Did Jeff Davis tell his wife to get herself killed, then run away in her dress? Well, she said so.

   Yes, it was. She said so. In writing. 

" I SAID IT WAS MY MOTHER"..... he told me to force the enemy to kill me" 

under construction...come back later, sorry.....

One of the thousands of things, large and small, that Southern apologist don't want you to know... because it's almost funny.

Jefferson Davis told his wife to get herself killed - "force your assailants to kill you".   Later, he ran away in her dress. 

Not only did he run away in her dress, in her book, Varina tells that Davis told her to get herself killed.

Varina Davis admitted Davis told her 

to get herself killed.


THIS IS IN HER BOOK, which was a huge best seller at the time, and still in print NOW.   "Historians"  use it all the time, if they need some flattery of Jeff Davis.

But they dare not use it to show you Davis amazing cowardice, or his insane defense of slavery, as a kindness to slaves. It was cruel, Davis insisted, not to enslave blacks, cruel to them.


Jeff Davis own nephew -- John Tyler Wood -- admitted Davis wore his wife's dress. He should know, he was there. 



Davis insisted -- for the rest of his life -- that he had on his manly normal clothing, and protected his children.   Davis had pictures taken in the exact clothes he said he wore, to "prove it".

He even had others fill out affidavits -- sworn statements -- saying he was in his own clothes and acted bravely.  He had no idea that his wife wrote Blairs a letter, and would after his death write a book, and essentially make a mockery of his claims.

Davis and supporters claimed the "slander" was result of Northern papers -- even though a Southern reporter first reported it, not Northern, and even though those early reports had nothing in them, about Davis telling his wife to get herself killed.

Davis wife would reveal that detail -- later.


Davis told his wife -- in public, in front of a small crowd -- that she should go down fighting.   It would be "shame upon the South"  if any Davis surrendered.   Ironically, Davis was at that moment running from Richmond, staying long enough to grab all the gold he could.   Varina refers to that gold in her letter.

Davis supporters, then and later, insisted Davis was going to kill the first soldier than came near him or his children,  and go down fighting like he told his wife to do, but the proximity of the children created a danger to them

Actually, Davis did not do anything to protect his children, and was no where near them.  He had left them to the "tender mercies" of the Union soldiers who were shooting as they came into camp.  In fact, Union soldiers accidently shot each other.   The children were in danger - Davis did nothing to help them.

But he claims he let himself be taken alive FOR THEIR SAFETY.

That's right, Davis accepted the humiliation of being taken alive, because of his children's safety.  

Can you imagine Lincoln running away if his children were in danger?   Then imagine -- would Lincoln put on his wife's dress?  Would he tell her to get herself killed, and then save himself.

Now you see why Davis cowardice is so toxic to the entire myth of Southern honor. Davis was not alone, either.  There was no honor among Southern leaders, like Davis, who pumped up the hate and fear, issued War Ultimatums, sent killers to KS in 1856, etc. 



Union soldiers reports were much the same, in every important detail, to Varina's letter.

Pricharts report  

"Davis had on for disguise a black shawl drawn closely around his head and shoulders, through the folds of which I could see his gray hairs. He wore on his person a woman's long, black dress, which completely concealed his figure, excepting his spurred boot heels. The dress was undoubtedly Mrs. Davis' traveling dress, which she afterwards wore on her return march to Macon. "


Furthermore, they allowed Davis to change out of his dress.  A very interesting tid bit in the soldiers reports,  stated matter of factly.

Varina Davis -- according to the reports emerged from the tent, wearing the plain black dress, Davis had just worn minutes before -- she put it on so the soldiers would not take that dress as a souvenir.  Indeed, the soldiers DID ransack Davis parties person effects and took what they wanted.   

No,  Varina  does not mention Davis changing back into his normal clothing, but clearly he did.   The soldiers mentioned it, matter of factly.   

Remember, Varina's letter do validate the entire substance of Union soldier's reports.  Strange indeed, the soldiers would make up a lie about Davis taking off her dress, and then Varina putting on that exact dress, apparent when they exited the tent, where Davis was allowed to change.

Too bad the Union soldiers didn't make him keep the dress on.  But they let him change out of the dress, and stunningly, Varina emerged from the tent (she and a slave woman helped him dress)  wearing THAT dress.

But the soldiers did mention that, in their report.  Were they lying?

Hell no, we know they were not lying, because so many of their details meshed up with Varina's own letter.  Try to understand that.   The Union reports coincided on many basic facts, with her letter.

So no, Davis was not heroic.  So no, Davis did not protect his children.  So yes, Davis was running away for his own safety, wearing his wife's dress.

So yes, Davis (as one fawning biographer said) did spend the rest of his life preoccupied to prove he was not cowardly that day. Oh hell yes, he was.

AND YES -- those lying bastards who write such flattering bullshit about Southern leaders know this. 

 While Davis is just one example -- we have his wife's letter and nephews journal -- the other leaders were also cowards.  David Rice Atchison, the Senator who got Kansas Act passed, then went to Kansas to hire men to kill and terrorize,  deserted in the Civil War, as did Robert Toombs, Alexander Stephens, and others. All the big shots, essentially, ended up being cowards.

Davis was not at all unique in that, but we don't have their wive's letters about it.



Often overlooked as documented evidence of Jeff Davis cowardice -- and much more -- is the writing by slave Elizabeth Keckley.

Keckley, astonishingly, was so valued as a dress maker, she worked for both - that's right both -- Lincoln's wife, and Jeff Davis wife.

In her amazing biography, Keckley mentions, in passing, about Davis plans to invade the North, implied in conversations with Varina.  Varina could have no way to know that 100 years later, people would doubt Davis had any such plan. But Varina told Keckley about it, in an attempt to keep Keckley with the Davis family.  

Also, Keckley mentions that she saw a dress displayed after the Civil War, purporting to be one Jeff Davis wore. She confirmed, it was her dress, she had sewn it.

Keckley confirmed -- yes -- the dress shown, she had sewn for Varina Davis She did not make much of it -- simply mentioned it, almost in passing, in her book. 

 She could tell by a certain kind of stitch she used, and the dress itself.  It could have, and most likely was, a different dress, not the one Davis would run in, because the dress she confirmed was hers, was a formal dress for formal occasions. Davis wore a plain black dress, not a formal dress.

The point is --the person who made dresses for Davis wife, did indeed confirm the dress shown to the public, was one she had made. 



This is not unusual,  the "scholarship"  concerning Southern leaders has always been a joke, quite the opposite of scholarship.  And Southern apologist know it.

Southern leaders that were so eager for war-- as you will see --ended up being personal cowards.   Lee and Davis both ran like cowards -- yes they did -- and kept urging others to attack, while they stayed safe.   Davis even told his wife to attack the Union troops!    Lee had slave girls tortured, there are documents to verify this, in his own hand writing.   He also bought kidnapped women -- women that were free, living in the North,  that his bounty hunters found.  There are documents about that, too, and in Lee's own handwriting.

Do Southern historians know all this ?  FUCK YES -- at least the documents are there, and have been since Lee wrote his slave ledgers, and Davis's wife wroter her letters about his cowardice. 

We really need to "start over" on the scholarship of SOuthern leaders, because what we have now is mostly nonsense --nonsense made up by bullshitters, and then repeated ad nasuum, with one bullshitter quoting the last.   That's not scholarship, that is bullshit. 


So yes, they know all about her letter, and her book.  

But  they sure as hell don't mention her letter about his cowardice, or her book about Davis telling her to get herself killed. Nor do they tell you that Davis, for the rest of his life, was nearly obsessed with trying to prove he wore his own clothes that day, and was heroic.

He wore his wife's clothes, and he was cowardly as can be.  Who in US history -- world history -- told their wives to get themselves killed, left their children as bullets flew, and ran away in his wife's dress.

Remember, Davis was apparently very willing the others die. He was not taking his children with him, he was concerned 100% for himself.  Do not forget that.   

It does not matter what he wore -- though he wore her dress.   What matters is what he did. 

By the way, there probably is no better book than Varina's, to see the Civil War from her side. Distorted as her views were, she gives amazing insights into Davis, like his insistence that not enslaving blacks was a cruelty to them, and not spreading slavery (by force) into Kansas was a hardship on the slaves, who "were the most contented laborers on earth".


Until the internet, historians and other lying bastards, could just cover up shit like this, and did. Who the hell knew Varina even wrote a letter about Jeff Davis running away in a dress?

But with the internet, I was able to stumble on amazing things, like Varina's letter.  And I was not about to read 800 pages of Varina's book, but I could search through it, in about two seconds, for information I needed about Jeff Davis.

 You can be sure "historians"  like Shelby Foote, William Davis, James McPherson knew every page of her book, and every word of her letter.  They wrote some lofty sounding bullshit (historians are bullshitters, you know that, right?) and didn't want their bullshit blown up by facts.

Real history is this -- who killed who, and why. Everything else is bullshit.   To understand the Civil War, understand who killed who and why, from 1852, to 1861.  Jeff Davis was the catalyst of virtually all the killings, but then he runs like a coward.

Trying to make Jeff Davis seem principled, honorable, brave, is impossible if you admit he bought "beautiful boys" from time to time, and told his wife to get herself killed, and ran away in her dress.






Historians  -- the bullshitters -- could not write much about Davis, if they admitted he ran like a punk, told his wife to die, left his children in danger, and claimed to be hero.

Why can't they admit that?

Because Lincoln was a real man. Lincoln would not have run away, not in a dress,  not in his clothes. And he would not tell his wife to die.  And if anyone came anywhere near his children firing weapons,  those doing the shooting would have been dead, or Lincoln would have been dead.

But Davis?   He ran away -- yes he did -- told his wife to get herself killed, but claimed, like he had a habit of doing, of being selfless, brave, wonderful.   And remember, he left his children to deal with the men shooting guns, as he ran.

Never forget that, as Davis was running, his children were in danger. We know from Davis nephew (see below)  the bullets were going everywhere.  Union soldiers were even firing at each other, by accident, moments before





Well historians knew.  And they sure as fuck didn't tell us, because their heroes -- Davis and Lee --  had to be men of kindness, bravery, and virtue. None of that was remotely true, but once you have a myth like that, you don't fuck with it. You sure as hell don't put it in text books. 


Facts are stubborn things- - almost as stubborn as myths.

We show just a few of those things here.   These are not in dispute, not some conspiracy.  

We had no idea of them ourselves, until we found them in original documents.  And yes, of course "historians"  know.  We show you why Southern apologist dare not admit any of this.

The myth of brave honorable Southern leaders were never true.

Robert E Lee and Jeff Davis, as you will see, were both personal cowards.  Both ran from Richmond on the false rumor of a breech in the line, both had promised to defend Richmond to the end.

And both didn't even bother to tell the citizens of Richmond they were leaving.  Lee left first, Davis stayed behind long enough to steal -- really, steal-- all the gold  he could get his hands on.



Just in case you think this is some abberation, some isolated case of a few well meaning "historians" not knowing something,  think again. Just like Jeff Davis himself was "obsessed" said one biographer, to prove he was in his own clothes and acted manly that day (and other days), so too "historians" are as eager to present their bullshit in a way to sound smart.  It's very hard to sound smart about prasing Davis, if you admit he sent 1000 killers to Kansas in 1856, issued war ultiamtums to spread slavery, claimed GOD ordained slavery and he would see it spread North by force of arms, that slavery was a kindness and it was a "cruelty" to deny slaves be slaves in Kansas and beyond.   You simply must ignore those, consciously or dismiss them as absurd, when you see them.   Such is the dynamics of writing about Southern leaders---  they were not brave, they were not noble, they were men who had slave girls tortured and sold children.  They sent men to die, claimed it was GODLY and claimed they were doing the will of GOD. Let their actions speak? Oh hell no.  They not only won't allow their actions to be on any book they write, they will not allow their full words to be there, either. Just the bullshit that makes them -- yes them -- sound knowledgable.  Historians are as ego driven as anyone.  See the book "On Bullshit" to understand what motivates historians, and most of us.

"The dress was the least cowardly thing Jeff Davis did that day." 

There is no dispute -- it's her letter, and her book.

An irony of Davis cowardly escape in a dress, after he told his wife to get herself killed, is that the dress by itself was not necessarily cowardly. No matter what he wore, his own clothes or not (he wore his wife's dress) his actions of telling her to get herself killed, then running away leaving her and the children in danger, is what's actually the biggest insight into what Jeff Davis was all about.

Not that others have not be cowardly -- but Jeff Davis frequently urged his generals to send men to attack, he berated them, fired them, mocked them in public, if they did not attack.

Jeff Davis himself claimed great courage -- every time he spoke of himself or his actions, it was always encased as if he were selfless, brave, and principled. For example,  the fact he reunited with his wife's party,  on their escape, was an act of cowardice.  He found her, almost certainly,  because she had the dresses, and he figured out, the hunt for him so  great, he had to leave in disquise, because any day, they would be confronted. 

But Davis, being Davis, claimed he reunited with her, to PROTECT HER. Clearly he did not protect her.  So clearly he did not seek her out to protect her.

And when Davis pestered, and humliated, and taunted his generals enough to attack despite desperate situations, they attacked with results that costs the South the War.   Davis had every advantage -- be on defense.    But he loved to sit back and order ATTACKS.  The convinced himself he had been brave in Mexican war ( doubtful as hell)  and by GOD, he would have the Southern Army as brave as he!

The Generals  attacked to please him, like Hood near Atlanta, or they would have been fired. He did fire generals who did not attack, even though that would have decimated the men, already barely sticking together.   Pluse, became impossible just to replace the deserters.

As Jeff Davis himself said, 2/3 of Confederate soldiers deserted by 1864 summer!   And Davis frantic calls to attack with this decimated men, lost the war for the South.

But even in 1863, Davis messed up the Confederate Army.  He urged Lee repeatedly to strike blows --- Lee actually had more men at Gettysburg, but they were stupidly situated for an attack.  Still Davis wanted an attack, and Lee was stupid enough to give it to him.

Both at Atlanta and  Gettysburg, the men were decimated, and in effect, Davis caused the death of most of his own men, in those battles. 

Davis  never, of course, gave a shit about those soldiers.  If you don't care about your own wife and children, you sure as fuck don't care about your soldiers.

Varina's letter -- the one she sent to Blairs, with details of Davis cowardice   -- is in no way in dispute.  She is not trying to embarrass him, quite the reverse. She even wrote, in the letter itself, to destroy the letter.  Clearly, they did not.

While Varina Blair was briefly -- about three days -- detained, she was released, and the Blairs gave her support, including a place to stay.

Varina would have never written the letter, or written it differently, if she knew the Blair children would donate it to the library of Congress, after  her death.

Varina never -- ever -- would verify her  husband's story of his heroism and bravery when confronted.   In her own amazing book about Jeff Davis, she wrote details about everything -- up to the moment he was capturedm then simply ended the chapter, as if she tried to write it a dozen ways, honestly, dishonestly, and then tore all that up.

  At any time, for 50 years, she could have said "Yes, Davis wore his own clothes and was brave". 

She never would.   

Varina's letter

Varina's letter to the Blairs, was written a week after her capture, with Jefferson Davis.  The Blairs welcomed Varina in their home soon after, and no doubt told them many more details of what Jeff Davis was wearing, and what he did.  The Blair children, in 1910, donated her letter, along with copious amounts of other memorabilia, to the Library of Congress.

The Blair's comments later in life made it clear, they all knew Davis was not only in a dress, but that he did tell his wife to get herself killed.

Her letter remains there to this day --in library of Congress -- and you can go see it, if you want to. 

  No Southern apologist dares deny it's her letter, they just hope like hell it stays relatively obscure, so they can pretend not to know it, or her book.   If they ever refer to either the letter or book about his cowardice, they always quote from it disingenuously.   And they never, ever, show the full letter.


Clearly  Davis wore three layers of female clothing -- and was running away.

When confronted, Davis stood mute, and looked down.

Varina ran to him, and held him safe, as the soldiers shouted at him and demanded he identify himself. 

Davis and his supporters, of course, claimed he was brave, and wore his own clothing. Davis was protecting his children -- and was going to kill the first soldier who came  near, and only his "tender regard" for his children made him be taken alive.

Such horse shit.   He had specifically told his wife to go down in a blaze of glory,  which is pure Davis macho talk.    The implication, when Davis told Varina to go down fighting, was that he would too.  No "Davis" should be taken alive, or "it would bring shame on the South."

Varina described each garment, but would not actually say "my dress."     Overall, it was clear in her letter, he wore female clothing, because she wrote that she told the soldiers Davis was her mother.

Rather cleverly, she called the neck-to-ankle garment as a 
"dressing gown".    And she even claimed he "wore no disguise"   but then described the disguise and admitted it was so "he would not be recognized"

Davis wore two other female garments, on top of the dress, that belonged to her.    How do we know? She described them, that's how. 


Her letter to Blairs was not candid, and if she had not written "I SAID IT WAS MY MOTHER, you could torture the words a bit, and claim it's "just too complicated" to know.

But she did write "I SAID IT WAS MY MOTHER"   and she did write about three layers of female attire, and did write, essentially, well so what if he did wear "full women's attire".

A few "historians" who praise Davis have clearly read her letter and book, but they are not about to show you either.  They do not show you her full letter, and to not mention it, in an honest way.  Most just claim Davis would not wear a dress, was the opposite of a coward, and posit that the whole thing was a "newspaper slander".

Never mind that the first reporter to send the story, was from Mobile. And other southern states ran the story too.  It had to be a Northern newspaper thing, "just because we say so."

More than anything, her comments to Blairs confirms the soldier's reports to such a degree, that no Davis apologist can even show you the Union soldiers reports.    If you read Davis apologists, they don't even mention the reports, as if 100% of this, was just a newspaper thing. 

Bullshit. Other than the clothes Lincoln wore when killed, no other garments from that period are as well documented as Davis's clothes, in the sense repeated first hand accounts, including his own wife who helped dress him, showed with absolute credibility, that at the very least he was dressed as a woman, and did not have on his  normal manly clothing, as he said.

Slander my ass. First, it was true. 

 Second, a Southern reporter from Macon got the story first, not Northern. 

Third,  if anything, Northern newspapers  did not know Davis also told her to get herself killed, and left his children in danger.  The dress was the least cowardly thing Jeff Davis did that day. 

Point is, Varina tried to absolve Davis of any blame.   But Davis was above all, a control freak.  He wife could no more tell him to wear her dress and run away, than she could fly.   

In the same letter above,  Varina said essentially, well so what if he had on full women's attire. He did it because he so loved the South.

Varina writes that she ran to Davis, who stood mute, and pulled him to her, to save him from being shot by the soldiers.   Davis tried to play it off later, as if he advanced on the soldier, and was about to kill the soldier, and then called the soldier a thief.

Varina was specific -- Davis stood mute.  And SHE got in the soldiers face, not Davis.

According to her letter, the soldier was cursing Davis, who would not give his (her) name.   Varina told the soldier to leaver her MOTHER alone.  That's my MOTHER

Although Varina does not mention this in her letter, her sister, Mary, was also there, and also told the soldiers Davis was their MOTHER.  


The dress is the least important thing in the story --because Davis had told his wife to get herself killed rather than be taken alive. Yes he did. 

Remember, her book as been around over a century, and Davis "historians" refer to it often,  there is no other book written about Davis that even comes close to being as complete, about his day to day actions, during the war and his capture. 

But just like everything Davis, everything Lee, everything Confederate, Southern crybabies have steadfastly lied their ass off about the basic facts, of nearly everything that matters.  This is just one example.

According to Davis myth, Davis was so brave, he would have killed the first soldier,  and gone down fighting,  but the promiximity of his "beloved children"   made him relent, for their sake.

Bullshit, Davis was no where near his children. In fact, he was running away, as his wife made clear, and she had to run to him, to hold him, so the soldiers would not blow his head off.

Davis not only wore Varina's dress, he depended on her to save him.  He stood there mute, and let Varina tell the soldiers he was her MOTHER.


But Davis public admonition to his wife (yes, he told her in public, while waiting for the gold he had others grab, before leaving Richmond)  is in  Varina's own book. 

So please don't write me and tell me this is made up. Just like her letter, Varina wrote this. 

  Force your assailants to KILL you? Seriously? 

Did Davis want  his wife to die? 

 No more than he wanted anyone to die, the soldiers he sent to Kansas, for example.  But Davis had a life long habit, it seems, of boasting in speech, but was quite the opposite in action.

What has "history" said about Davis?  Basically, "historians"  just quote Davis himself or his supporters BS.  You will not see any Davis biography, or book about Davis, show in any clear way, his cowardice or endless efforts to spread slavery,  from 1854 on, by force, mostly hiring others to kill and be killed, while he stayed way out of danger's way,  spouting Orwellian double speak.



 Davis likely did not want his wife to die, but the death of others meant little to Davis.  A man who could buy children, and "beautiful boys" for his own enrichment, and get others to kill, is almost certainly a sociopath, this one, very good at making himself to get selfless and  altruistic.

Davis even claimed slavery was a kindness, that slaves were "the most contented laborers on earth"   and God sent the black man to the white race, to enslave.  Another little tid bit, your history books "forget" to mention.

He was about his own ego, and his ego came before his wife's life.


Davis had a habit of urging his generals to attack - and if they did not, Davis replaced them.  Davis stupidity about attacking  ended up losing the war for the South, when he replaced his best general with a crazy guy who would gladly send thousands of men to their deaths, outside Atlanta.   

Desertions were ALREADY over 66%, according to Davis, when Davis ordered Hood to attack.  Hood did, and the desertion and death rate soon soared.  Ninety percent desertion rates, around Atlanta and Richmond, was the result of Davis endless exhortations to attack. 

No one told you that either, did they?

Davis told his wife that (to get herself killed) because any Davis being taken alive "would bring shame to the South."  Varina only told part of the story -- that surrendering would bring shame upon the South, better you should die. 

Varina would not tell that "detail"  about shame to the South, if she was taken alive,  in her book, though she did reveal Davis told her to get herself killed.  

Others had already revealed that public conversation, with the "shame part" included. Varina might have let that slide into obscurity, herself.   

So did Davis himself go down fighting?

Not so much.

He ran away in his wife's dress. ________________________________________________


And in her letter to Blairs, she tells of Davis running away in a dress, though she hedges a bit and calls it a "dressing gown"  with two other female articles of clothing.

The dressing gown was as close as she would come -- but she did add, in her letter, that even if Davis had on "full women's attire"  it was a small matter!   

Later in life, when asked if Davis wore a dress, she was coy, and said with a smile "Mr Davis did not wear a hoop skirt". 


Keep in mind, in her book, in public, at any time, Varina could have said "He wore his own clothes. He protected  us."

She would never say or imply such a thing. Ever.  She would never back Davis up in his claims of heroism.


Varina would never would utter the words "Mr Davis wore my dress"-    but danced all around that.   A dressing GOWN, and two other female garments.  Plus, of course, she insisted Davis was her mother, until the soldier pulled Davis hood back.

Remember-- Varina insisted Davis was her MOTHER, until the soldier pulled the hood back.   The "historians" who make up bullshit about Davis will sometimes misquote Varina, by leaving the effective words out.  She did write "he wore no disguise"  but then described the disguise.  Guess which part Davis devotees quote?



Varina  not only told the Union soldiers that  Davis was her mother, according to her own letter, she held Davis, to her own body, and told the soldiers to leave her mother alone.  

 Was she out of her mind?  Would she old Davis close to her chest and tell the soldiers Davis was her mother, if he looked like he normally did?  

 No.   Was she lying about what she did in her own private letter?  No. She had no reason to lie in that letter, but she did have every reason to spare Davis embarrassment, so she tried to do that. 

Was she lying in her book, when she wrote that Davis told her to get herself killed?


And do "historians" know this?  FUCK YES they know.  But to show Davis amazing cowardice, destroys completely any nothing that Southern leaders were brave and honorable.   They were not. They were much like Davis -- big on urging others to die and fight, but cowards themselves.  

This is hardly new in history -- cowards often get wars started to act macho, and urge others to fight and die, but they themselves end up running away.  Davis was not at all unique.

The point is, according to Varina herself, the facts show Davis had dressed so completely as a woman, and hid his face in the shawl over his head, with a dress down to his ankles, that he could pass for a woman. Why else would she tell the soldiers Davis was her MOTHER??

Furthermore, Varina was not surprised.   This had to be a planned thing -- to tell anyone who found them, that the "woman" was her mother. You think she came up with this phrase -- that she used to describe Davis --on the spot?  Hell no. 

Do you think Davis was a cross dresser? Hell no.

He put on her dress, very likely the night before, and stayed in the tent in case they had to flee.   His supporters were likely surprised as hell.  But his immediate circle was not.

Varina and her sister BOTH -- remember that -- BOTH  protested to the Union soldiers that Davis was their mother.  So Davis sister in law, was aware too.

A Union soldier, standing inches away, just pulled that hood back, to reveal Jeff Davis well known face, scraggly beard and all.



Varina's letter ---not what someone else said about her, SHE wrote that. 

Varina's book -- not what someone else said. What SHE wrote in her book, Davis told her to get herself killed.

But this was not the first Davis cowardice. Davis previously challenged a man to a duel on Senate floor -- knowing the man would be expelled from his position if he accepted. (Illinois Constitution made it a crime to fight in duels).  But the man surprised Davis, and accepted the duel.

Davis weaseled his way out of the duel. 

 Davis had been relating his own bravery in battle -- when the other Senator had been there, and knew Davis was lying.   He never accused Davis of cowardice, but accused Davis of not telling the truth about the battle. Davis version of the battle, of course, was his heroism.

  When the Senator rose to explain what actually happened, Davis had to do something, or lose face. So he challenged the man to a duel.   Davis then cowardly backed out of the duel



Why?  Because he knew Davis well. 


The more you find out about Davis, it's possible he was a great bullshitter, but a coward and liar, as Sam Houston essentially said. 

 Not just because Davis  owned slaves, and went on "buying trips" and bought "beautiful boys,"   but because Davis was always eager that others fight and die.

One of the most overlooked truths of Civil War, is that Confederate leaders who were pushing for war and the spread of slavery (Davis chief among those) all ended up being, arguably, cowards.  Davis was a coward, but so were the others, like David Rice Atchison, the US Senator that led 1000 men hired by Davis into Kansas, to force Kansas citizens to "accept and respect slavery"   as Davis claimed Dred Scott decision ordered.

Atchison could give "lets kill them speeches"   but somehow he would vanish on the way to the actual fighting.   He left all danger and sat out the war far from where he might be hurt.  Robert Toombs, bombastic and getting crowds to cheer that we must expand slavery or die,  he ran too, made sure he didn't get near a fight.

It's not uncommon, in fact its normal, for those pushing for war, getting the population hateful and fearful, to not actually fight.   This is what happened to Confederacy, but like Davis cowardice, you are not told.



Had Davis been any other Southern leader,  those who push the narrative of an honorable South could admit the man was cowardly, at least at that moment.

But they could not do that for Davis -- because the boast is, Davis was honorable, brave, honest, and cared "only for a principle".  






Davis PR effort.

Davis advanced on the Union solder, and was about to kill him, according to one of a dozen statements that came from Davis entourage.  Luckily, Varina's letter, and Davis's nephews journal showed how cowardly Davis was.  Davis was "obsessed"  for the rest of his life to disprove the true reports of his cowardice.  Davis ran away, did not protect his children, and his wife had to rescue him.  All after -- after -- he told her to get herself killed.   

  As we have said, the President was already fully dressed. He hastily took leave of his wife, who threw over his shoulders a water proof cloak or wrapper, either as a protection from the dampness of the early morning, or in the hope that it might serve as a partial disguise, or perhaps with woman's ready and rapid thoughtfulness of its possible use for both these purposes. Mrs. Davis also directed a female servant, who was present, to take an empty bucket and accompany him in the direction of the spring -- his horse, on the other side of the camp, being cut off from access by the interposition of the assailants.

He had advanced only a few steps from the door of the tent, when he was challenged by a mounted soldier, who presented his carbine and ordered him to "surrender." The answer was: "I never surrender to a band of thieves." The carbine was still presented, but the man refrained from firing -- it is but fair to presume from an unwillingness to kill his adversary -- while the President continued to advance. This was not from desperation or foolhardy recklessness, but of deliberate purpose. I take the risk of going perhaps a little beyond the limits of the authorized use of information obtained in the freedom of personal confidence, in stating that, with the rapid process of thought and formation of design which sometimes takes place in moments of imminent peril, Mr. Davis recalled an incident of his own experience that had occurred many years before. On the field of Buena Vista, while riding along a ravine in search of a slope that his horse could ascend, he was fired at and missed by the whole front rank of a squadron of Mexican cavalry on the crest of the bank above.

Lincoln, as every historian knows, even those who praise Davis, actually was in a battle of Fort Stevens near Washington, and stood tall as shots were fired at him, killing the man next to him.  Being so tall, Lincoln was a clear target   And everyone knows if anyone came shooting at his wife or near his children, Lincoln was going to kill or be killed, to stop them.

So no Southern historian dares admit anything, at best as Foote did, they claim it was "too confusing".  No, it was not confusing, not with his wife describing three female garments, and his actions. Not with soldiers being specific about what he wore, that confirmed to an astonishing degree, what his wife wrote.

Finally, his own nephew confirmed, in his journal, that Davis dressed like a woman.  



  Just like his capture, he made damn sure he survived, even if it mean telling his wife to get herself killed.

And his children!   Shelby Foote, a Davis groupie, said no one could think badly of Davis "if you saw him greet  his children".

First of all, Foote never saw Davis do anything, he just read the endless bullshit about wonderful Southern leaders.  Davis himself wrote in a marvelous and self serving way,  justifying everything from killing to spread slavery, to invading the North and turning free blacks into slaves in perpetuity, to his War Ultimatums.

To admit Davis was a cowardly man, with a history of cowardice, would be to admit the entire confederacy was brought about by hustlers like Jeff Davis stirring up the hate, getting wars going, then running.

Not all Southern leaders were cowards -- but those who were most responsible for urging a violent spread of slavery, that group ended up being cowards.



You can't even make this up, running away in a dress, after he told  his wife to get herself killed?  No Hollywood screen writer would dare to write anything like it.

But Davis did it.

And, he insisted he was heroic -- that he allowed himself to be captured ONLY because of his "tender concern"  for his children.

He didn't give a shit -- not a shit -- about his kids.  Or he would have protected them, at least got them to safety before he ran.

Davis just ran. Period.  Varina's report shows no indication at all Davis took care for the children before he ran.  He heard the gunshots, and he was gone.   Period.  

It's  possible all Davis claims of honor and bravery, are as bogus as these events show.  But we deal with his amazing cowardice, upon capture.

There is much in Varina's letter and book to obliterate Davis post war bullshit, about his supposed bravery, about what he was trying to do in, and before the Civil War.   

Davis spent the rest of his life -- one biographer said, (he loved Davis) trying to disprove the "slander"  of the charge he ran away in a dress.   

But later, too,  Davis made other goofy claims -- such as that he had always held "state's rights" sacred.

Uh -- actually, Jeff Davis sent 1000 Texas and South Carolina men -- hired men, not Army men  - to Kansas in 1856 to kill and terrorize under the leadership of US Senator David Rice Atchison, who boasted of it.  Atchison was the also the Senator who got Kansas Act passed, with Stephen A Douglas.   

Even later, in 1861, Jefferson Davis and his cabinet, issued War Ultimatums, according to Southern newspapers, boasting of it, that Kansas MUST accept and respect slavery, even after Kansas became a free state, and had voted 90% against slavery.

Sound like ""state's rights"  to you?   Sending killers there to terrorize anyone who spoke against slavery, which Atchison and his men did.  Davis would claim he told Atchison to not use violence, but that was all Atchison did use, and he boasted of that, 

But that's another story....


Davis's own nephew also essentially validated the Union soldiers matter of fact reports -- Davis was in a dress, running away, and his wife ran to his side.


Virtually ever "historian" or author pretending to be one, that even dares to mention Davis in a dress, claims it was a "newspaper slander" by the North,. Bullshit.

First, it was a SOUTHERN NEWSPAPER reporter who first put the news of Davis running away in a dress, on the telegraph lines -- the internet of the day.  
If anything -- Northern newspapers failed to convey the cowardice of Davis, who not only ran away, but his wife had to save him.

 She ran to protect HIM.  She held HIM so the soldiers would not shoot Davis, and told the soldiers that Jeff was her mother. Yes, she did. Don't believe me, that's in her letter.

And the newspapers at the time, had no flipping idea that Davis told his wife to get herself killed.  Varina herself would reveal that to the public much later, in her own book.  



This is more about the "historians" who cover up shit, than it is about Davis himself.  To an astonishing extent, repeating bullshit is now accepted as "history" and repeated endlessly.  

Davis was  never brave or noble.  He was more like Newt Gingrich, a very able bullshitter, and self promoter. 


At least Davis had people chasing him, and could have been shot, if he resisted.  Yes, he ran like a coward from Richmond to begin with. Yes, he took all the gold he could find, including gold from funds collected for the wounded.

Yes, Davis more than anyone,  pushed for War Ultimatums (see below) to spread slavery -- and Davis boasted of spreading slavery to the entire US, "by force of arms" (yes, he did, see below).

But as for  his capture, he was smart to wear his wife's dress, and smart to claim to be heroic.   What kind of idiot would he have been, to not escape, by any means, dress or not?

What kind of idiot would he have to be, to claim "Yeah I was a coward, yeah, I told my wife to get herself killed, yeah, I left my children in danger, yeah, so what".   That's not the way people do things.

But historians should not be bullshitters and liars. No one is chasing them.  No one is going to shoot them.  Just tell the fucking truth -- who did what.

Start there.


If you think the history in your text books, and sold by "historians"  is any kind of true account of who did what, think again. History as taught is an agreed upon delusion.  A fabrication, a lie, a distortion, gets picked up (like Davis heroism, like Davis caring for state's rights)  and is repeated by dumb asses and "scholars"  alike.   When something disproves that, it's human nature to ignore it.  




A true account of Jeff Davis might include his cowardice over decades, his lies, and his pathological push to spread slavery by force -- yes force.

When have you even heard that Jeff Davis boasted of using force of arms to spread slavery North and South?

When have you heard that Davis sent 1000 killers to Kansas 1856,   and approved of their torture and killing of folks who dared to speak against slavery?    If you don't know about that, you should, the narrative of "state's rights"  canard, largely pushed after the war by Jeff Davis himself, is essentially what we teach in schools.

We don't teach Jeff Davis War Ultimatums, or show his speeches boasting of spreading slavery by force of arms.  Or how his generals, with his approval, killed and tortured folks for speaking out against slavery in Kansas.

If no one told you, how the hell would you know?


The point is, none of these things get into the history text books. His cowardice, and willingness that his wife die while he runs away in her dress, is just the most stunning, and verified, example of his crap.

Varina's letter has been in Library of Congress, since 1908.

The Blair children donated it.

Varina's letter was among those things donated to library of Congress.  The Blair family never thought anything but that Davis ran away in a dress, and they knew him, before, during and after the war.  The Davis were their house guests.   Varina wrote to them, about her telling the soldiers "I said it was my mother".

Hard telling how clear she was in person, later.  The point is, Blairs and their children were always aware, Davis ran away in a dress, and it apparently did not surprise them at all.

If Varina knew the Blairs would keep that letter, and the children donate it to library of Congress, she would have slapped them. No one questions it's her letter, and no one questions that's  her book.

But Varina could not have known, what a good job Southern crybabies would do after the war, showing not just this, but many things about Southern leaders in a drastically cleaned up, white washed way.  Cowardice became bravery. Cruelty became honor.  Torture became kindness.   War Ultimatums to spread slavery for GOD, and against states rights, became a "principle of state's rights".

It really got turned that upside down, were it remains to this day.  This is but one example. 




Varina actually ran to Jeff Davis defense, when he was confronted by a Union soldier, who was aiming is pistol and Davis and promising to shoot him.

Varina describes that, just in case you are skeptical.  She told the Blairs, in the letter, she believed the soldier would have shot Davis.  

Davis let his wife hold him, so he would be safe.  And remember, he had never done a thing to protect his wife or children.  


Amazingly, one witness who showed up after Davis changed into his normal clothing, overheard Davis berating his wife mercilessly for his capture. He blamed her, in his unfailing habit of blaming others, claiming he should have never been with her in the first place.  She got him captured.

Nonsense, in fact, Jeff Davis was with a group of his supporters, all male,  travelling apart from his wife.   There is no evidence of this -- this is conjecture -- but knowing Davis and the situation, it's very likely Davis joined his wife's party -- because she had the dresses.

It was very obvious to the Davis party that the Union solders were covering all the roads, and closing in on him from all sides.  He was going to run into Union men, armed men, any day.

The smart thing was to disguise himself -- and so he did.   It was really the only way he could travel by road.   His party of 40 men would be spotted and challenged. 

Davis was in his wife's dress, very very early in the morning, 4am or so.   To do that, almost certainly he had the dress on, the night before. You don't suddenly, on spur of the moment, put on  your wife's dress as bullets flew.   That would be stupid to change your clothes while under fire.  Logically, Davis was already in that dress, just in case they were caught in the morning, as they thought they might be.

The night before "Davis retired early"  according to one supporter.   He did not show himself to his men that night.  He stayed in the tent.   Very likely Davis was already in women's clothing the night before.   So most of his own men could be ignorant of his disguise, until he was actually caught -- then, they all knew.   They all saw him.

Not all the Confederate men were taken -- they were let go, possibly because (as sometimes happened) they paid money to the captures.   The nephew is one of those the Union soldiers just let go.  They likely did not want to have 50 or 60 captured men, they were about the same number.   We are trying to find a list of those returned to Washington, as Davis was.

Davis capture, and lies about it, maybe an apt metaphor for his entire self serving, duplicitous life. 




There have been entire books -- even recently -- all about Jeff Davis capture.  Best selling books, "scholarly"  books in that they are accepted as fact, and assigned in college courses.   

Such bullshit.  They just stupidly repeat Davis own claims of bravery as proof -- that he was brave!   

Or, like others, claim the "issue is so confusing"  it's "difficult to tell, but Jeff Davis was an honorable and brave man, it's unlikely --" blah fucking blah.

No, it's not confusing, no other day in CIvil War history is more documented than that day, per what Jeff Davis wore.   His wife said he had on three garments, all female, and that SHE told the Union troops he was her mother.

His nephew wrote that Davis wore female clothing.

The first newspaper reports -- a Macon reporter -- reported the female attire.

The Union reports, reported female attire -- a black dress, which he was allowed to take off, in privacy, with his wife's help. 

Davis, however, was "obsessed"  thereafter, according to one admiring biographer, with proving he wore his normal clothing and acted bravely.  That biographer believed Davis, like all stupid Southern apologists.   But the facts are not confusing.

He wore a dress, and told his wife to get herself killed.  Not sorta, not kinda, not maybe.  


Do "historians" know this?  As you will see, HELL YES, they know.   But it does not fit their bullshit narrative. 



Regarding US history text books, and historians -- this is typical, actually.  Southern leaders were vile men, and as we learn, cowards in the end. Lee, and Davis, were both cowards, though this is about Davis, Lee was much the same.

 Davis boasted of spreading slavery by force to the entire US, and sent killers to Kansas, while he was Secretary of war, to kill not only to spread slavery, but to stop newspapers from even writing against slavery. 

Why don't we learn of Davis boasting of spreading slavery into North and beyond by "force of arms"?

Because that would mean you can't use the bullshit narrative historians like so much.  It's not some evil conspiracy to save Davis's reputation, as much as it is the tendency to bullshit and repeat narratives you were taught. 

Bullshit is really a much bigger impediment to the truth, than lying. 



Very basic history --facts -- about Davis and Robert E Lee, that you won't find that in any US text books. 

But it's not just Southern apologist or liars.  Historians"  like Bruce Catton or James McPherson, have essentially accepted Jeff Davis own self serving claims.   Davis claimed all kinds of things and principles, that were not true. 

Most particularly, Davis hatred of state's rights, which was evident by Davis own words and actions, sending killers to Kansas, when Kansas rejected slavery by 90%.  And then Davis own words justifying the killings, by claiming Kansas could  not reject slavery, even after they were a free state admitted into Union.  Kansas MUST accept and protect slavery, Davis said.

The resistance to the spread of slavery into Kansas, Davis said, was "intolerable".  People in Kansas could not reject slavery -- not by vote, not by legislation, not by their legislature. Did you know -- yes or know -- that Davis went to great lengths to explain why Kansas citizens could NOT reject slavery?

Do you know that or not?    Hell no.  

It's not that your history teacher or text books intend to lie or cover up.  It's that someone told them,  and Jeff Davis sure made himself seem brave and caring about state's rights -- but his actions said something else entirely.

So need to learn from all sources, especially original sources.  And not from "historians" who are often just bullshitters. 

 Varina's letter and book, and the Union soldiers report, are just such original sources.  And you won't see those sources even mentioned, in any candid way, by men like Bruce Catton and James McPherson, both of whom praise Southern leaders, stupidily and brazingly, as men of honor. Fuck no they were not honorae, no matter what these idiots wrote later,  

Bruce Catton and McPherson, et al, cared more about their narrative -- so they would sound "balanaced"  perhaps, (who knows) but did not, really, did not, and do not, care what actually happened. 



How  do  the dozen of books about Jefferson Davis capture portray it?   Repeating the very bullshit excuse Davis himself used.

It was slander against a brave noble man. 

A "Northern" newspaper thing, which is such crap, because a Macon Ga newspaper reporter first went with the story, which he apparently got by asking the Union troops as they marched by. 

But the bullshit got repeated 1000 times, and inserted into "history books"  so often, it's accepted as true.  It was never true.

Repeating that it was baseless slander is no more true now, than then.

The books claim this entire "dress thing"  was newspaper contrived assaults.  Actually, if anything, the newspapers of the day failed to report (because they did not know) Davis also told his wife to get herself killed, and arguably, was very willing his children die, because he left them defenseless, when bullets were flying.

Not one newspaper pointed that out -- because they were so focused on the dress.

So they just used Davis own self serving statements.  He and his supporters said it was a newspaper thing -- so "historians"  repeat that as the gospel.   When you write an entire fucking book on his capture, and can't seem to grasp that his wife and nephew already spilled the beans 100 years ago,  what does that tell you about the bullshit replacing scholarship?

The only way you can claim it was a newspaper thing, is to just go by the deceptions from Davis himself, and his supporters., 

He wore only his manly clothes, he said, and he even had his picture taken later, in those very clothes.

So, Davis settled the issue. He was brave after all, and if you don't believe him, ask him.  Seriously, that is how stupid some biographers and even "historians" are.  No, I'm not kidding.  Historians --so called --often do this kind of crap, it's not unique to defense Davis and Southern leaders.


If that were not enough, Davis had his picture taken, and then donated those clothes to be displayed after his death.  He was, to quote on historian "obsessed" to prove he did not wear a dress, did not run like a coward, and did not leave his children in danger.

Oh, but he did.  And his own people, unwittingly, confirmed it all.    Davis should have just denied it, and gone on.  But by insisting he wore only his own clothes, and by getting affidavits from his supporters testifying to his bravery, he shows quite the opposite.

You see, his wife, and his nephew, who wrote at the time, were trying to spare him embarrassment.  Varina was trying to explain away the dress, essentially saying she put the clothes on him.


Remember, Davis looked enough like a woman, in garments, with his head covered, that Varina herself admits she tried to convince the Union soldiers Davis was her mother. And she was holding Jefferson Davis to her body as she spoke, with the Union soldier a few inches away.

The Union soldier simply reached over, and pull Davis's female  hood covering off, exposing the well known scrawn beard Davis wore.

Davis had not fool anyone, he was running in spurs -- very fancy boots, and spurs, while wearing a dress. Women did not wear a dress.  Davis was also much taller than Varina, her dress did not go down far enough to cover those fancy boots, and spurs.



Does truth matter to "historians"?

Not so much.   But bullshit does matter.


Bullshit is normal -- and a very human part -- of history telling, because it's normal in almost any telling of anything.  Sadly, we often repeat the bullshit so often, we miss what happened. 

Davis claimed to be heroic - saying that he only allowed himself to be taken alive BECAUSE of his "tender concern" for his children.  He didn't care about his children -- he left them when bullets were flying, for their own fate, and he sought his own safety, not theirs. 

Do "historians" know this?  As you will see, HELL YES, they know.   But it does not fit their narrative.  Hard to claim the South was led by men of principle, when their leaders (not just Jeff Davis) turned out to be so cowardly.  Davis was not the only coward among them.



Davis own nephew also admitted Davis ran away in wife's dress. So no, not just his wife.

And not just the Union soldiers. 


If you are an honest person, studying Jeff Davis or Confederate leaders generally, it's very difficult not to know about Jeff Davis cowardice and penchant for lying.    But Davis is -- despite clear evidence to the contrary -- shown as a victim, an honorable man doing his best. 


It is not just his cowardice  you can't mention, if you are going to portray him as a principled man.   Davis was cowardly other times, too. This was not a one time thing.

You can not mention Davis travels to buy "beautiful boys"  for example, just like you can't mention Robert E Lee's purchase of women -- free women -- his bounty hunters caught in the North illegally.

There are a lot of "ugly things" about Southern leaders, like their tortures of women slaves, like buying kidnapped women, like their cowardice, that would completely wreck the BS narratives historians like to spin, like McPherson. 

 Davis even said blacks should be whipped, that it was good for blacks to be whipped, that Satan caused all the trouble, by "whispering into the ear of slaves, the life of freedom."

That's right, Satan whispered the lie of freedom into the slave's ears, or slaves would be "contented -- the most contended laborers on earth".

You never hear of Davis cowardice, or claims that slaves are whipped for their own good, or that GOD delivered the black man to us -- hundred other things.

Slaves LIKED slavery, and it was a kindness to enslave them, Davis said. 


In fact, to not spread slavery into Kansas and beyond was a "cruelty" to slaves!!!   You can't make up shit as crazy as Davis wrote in his own books, or what he said.

Spreading slavery was a KINDNESS to slave. Slaves were not treated badly, according to Davis, in fact, they "protected"  and cared.  We care for their children, their sick, and they are much better off than the poor and the working class in the North.

See his wife's own book, quoting her husband.  

Why not show that?   They dare not. 

Davis, of course, would never tell anyone slaves were tortured, raped, sold.   They way Davis spoke, slavery was a kindness.  And it was cruel -- yes cruel -- not to spread slavery further, so slaves would be cared for more!

That's not what someone made up -- that is what Varina Davis, his own wife, wrote in Davis defense. 

Did you ever heard of Davis claim slavery was a kindness?

Fuck no.  

Did you ever hear he bought beautiful boys?

Fuck no.

Did you ever hear other Southern leaders had slave girls tortured, too, and defended it as a Godly directive, intended by God?

No.  Yet these are the things Southern leaders -- including Lee and Davis, actually wrote, and did. 

Slavery was justified -- always -- by reference to GOD and his intention, yes intention, that blacks be enslaved.   Did you know that? Jeff Davis did that.  And proudly. And it's not even in dispute, his own wife, and others, boasted of it.  

But has any biography of Lee or Davis made this clear?  Hell no.

Just like the "historians" dare not show you how cowardly Davis was, they won't dare show you their tortured logic for torture of slaves, and spread of slavery.

  Certainly every Davis "historian" has read Varina's book and letters, including the letter about his cowardice. And Davis defending slavery as ordained by GOD, a kindness to slaves, a cruelty to slaves to not enslave them.

Of course they know that, but they can't put that kind of blunt craziness in the biographies, and call Davis principled or honorable. He was a lunatic eager for power, who enjoyed being a slave owner, and the profit and power he got from it. 

Yes, he was. So was Lee. 

 Yes, historians are mostly about bullhit.  See the book "On Bullshit".   Bullshit makes them feel smart, and you can not insert the truth about Davis, then write all t hat bullshit.  So they leave out the truth.

A historian reading Varinas book would have to also know Davis was eager to send others to die--- eager to appear macho, too.  Nothing mattered, as you will see, to Davis, as much as appearing macho.

Do you think they did not read Varina's book?  She wrote about Davis telling her to get herself killed -- force your assailants to kill you.   Other accounts, at the time, made it even more clear. Davis told her to die, rather than be taken prisoner, because it would bring "shame on the family"  for a Davis to surrender.

Davis did not only surrender, he did not fight back,  and he ran away in his wife's dress. Yes, that's what he fucking did.  Then he claimed to be heroic.   And these "historians"  have all this material right there, in Varina's book, for one example, and in her letter.

But he was as big a coward as you can find. The "histories" of his bravery, books hilariously entitled "Undaunted Courage"  are  little more than goofy sophistry, repeating Jeff Davis own stories, all false, of his heroism.   Or  his lackies telling the stories Davis made up.

Davis telling his wife to get herself killed -- then running away for his safety, while is wife and children could have been killed, would be almost comical, if it were made up.  But it's true.

 In Varina's letter to the Blairs,  written a few day after Davis capture, she writes that SHE told the Union soldiers Jeff Davis was her mother, as she held him.


This is not someone else claiming she said it. This is her letter to Blairs, and her letter is not in doubt.   Furthermore, Varina was trying to HELP her husband avoid shame -- his cowardice was reported in papers, North and South. 

In her letter, Varina tries to take blame for Davis being in a dress, but she wrote so quickly, in such an emotional state, that she spilled the beans -- she verified, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the Union reports were correct.

Davis did run away in a dress, and she did have to protect him.  He protected no one.   He left her not only in danger, he left his children not only in danger, he also told her to get herself killed


The facts are so amazing, so extreme, it's no wonder Southern "historians" dare not admit to any of  them, but to blame the "Northern Press".

You seldom even hear of the story that Davis ran away in a dress, and if you hear of it at all, it's buried on page 287, in one paragraph, with a dismissive manner, claiming it was a "newspaper attempt at slander".

Bull shit.  For one thing, a SOUTHERN paper, not Northern, first reported his cowardice, as you will see.  

But tell a lie over and over, and people naturally believe it.  

More more importantly, Davis wife's letter -- and his newphew's journal make it incontrovertible, Davis ran away -- literally ran away -- in his wife's dress, while his children were in danger.

The Union soldiers reported he wore her dress-- very matter of factly.  You won't ever see Southern apologist even mention that either. The point is, his wife's letter, and nephew's journal verify the soldier's reports.  


And yet, Davis, and his sympathizers since, have tried to claim heroism on Davis part, saying Davis had to resist his own manly impulse to kill the first Union soldier, and go down fighting, because the "proximity" of his children would mean they would be caught in the cross fire.

Nonsense. Davis cared rather little for his children, leaving them to whatever fate befell them,  and literally left them while bullets were flying, as the nephew indicated.

I SAID IT WAS MY MOTHER..  Those six words, by themselves, make it impossible to honestly posit that Davis was not in his wife's clothes, and not running away.

Varina was three feet away from Union soldiers, and holding Jeff Davis to her chest, protecting him, when she told the soldiers to leave "her" alone.  "I said it was my mother".

She told the soldiers Jeff Davis was her mother, when the soldiers were close enough to reach over, and pull Davis's head cover off, and end the charade. 

You can parse her words all you want -- and Southerners don't even want you to know she wrote a letter about her capture.  But "I said it was my mother"  ends all that.

There is not ONE book, by any Southern apologist, who dares even mention the sentence "I said it was my mother".  And hell yes, they know it. 

As a result, most "history teachers" will not  know Varina wrote a long letter to Blairs.   They will not know of the nephews journal either.

And of the few that even mention her letter, like Shelby Foote, they quote it dishonestly, and give you the exact opposite impression.

Varina told rational men, standing feet away, that Jeff Davis was her mother.  She told the Blairs Davis was running away, in three layers of female clothing, though she stopped just short of admitting fully, that it was her dress.

Varina  told the men to leave her mother alone.   She told the Blairs that in the letter -- it wasn't a he said, she said thing. She wrote that in her own letter.

A second later,  after Varina told the soldiers Davis was her mother, a Union soldier pulled Davis head cover off, and the ruse was over.


Forget the Union reports -- call them all liars.  But Varina's letter, and the newphews journal actually go into more detail, than Union soldiers reports at the time.  Yes, the Union reports did mention Davis was in female attire -- a black dress.   The reports mention that Davis was allowed to get out of the dress, and that his wife put on the dress, that  he had just taken off!

If Varina had not written her letter, you could say, well, it was such confusion, there is no way to know.  Bullshit -- some "historians" like Shelby Foote tried to say there was "confusion"  and no way to know.   Nonsense. 


Varina would spin, would bend, would do everything but outright lie for her husband. A really remarkable woman, so much so that her book about the Confederacy and Jeff Davis, is one of the most important books written in that era. Most people would lie out the ass -- and did.  Not Varina.  

Remember that- - Varina  would never, ever back Davis on his story that he was wearing his own clothes and acted bravely.   

She could have said "Yes, he wore his own clothes, he protected us".   Never said it. 

She was doing all she could to save Davis embarrassment, but she would not lie.  

Remember Davis looked enough like a female, with his dead down, that Varina told the soldiers to leave him alone "IT'S MY MOTHER".   That came from HER own letter to the Blairs, not from someone else. 

Yes--  Davis told his wife to "force your assailants to kill you."   Others who witnessed Davis tell her to get herself killed, added an interesting detail that Varina omitted. Davis told her that for a "Davis" to surrender without a fight, "would bring shame upon the South."


Take a minute.  Do you know anyone who told their wife to get herself killed?

Do you know anyone who left his wife and children, ran away in a dress, but later claimed to be heroic?

No, you know no such human being.  



Yet he and his friends, tried to show him as heroic.   In fact, Davis had his friends swear out affidavits, and statements,  backing up his lies of heroism.  He even donated the clothes he claimed he wore, to "prove"  he had on his normal clothing -- and those clothes are on display right now, it Museum of Confederacy,

Davis claimed he WOULD have killed that first soldier, and was willing to die in the reign of bullets that would follow --  but the safety of his nearby children made him resist his brave impulses -- for their sake. 

For their sake?  Really?  He had left them to their own devices, to survive on their own, told his wife to get herself killed, as he ran away in her dress.  Sound like he has such noble concern for his children, that he suffered the "humiliation" of not going down in battle?

Davis could -- and often did -- twist the truth exactly to this degree. In fact, he was quite good at that. 

WTF?   As we know for Varina, Davis was no where near those kids. He was running away, leaving them in danger.

But he wanted to claim he surrendered, only for their safety?

Not sorta, not kinda, not  "if you want to look at it that way".  

And like many things about Southern leaders, Southern cry babies have kept spent a lot of time and effort, making sure things like this never got in any US text book.



How we know -- for sure...

Being in his wife's dress does not mean he was a coward.  Running away, leaving her in danger, leaving his children in danger, for his own safety,  THAT was cowardly.  Does not matter what he was wearing, but he was wearing her dress. 

That's not misquoting, that's not misrepresenting what happened.  That's what happened.

Varina essentially validated the Union soldier's own reports.  They reported he was in full woman's attire, that he ran, that she (Varina) ran to protect him.

Strange -- that's what she wrote to the Blairs, too.   Do you think she got together with the Union soldiers and made it up? Do you think she accidently reported the same basic facts (though she did do some spinning, her facts were largely the same) as the Union soldiers -- and Davis nephew.

Davis's own nephew was there, and wrote in his journal that Davis was dressed as female. He was not trying to shame Davis, any more than Varina was.   The nephew tried to make say Davis mush have been doing it, as his wife's urging. 

If his wife urged Davis to wear her dress, why didn't she just say that?  She never did say that. 

Varina even wrote, essentially 'well so what if he did have on full women's attire' -- he did it for the South, its of no cavil.  (Not a big deal).

Later in life, when asked in public if Davis had worn a dress, Varina was coy, almost comical.  She would say, "Mr. Davis did not wear a hoop skirt".

Everyone would laugh --no one had ever claimed he wore a hoop skirt, a big frilly skirt made for formal dances.   Davis wore his wife's travel skirt. 

Remember Davis looked enough like a female, with his dead down, that Varina told the soldiers to leave him alone "IT'S MY MOTHER".   That came from HER own letter to the Blairs, not from someone else. 



  When asked later  in life, in public, if Davis was running away in a dress, she would be coy.  She said "Mr Davis did not wear a hoop skirt".

No one said he wore a hoop skirt, though some cartoons had shown, as satire, a hoop shirt.  Everyone at that time knew women would not wear a hoop skirt to anyplace but a formal dance.   Certainly no one wore such a formal dress in the woods while running away during a war.  



How do Southern "historians" like to play this? 

OF COURSE they know her letter, and book.  In fact, they often quote Varina's book (almost always in a deceptive way) in other matters. 

Some will even quote her letter -- the sentence she writes that Davis "employed no subterfuge" --  but then spends several paragraphs detailing the subterfuge.     

They are well aware of her letter, well aware of his nephew's journal, well aware of the Union reports validating the Davis running away like a coward story -- but they parse words, and never tell you the full story.

Typical, for historians, especially those who try to make the Southern leaders seem noble.  



His nephew's journal.

Davis nephew, who was also there, admitted Davis ran away, dressed as female, in his private journal, and apologized for his role in it.


So why do  Southern and some other "historians" insist Davis was no coward, and did not run away in a dress?

Because they dont want to piss off Southern crybabies.  Yes, they know he ran away in a dress, but if you admit that, and admit he told his wife to get herself killed (as she made clear), that whole Southern honor crap becomes a joke.

It was always a joke.  Southern leaders had no honor.  No, they did not. The only reason anyone alive thinks they did, is the bullshit put out by Southern apologist, and the weak ass stupid shits like McPherson and Bruce Catton, whose vapid and foul honoring of Jeff Davis and Robert E Lee is actually more putrid than Southern crybaby's actions. 

McPherson, Bruce Catton, etc, claimed to be historians. No, actually, they were not. They were bullshitters. 



Davis had often urged -- even ordered - idiotic attacks on Northern troops, which decimated the remaining Confederate soldiers.

Did you know that? Very basic to the military history of the day -- how Jeff Davis stupidity and vanity wiped out the South.

Lee, for example, and others, knew two years earlier the war was unwinnable. Lee, however, was such a punk, he dared not confront Davis with that news, and never would, even at the end.

Other generals, just like German generals at the end of WW2, had the balls to tell HItler it was over, and were fired, or killed.

Davis was like that.  He would not abide anyone who did not attack. Someone should write a book about Hitler's end game of lunacy, and Davis, they were not dissimilar. 

No.   Davis was always for the peons to kill, to die.

 The poor were fodder,  and like Lee's crazy orders to attack a fortified line at Gettysburg, (easily the dumbest order of the Civil War)  Lee and Davis themselves sure as hell were not going to get near  danger themselves.

Both Lee and Davis ran away from Richmond like cowards -- after boasting they would defend Richmond with their lives.  They ran away -- upon a rumor of a breech in the slave built lines. There was no breech!   But they ran like cowards.  Yes, they did.

Lee ran, and when he personally was likely to be invovled in any danger, he not only surrendered, he surrendered his entire army, despite his staff saying they could fight.   Lee, for the first time (you are never told this) was not close to where the fighting would be. Contrary to the bullshit in US movies, Lee was never close to battles, he was always "well in the rear"  and ordering these people to die, or those, from afar..

That's another story.

We will show Lee's cowardice, another place, but both were personal cowards. 

Davis made fun of, and replaced, generals who would not attack, per his macho orders, essentially suicide attacks.  

So when myths get created -- Davis helped create his own myths, and had surrogates do it, too -- it's very hard to change them.   

But the facts were clear -- Davis ran away in his wife's dress, was a coward, and told her to get herself killed.  



Varina told the Blairs -- in the letter itself -- to destroy it, or it would be used to "embarrass" Davis.

But 50 years later, after Varina died, after Davis died, the Blair children donated boxes of papers to the Library of Congress.

This was just one letter.  

The Blair children were essentially bragging that their parents, since the time of George Washington, through the CIvil War,  and up to the 20th century, were BFD in politics. And they were!

One of the Blair children, even spoke on the occasion of giving the letters to Library of Congress.    They had always known Davis wore a dress, it was an open secret in their conversations.    

There is no doubt, whatsoever, about Varina's authorship, of her letter and her book.



The typical response to Davis "dress story" is that it was made up by Northern papers.  Not even close.   In fact, as you will see, a Southern newspaper first ran the story.

But more than the dress, was his cowardice.  No matter what  he wore (and he wore his wife's dress)   Davis told his wife to cause her own death by HER shooting at the Union soldiers, and his wife said so.  Try to grasp that. In her own book -- not some rumor, her own book, she says that.  Davis told her to get herself killed by shooting at the Union soldiers.

And he ran away in  her dress.

 Let me repeat that, Davis had on three female garments, and was running away.

And he told his wife to get herself killed.

 She said so. In writing. 

According to her OWN book, Varina tells the world that Jeff Davis told her to get herself killed.



Varina's two volume biography of Davis does repeat Davis's Orwellian nonsense -- his double speak, his justifications for slavery and killing to spread slavery.  

You won't hear that from Southern apologist -- or cowards like McPherson or Bruce Catton, either.

Varina  was "all over the map" in her letter, and the sentence "I said it was my mother"    Davis did indeed look enough like a woman, dressed that way, that even after they were all standing together, close enough to touch, Davis, his wife, and his wife's sister, were still trying to pass Davis off as a woman.  



Davis made it hard for modern "historians"  to lie for Davis--  if they admitted he lied and was a coward about that, and that he told his wife to get herself killed, how the fuck were they going to show he was a man of principle and honor.

There is no way. 


Varina's book was a major sensation in 1890,  and should be required reading today for anyone who pretends to know anything about the Civil War or Jeff Davis.  Varina is very, very much on  her husband's side. Much of the book is Jeff Davis own quotes

Varina does omit many things -- like Southern War Ultimatums, Jeff Davis sending 1000 killers to Kansas in 1856, under the leadership of US Senator David Rice Atchison, the Senator who boasted about killing in Kansas.

But if you want to read something by a remarkably honest woman, who was there every second of the Civil War with Jeff Davis, you can't do better than Varina Davis.   If you are smart, you will notice Davis boasts about shit that seems crazy today -- like boasting the slavery is a kindness, and it's cruel not to spread slavery into the West. 

Varina, rather stupid and young when she met and married Davis, would never get her own mind going till after she moved North, to NY, after the war.   One of the more interesting lives of the century.  And a great resource, as honest as she could be, within her own limitations.


Here is what Davis said he wore -- and he went to the amazing length of having his picture taken later, with the very clothes he claimed to have on -- not similar clothes, these are the clothes he specifically said he had on. Exactly.


Not a waterproof cloak, as some Davis apologist said.

But a woman's dress.

Davis never claimed he had on a waterproof cloak. Davis always insisted he wore his normal clothing.

There are all kinds of variations of excuses for Davis.   But his wife, his nephew, and the Union reports are all so closely alike, written at the time, that is the best evidence.

Overlapping evidence.

And remember, Davis wife, and nephew, were doing all they could to SPARE Davis shame, not humiliate him.

 Davis -- of his own volition, his own idea -- had this picture taken to prove exactly what he wore that day.

 He was very clear, these are the clothes, not similar clothes,  he had on, when captured. Remember that.

Of course Davis would have no way to know, Varina already let the cat out of the bag, re the clothes. She had already admitted he had on three layers of female attire-- though she tried to parse words.

Strange indeed, the Union soldiers, and Davis nephew, both reported he had on female clothes.   Matter of factly,  with only two sentences, the Union reports were that he had on a dress, and when allowed to change, his wife emerged from the tent, wearing that dress!

You can't make this up.  Davis wife emerged from the tent, after Davis changed, with that dress on, no doubt to keep the soldiers from taking it as a souvenir. 

Do you see any female "dressing gown"  his wife wrote about, at the time? Do you see the other two female garments? 

  Davis was dressed 100% in female attire -- except for his boots. 

 Union soldiers spotted this woman running, and noticed "she" had on spurs, manly spurs in very manly boots, very expensive manly boots. 

Women did not wear spurs.   Davis was caught because of his spurs.

Davis would not speak, when first confronted, but put his head down like a child in trouble. 

His wife ran to him, and  held him she wrote.  She held him -- and told the soldiers to "leave her alone, it's my mother"

That's in her letter.  That's what Varina wrote.  She said she told the soldiers to LEAVE HER MOTHER ALONE.

Varina was pissed as hell that the soldiers swore at Davis -- they told him to identify himself or they would shoot (several of their own soldiers were moments ago shot, by each other, and no one was quite sure who was who, at that point). 

Remember Varina was NOT trying to shame Davis.  She added, oddly, that Davis was not in disguise, though she had detailed three layers of the disguise, and admitted she put the things on him to prevent him from being recognized.

Anyone that knew Davis, however, would know, he would not be told to wear women's clothes by her direction. He was a control freak. If he wore women's clothes, he did it for his own purposes. Davis hated anyone telling him what to do, which is a big reason the South lost the Civil War.


At least Davis  did have men chasing him, men with guns.  I would be scared shitless, too.  More than one man has fled for his own safety, and let his family stay in danger. 

 Who knows what anyone would do, in that situation.  Yes he was cowardly, but other men have done that. 

But -- who is chasing the "historians" who knowingly gloss over or misrepresent this?  WTF?   Davis did have men chasing him.  He could have been killed.   So what if he told his wife to die, to force her own death -- yes he did.   That was big talk.  Then he ran away in her dress.

 But what are "historians" -- who know all this - afraid of?


Davis always talked big -- and in the war, urged his generals to attack, made fun of, and replaced, generals that would not.

 In fact, Davis idiotically replaced his best general for NOT attacking Sherman outside Atlanta.   Davis named Hood the new general, who quickly attacked, and quickly decimated his own troops, causing even more desertions, and essentially, the end of the war.

Davis was not alone, of course, in urging others to fight and die, then running like a coward.  



Southern historians, who know exactly what happened, who have seen all Varina's letters, her books, and Davis's nephew's journal  dare not whisper  word of truth about it.

Think if LIncoln ran away in his wife's dress, if she had written a book that said he told her to get herself killed, and wrote a letter about his cowardice, Southern "historians" would cover that up?




Davis ran when the Union soldier came near -- he put on his wife's dress (must have had it  on all night, actually, because you don't put her dress on a quick minute).

He ran -- leaving his children in danger, and he told his wife to get herself killed. Yes, he did.




Many people then, and now, claim  the "dress story"  was a  "newspaper thing"  made up in the North to embarrass Davis.

Not so.   It was first reported in Macon Georgia papers, and it was far more than just wearing a dress and running away.


 Remember that if your history teacher smugly tells you this was all a "newspaper" thing.

From North Carolina paper...

This North Carolina paper has Varina and Davis in the the tent, at same time, before capture.  According to this report, Varina was next to Davis,  as they emerged from the tent, both trying to convince the soldiers Davis was her mother.

Varina's letter reveals slightly different -- that Davis was running away -- and she went to him, and held him, keeping the soldiers from shooting him!  Varina's own letter is the best evidence, of course.   By the time the rumor mill got to the North Carolina paper, things got distorted, but still reported he wore his wife's dress.

This bit of comedy was in a North Carolina paper, too. 


Why some in the South -- SEEM to hate Varina, to this day.

One interesting thing I noticed while researching Varina Davis, was the loathing, just beneath the surface, for her by some in Virginia.

Keep in mind Varina was very loyal to Davis -- saved his life, protected him from everyone, and while she wrote that letter, she had no idea it would be saved and published.

Every thing she did --everything she said, in public, was like an obedient wife. Her two volume book on Davis is as flattering as it could possible be.

Yes, she wrote that letter to Blairs but even in it she tries to take the blame. And she told them to destroy the letter

See this article about Varina in "Encyclopedia Virginia" which essentially glorifies slave owners, specifically Davis, and Lee. But their tone and personal cruelty to Varina is amazing, given the supposed "academic" of their publication.

They claimed she was homely, and suggested she lured a lonely Davis into marriage. They claimed she was "manifestly ill suited" for first lady of the South because she lived in the North!

Actually Varina was HOT.  She was, to be blunt, stacked. And she was young, and Davis was over twice her age.  He ruled over her, she did what he said. Period. 

Later in life, after the war, after she was in Washington, the civil war done, she said she was happy.   That infuriated the encyclopedia!

Well she did live in the North -- with Davis! She lived with JEFF DAVIS in DC.

For them to hate Varina -- who did nothing but dote and serve Davis like an obedient wife, and saved his life, his honor, is amazing.

Did they point out Robert E Lee's wife was homely? 

Of course not!  Lee's wife was homely as a mud fence, did you know that? But she was loaded.  She had the biggest mansion in VA.   Lee married her -- yes he did -- for the mansion and her wealth, she owned over 200 slaves.

No one berates Lee for that, but Lee's wife was homely, Varina hot.

 Yet by time these hackers get done with her,  in an encyclopedia no less, Davis is the victim, she is ugly. Why do that in an encyclopedia? It's not true, but even if it were, why trash her in an encylopedia?

These folks in VA  who adore Davis and Lee, are still haters and liars, yes, they are.

Not only was she homely, her "political loyalties" were "suspect from the beginning," said the article. Really? No, they were not.

As if it was horrible to be against Southern killing sprees, torture of slaves, sale of children.  But Varina was not anti slavery in the least, and was docile and obedient as hell. 

Varina wrote to Northern relatives? Seriously, thats the charge against her. She wrote to Northern relatives.

"Spent years in the North". By North, they mean DC, and Davis lived there too,  she went there WITH DAVIS.

Whoever runs the Virginia Encyclopedia savaged Varina in this article -- almost like a gossip piece rather than an encyclopedia, or a smear political distorted commerical.

Her skin was considered "unattractive" they said!

No she had very sensual skin -- a little bit darker than pale white, she was of Native American heritage. She looked rather Italian, a bit of Sophia Loren, likely, when younger. Body to die for, and obedient as a slave, to Davis.

Even if she was unattractive  why mention that? Because they hate her.

If you want a homely woman, check out Robert E Lee's wife, meaning no disrespect. Of course they dare not imply she was homely, but she was. 

The article claims she had "few marriage prospects".

How the hell do they know?

She was young and impressionable. She saw him as an older guy, not as a suitor, until he chased her.

The article said her father was "unable to support his family". What evidence do they have?   Who the hell puts this kind of hachet job, in an encyclopedia?

Well, people in Virgina, who know Varina told the truth about his cowardice -- THEY do.   She only told the Blairs, she had no idea they would save the letter --- in fact, she told them to destroy the letter!

Their children donated it to library of Congress, 50 years later, after Varina and Jeff Davis were long gone.

This same "encyclopedia" does nothing but praise Davis and Robert E Lee, effusively, never mind how cowardly they were in private, nor how cruel they were as slave masters.

Varina did NOT "quickly fall in love with him" as the encyclopedia claims - she indicated to others that because of her youth, and his age, she did not even consider him a suitor. He was old enough to be her father -- and she was hot with big tits. 

And Davis was one ugly man, yes he was. Lee, on the other hand was famous for his looks, but Davis was ugly.

The writer of the article wanted you believe Varina just lusted after Davis. Bullshit.

Then the article claims Davis was too refined for her, and a hero -- Davis claims of heroism, we know what those are worth.

Really amazing to do that to the "First Lady" of the Confederacy, even if it were true, but what they said is false, and the bastards knew it.

Even the letter which rats Davis out, she is trying to protect him. She just wrote so much, so many details, that she essentially repudiated Davis own distortions --but that was not her intention. 

Had she known anyone other than the Blairs would read it, she would not have written it.

To throw that word "squaw" in there  about her, was not only false, it was malicious, and the writer at the Encyclopedia meant it to be.

Have you ever seen such an "Encyclopedia" article? I never have.

Read the full article, its really amazing.

Varina could have easily written a tell all book about her husband years later -- she was nothing but flattering to and about him. Her letter was private, and even that tried to protect Davis.



Julian G. Dickinson, Late Adjutant 4th Michigan Cavalry and Brevet Captain, USV

Original Member of the Michigan Commandery, Insignia Number 3751

Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States

Read January 8, 1889 (First Published 1899)



Being questioned by Col. Pritchard, he stated there had been several mounted men to the house ring the afternoon, from a camp near the village, to purchase forage and provisions, and the camp lay about a mile and a half out on the Abbeville road. Placing the freedman in advance for guide, and directing the utmost silence to be preserved in the column, we moved out on the Abbeville road. The night was rather dark, but clear and very quiet. We marched the distance of about a mile when we halted and made the necessary arrangements for the capture of the camp when light was deemed sufficient to enable us to discern its situation.

A detail of 25 men, under command of Lieut. Purinton, was sent to make a circuit of the camp and get into position on the road beyond, to station pickets, and take precautions for preventing the escape of the occupants in that direction, awaiting our advance and capture of the camp.

We rested until the first appearance of the dawn of the morning of the 10th. The order was then quietly given to mount, and placing a small force under command of Capt. Charles T. Hudson, as an advance guard, with directions to charge forward upon the camp, our column moved in support. The charge was uninterrupted by any picket of camp guards, and we speedily entered and enveloped the camp by a surprise so complete that no one seemed to have been disturbed.

The advance guard moved directly and quickly through the camp toward Lieut. Purinton's picket. Our main column halted for a minute in the road before entering the camp. On the right of the road, in line, facing a clearing or parade, stood three wall tents; beyond the clearing there was, what appeared to me to be, a swampy thicket; on our left, in the woods, at some distance from the road, was a miscellaneous collection of tents and ambulances. The extent of the camp could not, however, be distinctly seen from our position.

At this moment some of our men appeared to be straggling from the column and Col. Pritchard directed my attention to it and to the care of the camp, and as he moved forward with the column through the camp, I rode out and took a position by the roadside until the column passed me. I then rode across the parade, in front of the wall tents, on the right of the road. I saw no one about the tents and there was nothing indicating who occupied them, until, as I passed the tents d started to move into the road beyond, I saw a man partially dressed, emerging from a "shelter-tent." I at once rode up to him and inquired what force was there in camp. He looked at me seemingly bewildered. Not hearing him reply to me, I repeated the question, and while lingering for a response, I was suddenly startled by a familiar voice calling.

I turned and saw Andrew Bee, our "headquarters cook," who was standing close to the front of one of the wall tents and pointing to three persons in female attire, who, arm in arm, were moving rapidly across the clearing towards the thicket. Andrew called to me, "Adjutant, there goes a man dressed in woman's clothes."

The person indicated was quite apparent, and I rode at once toward the party, ordering them to halt, repeating the order rapidly, they seeming not to hear, or not inclined to obey, until I rode directly across their pathway, when they halted. At that moment Corporal Munger, of Company C, came riding up from the thicket, and taking a stand in the rear of the party brought his carbine to a position for firing upon the man dressed in woman's clothes, at the same time applying to him an appellation that was in vogue among the troopers as a designation of "Jeff. Davis." I ordered the corporal not to fire, there being no perceptible resistance.

The person in disguise was Jefferson Davis, and his companions were Mrs. Davis and her colored waiting maid. The scene thus presented was rendered pathetic by the cries of Davis' family at the tents and by the heroic conduct of Mrs. Davis, who placed her arms around the drooping head of her husband, as if to protect him from threatened peril; she made no other appeal to us.

Davis had on for disguise a black shawl drawn closely around his head and shoulders, through the folds of which I could see his gray hairs. He wore on his person a woman's long, black dress, which completely concealed his figure, excepting his spurred boot heels. The dress was undoubtedly Mrs. Davis' traveling dress, which she afterwards wore on her return march to Macon. At the time of the capture she was attired in her morning gown and a black shawl covering her head and stately form, while her waiting maid was completely attired in black.

Glancing from this party before me, and around the position, I was startled by the presence of several rebel officers who in the meantime quietly came upon the scene. The positions they had taken clearly indicated they were interested in the movement of their chief. I ordered Davis and his party to retire to their tents and then moved toward the rebel officers in question, requesting them to also retire. I was promptly obeyed.

I directed Corporal Munger to guard Mr. Davis and his party in their tents, and to take two men who came up with him for that purpose. I then rode forward to report to Col. Pritchard the episode that had taken place. In the meantime spirited firing had commenced, and the usual evidences of an engagement with an enemy appeared in the direction our column had advanced.

As I passed Davis' tent, in going to the front, Mrs. Davis called to me, and I dismounted to hear her request. She asked what we were going to do with Mr. Davis and whether herself and family would be permitted to go along with him. I informed her that I could not tell what would be done with any of them until I had reported to my commanding officer. She then very earnestly said that we must not interfere with Mr. Davis as he was a very desperate man and would hurt some of us. She further requested that I would see to certain things that she had in the wagon, and I promised to attend to that

As I moved into the road I met one of our officers from the front with something from the wagon, in the shape of a canteen of most excellent fluid, of which he freely offered me a share. I mete Col. Pritchard just returning from an unfortunate conflict with the 1st Wisconsin Cavalry, that regiment having come upon our pickets and mistaking them for an enemy, retired and formed for a battle, which forced our column to form in line and skirmish with them, in the belief that we had met a force of the enemy. Col. Pritchard brought the engagement to a close by dashing into the lines of the 1st Wisconsin and notifying them of the mistake.

The fact was that the 1st Wisconsin and the 4th Michigan expected to find a desperate force of the enemy; the 1st Wisconsin, however, was marching without any knowledge of the locality of the camp, and without any expectation of finding it at that time, having been in bivouac most of the night, a few miles from our picket.

I reported to Col. Pritchard the capture of Jeff. Davis in his attempt to escape from the camp in female attire, and that I had put him under guard. In the meantime Mr. Davis put on his male attire - a suit of gray - and came out of his tent. When he saw Col. Pritchard he shouted out some inquiry, which he followed up with the old familiar charge, "You are vandals, thieves and robbers." He evidently had worked himself into a rage, for when I went to him soon after, getting the names of the prisoners, he refused my request for his name, and I was obliged to receive it from his wife, who spoke up proudly, in answer to my repeated question, "his name is Jefferson Davis, sir."

The captured party consisted of Jefferson Davis, accompanied by Mrs. Davis and their three children; John H. Reagan, Postmaster General; Col. Johnston, A.D.C.; Col. Burton N. Harrison, Private Secretary, and Col. F.R. Lubbock, A.D.C., of Jeff. Davis' staff; Major V.R. Maurin, of the Richmond Battery of Light Artillery; Capt. George V. Moody, Mollison's Light Artillery; Lieut. Hathaway, 14th Ky. Infantry; privates W.W. Monroe and F. Messick, 14th Ky.; privates Sanders, Ingraham, Wilbury, Baker, Smith, Heath and Alliston, of the 2d Ky. Cavalry; privates J.H. Taylor and A.W. Brady, Co. E. 15th Miss., private J.W. Furley, 13th Tenn., all of the late Confederate States army, and midshipman Howell of the Confederate navy, Miss Howell, a sister of Mrs. Davis, accompanied her. There were two colored women and one colored man, servants of the Davis family. Of the three children of Mr. Davis' family, the youngest was a babe and quite a favorite in our command (once on the march I saw it handed along the line); the oldest child was a little girl about ten years of age, and the other child was a boy of about seven or eight years. There was also with the party a little colored lad about the same age as young Davis, and the two created considerable amusement for us by their wrestling exercises. Burton N. Harrison, the Private Secretary, was the gentleman of whom I sought so diligently to elicit information immediately preceding the capture.

There was not the slightest show of any resistance on the part of any of the captured party, and they were all kindly treated by their captors. That their wagons and tents were searched thoroughly, I have no doubt. Lieut. James Vernor obtained a trophy of Davis' wardrobe, a dressing gown, which he exhibits, but whether Davis wore it as part of his garments at the capture is not known. It might possibly have been worn under his disguise.

Their horses were all taken by our men and considerable sums of money in gold were captured. The gold was taken, as I understood from Col. Johnston at the time, in the holsters of the rebel officers, where it had been carried for safety and convenience. Who captured the gold is somewhat of a mystery to this day. At the camp, immediately after the capture, Col. Pritchard was informed that one of our men, a Tennessean named James H. Lynch, was possessed of most of the coin and the Colonel searched him but found none of the gold; afterwards it is well known that Lynch distributed several pieces of gold coin among his companions and gave a few pieces to some of his officers. It is certain that the coin was never equally distributed.

In preparing for the return march their horses were all returned to the prisoners, and Mr. and Mrs. Davis and family were allowed the use of the ambulances, which they occupied most of the time on our return march.

On the 12th of May, returning, we met Major Robert Burns, A.A.G. of Minty's staff, from headquarters at Macon, who brought to us President Johnson's proclamation, offering rewards for the capture of Jeff. Davis and other fugitives. The proclamation was the first intelligence we received of the assassination of our President, Abraham Lincoln, and of the reward. I have now in my possession the copy of the proclamation which was handed to me at that time. It was issued on the 2d day of May, 1865, was published to the Cavalry Corps, M.D.M. at Macon, on the 8th day of May, 1865, and reached our command, as I have said, on the 12th day of May. Mr. Davis was securely guarded during our return march. Perhaps his guard was more strict than it would have been had he not given notice that he would make his escape if possible.

Before reaching Macon, Col. Pritchard received orders to make a detail form his regiment in readiness to take his prisoners to Washington, and after we reached camp, he proceeded upon that service and conveyed Jeff. Davis to Fortress Monroe.

The Secretary of War directed Col. Pritchard at Washington to obtain the disguise worn by Jeff. Davis at his capture, and Captain Charles T. Hudson undertook to procure it from Mrs. Davis. In his account of the affair, Capt. Hudson has related in a letter to Major-General J.H. Wilson, that Mrs. Davis stated to him that she attired Mr. Davis in her own dress, and she surrendered a certain garment which Col. Pritchard afterward described in his report to the Secretary of War as a "waterproof cloak or dress." Though I did not examine the texture of the dress worn by Davis at the capture, and cannot say whether it was waterproof or not, it was beyond all question a "woman's dress," and precisely like the dress usually worn by Mrs. Davis after the capture during our march back to Macon. I am very sure that not any gentleman's garment that could be described as a waterproof cloak was found or seen in the possession of Davis at his capture, or while on the march to Macon.

Burton N. Harrison, Jeff. Davis' Private Secretary, in his paper in "The Century," November, 1886, on this subject, states that Davis was not disguised at all, and that he wore a waterproof cloak which he usually wore on the march; and by further statement seeks to discredit other witnesses present at the capture, by assuring the public only one of our troopers was present there, the one who accosted him, and that he and Mrs. Davis and that one trooper, were the only persons who saw Davis at his capture; when the fact is, that while Davis was standing in his disguise in my presence, three of our troopers saw him, besides Andrew Bee, who pointed to Davis as "a man dressed in woman's clothes;" and there was present not more than two rods from the disguised figure, Capt. Moody and within about four rods from him, Col. Lubbock and other Confederate Army officers, who doubtless saw what took place.

My record of the event was made at the time in the line of my duty, and I then correctly and officially reported the fact of his disguise to my commanding officers.