+ – Critic. 49: 189. Ag. ’06. 240w.
“The author’s dislike of those on the other side and his failure to appreciate their position, his inability to recognize and understand the principle of evolution in human affairs, and his twentieth century criticism of nineteenth century deeds, are defects that mar a work which otherwise might have been of considerable interest and value.”
– + Dial. 41: 167. S. 16. ’06. 530w.
“It is entertainingly written, and only the most ‘blasé’ of readers of Civil war matters can fall to find an engaging interest in its pages. It reveals moreover, a vast deal of research. But it can hardly be called a critical study of the relation of federal to state government during the Civil war.”
+ – Ind. 61: 639. S. 13. ’06. 210w.
“The subject is one deserving exhaustive exploration and it is therefore the more to be regretted that Mr. Weeden has not treated it with a firmer grasp and an unprejudiced mind.”
– + Lit. D. 33: 123. Jl. 28, ’06. 150w.
“The narrative, well fortified by references, is marred by a good deal of feeble and confused rhetoric.”
+ – Nation. 82: 511. Je. 21, ’06. 280w.
“It is an interesting and able work.” Wm. E. Dodd.