Martha Lyman of Northampton, Massachusetts. Two daughters and a son were born of the first marriage, but all of them died in childhood.

There were no children from the second marriage. Foster became interested in politics early in his career. He first represented Norwich in the General Assembly in 1839. He was reelected in 1840, from 1846 to 1849 served three years in succession, and later served two single terms, in· 1854 and 1870. Four times he was speaker of the House of Representatives. In the state elections of 1850 and 1851 Foster was the unsuccessful Whig candidate for governor. During 1851 and 1852 he was mayor of Norwich. In 1854 he was chosen United States senator, subsequently holding that position twelve years, from 1855 to 1867. While in the Senate he spoke frequently but his chief distinction was his election as president pro tempore of the Senate. In 1866 he failed to receive the Republican caucus nomination for a third senatorial term, presumably because his opinions were too conservative. In 1870 he became a judge of the Connecticut superior court, and served until 1876. He supported Horace Greeley for president in 1872. Later he was nominated for national representative by a combination of Democrats and liberal Republicans, but was not elected. In 1878 he served on a commission studying a simplification of legal procedure in Connecticut, and during 1878-79 he was a member of a commission to settle a boundary dispute with the state of New York. In appearance, Foster, was slight and unimpressive, his expression being grave and serious. He possessed, nevertheless, both humor and caustic wit, with which he frequently enlivened the otherwise dull sessions of legislative assemblies wherein he spent so much of his life.

[Memorial Sketch of Lafayette S. Foster (privately printed, Boston; 1881); F. C. Pierce, Foster Genealogy (1889); F. M. Caulkins, History of Norwich, Connecticut (1866); D. Loomis and J. G. Calhoun, Judicial and Civil History of Connecticut (1895); "Brown University Necrology for 1880-1881," printed in Providence Daily Journal, June 15, 1881; Hartford Daily Courant, September 21, 1880.]

J.M.M.


FOWLER, Orin, 1791-1852, Lebanon, Connecticut, clergyman.  Free-Soil U.S. Congressman, temperance activist, strong opponent of slavery. 

(Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, p. 517; Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 565; Biographical Dictionary of the U.S. Congress 1774-1927 (1928); Congressional Globe, 32 Congress, 2 Session, p. 28)

Biography from Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography:

FOWLER, Orin, clergyman, born in Lebanon, Connecticut, 29 July, 1791; died in Washington, D. C., 3 Sept., 1852. He was graduated at Yale in 1815, studied theology under President Dwight, taught in the academy in Fairfield, Connecticut, for a year, was licensed to preach on 14 October, 1817, made a missionary tour in the Mississippi valley in 1818, and in 1819 was settled over a Congregational Church in Plainfield, Connecticut. He was dismissed by this society in 1831, but was immediately called to a church in Fall River, of which he remained pastor until he entered Congress. In 1841 he delivered three discourses containing a history of Fall River since 1620, and an account of the boundary dispute between Massachusetts and Rhode Island. He was appointed by a committee of citizens to defend the interests of the town before the boundary commissioners, published a series of articles on the subject in the Boston “Atlas,” and was elected in 1847 to the state senate, where he secured the rejection of the decision of the boundary commission by a unanimous vote. His constituents were so pleased with his ability as a legislator that they elected him in 1848 as a Free-Soil Whig to the National House of Representatives, and re-elected him for the following term. He was an advocate of temperance laws, and a strong opponent of slavery. In March, 1850, he replied to Daniel Webster's speech in justification of the Fugitive-Slave Law. He was the author of a “Disquisition on the Evils attending the Use of Tobacco” (1833), and “Lectures on the Mode and Subjects of Baptism” (1835). His “History of Fall River, with notices of Freeborn and Tiverton,” was republished in 1862 (Fall River). Appletons’ Cycolpædia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, p. 517.

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, p. 565

FOWLER, ORIN (July 29, 1791-September 3, 1852), Congregational clergyman, congressman, was born in Lebanon, Connecticut, the son of Capt. Amos and Rebecca (Dewey) Fowler. He was the oldest boy and the sixth child in a family of twelve. Prepared for college by his pastor, Reverend William B. Ripley, he entered Williams in 18u, but remained there for only one term. After further study at Bacon Academy, Colchester, Connecticut, he became a member of the sophomore class at Yale, graduating in 1815. For a short time he was preceptor of the academy in Fairfield, Connecticut, relinquishing the position in order to devote himself to a course in theology under Reverend Heman Humphrey [q.v.] of that town. On October 14, 1817, he was licensed to preach by the Association of the Western District of Fairfield County; and on June 3, 1818, at Farming ton, . Connecticut, he was ordained by the North Association of Hartford County with a view to missionary work in the West. After a year spent chiefly in Indiana he returned to Connecticut. To the Christian Spectator, August and September 1819, he contributed "Remarks on the State of Indiana." He was installed as pastor of the Congregational church, Plainfield, Connecticut, on March 1, 1820. The following year, October 16, he married Amaryllis, daughter of John H. Payson of Pomfret, Connecticut. After a pastorate of nearly eleven years, having incurred the ill will of some of his parishioners who professed to believe reports derogatory to his character, he was dismissed by the Windham Association of Ministers, January 27, 1831, although a public investigation had revealed nothing affecting his standing as a Christian minister. On July 7, 1831, he became pastor of the Congregational church in Fall River, Massachusetts.

Reference to a long-standing dispute over the boundary-line between Massachusetts and Rhode Island in a series of discourses published under the title An Historical Sketch of Fall River from 1620 to the Present Time (1841) launched him on a political career. His fellow townsmen made him one of a committee to represent them before boundary commissioners of the two states. Their decision was displeasing to the town; and Fowler defended its position under the pseudonym "Plymouth Colony" in articles appearing in the Boston Daily Atlas between Sept. 17 and October 18, 1847. As a result of these, on October 20, 1847, the Whig convention of Bristol County nominated him to the state Senate and he was elected. Here he was influential in causing the commissioners' report to be rejected by Massachusetts. His career in the legislature brought about his election to Congress in 1848 as a Free-Soil Whig, and the following year he took up his residence in Washington, although he was not formally dismissed from his church until May 1850. He was reelected for a second term, but died in Washington, September 3, 1852. He was an opponent of slavery and an advocate of temperance laws and cheap postage. "His strength in the House consisted not so much in eloquence and readiness of debate as in diligent research and knowledge of facts." Besides several speeches his publications include a sermon preached at the ordination of Israel G. Rose, March 9, 1825, entitled The Duty of Distinction in Preaching Explained and Enforced (1825); The Mode and Subjects of Baptism (1835), and A Disquisition on the Evils of Using Tobacco (1833, 1835, 1842).

[W. B. Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, II (1857); F . B . Dexter, Biographical Sketches of the Graduates of Yale College, VI (1912); Congressional Globe, 32 Congress, 2 Session, p. 28].

H.E.S.


FRANCIS, JOHN MORGAN (March 6, 1823- June 18, 1897), newspaper editor, publisher, diplomat, supported the Free-Soil and Republican Parties. (C. E. Francis, Francis: Descendants of Robt. Francis of Wethersfield, Connecticut (1906), p. 194)

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 4, Pt. 2, pp. 580-581;

FRANCIS, JOHN MORGAN (March 6, 1823- June 18, 1897), editor, publicist, diplomat, was born at Prattsburg, New York, the son of Richard and Mary (Stewart) Francis. From his father, a midshipman in the British navy who emigrated to America in 1795, married, and settled in Steuben County, New York, he inherited the rugged physique characteristic of the family. Since he was next to the youngest of thirteen children, he received little formal education. His training as a journalist, however, provided him with an excellent background for a successful career. Beginning at fifteen as an apprentice on the Ontario Messenger, at Canandaigua, New York, he served successively in the editorial departments of the Wayne Sentinel and the Rochester Daily Advertiser. On December 8, 1846, he married a woman of considerable literary talent, Harriet Elizabeth Tucker, daughter of Pomeroy Tucker, editor of the Sentinel, and established himself in Troy as editor-in-chief of the Northern Budget. While connected with the Budget, a Democratic paper, of which he eventually became joint proprietor, he advocated the claims of the Free-Soil party. In 1849 he sold his interests and removed to New York to engage in business. He soon returned to Troy, however, to take charge of the Daily Whig; and in 1851 he founded the Troy Daily Times, with R. D. Thompson as partner. When the latter withdrew in 1853, he became the sole owner. Under his hands the Times was one of the leading papers of the state. Realizing the importance of local news, he stressed it consistently, and by the consequent popularity of the paper he contributed much to the strength of the Republican party, which he joined on its inception. In his devotion to the Union he never wavered. As a result the building occupied by the Times was sacked by a mob during the draft riots of 1863. Publication was suspended, however, for only a day; and the paper continued to gain in influence. When Francis died, he was succeeded by his son, Charles Spencer Francis [q.v.].

Although he never swerved from the ideals in which he believed, he was essentially practical in his approach toward public affairs. In New York he was a member of the state constitutional conventions of 1867-68 and 1894, in both of which he played a prominent part. In national politics he was also an influential figure. In 1856 he was a delegate to the first convention of the Republican party, and at the convention of 1880 he was one of the "die-hards" who supported President Grant. In recognition of his Republicanism he had been appointed in 1871 minister to Greece, where he remained for three years. After a tour of the world, he again engaged in politics. In 1881 President Garfield, to whom he had transferred his allegiance, included his name as minister to Belgium in his tentative list of appointments, but did not live to make the nomination. President Arthur, embarrassed by other commitments, named him to the post at Lisbon. In 1884 he was promoted to the mission at Vienna. He resigned the following year.

[C. E. Francis, Francis: Descendants of Robt. Francis of Wethersfield, Connecticut (1906), p. 194; files of the Troy Daily Times, especially the supplement of June 25, 1901, and the anniversary issue of June 25, 1926; a memorial volume published in 1897, containing sketches, appreciations, and reprints of newspaper obituaries; the volumes of reminiscences by his wife, especially By Land and Sea (1891); Rutherford Hayner, Troy and Rensselaer County, New York (3 vols., 1925); Geo. B. Anderson, Landmarks of Rensselaer County (1897); N. B. Sylvester, History of Rensselaer County, New York (1880); New York Times, June 19, 1897; Northern Budget, June 20, 1897.)

R. P. B-r.


FRÉMONT, John C., 1813-1890, California, Army officer, explorer, anti-slavery political leader.  In 1856, was first candidate for President from the anti-slavery Republican Party.  Lost to James Buchanan.  Early in his career, he was opposed to slavery and its expansion into new territories and states.  Third military governor of California, 1847. First U.S. Senator from the State of California, 1850-1851.  He was elected as a Free Soil Democrat, and was defeated for reelection principally because of his adamant opposition to slavery.  Frémont supported a free Kansas and was against the provisions of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law.  On August 30, 1861, General Frémont issued an unauthorized proclamation to free slaves owned by secessionists in his Department in Missouri.  Lincoln revoked the proclamation and relieved Frémont of command.  In March 1862, Frémont was given commands in Virginia, Tennessee and Kentucky. 

(Blue, 2005, pp. 8, 10, 12-13, 58, 77, 78, 105, 131, 153, 173, 178, 206, 225, 239, 245, 252, 261-263, 268-269; Chaffin, 2002; Mitchell, 2007, pp. 89, 93, 94-95, 97-98, 138, 139, 145, 149, 159, 161, 172, 215, 219-225, 228-230, 243; Nevins, 1939; Rodriguez, 2007, pp. 59, 65, 140, 242-243, 275, 369, 385, 687; Sewell, 1976; pp.  243, 277, 282-284, 287-290, 334; Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 1888, Vol. II, pp. 545-548; Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 4, Pt. 1, pp. 19-23; American National Biography, Oxford University Press, New York, 2002, Vol. 8, p. 459; Chaffin, Tom, Pathfinder: John Charles Frémont and the Course of American Empire, New York: Hill and Wang, 2002; Eyre, Alice, The Famous Fremonts and Their America, Boston: The Christopher Publishing House, 1948; Nevins, Allan, Fremont: Pathmarker of the West, Volume 1: Fremont the Explorer; Volume 2: Fremont in the Civil War, 1939, rev ed. 1955)

Biography from Appletons’ Cyclopaedia of American Biography:

FRÉMONT, John Charles, explorer, born in Savannah, Georgia, 21 January, 1813; died in New York City, 13 July, 1890. His father, who was a Frenchman, had settled in Norfolk, Virginia, early married Anne Beverley Whiting, a Virginian lady, and supported himself by teaching his native language. After his death, which took place in 1818, his widow moved with her three infant children to Charleston, South Carolina. John Charles entered the junior class of Charleston College in 1828, and for some time stood high, especially in mathematics; but his inattention and frequent absences at length caused his expulsion. He then employed himself as a private teacher of mathematics, and at the same time taught an evening school. He became teacher of mathematics on the sloop-of-war “Natchez” in 1833, and after a cruise of two years returned, and was given his degree by the college that had expelled him. He then passed a rigorous examination at Baltimore for a professorship in the U. S. Navy, and was appointed to the frigate “Independence,” but declined, and became an assistant engineer under Captain William G. Williams, of the U. S. Topographical Corps, on surveys for a projected railroad between Charleston and Cincinnati, aiding particularly in the exploration of the mountain passes between North Carolina and Tennessee. This work was suspended in 1837, and Frémont accompanied Captain Williams in a military reconnaissance of the mountainous Cherokee country in Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee, made rapidly, in the depth of winter, in anticipation of hostilities with the Indians. On 7 July, 1838, while engaged with Jean Nicolas Nicollet in exploring, under government authority, the country between the Missouri and the northern frontier, he was commissioned by President Van Buren as 2d lieutenant of topographical engineers. He went to Washington in 1840 to prepare his report, and while there met Jessie, daughter of Thomas H. Benton, then senator from Missouri. An engagement was formed, but, as the lady was only fifteen years of age, her parents objected to the match; and suddenly, probably through the influence of Colonel Benton, the young officer received from the war department an order to make an examination of the River Des Moines on the western frontier. The survey was made rapidly, and shortly after his return from this duty the lovers were secretly married, 19 October, 1841. In 1842, Frémont was instructed by the War Department to take charge of an expedition for the exploration of the Rocky Mountains, particularly the South pass. He left Washington on 2 May, and in four months had carefully examined the South pass and explored the Wind River mountains, ascending their highest point, since known as Frémont's peak (13,570 ft.). His report of the expedition was laid before Congress in the winter of 1842-'3, and attracted much attention both at home and abroad. Immediately afterward, Frémont determined to explore the unknown region between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific, and set out in May, 1843, with thirty-nine men. On 6 September, after travelling over 1,700 miles, he came in sight of Great Salt Lake. His investigations corrected many vague and erroneous ideas about this region, of which no accurate account had ever been given, and had great influence in promoting the settlement of Utah and the Pacific states. It was his report of this expedition that gave to the Mormons their first idea of Utah as a place of residence. After leaving Great Salt Lake, he explored the upper tributaries of the Columbia, descended the valley of that River to Fort Vancouver, near its mouth, and on 10 November set out on his return. His route lay through an almost unknown region leading from the Lower Columbia to the Upper Colorado, and was crossed by high and rugged mountain-chains. Deep snow soon forced him to descend into the great basin, and he presently found himself, in the depth of winter, in a desert, with the prospect of death to his whole party from cold and hunger. By astronomical observation he found that he was in the latitude of the Bay of San Francisco; but between him and the valleys of California was a snow-clad range of mountains, which the Indians declared no man could cross, and over which no reward could induce them to attempt to guide him. Frémont undertook the passage without a guide, and accomplished it in forty days, reaching Sutter's Fort, on the Sacramento, early in March, with his men reduced almost to skeletons, and with only thirty-three out of sixty-seven horses and mules remaining. Resuming his journey on 24 March, he crossed the Sierra Nevada through a gap, and after another visit to Great Salt Lake returned to Kansas through the South pass in July, 1844, having been absent fourteen months. The reports of this expedition occupied in their preparation the remainder of 1844. Frémont was given the double brevet of 1st lieutenant and captain in January, 1845, at the instance of General Scott, and in the spring of that year he set out on a third expedition to explore the great basin and the maritime region of Oregon and California. After spending the summer in exploring the watershed between the Pacific and the Mississippi, he encamped in October on the shore of the Great Salt Lake, and after crossing the Sierra Nevada with a few men, in the dead of winter, to obtain supplies, left his party in the valley of the San Joaquin while he went to Monterey, then the capital of California, to obtain from the Mexican authorities permission to proceed with his exploration. This was granted, but was almost immediately revoked, and Frémont was ordered to leave the country without delay. Compliance with this demand was impossible, on account of the exhaustion of Frémont's men and his lack of supplies, and it was therefore refused. The Mexican commander, General José Castro, then mustered the forces of the province and prepared to attack the Americans, who numbered only sixty-two. Frémont took up a strong position on the Hawk's peak, a mountain thirty miles from Monterey, built a rude fort of felled trees, hoisted the American flag, and, having plenty of ammunition, resolved to defend himself. The Mexican general, with a large force, encamped in the plain immediately below the Americans, whom he hourly threatened to attack. On the evening of the fourth day of the siege Frémont withdrew with his party and proceeded toward the San Joaquin. The fires were still burning in his deserted camp when a messenger arrived from General Castro to propose a cessation of hostilities. Frémont now made his way northward through the Sacramento valley into Oregon without further trouble, and near Klamath Lake, on 9 May, 1846, met a party in search of him with despatches from Washington, directing him to watch over the interests of the United States in California, there being reason to apprehend that the province would be transferred to Great Britain, and also that General Castro intended to destroy the American settlements on the Sacramento. He promptly returned to California, where he found that Castro was already marching against the settlements. The settlers flocked to Frémont's camp, and in less than a month he had freed northern California from Mexican authority. He received a lieutenant-colonel's commission on 27 May, and was elected governor of California by the American settlers on 4 July. On 10 July, learning that Commodore Sloat, commander of the United States Squadron on that coast, had seized Monterey, he marched to join him, and reached that place on 19 July, with 160 mounted riflemen. About this time Commodore Stockton arrived at Monterey with the frigate “Congress” and took command of the squadron, with authority from Washington to conquer California. At his request Frémont organized a force of mounted men, known as the “California battalion,” of which he was appointed major. He was also appointed by Commodore Stockton military commandant and civil governor of the territory, the project of making California independent having been relinquished on receipt of intelligence that war had begun between the United States and Mexico. On 13 January, 1847, Frémont concluded with the Mexicans articles of capitulation, which terminated the war in California and left that country permanently in the possession of the United States. Meantime General Stephen W. Kearny, with a small force of dragoons, had arrived in California. A quarrel soon broke out between him and Commodore Stockton as to who should command. Each had instructions from Washington to conquer and organize a government in the country. Frémont had accepted a commission from Commodore Stockton as commander of the battalion of volunteers, and had been appointed governor of the territory. General Kearny, as Frémont's superior officer in the regular army, required him to obey his orders, which conflicted with those of Commodore Stockton. In this dilemma Frémont concluded to obey Stockton's orders, considering that he had already fully recognized that officer as commander-in-chief, and that General Kearny had also for some time admitted his authority. In the spring of 1847 despatches from Washington assigned the command to Gen Kearny, and in June that officer set out overland for the United States, accompanied by Frémont, whom he treated with deliberate disrespect throughout the journey. On the arrival of the party at Fort Leavenworth, on 22 August, Frémont was put under arrest and ordered to report to the adjutant-general at Washington, where he arrived on 16 September, and demanded a speedy trial. Accordingly a court-martial was held, beginning 2 November, 1847, and ending 31 January, 1848, which found him guilty of “mutiny,” “disobedience of the lawful command of a superior officer,” and “conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline,” and sentenced him to be dismissed from the service. A majority of the members of the court recommended him to the clemency of President Polk. The president refused to confirm the verdict of mutiny, but approved the rest of the verdict and the sentence, of which, however, he remitted the penalty. Notwithstanding this, Frémont at once resigned his commission, and on 14 October, 1848, set out on a fourth expedition across the continent, at his own expense, with the object of finding a practicable passage to California by way of the upper waters of the Rio Grande. With thirty-three men and 120 mules he made his way through the country of the Utes, Apaches, Comanches, and other Indian tribes then at war with the United States. In attempting to cross the great Sierra, covered with snow, his guide lost his way, and Frémont's party encountered horrible suffering from cold and hunger, a portion of them being driven to cannibalism. All of his animals and one third of his men perished, and he was forced to retrace his steps to Santa Fé. Undaunted by this disaster, he gathered another band of thirty men, and after a long search discovered a secure route by which he reached the Sacramento in the spring of 1849. He now determined to settle in California, where, in 1847, he had bought the Mariposa estate, a large tract of land containing rich gold-mines. His title to this estate was contested, but after a long litigation it was decided in his favor in 1855 by the Supreme Court of the United States. He received from President Taylor in 1849 the appointment of commissioner to run the boundary-line between the United States and Mexico, but, having been elected by the legislature of California, in December of that year, to represent the new state in the U. S. Senate, he resigned his commissionership and departed for Washington by way of the isthmus. He took his seat in the Senate, 10 September, 1850, the day after the admission of California as a state. In drawing lots for the terms of the respective senators, Frémont drew the short term, ending 4 March, 1851. The Senate remained in session but three weeks after the admission of California, and during that period Frémont devoted himself almost exclusively to measures relating to the interests of the state he represented. For this purpose he introduced and advocated a comprehensive series of bills, embracing almost every object of legislation demanded by the peculiar circumstances of California. In the state election of 1851 in California the Anti-slavery Party, of which Frémont was one of the leaders, was defeated, and he consequently failed of re-election to the Senate, after 142 ballotings. After devoting two years to his private affairs, he visited Europe in 1852, and spent a year there, being received with distinction by many eminent men of letters and of science. He had already, in 1850, received a gold medal from the king of Prussia for his discoveries, had been awarded the “founder's medal” of the Royal geographical Society of London, and had been elected an honorary member of the Geographical Society of Berlin. His explorations had gained for him at home the name of the “Pathfinder.” While in Europe he learned that Congress had made an appropriation for the survey of three routes from the Mississippi valley to the Pacific, and immediately returned to the United States for the purpose of fitting out a fifth expedition on his own account to complete the survey of the route he had taken on his fourth expedition. He left Paris in June, 1853, and in September was on his march across the continent. He found passes through the mountains on the line of latitudes 38 and 39, and reached California in safety, after enduring great hardships. For fifty days his party lived on horse-flesh, and for forty-eight hours at a time were without food of any kind. In the spring of 1855 Frémont with his family took up his residence in New York, for the purpose of preparing for publication the narrative of his last expedition. He now began to be mentioned as an anti-slavery candidate for the presidency. In the first National Republican Convention, which met in Philadelphia on 17 June, 1856, he received 359 votes to 196 for John McLean, on an informal ballot, and on the first formal ballot Frémont was unanimously nominated. In his letter of acceptance, dated 8 July, 1856, he expressed himself strongly against the extension of slavery and in favor of free labor. A few days after the Philadelphia Convention adjourned, a National American Convention at New York also nominated him for the presidency. He accepted their support in a letter dated 30 June, in which he referred them for an exposition of his views to his forthcoming letter accepting the Republican nomination. After a spirited and exciting contest, the presidential election resulted in the choice of Mr. Buchanan by 174 electoral votes from nineteen states, while Frémont received 114 votes from eleven states, including the six New England states, New York, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconsin. Maryland gave her eight electoral votes for Mr. Fillmore. The popular vote for Frémont was 1,341,000; for Buchanan, 1,838,000; for Fillmore, 874,000. In 1858 Frémont went to California, where he resided for some time. In 1860 he visited Europe. Soon after the beginning of the Civil War he was made a major-general of the regular army and assigned to the command of the newly created Western Department. After purchasing arms for the U. S. government, in Europe, he returned; he arrived in St. Louis on 26 July, 1861, and made his headquarters there, fortifying the city, and placing Cairo in security by a demonstration with 4,000 troops. After the battle of Wilson's Creek, on 10 August, where General Nathaniel Lyon was slain, Frémont proclaimed martial law, arrested active secessionists, and suspended the publication of papers charged with disloyalty. On 31 August he issued a proclamation assuming the government of the state, and announcing that he would emancipate the slaves of those in arms against the United States. President Lincoln wrote to him, approving all of the proclamation except the emancipation clause, which he considered premature. He asked Frémont to withdraw it, which he declined, and the president annulled it himself in a public order. In the autumn Frémont moved his army from the Missouri River in pursuit of the enemy. Meanwhile many complaints had been made of his administration, it being alleged that it was inefficient, though arbitrary and extravagant, and after an investigation by the Secretary of War he was, on 2 November, 1861, relieved from his command just as he had overtaken the Confederates at Springfield. It is claimed by Frémont's friends that this was the result of a political intrigue against him. On leaving his army, he went to St. Louis, where he was enthusiastically received by the citizens. In March, 1862, he was given the command of the newly created “mountain district” of Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. In the early part of June his army engaged a superior force under General Jackson for eight days, with constant sharp skirmishing, the enemy retreating slowly and destroying culverts and bridges to cause delay. The pursuit was terminated with a severe engagement on the evening of 6 June, in which Jackson's chief of cavalry, General Ashby, was killed, and by the battle of Cross-Keys on 8 June. It is claimed by General Frémont that if McDowell's force had joined him, as promised by the president, Jackson's retreat would have been cut off; as it was, the latter made good his escape, having accomplished his purpose of delaying re-enforcements to McClellan. On 26 June the president issued an order creating the “Army of Virginia,” to include Frémont's corps, and giving the command of it to General Pope. Thereupon Frémont asked to be relieved, on the ground that he could not serve under General Pope, for sufficient personal reasons. His request having been granted, he went to New York to await further orders, but received no other command during the war, though, as he says, one was constantly promised him. On 31 May, 1864, a convention of Republicans, dissatisfied with Mr. Lincoln, met at Cleveland and tendered to General Frémont a nomination for president, which, he accepted. In the following September a committee of Republicans representing the administration waited on him and urged his withdrawal, as “vital to the success of the party.” After considering the matter for a week, he acceded to their request, saying in his letter of withdrawal that he did so “not to aid in the triumph of Mr. Lincoln, but to do my part toward preventing the election of the Democratic candidate.”

Since 1864 General Frémont has taken little part in public affairs, but has been active in railway matters. He procured from the Texas legislature a grant of state land in the interest of the Memphis and El Paso Railway, which was to be part of a proposed trans-continental road from Norfolk to San Diego and San Francisco. The French agents employed to place the land-grant bonds of this road on the market made the false declaration that they were guaranteed by the United States. In 1869 the Senate passed a bill giving Frémont's road the right of way through the territories, an attempt to defeat it by fixing on him the onus of the misstatement in Paris having been unsuccessful. In 1873 he was prosecuted by the French government for fraud in connection with this misstatement. He did not appear in person, and was sentenced by default to fine and imprisonment, no judgment being given on the merits of the case. In 1878-'81 General Frémont was governor of Arizona. He has published “Report of the Exploring Expedition to the Rocky Mountains in 1842, and to Oregon and North California in 1843-'4” (Washington, 1845; New York, 1846; London, 1849); “Colonel J. C. Frémont's Explorations,” an account of all five of his expeditions (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1859); and “Memoirs of my Life” (New York, 1880). See also the campaign biographies by John Bigelow (New York, 1856), and Charles W. Upham (Boston, 1856). His wife, Jessie Benton, born in Virginia in 1824, has published “Story of the Guard; a Chronicle of the War,” with a German translation (Boston, 1863); a sketch of her father, Thomas H. Benton, prefixed to her husband's memoirs (1880); and “Souvenirs of my Time” (Boston, 1887). [Appleton’s 1900]

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 4, Pt. 1, pp. 19-23;

FREMONT, JOHN CHARLES (January 21, 1813-July 13, 1890), explorer, politician, soldier, was the son of a French emigre school-teacher of Richmond, Virginia, Jean Charles Fremon, who eloped with Mrs. Anne Whiting Pryor of that city in 1811. They fled from Mrs. Pryor's aged husband to Savannah, Georgia, where Fremont was born. While the father taught French and dancing in various parts of the South, the mother sometimes took boarders. The family spent some years in Norfolk, Virginia, and after the death of Fremon in 1818 his widow (if we may so call her in the absence of any marriage) removed to Charleston, South Carolina, where she supported several children on a meager inherited income. Fremont was precocious, handsome, and daring, and quickly showed an aptitude for obtaining protectors. A lawyer, John W. Mitchell, saw that he was givein sufficient schooling to enter Charleston College in May 1829, and he remained there, with intervals of teaching in the country, till expelled for irregular attendance in 1831. Fortunately the college had grounded him in mathematics and the natural sciences. Fortunately also he had attracted the attention of Joel R. Poinsett, Jacksonian leader in the state, and shortly obtained through him an appointment as teacher of mathematics on the sloop of war Natchez. On this ship he cruised in South American waters in 1833.

Fremont's real career began when he resigned from the navy to become a second lieutenant in the United States Topographical Corps and to assist in surveying the route of a projected railway between Charleston and Cincinnati. In his work in the Carolina mountains he formed a strong taste for wilderness exploration. This was deepened when in 1837-38 he acted with another detachment of the Topographical Corps in a reconnaissance of the Cherokee country in Georgia, instituted by the government preparatory to the removal of the Indians. Ordered thence to Washington, Fremont obtained from Poinsett a place with the expedition of J. N. Nicollet [q.v.] for exploring the plateau between the upper Mississippi and Missouri Rivers. Nicollet; a scientist of high reputation in Paris and Washington, gave him an expert training in astronomical, topographical, and geological observation, for which Fremont's quick mind had a natural taste. He also received a thorough initiation into western frontier life, becoming intimate with such men as Henry Sibley of the American Fur Company, Joseph Renville, J. B. Faribault, and Etienne Provot, meeting large bodies of Sioux, and traversing much of the country between Fort Pierre on the Missouri and Fort Snelling on the Mississippi. Returning to Washington, he took bachelor quarters with Nicollet and collaborated with him upon a map and an elaborate scientific report.

The second turning-point in Fremont's life was his meeting with Senator Thomas Hart Benton, who was greatly interested in Nicollet's work, brought Fremont to his house, and gave him a new vision of the possibilities of western exploration and expansion to the Pacific. Fremont later wrote that his interviews with Benton were "pregnant with results and decisive of my life" (Memoirs of My Life, 1887, I, 65). He fell in love with the sixteen-year-old Jessie Benton. Alarmed by their obvious attachment, her father persuaded Poinsett, now secretary of war, to send the penniless lieutenant to explore the Des Moines River. Fremont, elated by his first independent commission, equipped an expedition in St. Louis, hired the botanist Charles Geyer, and during the spring and summer of 1841 creditably mapped much of Iowa Territory. Neither he nor the strong-willed Jessie Benton had swerved, however, from what was to prove a lifelong devotion, and when the Benton family remained obdurate, they were secretly married in Washington, on October 19, 1841, by a Catholic priest. When Benton learned the fact in November he angrily ordered Fremont from his door, but relented when Jessie quoted the words of Ruth, "Whither thou goest, I will go." Thereafter Fremont found an invaluable adviser, patron, and protector in his father-in-law.

Fremont's first important exploration, a summer expedition in 1842 to the Wind River chain of the Rockies, was planned by Benton, Senator Lewis Linn, and other Westerners interested in the acquisition of Oregon, and marked him definitely as the successor of the now dying Nicollet. Its main object was to give a scientific examination to the Oregon Trail through South Pass and to report on the rivers, the fertility of the country, the best positions for forts; and the nature of the mountains beyond in Wyoming. Equipping a party of twenty-five in St. Louis with the aid of Cyprian Chouteau and obtaining by a lucky chance the services of Kit Carson as guide; Fremont left the Kansas River on June 15, 1842; followed the Platte toward the Rockies, crossed South Pass, and from the headwaters of the Green River explored the Wind River range, where he climbed what he mistakenly thought to be the highest peak of the Rockies, Fremont's Peak (13,730 feet). On his return he recklessly shot the rapids of the swollen Platte in a rubber boat and lost much of his equipment (F. S. Dellenbaugh, Fremont and '49, 1914, p. 65 ff.). He was back in Washington in October, and with Jessie Fremont's expert help, for she possessed high literary gifts, he composed a report which gave him a wide popular reputation (Report of the Exploring Expedition to the Rocky Mountains, 1843). Modeled on Irving's Adventures of Captain Bonneville, it showed a zest for adventure and a descriptive sparkle which appealed to the fast-growing interest in Oregon settlement. It furnished a scientific map of much of the Oregon Trail prepared by the topographer Charles Preuss, emphasized the fertility of the plains, and offered much practical advice to emigrants. Government publication was followed by numerous reprints. Congress, prompted by Benton, at once authorized a second expedition under Fremont which was to reach the South Pass by a different route, push to the Columbia, and examine the Oregon country, connecting on the Pacific with the coastal surveys by Commander Wilkes.

Fremont's second expedition of almost forty well-equipped men left the Missouri River in May 1843, with Thomas Fitzpatrick as guide, Preuss as topographer, and a twelve-pound howitzer cannon which he rashly obtained from Colonel S. W. Kearny in St. Louis. Its departure was hastened by an urgent message from Jessie Fremont, who suppressed a War Department order requiring Fremont to return to Washington to explain his howitzer; the government objected to giving the expedition the appearance of a military reconnaissance. Benton later successfully defended his daughter's action. On the Arkansas River Fremont was joined by Kit Carson. After an unavailing effort to blaze a new trail through northern Colorado, he struck the regular Oregon Trail, on which he passed the main body of the great emigration of 1843; stopped to explore the Great Salt Lake; and pushed on by way of Fort Hall and Fort Boise to Marcus Whitman's mission on the Columbia. His endurance, energy, and resourcefulness were remarkable. Reaching the Dalles on November 5, Fremont left the main body of his expedition while he went down stream to Fort Vancouver for supplies. He might then have retraced his steps to St. Louis. But under the spell of Benton's dream of acquiring the whole West, he resolved to turn south and explore the Great Basin between the Rockies and Sierras. Moving through Oregon to Pyramid Lake, which he named, and into Nevada, he reached the Carson River on January 18, 1844. From a point near the site of Virginia City he resolved to cross the Sierra into California, a feat daring to the point of foolhardiness, yet despite the perils of cold and snow he accomplished it. Early in March he reached the Sacramento Valley and was hospitably received by Captain August Sutter at his fort, where he refitted his party. While here he talked with the American settlers, now growing numerous, and formed a clear impress ion of the feeble Mexican hold upon California. Moving south till he struck the "Spanish Trail" from Los Angeles to Santa Fe, he followed this for some distance, crossed parts of the present states of Nevada and Utah, explored Utah Lake, and by way of Pueblo reached Bent's Fort on the Arkansas. Not until August 1844 did he arrive in St. Louis. His return was one of the sensations of the day. Accompanied by Jessie, he traveled to Washington and devoted the winter with her aid to his second report. It appeared at a fortunate moment, when Polk's victory had given impetus to policies of expansion. As detailed, vivid, and readable as the first report, with much careful scientific observation, it showed that the Oregon Trail was not difficult and that the Northwest was fertile and desirable. Senator Buchanan moved the printing of 10,000 copies.

With war with Mexico now clearly imminent and all eyes fixed on the West, it was easy for Benton to carry an appropriation for a third expedition under Fremont. Under the War Department, it was to execute a survey of the central Rockies, the Great Salt Lake region, and part of the Sierra Nevada. In St. Louis Fremont equipped sixty men, fully armed; Kit Carson was again called to be his guide, and two other distinguished frontiersmen, Joseph Walker and Alexander Godey, were enlisted. Fremont in his Memoirs (I, 422 ff.) states that it was secretly intended by Benton and George Bancroft, secretary of the navy, that if he reached California and found war had begun, he should transform his scientific force into a military body. Unquestionably he desired to play a role in conquering California, which had captivated him by its beauty and wealth, and this desire furnishes the key to his very controversial conduct there. Moving west by way of Bent's Fort, the Great Salt Lake, and the "Hastings Cut-Off," he reached the Ogden River, which he renamed the Humboldt, and divided his party in order to double his geographical information. On December 9, 1845, after blazing a useful new trail across Nevada, he was again at Sutter's Fort. Under the pretext of obtaining fuller supplies, he took his men to Monterey and established contact there with the American con~ sul, Thomas Larkin. In February 1846 he united with the other branch of his expedition near San Jose, thus giving the United States a formidable little force in the heart of California. The suspicious Mexican officials ordered him from the country but with headstrong audacity he promptly hoisted the American flag, defying them. Then, obviously playing for time, he moved north to Klamath Lake, where on May 8 he was overtaken by Lieutenant A. H. Gillespie from Washington. Gillespie had brought dispatches to Larkin, of which he carried copies to Fremont, and according to the latter he also brought verbal instructions from Benton and Buchanan which justified aggressive action. There can be no question that he brought news that both Larkin and the commander of the American warship Portsmouth in San Francisco Bay expected war to begin in a few days (Larkin Manuscripts, State Department, letters of April 17, 23, 1846). Fremont felt that his course was clear and turned back.

The result was that he played a prominent if at first hesitating role in the conquest of California. Hastening to Sutter's Fort, he made a display of force there which inspired the discontented American settlers in the Sacramento Valley to begin the Bear Flag revolt, and then (June 23) took up arms in their support. When news of actual war reached him on July 10 he actively cooperated with Sloat and Stockton in the conquest of California. His "California Battalion" of expedition- members and settlers marched to Monterey, took ship to San Diego, and with Stockton's force captured Los Angeles on August 13. Fremont then went north to muster a larger force, was busy recruiting when a revolt wrested Los Angeles from the Americans, and returned only in time to assist Stockton and General S. W. Kearny in the final capture of that town in January 1847. He accepted the Mexican surrender in the Capitulation of Couenga. Almost immediately he was involved in the bitter quarrel of Stockton and Kearny [qq.v.] over their respective authorities, caused by conflicting instructions from Washington. Taking Stockton's side, he was appointed by him civil governor of California, and exercised that authority for two months, until final orders from Washington established Kearny's supremacy. Kearny humiliated Fremont, detained him in defiance of Polk's orders that he was allowed to proceed to Mexico, and, taking him to Fort Leavenworth as a virtual prisoner, there arrested him upon charges of mutiny and insubordination. The quarrel was taken up with indiscreet energy by Benton. It resulted in a famous court martial in Washington (November 1847-January 1848) in which a panel of regular officers found Fremont guilty of mutiny, disobedience, and conduct prejudicial to order. Though President Polk remitted the penalty, Fremont, who found public sentiment on his side, indignantly resigned from the service.

This resignation was followed by a midwinter expedition (1848-49), at the expense of Benton and certain wealthy St. Louisans interested in a Pacific railroad, to find passes for such a line westward from the upper waters of the Rio Grande. It proved a disastrous venture. Eager to show that passage of the mountains was practicable in midwinter, Fremont ignored frontiersmen who warned him that the Sangre de Cristo and San Juan ranges were impassable. He was led astray by his guide "Old Bill" Williams, but he unwisely failed to turn back from the San Juan Mountains in time, and after intense suffering from cold, storms, and starvation, lost eleven men. Succored by Kit Carson and others in Taos, he proceeded to California, meeting on the Gila a troop of Sonora Mexicans who told him that gold had been discovered. Consul Larkin had recently purchased for him a tract of seventy square miles in the Sierra foothills, the Mariposa estate, and he hired the Mexicans to work there on shares. Within a few weeks his income from the diggings reached enormous sums-Jessie Fremont speaks of hundred-pound bags of gold dust-and he was able to acquire large realty interests in San Francisco, live on a generous scale in Monterey, and develop his Mariposa property. His election as United States senator in December 1850 gave him only the short term from September 9, 1850, to March 4, 1851.

Fremont remained essentially a Californian till the Civil War, but with restless energy spent much time outside the state. He served six weeks as senator in Washington, made a prolonged stay with his family in London and Paris (1852-53), gathering capital to work the quartz deposits at Mariposa, and conducted another winter exploration in search of a southern railway route to the Pacific (1853-54). In this expedition he reached central Utah with a small body of men after a journey of great hardship, demonstrating that practicable passes through the mountains existed between north latitude 37° and 38°. But the most important event of these years was his nomination for the presidency. His explorations and court martial had made him a national hero, while his aloofness from the slavery contest rendered him available. First approached by Democratic leaders, including Ex-Governor John B. Floyd of Virginia and members of the influential Preston family, he pronounce d himself vigorously for a free-soil Kansas and against enforcement of the Fugitive-Slave Law (Jessie Benton Fremont Manuscripts). Organizers of the new national Republican party, led by N. P. Banks, Henry Wilson, and John Bigelow, then took him up, and he was nominated at Philadelphia in June 1856. He had hoped that Simon Cameron would be named for vice-president, and always regarded the nomination of W. L. Dayton as one of the causes of his defeat. Possessing no taste or aptitude for politics, he played as passive a role as his opponent, Buchanan. In a campaign notable for abusiveness, much being made of his illegitimate birth and a mendacious report that he was a Catholic, he remained quietly at his Ninth St. home in New York. His defeat by Buchanan by an electoral vote of 174 to 114, and a popular vote of 1,838, 169 to 1,341,264, was clue partly to fear of Southern secession and partly to lack of campaign funds. Fremont shortly returned to California and devoted himself to his mining business, his title to Mariposa, then valued by some at ten million dollars, being confirmed by the federal Supreme Court in 1855.

The outbreak of the Civil War found Fremont in Europe raising more capital for Mariposa, and he attempted a bold service by hastening to England and on his own responsibility purchasing arms for the Federal cause (J. B. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, During Lincoln's Administration, 1927, p. 190). Lincoln wished to appoint him minister to France, but when Secretary Seward protested, appointed him major-general in charge of the department of the West, with headquarters at St. Louis, where he arrived July 25, 1861. The task before him was of tremendous difficulty; he had to organize an army in a slave state, largely disloyal, with few arms, few supplies, and limited numbers of raw volunteers for material, and with political and military enemies ready to make the most of every misstep. When he took charge guerrilla warfare was breaking out in Missouri, while his forces at Cairo, Illinois, and Spring field, Missouri, were menaced by superior armies. He accomplished much, reinforcing Cairo, fortifying St. Louis, organizing a squadron of river gunboats, arousing the enthusiasm of the German population, and training large bodies of men; but the defeats at Wilson's Creek, and Lexington were unfairly blamed upon him, he was justly accused of ostentation and reckless expenditures, and the attacks of Frank Blair cost him Lincoln's confidence. He blundered when on August 30, 1861, he issued a rash proclamation declaring the property of Missourians in rebellion confiscated and their slaves emancipated; this act aroused the applause of radical Northerners, but Lincoln rightly regarded it as premature and when Fremont refused to retract issued an order modifying it. In response to growing complaints Lincoln sent first Montgomery Blair, and later Secretary Cameron and Lorenzo Thomas, to Missouri to investigate, and on the basis of their reports removed Fremont as he was leading an army in futile pursuit of Price's Confederate force (November 2, 1861). The antagonisms aroused in the West by Fremont would alone have justified such action, but the removal was bitterly resented by radical anti-slavery men, and was indirectly censured by the congressional committee on the conduct of the war. Out of regard for this radical opinion, Lincoln in March 1862 appointed Fremont to command the mountain department in western Virginia. But he was given inadequate forces, his command was improperly divided by the government, Lincoln plainly distrusted him, and in May and June 1862 he was completely out generalled by "Stonewall" Jackson in the latter's brilliant Valley campaign. Lincoln then placed Fremont and his corps under the command of Pope, whom Fremont detested for. his alleged insubordination in Missouri, and Fremont asked to be relieved.

Thereafter Fremont's history was one of adversity. Still popular with the radical Republicans who disliked Lincoln, he was nominated for the presidency on May 31, 1864, in Cleveland, but a convention of radicals, western Germans, and war Democrats. His candidacy disturbed the administration, and by a bargain between it and Fremont's radical supporters, Fremont ungracefully withdrew on September 22, 1864, and Lincoln the next day dismissed the ultra-conservative Montgomery Blair from his cabinet. Fremont played no further part in public life. Turning to business, he proved unable to rescue his Mariposa estate from the embarrassments into which it had fallen during his preoccupation with the war, and by the end of 1864 had lost control of that property. For finance, as for war, he lacked essential qualities of judgment. He became interested in western railroads, and after purchasing the Kansas Pacific franchise and a part-interest in the Memphis & Little Rock, he became president and promoter of the Memphis & El Paso, which he dreamed of extending from Norfolk, Virginia, to San Diego, California. Though his methods were merely those characteristic of promoters in the flush years preceding 1873, the bankruptcy of the line in 1870 not only cost him the remnants of his fortune, but left his reputation under a cloud. Misleading advertisements in French papers, for which he was indirectly responsible, caused his indictment in that country. He never reestablished himself, and was saved from poverty only by Jessie Benton Fremont's activities as an author, his appointment as territorial governor of Arizona (1878-83), and his restoration to the army as major-general, with pay on the retired list, early in 1890. In 1887 he made his home in California, but death came while he was temporarily staying in New York. He and his wife, who survived until 1902, are buried at Piermont on the Hudson. His whole later career had been a tragic anti-climax; but his fame as an explorer, in which his achievements were of very high rank, is commemorated by numerous place-names throughout the United States, and represents services which cannot be forgotten.

[The fullest Work on Fremont's life is Allan Nevins, Fremont, the West's Greatest Adventurer (2 volumes, 1928); it is based in part on family documents, and contains an extensive bibliography. It is supplemented by Fremont's Memoirs of My Life (1887), of which but one volume was ever published; by Mrs. Fremont's Souvenirs of My Time (1887), Far West Sketches (1890), and A Year of American Travel (1878), valuable in the order mentioned; and by F. S. Dellenbaugh's Fremont and '49 (1914). Of less importance are S. N. Carvalho, Incidents of Travel and Adventure in the Far West with Fremont's Last Expedition (1857); John R. Howard, Remembrance of Things Past (1925), by a member of Fremont's staff in Missouri; the manuscript "Narrative of John C. Fremont's Expedition in Cal. 1845-46," by Thos. S. Martin, in the Bancroft Library Cal.; and John Fowler's manuscript paper on "The Bear Flag Revolt in Cal." (1846), in the same collection. The Recollections of Elizabeth Benton Fremont (1912), compiled by I. T. Martin, contains materials by his daughter. There is an obituary in the New York Tribune, July 14, 1890. Cardinal Goodwin, John Chas. Fremont: An Explanation of His Career (1930), is an able but excessively hostile treatment which centers attention upon the Bear Flag Revolt, the events of 1861, and the subsequent railroad transactions.

All of Fremont's papers which survive, many having been destroyed in a fire, are in the Bancroft Library.]

A. N.


FREMONT, JESSIE BENTON (May 31, 1824-December 27, 1902), writer, daughter of Senator Thomas Hart Benton [q. v.] and wife of John Charles Fremont, had an influence on the members of the convention which drafted California's Free-Soil constitution.  

(Allan Nevins, Fremont: the West's Greatest Adventurer (2 volumes, 1928); Recollections of Elizabeth Benton Fremont (1912), comp. by I. T. Martin; M. C. Kendall, "A Woman who has Lived History," Overland Monthly, January 1, 1901)

Dictionary of American Biography, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1936, Vol. 4, Pt. 1, pp. 18-19;

FREMONT, JESSIE BENTON (May 31, 1824-December 27, 1902), writer, daughter of Senator Thomas Hart Benton [q. v.] and wife of John Charles Fremont, was the second of five children. Her mother was Elizabeth McDowell, and Jessie was born at her grandfather McDowell's estate near Lexington, Virginia. Here, in Washington, and in St. Louis, she passed her girlhood. She was tutored at home, much of the time by her father himself, in St. Loui s went to an informal French school where she helped the master's wife with her pre serving and acquired an easy familiarity with spoken French; studied Spanish" the neighbor language," as her father called it -and in her earl y teens was sent to the fashionable boarding school kept by Miss English in Georgetown, D. C. At this time, as she later admitted, she was still something of a tomboy, given to climbing trees. At sixteen, a blooming, vigorous girl, full of fun, with a n intellectual capacity beyond her years-the result in part of companionship with h er father-she met young John Charles Fremont [q. v.], a lieutenant in the Topographical Corps, and in spite of the effort of her parents to postpone what seemed inevitable, she married him on October 19, 1841. For the fir st years after h er marriage, during her explorer-husband's long absences, she lived in her father's house-continuing her studies under his supervision, translating confidential State Department papers from the Spanish, serving as his hostess, and becoming increasingly his companion during her mother's long invalidism. Fremont returned from his first important expedition in October 1842; their baby, Elizabeth, was born in November; and during the happy winter that followed, Jessie worked daily with her husband on the first of his vivid reports. When his second expedition (1843) was endangered by a letter recalling him to Washington, she suppressed the order, wrote to him to start at once without waiting for a 1·eason, and when she had received word that he had acted immediately upon her message, wrote to the Department at Washington explaining what she had done. The expedition-a long one-was successful, and in the winter of 1844-45 Fremont and Jessie collaborated on the second report. Anxiety incident to Fremont's court martial in 1848 following his third expedition, told upon Jessie 's health, and in the fall of that year her second baby died. In 1849, with her little girl, she went, by the Panama route, to meet Fremont in San Francisco, suffering a critical illness on the way. The hardships of the voyage and conditions in California on the eve of its admission as a state are described in her little volume, A Year of American Travel (1878). The example of young Mrs. Fremont, reared in a very comfortable home, gallantly doing her own work in the frontier community and refusing to employ slaves, is said to have had an influence on the members of the convention which drafted California's Free-Soil constitution. During the next five years she returned for a short time to Washington society as wife of the first senator from California; bore a son, and when he was but two months old saw her house burn to the ground in the San Francisco fire of 185; visited Europe, 1852-53, being received cordially everywhere as the daughter of Senator Benton and the wife of the brilliant explorer and making lasting friendships in her own right; had another baby, who died; went back to her father's house to wait for Fremont's return from his fifth and most dangerous expedition (1853-54); and in May 1854 gave birth to another son. In her husband's unsuccessful campaign for the presidency (1856) her charm was exploited until "'Fremont and Jessie' seemed to constitute the Republican ticket rather than Fremont and Dayton" (Nevins, post, II, 496-97). After another brief visit to Europe and three years on the California ranch and in San Francisco, where she encouraged and befriended the obscure young reporter, Bret Harte, there came the Civil War. Throughout Fremont's stormy military service she shared his intense anxiety, giving expression to the bitterness which he would not admit and even, on one occasion, attempting to argue with the President in his behalf. Her feeling is partially revealed in The Story of the Guard: A Chronicle of the War (1863). After the war their home in New York City and their country place on the Hudson were centers of hospitality, but in the seventies they lost their entire fortune and for a time were in actual need. Faced by the problem of a young son whose health required a change of climate, and with no money to send him away, Mrs. Fremont offered Robert Bonner of the New York Ledger a series· of articles at $100 each. He accepted her offer, and she began to contribute regularly to a number of periodicals, writing travel sketches, historical sketches, and stories for boys and girls. Selections from these papers were republished in book form: Souvenirs of My Time (1887); Far West Sketches (1890); The Will and the Way Stories (1891). She helped Fremont with the writing of the first and only published volume of his Memoirs (1887), and wrote for it a sketch of Senator Benton. (Another sketch of her father, which she wrote in 1879, was not published for many years ; see New York Independent, January 29, 1903.) In 1887 the Fremonts returned to California, and after her husband's death in 1890 Mrs. Fremont remained in Los Angeles with her daughter, living in a house given her by the ladies of Southern California. At her death in 1902 she was buried beside Fremont at Piermont on the Hudson.

[Mrs. Fremont's writings; Allan Nevins, Fremont: the West's Greatest Adventurer (2 volumes, 1928); Recollections of Elizabeth Benton Fremont (1912), comp. by I. T. Martin; M. C. Kendall, "A Woman who has Lived History," Overland Monthly, January 1, 1901; C. A. Moody, "Here was a Woman," Out West (Los Angeles), February 1903, a good character sketch; Rebecca Harding Davis, "In Remembrance," Independent (New York), January 29, 1903; articles in Los Angeles Times, December 28, 1902, and following issues.]

E. R. D.


FRISBY, Leander F., Wisconsin Attorney General, Free Soil Party


FRENCH, Robert, 1802-1882, politician, abolitionist, Temperance activist.  Mayor of New Bedford, Massachusetts.  Massachusetts State Senator.  Co-founder and President of the New Bedford Young Man’s Anti-Slavery Society.  Member of the Whig and Free Soil parties.  Opposed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and successfully passed legislation to oppose it in New Bedford.



Source: Dictionary of American Biography, Volumes I-X, Edited by Dumas Malone, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1930.