Louisa Hawkins Canby - Controversy(?)

Controversy(?)

Historians are surprisingly mum about whether or not there were any negative consequences for Louisa Canby’s actions, especially because these could have been interpreted as giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Her husband's biographer, Max Heyman, says that the Santa Fe Gazette described her actions as "praiseworthy," but the same paper declared that Colonel Canby had "given more general satisfaction than any other Department Commander" and "we have seen nothing to condemn" in his record. Just as the Gazette's favorable view of Canby did not mean that he was universally praised, so the paper's assessment of Mrs. Canby's actions may not have been shared by all. In understanding what consequences did occur, it is necessary to examine the context of her behavior. In comparison to other campaigns of the Civil War, and especially in light of the ill-treatment of prisoners of war at Andersonville by the Confederates and at Camp Douglas by the Federals, the conduct of the New Mexico Campaign was generally chivalrous. Truces were honored after each of the campaign’s two major battles and prisoners of war were usually freed or “paroled” after brief captivity. General Canby personally set a high standard. After interviewing several former P.O.W.s, Confederate Sgt. Albert Peticolas concluded that all who had fallen into Canby’s hands had been well treated. In this context, Louisa’s compassion can be seen as consistent with her husband’s policies.

Others in the territory, including Governor Henry Connolly, were not satisfied with General Canby’s strategy of minimal engagement combined with drawing the Confederates further and further from their sources of support in southern-most New Mexico and Texas. The governor and others wanted to see more pitched battles with the invaders. The battle at Glorietta would never have taken place had Col. John Slough followed Canby’s order to remain inside Fort Union. No doubt, Slough had gone forth with the blessing of the governor; yet, although the ultimate outcome of the battle favored the Union, Slough resigned his commission before Canby had the opportunity to demand it. (Though another interpretation is that he resigned in protest because Canby ordered him not to pursue the rebels.) Subsequently, Canby nearly engaged the retreating Confederates in a battle near Peralta, New Mexico, but halted preliminary skirmishing when a sandstorm arose. While Canby's decision was probably prudent in view of the bad weather and the fact that the Confederates were already defeated, many of his critics began to make up stories such as that Canby and Sibley “had an understanding” not to engage each other and that Louisa Canby was either Sibley’s sister or Mrs. Sibley’s cousin. (Mrs. Sibley was Charlotte Kendall, a New Yorker whose father was from Massachusetts and mother was from New York; there is no evidence that she and Louisa were related.) Many of these stories were seriously entertained by later historians, although Martin Hall and Heyman were among the first to realize that there was no basis for these rumors. In this context, it seems likely that Louisa’s kindness toward the Confederate wounded played into the whispering campaign or even provided the germ of the rumor that the Kentucky-born officer’s wife was actually the Louisiana general’s sister; however, no one seems to have recorded any explicit charges against her, either officially or unofficially. This may have been because Louisa had her defenders (as evidenced by the April 26, 1862 article in the influential Gazette), but, finally, the fact of the Confederates' ultimate retreat from the territory rendered the issue moot.