1 I hi lilt I iMliii nil n n»!HStHf»Hii:l Hit i II IHilJinlliif i'l vl\ mm . |i fill |}i|^*" '"-i! I jiin'H'iHniiiuuniiuiiinril i ll 1 j jUliiillliilHUU I mm Class _l=ji^ Bonk . ^ 1 Oi Gopight}!". 1 COPVRIGHT DEPOSnV ECLECTIC ENGLISH CLASSICS LINCOLN II ADDRESSES AND LETTERS EDITED BY CHARLES W. MOORES, Litt.D. AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY NEW YORK CINCINNATI CHICAGO /9H Copyright, 1914, by AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY. LINCOLN, ADDRESSES AND LETTERS. w. p. I MAY -5 1314 ©CI.A369942 ^ f CONTENTS PAGE Introduction 7 Autobiography written at the request of a friend as the basis OF a campaign biography, June, i860 9 From a handbill announcing his legislative candidacy, 1832 . 18 Letter to George Spears [1833 ?] 21 Announcement of his platform as a candidate for the legisla- ture, 1836 22 Letter to W. G. Anderson, Oct. 31, 1840 23 Letter to John T. Stuart, Jan. 23, 1841 24 Letter to Miss Mary Speed, Sept. 27, 1841 .... 25 Extracts from a letter to George E. Pickett, Feb. 22, 1842 . 27 From an address before the Springfield Washingtonian Tem- perance Society, Feb. 22, 1842 29 Letters to Joshua F. Speed, Feb. 25, 1842; July 4, 1842 . 31 From a letter to Martin S. Morris, March 26, 1843 . . 34 Letter to Williamson Durley, Oct. 3, 1845 • • • • 35 Verses, April, 1846 38 From a letter to William H. Herndon, Jan. 8, 1848 . . 40 Letter to William H. Herndon, Feb. 2, 1848 . . . -41 Letter to Josephus Hewett, Feb. 13, 1848 42 Letters to William H. Herndon, June 22, 1848; July 10, 1848 43 From a speech in Congress, July 27, 1848, on the candidacy of Zachary Taylor for President 45 Letter to Hon. John M. Clayton, July 28, 1849 ... 49 3 4 CONTENTS PAGE Memorandum for law lecture, 1850 50 Letters to John D. Johnston, Jan. 2, 1851 .... 53 Letter TO John D. Johnston and to his mother, Nov. 4, 1851 55 Speech in reply to Senator Douglas at Peoria, Oct. 16, 1854 56 From a letter to George Robertson of Lexington, Kentucky, Aug. 15, 1855 From a letter to Joshua F. Speed, Aug. 24, 1855 From a letter to Isham Reavis, Nov. 5, 1855 . Letter to Richard P. Morgan, Feb. 13, 1856 Letter to J. A. Brittenham, Sept. 17, 1856 Autobiography, compiled for the " Dictionary of Congress," June, 1858 Speech accepting the nomination to the United States Senate, June 16, 1858 — the " House Divided" speech From a speech at Springfield, Illinois, July 17, 1858 From the debate v^ith Stephen A. Douglas; speeches deliv- ered AT QuiNCY, Oct. 13, 1858 Mr. Lincoln's rejoinder at Quincy From the speech at Alton, on Oct. 15, 1858; the last of the formal debates with Douglas Letter to James T. Thornton, Dec. 2, 1858 Letter to Thomas Johnson Pickett, April 16, 1859 . Autobiography written for Jesse W. Fell, Dec. 20, 1859 Speech at Cooper Institute, Feb. 27, i860 .... Letter to "Professor" Gardner, Sept. 28, i86o Letter to Grace Bedell, Oct. 19, i860 .... Letter to William S. Speer, Oct. 23, i860 .... Letter to Peter Page, Jan. 21, 1861 The farewell at Springfield, Illinois, Feb. ii, 1861 From a reply to the address of welcome at Indianapolis, Feb. II, 1861 Address to the Ohio Legislature at Columbus, Feb. 13, 1861 Speech at Utica, New York, Feb. 18, 1861 CONTENTS From the address to the New Jersey Senate, at Trenton, Feb. 21, 1861 From an address to the Assembly of New Jersey, Feb. 21, 1861 Address at Independence Hall, Philadelphia, Feb. 22, 1861 First inaugural address, March 4, 1861 .... Secretary Seward's suggestions entitled : " Some thoughts for the President's consideration," April i, 1861 Letter to Colonel Ellsworth's parents. May 25, 1861 . Proclamation of a national fast day, Aug. 12, 1861 . Letter to Mayor Ramsey, Oct. 17, 1861 .... Memorandum : Suggestions to the widow of Stephen A. DouG' LAS, Nov. 27, 1861 Letter to Major General David Hunter, Dec. 31, 1861 . Letter to Secretary Stanton, Jan. 22, 1862 -Speech to the Twelfth Indiana Volunteers, May 15, 1862 Letter to Reverdy Johnson, July 26, 1862 Letter to Cuthbert Bullitt, July 28, 1862 Letter to Horace Greeley, -Aug. 22, 1862 .... Meditation on the will of God, September, 1862 Telegram to Major General McClellan, Oct. 24, 1862 . Order for Sunday observance, Nov. 15, 1862 Letter to General Carl Schurz, Nov. 24, 1862 From the annual message of Dec. i, 1862, recommending com pensated emancipation Letter of thanks to the Army of the Potomac, after the DEFEAT at FrEDERICKSBURG, DeC. 22, 1862 Letter to Miss Fanny McCullough, Dec. 23, 1862 . Emancipation Proclamation, Jan. i, 1863 .... Letter to THE workingmen of Manchester, England, Jan. 19, 1863 Letter to General Joseph Hooker, Jan. 26, 1863 Letter to General William S. Rosecrans, March 17, 1863 Telegram to General Joseph Hooker, June 10, 1863 Telegram to General Joseph Hooker, June 14, 1863 5 PAGE CONTENTS CEMETERY AT March 1 8, 1864 Letter to General Grant, July 13, 1863 . From a letter to Mrs. Lincoln, Aug. 8, 1863 Letter to James H. Hackett, Aug. 17, 1863 Letter to James C. Conkling, Aug. 26, 1863 Memorandum, Sept. 26, 1863 .... Address at the dedication of the national Gettysburg, Nov. 19, 1863- Address to General Grant, March 9, 1864 Address on closing the sanitary fair, Washington, Letter to Albert G. Hodges, April 4, 1864 Telegram to Mrs. Lincoln, April 28, 1864 . Letter to General U. S. Grant, April 30, 1864 Speech in response to a delegation from the National Union League, June 9, 1864 Telegram to General U. S. Grant, Aug. 17, 1864 From a speech to the i66th Ohio volunteers, Aug. 22, 1864 Memorandum, Aug. 23, 1864 .... From a response to a serenade, Nov. 9, 1864 Letter to Mrs. Bixby, Nov. 21, 1864 . Letter to Deacon John Phillips, Nov. 21, 1864 Memorandum, Dec. 3, 1864 .... Response to a serenade, Dec. 6, 1864 . Letter to General William T. Sherman, Dec. 26, 1864 Letter to Dr. John Maclean, Dec. 27, 1864 Letter to General U. S. Grant, Jan. 19, 1865 The second inaugural address, March 4, 1865 Letter to Thurlow Weed, March 15, 1865 The last public speech, April ii, 1865 Bibliography INTRODUCTION One who appreciates the Gettysburg address and the two inaugurals is not content unless he can go further. There is much in Lincoln's writings of the highest literary quality. There is much more that justifies the student of American history in continuing his study of Lincoln. In the prepara- tion of this collection the editor has had in mind the chief value which it should possess for the reader. That value is to be found in the revelation which his writings give of the personality of one of the greatest public characters in all history. So those speeches and letters have been chosen which reveal the most of the man, Lincoln. With this in view, the notes are meant to explain the man and the occa- sion, and with the letters give such information as will enable the reader to understand better why the letters were written and who Lincoln's correspondents were. The few obvious errors in grammatical or rhetorical form are not noted. The *' split infinitive" is one of Lincoln's com- monest failings, but the critical student can find better use for his time than in hunting for faults. The autobiography with which the volume opens gives us the man's own story and his own modest estimate of himself. It should be read with the other two autobiographies which the book contains. To these may be added the following facts: Lincoln was a candidate for senator in 1854 as an anti-Nebraska Whig, but was defeated by Lyman Trumbull. In 1858 he was again a candidate for the senatorship to suc- ceed Stephen Arnold Douglas, the Democratic leader. In this campaign he debated the slavery question with Douglas in every part of Illinois. Lincoln's party won a popular majority, but Lincoln was defeated because of inequalities 7 8 INTRODUCTION in the legislative apportionment. He made political speeches in 1859 and i860, still answering Douglas, in Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, and New York, and in May, i860, was nominated for President by the Republican national convention. He carried nearly all of the northern states and, the Democratic party being divided, was elected. He was renominated at Baltimore in 1864 by a convention of "unconditional Union men,'' many of whom were Democrats, and was reelected almost unanimously. He was shot by an assassin at Ford's Theater, in Washington, on April 14, 1865, and died the next morning. Some idea of his appearance may be had from his auto- biography written in December, 1859 (see page no) : "I am, in height, six feet four inches, nearly, lean in flesh, weighing on an average one hundred and eighty pounds, dark com- plexion, with coarse black hair and gray eyes. No other marks or brands recollected." The best estimates of his character and ability are in the monumental history by his secretaries Nicolay and Hay, the essays of James Russell Lowell, Carl Schurz, and Richard Watson Gilder, and the orations of Joseph H. Choate, Robert G. Ingersoll, Henry Watterson, Phillips Brooks, George Bancroft, and Henry Ward Beecher. So far as the editor can discover, the letter to J. M. Clay- ton, dated July 28, 1849, the letter to J. A. Brittenham, dated September 17, 1856, the letter to Peter Page, dated January 21, 1861, and the memorandum about General Negley, dated September 26, 1863, have never before been published in any collection of Lincoln's writings. Most of the letters and tele- grams included in this volume are used through the courtesy of the Century Company, publishers of Nicolay and Hay's "Abraham Lincoln : Complete Works," and by special ar- rangement with that company. Acknowledgment is also made to Doubleday, Page & Company for permission to use the quotation from "Reminiscences of Carl Schurz," on page 176. CHARLES W. MOORES. LINCOLN ADDRESSES AND LETTERS AUTOBIOGRAPHY WRITTEN AT THE REQUEST OF A FRIEND AS THE BASIS OF A CAMPAIGN BIOGRAPHY, JUNE, i860 Abraham Lincoln was born Februar}^ 12, 1809, then in Hardin, now in the more recently formed county of La Rue, Kentucky. His father, Thomas, and grandfather, Abraham, were born in Rockingham County, Virginia, whither their ancestors had come from Berks County, Pennsylvania. His lineage has been traced no farther back than this. The family were originally Quakers, though in later times they have fallen away from the peculiar habits of that people. The grandfather, Abraham, had four brothers — Isaac, Jacob, John, and Thomas. So far as known, the descendants of Jacob and John are still in Virginia. Isaac went to a place near where Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee join ; and his descendants are in that region. Thomas came to Kentucky, and after many years died there, whence his de- scendants went to Missouri. Abraham, grandfather of the subject of this sketch, came to Kentucky, and was killed by Indians about the year 1784. He left a widow, three sons, and two daughters. The eldest son, Mordecai, re- mained in Kentucky till late in life, when he removed to Hancock County, Illinois, where soon after he died, and where several of his descendants still remain. The second son, Josiah, removed at an early day to a place on Blue River, now within Hancock County, Indiana, but no recent informa- tion of him or his family has been obtained. The eldest sister, Mary, married Ralph Crume, and some of her de- scendants are now known to be in Breckinridge County, Kentucky. The second sister, Nancy, married William Brumfield, and her family are not known to have left Ken- 9 lO AUTOBIOGRAPHY tucky, but there is no recent Information from them. Thomas, the youngest son, and father of the present subject, by the early death of his father, and very narrow circum- stances of his mother, even in childhood was a wandering laboring-boy, and grew up literally without education. He never did more in the way of writing than to bunglingly write his own name. Before he was grown he passed one year as a hired hand with his uncle Isaac on Watauga, a branch of the Holston River. Getting back into Kentucky, and having reached his twenty-eighth year, he married Nancy Hanks — mother of the present subject — in the year 1806. She also was born in Virginia, and relatives of hers of the name of Hanks, and of other names, now reside in Coles, in Macon, and in Adams Counties, Illinois, and also in Iowa. The present subject has no brother or sister of the whole or half blood. He had a sister, older than himself, who was grown and married, but died many years ago, leaving no child ; also a brother, younger than himself, who died in infancy. Before leaving Kentucky, he and his sister were sent, for short periods, to A B C schools, the first kept by Zachariah Riney, and the second by Caleb Hazel. At this time his father resided on Knob Creek, on the road from Bardstown, Kentucky, to Nashville, Tennessee, at a point three or three and a half miles south or southwest of Atherton's Ferry, on the Rolling Fork. From this place he removed to what is now Spencer County, Indiana, in the autumn of 18 16, Abraham then being in his eighth year. This removal was partly on account of slavery, but chiefly on account of the diflRculty in land titles in Kentucky. He settled in an unbroken forest, and the clearing away of surplus wood was the great task ahead. Abraham, though very young, was large of his age, and had an ax put into his hands at once ; and from that till within his twenty-third year he was almost constantly handling that most useful instrument — less, of course, in plowing and harvesting seasons. At this place Abraham took an early start as a AUTOBIOGRAPHY II hunter, Vvhich was never much improved afterward. A few days before the completion of his eighth year, in the absence of his father, a flock of wild turkeys approached the new log cabin, and Abraham with a rifle-gun, standing inside, shot through a crack and killed one of them. He has never since pulled a trigger on any larger game. In the autumn of 1 8 18 his mother died ; and a year afterward his father married Mrs. Sally Johnston, at Elizabethtown, Kentucky, a widow with three children of her first marriage. She proved a good and kind mother to Abraham, and is still living in Coles County, Illinois. There were no children of this second marriage. His father's residence continued at the same place in Indiana till 1830. While here Abraham went to ABC schools by littles, kept successively by Andrew Crawford, Sweeney, and Azel W. Dorsey. He does not remember any other. The family of Mr. Dorsey now resides in Schuyler County, Illinois. Abraham now thinks that the aggregate of all his schooling did not amount to one year. He was never in a college or academy as a student, and never inside of a college or academy building till since he had a law license. What he has in the way of edu- cation he has picked up. After he was twenty-three and had separated from his father, he studied English grammar — imperfectly, of course, but so as to speak and write as well as he now does. He studied and nearly mastered the six books of Euclid since he. was a member of Congress. He regrets his want of education, and does what he can to supply the want. In his tenth year he was kicked by a horse, and apparently killed for a time. When he was nineteen, still residing in Indiana, he made his first trip upon a flatboat to New Orleans. He was a hired hand merely, and he and a son of the owner, without other assistance, made the trip. The nature of part of the ''cargo-load," as it was called, made it necessary for them to linger and trade along the sugar-coast ; and one night they were attacked by seven negroes with intent to kill and rob them. They were hurt some in the 12 AUTOBIOGRAPHY melee, but succeeded in driving the negroes from the boat, and then "cut cable," "weighed anchor," and left. March i, 1830, Abraham having just completed his twenty- first year, his father and family, with the families of the two daughters and sons-in-law of his stepmother, left the old homestead in Indiana and came to Illinois. Their mode of conveyance was wagons drawn by ox-teams, and Abraham drove one of the teams. They reached the county of Macon, and stopped there some time within the same month of March. His father and family settled a new place on the north side of the Sangamon River, at the junction of the timberland and prairie, about ten miles westerly from Decatur. Here they built a log cabin, into which they removed, and made sufficient of rails to fence ten acres of ground, fenced and broke the ground, and raised a crop of sown corn upon it the same year. These are, or are supposed to be, the rails about which so much is being said just now, though these are far from being the first or only rails ever made by Abraham. The sons-in-law were temporarily settled in other places in the county. In the autumn all hands were greatly afflicted with ague and fever, to which they had not been used, and by which they were greatly discouraged, so much so that they determined on leaving the county. They remained, however, through the succeeding winter, which was the winter of the very celebrated "deep snow" of Illinois. During that winter Abraham, together with his stepmother's son, John D. Johnston, and John Hanks, yet residing in Macon County, hired themselves to Denton OfFutt to take a flatboat from Beardstown, Illinois, to New Orleans ; and for that purpose were to join him — OfFutt — at Springfield, Illinois, so soon as the snow should go oflP. When it did go off, which was about the first of March, 1831, the county was so flooded as to make traveling by land impracticable ; to obviate which difficulty they purchased a large canoe, and came down the Sangamon River in it. This AUTOBIOGRAPHY 13 is the time and manner of Abraham's first entrance into Sangamon County. They found OfFutt at Springfield, but learned from him that he had failed in getting a boat at Beardstown. This led to their hiring themselves to him for twelve dollars per month each, and getting the timber out of the trees and building a boat at Old Sangamon town on the Sangamon River, seven miles northwest of Springfield, which boat they took to New Orleans, substantially upon the old contract. During this boat-enterprise acquaintance with OfFutt, who was previously an entire stranger, he conceived a liking for Abraham, and believing he could turn him to account, he contracted with him to act as clerk for him, on his return from New Orleans, in charge of a store and mill at New Salem, then in Sangamon, now in Menard County. Hanks had not gone to New Orleans, but having a family, and being likely to be detained from home longer than at first expected, had turned back from St. Louis. He is the same John Hanks who now engineers the "rail enterprise" at Decatur,^ and is a first cousin to Abraham's mother. Abra- ham's father, with his own family and others mentioned, had, in pursuance of their intention, removed from Macon to Coles County. John D. Johnston, the stepmother's son, went to them, and Abraham stopped indefinitely and for the first time, as it were, by himself at New Salem, before mentioned. This was in July, 1831. Here he rapidly made acquaintances and friends. In less than a year OfFutt's business was failing — had almost failed — when the Black Hawk war of 1832 broke out. Abraham joined a volunteer company, and, to his own surprise, was elected captain of it. ^ This refers to the incident in the IlHnois RepuWican convention in May, i860, when John Hanks brought into the hall some rails which Lincoln had split and proposed the " rail splitter " as the candidate of Illinois for President of the United States. The convention went wild with enthusiasm, endorsed Lincoln as its candidate, and thus gave the first great public impulse to his nomination which occurred a few weeks later. 14 AUTOBIOGRAPHY He says he has not since had any success in Hfe which gave him so much satisfaction. He went to the campaign, served near three months, met the ordinary hardships of such an expedition, but was in no battle. He now owns, in Iowa, the land upon which his own warrants for the service were located. Returning from the campaign, and encouraged by his great popularity among his immediate neighbors, he the same year ran for the legislature, and was beaten — his own precinct, however, casting its votes 277 for and 7 against him — and that, too, while he was an avowed Clay man, and the precinct the autumn afterward giving a majority of 115 to General Jackson over Mr. Clay. This was the only time Abraham was ever beaten on a direct vote of the people. He was now without means and out of business, but. was anxious to remain with his friends who had treated him with so much generosity, especially as he had nothing elsewhere to go to. He studied what he should do — thought of learn- ing the blacksmith trade — thought of trying to study law — rather thought he could not succeed at that without a better education. Before long, strangely enough, a man offered to sell, and did sell to Abraham and another as poor as himself, an old stock of goods, upon credit. They opened as merchants ; and he says that was the store. Of course they did nothing but get deeper and deeper in debt. He was appointed postmaster at New Salem — the office being too insignificant to make his politics an objection. The store winked out. The surveyor of Sangamon offered to depute to Abraham that portion of his work which was within his part of the county. He accepted, procured a compass and chain, studied Flint and Gibson a little, and went at it. This procured bread, and kept soul and body together. The election of 1834 came, and he was then elected to the legis- lature by the highest vote cast for any candidate. Major John T. Stuart, then in full practice of the law, was also elected. During the canvass, in a private conversation he encouraged Abraham [to] study law. After the election he AUTOBIOGRAPHY 1 5 borrowed books of Stuart, took them home with him, and went at it in good earnest. He studied with nobody. He still mixed in the surveying to pay board and clothing bills. When the legislature met, the law books were dropped, but were taken up again at the end of the session. He was re- elected in 1836, 1838, and 1840. In the autumn of 1836 he obtained a law license, and on April 15, 1837, removed to Springfield, and commenced the practice — his old friend Stuart taking him into partnership. March 3, 1837, by a protest entered upon the "Illinois House Journal" of that date, at pages 817 and 818, Abraham, with Dan Stone, another representative of Sangamon, briefly defined his posi- tion on the slavery question ; and so far as it goes, it was then the same that it is now. The protest is as follows : "Resolutions upon the subject of domestic slavery having passed both branches of the General Assembly at its present ses- sion, the undersigned hereby protest against the passage of the same. " They believe that the institution of slavery is founded on both injustice and bad policy, but that the promulgation of Abolition doctrines tends rather to increase than abate its evils. " They believe that the Congress of the United States has no power under the Constitution to interfere with the institution of slavery in the different states. " They believe that the Congress of the United States has the power, under the Constitution, to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, but that the power ought not to be exercised unless at the request of the people of the District. " The difference between these opinions and those contained in the above resolutions is their reason for entering this protest. " Dan Stone, "A. Lincoln, " Representatives from the County of Sangamon." In 1838 and 1840, Mr. Lincoln's party voted for him as Speaker, but being in the minority he was not elected. After 1840 he declined a reelection to the legislature. He was on l6 AUTOBIOGRAPHY the Harrison electoral ticket in 1840, and on that of Clay in 1844, and spent much time and labor in both those can- vasses. In November, 1842, he was married to Mary, daughter of Robert S. Todd, of Lexington, Kentucky. They have three living children, all sons, one born in 1843, one in 1850, and one in 1853. They lost one, who was born in 1846. In 1846 he was elected to the lower House of Congress, and served one term only, commencing in December, 1847, and ending with the inauguration of General Taylor, in March, 1849. All the battles of the Mexican war had been fought before Mr. Lincoln took his seat in Congress, but the American army was still in Mexico, and the treaty of peace was not fully and formally ratified until the June afterward. Much has been said of his course in Congress in regard to this war. A careful examination of the "Journal" and ''Con- gressional Globe " shows that he voted for all the supply measures that came up, and for all the measures in any way favorable to the officers, soldiers, and their families, who conducted the war through : with the exception that some of these measures passed without yeas and nays, leaving no record as to how particular men voted. The "Journal" and "Globe" also show him voting that the war was unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by the President of the United States. This is the language of Mr. Ashmun's amendment, for which Mr. Lincoln and nearly or quite all other Whigs of the House of Representatives voted. Mr. Lincoln's reasons for the opinion expressed by this vote were briefly that the President had sent General Taylor into an inhabited part of the country belonging to Mexico, and not to the United States, and thereby had provoked the first act of hostility, in fact the commencement of the war; that the place, being the country bordering on the east bank of the Rio Grande, was inhabited by native Mexicans, born there under the Mexican government, and had never sub- mitted to, nor been conquered by, Texas or the United States, AUTOBIOGRAPHY 1 7 nor transferred to either by treaty ; that although Texas claimed the Rio Grande as her boundary, Mexico had never recognized it, and neither Texas nor the United States had ever enforced it ; that there was a broad desert between that and the country over which Texas had actual control ; that the country where hostilities commenced, having once be- longed to Mexico, must remain so until it was somehow legally transferred, which had never been done. Mr. Lincoln thought the act of sending an armed force among the Mexicans was unnecessary, inasmuch as Mexico was in no way molesting or menacing the United States or the people thereof; and that it was unconstitutional, because the power of levying war is vested in Congress, and not in the President. He thought the principal motive for the act was to divert public attention from the surrender of ''Fifty- four, forty, or fight" to Great Britain, on the Oregon boun- dary question. Mr. Lincoln was not a candidate for reelection. This was determined upon and declared before he went to Wash- ington, in accordance with an understanding among Whig friends, by which Colonel Hardin and Colonel Baker had each previously served a single term in this same district. In 1848, during his term in Congress, he advocated General Taylor's nomination for the presidency, in opposition to all others, and also took an active part for his election after his nomination, speaking a few times in Maryland, near Washing- ton, several times in Massachusetts, and canvassing quite fully his own district in Illinois, which was followed by a majority in the district of over 1500 for General Taylor. Upon his return from Congress he went to the practice of the law with greater earnestness than ever before. In 1852 he was upon the Scott electoral ticket, and did something in the way of canvassing, but owing to the hopelessness of the cause in Illinois he did less than in previous presidential canvasses. In 1854 his profession had almost superseded the thought LINCOLN — 2 1 8 HANDBILL, 1832 of politics in his mind, when the repeal of the Missouri Com- promise aroused him as he had never been before. In the autumn of that year he took the stump with no broader practical aim or object than to secure, if possible, the reelection of Hon. Richard Yates to Congress. His speeches at once attracted a more marked attention than they had ever before done. As the canvass proceeded he was drawn to different parts of the state outside of Mr. Yates's district. He did not abandon the law, but gave his atten- tion by turns to that and politics. The state agricultural fair was at Springfield that year, and Douglas was announced to speak there. In the canvass of 1856 Mr. Lincoln made over fifty speeches, no one of which, so far as he remembers, was put in print. One of them was made at Galena, but Mr. Lincoln has no recollection of it being printed ; nor does he remember whether in that speech he said anything about a Supreme Court decision. He may have spoken upon that subject, and some of the newspapers may have reported him as saying what is now ascribed to him ; but he thinks he could not have expressed himself as represented. FROM A HANDBILL ANNOUNCING HIS LEGISLATIVE CANDIDACY, 1832 This is an interesting document, valuable because it is the first authentic example of Lincoln's literary style and the first expression of his political views. He had been living in Illinois two years, during which time he had spent a few months in helping his father's family erect a log house near Decatur, and in fencing the new place, had split some black walnut rails which were to make him famous thirty years later when the Republican state convention in Decatur should propose his name as the candidate of Illinois for President of the United States. From Decatur he had gone in July, 183 1, to New Salem, near Petersburg, now the county seat of Menard County. Here he was making a living as a laborer in a general store and on a flatboat. An Indian invasion of Illinois under Black Hawk in 1832 had made the organization of three regiments of militia necessary to repel the invaders. HANDBILL, 1832 1 9 In this little army Lincoln's neighbors elected him to a captaincy, and he returned after a few weeks of a bloodless campaign, filled with the ambition to continue in some sort of public service. His platform, although limited to the subjects of usury and common schools, is sound enough, but it failed to elect him. The bitterness of defeat was sweetened by the knowledge that his own New Salem precinct gave him all but seven of the two hundred eighty-four votes which it cast. Fellow Citizens : Having become a candidate for the honorable office of one of your Representatives in the next General Assembly of this state, in accordance with an established custom and the principles of true republicanism/ it becomes my duty to make known to you, the people whom I propose to represent, my sentiments with regard to local affairs. . . . It appears that the practice of loaning money at exorbi- tant rates of interest has already been opened as a field for discussion ; so I suppose I may enter upon it without claim- ing the honor, or risking the danger, which may await its first explorer. It seems as though we are never to have an end to this baneful and corroding system, acting almost as prejudicially to the general interests of the community as a direct tax of several thousand dollars annually laid on each county for the benefit of a few individuals only, unless there be a law made fixing the limits of usury. A law for this purpose, I am of opinion, may be made without materially injuring any class of people. In cases of extreme necessity, there could always be means found to cheat the law; while in all other cases it would have its intended eff^ect. I would favor the passage of a law on this subject which might not be very easily evaded. Let it be such that the labor and difficulty of evading it could only be justified in cases of greatest necessity. Upon the subject of education, not presuming to dictate ^ This, of course, does not refer to the Republican party, with whose organization, twenty-four years later, Lincoln was identified. Here it means representative government. 20 HANDBILL, 1832 any plan or system respecting it, I can only say that I view it as the most important subject which we, as a people, can be engaged in. That every man may receive at least a mod- erate education, and thereby be enabled to read the histories of his own and other countries, by which he may duly appre- ciate the value ofour free institutions, appears to be an object of vital importance, even on this account alone, to say noth- ing of the advantages and satisfaction to be derived from all being able to read the Scriptures, and other works both of a religious and moral nature, for themselves. For my part, I desire to see the time when education — and by its means, morality, sobriety, enterprise, and industry — shall become much more general than at present, and should be gratified to have it in my power to contribute something to the advancement of any measure which might have a tendency to accelerate that happy period. With regard to existing laws, some alterations are thought to be necessary. Many respectable men have suggested that our estray laws, the law respecting the issuing of executions, the road law, and some others, are deficient in their present form, and require alterations. But considering the great probability that the framers of those laws were wiser than myself, I should prefer not meddling with them, unless they were first attacked by others ; in which case I should feel it both a privilege and a duty to take that stand which, in my view, might tend most to the advancement of justice. But, fellow citizens, I shall conclude. Considering the great degree of modesty which should always attend youth, it is probable I have already been more presuming than becomes me. However, upon the subjects of which I have treated, I have spoken as I have thought. I may be wrong in regard to any or all of them; but, holding it a. sound maxim that it is better only sometimes to be right than at all times to be wrong, so soon as I discover my opinions to be erroneous I shall be ready to renounce them. Every man is said to have his peculiar ambition. Whether LETTER TO GEORGE SPEARS [1833?] 21 it be true or not, I can say, for one, that I have no other so great as that of being truly esteemed of my fellow men by rendering myself worthy of their esteem. How far I shall succeed in gratifying this ambition is yet to be developed. I am young and unknown to many of you. I was born and have ever remained in the most humble walks of life. I have no wealthy or popular relations or friends to recommend me. My case is thrown exclusively upon the independent voters of the country, and if elected, they will have conferred a favor upon me for which I shall be unremitting in my labors to compensate. But if the good people in their wisdom shall see fit to keep me in the background, I have been too familiar with disappointments to be very much chagrined. Your friend and fellow citizen, A. Lincoln. New Salem, March 9, 1832. LETTER TO GEORGE SPEARS In 1833 Lincoln, although a Henry Clay Whig, held two Democratic appointments, postmaster of New Salem and deputy surveyor of Sanga- mon County. As postmaster of the little village that was soon to disappear, he found time to become familiar with English grammar and the writings of Shakespeare and Burns and Blackstone. As deputy surveyor he earned an occasional fee of three dollars for a day's work. This letter to George Spears, written in 1833 or 1834, shows that he had not been long in politics or his feelings would not have been hurt over so little a matter. Mr. Spears : At your request I send you a receipt for the postage on your paper. I am somewhat surprised at your request. I will, however, comply with it. The law requires newspaper postage to be paid in advance, and now that I have waited a full year you choose to wound my feel- ings by insinuating that unless you get a receipt I will probably make you pay it again. Respectfully, A. Lincoln. 22 POLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENT, 1836 Received of George Spears in full for postage on the "Sangamon Journal" up to the first of July, 1834. A. Lincoln, P. M. ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS PLATFORM AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE LEGISLATURE, 1836 When Lincoln made his race for the legislature, in 1836, he had already- served one term. His platform, here printed, favors suffrage for women as well as men, the distribution of government lands among the states, and the devotion of public funds to internal improvements. The feature characteristic of Lincoln, but not always found among legislators, is the declaration that the whole people, regardless of party, shall be his constitu- ency. Hugh L. White, senator from Tennessee, was the Whig candidate for President of the United States and was defeated by Martin Van Buren. Lincoln's candidacy, here announced, was successful. In the legislature, in speeches which are published in the Nicolay and Hay collection of his writings and speeches, he advocated the liberal spending of public money in aid of railways, canals, and highways. New Salem, June 13, 1836. To THE Editor of the Journal : In your paper of last Saturday I see a communication, over the signature of " Many Voters," in which the candidates . . . announced . . . are called upon to " show their hands." Agreed. Here's mine. I go for all sharing the privileges of the government who assist in bearing its burdens. Consequently, I go for ad- mitting all whites to the right of suffrage who pay taxes or bear arms (by no means excluding females). If elected, I shall consider the whole people of Sangamon my constituents, as well those that oppose as those that support me. While acting as their representative, I shall be governed by their will on all subjects upon which I have the means of knowing what their will is ; and upon all others, I shall do what my own judgment teaches me will best advance their interests. Whether elected or not, I go for distributing the LETTER TO IF. G. ANDERSON, 1840 23 proceeds of the sales of the pubHc lands to the several states, to enable our state, in common with others, to dig canals and construct railroads without borrowing money and paying the interest on it. If alive on the first Monday in November, I shall vote for Hugh L. White for President. Very respectfully, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO W. G. ANDERSON Patient, good-humored, gentle, yet firm in his conviction that he has been in the right, he is evidently willing to bear much rather than quarrel, and to make concessions in aid of peace, so long as they do not yield the truth or lower his dignity. The temperamental characteristics thus early mani- fested remained to the last. The disagreement referred to was doubtless political, as both men were active in poHtics. Mr. Anderson had represented Lawrence County in the Illinois legislature in the session of 1832 and served later in the sessions of 1842 and 1844. Lawrenceville, Illinois, October 31, 1840. Dear Sir : Your note of yesterday is received. In the difficulty between us of which you speak, you say you think I was the aggressor. I do not think I was. You say my "words imported insult." I meant them as a fair set-oflP to your own statements, and not otherwise ; and in that light alone I now wish you to understand them. You ask for my present ''feelings on the subject." I entertain no unkind feelings to you, and none of any sort upon the sub- ject, except a sincere regret that I permitted myself to get into such an altercation. Yours, etc., A. Lincoln. 24 LETTER TO J. T. STUART, 1841 LETTER TO JOHN T. STUART Major John T. Stuart, to whom this letter is written, was Lincoln's law partner (1837 to 1841), his fellow worker in Whig politics, and always his loyal friend. At this time he was representative in Congress from the Springfield district, the same district which Lincoln himself was to represent six years later. The letter was written during one of those periods of mental depression from which Lincoln suffered at times, and from which he never wholly escaped. His engagement to marry Mary Todd had just been broken. His legislative duties and opportunities interested him little. The melancholy into which he had fallen caused his friends much anxiety. After many months it was dispelled by a visit with his most intimate friend, Joshua Fry Speed, at Louisville. A number of letters given in this volume reveal the wholesome effect his friendly relations with the Speed family had upon him. Springfield, Illinois, January 23, 1841. Dear Stuart: Yours of the 3d instant is received, and I proceed to answer it as well as I can, though from the de- plorable state of my mind at this time, I fear I shall give you but little satisfaction. . . . For not giving you a general summary of news, you must pardon me ; it is not in my power to do so. I am now the most miserable man living. If what I feel were equally distributed to the whole human family, there would not be one cheerful face on the earth. Whether I shall ever be better, I cannot tell ; I awfully forebode I shall not. To remain as I am is impossible; I must die or be better, it appears to me. The matter you speak of on my account you may attend to as you say, unless you shall hear of my condition forbidding it. I say this because I fear I shall be unable to attend to any business here, and a change of scene might help me. If I could be myself, I would rather remain at home with Judge Logan. I can write no more. Your friend, as ever, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED, 184.1 25 LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED Miss Mary Speed, of Louisville, was the sister of Joshua Fry Speed. This is the first expression we have of Lincoln's sympathy for the negro and his understanding of the negro temperament. The letter throws some light on Lincoln's sentimental nature, his interest in girls of all ages, and his eagerness to keep up a correspondence that would beguile the loneliness of his life as a lawyer who had to travel the circuit. Bloomington, where the letter was written, and Charleston, where the response to it was hoped for, were many miles apart, and, in those days of horseback travel, both were far from Springfield, where his broken engagement made him far from happy. Bloomington, III., September 27, 1841. Miss Mary Speed, Louisville, Ky. My Friend : Having resolved to write to some of your mother's family, and not having the express permission of any one of them to do so, I have had some little difficulty in determining on which to inflict the task of reading what I now feel must be a most dull and silly letter; but when I remembered that you and I were something of cronies while I was at Farmington, and that while there I was under the necessity of shutting you up in a room to prevent your committing an assault and battery upon me, I instantly decided that you should be the devoted one. I assume that you have not heard from Joshua and myself since we left, because I think it doubtful whether he has written. You remember there was some uneasiness about Joshua's health when we left. That little indisposition of his turned out to be nothing serious, and it was pretty nearly forgotten when we reached Springfield. We got on board the steamboat Lebanon in the locks of the canal, about twelve o'clock M. of the day we left, and reached St. Louis the next Monday at 8 p.m. Nothing of interest happened during the passage, except the vexatious delays occasioned by the sand bars be thought interesting. 26 LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED, 1841 By the way, a fine example was presented on board the boat for contemplating the effect of condition upon human happi- ness. A gentleman had purchased twelve negroes in different parts of Kentucky, and was taking them to a farm in the South. They were chained six and six together. A small iron clevis was around the left wrist of each, and this was fastened to the main chain by a shorter one, at a convenient distance from the others, so that the negroes were strung together precisely like so many fish upon a trotline. In this condition they were being separated forever from the scenes of their childhood, their friends, their fathers and mothers, and brothers and sisters, and many of them from their wives and children, and going into perpetual slavery, where the lash of the master is proverbially more ruthless and unrelenting than any other where ; and yet amid all these distressing circumstances, as we would think them, they were the most cheerful and apparently happy creatures on board. One whose offense for which he had been sold was an over- fondness for his wife, played the fiddle almost continually, and the others danced, sang, cracked jokes, and played various games with cards from day to day. How true it is that "God tempers the wind to the shorn lamb," or in other words, that he renders the worst of human conditions tolerable, while he permits the best to be nothing better than tolerable. To return to the narrative. When we reached Springfield, I stayed but one day, when I started on this tedious circuit where I now am. Do you remember my going to the city, while I was in Ken- tucky, to have a tooth extracted, and making a failure of it } Well, that same old tooth got to paining me so much that about a week since I had it torn out, bringing with it a bit of the jawbone, the consequence of which is that my mouth is now so sore that I can neither talk nor eat. I am literally "subsisting on savory remembrances'* — that is, being unable to eat, I am living upon the remem- brance of the delicious dishes of peaches and cream we used LETTER TO GEO. E. PICKETT, 1842 27 to have at your house. When we left, Miss Fanny Henning was owing you a visit, as I understood. Has she paid it yet .? If she has, are you not convinced that she is one of the sweetest girls in the world ? There is but one thing about her, so far as I could perceive, that I would have otherwise than it is — that is, something of a tendency to melancholy. This, let it be observed, is a misfortune, not a fault. Give her an assurance of my very highest regard when you see her. Is little Siss Eliza Davis at your house yet ? If she is, kiss her "o'er and o'er again" for me. Tell your mother that I have not got her "present" [an "Oxford" Bible] with me, but I intend to read it regularly when I return home. I doubt not that it is really, as she says, the best cure for the blues, could one but take it accord- ing to the truth. Give my respects to all your sisters (includ- ing Aunt Emma) and brothers. Tell Mrs. Peay, of whose happy face I shall long retain a pleasant remembrance, that I have been trying to think of a name for her homestead, but as yet cannot satisfy myself with one. I shall be v^ry happy to receive a line from you soon after you receive this, and in case you choose to favor me with one, address it to Charleston, Coles County, 111., as I shall be there about the time to receive it. Your sincere friend, A. Lincoln. EXTRACTS FROM A LETTER TO GEORGE E. PICKETT George Edward Pickett, then seventeen years old, was about to enter the United States Military Academy at West Point, by an appointment from Illinois, secured for him by Mr. Lincoln. He graduated in 1846 and won distinction in the war with Mexico. Later, as a major general in the army of the Confederacy, his achievements — especially at Gettysburg and Petersburg — gained him a name for brilliant and fearless leadership unsur- passed in that great struggle. It is possible that George Pickett, who was to become a colonel of Virginia troops in 1861, was not ready to assent 28 LETTER TO GEO. E. PICKETT, 1842 to the thought which Lincoln here expressed, "that the one victory we can ever call complete will be that one which proclaims that there is not one slave ... on the face of God's green earth." February 22, 1842. I never encourage deceit, and falsehood, especially if you have got a bad memory, is the worst enemy a fellow can have. The fact is truth is your truest friend, no matter what the circumstances are. Notwithstanding this copy- book preamble, my boy, I am inclined to suggest a little prudence on your part. You see I have a congenital aversion to failure, and the sudden announcement to your Uncle Andrew of the success of your '*lamp-rubbing" might possibly prevent your passing the severe physical examina- tion to which you will be subjected in order to enter the Military Academy. You see, I should like to have a perfect soldier credited to dear old Illinois — no broken bones, scalp wounds, etc. So I think perhaps it might be wise to hand this letter from me, in to your good uncle through his room-window after he has had a comfortable dinner, and watch its effect from the top of the pigeon house. I have just told the folks here in Springfield on this iioth anniversary of the birth of him whose name, mightiest in the cause of civil liberty, still mightiest in the cause of moral reformation, we mention in solemn awe, in naked, deathless splendor, that the one victory we can ever call complete will be that one which proclaims that there is not one slave or one drunkard on the face of God's green earth. Recruit for this victory. Now, boy, on your march, don't you go and forget the old maxim that " one drop of honey catches more flies than a half gallon of gall." Load your musket with this maxim, and smoke it in your pipe. TEMPERANCE ADDRESS, 1842 29 FROM AN ADDRESS BEFORE THE SPRINGFIELD WASHING- TONIAN TEMPERANCE SOCIETY, FEBRUARY 22, 1842 At a time and in a pioneer country where no especial odium attached to the use of intoxicants, Lincoln was a total abstainer and always re- mained so. The literary style of this early effort is florid and opaque. It betrays its author's personality only where it shows Lincoln's sympathy for the unfortunate, and, in one place, his irrepressible humor. Although the temperance cause has been in progress for near twenty years, it is apparent to all that it is just now being crowned with a degree of success hitherto unparalleled. The list of its friends is daily swelled by the additions of fifties, of hundreds, and of thousands. The cause itself seems suddenly transformed from a cold abstract theory to a living, breathing, active, and powerful chieftain, going forth conquering and to conquer. The citadels of his great adver- sary are daily being stormed and dismantled; his temple and his altars, where the rites of his idolatrous worship have long been performed, and where human sacrifices have long been wont to be made, are daily desecrated and deserted. The triumph of the conqueror's fame is sounding from hill to hill, from sea to sea, and from land to land, and calling millions to his standard at a blast. Another error, as it seems to me, into Vvhich the old re- formers fell, was the position that all habitual drunkards were utterly incorrigible, and therefore must be turned adrift and damned without remedy in order that the grace of tem- perance might abound, to the temperate then, and to all mankind some hundreds of years thereafter. There is in this something so repugnant to humanity, so uncharitable, so cold-blooded and feelingless, that it never did, nor ever can enlist the enthusiasm of a popular cause. We could not love the man who taught it — we could not hear him with patience. The heart could not throw open its portals 30 TEMPERANCE ADDRESS, 1842 to it, the generous man could not adopt it — it could not mix with his blood. It looked so fiendishly selfish, so like throwing fathers and brothers overboard to lighten the boat for our security, that the noble-minded shrank from the manifest meanness of the thing. And besides this, the benefits of a reformation to be eflPected by such a system were too remote in point of time to warmly engage many in its behalf. Few can be induced to labor exclusively for pos- terity; and none will do it enthusiastically. Posterity has done nothing for us ; and theorize on it as we may, practically we shall do very little for it, unless we are made to think we are at the same time doing something for ourselves. What an ignorance of human nature does it exhibit, to ask or expect a whole community to rise up and labor for the temporal happiness of others, after themselves shall be consigned to the dust, a majority of which community take no pains whatever to secure their own eternal welfare at no more distant day ! Great distance in either time or space has wonderful power to lull and render quiescent the human mind. Pleasures to be enjoyed, or pains to be endured, after we shall be dead and gone, are but little regarded even in our own cases, and much less in the cases of others. Still, in addition to this there is something so ludicrous in promises of good or threats of evil a great way off as to render the whole subject with which they are connected easily turned into ridicule. *' Better lay down that spade you are stealing, Paddy; if you don't you'll pay for it at the day of judg- ment." "Be the powers, if ye'll credit me so long I'll take another jist." "But," say some, "we are no drunkards, and we shall not acknowledge ourselves such by joining a reformed drunkard's society, whatever our influence might be." Surely no Christian will adhere to this objection. If they believe, as they profess, that Omnipotence con- LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1842 3 1 descended to take on himself the form of sinful man, and, as such, to die an ignominious death for their sakes, surely they will not refuse submission to the infinitely lesser con- descension for the temporal and perhaps eternal salvation of a large, erring, and unfortunate class of their fellow creatures. Nor is the condescension very great. In my judgment, such of us as have never fallen victims have been spared more by the absence of appetite, than from any mental or moral superiority over those who have. Indeed I beheve, if we take habitual drunkards as a class, their heads and their hearts will bear an advantageous comparison with those of any other class. There seems ever to have been a proneness in the brilliant and warm-blooded to fall into this vice. The demon of intemperance ever seems to have delighted in sucking the blood of genius and of generosity. What one of us but can call to mind some relative more promising in youth than all his fellows, who has fallen a sacrifice to his rapacity ? He ever seems to have gone forth, like the Egyptian angel of death, commissioned to slay, if not the first, the fairest born of every family. Shall he now be arrested in his desolating career ? In that arrest all can give aid that will ; and who shall be excused that can and will not ? Far around as human breath has ever blown, he keeps our fathers, our brothers, our sons, and our friends prostrate in the chains of moral death. . . . LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED The letters to Joshua Fry Speed given here are almost the only published letters of Lincoln which are intimately personal in their character. Speed was the proprietor of a general store in Springfield in 1837 when Lincoln moved there from New Salem for the purpose of engaging in the practice of law. With no property except a book or two in his saddlebags and no money to pay for furnishing a room, he accepted Speed's invitation to occupy a bed over the store. This upstairs bedroom was his home until Speed moved back to Kentucky in 1841. The big fireplace in Speed's store was the gathering place for a group, all of whom were, or soon became, 32 LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1842 men of mark in the public life of Illinois. Speed and Lincoln continued their intimacy until the end. Joshua F. Speed's lecture of Lincoln remin- iscence, published, but out of print, is one of the most valuable contribu- tions to Lincolniana. James Speed, Joshua Speed's brother, became At- torney General in Lincoln's cabinet in the later years of the Civil War. The confession — "I am so poor and make so little headway in the world, that I drop back in a month of idleness as much as I gain in a year's sow- ing" — shows how precarious a living the law afforded in pioneer days to even as good a lawyer as Abraham Lincoln. Springfield, February 25, 1842. Dear Speed: Yours of the i6th instant, announcing that Miss Fanny and you are "no more twain, but one flesh," reached me this morning. I have no way of telHng you how much happiness I wish you both, though I beheve you both can conceive it. I feel somewhat jealous of both of you now: you will be so exclusively concerned for one another, that I shall be forgotten entirely. . . . I regret to learn that you have resolved to not return to Illinois. I shall be very lonesome without you. How miserably things seem to be arranged in this world ! If we have no friends, we have no pleasure; and if we have them, we are sure to lose them, and be doubly pained by the loss. I did hope she and you would make your home here; but I own I have no right to insist. You owe obligations to her ten thousand times more sacred than you can owe to others, and in that light let them be respected and observed. It is natural that she should desire to remain with her relatives and friends. As to friends, however, she could not need them anywhere : she would have them in abundance here. . . . Yours forever, Lincoln. Springfield, Illinois, July 4, 1842. Dear Speed : . . . As to my having been displeased with your advice, surely you know better than that. I know you do, and therefore LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1842 33 will not labor to convince you. True, that subject is painful to me; but it is not your silence, or the silence of all the world, that can make me forget it. I acknowledge the correctness of your advice too ; but before I resolve to do the one thing or the other, I must gain my confidence in my ovv^n ability to keep my resolves when they are made. In that ability you know I once prided myself as the only or chief gem of my character; that gem I lost — how and where you know too well. I have not yet regained it; and until I do, I cannot trust myself in any matter of much importance. I believe now that had you understood my case at the time as well as I understood yours afterward, by the aid you would have given me I should have sailed through clear, but that does not now afford me sufficient confidence to begin that or the like of that again. You make a kind acknowledgment of your obligations to me for your present happiness. I am pleased with that acknowledgment. But a thousand times more am I pleased to know that you enjoy a degree of happiness worthy of an acknowledgment. The truth is, I am not sure that there was any merit with me in the part I took in your difficulty; I was drawn to it by a fate. If I would I could not have done less than I did. I was always superstitious ; I believe God made me one of the instruments of bringing your Fanny and you together, which union I have no doubt he had fore- ordained. Whatever he designs he will do for me yet. "Stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord'* is my text just now. If, as you say, you have told Fanny all, I should have no objection to her seeing this letter, but for its refer- ence to our friend here : let her seeing it depend upon whether she has ever known anything of my affairs; and if she has not, do not let her. I do not think I can come to Kentucky this season. I am so poor and make so little headway in the world, that I drop back in a month of idleness as much as I gain in a year's sowing. I should like to visit you again. I should LINCOLN — 3 34 LETTER TO MARTIN S. MORRIS, 1843 like to see that "sis" of yours that was absent when I was there, though I suppose she would run away again if she were to hear I was coming. My respects and esteem to all 3^our friends there, and, by your permission, my love to your Fanny. Ever yours, A. Lincoln. FROM A LETTER TO MARTIN S. MORRIS This letter refers to Lincoln's candidacy for the Whig nomination for Congress. One of his opponents in the race was Edward D. Baker, a Spring- field lawyer and a brilliant orator. Afterwards United States senator from Oregon and colonel of volunteers in the army of the Union, Baker was killed at the battle of Ball's Bluff, in 1861. Menard County, where Morris lived, was Lincoln's first home in Illinois, and the county seat of Sangamon County was Springfield. The statement of the writer, "I do, however, feel myself bound not to hinder Baker in any way — I should despise my- self were I to attempt it," shows Lincoln's characteristic fairness in a po- litical fight. Lincoln and Baker were intimate friends, and Lincoln's first child was named Edward Baker Lincoln. The third candidate against Lincoln and Baker was John J. Hardin, and he was successful. In the next election, 1845, Baker was chosen, and he, in turn, was succeeded in 1847 by Abraham Lincoln. Martin S. Morris was a blacksmith and wagon maker and then an active political worker in the Whig party. Later he became a Republican, and as a Republican continued one of Lincoln's faithful supporters in politics. Menard County, although partial to Lincoln's candidacy, was a Democratic stronghold. Springfield, Illinois, March 26, 1843. Friend Morris : . . . It is truly gratifying to me to learn that while the people of Sangamon have cast me off, my old friends of Menard, who have known me longest and best, stick to me. It would astonish, if not amuse, the older citizens to learn that I (a stranger, friendless, uneducated, penniless boy, working on a flatboat at ten dollars per month) have been put down here as the candidate of pride, wealth, and aristocratic family distinction. Yet so, chiefly. LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY, 1845 35 it was. There was, too, the strangest combination of church influence against me. Baker is a CampbelHte ; and there- fore, as I suppose, with few exceptions, got all that church. My wife has some relations in the Presbyterian churches, and some with the Episcopal churches ; and therefore, wherever it would tell, I was set down as either the one or the other, while it was everywhere contended that no Chris- tian ought to go for me, because I belonged to no church, was suspected of being a deist, and had talked about fighting a duel. With all these things. Baker, of course, had nothing to do. Nor do I complain of them. As to his own church going for him, I think that was right enough, and as to the influences I have spoken of in the other, though they were very strong, it would be grossly untrue and unjust to charge that they acted upon them in a body, or were very near so. I only mean that those influences levied a tax of a consider- able per cent upon my strength throughout the religious controversy. But enough of this You say you shall instruct your delegates for me unless I object. I certainly shall not object. That would be too pleasant a compliment for me to tread in the dust. And, besides, if anything should happen ... by which Baker should be thrown out of the fight, I would be at liberty to accept the nomination if I could get it. I do, however, feel myself bound not to hinder him in any way from getting the nomination. I should despise myself were I to attempt it. Yours as ever, A. Lincoln. P. S. Will you write me again ? LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY It is plain that as far back as 1845, Lincoln, while considering slavery as an evil, believed he had no right to interfere with it where it existed lawfully within a state, but that it was his duty to work to prevent the 36 LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY, 1845 extension of slavery into new territory. This position, assumed by the Republican party in i860, was not extreme enough to satisfy many of the Abolitionists, and yet it lost the Republicans all hope of support in any of the slave states. Lincoln's personal feeling was strongly antislavery, but his political conviction, based upon a respect for the constitutional rights of the slaveholder, kept him from advocating anything more ex- treme than an opposition to the extension of slavery into the territories and the free states. Williamson Durley and his brother Madison, of Putnam County, Illinois, were local members of the Liberty party, a "third party" movement carried on by the more extreme of the antislavery partisans. The independent movement from which Lincoln was here trying to dissuade the brothers failed for the very reasons so well advanced by Lincoln in this letter. Mr. Durley had served with Lincoln in the Black Hawk war, since which time he had been a farmer and had conducted a general store in a small way in Hennepin. He had been a county commissioner, and later, by appointment of President Lincoln, he held a position in the federal revenue department. Springfield, October 3, 1845. When I saw you at home, it was agreed that I should write to you and your brother Madison. Until I then saw you I was not aware of your being what is generally called an Abolitionist, or, as you call yourself, a Liberty man, though I well knew there were many such in your country. I was glad to hear that you intended to attempt to bring about, at the next election in Putnam, a union of the Whigs proper and such of the Liberty men as are Whigs in principle on all questions save only that of slavery. So far as I can perceive, by such union neither party need yield anything on the point in difference between them. If the Whig Abolitionists of New York had voted with us last fall, Mr. Clay would now be President, Whig principles in the ascend- ant, and Texas not annexed ; whereas, by the division, all that either had at stake in the contest was lost. And, indeed, it was extremely probable, beforehand, that such would be the result. As I always understood, the Liberty men deprecated the annexation of Texas extremely; and this being so, why they should refuse to cast their votes [so] as to prevent it, even to me seemed wonderful. What was LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY, 1845 37 their process of reasoning, I can only judge from what a single one of them told me. It was this : "We are not to do evil that good maiy come/' This general proposition is doubtless correct ; but did it apply ? If by your votes you could have prevented the extension, etc., of slavery would it not have been good, and not evil, so to have used your votes, even though it involved the casting of them for a slaveholder .? By the fruit the tree is to be known. An evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit. If the fruit of elect- ing Mr. Clay would have been to prevent the extension of slavery, could the act of electing have been evil .? But I will not argue further. I perhaps ought to say that individually I never was much interested in the Texas ques- tion. I never could see much good to come of annexation, inasmuch as they were already a free republican people on our own model. On the other hand, I never could very clearly see how the annexation would augment the evil of slavery. It always seemed to me that slaves would be taken there in about equal numbers, with or without annexation. And if more were taken because of annexation, still there would be just so many the fewer left where they were taken from. It is possibly true, to some extent, that, with annexa- tion, some slaves may be sent to Texas and continued in slavery that otherwise might have been liberated. To whatever extent this may be true, I think annexation an evil. I hold it to be a paramount duty of us in the free states, due to the union of the states, and perhaps to liberty itself (paradox though it may seem), to let the slavery of the other states alone ; while, on the other hand, I hold it to be equally clear that we should never knowingly lend ourselves, directly or indirectly, to prevent that slavery from dying a natural death — to find new places for it to live in, when it can no longer exist in the old. Of course I am not now considering what would be our duty in cases of insurrection among the slaves. To recur to the Texas question, I understand the Liberty men to have viewed 38 FERSES, 1846 annexation as a much greater evil than ever I did ; and I would like to convince you, if I could, that they could have prevented it, if they had chosen. I intend this letter for you and Madison together; and if you and he or either shall think fit to drop me a line, I shall be pleased. Yours with respect, A. Lincoln. VERSES, April, 1846 These verses are as good as the reader would expect from the sentimental young man whose favorite poem is said to have been "O, why should the Spirit of Mortal be proud ?" Their old-fashioned stanza form belongs to the verse of the i8th century. They are valuable here because of the glimpse they give into Lincoln's inner life. The knowledge that at this time Lincoln was a close student of Burns and Shakespeare makes it hard to realize that he thought enough of these lines to send them to a corre- spondent with the promise of more. They record the impressions gained from a visit to the country about Gentryville, in Spencer County, Indiana, where the author had spent his boyhood, and whither, in the campaign of 1844, he went to make speeches in behalf of Henry Clay, the Whig candidate for the presidency. Memory My childhood's home I see again, And sadden with the view; And still, as memory crowds my brain, There's pleasure in it too. O Memory ! thou midway world 'Twixt earth and paradise. Where things decayed and loved ones lost In dreamy shadows rise. And, freed from all that's earthly vile. Seem hallowed, pure, and bright, FERSES, 1846 39 Like scenes in some enchanted isle All bathed in liquid light. As dusky mountains please the eye When twilight chases day; As bugle-notes that, passing by, In distance die away; As leaving some grand waterfall. We, lingering, list its roar — So memory will hallow all We've known, but know no more. Near twenty years have passed away Since here I bid farewell To woods and fields, and scenes of play. And playmates loved so well. Where many were, but few remain Of old familiar things ; But seeing them, to mind again The lost and absent brings. The friends I left that parting day. How changed, as time has sped ! Young childhood grown, strong manhood gray, And half of all are dead. I hear the loved survivors tell How naught from death could save, Till every sound appears a knell, And every spot a grave. I range the fields with pensive tread. And pace the hollow rooms. And feel (companion of the dead) I'm living in the tombs. 40 LETTER TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 FROM A LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON William H. Herndon was Lincoln's partner in the practice of law at Springfield from 1843 until 1861. He was nine years younger than Lin- coln, a man of considerable learning, a fair lawyer, and until Lincoln's death a loyal friend. He gathered the first material for his distinguished partner's biography and placed it at the disposal of Ward H. Lamon. Later with the aid of Jesse W. Weik, of Greencastle, Indiana, he published a three- volume life of Lincoln which contains much valuable biographical material. The speeches in Congress to which this letter refers gave Lincoln his first reputation as a political debater, and resulted in an invitation to campaign New England for General Zachary Taylor, the Whig candidate for President in 1848; but his opposition in Congress to the prosecution of the war with Mexico, at a time when the military success and the promise of enlarging American territory by the annexation of Texas were everywhere popular, would have made his reelection to Congress impossible had he become a candidate. The letter shows his fine sense of honor, a feeling which controlled his political conduct as it did his career at the law. Washington, January 8, 1848. Dear William : Your letter of December 27th was received a day or two ago. I am much obliged to you for the trouble you have taken and promise to take, in my little business there. As to speech-making, by way of getting the hang of the House, I made a little speech two or three days ago on a post-office question of no general inter- est. I find speaking here and elsewhere about the same thing. I was about as badly scared and no worse, as I am when I speak in court. I expect to make one within a week or two, in which I hope to succeed well enough to wish you to see it. It is very pleasant to learn from you that there are some who desire that I should be reelected. I most heartily thank them for their partiality; and I can say, as Mr. Clay said of the annexation of Texas, that "personally I would not object" to a reelection, although I thought at the time, and still think, it would be quite as well for me to return to LETTER TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 4 1 the law at the end of a single term. I made the declaration that I would not be a candidate again, more from a wish to deal fairly with others, to keep peace among our friends, and to keep the district from going to the enemy, than for any cause personal to myself; so that, if it should so happen that nobody else wishes to be elected, I could not refuse the people the right of sending me again. But to enter myself as a competitor of others, or to authorize any one so to enter me, is what my word and honor forbid. Most truly your friend, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON The interest of this letter hes in the relations which afterwards existed between Alexander H. Stephens, then 36 years old, and Abraham Lincoln, then 39, and both prominent Whig politicians. In the anxious weeks which followed the national election of i860, Lincoln used every effort to retain his hold upon Stephens, whose friendship he greatly valued. He would have liked to offer Stephens a cabinet appointment, but Georgia's adoption of the ordinance of secession in 1861 practically carried Stephens and his followers out of the Union. Alexander H. Stephens became Vice President of the Confederate States of America, and, at the close of the war, was one of the three commissioners of the dying Confederacy who met President Lincoln at Hampton Roads, in 1865, to take part in an unsuccess- ful effort to end the war and agree upon terms of peace. Washington, February 2, 1848. Dear William: I just take my pen to say that Mr. Stephens, of Georgia, a little, slim, pale-faced, consumptive man, with a voice like Logan's, has just concluded the very best speech of an hour's length I ever heard. My old with- ered dry eyes are full of tears yet. If he writes it out anything like he delivered it, our people shall see a good many copies of it. Yours truly, A. Lincoln. 42 LETTER TO JOSEPHUS HEWETT, 1848 LETTER TO JOSEPHUS HEWETT Josephus Hewett had been a preacher and later a lawyer in Illinois, com- ing to Sangamon County in 1830 and reading law with Stephen T. Logan, Lincoln's second law partner. He removed to Natchez, Mississippi, about 1840, where he established a successful law practice. The reference to the horseback ride from Tremont to Springfield, a distance of about eighty miles, is to the days when Lincoln and his associates at the law rode from county to county following the court and trying cases for such clients as employed them after they reached town. This letter is one of the earliest references in Lincoln's writings to the Constitution of the United States, and shows his familiarity with that document. Washington, February 13, 1848. Dear Hewett : Your Whig representative from Missis- sippi, D. W. Tompkins, has just shown me a letter of yours to him. I am jealous because you did not write to me — perhaps you have forgotten me. Don't you remember a long black fellow who rode on horseback with you from Tremont to Springfield nearly ten years ago, swimming our horses over the Mackinaw on the trip .? Well, I am that same one fellow yet. I was once of your opinion, expressed in your letter, that presidential electors should be dispensed .with, but a more thorough knowledge of the causes that first introduced them has made me doubt. The causes were brieHy these : The convention that framed the Constitution had this difficulty : the small states wished to so form the new government as that they might be equal to the large ones, regardless of the inequality of population ; the large ones insisted on equality in proportion to population. They compromised it by basing the House of Representatives on population, and the Senate on states regardless of population, and the execution of both principles by electors in each state, equal in number to her Senators and Representatives. Now throw away the machinery of electors and this com- promise is broken up and the whole yielded to the principle of the larger states. There is one thing more. In the slave LETTERS TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 43 states you have representatives, and consequently electors, partly upon the basis of your slave population, which would be swept away by the change you seem to think desirable. Have you ever reflected on these things ? But to come to the main point. I wish you to know that I have made a speech in Congress, and that I want you to be enlightened by reading it ; to further which object I send you a copy of the speech by this mail. For old acquaintance's sake, if for nothing else, be sure to write to me on receiving this. I was very near forgetting to tell you that on my being introduced to General Quitman and telling him I was from Springfield, Illinois, he at once re- marked, *'Then you know my valued friend Hewett of Natchez " ; and on being assured I did, he said just such things about you as I like to hear said about my own valued friends. Yours as ever, A. Lincoln. LETTERS TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON In these next two letters to Herndon, note Lincoln's political astuteness, his belief in frankness and sincerity in politics, and his appreciation of the efficiency of the younger men in political struggles. The letters, like many others, are interesting because of their revelation of Lincoln's real nature and especially of Lincoln's modesty, almost humility, and his evi- dent notion that, at thirty-nine, he was beginning to be too old for success- ful political activity. Washington, June 22, 1848. As to the young men. You must not wait to be brought forward by the older men. For instance, do you suppose that I should ever have got into notice if I had waited to be hunted up and pushed forward by older men ? You young men get together and form a "Rough and Ready Club," and have regular meetings and speeches. Take in every- 44 LETTERS TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 body you can get. Harrison Grimsley, L. A. Enos, Lee Kimball, and C. W. Matheny will do to begin the thing; but as you go along gather up all the shrewd, wild boys about town, whether just of age or a little under age, — Chris. Logan, Reddick Ridgley, Lewis Zwizler, and hundreds such. Let every one play the part he can play best, — some speak, some sing, and all "holler." Your meetings will be of evenings ; the older men, and the women, will go to hear you ; so that it will not only contribute to the election of *'01d Zach," ^ but will be an interesting pastime, and improv- ing to the intellectual faculties of all engaged. Don't fail to do this. Washington, July 10, 1848. Dear William : Your letter . . . was received last night. The subject of that letter is exceedingly painful to me; and I cannot but think there is some mistake in your impression of the motives of the old men. I suppose I am now one of the old men ; and I declare, on my veracity, which I think is good with you, that nothing could afford me more satisfaction than to learn that you and others of my young friends at home are doing battle in the contest, and endearing themselves to the people, and taking a stand far above any I have ever been able to reach in their admiration. I cannot conceive that other old men feel differently. Of course I cannot demonstrate what I say. The way for a young man to rise is to improve himself every way he can, never suspect- ing that anybody wishes to hinder him. Allow me to assure you that suspicion and jealousy never did help any man in any situation. There may sometimes be ungenerous attempts to keep a young man down ; and they will succeed, too, if he allows his mind to be diverted from its true channel to brood' over the attempted injury. Cast about, and see if this ^ General Zachary Taylor, Whig candidate for President. SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 45 feeling has not injured every person you have ever known to fall into it. Now, in what I have said I am sure you will suspect nothing but sincere friendship. I would save you from a fatal error. You have been a laborious, studious young man. You are far better informed on almost all subjects than I have been. You cannot fail in any laudable object, unless you allow your mind to be improperly directed. I have somewhat the advantage of you in the world's experience, merely by being older; and it is this that induces me to advise. . . . Your friend, as ever, A. LiNCOiN. FROM A SPEECH IN CONGRESS, JULY 27, 1848, ON THE CANDIDACY OF ZACHARY TAYLOR FOR PRESIDENT This is a congressional "stump speech," not to be taken at all seriously. Taylor was Lincoln's candidate for the presidency and Cass was seeking the Democratic nomination for the same office, and in a long public career had done many things which laid him open to Lincoln's attacks, here so humorously and so effectively made. The speech is valuable as a contribu- tion to Lincoln's autobiography showing that he looked upon his own experiences as an Indian fighter as an amusing and a pleasant memory but by no means believed that they entitled him, as a sort of tin soldier, to any claim to military fame. Lincoln evidently did not believe that a man's military achievements necessarily fitted him for civil responsibilities. o . . But in my hurry I was very near closing this subject of military tails before I was done with it. There is one entire article of the sort I have not discussed yet, — I mean the military tail you Democrats are now engaged in dovetailing into the great Michigander [General Lewis Cass]. Yes, sir; all his biographies (and they are legion) have him in hand, tying him to a military tail, like so many mischievous boys tying a dog to a bladder of beans. True the material they have is very limited, but they drive at it might and main. He invaded Canada without resistance, and he ow/vaded it 46 SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 without pursuit. As he did both under orders, I suppose there was to him neither credit nor discredit in them; but they constitute a large part of the tail. He was not at Hull's surrender, but he was close by; he was volunteer aid to General Harrison on the day of the battle of the Thames; and as you said in 1840 Harrison was picking huckleberries two miles off while the battle was fought, I suppose it is a just conclusion with you to say Cass was aiding Harrison to pick huckleberries. This is about all, except the mooted question of the broken sword. Some authors say he broke it, some say he threw it away, and some others, who ought to know, say nothing about it. Perhaps it would be a fair historical compromise to say, if he did not break it, he did not do anything else with it. By the way, Mr. Speaker, did you know I am a military hero? Yes, sir; in the days of the Black Hawk war I fought, bled, and came away. Speaking of General Cass's career reminds me of my own. I was not at Stillman's defeat, but I was about as near it as Cass was to Hull's surrender; and, like him, I saw the place very soon after- ward. It is quite certain I did not break my sword, for I had none to break ; but I bent a musket pretty badly on one occasion. If Cass broke his sword, the idea is he broke it in desperation ; I bent the musket by accident. If General Cass went in advance of me in picking huckleberries, I guess I surpassed him in charges upon the wild onions. If he saw any live, fighting Indians, it was more than I did ; but I had a good many bloody struggles with the mosquitoes, and although I never fainted from the loss of blood, I can truly say I was often very hungry. Mr. Speaker, if I should ever conclude to doff whatever our Democratic friends may suppose there is of black-cockade federalism about me, and therefore they shall take me up as their candidate for the presidency, I protest they shall not make fun of me, as they have of General Cass, by attempting to write me into a military hero. ... SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 47 Mr. Speaker, I adopt the suggestion of a friend, that General Cass is a general of splendidly successful charges — charges to be sure, not upon the public enemy, but upon the public treasury. He was Governor of Michigan Territory, and ex-officio Superintendent of Indian Affairs, from the 9th of October, 1813, till the 31st of July, 1831 — a period of seventeen years, nine months, and twenty-two days. During this period he received from the United States treasury, for personal services and personal expenses, the aggregate sum of ninety-six thousand and twenty-eight dollars, being an average of fourteen dollars and seventy-nine cents per day for every day of the time. This large sum was reached by assuming that he was doing service at several different places, and in several different capacities in the same place, all at the same time. By a correct analysis of his accounts during that period, the following propositions may be deduced : First. He was paid in three different capacities during the whole of the time ; that is to say — (i) As governor's salary at the rate per year of ^2,000. (2) As estimated for office, rent, clerk hire, fuel, etc., in superintendence of Indian affairs in Michigan, at the rate per year of ^1,500. (3) As compensation and expenses for various miscellaneous items of Indian service out of Michigan, an average per year of ^625. Second. During part of the time — that is, from the 9th of October, 1 8 1 3 , to the 29th of May, 1822 — he was paid in four different capacities ; that is to say, the three as above, and, in addition thereto, the commutation of ten rations per day, amounting per year to ^730. Third, During another part of the time — that is, from the beginning of 1822 to the 31st of July, 1831 — ^ he w^as also paid in four different capacities ; that is to say, the first three, as above (the rations being dropped after the 29th of May, 1822), and, in addition thereto, for superintending Indian Agencies at Piqua, Ohio; Fort Wayne, Indiana; and Chicago, Illinois, at the rate per year of ^1,500. It 48 SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 should be observed here that the last item, commencing at the beginning of 1822, and the item of rations, ending on the 29th of May, 1822, lap on each other during so much of the time as lies between those two dates. Fourth. Still another part of the time — that is, from the 31st of October, 1821, to the 29th of May, 1822 — he was paid in six different capacities; that is to say, the three first, as above; the item of rations, as above; and, in addi- tion thereto, another item of ten rations per day while at Washington settling his accounts, being at the rate per year of ^730; and also an allowance for expenses traveling to and from Washington, and while there, of ^1,022, being at the rate per year of $1,793. Fifth. And yet during the little portion of the time which lies between the ist of January, 1822, and the 29th of May, 1822, he was paid in seven different capacities; that is to say, the six last mentioned, and also, at the rate of $1,500 per year, for the Piqua, Fort Wayne, and Chicago service, as mentioned above. . . . I have introduced General Cass's accounts here chiefly to show the wonderful physical capacities of the man. They show that he not only did the labor of several men at the same time, but that he often did it at several places, many hundreds of miles apart, at the same time. And at eating, too, his capacities are shown to be quite as wonderful. From October, 1821, to May, 1822, he eat ten rations a day in Michigan, ten rations a day here in Washington, and near five dollars' worth a day on the road between the two places ! And then there is an important discovery in his example — • the art of being paid for what one eats, instead of having to pay for it. Hereafter if any nice young man should owe a bill which he cannot pay in any other way, he can just board it out. Mr. Speaker, we have all heard of the animal stand- ing in doubt between two stacks of hay and starving to death. The like of that would never happen to General Cass. Place the stacks a thousand miles apart, he would stand stock- LETTER TO J. M. CLAYTON, 1849 49 still midway between them, and eat them both at once, and the green grass along the line would be apt to suffer some, too, at the same time. By all means make him President, gentlemen. He will feed you bounteously — if — if there is any left after he shall have helped himself. . . . I have heard some things from New York ; and if they are true, one might well say of your party there, as a drunken fellow once said when he heard the reading of an indictment for hog-stealing. The clerk read on till he got to and through the words, ''did steal, take, and carry away ten boars, ten sows, ten shoats, and ten pigs," at which he exclaimed, "Well, by golly, that is the most equally divided gang of hogs I ever did hear of !" If there is any other gang of hogs more equally divided than the Democrats of New York are about this time, I have not heard of it. LETTER TO HON. JOHN M. CLAYTON This letter throws a new Hght upon its author's political views. Always a hero-worshiper, Lincoln had been a lifelong admirer of Andrew Jackson. With all of his deference to the opinions of others and his apparent willingness to efface himself, it is characteristic of Abraham Lincoln that when the time for decision came he was ready to assume the responsibility for his decisions and for his acts. This was illustrated when he rejected Seward's suggestion of a dictatorship, and when he revoked the orders of Generals Fremont and Hunter freeing certain slaves, and in many other instances which might be cited. It is believed that this letter is not published in any other collection of Lincoln's writings. Springfield, III., July 28th, 1849. Hon. J. M. Clayton, Sec'y of State, Dear Sir : It is with some hesitation I presume to address you this letter — and yet I wish not only you, but the whole cabinet, and the President too, would consider the subject matter of it — my being among the people while you and they are not, will excuse the apparent presumption. LINCOLN — 4 50 MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE, 1850 It is understood that the President at first adopted, as a general rule, to throw the responsibility of the appointments upon the respective Departments ; and that such rule is adhered to and practiced upon. This course I at first thought proper; and, of course, I am not now complaining of it. Still I am disappointed with the effect of it upon the public mind. It is fixing for the President the unjust and ruinous character of being a mere man of straw. This must be arrested, or it will damn us all inevitably. It is said Gen. Taylor and his officers held a council of war at Palo Alto (I believe) ; and that he then fought the battle against unanimous opinion of those officers — this fact (no matter whether rightfully or wrongfully) gives him more popularity than ten thousand submissions, however really v/ise and magnanimous those submissions may be. The appoint- ments need be no better than they have been, but the public must be brought to understand, that they are the President's appointments. He must occasionally say, or seem to say, "by the Eternal," "I take the responsibility." Those phrases were the "Samson's locks" of Gen. Jackson, and we dare not disregard the lessons of experience. Your Ob't Sev't. A. Lincoln. MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE These notes, in thelight of their writer's history, seem autobiographicaL Expressed in a modesty that was almost humble, they reveal Lincoln's qualities as a lawyer : diligence in the pursuit of the one thing in hand, — as though he bore in mind St. Paul's motto, "This one thing I do," — persist- ence in self-training as a debater and speaker, absolute integrity in his re- lations with men and his reckoning with his own conscience, and a willingness to yield much for the sake of peace and fair dealing. All these were his own professional ideals. The rules of conduct here laid down he applied to his own practice and following them, he gained a place at the head of the bar of Illinois. The reported decisions of the Illinois supreme court contain 175 of Lincoln's cases. Besides these he appeared in the federal courts in Illinois and other states, in many important suits, and in the Supreme MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE, 1850 51 Court of the United States. The dominant characteristic of his legal argument was crystal clearness, and in his manner of presentation he dis- played absolute fairness toward the other side and frank sincerity toward the court. His disposition to undervalue his own services kept him a poor man at a time when by making reasonable charges he could have made himself comfortably rich. As an advocate he was much sought after, trying cases in every part of his own state. His success in presenting his cases to the jury did not lead him into the error which he condemns in this lecture of "relying too much on speech-making." While he studied human nature in his juries and on the witness stand, and prepared his most trifling cases with scrupulous care, he found time for the mastery of the great questions of constitutional law, until he was able to demonstrate by his Cooper Institute speech (page 112) and by his handling of the intricate legal problems of the Civil War, that he was one of the foremost constitutional lawyers of his time. In this connection, read the letters to Isham Reavis, November 5, 1855 (P- 64) and to James T. Thornton, December 2, 1858 (p. 109). His fairness to his opponent in the trial of causes gave him the confidence of the court and of the bar and won him the popular title "Honest Abe Lin- coln." In the statement of his case to the court or jury it was a common thing for his opponent to submit his case for trial on Lincoln's presentation of the facts. A fair illustration of his disposition is found in a letter to Senator Lyman Trumbull written in 1857 {yj Century Magazine^ p. 620) : "This notice is not required by law, and I am giving it merely because I thmk fairness requires it." I am not an accomplished lawyer. I find quite as much material for a lecture in those points wherein I have failed, as in those wherein I have been moderately successful. The leading rule for a lawyer, as for the man of every other call- ing, is diligence. Leave nothing for to-morrow which can be done to-day. Never let your correspondence fall behind. Whatever piece of business you have in hand, before stop- ping, do all the labor pertaining to it which can then be done. When you bring a common-law suit, if you have the facts for doing so, write the declaration at once. If a law point be involved, examine the books, and note the authority you rely on upon the declaration itself, where you are sure to find it when wanted. The same of defenses and pleas. In business not likely to be litigated, — ordinary collection cases, foreclosures, partitions, and the like, — make all 52 MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE, 1850 examinations of titles, and note them and even draft orders and decrees in advance. This course has a triple advantage; it avoids omissions and neglect, saves your labor when once done, performs the labor out of court when you have leisure, rather than in court when you have not. Extemporaneous speaking should be practiced and cul- tivated. It is the lawyer's avenue to the public. However able and faithful he may be in other respects, people are slow to bring him business if he cannot make a speech. And yet there is not a more fatal error to young lawyers than relying too much on speech-making. If any one, upon his rare powers of speaking, shall claim an exemption from the drudgery of the law, his case is a failure in advance. Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser — in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peace-maker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough. Never stir up litigation. A worse man can scarcely be found than one who does this. Who can be more nearly a fiend than he who habitually overhauls the register of deeds in search of defects in titles, whereon to stir up strife, and put money in his pocket ^ A moral tone ought to be infused into the profession which should drive such men out of it. The matter of fees is important, far beyond the mere question of bread and butter involved. Properly attended to, fuller justice is done to both lawyer and client. An exorbitant fee should never be claimed. As a general rule, never take your whole fee in advance, nor any more than a small retainer. When fully paid beforehand, you are more than a common mortal if you can feel the same interest in the case as if something was still in prospect for you, as well as for your client. And when you lack interest in the case the job will very likely lack skill and diligence in LETTERS TO J. D. JOHNSTON, 1S51 53 the performance. Settle the amount of fee and take a note in advance. Then you will feel that you are working for something, and you are sure to do your work faithfully and well. Never sell a fee-note — at least not before the con- sideration service is performed. It leads to negligence and dishonesty — negligence by losing interest in the case, and dishonesty in refusing to refund when you have allowed the consideration to fail. There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are neces- sarily dishonest. I say vague, because when we consider to what extent confidence and honors are reposed in and conferred upon lawyers by the people, it appears improbable that their impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid. Yet the impression is common, almost universal. Let no young man choosing the law for a calling for a moment yield to the popular belief. Resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer. Choose some other occupation, rather than one in the choosing of which you do, in advance, consent to be a knave. LETTERS TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON John D. Johnston was the son of Lincoln's stepmother. He had grown up with Abraham Lincoln in the log-cabin days in Indiana, and had migrated to Illinois with the Lincoln party in 1830. He had the restless, thriftless irresponsibility of the chronic emigrant who fancied he could gain social betterment without working for it. These and other letters show that Lincoln was patient with his brother's failings, and, despite his own poverty, continued to share what he had with his less deserving kin. January 2, 1851. Dear Johnston : Your request for eighty dollars I do not think it best to comply with now. At the various times when I have helped you a little you have said to me, "We can get along very well now"; but in a very short time I 54 LETTERS TO J. D. JOHNSTON, 1851 find you in the same difficulty again. Now, this can only happen by some defect in your conduct. What that defect is, I think I know. You are not lazy, and still you are an idler. I doubt whether, since I saw you, you have done a good whole day's work in any one day. You do not very much dislike to work, and still you do not work much, merely because it does not seem to you that you could get much for it. This habit of uselessly wasting time is the whole difficulty ; it is vastly important to you, and still more so to your children, that you should break the habit. It is more important to them, because they have longer to live, and can keep out of an idle habit before they are in it, easier than they can get out after they are in. You are now in need of some money; and what I propose is, that you shall go to work, "tooth and nail," for somebody who will give you money for it. Let father and your boys take charge of your things at home, prepare for a crop, and make a crop, and you go to work for the best money wages, or in discharge of any debt you owe, that you can get ; and, to secure you a fair reward for your labor, I now promise you, that for every dollar you will, between this and the first of May, get for your own labor, either in money or as your own indebtedness, I will then give you one other dollar. By this, if you hire yourself at ten dollars a month, from me you will get ten more, making twenty dollars a month for your work. In this I do not mean you shall go off to St. Louis, or the lead mines, or the gold mines in California, but I mean for you to go at it for the best wages you can get close to home in Coles County. Now, if you will do this, you will be soon out of debt, and, what is better, you will have a habit that will keep you from getting in debt again. But, if I should now clear you out of debt, next year you would be just as deep in as ever. You say you would almost give your place in heaven for seventy or eighty dollars. Then you value your place in heaven very cheap, for I am sure you can, with the offer I make, get the seventy or eighty dollars for LETTERS TO J. D. JOHNSTON, 1851 55 four or five months' work. You say if I will furnish you the money you will deed me the land, and, if you don't pay the money back, you will deliver possession. Nonsense ! If you can't now live with the land, how will you then live without it ? You have always been kind to me, and I do not mean to be unkind to you. On the contrary, if you will but follow my advice, you will find it worth more than eighty times eighty dollars to you. Affectionately your brother, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON AND TO HIS MOTHER Shelbyville, November 4, 1851. Dear Brother: When I came into Charleston day before yesterday, I learned that you are anxious to sell the land where you live and move to Missouri. I have been thinking of this ever since, and cannot but think such a notion is utterly foolish. What can you do in Missouri better than here ? Is the land any richer 1 Can you there, any more than here, raise corn and wheat and oats without work .? Will anybody there, any more than here, do your work for you .? If you intend to go to work, there is no better place than right where you are ; if you do not intend to go to work, you cannot get along anywhere. Squirming and crawling about from place to place can do no good. You have raised no crop this year; and what you really want is to sell the land, get the money, and spend it. Part with the land you have, and, my life upon it, you will never after own a spot big enough to bury you in. Half you will get for the land you will spend in moving to Missouri, and the other half you will eat, drink, and wear out, and no foot of land will be bought. Now, I feel it my duty to have no hand in such a piece of foolery. I feel that it is so even on your own account, and particularly on mother's account. The eastern forty acres 56 SPEECH AT PEORIA, 1854 I intend to keep for mother while she lives ; if you will not cultivate it, it will rent for enough to support her — at least, it will rent for something. Her dower in the other two forties she can let you have, and no thanks to me. Now, do not misunderstand this letter; I do not write it in any unkindness. I write it in order, if possible, to get you to face the truth, which truth is, you are destitute because you have idled away all your time. Your thousand pretenses for not getting along better are all nonsense ; they deceive no- body but yourself. Go to work is the only cure for your case. A word to mother. Chapman tells me he wants you to go and live with him. If I were you I would try it awhile. If you get tired of it (as I think you will not), you can return to your own home. Chapman feels very kindly to you, and I have no doubt he will make your situation very pleasant. Sincerely your son, A. Lincoln. SPEECH IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS AT PEORIA October 16, 1854. . . . This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert, real zeal, for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world, enables the enemies of free institutions with plausibility to taunt us as hypocrites, causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many good men among ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental prin- ciples of civil liberty, criticizing the Declaration of Independ- ence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest. Before proceeding let me say that I think I have, no preju- dice against the Southern people. They are just what we would be in their situation. If slavery did not now exist SPEECH AT PEORIA, 1854 57 among them, they would not introduce it. If it did now exist among us, we should not instantly give it up. This I believe of the masses North and South. Doubtless there are individuals on both sides who would not hold slaves under any circumstances, and others who would gladly introduce slavery anew if it were out of existence. . . . When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery than we are, I acknowledge the fact. When it is said that the institution exists, and that it is very difficult to get rid of it in any satisfactory way, I can under- stand and appreciate the saying. I surely will not blame them for not doing what I should not know how to do myself. If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do as to the existing institution. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land. But a moment's reflection would convince me that whatever of high hope (as I think there is) there may be in this in the long run, its sudden execution is impos- sible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all perish in the next ten days ; and there are not surplus ship- ping and surplus money enough to carry them there in many times ten days. What then .? Free them all, and keep them among us as underlings ? Is it quite certain that this betters their condition ? I think I would not hold one in slavery at any rate, yet the point is not clear enough for me to denounce people upon. What next .? Free them, and make them politically and socially our equals } My own feelings will not admit of this, and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of whites will not. Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judg- ment is not the sole question, if indeed it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether well or ill founded, cannot be safely disregarded. We cannot then make them equals. It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation might be adopted, but for their tardiness in this I will not undertake to judge our brethren of the South. . . . 58 LETTER TO GEORGE ROBERTSON, 1855 FROM A LETTER TO GEORGE ROBERTSON OF LEXINGTON, KENTUCKY The introduction to this letter refers to a speech of the Hon. George Robertson, made long before, on the Missouri Compromise. The value of this letter is that in the last paragraph the writer first gives expression to the idea advanced in the famous "House Divided" speech of June 17, 1858 (p. 68), namely the expression of the query, "Can we as a nation continue together pertnanently, half slave, and half free V Robertson was at this time a lecturer in law in Transylvania University. He had been a member of Congress, participating there in slavery legislation. Later he was for many years a member of the legislature and chief justice of Kentucky, and author of a number of books of biography, and on law and politics, Springfield, Illinois, August 15, 1855. My dear Sir : . . . You are not a friend of slavery in the abstract. In that speech you spoke of "the peaceful extinction of slavery" and used other expressions indicating your belief that the thing was, at some time, to have an end. Since then we have had thirty-six years of experience; and this experience has demonstrated, I think, that there is no peaceful extinction of slavery in prospect for us. The signal failure of Henry Clay and other good and great men, in 1849, to effect anything in favor of gradual emancipation in Kentucky, together with a thousand other signs, extin- guished that hope utterly. On the question of liberty, as a principle, we are not what we have been. When we were the political slaves of King George, and wanted to be free, we called the maxim that "all men are created equal" a self-evident truth, but now when we have grown fat, and have lost all dread of being slaves ourselves, we have become so greedy to be masters that we call the same maxim "a self- evident lie." The Fourth of July has not quite dwindled away ; it is still a great day — for burning fire-crackers ! That spirit which desired the peaceful extinction of slavery has itself become extinct with the occasion and the men of the Revolution. Under the impulse of that occa- LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 59 slon, nearly half the states adopted systems of emancipation at once, and it is a significant fact that not a single state has done the like since. So far as peaceful, voluntary emancipation is concerned, the condition of the negro slave in America, scarcely less terrible to the contemplation of a free mind, is now as fixed and hopeless of change for the better as that of the lost souls of the finally impenitent. The Autocrat of all the Russias will resign his crown and pro- claim his subjects free republicans,^ sooner than will our American masters voluntarily give up their slaves. Our political problem now is, "Can we as a nation continue together permanently — forever — half slave, and half free ?" The problem is too mighty for me — may God in his mercy superintend the solution. Your much obliged friend, and humble servant, A. Lincoln. FROM A LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED Note the reference to the effect of seeing slaves shackled together: "That sight was a continued torment to me." Although he thus felt the horror of slavery he was willing to concede the rights of the South under the Constitution and to wait until the end of slavery could be brought about by constitutional means. Because of this attitude, Lincoln became known in antislavery audiences in New England as "The Slave Hound of Illinois " ; and for years bore with singular patience the criticism and abuse of the radical Abolitionists of the North. Andrew H. Reeder, here mentioned, was appointed by President Franklin Pierce as first governor of Kansas. He tried to protect the integrity of the ballot, became a Liberty man, was elected senator from Kansas, 1856, but his election was not recognized by Congress. President Lincoln in 1861 made him a brigadier general. Springfield, August 24, 1855. Dear Speed : You know what a poor correspondent I am. Ever since I received your very agreeable letter of the 22d ^ The Czar of Russia emancipated the serfs on March 3, 1861 ; so this prophecy came true. 6o LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 of May I have been intending to write you an answer to it. You suggest that in poHtical action now, you and I would differ. I suppose we would ; not quite so much, however, as you may think. You know I dislike slavery, and you fully admit the abstract wrong of it. So far there is no cause of difference. But you say that sooner than yield your legal right to the slave, especially at the bidding of those who are not themselves interested, you would see the Union dissolved. I am not aware that any one is bidding you yield that right ; very certainly I am not. I leave that matter entirely to yourself. I also acknowledge your rights and my obligations under the Constitution in regard to your slaves. I confess I hate to see the poor creatures hunted down and caught and carried back to their stripes and unre- quited toil ; but I bite my lips and keep quiet. In 1841, you and I had together a tedious low-water trip on a steamboat, from Louisville to St. Louis. You may remember, as I well do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio, there were on board ten or a dozen slaves shackled together with irons. That sight was a continued torment to me, and I see some- thing like it every time I touch the Ohio or any other slave border. It is not fair for you to assume that I have no inter- est in a thing which has, and continually exercises, the power of making me miserable. You ought rather to appreciate how much the great body of the Northern people do crucify their feelings in order to maintain their loyalty to the Con- stitution and the Union. I do oppose the extension of slavery, because my judgment and feeling so prompt me, and I am under no obligations to the contrary. If for this you and I must differ, differ we must. You say if you were President, you would send an army and hang the leaders of the Missouri outrages upon the Kansas elections ; still, if Kansas fairly votes herself a slave state she must be admitted, or the Union must be dissolved. But how if she votes herself a slave state unfairly ; that is, by the very means for which you say you would hang men ? Must she still be admitted, or the LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 6 1 Union dissolved ? That will be the phase of the question when it first becomes a practical one. In your assumption that there may be a fair decision of the slavery question in Kansas, I plainly see that you and I would differ about the Nebraska law. I look upon that enactment, not as a law, but as a violence from the beginning. It was conceived in violence, is maintained in violence, and is being executed in violence. I say it was conceived in violence, because the destruction of the Missouri Compromise, under the circum- stances, was nothing less than violence. It was passed in violence, because it could not have passed at all but for the votes of many members in violence of the known will of their constituents. It is maintained in violence, because the elections since clearly demand its repeal, and the demand is openly disregarded. You say men ought to be hung for the way they are executing the law; I say that the way it is being executed is quite as good as any of its antecedents. It is being executed in the precise way which was intended from the first, else why does no Nebraska man express astonishment or condemnation ? Poor Reeder ^ is the only public man who has been silly enough to believe that anything like fairness was ever intended, and he has been bravely undeceived. That Kansas will form a slave constitution, and with it will ask to be admitted into the Union, I take to be already a settled question, and so settled by the very means you so pointedly condemn. By every principle of law ever held by any court North or South, every negro taken to Kansas is free ; yet in utter disregard of this, — in the spirit of violence merely, — that beautiful legislature gravely passes a law to hang any man who shall venture to inform a negro of his legal rights. This is the subject and real object of the law. If, like Haman, they should hang upon the gallows of their 1 Andrew H. Reeder was the first territorial governor of Kansas and in 1855 was removed from office by President Buchanan because he attempted to protect the antislavery party in the territorial election. 62 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 own building, I shall not be among the mourners for their fate. In my humble sphere, I shall advocate the restoration of the Missouri Compromise so long as Kansas remains a territory, and when, by all these foul means, it seeks to come into the Union as a slave state, I shall oppose it. I am very loath in any case to withhold my assent to the enjoy- ment of property acquired or located in good faith ; but I do not admit that good faith in taking a negro to Kansas to be held in slavery is a probability with any man. Any man who has sense enough to be the controller of his own property has too much sense to misunderstand the outrageous charac- ter of the whole Nebraska business. But I digress. In my opposition to the admission of Kansas, I shall have some company, but we may be beaten. If we are, I shall not, on that account, attempt to dissolve the Union. I think it probable, however, we shall be beaten. Standing as a unit among yourselves, you can, directly and indirectly, bribe enough of our men to carry the day, as you could on the open proposition to establish a monarchy. Get hold of some man in the North whose position and ability are such that he can make the support of your measure, whatever it may be, a Democratic-party necessity, and the thing is done. Apropos of this, let me tell you an anecdote. Douglas introduced the Nebraska bill in January. In February afterward, there was a called session of the Illinois legislature. Of the one hundred members composing the two branches of that body, about seventy were Democrats. These latter held a caucus, in which the Nebraska bill was talked of, if not formally discussed. It was thereby discovered that just three, and no more, were in favor of the measure. In a day or two Douglas's orders came on to have resolutions passed approv- ing the bill ; and they were passed by large majorities ! ! ! The truth of this is vouched for by a bolting Democratic member. The masses too, Democratic as well as Whig, were even nearer unanimous against it; but as soon as the party necessity of supporting it became apparent, the way the LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 63 ' Democrats began to see the wisdom and justice of it was perfectly astonishing. You say that if Kansas fairly votes herself a free state, as a Christian you will rejoice at it. All decent slaveholders talk that way, and I do not doubt their candor. But they never vote that way. Although in a private letter or con- versation you will express your preference that Kansas should be free, you would vote for no man for Congress who would say the same thing publicly. No such man could be elected from any district in a slave state. . . . The slave breeders and slave traders are a small, odious, and detested class among you ; and yet in politics they dictate the course of all of you, and are as completely your masters as you are the master of your own negroes. You inquire where I now stand. That is a disputed point. I think I am a Whig; but others say there are no Whigs, and that I am an Abolitionist. When I was at Washington, I voted for the Wilmot Proviso as good as forty times ; and I never heard of any one attempt- ing to unwhig me for that. I now do no more than oppose the extension of slavery. I am not a Know-nothing ; that is certain. How could I be .? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes be in favor of degrading classes of white people ? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that " all men are created equal!^ We now practically read it, " all men are created equal except negroes!^ When the Know- nothings get control, it will read, " all men are created equal except negroes and foreigners and Catholics J'^ When it comes to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty — to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and with- out the base alloy of hypocrisy. . . . My kindest regards to Mrs. Speed. On the leading subject of this letter I have more of her sympathy than I have of yours ; and yet let me say I am your friend for ever. A. Lincoln. * 64 LETTER TO I SHAM RE A VIS, 1855 FROM A LETTER TO ISHAM REAVIS See the letter to James T. Thornton (p. 109) ; also memorandum for Law Lecture (p. 50). Springfield, Nov'r 5, 1855. IsHAM Reavis, Esq. My dear Sir: — I have just reached home, and found your letter of the 23 rd ult. I am from home too much of my time, for a young man to read law with me advantage- ously. If you are resolutely determined to make a lawyer of yourself, the thing is more than half done already. It is but a small matter whether you read with anybody or not. I did not read with any one. Get the books, and read and study them till you understand them in their principal features ; and that is the main thing. It is of no conse- quence to be in a large town while you are reading. I read at New Salem, which never had three hundred people living in it. The books, and your capacity for understanding them, are just the same in all places. Mr. Dummer is a very clever man and an excellent lawyer (much better than I, in law- learning) ; and Ihave no doubt he will cheerfully tell you what books to read, and also loan you the books. Always bear in mind that your own resolution to suc- ceed, is more important than any other one thing. Very truly your friend, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO RICHARD P. MORGAN This is an appHcation for the renewal of his pass as local attorney for the Chicago, Alton, & St. Louis — now Chicago & Alton Railway. In his practice at the bar, Lincoln was regularly retained by this corporation. He was also employed by the Illinois Central, the Atlantic, and the Tonica and Petersburg railway companies. "Chalked hat" was a colloquial term for a railway pass. LETTER TO J. A. BRITTENHAM, 1856. 65 Richard Price Morgan was then the general superintendent of the railway company. The employment by Mr. Morgan is said to have grown out of a friendship that sprang up between the men while Lincoln was "traveling the circuit" as the result of a little act of hospitality on Mr. Morgan's part at a country boarding place where Lincoln, unable to secure quarters for the night, was asked to share Mr. Morgan's room and bed. He was a delegate to the state convention in i860 where Lincoln's name was first proposed for Presi- dent. Mr. Morgan later is said to have designed and planned the elevated railroads for the New York Rapid Transit Commission. Springfield, February 13, 1856. Dear Sir: Says Tom to John: "Here's your old rotten wheelbarrow. Fve broke it, usin' on it. I wish you would mend it, case I shall want to borrow it this arter-noon." Acting on this as a precedent, I say, "Here's your old * chalked hat.' I wish you would take it, and send me a new one ; case I shall want to use it the first of March." Yours truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO J. A. BRITTENHAM The following letter is of interest because, in compact form, it shows what a close reasoner the author was on political questions. This particular letter has never been published, although one in the same language, also marked " confidential," appears in the Nicolay and Hay collection of Lincoln's writings under date of September 8, 1856, addressed to Harrison Maltby. It is apparent that Lincoln was sending this letter to various representative supporters of Millard Fillmore, the Whig candidate for President of the United States in the national campaign then in progress. (Confidential) Springfield, Sept. 17, 1856. J. A. Brittenham, Esq. Dear Sir : I understand you are a Fillmore man. Let me prove to you that every vote withheld from Fremont, and given to Fillmore, in this state, actually lessens Fillmore's chance of being President. LINCOLN — 5 66 LETTER TO J. A. BRITTENHAM, 1856 Suppose Buchanan gets all the slave states, and Penn- sylvania, and any other one state besides ; then he is elected, no matter who gets all the rest. But suppose Fillmore gets the two slave states of Mary- land and Kentucky; then Buchanan is not elected, Fillmore goes into the House of Representatives, and may be made President by a compromise. But suppose again Fillmore's friends throw away a few thousand votes on him, in Indiana and Illinois, it will in- evitably give these states to Buchanan, which will more than compensate him for the loss of Maryland and Kentucky, will elect him, and leave Fillmore no chance in the H. R. or out of it. This is as plain as the adding up of the weights of three small hogs. As Mr. Fillmore has no possible chance to carry Illinois for himself, it is plainly his interest to let Fremont take it, and then keep it out of the hands of Buchanan. Be not deceived. Buchanan is the hard horse to beat in this race. Let him have Illinois, and nothing can beat him; and he will get Illinois, if men persist in throwing away votes upon Mr. Fillmore. Does some one persuade you that Mr. Fillmore can carry Illinois ? Nonsense ! There are over seventy newspapers in Illinois opposing Buchanan, only three or four of which support Mr. Fillmore, see the rest going for Fremont. Are not these newspapers a fair index of the proportion of the voters ? If not, tell me why. Again, if these three or four Fillmore newspapers, two at least, are supported, in part, by the Buchanan men, as I understand, do not they know where the shoe pinches ^ They know the Fillmore movement helps them, and therefore they help it. Do think these things over, and then act according to your judgment. Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. AUTOBIOGRAPHY, 1858 67 AUTOBIOGRAPHY, COMPILED FOR THE "DICTIONARY OF CONGRESS," JUNE, 1858 Born, February 12, 1809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. Education defective. Profession, a lawyer. Have been a captain of volunteers in Black Hawk war. Postmaster at a very small office. Four times a member of the Illinois Legislature, and was a member of the lower house of Congress. Yours, etc., A. Lincoln. SPEECH ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE, JUNE 16, 1858. — THE "HOUSE DIVIDED'* SPEECH The introductory paragraph suggests the exordium to Webster's Reply to Hayne, deHvered in the Senate of the United States in 1832, and familiar to every schoolboy in the North : "When the mariner has been tossed for many days in thick weather, and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails himself of the first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his lati- tude, and ascertain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. Let us imitate this prudence, and before we float farther . . . refer to the point from which we departed, that we may at least be able to conjecture where we now are." This speech, contrary to Lincoln's custom, was read from manuscript. Mr. Horace White, then a reporter and political correspondent for the Chicago Press and Tribune, says of it: Mr. Lincoln "said to me he had taken a great deal of pains with the speech and that he wanted it to go before the people just as he had prepared it. He added that some of his friends had scolded him a good deal about the opening paragraph and 'the house divided against itself and wanted him to change it or leave it out altogether, but that he believed he had studied this subject more deeply than they had, and that he was going to stick to that text whatever happened." Douglas seized upon the proposition that the Union would cease to be divided and would "become all one thing or all the other" as a declaration of war against slavery as a constitutional institution, and the expression of his hope that 68 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 the house, admittedly divided against itself, could not stand, and pressed the charge of disloyalty upon Lincoln throughout the debating campaign, notably at Chicago on June 9, 1858, where he accused Lincoln of advocating a war of the sections; see Lincoln's reply, at Bloomington, on July 16, 1858, at Jonesboro, on September 15, 1858, and at Galesburg, on October 7, 1858. See also Lincoln's rejoinder at Quincy (p. 98). Lincoln's prophecy was fulfilled in the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment at the conclusion of the Civil War on December 18, 1865. The charge which Lincoln makes in this speech, that Douglas had con- spired with Chief Justice Taney and the two Presidents, Pierce and Buchanan, to use the Dred Scott decision (rendered on March 6, 1857, see U. S. Supreme Court Reports, 19 How. 393) for the political advantage of the Demo- cratic party, employs one of Lincoln's best illustrations (see p. 73), the figure of "a lot of framed timbers" which "exactly make the frame of a house, all the tenons and mortises exactly fitting, . . . not a piece too many or too few. ... In such a case, we find it impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James all understood one another from the beginning." The speech was delivered in the evening of June 16, 1858, at Springfield, before the Republican state convention, which earlier in the. same day had adopted a resolution declaring "that Abraham Lincoln is the first and only choice of the Republicans of Illinois for the United States Senate as the successor of Stephen A. Douglas." If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object and confident promise of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has con- stantly augmented. In my opinion it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. *' A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the op- ponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction ; or its advocates will THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 69 push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the states, old as well as new, North as well as South. Have we no tendency to the latter condition ? Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost com- plete legal combination — piece of machinery, so to speak — compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott decision. Let him consider not only what work the machin- ery is adapted to do, and how well adapted ; but also let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidences of design and concert of action among its chief architects from the begin- ning. The new year of 1854 found slavery excluded from more than half the states by state constitutions, and from most of the national territory by congressional prohibition. Four days later commenced the struggle which ended in repealing that congressional prohibition. This opened all the national territory to slavery, and was the first point gained. But so far, Congress only had acted; and an indorsement by the people, real or apparent, was indispensable to save the point already gained and give chance for more. This necessity had not been overlooked, but had been provided for, as well as might be, in the notable argument of Squatter Sovereignty, otherwise called sacred right of self- government, which latter phrase, though expressive of the only rightful basis of any government, was so perverted in this attempted use of it, as to amount to just this : That if any one man choose to enslave another, no third man shall be allowed to object. That argument was incorporated into the Nebraska bill itself, in the language which follows : "It being the true intent and meaning of this act, not to legislate slavery into any territory or state, nor to exclude it therefrom ; but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." Then opened the roar of loose declamation in favor of 70 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 Squatter Sovereignty and sacred right of self-government. "But," said opposition members, "let us amend the bill so as to expressly declare that the people of the territory may exclude slavery." "Not we," said the friends of the measure, and down they voted the amendment. While the Nebraska bill was passing through Congress, a law case, involving the question of a negro's freedom, by reason of his owner having voluntarily taken him first into a free state and then into a territory covered by the congressional prohibition, and held him as a slave for a long time in each, was passing through the United States Circuit Court for the District of Missouri ; and both Nebraska bill and lawsuit were brought to a decision, in the same month of May, 1854. The negro's name was Dred Scott, which name now designates the decision finally made in the case. Before the then next presidential election, the law case came to, and was argued in, the Supreme Court of the United States ; but the decision of it was deferred until after the election. Still, before the election, Senator Trum- bull, on the floor of the Senate, requested the leading advo- cate of the Nebraska bill to state his opinion whether the people of a territory can constitutionally exclude slavery from their limits, and the latter answers : "That is a question for the Supreme Court." The election came. Mr. Buchanan was elected, and the indorsement, such as it was, secured. That was the second point gained. The indorsement, however, fell short of a clear popular majority by nearly four hundred thousand votes, and so, perhaps, was not overwhelmingly reliable and satisfactory. The outgoing President, in his last annual message, as impressively as possible echoed back upon the people the weight and authority of the indorse- ment. The Supreme Court met again ; did not announce their decision, but ordered a reargument. The presidential inauguration came, and still no decision of the Court ; but the incoming President in his inaugural address fervently THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 7 1 exhorted the people to abide by the forthcoming decision, whatever it might be. Then, in a few days, came the decision. The reputed author of the Nebraska bill finds an early occasion to make a speech at this capital, indorsing the Dred Scott decision, and vehemently denouncing all oppo- sition to it. The new President, too, seizes the early occa- sion of the Silliman letter to indorse and strongly construe that decision, and to express his astonishment that any different view had ever been entertained ! At length a squabble springs up between the President and the author of the Nebraska bill, on the mere question of fact whether the Lecompton constitution was, or was not, in any just sense, made by the people of Kansas; and in that quarrel, the latter declares that all he wants is a fair vote for the people, and that he cares not whether slavery be voted down or voted up. I do not understand his decla- ration that he cares not whether slavery be voted down or voted up, to be intended by him other than as an apt defi- nition of the policy he would impress upon the public mind — the principle for which he declares he has suffered so much, and is ready to suffer to the end. And well may he cling to that principle. If he has any parental feeling, well may he cling to it. That principle is the only shred left of his original Nebraska doctrine. Under the Dred Scott decision, "squatter sovereignty" squatted out of existence, tumbled down like temporary scaffolding — like the mold at the foun- dry, served through one blast, and fell back into loose sand, — helped to carry an election, and then was kicked to the winds. His late joint struggle with the Republicans against the Lecompton constitution, involves nothing of the original Nebraska doctrine. That struggle was made on a point — the right of the people to make their own constitution — upon which he and the Republicans have never differed. The several points of the Dred Scott decision in connec- tion with Senator Douglas's "care not" policy, constitute 72 THE ''HOUSE DIFIDED" SPEECH, 1858 the piece of machinery in its present state of advancement. This was the third point gained. The working points of that machinery are : First. That no negro slave, imported as such from Africa, and no descendant of such slave, can ever be a citizen of any state, in the sense of that term as used in the Constitution of the United States. This point is made in order to deprive the negro, in every possible event, of the benefit of that provision of the United States Constitution which declares that "citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privi- leges and immunities of citizens in the several States." , Secondly. That ''subject to the Constitution of the .j United States," neither Congress nor a territorial legislature can exclude slavery from any United States territory. This point is made in order that individual men may fill up the territories with slaves, without danger of losing them as property, and thus enhance the chances of permanency to the institution through all the future. Thirdly. That whether the holding a negro in actual slavery in a free state makes him free as against the holder, the United States Courts will not decide, but will leave to be decided by the courts of any slave state the negro may be forced into by the master. This point is made, not to be pressed immediately, but if acquiesced in for a while, and apparently indorsed by the people at an election, then to sustain the logical conclusion that what Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott in the free state of Illi- nois, every other master may lawfully do, with any other one, or one thousand slaves in Illinois, or in any other free state. Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the Nebraska doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and mold public opinion, at least Northern public opinion, not to care whether slavery is voted down or voted up. This shows exactly where we now are, and partially, also, whither we are tending. It will throw additional light on the latter, to go back, THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 J 2, and run the mind over the string of historical facts already stated. Several things will now appear less dark and mys- terious than they did when they were transpiring. The peo- ple were to be left ''perfectly free," "subject only to the Constitution." What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders could not then see. Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche for the Dred Scott decision to after- ward come in, and declare the perfect freedom of the people to be just no freedom at all. Why was the amendment expressly declaring the right of the people voted down ? Plainly enough now, the adoption of it would have spoiled the niche for the Dred Scott decision. Why was the Court decision held up ^ Why even a senator's individual opinion withheld till after the presidential election 1 Plainly enough now, the speaking out then would have damaged the "per- fectly free " argument upon which the election was to be carried. Why the outgoing President's felicitation on the indorsement ? Why the delay of a reargument ? Why the incoming President's advance exhortation in favor of the decision ? These things look like the cautious patting and petting of a spirited horse, preparatory to mounting him, when it is dreaded that he may give the rider a fall. And why the hasty after-indorsement of the decision by the President and others ? We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adapta- tions are the result of preconcert. But when we see aTot of framed timbers, different portions of which we know have been gotten out at different times and places, and by differ- ent workmen, — Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James,^ for instance, — and we see these timbers joined together, and see they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons and mortises exactly fitting, and all the lengths and proportions of the different pieces exactly adapted ^ Stephen A. Douglas, senator from Illinois; Franklin Pierce, Ex-Presi- dent of the United States; Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the United States; and James Buchanan, President of the United States. 74 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 to their respective places, and not a piece too many or too few, not omitting even scaffolding — or if a single piece be lacking, we see the place in the frame exactly fitted and prepared yet to bring such piece in — in such a case, we find it impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James all understood one another from the beginning, and all worked upon a common plan or draft, drawn up before the first blow was struck. It should not be overlooked that by the Nebraska bill the people of a state as well as territory were to be left *' perfectly free,'' "subject only to the Constitution." Why mention a state ? They were legislating for territories, and not for or about states. Certainly the people of a state are and ought to be subject to the Constitution of the United States ; but why is mention of this lugged into this merely territorial law ^ Why are the people of a territory and the people of a state therein lumped together, and their relation to the Constitution therein treated as being precisely the same ? While the opinion of the Court by Chief Justice Taney, in the Dred Scott case, and the separate opinions of all the concurring judges, expressly declare that the Consti- tution of the United States neither permits Congress nor a territorial legislature to exclude slavery from any United States territory, they all omit to declare whether or not the same Constitution permits a state or the people of a state to exclude it. Possibly this is a mere omission ; but who can be quite sure if McLean or Curtis had sought to get into the opinion a declaration of unlimited power in the people of a state to exclude slavery from their limits, just as Chase and Mace sought to get such declaration in behalf of the people of a territory, into the Nebraska bill — I ask, who can be quite sure that it would not have been voted down in the one case as it had been in the other .? The nearest approach to the point of declaring the power of a state over slavery is made by Judge Nelson. He ap- proaches it more than once, using the precise idea, and almost THE "HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 75 the language too, of the Nebraska act. On one occasion his exact language is ''except in cases where the power is re- strained by the Constitution of the United States, the law of the state is supreme over the subject of slavery within its jurisdiction." In what cases the power of the state is so restrained by the United States Constitution is left an open question, precisely as the same question, as to the restraint on the power of the territories, was left open in the Nebraska act. Put this and that together, and we have another nice little niche, which we may, ere long, see filled with another Supreme Court decision, declaring that the Constitution of the United States does not permit a state to exclude slavery from its limits. And this may especially be expected if the doctrine of "care not whether slavery be voted down or voted up" shall gain upon the public mind sufficiently to give promise that such a decision can be maintained when made. • Such a decision is all that slavery now lacks of being alike lawful in all the states. Welcome or unwelcome, such decision is probably coming, and will soon be upon us, unless the power of the present political dynasty shall be met and overthrown. We shall lie down, pleasantly dreaming that the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their state free, and we shall awake to the reality instead, that the Supreme Court has made Illinois a slave state. To meet and overthrow the power of that dynasty is the work now before all those who would prevent that consummation. That is what we have to do. How can we best do it .? There are those who denounce us openly to their own friends, and yet whisper us softly that Senator Douglas is the aptest instrument there is with which to effect that object. They wish us to infer all from the fact that he now has a little quarrel with the present head of the dynasty, and that he has regularly voted with us on a single point, upon which he and we have never differed. They remind us that he is a great man and that the largest of us are very 76 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED" SPEECH, 1858 small ones. Let this be granted. But "a living dog is better than a dead lion." Judge Douglas, if not a dead lion, for this work, is at least a caged and toothless one. How can he oppose the advances of slavery .? He don't care anything about it. His avowed mission is impressing the "public heart" to care nothing about it. A leading Douglas Democratic newspaper thinks Douglas's superior talent will be needed to resist the revival of the African slave trade. Does Douglas believe an effort to revive that trade is approaching ? He has not said so. Does he really think so t But if it is, how can he resist it ^. For years he has labored to prove it a sacred right of white men to take negro slaves into the new territories. Can he possibly show that it is a less sacred right to buy them where they can be bought cheapest ? And unquestionably they can be bought cheaper in Africa than in Virginia. He has done all in his power to reduce the whole question of slavery to one of a mere right of property ; and, as such, how can he; oppose the foreign slave trade ? How can he refuse that trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free," unless he does it as a protection to home production ? And as the home producers will probably not ask the protection, he will be wholly without a ground of opposition. Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may right- fully be wiser to-day than he was yesterday — that he may rightfully change when he finds himself wrong. But can we, for that reason, run ahead, and infer that he will make any particular change, of which he himself has given no intimation ? Can we safely base our action upon any such vague inference .? Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent Judge Douglas's position, question his motives, or do aught that can be personally offensive to him. Whenever, if ever, he and we can come together on principle, so that our great cause may have assistance from his great ability, I hope to have inter- posed no adventitious obstacle. But, clearly, he is not now SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 yj with us — he does not pretend to be — he does not promise ever to be. Our cause, then, must be intrusted to, and conducted by, its own undoubted friends — those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the work, who do care for the result. Two years ago the RepubHcans of the nation mustered over thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under the single impulse of resistance to a common danger, with every external circumstance against us. Of strange, discordant, and even hostile elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the battle through, under the con- stant hot lire of a disciplined, proud, and pampered enemy. Did we brave all then to falter now } — now, when that same enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent ? The result is not doubtful. We shall not fail — if we stand firm, we shall not fail. Wise counsels may accelerate or mistakes delay it, but sooner or later the victory is sure to come. FROM A SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, JULY 17, 1858 In this speech, only a third of which is here reproduced, Lincoln is answer- ing one which he had heard Senator Douglas make at Bloomington on the day before. On this same day, Douglas had attacked Lincoln's "House Divided" doctrine, had accused Lincoln of seeking to destroy the powers of the states by consolidating all the power in the national government, and had charged him with disputing the authorit}^ of the Supreme Court of the United States, and then tried to smooth things over by calling Lincoln "an eminent lawyer" and a "kind-hearted, amiable, good-natured gentleman, with whom no man has a right to pick a quarrel," and to whom "there is no objection, except the monstrous revolutionary doctrines with which he is identified, and which he conscientiously entertains and is determined to carry out if he gets the power." Lincoln's reply presents the various difficul- ties which must be overcome by those who would defeat Senator Douglas's reelection, — an unfair legislative apportionment, a number of Douglas sup- porters chosen in 1856 and still holding seats in the new legislature, and finally the prominent place held by Douglas as his party's probable choice for the presidency in i860. Following this presentation of the inequality of the contest he restates his attitude toward the Dred Scott decision — not 78 SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 as a rule of law applicable to a single lawsuit, but as a rule of political conduct, indulges in a little friendly ridicule of the senator to keep his audience in good spirits, and concludes with a clear and convincing declaration of his contention regarding negro equality, that "in the right to put into his mouth the bread that his own hands have earned," the negro "is the equal of every other man, white or black." The description of Douglas's "round, jolly, fruitful face," bursting and sprouting with "post offices, land offices, marshalships, and cabinet appointments, chargeships and foreign missions," is a characteristic instance of Lincoln's lighter and more playful manner in debate. The challenge to Douglas to a series of joint public debates was sent by Lincoln just a week later, and its acceptance gave Lincoln the opportunity for which he so much wished of presenting his views on slavery to the Demo- cratic voters, . . . There is still another disadvantage under which we labor, and to which I will ask your attention. It arises out of the relative positions of the two persons who stand before the state as candidates for the Senate. Senator Doug- las is of world-wide renown. All the anxious politicians of his party, or who have been of his party for years past, have been looking upon him as certainly, at no distant day, to be the President of the United States. They have seen, in his round, jolly, fruitful face, post offices, land offices, marshalships, and cabinet appointments, chargeships and foreign missions, bursting and sprouting out in wonderful exuberance, ready to be laid hold of by their greedy hands. And as they have been gazing upon this attractive picture so long, they cannot, in the little distraction that has taken place in the party, bring themselves to give up the charming hope. But with greedier anxiety they rush about him, sustain him, and give him marches, triumphal entries, and receptions, beyond what, even in the days of his highest prosperity, they could have brought about in his favor. On the contrary, nobody has ever expected me to be President. In my poor, lean, lank face, nobody has ever seen that any cabbages were sprouting out. These are dis- advantages, all taken together, that the Republicans labor under. We have to fight this battle upon principle, and upon SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 79 principle alone. I am in a certain sense made the standard- bearer in behalf of the Republicans. I was made so merely because there had to be some one so placed, I being in no wise preferable to any other one of the twenty-five, perhaps a hundred, we have in the Republican ranks. Then I say, I wish it to be distinctly understood and borne in mind, that we have to fight this battle without many — perhaps without any — of the external aids which are brought to bear against us. So I hope those with whom I am surrounded have principle enough to nerve themselves for the task, and leave nothing undone that can be fairly done to bring about the right result. . . . Now, as to the Dred Scott decision ; for upon that he makes his last point at me. He boldly takes ground in favor of that decision. This is one half the onslaught, and one third of the entire plan of the campaign. I am opposed to that decision in a certain sense, but not in the sense which he puts on it. I say that in so far as it decided in favor of Dred Scott's master, and against Dred Scott and his family, I do not propose to disturb or resist the decision. I never have proposed to do any such thing. I think that in respect for judicial authority my humble history would not suffer in comparison with that of Judge Douglas. He would have the citizen conform his vote to that decision; the member of Congress, his ; the President, his use of the veto power. He would make it a rule of political action for the people and all the departments of the government. I would not. By resisting it as a political rule, I disturb no right of property, create no disorder, excite no mobs. . . . One more thing. Last night Judge Douglas tormented himself with horrors about my disposition to make negroes perfectly equal with white men in social and polit- ical relations. He did not stop to show that I have said any such thing, or that it legitimately follows from anything I have said, but he rushes on with his assertions. I adhere to the Declaration of Independence. If Judge Douglas and his 8o SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 friends are not willing to stand by it, let them come up and amend it. Let them make it read that all men are created equal except negroes. Let us have it decided whether the Declaration of Independence, in this blessed year of 1858, shall be thus amended. In his construction of the Declara- tion last year, he said it only meant that Americans in America were equal to Englishmen in England. Then, when I pointed out to him that by that rule he excludes the Germans, the Irish, the Portuguese, and all the other people who have come amongst us since the Revolution, he reconstructs his construction. In his last speech he tells us it meant Europeans. I press him a little further, and ask if it meant to include the Russians in Asia .? or does it mean to exclude that vast population from the principles of our Declaration of Independence } I expect ere long he will introduce another amendment to his definition. He is not at all particular. He is satisfied with anything which does not endanger the nationalizing of negro slavery. It may draw white men down, but it must not lift negroes up. Who shall say, *'I am the superior and you are the inferior .^" My declarations upon this subject of negro slavery may be misrepresented, but cannot be misunderstood. I have caid that I do not understand the Declaration to mean that all men were created equal in all respects. They are not our equal in color; but I suppose that it does mean to declare that all men are equal in some respects ; they are equal in their right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Cer- tainly the negro is not our equal in color — perhaps not in many other respects ; still, in the right to put into his mouth the bread that his own hands have earned, he is the equal of every other man, white or black. In pointing out that more has been given you, you cannot be justified in taking away the little which has been given him. All I ask for the negro is that if you do not like him, let him alone. If God gave him but little, that little let him enjoy. QUINCY SPEECH 8 1 When our government was established, we had the insti- tution of slavery among us. We were in a certain sense com- pelled to tolerate its existence. It was a sort of necessity. We had gone through our struggle, and secured our own independence. The fr^mers of the Constitution found the institution of slavery amongst their other institutions at the time. They found that by an effort to eradicate it, they might lose much of what they had already gained. They were obliged to bow to the necessity. They gave power to Congress to abolish the slave trade at the end of twenty years. They also prohibited slavery in the territories where it did not exist. They did what they could and yielded to necessity for the rest. I also yield to all which follows from that necessity. What I w^ould most desire would be the sep- aration of the white and black races FROM THE DEBATE WITH STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS; SPEECHES DELIVERED AT QUINCY, OCTOBER 13, 1858 The Quincy debate was the sixth of the great series. Senator Douglas had accepted Lincoln's challenge, and a debate was held during the campaign, in each of the seven congressional districts in Illinois; namely, at Ottawa, Freeport, Jonesboro, Charleston, Galesburg, Quincy, and Alton. From the beginning, Douglas's prominence in national politics had drawn the attention of the entire country to the contest. As the series progressed and Lincoln demonstrated, much to the world's surprise, that he was Douglas's equal, the interest became intense. Lincoln was practically unknown outside of Illi- nois, while Douglas was the most conspicuous figure then in public life. A proper study of the discussion requires an understanding of the history of the time, and particularly of the political effect of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise and of the Dred Scott decision. The South had begun to believe that the constitutional rights of the slave states and the slave owners were in danger, and the North had awakened to the necessity of preventing the introduction of slavery into the national territories and the legalizing of slavery in the new states. The difficulties which Lincoln was confronting cannot be realized without reading Douglas's brilliant speeches, for the Democratic senator had no superior as a debater. He had gifts of oratory which Lincoln never possessed, an assurance that nothing could abash, a rich, resonant voice, great grace and LINCOLN — 6 82 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 ease of expression, and a genius for debate which enabled him to take every advantage in pressing his argument, whether strictly legitimate or not. With these gifts Douglas had enormous personal popularity, and all the prestige of a lifelong series of personal and political successes. His fame as an orator was such that Lincoln's supporters dreaded the meeting; the most sanguine among them entertained little hope of their leader's success. Lincoln's deprecatory manner was not a pose. He realized that as compared with his distinguished opponent he was an obscure and an untried man. The Quincy debate is given here rather than one of the others because it shows best Lincoln's talent as a debater. There is here less of the dignity of the orator, it is true, and less literary distinction in the speaker's form of expression; but better than the others this debate makes it possible for the reader to realize the occasion, for it has much of Lincoln's characteristic wit and humor, and it contains many passages which prove Lincoln's readiness in repartee and retort. Thus, there is something winning in the opening sentence of his rejoinder: "Since Judge Douglas has said to you in his conclusion that he had not time in an hour and a half to answer all I had said in an hour, it follows, of course, that I will not be able to answer in half an hour all that he said in an hour and a half." There is no better illus- tration of Lincoln's humor in any of his formal speeches than when he charges Douglas with having diluted his Popular Sovereignty doctrine until it is "as thin as the homoeopathic soup that was made by boiling the shadow of a pigeon that had starved to death." It was after the Ottawa debate that Lincoln wrote to a friend : " Douglas and I, for the first time this canvass, crossed swords here yesterday; the fire flew some, and I am glad to know I am yet alive. There was a vast concourse of people — more than could get near enough to hear." The crowd at the Quincy meeting numbered from twelve to fifteen thou- sand, and included hundreds from Iowa and Missouri. The party feeling was so strong that it is not possible to learn the truth from the newspapers of the time as to the efi^ect of these speeches. The net result, however, was the election of Douglas to the United States Senate, the alienation of the southern wing of the Democratic party from Douglas, which until then had been friendly to him, and the conviction which grew from that time forward throughout the North that Abraham Lincoln had the qualities of leadership which made him the logical candidate of the Re- publican party for the presidency in i860. Lincoln's loss of the senatorship in this campaign was a disappointment, but it did not embitter him. "I am glad I made the late race," he wrote a friend. "It gave me a hearing on the great and durable question of the age, which I could have had in no other way; and though I now sink out of view and shall be forgotten, I believe I have made some marks which will tell for the cause of civil liberty long after I am gone." QUINCY SPEECH 83 Ladies and Gentlemen : I have had no immediate con- ference with Judge Douglas, but I will venture to say that he and I will perfectly agree that your entire silence, both when I speak and when he speaks, will be most agreeable to us. In the month of May, 1856, the elements in the state of Illinois, which have since consolidated into the Repub- lican party, assembled together in a state convention at Bloomington. They adopted at that time what, in political language, is called a platform. In June of the same year the elements of the Republican party in the nation assembled together in a national convention at Philadelphia. They adopted what is called the national platform. In June, 1858, — the present year, — the Republicans of Illinois reassembled at Springfield in state convention, and adopted again their platform, as I suppose not differing in any essen- tial particular from either of the former ones, but perhaps adding something in relation to the new developments of political progress in the country. The convention that assembled in June last did me the honor, if it be one, and I esteem it such, to nominate me as their candidate for the United States Senate. I have sup- posed that, in entering upon this canvass, I stood generally upon these platforms. We are now met together on the 13th of October of the same year, only four months from the adoption of the last platform, and I am unaware that in this canvass, from the beginning until to-day, any one of our adversaries has taken hold of our platforms, or laid his finger upon anything that he calls wrong in them. In the very first one of these joint discussions between Senator Douglas and myself, Senator Douglas, without alluding at all to these platforms, or any one of them, of which I have spoken, attempted to hold me responsible for a set of resolutions passed long before the meeting of either one of these conventions of which I have spoken. And as a ground for holding me responsible for these resolutions, he assumed that they had been passed at a state convention of 84 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 the Republican party, and that I took part in that con- vention. It was discovered afterward that this was erro- neous, that the resolutions which he endeavored to hold me responsible for had not been passed by any state convention anywhere, — had not been passed at Springfield, where he supposed they had, or assumed that they had ; and that they had been passed in no convention in which I had taken part. The judge, nevertheless, was not willing to give up the point that he was endeavoring to make upon me, and he therefore thought to still hold me to the point that he was endeavoring to make, by showing that the resolutions that he read had been passed at a local convention in the northern part of the state, although it was not a local convention that embraced my residence at all, nor one that reached, as I suppose, nearer than one hundred and fifty or two hundred miles of where I was when it met, nor one in which I took any part at all. He also introduced other resolutions, passed at other meetings, and by combining the whole, although they were all antecedent to the two state conventions and the one national convention I have mentioned, still he insisted, and now insists, as I understand, that I am in some way responsible for them. At Jonesboro, on our third meeting, I insisted to the judge that I was in no way rightfully held responsible for the pro- ceedings of this local meeting or convention, in which I had taken no part, and in which I was in no way embraced ; but I insisted to him that if he thought I was responsible for every man or every set of men everywhere, who happen to be my friends, the rule ought to work both ways, and he ought to be responsible for the acts and resolutions of all men or sets of men who were or are now his supporters and friends ["Good, good"]; and gave him a pretty long string of resolutions, passed by men who are now his friends, and announcing doctrines for which he does not desire to be held responsible. QUINCY SPEECH 85 This still does not satisfy Judge Douglas. He still adheres to his proposition, that I am responsible for what some of my friends in different parts of the state have done, but that he is not responsible for what his have done. At least, so I understand him. But in addition to that, the judge, at our meeting in Galesburg, last week, undertakes to establish that I am guilty of a species of double dealing with the pub- lic ; that I make speeches of a certain sort in the North, among the Abolitionists, which I would not make in the South, and that I make speeches of a certain sort in the South which I would not make in the North. I apprehend, in the course I have marked out for myself, that I shall not have to dwell at very great length upon this subject. As this was done in the judge's opening speech at Gales- burg, I had an opportunity, as I had the middle speech then, of saying something in answer to it. He brought forward a quotation or two from a speech of mine delivered at Chicago, and then, to contrast with it, he brought forward an extract from a speech of mine at Charleston, in which he insisted that I was greatly inconsistent, and insisted, that his conclu- sion followed, that I was playing a double part, and speak- ing in one region one way, and in another region another way. I have not time now to dwell on this as long as I would like, and wish only now to requote that portion of my speech at Charleston which the judge quoted, and then make some comments upon it. This he quotes from me as being deliv- ered at Charleston, and I believe correctly : — I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races ; that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say, in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must 86 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. ["Good, good," and loud cheers.] This, I believe, is the entire quotation from the Charleston speech, as Judge Douglas made it. His comments are as follows : — Yes, here you find men who hurrah for Lincoln, and say he is right when he discards all distinction between races, or when he declares that he discards the doctrine that there is such a thing as a superior and inferior race ; and Abolitionists are required and expected to vote for Mr, Lincoln because he goes for the equality of races, holding that in the Declaration of Independence the white man and negro were declared equal, and endowed by divine law with equality. And down South, the old-line Whigs, with the Kentuckians, the Virginians, and the Tennesseeans, he tells you that there is a physical difference between the races, making the one the superior, the other inferior, and he is in favor of maintain- ing the superiority of the white race over the negro. Those are the Judge's comments. Nov^, I Wish to show you that a month, or only lacking three days of a month, before I made the speech at Charleston, which the Judge quotes from, he had himself heard me say substantially the same thing. It was in our first meeting at Ottawa — and I will say a word about where it was, and the atmosphere it was in, after awhile — but at our first meeting, at Ottawa, I read an extract from an old speech of mine, made nearly four years ago, not merely to show my sentiments, but to show that my sentiments were long entertained and openly expressed ; in which extract I expressly declared that my own feelings would not admit a social and political equality be- tween the white and black races, and that even if my own feel- ings would admit of it, I still knew that the public sentiment of the country would not, and that such a thing was an utter impossibility, or substantially that. That extract from my old speech the reporters, by some sort of accident, passed QUINCY SPEECH 87 over, and it was not reported. I lay no blame upon anybody. I suppose they thought that I would hand it over to them, and dropped reporting while I was reading it, but afterward went away without getting it from me. At the end of that quotation from my old speech, which I read at Ottawa, I made the comments which were reported at that time, and which I will now read, and ask you to notice how very nearly they are the same as Judge Douglas says were deliv- ered by me, down in Egypt. After reading, I added these words : — Now, gentlemen, I don't want to read at any greater length ; but this is the true complexion of all I have ever said in regard to the institution of slavery or the black race, and this is the whole of it : anything that argues me into his idea of perfect social and political equality with the negro, is but a specious and fantastical arrangement of words by which a man can prove a horse-chestnut to be a chestnut horse. I will say here, while upon the subject, that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together on the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. [Cheers; "That's the doctrine."] I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstand- ing all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Inde- pendence, — the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas that he is not my equal in many respects, certainly not in color, perhaps not in intellectual and moral endow- ments ; but in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of any- body else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal, and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. 88 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 I have chiefly introduced this for the purpose of meeting the judge's charge that the quotation he took from my Charleston speech was what I would say down South among the Kentuckians, the Virginians, etc., but would not say in the regions in which was supposed to be more of the Aboli- tion element. I now make this comment : That speech from which I have now read the quotation, and which is there given correctly — perhaps too much so for good taste — was made away up North in the Abolition district of this state par. excellence, in the Lovejoy district, — in the personal presence of Lovejoy, for he was on the stand with us when I made it. It had been made and put in print in that region only three days less than a month before the speech made at Charleston, the like of which Judge Douglas thinks I would not make where there was any abolition element. I only refer to this matter to say that I am altogether uncon- scious of having attempted any double-dealing anywhere, that upon one occasion I may say one thing, and leave other things unsaid, and vice versa; but that I have said anything on one occasion that is inconsistent with what I have said elsewhere, I deny, — at least I deny it so far as the intention is concerned. I find that I have devoted to this topic a larger portion of my time than I had intended. I wished to show, but I will pass it upon this occasion, that in the sen- timent I have occasionally advanced upon the Declaration of Independence, I am entirely borne out by the sentiments of our old Whig leader, Henry Clay, and I have the book here to show it from ; but because I have already occupied more time than I intended to do on that topic, I pass over it. At Galesburg I tried to show that by the Dred Scott deci- sion, pushed to its legitimate consequences, slavery would be established in all the states as well as in the territories. I did this because, upon a former occasion, I had asked Judge Douglas whether, if the Supreme Court should make a decision declaring that the states had not the power to exclude slavery from their limits, he would adopt and follow QUINCY SPEECH 89 that decision as a rule of political action ; and because he had not directly answered that question, but had merely con- tented himself with sneering at it, I again introduced it, and tried to show that the conclusion that I stated followed inevitably and logically from the proposition already decided by the court. Judge Douglas had the privilege of replying to me at Galesburg, and again he gave me no direct answer as to whether he would or would not sustain such a decision if made. I give him his third chance to say yes or no. He is not obliged to do either, — probably he will not do either [Laughter] ; but I give him the third chance. I tried to show then that this result, this conclusion, inevitably fol- lowed from the point already decided by the court. The judge, in his reply, again sneers at the thought of the court making any such decision, and in the course of his remarks upon this subject uses the language which I will now read. Speaking of me, the judge says : "He goes on and insists that the Dred Scott decision would carry slavery into the free states, notwithstanding the decision itself says the con- trary." And he adds: "Mr. Lincoln knows that there is no member of the Supreme Court that holds that doctrine. He knows that every one of them in their opinions held the reverse." I especially introduce this subject again, for the purpose of saying that I have the Dred Scott decision here, and I will thank Judge Douglas to lay his finger upon the place in the entire opinions of the court where any one of them "says the contrary." It is very hard to affirm a negative with entire confidence. I say, however, that I have examined that decision with a good deal of care, as a lawyer examines a decision, and, so far as I have been able to do so, the court has nowhere in its opinions said that the states have the power to exclude slavery, nor have they used other language substantially that. I also say, so far as I can find, not one of the concurring judges has said that the states can exclude slavery, nor said anything that was substantially that. 90 DEBATE fFITII DOUGLAS, 1858 The nearest approach that any one of them has made to it, so far as I can find, was by Judge Nelson, and the approach he made to it was exactly, in substance, the Nebraska bill, — - that the states had the exclusive power over the question of slavery, so far as they are not limited by the Constitution of the United States. I asked the question, therefore, if the non-concurring judges, McLean or Curtis, had asked to get an express declaration that the states could absolutely exclude slavery from their limits, what reason have we to believe that it would not have been voted down by the majority of the judges, just as Chase's amendment^was voted down by Judge Douglas and his compeers when it was offered to the Nebraska bill. [Cheers.] Also, at Galesburg, I said something in regard to those Springfield resolutions that Judge Douglas had attempted to use upon me at Ottawa, and commented at some length upon the fact that they were, as presented, not genuine. Judge Douglas in his reply to me seemed to be somewhat exasperated. He said he never would have believed that Abraham Lincoln, as he kindly called me, would have attempted such a thing as I had attempted upon that occa- sion ; and among other expressions which he used toward me, was that I dared to say forgery, — that I had dared to say forgery [turning to Judge Douglas]. Yes, Judge, I did dare to say forgery. [Loud applause.] But in this political canvass, the judge ought to remember that I was not the first who dared to say forgery. At Jacksonville, Judge Douglas made a speech in answer to something said by Judge Trumbull, and at the close of what he said upon that subject, he dared to say that Trumbull had forged his evidence. He said, too, that he should not concern himself with Trumbull any more, but thereafter he should hold Lincoln responsible for the slanders upon him. [Laughter.] When I met him at Charleston after that, although I think that I should not have noticed the subject if he had not said he would hold me responsible for it, I spread out before QUINCY SPEECH 91 him the statements of the evidence that Judge Trumbull had used, and I asked Judge Douglas, piece by piece to put his finger upon one piece of all that evidence that he would say was a forgery. When I went through with each and every piece, Judge Douglas did not dare then to say that any piece of it was forgery. [Laughter and cries of " Good, good."] So it seems that there are some things that Judge Douglas dares to do, and some that he dares not to do. [Great applause and laughter.] [A Voice : It's the same thing with you.] Yes, sir, it's the same thing with me. I do dare to say forgery when it's true, and don't dare to say forgery when it's false. [Thunders of applause. Cries of "Hit him again. Give it to him, Lincoln."] Now I will say here to this audience and to Judge Douglas, I have not dared to say he committed a forgery, and I never shall until I know it; but I did dare to say — just to suggest to the judge — that a forgery had been committed, which by his own show- ing had been traced to him and two of his friends. [Roars of laughter and loud cheers.] I dared to suggest to him that he had expressly promised in one of his public speeches to investigate that matter, and I dared to suggest to him that there was an implied promise that when he investigated it he would make known the result. I dared to suggest to the judge that he could not expect to be quite clear of sus- picion of that fraud, for since the time that promise was made he had been with those friends, and had not kept his promise in regard to the investigation and the report upon it. [Loud laughter. Cries of "Hit him hard"; "Good, good."] I am not a very daring man [Laughter], but I dared that much, Judge, and I am not much scared about it yet. [Uproarious laughter and applause.] When the judge says he wouldn't have believed of Abraham Lincoln that he would have made such an attempt as that, he reminds me of the fact that he entered upon this canvass with the purpose to treat me courteously. That touched me 92 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 somewhat. [Great laughter.] It set me to thinking. I was aware, when it was first agreed that Judge Douglas and I were to have these seven joint discussions, that they were the successive acts of a drama, — perhaps I should say, to be enacted not merely in the face of audiences like this, but in the face of the nation, and to some extent, by my relation to him, and not from anything in myself, in the face of the world ; and I am anxious that they should be conducted with dignity and in the good temper which would be befitting the vast audience before which it was conducted. But when Judge Douglas got home from Washington and made his first speech in Chicago, the evening afterward I made some sort of a reply to it. His second speech was made at Bloomington, in which he commented upon my speech at Chicago, and said that I had used language in- geniously contrived to conceal my intentions, — or words to that effect. Now, I understand that this is an imputation upon my veracity and my candor. I do not know what the judge understood by it, but in our first discussion, at Ottawa, he led off by charging a bargain, somewhat corrupt in its character, upon Trumbull and myself, — that we had entered into a bargain, one of the terms of which was that Trumbull was to Abolitionize the old Democratic party, and I (Lincoln) was to Abolitionize the old Whig party ; I pretending to be as good an old-line Whig as ever. Judge Douglas may not understand that he implicated my truth- fulness and my honor when he said I was doing one thing and pretending another; and I misunderstood him if he thought he was treating me in a dignified way, as a man of honor and truth, as he now claims he was disposed to treat me. Even after that time, at Galesburg, when he brings forward an extract from a speech made at Chicago, and an extract from a speech made at Charleston, to prove that I was trying to play a double part, — that I was trying to cheat the public, and get votes upon one set of principles OUINCY SPEECH 93 at one place, and upon another set of principles at another place, — I do not understand but what he impeaches my honor, my veracity, and my candor; and because he does this, I do not understand that I am bound, if I see a truth- ful ground for it, to keep my hands off of him. As soon as I learned that Judge Douglas was disposed to treat me in this way, I signified in one of my speeches that I should be driven to draw upon whatever of humble resources I might have, — to adopt a new course with him. I was not entirely sure that I should be able to hold my own with him, but I at least had the purpose made to do as well as I could upon him; and now I say that I will not be the first to cry "hold." I think it originated with the judge, and when he quits, I probably will. [Roars of laughter.] But I shall not ask any favors at all. He asks me, or he asks the audience, if I wish to push this matter to the point of personal difficulty. I tell him, no. He did not make a mistake, in one of his early speeches, when he called me an "amiable" man, though perhaps he did when he called me an "intelligent" man. [Laughter.] It really hurts me very much to suppose that I have wronged anybody on earth. I again tell him, no ! I very much prefer, when this canvass shall be over, however it may result, that we at least part without any bitter recollections of personal difficulties. The judge, in his concluding speech at Galesburg, says that I was pushing this matter to a personal difficulty, to avoid the responsibility for the enormity of my principles. I say to the judge and this audience, now, that I will again state our principles as well as I hastily can, in all their enormity, and if the judge hereafter chooses to confine himself to a war upon these principles, he will probably not find me departing from the same course. We have in this nation this element of domestic slavery. It is a matter of absolute certainty that it is a disturbing element. It is the opinion of all the great men who have 94 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 expressed an opinion upon it, that it is a dangerous element. We keep up a controversy in regard to it. That controversy necessarily springs from difference of opinion ; and if we can learn exactly — can reduce to the lowest elements — what that difference of opinion is, we perhaps shall be better prepared for discussing the different systems of policy that we would propose in regard to that disturbing element. I suggest that the difference of opinion, reduced to its lowest terms, is no other than the difference between the men who think slavery a wrong, and those who do not think it wrong. The Republican party think it wrong; we think it is a moral, a social, and a political wrong. We think it is a wrong not confining itself merely to the persons or the states where it exists, but that it is a wrong in its tendency, to say the least, that extends itself to the existence of the whole nation. Because we think it wrong, we propose a course of policy that shall deal with it as a wrong. We deal with it as with any other wrong, in so far as we can prevent its growing any larger, and so deal with it that in the run of time there may be some promise of an end to it. We have a due regard to the actual presence of it amongst us, and the difficulties of getting rid of it in any satisfactory way, and all the constitutional obligations thrown about it. I suppose that in reference both to its actual existence in the nation, and to our constitutional obligations, we have no right at all to disturb it in the states where it exists, and we profess that we have no more inclination to disturb it than we have the right to do it. We go further than that; we don't propose to disturb it where, in one instance, we think the Constitution would permit us. We think the * Constitution would permit us to disturb it in the District of Columbia. Still, we do not propose to do that, unless it should be in terms which I don't suppose the nation is very likely soon to agree to, — the terms of making the eman- cipation gradual, and compensating the unwilling owners. Where we suppose we have the constitutional right, we QUINCY SPEECH 95 restrain ourselves in reference to the actual existence of the institution and the difficulties thrown about it. We also oppose it as an evil so far as it seeks to spread itself. We insist on the policy that shall restrict it to its present limits. We don't suppose that in doing this we violate anything due to the actual presence of the institution, or anything due to the constitutional guarantees thrown around it. We oppose the Dred Scott decision in a certain way, upon which I ought perhaps to address you a few words. We do not propose that when Dred Scott has been decided to be a slave by that court, we, as a mob, will decide him to be free. We do not propose that, when any other one, or one thousand, shall be decided by the court to be slaves, we will in any violent way disturb the rights of property thus settled : but we nevertheless do oppose that decision as a political rule which shall be binding on the voter to vote for nobody who thinks it wrong : which shall be binding on the members of Congress or the President to favor no measure that does not actually concur with the principles of that decision. We do not propose to be bound by it as a political rule in that way because we think it lays the foundation, not merely of enlarging and spreading out what we consider an evil, but it lays the foundation for spreading that evil into the states themselves. We propose so resisting it as to have it reversed if we can, and a new judicial rule estab- lished upon this subject. I will add this, that if there be any man who does not believe that slavery is v/rong in the three aspects which I have mentioned, or in any one of them, that man is mis- placed, and ought to leave us. While, on the other hand, if there be any man in the Republican party who is impatient over the necessity springing from its actual presence, and is impatient of the constitutional guarantees thrown around it, and would act in disregard of these, he too is misplaced, standing with us. He will find his place somewhere else ; for we have a due regard, so far as we are capable of under- 96 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 standing them, for all these things. This, gentlemen, as well as I can give it, is a plain statement of our principles in all their enormity. I will say now that there is a sentiment in the country contrary to me, — a sentiment which holds that slavery is not wrong, and therefore it goes for the policy that does not propose dealing with it as a wrong. That policy is the Democratic policy, and that sentiment is the Democratic sentiment. If there be a doubt in the mind of any one of this vast audience that this is really the central idea of the Democratic party, in relation to the subject, I ask him to bear with me while I state a few things tending, as I think, to prove that proposition. In the first place, the leading man -^ I think I may do my friend Judge Douglas the honor of calling him such — • advocating the present Democratic policy, never himself says it is wrong. He has the high distinction, so far as I know, of never having said slavery is either right or wrong. [Laughter.] Almost everybody else says one or the other, but the judge never does. If there be a man in the Demo- cratic party who thinks it is wrong, and yet clings to that party, I suggest to him, in the first place, that his leader don't talk as he does, for he never says that it is wrong. In the second place, I suggest to him that if he will examine the policy proposed to be carried forward, he will find that he carefully excludes the idea that there is anything wrong in it. If you will examine the arguments that are made on it, you will find that every one carefully excludes the idea that there is anything wrong in slavery. Perhaps that Democrat who says he is as much opposed to slavery as I am, will tell me that I am wrong about this. I wish him to examine his own course in regard to this matter a moment, and then see if his opinion will not be changed a little. You say it is wrong ; but don't you constantly object to anybody else saying so 1 Do you not constantly argue that this is not the right place to oppose it .? You say it QUINCY SPEECH 97 must not be opposed in the free states, because slavery is not here; it must not be opposed in the slave states, because it is there; it must not be opposed in politics, because that will make a fuss ; it must not be opposed in the pulpit, because it is not religion. [Loud cheers.] Then where is the place to oppose it ^. There is no suitable place to oppose it. There is no plan in the country to oppose this evil overspreading the continent, which you say yourself is coming. Frank Blair and Gratz Brown tried to get up a system of gradual emancipation in Missouri, had an election in August, and got beat, and you, Mr. Democrat, threw up your hat, and hallooed " Hurrah for Democracy ! " [En- thusiastic cheers.] So I say, again, that in regard to the arguments that are made, when Judge Douglas says he "don't care whether slavery is voted up or voted down," whether he means that as an individual expression of sentiment, or only as a sort of statement of his views on national policy, it is alike true to say that he can thus argue logically if he don't see any- thing wrong in it ; but he cannot say so logically if he admits that slavery is wrong. He cannot say that he would as soon see a wrong voted up as voted dov/n. When Judge Douglas says that whoever or whatever community wants slaves, they have a right to have them, he is perfectly logical, if there is nothing wrong in the institu- tion ; but if you admit that it is wrong, he cannot logically say that anybody has a right to do wrong. When he says that slave property and horse and hog property are alike to be allowed to go into the territories, upon the principles of equality, he is reasoning truly, if there is no difference between them as property; but if the one is property held rightfully, and the other is wrong, then there is no equality between the right and wrong ; so that, turn it in any way you can, in all the arguments sustaining the Democratic policy, and in that policy itself, there is a careful, studied exclusion of the idea that there is anything wrong in slavery. LINCOLN — 7 98 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 Let us understand this. I am not, just here, trying to prove that we are right, and they are wrong. I have been stating where we and they stand, and trying to show what is the real difference between us ; and I now say that when- ever we can get the question distinctly stated, can get all these men who believe that slavery is in some of these respects wrong, to stand and act with us in treating it as a wrong, — then, and not till then, I think we will in some way come to an end of this slavery agitation. [Prolonged cheers.] At this point Senator Douglas took the stand and spoke for an hour and a half in answer to Lincoln's foregoing speech. MR. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER AT QUINCY On resuming the stand, Mr. Lincoln was greeted with a tremendous cheer. He said : My Friends : Since Judge Douglas has said to you in his conclusion that he had not time in an hour and a half to answer all I had said in an hour, it follows of course that I will not be able to answer in half an hour all that he said in an hour and a half. [Cheers and laughter.] I wish to return to Judge Douglas my profound thanks for his public annunciation here to-day, to be put on record, that his system of policy in regard to the institution of slavery contemplates that it shall last forever. [Great cheers, and cries of " Hit him again."] We are getting a little nearer the true issue of this controversy, and I am profoundly grateful for this one sentence. Judge Douglas asks you, "Why cannot the institution of slavery, or rather, why cannot the nation, part slave and part free [Applause, and "That's so."], continue as our fathers made it, forever?" In the first place, I insist that our fathers did not make this nation half slave and half free, or part slave and part free. [Applause, and "That's so."] I insist that they found the REJOINDER AT QUINCY 99 institution of slavery existing here. They did not make it so, but they left it so because they knew of no way to get rid of it at that time. ["Good, good." "That's true."] When Judge Douglas undertakes to say that, as a matter of choice, the fathers of the government made this nation part slave and part free, he assumes what is historically a falsehood. [Long continued applause.] More than that : when the fathers of the government cut off the source of slavery by the abolition of the slave trade, and adopted a system of restricting it from the new territories where it had not existed, I maintain that they placed it where they under- stood, and all sensible men understood, it was in the course of ultimate extinction ["That's so."]; and when Judge Douglas asks me why it cannot continue as our fathers made it, I ask him why he and his friends could not let it remain as our fathers made it ? [Tremendous cheering.] It is precisely all I ask of him in relation to the institution of slavery, that it shall be placed upon the basis that our fathers placed it upon. Mr. Brooks, of South Carolina, once said, and truly said, that when this government was estab- lished no one expected the institution of slavery to last until this day, and that the men who formed this government were wiser and better than the men of these days ; but the men of these days had experience which the fathers had not, and that experience had taught them the invention of the cotton gin, and this had made the perpetuation of the insti- tution of slavery a necessity in this country. Judge Douglas could not let it stand upon the basis where our fathers placed it, but removed it, and put it upon the cotton-gin basis. [Roars of laughter and enthusiastic applause.] It is a question, therefore, for him and his friends to answer, why they could not let it remain where the fathers of the government origi- nally placed it. [Cheers and cries of "Hurrah for Lincoln"; "Good"; "Good."] I hope nobody has understood me as trying to sustain the lOO DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 doctrine that we have a right to quarrel with Kentucky, or Virginia, or any of the slave states, about the institution of slavery, — thus giving the judge an opportunity to make himself eloquent and valiant against us in fighting for their rights. I expressly declared in my opening speech that I had neither the inclination to exercise, nor the belief in the existence of, the right to interfere with the states of Ken- tucky or Virginia in doing as they pleased with slavery or any other existing institution. [Loud applause.] Then what becomes of all his eloquence in behalf of the rights of the states, which are assailed by no living man ^ [Applause ; "He knows it's all humbuggery."] But I have to hurry on, for I have but a half hour. The judge has informed me, or informed this audience, that the Washington Union is laboring for my election to the United States Senate. [Cheers and laughter.] This is news to me, — not very ungrateful news either. [Turning to Mr. W. H. Carlin, who was on the stand] — I hope that Carlin will be elected to the state senate, and will vote for me. [Mr. Carlin shook his head.] Carlin don't fall in, I perceive, and I suppose he will not do much for me ; [Laughter] but I am glad of all the support I can get anywhere, if I can get it without practicing any deception to obtain it. In respect to this large portion of Judge Douglas's speech in which he tries to show that in the controversy between himself and the administration party he is in the right, I do not feel myself at all competent or inclined to answer him. I say to him, "Give it to them, [Laughter] — give it to them just all you can" ; [Renewed laughter and cheers] and, on the other hand, I say to Carlin, and Jake Davis, and to this man Wogley up here in Hancock, "Give it to Douglas [Roars of laughter], — just pour it into him." [Cheers and laughter; " Good for you " ; " Hurrah for Lincoln."] Now in regard to this matter of the Dred Scott decision, I wish to say a word or two. After all, the judge will not say whether, if a decision is made holding that the people REJOINDER AT QUINCY lOl of the states cannot exclude slavery, he will support it or not. He obstinately refuses to say what he will do in that case. The judges of the Supreme Court as obstinately refused to say what they would do on this subject. Before this I reminded him that at Galesburg he said the judges had expressly declared the contrary, and you remember that in my opening speech I told him I had the book containing that decision here, and I would thank him to lay his finger on the place where any such thing was said. He has occupied his hour and a half, and he has not ventured to try to sustain his assertion. [Loud cheers.] He never will. [Renewed cheers.] But he is desirous of knowing how we are going to reverse the Dred Scott decision. Judge Douglas ought to know how. Did not he and his political friends find a way to reverse the decision of that same court in favor of the constitutionality of the National Bank ? [Cheers and laughter.] Didn't they find a way to do it so effectually that they have reversed it as completely as any decision ever was reversed, so far as its practical operation is concerned ^. [Cheers, and cries of "Good"; "Good."] And let me ask you, didn't Judge Douglas find a way to reverse the decision of our Supreme Court v/hen it decided that Carlin's father — old Governor Carlin — had not the constitutional power to remove a Secretary of State .? [Great cheers and laughter.] Did he not appeal to the "mobs," as he calls them ? Did he not make speeches in the lobby to show how villainous that decision was, and how it ought to be overthrown ? Did he not succeed, too, in getting an act passed by the legislature to have it overthrown ? And didn't he himself sit down on that bench as one of the five added judges, who were to over- slaugh the four old ones, — getting his name of "judge" in that w^ay, and no other .? [Thundering cheers and laugh- ter.] If there is a villainy in using disrespect or making opposition to Supreme Court decisions, I commend it to Judge Douglas's earnest consideration. [Cheers and laugh- 102 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 ter.] I know of no man in the state of Illinois who ought to know so well about hoiu much villainy it takes to oppose a decision of the Supreme Court as our honorable friend Stephen A. Douglas. [Long continued applause.] Let me talk to some gentleman down there among you who looks me in the face. We will say you are a member of the territorial legislature, and, like Judge Douglas, you believe that the right to take and hold slaves there is a con- stitutional right. The first thing you do is to swear you will support the Constitution and all rights guaranteed therein ; that you will, whenever your neighbor needs your legislation to support his constitutional rights, not withhold that legislation. If you withhold that necessary legisla- tion for the support of the Constitution and constitutional rights, do you not commit perjury ? [Cries of "Yes."] I ask every sensible man if that is not so ? ["Yes" ; "Yes" ; "That's a fact."] That is undoubtedly just so, say what you please. Now, that is precisely what Judge Douglas says, that this is a constitutional right. Does the judge mean to say that the territorial legislature in legislating may, by withholding necessary laws, or by passing unfriendly laws, nullify that constitutional right ? Does he mean to say that } Does he mean to ignore the proposition so long and well established in law, that what you cannot do directly, you cannot do indirectly } Does he mean that ? The truth about the matter is this : Judge Douglas has sung paeans to his "popular sovereignty" doctrine until his Supreme Court, cooperating with him, has squatted his squatter sovereignty out. [Uproarious laughter and ap- plause.] But he will keep up this species of humbuggery about squatter sovereignty. He has at last invented this sort of do-nothing sovereignty, [Renewed laughter] — that the people may exclude slavery by a sort of "sovereignty" that is exercised by doing nothing at all. [Continued REJOINDER AT QUINCY 103 laughter.] Is not that running his popular sovereignty down awfully ? [Laughter.] Has it not got down as thin as the homoeopathic soup that was made by boiling the shadow of a pigeon that had starved to death .f* [Roars of laughter and cheering.] But at last when it is brought to the test of close reasoning, there is not even that thin decoc- tion of it left. It is a presumption impossible in the domain of thought. It is precisely no other than the putting of that most unphilosophical proposition, that two bodies can occupy the same space at the same time. The Dred Scott decision covers the whole ground, and while it occupies it, there is no room even for the shadow of a starved pigeon to occupy the same ground. [Loud cheers and laughter. A voice on the platform — ''Your time is almost out." Loud cries of "Go on, go on " ; "We'll listen all day."] When I sometimes, in relation to the organization of new societies in new countries, where the soil is clean and clear, insist that we should keep that principle in view, Judge Douglas will have it that I want a negro wife. [Great laughter.] He never can be brought to understand that there is any middle ground on this subject. I have lived until my fiftieth year, and have never had a negro woman either for a slave or a wife, and I think I can live fifty centuries, for that matter, without having had one for either. [Cheers and laughter.] I maintain that you may take Judge Doug- las's quotations from my Chicago speech, and from my Charleston speech, and the Galesburg speech, — in his speech of to-day, — and compare them over, and I am willing to trust them with you upon his proposition that they show rascality or double-dealing. I deny that they do. [Great applause.] I am told that I still have five minutes left. There is another matter I wish to call attention to. He says, when 104 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 he discovered there was a mistake in that case, he came forward magnanimously, without my calHng his attention to it, and explained it. I will tell you how he became so magnanimous. When the newspapers of our side had dis- covered and published it, and put it beyond his power to deny it, then he came forward and made a virtue of ne- cessity by acknowledging it. [Great applause.] Now he argues that all the point there was in those resolutions, although never passed at Springfield, is retained by their being passed at other localities. Is that true .? He said I had a hand in passing them, in his opening speech, — that I was in the convention and helped to pass them. Do the resolutions touch me at all .? It strikes me there is some difference between holding a man responsible for an act which he has not done and holding him responsible for an act that he has done. Yqu will judge whether there is any difference in the "spots." [Laughter and cheers.] And he has taken credit for great magnanimity in coming forward and acknowl- edging what is proved on him beyond even the capacity of Judge Douglas to deny; and he has more capacity in that way than any other living man. [Laughter and cheers.] Then he wants to know why I won't withdraw the charge in regard to a conspiracy to make slavery national, as he has withdrawn the one he made. May it please his worship, I will withdraw it zuhen it is proven false on me as that was proven false on him. [Shouts of applause and laughter.] I will add a little more than that. I will withdraw it when- ever a reasonable man shall be brought to believe that the charge is not true. [Renewed applause.] I have asked Judge Douglas's attention to certain matters of fact tending to prove the charge of a conspiracy to nation- alize slavery, and he S3.ys he convinces me that this is all untrue because Buchanan was not in the country at that time, and because the Dred Scott case had not then got into the Supreme Court ; and he says that I say the Democratic owners of Dred Scott got up the case. I never did say that. ALTON SPEECH ' . 1 05 [Applause.] I defy Judge Douglas to show that I ever said so, for I never uttered it. [One of Mr Douglas's reporters gesticulated affirmatively at Mr. Lincoln.] I don't care if your hireling does say I did, I tell you myself that / never said the ^'Democratic*' owners of Dred Scott got up the case. [Tremendous enthusiasm.] I have never pretended to know whether Dred Scott's owners were Democrats, or Aboli- tionists, or Free-soilers, or Border Ruffians. I have said that there is evidence about the case tending to show that it was a made-up case, for the purpose of getting that decision. I have said that that evidence was very strong in the fact that when Dred Scott was declared to be a slave, the owner of him made him free, showing that he had had the case tried and the question settled for such use as could be made of that decision ; he cared nothing about the property thus declared to be his by that decision. [Enthusiastic applause.] But my time is out and I can say no more. FROM THE SPEECH AT ALTON, ON OCTOBER 15, 1858; THE LAST OF THE FORMAL DEBATES WITH DOUGLAS The real issue between the two senatorial candidates in these debates is put in Lincoln's direct style near the conclusion of the Alton speech: "That is the real issue. That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles — right and wrong — throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time." . . . On this subject of treating it as a wrong and limiting its spread, let me say a word. Has anything ever threat- ened the existence of this Union save and except this very institution of slavery .? What is it that we hold most dear amongst us .? Our own liberty and prosperity. What has ever threatened our liberty and prosperity save and except this institution of slavery '^. If this is true, how do you pro- pose to improve the condition of things by enlarging slavery, Io6 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 — by spreading it out and making it bigger ? You may have a wen or a cancer upon your person, and not be able to cut it out lest you bleed to death ; but surely it is no way to cure it, to engraft it and spread it over your whole body. That is no proper way of treating what you regard a wrong. You see this peaceful way of dealing with it as a wrong, restricting the spread of it, and not allowing it to go into new countries where it has not already existed. That is the peaceful way, the old-fashioned way, the way in which the fathers themselves set us the example. On the other hand, I have said there is a sentiment which treats it as not being wrong. That is the Democratic senti- ment of this day. I do not mean to say that every man who stands within that range positively asserts that it is right. That class will include all who positively assert that it is right, and all who, like Judge Douglas, treat it as indifferent, and do not say it is either right or wrong. These two classes of men fall within the general class of those who do not look upon it as a wrong. And if there be among you anybody who supposes that he, as a Democrat, can consider himself *'as much opposed to slavery as anybody," I would like to reason with him. You never treat it as a wrong. What other thing that you consider a wrong do you deal with as you deal with that .? Perhaps you say it is wrong, but your leader never does, and you quarrel with anybody who says it is wrong. Although you pretend to say so yourself, you can find no fit place to deal with it as a wrong. You must not say anything about it in the free states, because it is not here. You must not say anything about it in the slave states, because it is there. You must not say anything about it in the pulpit, because that is religion, and has nothing to do with it. You must not say anything about it in politics, because that will disturb the security of "my place." There is no place to talk about it as being a wrong, although you say yourself it is wrong. But, finally, you will screw yourself up to the belief that if the people of the ALTON SPEECH 1 07 slave states should adopt a system of gradual emancipation on the slavery question, you would be in favor of it. You would be in favor of it ! You say that is getting it in the right place, and you would be glad to see it succeed. But you are deceiving yourself. You all know that Frank Blair and Gratz Brown, down there in St. Louis, undertook to introduce that system in Missouri. They fought as valiantly as they could for the system of gradual emancipa- tion, which you pretend you would be glad to see succeed. Now, I will bring you to the test. After a hard fight they were beaten ; and when the news came over here, you threw up your hats and hurrahed for Democracy ! More than that, take all the argument made in favor of the system you have proposed, and it carefully excludes the idea that there is anything wrong in the institution of slavery. The argu- ments to sustain that policy carefully exclude it. Even here to-day, you heard Judge Douglas quarrel with me, because I uttered a wish that it might sometime come to an end. Although Henry Clay could say he wished every slave in the United States was in the country of his ancestors, I am denounced by those pretending to respect Henry Clay, for uttering a wish that it might sometime, in some peaceful way, come to an end. The Democratic policy in regard to that institution will not tolerate the merest breath, the slightest hint, of the least degree of wrong about it. Try it by some of Judge Douglas's arguments. He says he ''don't care whether it is voted up or voted down in the territories." I do not care myself in dealing with that expression whether it is intended to be expressive of his individual sentiments on the subject or only of the national policy he desires to have established. It is alike valuable for my purpose. Any man can say that who does not see anything wrong in slavery, but no man can logically say it who does see a wrong in it, because no man can logically say he don't care whether a wrong is voted up or voted down. He may say he don't care whether lo8 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 an indifferent thing is voted up or down, but he must logi- cally have a choice between a right thing and a wrong thing. He contends that whatever community wants slaves has a right to have them. So they have if it is not a wrong. But if it is a wrong, he cannot say people have a right to do wrong. He says that, upon the score of equality, slaves should be allowed to go into a new territory like other prop- erty. This is strictly logical if there is no difference between it and other property. If it and other property are equal, « his argument is entirely logical. But if you insist that one is wrong and the other right, there is no use to institute a com- parison between right and wrong. You may turn over everything in the Democratic policy from beginning to end, j whether in the shape it takes on the statute book, in the shape it takes in the Dred Scott decision, in the shape it takes in conversation, or the shape it takes in short maxim-like arguments, it everywhere carefully excludes the idea that there is anything wrong in it. That is the real issue. That is the issue that will con- tinue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles — right and wrong — through- out the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity, and the other the "divine right of kings." It is the same prin- ciple in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same spirit that says, "You work and toil and earn bread, and I'll eat it." No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king, who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle. . . . Whenever the issue can be distinctly made, and all extraneous matter thrown out, so . that men can fairly see the real difference between the par- ties, this controversy will soon be settled, and it will be done LETTER TO J. T. THORNTON, 1858 109 peaceably, too. There will be no war, no violence. It will be placed again where the wisest and best men of the world placed it. LETTER TO JAMES T. THORNTON James T. Thornton was in politics, serving later through three sessions of the legislature as representative from Putnam County. Lincoln's ab- sences were due to the fact that he had a large trial practice and was trying cases in every part of Illinois and in other states. The significant phrase in the letter is " still keep reading." See letter to Isham Reavis (p. 64) ; also memorandum for Law Lecture (p. 50). Springfield, December 2, 1858. Dear Sir : Yours of the 29th written in behalf of Mr. John H. Widner, is received. I am absent altogether too much to be a suitable instructor for a law student. When a man has reached the age that Mr. Widner has, and has already been doing for himself, m_y judgment is, that he reads the books for himself without an instructor. That is pre- cisely the way I came to the law. Let Mr. Widner read Blackstone's Commentaries, Chitty's Pleadings, GreenleaPs Evidence, Story's Equity, and Story's Equity Pleadings, get a license, and go to the practice, and still keep reading. That is my judgment of the cheapest, quickest, and best way for Mr. Widner to make a lawyer of himself. Yours truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO THOMAS JOHNSON PICKETT The campaign of 1858 had interrupted Lincoln's law practice, had caused him heavy expense, and had left him poor. He tried to earn something by delivering an occasional lecture, but his unwillingness to make any ade- quate charge for his lectures deprived him of any substantial income from that source. It was proof of the honesty which the world was already no LETTER TO THOMAS J. PICKETT, 1859 recognizing a-s his strongest trait, that less than thirteen months before his nomination he should be able to say "I do not think myself fit for the presi- dency." Mr. Pickett was one of the first editors to propose Lincoln in the public press for president. He was a member of the anti-Nebraska editorial con- vention of 1856, which organized the Republican party in Illinois, and of the first Republican state committee. At the time this letter was written he was editing a paper at Rock Island, and was already urging Lincoln to be- come a candidate. He represented Putnam County in the state senate in 1861 and 1863. Springfield, April 16, 1859. My dear Sir: Yours of the 13th is just received. My engagements are such that I cannot at any very early day visit Rock Island to deliver a lecture, or for any other object. As to the other matter you kindly mention, I must in candor say I do not think myself fit for the presidency. I certainly am flattered and gratified that some partial friends think of me in that connection ; but I really think it best for our cause that no concerted effort, such as you suggest, should be made. Let this be considered confidential. Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. AUTOBIOGRAPHY WRITTEN FOR JESSE W. FELL December 20, 1859 I was born February 12,1 809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. My parents were both born in Virginia, of undistinguished families — second families, perhaps I should say. My mother, who died in my tenth year, was of a family of the name of Hanks, some of whom now reside in Adams, and others in Macon County, Illinois. My paternal grandfather, Abraham Lincoln, emigrated from Rockingham County, Virginia, to Kentucky about 1781 or 1782, where a year or two later he was killed by the Indians, not in battle, but by stealth, when he was laboring to open a farm in the forest. AUTOBIOGRAPHY, 1859 III His ancestors, who were Quakers, went to Virginia from Berks County, Pennsylvania. An effort to identify them with the New England family of the same name ended in nothing more definite than a similarity of Christian names in both families, such as Enoch, Levi, Mordecai, Solomon, Abraham, and the like. My father, at the death of his father, was but six years of age, and he grew up literally without education. He removed from Kentucky to what is now Spencer County, Indiana, in my eighth year. We reached our new home about the time the state came into the Union. It was a wild region, with many bears and other wild animals still in the woods. There I grew up. There were some schools, so called, but no qualification was ever required of a teacher beyond "readin', writin', and cipherin'" to the rule of three. If a straggler supposed to understand Latin happened to sojourn in the neighborhood, he was looked upon as a wizard. There was absolutely nothing to excite ambition for education. Of course, when I came of age I did not know much. Still, somehow, I could read, write, and cipher to the rule of three, .but that was all. I have not been to school since. The little advance I now have upon this store of education I have picked up from time to time under the pressure of necessity. I was raised to farm work, which I continued till I was twenty-two. At twenty-one I came to Illinois, Macon County. Then I got to New Salem, at that time in Sanga- mon, now in Menard, County, where I remained a year as a sort of clerk in a store. Then came the Black Hawk war, and I was elected a captain of volunteers, a success which gave me more pleasure than any I have had since. I went the campaign, was elated, ran for the legislature the same year (1832), and was beaten — the only time I ever have been beaten by the people. The next and three succeeding biennial elections I was elected to the legislature. I was not a candidate afterward. During 112 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 this legislative period I had studied law, and removed to Springfield to practice it. In 1846 I was once elected to the lower House of Congress. Was not a candidate for reelection. From 1849 to 1854, both inclusive, practiced law more assiduously than ever before. Always a Whig in politics; and generally on the Whig electoral tickets, making active canvasses. I was losing interest in politics when the repeal of the Missouri Compromise aroused me again. What I have done since then is pretty well known. If any personal description of me is thought desirable, it may be said I am, in height, six feet four inches, nearly; lean in flesh, weighing on an average one hundred and eighty pounds ; dark complexion, with coarse black hair and gray eyes. No other marks or brands recollected. SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, FEBRUARY 27, i860 This speech was in response to an invitation to deliver a lecture in New York. Realizing that he had not been successful as a lecturer, Lincoln was loath to accept, but finally consented on the condition that he be permitted to discuss the political situation. It was a great opportunity. Among the members of the Young Men's Republican Union which had the enterprise in charge were such men as William Cullen Bryant, Horace Greeley, and David Dudley Field. The audience, a vast one, included the most cultivated and intelligent men and women of the East. The address was a distinct success. The Tribune next morning said of it: "No man ever before made such an impression on his first appeal to a New York audience." It was this address which constituted Lincoln's real introduction to the Republicans of the East and made it possible a few months later to secure their consent to his nomination to the presidency. As the Gettys- burg oration is the most perfect work of Lincoln the orator, and the second inaugural is the most perfect work of Lincoln the prophet and the poet, the Cooper Institute speech is the best work of Lincoln the reasoner and scholar. The logic of the address is conclusive. He undertakes to prove that the men who framed the Constitution of the United States believed that human slavery was wrong and that the national government had power to exclude it from the national territory, and he proves it. In doing so he produces evidence of research which only a profound student of American constitu- tional history could have made. Besides furnishing out of a well-stored mind the proof of a lifelong study of a great public question, and besides ex- SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 II3 hibiting a literary style and oratorical quality of a high order, he shows reason- ing powers unsurpassed in the American forum. The climax of tKe speech is in the final sentence, one of Lincoln's best: "Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it." The speech was published by the Young Men's Republican Union as a campaign document, with an introduction from which we quote. "No one who has not actually attempted to verify its details can understand the patient research and historical labor which it embodies. The history of our earlier politics is scattered through numerous journals, statutes, pam- phlets, and letters; and these are defective in completeness and accuracy of statement, and in indices and tables of contents. Neither can any one who has not traveled over this precise ground appreciate the accuracy of every trivial detail, or the self-denying impartiality with which Mr. Lincoln has turned from the testimony of 'the fathers' on the general question of slavery to present the single question which he discusses. From the first line to the last — from his premises to his conclusion, he travels with a swift, unerring directness which no logician ever excelled — an argument complete and full, without the affectation of learning, and without the stifl^ness which usually accompanies dates and details. A single, easy, simple sentence of plain Anglo-Saxon words contains a chapter of history, that, in some instances, has taken days of labor to verify and which must have cost the author months of investigation to acquire." Joseph H. Choate has thus described his impressions of this occasion: "At first sight there was nothing impressive or imposing about him — ex- cept that his great stature singled him out from the crowd ; his clothes hung awkwardly on his giant frame; his face was of a dark pallor, without the slightest tinge of color; his seamed and rugged features bore the furrows of hardship and struggle; his deep-set eyes looked sad and anxious. . . . He was equal to the occasion. When he spoke he was transformed; his eye kindled, his voice rang, his face shone and seemed to light up the whole assembly. For an hour and a half he held his audience in the hollow of his hand. His style of speech and manner of delivery were severely simple." Mr. President and Fellow Citizens of New York: The facts with which I shall deal this evening are mainly old and familiar; nor is there anything new in the general use I shall make of them. If there shall be any novelty, it will be in the mode of presenting the facts, and the infer- ences and observations following that presentation. In his speech last autumn at Columbus, Ohio, as reported in the New York Times, Senator Douglas said : LINCOLN — 8 114 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 Our fathers, when they framed the government under which we live, understood this question just as well, and even better, than we do now. I fully indorse this, and I adopt it as a text for this dis- course. I so adopt it because it furnishes a precise and an agreed starting point for a discussion between Republicans and that wing of the Democracy headed by Senator Douglas. It simply leaves the inquiry : What was the understanding those fathers had of the question mentioned ^ What is the frame of government under which we live ^. The answer must be, "The Constitution of the United States." That Constitution consists of the original, framed in 1787, and under which the present government first went into operation, and twelve subsequently framed amendments, the first ten of which were framed in 1789. Who were our fathers that framed the Constitution ? I suppose the "thirty-nine" who signed the original instru- ment may be fairly called our fathers who framed that part of the present government. It is almost exactly true to say they framed it, and it is altogether true to say they fairly represented the opinion and sentiment of the whole nation at that time. Their names, being familiar to nearly all, and accessible to quite all, need not now be repeated. I take these "thirty-nine," for the present, as being "our fathers who framed the government under which we live." What is the question which, according to the text, those fathers understood "just as w^ell, and even better, than we do now ?" It is this : Does the proper division of local from federal authority, or anything in the Constitution, forbid our federal government to control as to slavery in our federal territories ? Upon this. Senator Douglas holds the affirmative, and Republicans the negative. This affirmation and denial form an issue ; and this issue — this question — is precisely what the text declares our fathers understood " better than we." Let us now inquire whether the "thirty-nine," or any of them, ever acted upon this question ; and if they did, how SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 15 they acted upon it — how they expressed that better under- standing. In 1784, three years before the Constitution, the United States then owning the Northwestern Territory, and no other, the Congress of the Confederation had before them the question of prohibiting slavery in that territory; and four of the "thirty-nine" who afterward framed the Con- stitution were in that Congress and voted on that question. Of these, Roger Sherman, Thomas Mifflin, and Hugh WilHamson voted for the prohibition, thus showing that, in their understanding, no Hne dividing local from federal authority, nor anything else, properly forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in federal territory. The other of the four, James McHenry, voted against the prohibition, showing that for some cause he thought it im- proper to vote for it. In 1787, still before the Constitution, but while the con- vention was in session framing it, and while the Northwestern Territory still was the only territory owned by the United States, the same question of _ prohibiting slavery in the territory again came before the Congress of the Confedera- tion ; and two more of the "thirty-nine" who afterward signed the Constitution were in that Congress, and voted on the question. They were William Blount and William Few; and they both voted for the prohibition — thus showing that in their understanding no line dividing local from federal authorit}^, nor anything else, properly forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in federal territory. This time the prohibition became a law, being part of what is now well known as the ordinance of '87. The question of federal control of slavery in the territories seems not to have been directly before the convention which framed the original Constitution ; and hence it is not re- corded that the "thirty-nine," or any of them, while engaged on that instrument, expressed any opinion on that precise question. In 1789, by the first Congress which sat under the Con- Il6 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 stitution, an act was passed to enforce the ordinance of '87, including the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern Territory. The bill for this act was reported by one of the "thirty-nine" — Thomas Fitzsimmons, then a member of the House of Representatives from Pennsylvania. It went through all its stages without a word of opposition, and finally passed both branches without ayes and nays, which is equivalent to a unanimous passage. In this Congress there were sixteen of the thirty-nine fathers who framed the original Constitution. They were John Langdon, Nicholas Oilman, Wm. S. Johnson, Roger Sherman, Robert Morris, Thos. Fitzsimmons, William Few, Abraham Baldwin, Rufus King, William Paterson, George Clymer, Richard Bassett, George Read, Pierce Butler, Daniel Carroll, and James Madison. This shows that, in their understanding, no line dividing local from federal authority, nor anything in the Constitution, properly forbade Congress to prohibit slavery in the federal territory ; else both their fidelity to correct principle, and their oath to support the Constitution, would have con- strained them to oppose the prohibition. Again, George Washington, another of the '* thirty-nine," was then President of the United States and as such approved and signed the bill, thus completing its validity as a law, and thus showing that, in his understanding, no line dividing local from federalauthority, nor anything in the Constitution, forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in federal territory. No great while after the adoption of the original Constitu- tion, North Carolina ceded to the federal government the country now constituting the state of Tennessee ; and a few years later Georgia ceded that which now constitutes the states of Mississippi and Alabama. In both deeds of cession it was made a condition by the ceding states that the federal government should not prohibit slavery in the ceded country. Besides this, slavery was then actually in the ceded country. SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 117 Under these circumstances, Congress, on taking charge of these countries, did not absolutely prohibit slavery within them. But they did interfere with it — take control of it — even there, to a certain extent. In 1798 Congress organized the territory of Mississippi. In the act of organiza- . tion they prohibited the bringing of slaves into the territory from any place without the United States, by fine, and giving freedom to slaves so bought. This act passed both branches of Congress without yeas and nays. In that Congress were three of the "thirty-nine" who framed the original Con- stitution. They were John Langdon, George Read, and Abraham Baldwin. They all probably voted for it. Cer- tainly they would have placed their opposition to it upon record if, in their understanding, any line dividing local from federal authority, or anything in the Constitution, properly forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in federal territory. In 1803 the federal government purchased the Louisiana country. Our former territorial acquisitions came from certain of our own states; but this Louisiana country was acquired from a foreign nation. In 1804 Congress gave a territorial organization to that part of it which now con- stitutes the state of Louisiana. New Orleans, lying within that part, was an old and comparatively large city. There were other considerable towns and settlements, and slavery was extensively and thoroughly intermingled with the people. Congress did not, in the Territorial Act, prohibit slavery ; but they did interfere with it — take control of it — in a more marked and extensive way than they did in the case of Mississippi. The substance of the provision therein made in relation to slaves was : 1st. That no slave should be imported into the territory from foreign parts. 2d. That no slave should be carried into it who had been imported into the United States since the first day of May, 1798. Il8 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 3d. That no slave should be carried into it, except by the owner, and for his own use as a settler; the penalty in all the cases being a fine upon the violator of the law, and freedom ; to the slave. This act also was passed without ayes or nays. In the Congress which passed it there were two of the "thirty-nine." They were Abraham Baldwin and Jonathan Dayton. As stated in the case of Mississippi, it is probable they both voted for it. They would not have allowed it to pass without recording their opposition to it if, in their understanding, it violated either the line properly dividing local from federal authority, or any provision of the Constitution. In 1819-1820 came and passed the Missouri question. Many votes were taken, by yeas and nays, in both branches of Congress, upon the various phases of the general question. Two of the "thirty-nine" — Rufus King and Charles Pinckney — were members of that Congress. Mr. King steadily voted for slavery prohibition and against all com- promises, while Mr. Pinckney as steadily voted against slavery prohibition and against all compromises. By this, Mr. King showed that, in his understanding, no line dividing local from federal authority, nor anything in the Constitu- tion, was violated by Congress prohibiting slavery in federal territory; while Mr. Pinckney, by his votes, showed that, in his understanding, there was some sufficient reason for opposing such prohibition in that case. The cases I have mentioned are the only acts of the "thirty- nine," or of any of them, upon the direct issue, which I have been able to discover. * To enumerate the persons who thus acted as being four in 1784, two in 1787, seventeen in 1789, three in 1798, two in 1804, and two in 18 19-1820, there would be thirty of them. \ But this would be counting John Langdon, Roger Sherman, William Few, Rufus King, and George Read each twice, and Abraham Baldwin three times. The true number of those of the "thirty-nine" whom I have shown to have acted SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 19 upon the question which, by the text, they understood better than we, is twenty-three, leaving sixteen not shown to have acted upon it in any way. Here, then, we have twenty-three out of our thirty-nine fathers "who framed the government under which we Hve," who have, upon their official responsibility and their corporal oaths, acted upon the verj^ question which the text affirms they "understood just as well, and even better, than we do now" ; and twenty-one of them — a clear majority of the whole "thirty-nine" — so acting upon it as to make them guilty of gross political impropriety and willful perjury if, in their understanding, any proper division between local and federal authority, or anything in the Constitution they had made themselves, and sworn to support, forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in the federal territories. Thus the twenty-one acted ; and, as actions speak louder than words, so actions under such responsibility speak still louder. Two of the twenty-three voted against congressional prohibition of slavery in the federal territories, in the in- stances in which they acted upon the question. But for what reasons they so voted is not known. They may have done so because they thought a proper division of local from federal authority, or some provision or principle of the Constitution, stood in the way, or they may, without any such question, have voted against the prohibition on what appeared to them to be sufficient grounds of expediency. No one who has sworn to support the Constitution can con- scientiously vote for what he understands to be an uncon- stitutional measure, however expedient he may think it; but one may and ought to vote against a measure which he deems constitutional if, at the same time, he deems it inex- pedient. It, therefore, would be unsafe to set down even the two who voted against the prohibition as having done so because, in their understanding, any proper division of local from federal authority, or anything in the Constitution, for- I20 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 bade the federal government to control as to slavery in ■ federal territory. The remaining sixteen of the ''thirty- nine," so far as I have discovered, have left no record of their understanding upon the direct question of federal control of slavery in the federal territories. But there is much reason to believe that their understanding upon that question would not have appeared different from that of their twenty-three compeers, had it been manifested at all. For the purpose of adhering rigidly to the text, I have purposely omitted whatever understanding may have been manifested by any person, however distinguished, other than the thirty-nine fathers who framed the original Con- stitution ; and, for the same reason, I have also omitted whatever understanding may have been manifested by any of the "thirty-nine" even on any other phase of the general question of slavery. If we should look into their acts and declarations on those other phases, as the foreign slave trade, and the morality and policy of slavery generally, it would appear to us that on the direct question of federal control of slavery in federal territories, the sixteen, if they had acted at all, would probably have acted just as the twenty- three did. Among that sixteen were several of the most noted antislavery men of those times, — as Dr. Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and Gouverneur Morris, — while there was not one now known to have been otherwise, unless it may be John Rutledge, of South Carolina. The sum of the whole is that of our thirty-nine fathers who framed the original Constitution, twenty-one — a clear majority of the whole — certainly understood that no proper division of local from federal authority, nor any part of the Constitution, forbade the federal government to control slavery in the federal territories; while all the rest had probably the same understanding. Such, unquestionably, was the understanding of our fathers who framed the origi- nal Constitution ; and the text affirms that they understood the question ''better than we." I SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 121 But, so far, I have been considering the understanding of the question manifested by the framers of the original Constitution. In and by the original instrument, a mode was provided for amending it; and, as I have already stated, the present frame of ''the government under which we live" consists of that original, and twelve amendatory articles framed and adopted since. Those who now insist that federal control of slavery in federal territories violates the Constitution, point us to the provisions which they sup- pose it thus violates ; and, as I understand, they all fix upon provisions in these amendatory articles, and not in the origi- nal instrument. The Supreme Court, in the Dred Scott case, plant themselves upon the fifth amendment, which provides that no person shall be deprived of "life, liberty, or property without due process of law" ; while Senator Douglas and his peculiar adherents plant themselves upon the tenth amendment, providing that "the powders not delegated to the United States by the Constitution" "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." Now, it so happens that these amendments were framed by the first Congress which sat under the Constitution — the identical Congress which passed the act, already mentioned, enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern Territory. Not only was it the same Congress, but they were the identical, same individual men who, at the same session, and at the same time within the session, had under considera- tion, and in progress toward maturity, these constitutional amendments, and this act prohibiting slavery in all the territory the nation then owned. The constitutional amend- ments were introduced before, and passed after, the act enforcing the ordinance of '87; so that, during the whole pendency of the act to enforce the ordinance, the constitu- tional amendments vv^ere also pending. The seventy-six members of that Congress, including sixteen of the framers of the original Constitution, as before stated, were preeminently our fathers who framed that part 122 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 of ''the government under which we live" which is now claimed as forbidding the federal government to control slavery in the federal territories. Is it not a little presumptuous in any one at this day to affirm that the two things which that Congress deliberately framed, and carried to maturity at the same time, are abso- lutely inconsistent with each other ? And does not such affirmation become impudently absurd when coupled with the other affirmation, from the same mouth, that those who did the two things alleged to be inconsistent, understood whether they really were inconsistent better than we — better than he who affirms that they are inconsistent ? It is surely safe to assume that the thirty-nine framers of the original Constitution, and the seventy-six members of the Congress which framed the amendments thereto, taken together, do certainly include those who may be fairly called "our fathers who framed the government under which we live." And so assuming, I defy any man to show that any one of them ever, in his whole life, declared that, in his understanding, any proper division of local from federal authority, or any part of the Constitution, forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in the federal territories. I go a step further. I defy any one to show that any living man in the whole world ever did, prior to the beginning of the present century (and I might almost say prior to the beginning of the last half of the present century), declare that, in his understanding, any proper division of local from federal authority, or any part of the Constitution, forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in the federal territories. To those who now so declare I give not only "our fathers who framed the government under which we live," but with them all other living men within the cen- tury in which it was framed, among whom to search, and they shall not be able to find the evidence of a single man agreeing with them. Now, and here, let me guard a little against being mis- SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 23 understood. I do not mean to say we are bound to follow implicitly in whatever our fathers did. To do so, would be to discard all the lights of current experience — to reject all progress, all improvement. What I do say is, that if we would supplant the opinions and policy of our fathers in any case, we should do so upon evidence so conclusive, and argument so clear, that even their great authority, fairly considered and weighed, cannot stand ; and most surely not in a case whereof we ourselves declare they understood the question better than we. If any man at this day sincerely believes that a proper division of local from federal authority, or any part of the Constitution, forbids the federal government to control as to slavery in the federal territories, he is right to say so, and to enforce his position by all truthful evidence and fair argument which he can. But he has no right to mislead others who have less access to history, and less leisure to study it, into the false belief that "our fathers who framed the government under which we live" were of the same opinion — thus sub- stituting falsehood and deception for truthful evidence and fair argument. If any man at this day sincerely believes "our fathers who framed the government under which we live" used and applied principles, in other cases, which ought to have led them to understand that a proper division of local from federal authority, or some part of the Con- stitution, forbids the federal government to control as to slavery in the federal territories, he is right to say so. But he should, at the same time, brave the responsibility of declar- ing that, in his opinion, he understands their principles better than they did themselves; and especially should he not shirk that responsibility by asserting that they " understood the question just as well and even better than we do now. But enough ! Let all who believe that "our fathers who framed the government under which we live understood this question just as well, and even better than we do now," 124 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 speak as they spoke, and act as they acted upon it. This is all Republicans ask, all Republicans desire, in relation to slavery. As those fathers marked it, so let it be again marked, as an evil not to be extended, but to be tolerated and I protected only because of and so far as its actual presence J among us makes that toleration and protection a necessity. Let all the guaranties those fathers gave it be not grudg- ingly, but fully, and fairly maintained. For this Republi- cans contend, and with this, so far as I know or believe, they will be content. And now, if they would listen, — as I suppose they will not, — I would address a few words to the Southern people. I would say to them : You consider yourselves a reason- able and a just people; and I consider that in the general qualities of reason and justice you are not inferior to any other people. Still, when you speak of us Republicans, you do so only to denounce us as reptiles, or, at the best, as no better than outlaws. You will grant a hearing to pirates or murderers, but nothing Hke it to " Black Republicans." In all your contentions with one another, each of you deems an unconditional condemnation of "Black Republicanism" as the first thing to be attended to. Indeed, such condemna- tion of us seems to be an indispensable prerequisite — license, so to speak — among you to be admitted or permitted to speak at all. Now, can you or not be prevailed upon to pause and to consider whether this is quite just to us, or even to yourselves ? Bring forward your charges and specifica- tions, and then be patient long enough to hear us deny or justify. You say we are sectional. We deny it. That makes an issue; and the burden of proof is upon you. You produce your proof; and what is it ? Why, that our party has no existence in your section — gets no votes in your section. The fact is substantially true; but does it prove the issue ^ If it does, then, in case we should, without change of principle, begin to get votes in your section, we should thereby cease SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 25 to be sectional. You cannot escape this conclusion ; and yet, are you willing' to abide by it ? If you are, you will probably soon find that we have ceased to be sectional, for we shall get votes in your section this very year. You will then begin to discover, as the truth plainly is, that your proof does not touch the issue. The fact that we get no votes in your section is a fact of your making, and not of ours. And if there be fault in that fact, that fault is prima- rily yours, and remains so until you show that we repel you by some wrong principle or practice. If we do repel you by any wrong principle or practice, the fault is ours ; but this brings you to where you ought to have started — to a discussion of the right or wrong of our principle. If our principle, put in practice, would wrong your section for the benefit of ours, or for any other object, then our principle, and we with it, are sectional, and are justly opposed and denounced as such. Meet us, then, on the question of whether our principle, put in practice, would wrong your section; and so meet us as if it were possible that something may be said on our side. Do you accept the challenge ^ No ! Then you really believe that the principle which *'our fathers who framed the government under which we live" thought so clearly right as to adopt it, and indorse it again and again, upon their official oaths, is in fact so clearly wrong as to demand your condemnation without a moment's consideration. Some of you delight to flaunt in our faces the warning against sectional parties given by Washington in his Fare- well Address. Less than eight years before Washington gave that warning he had, as President of the United States, approved and signed an act of Congress enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern Territory, which act embodied the policy of the government upon that subject up to and at the very moment he penned that warning ; and about one year after he penned it, he wrote Lafayette that he considered that prohibition a wise measure, expressing 126 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, iS6o in the same connection his hope that we should at some time have a confederacy of free states. Bearing this in mind, and seeing that sectionalism has since arisen upon this same subject, is that warning a weapon in your hands against us, or in our hands against you ? Could Washington himself speak, would he cast the blame of that sectionalism upon us, who sustain his policy, or upon you, who repudiate it ? We respect that warning of Wash- ington, and we commend it to you, together with his example pointing to the right application of it. But you say you are conservative — eminently conserva- tive — while we are revolutionary, destructive, or some- thing of the sort. What is conservatism ? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried ? We stick to, con- tend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by "our fathers who framed the govern- ment under which we live"; while you with one accord reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist upon substituting something new. True, you disagree among yourselves as to what that substitute shall be. You are divided on new propositions and plans, but you are unanimous in rejecting and denouncing the old policy of the fathers. Some of you are for reviving the foreign slave trade ; some for a congressional slave code for the territories ; some for Congress forbidding the territories to prohibit slavery within their limits ; some for maintaining slavery in the territories through the judiciary; some for the "gur-reat pur-rinciple" that "if one man would enslave another, no third man should object," fantastically called "popular sovereignty"; but never a man among you is in favor of federal prohibition of slavery in federal territories, according to the practice of "our fathers who framed the government under which we live." Not one of all your various plans can show a precedent or an advocate in the century within which our government originated. Consider, then, whether your SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 27 claim of conservatism for yourselves, and your charge of destructiveness against us, are based on the most clear and stable foundations. Again, you say we have made the slavery question more prominent than it formerly was. We deny it. We admit that it is more prominent, but we deny that we made it so. It was not we, but you, who discarded the old policy of the fathers. We resisted, and still resist, your innovation ; and thence comes the greater prominence of the question. Would you have that question reduced to its former propor- tions .? Go back to that old policy. What has been will be again, under the same conditions. If you would have the peace of the old times, readopt the precepts and policy of the old times. You charge that we stir up insurrections among your slaves. We deny it ; and what is your proof ? Harpers Ferry! John Brown! John Brown was no Republican; and you have failed to implicate a single Republican in his Harpers Ferry enterprise. If any member of our party is guilty in that matter, you know it, or you do not know it. If you do know it, you are inexcusable for not designating the man and proving the fact. If you do not know it, you are inexcusable for asserting it, and especially for persisting in the assertion after you have tried and failed to make the proof. You need not be told that persisting in a charge which one does not know to be true is simply malicious slander. Some of you admit that no Republican designedly aided or encouraged the Harpers Ferry affair, but still insist that our doctrines and declarations necessarily lead to such results. We do not believe it. We know we hold no doctrine, and make no declaration, which were not held to and made by *'our fathers who framed the government under which we live." You never dealt fairly by us in relation to this affair. When it occurred, some important state elections were near at hand, and you were in evident glee with the belief that, by 128 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 charging the blame upon us, you could get an advantage of us in those elections. The elections came, and your expec- tations were not quite fulfilled. Every Republican man knew that, as to himself at least, your charge was a slander, and he was not much inclined by it to cast his vote in your favor. Republican doctrines and declarations are accom- panied with a continual protest against any interference whatever with your slaves, or with you about your slaves. Surely this does not encourage them to revolt. True, we do, in common with "our fathers who framed the government under which we live," declare our belief that slavery is wrong ; but the slaves do not hear us declare even this. For anything we say or do, the slaves would scarcely know there is a Republican party. I believe they would not, in fact, generally know it but for your misrepresentations of us in their hearing. In your political contests among yourselves, each faction charges the other with sympathy with Black Republicanism ; and then, to give point to the charge, defines Black Republicanism to simply be insurrection, blood, and thunder among the slaves. Slave insurrections are no more common now than they were before the Republican party was organized. What induced the Southampton insurrection, twenty-eight years ago, in which at least three times as many lives were lost as at Harpers Ferry ? You can scarcely stretch your very elastic fancy to the conclusion that Southampton was "got up by Black Republicanism." In the present state of things in the United States, I do not think a general, or even a very extensive, slave insurrection is possible. The indispensable concert of action cannot be attained. The slaves have no means of rapid communication ; nor can incendiary freemen, black or white, supply it. The explosive materials are every- where in parcels ; but there neither are, nor can be supplied, the indispensable connecting trains. Much is said by Southern people about the aflFection of slaves for their masters and mistresses ; and a part of it, at SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 29 least, is true. A plot for an uprising could scarcely be devised and communicated to twenty individuals before some one of them, to save the life of a favorite master or mistress, would divulge it. This is the rule; and the slave revolution in Haiti was not an exception to it, but a case occurring under peculiar circumstances. The Gunpowder Plot of British history, though not connected with slaves, was more in point. In that case, on\f about twenty were admitted to the secret; and yet one of them, in his anxiety to save a friend, betrayed the plot to that friend, and, by consequence, averted the calamity. Occasional poisonings from the kitchen, and open or stealthy assassinations in the field, and local revolts extending to a score or so, will con- tinue to occur as the natural results of slavery ; but no general insurrection of slaves, as I think, can happen in this country for a long time. Whoever much fears, or much hopes, for such an event, will be alike disappointed. In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, *'It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipa- tion and deportation peaceably, and in such slow degrees as that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their places be, pari passu, filled up by free white laborers. If, on the con- trary, it is left to force itself on, human nature must shudder at the prospect held up." Mr. Jefferson did not mean to say, nor do I, that the power of emancipation is in the federal government. He spoke of Virginia; and, as to the power of emancipation, I speak of the slaveholding states only. The federal govern- ment, however, as we insist, has the power of restraining the extension of the institution — the power to insure that a slave insurrection shall never occur on any American soil which is now free from slavery. John Brown's effort was peculiar. It was not a slave insurrection. It was an attempt by white men to get up a revolt among slaves, in which the slaves refused to partici- pate. In fact, it was so absurd that the slaves, with all LINCOLN — 9 130 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, iS6o their ignorance, saw plainly enough it could not succeed. That affair, in its philosophy, corresponds with the many attempts, related in history, at the assassination of kings and emperors. An enthusiast broods over the oppres- sion of a people till he fancies himself commissioned by Heaven to liberate them. He ventures the attempt, which ends in little else than his own execution. Orsini's attempt on Louis Napoleon, *and John Brown's attempt at Harpers Ferry, were, in their philosophy, precisely the same. The eagerness to cast blame on Old England in the one case, and on New England in the other, does not disprove the sameness of the two things. And how much would it avail you if you could, by the use of John Brown, Helper's book,^ and the like, break up the Republican organization 1 Human action can be modi- fied to some extent, but human nature cannot be changed. There is a judgment and a feeling against slavery in this nation, which cast at least a million and a half of votes. You cannot destroy that judgment and feeling — that sentiment — by breaking up the political organization which rallies around it. You can scarcely scatter and disperse an army which has been formed into order in the face of your heaviest fire; but if you could, how much would you gain by forcing the sentiment which created it out of the peaceful channel of the ballot box into some other channel .? What would that other channel probably be ? Would the number of John Browns be lessened or enlarged by the operation .? But you will break up the Union rather than submit to a denial of your constitutional rights. That has a somewhat reckless sound ; but it would be palliated, if not fully justified, were we proposing, by the mere force of numbers, to deprive you of some right plainly written down in the Constitution. But we are proposing no such thing. 1 "Impending Crisis of the South," by Hinton R. Helper, published 1857. SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 13 1 When you make these declarations you have a specific and well-understood allusion to an assumed constitutional right of yours to take slaves into the federal territories, and to hold them there as property. But no such right is spe- cifically written in the Constitution. That instrument is literally silent about any such right. We, on the contrary, deny that such a right has any existence in the Constitution, even by implication. Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will de- stroy the government, unless you be allowed to construe and force the Constitution as you please, on all points in dis- pute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events. This, plainly stated, is your language. Perhaps you will say the Supreme Court has decided the disputed constitu- tional question in your favor. Not quite so. But waiving the lawyer's distinction between dictum and decision, the court has decided the question for you in a sort of way. The court has substantially said, it is your constitutional right to take slaves into the federal territories, and to hold them there as property. When I say the decision was made in a sort of way, I mean it was made in a divided court, by a bare major- ity of the judges, and they not quite agreeing with one another in the reasons for making it; that it is so made as that its avowed supporters disagree with one another about its meaning, and that it was mainly based upon a mistaken statement of fact — the statement in the opinion that '*the right of property in a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed in the Constitution." An inspection of the Constitution will show that the right of property in a slave is not *' distinctly and expressly affirmed" in it. Bear in mind, the judges do not pledge their judicial opinion that such right is impliedly affirmed in the Con- stitution ; but they pledge their veracity that i^ is "dis- tinctly and expressly" affirmed there — ''distinctly," that is, not mingled with anything else; "expressly," that is, in 132 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 words meaning just that, without the aid of any inference, and susceptible of no other meaning. If they had only pledged their judicial opinion that such right is affirmed in the instrument by implication, it would be open to others to show that neither the word ''slave" nor ''slavery" is to be found in the Constitution, nor the word "property," even, in any connection with language alluding to the things slave or slavery; and that wherever in that instrument the slave is alluded to, he is called a "person"; and wherever his master's legal right in relation to him is alluded to, it is spoken of as "service or labor which may be due" — as a debt payable in service or labor. Also it would be open to show, by contemporaneous history, that this mode of alluding to slaves and slavery, instead of speaking of them, was employed on purpose to exclude from the Constitution the idea that there could be property in man. To show all this is easy and certain. When this obvious mistake of the judges shall be brought to their notice, is it not reasonable to expect that they will withdraw the mistaken statement, and reconsider the con- clusion based upon it ^ And then it is to be remembered that "our fathers who framed the government under which we live" — the men who made the Constitution — decided this same constitu- tional question in our favor long ago; decided it without division among themselves when making the decision ; without division among themselves about the meaning of it after it was made, and, so far as any evidence is left, without basing it upon any mistaken statement of facts. Under all these circumstances, do you really feel your- selves justified to break up this government unless such a court decision as yours is shall be at once submitted to as a conclusive and final rule of political action ? But you will not abid^ the election of a Republican President ! In that supposed event, you say, you will destroy the Union ; and then, you say, the great crime of having destroyed it will be SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 I33 upon us ! That is cool. A highwayman holds a pistol to my ear, and mutters through his teeth, ''Stand and deliver, or I shall kill you, and then you will be a murderer !" To be sure, what the robber demanded of me — my money — was my own; and I had a clear right to keep it; but it was no more my own than my vote is my own; and the threat of death to me, to extort my money, and the threat of destruction to the Union, to extort my vote, can scarcely be distinguished in principle. A few words now to Republicans. It is exceedingly desirable that all parts of this great confederacy shall be at peace, and in harmony one with another. Let us Republi- cans do our part to have it so. Even though much provoked, let us do nothing through passion and ill temper. Even though the Southern people will not so much as listen to us, let us calmly consider their demands, and yield to them if, in our deliberate view of our duty, we possibly can. Judging by all they say and do, and by the subject and nature of their controversy with us, let us determine, if we can, what will satisfy them. Will they be satisfied if the territories be unconditionally surrendered to them ? We know they will not. In all their present complaints against us, the territories are scarcely mentioned. Invasions and insurrections are the rage now. Will it satisfy them if, in the future, we have nothing to do with invasions and insurrections ? We know it will not. We so know, because we know we never had anything to do with invasions and insurrections ; and yet this total abstain- ing does not exempt us from the charge and the denuncia- tion. The question recurs, What will satisfy them ? Simply this : we must not only let them alone, but we must somehow convince them that we do let them alone. This, we know by experience, is no easy task. We have been so trying to convince them from the very beginning of our organization, but with no success. In all our platforms and speeches we 134 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 have constantly protested our purpose to let them alone; but this has had no tendency to convince them. Alike unavailing to convince them is the fact that they have never detected a man of us in any attempt to disturb them. These natural and apparently adequate means all failing, what will convince them .? This, and this only : cease to call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right. And this must be done thoroughly — done in acts as well as in words. Silence will not be tolerated — we must place our- selves avowedly with them. Senator Douglas's new sedition law must be enacted and enforced, suppressing all declara- tions that slavery is wrong, whether made in politics, in presses, in pulpits, or in private. We must arrest and return their fugitive slaves with greedy pleasure. We must pull down our free-state constitutions. The whole atmosphere must b^ disinfected from all taint of opposition to slavery, before they will cease to believe that all their troubles proceed from us. I am quite aware they do not state their case precisely in this way. Most of them would probably say to us, "Let us alone; do nothing to us, and say what you please about slavery." But we do let them alone, — have never dis- turbed them, — so that, after all, it is what we say which dissatisfies them. They will continue to accuse us of doing, until we cease saying. I am also aware they have not as'yet in terms demanded the overthrow of our free-state constitutions. Yet those con- stitutions declare the wrong of slavery with more solemn emphasis than do all other sayings against it; and when all these other sayings shall have been silenced, the overthrow of these constitutions will be demanded, and nothing be left to resist the demand. It is nothing to the contrary that they do not demand the whole of this just now. Demanding what they do, and for the reason they do, they can volun- tarily stop nowhere short of this consummation. Holding, as they do, that slavery is morally right and socially elevat- SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 135 ing, they cannot cease to demand a full national recognition of it as a legal right and a social blessing. Nor can we justifiably withhold this on any ground save our conviction that slavery is wrong. If slavery is right, all words, acts, laws, and constitutions against it are them- selves wrong, and should be silenced and swept away. If it is right, we cannot justly object to its nationality — its univer- sality ; if it is wrong, they cannot justly insist upon its exten- sion — its enlargement. All they ask we could readily grant, if we thought slavery right; all we ask they could as readily grant, if they thought it wrong. Their thinking it right and our thinking it wrong is the precise fact upon which depends the whole controversy. Thinking it right, as they do, they are not to blame for desiring its full recognition as being right ; but thinking it wrong, as we do, can we yield to them ? Can we cast our votes with their view, and against our own ? In view of our moral, social, and political responsibilities, can we do this ? Wrong as we think slavery is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity arising from its actual presence in the nation ; but can we, while our votes will prevent it, allow it to spread into the national territories, and to overrun us here in these free states ? If our sense of duty forbids this, then let us stand by our duty fearlessly and effectively. Let us be diverted by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are so industriously plied and belabored, — contrivances such as groping for some middle ground between the right and the wrong, vain as the search for a man who should be neither a living man nor a dead man ; such as a policy of "don't care," on a question about which all true men do care; such as Union appeals beseeching true Union men to yield to dis- unionists, reversing the Divine rule, and calling not the sinners, but the righteous to repentance ; su^h as invocations to Washington, imploring men to unsay what Washington said, and undo what Washington did. 1^6 LETTER TO ''PROFESSOR'' GARDNER, i860 Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusa- tions against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruc- tion to the government, nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith let us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it. LETTER TO "PROFESSOR" GARDNER Springfield, III., September 28, i860. Dear Sir : Some specimens of your soap have been used at our house and Mrs. L. declares it is a superior article. She at the same time protests that / have never given suffi- cient attention to the "soap question" to be a competent judge. Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GRACE BEDELL The story which explains this letter is well known. Grace Bedell, a girl of eleven, had conceived the fancy that the presidential candidate "would look better if he wore a beard," and had written to him that "if he would promise to do so" she would "try to influence her two Democratic brothers to vote for him." Despite the implied refusal in this letter, Mr. Lincoln did as the little girl asked. On his way to Washington, the following February, he passed through the town where the child lived and supple- mented his brief political speech by calling for his "little correspondent" and announcing to her "You see I let these whiskers grow for you, Grace." No incident better illustrates the childlike frankness and simplicity of Lincoln's nature. Of the hundreds of portraits of Abraham Lincoln those which represent him as beardless were all taken before February, 1861. Springfield, Illinois, October 19, i860. My dear little Miss : Your very agreeable letter of the 15th is received. I regret the necessity of saying I have no daughter. I have three sons — one seventeen, one nine, and one seven years of age. They, with their mother, con- LETTER TO W. S. SPEER, i860 137 stitute my whole family. As to the whiskers, having never worn any, do you not think people would call it a piece of silly affectation if I were to begin it now ? Your very sincere well-wisher, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO WILLIAM S. SPEER Lincoln's utterances of this period are singularly free from any evidence of excitement. The spirit of panic was universal. Southern agitators were making revolutionary demands, while Northern leaders were in hope- less disagreement, some proposing by constitutional amendment, or by treaty between the states, to grant all that the slave power wished, and some advocating the coercion of the dissatisfied states and the abolition of slavery regardless of the Constitution, while still others were for permitting the seceding states to "depart in peace." Many believed that the nation would not live until Lincoln could become President. Lincoln's real views were well known. He opposed the introduction of slavery into the na- tional territories or into the free states, but he also opposed any interfer- ence with the right to hold slaves where that right already existed under the Constitution. The Southern leaders did not trust him. His Northern friends, quite as agitated as the men of the South, urged him to say some- thing pacific. Lincoln wisely maintained silence. (Confidential) Springfield, Illinois, October 23, i860. My dear Sir: Yours of the 13th was duly received. I appreciate your motive when you suggest the propriety of my writing for the public something disclaiming all inten- tion to interfere with slaves or slavery in the states ; but in my judgment it would do no good. I have already done this many, many times ; and it is in print, and open to all who will read. Those who will not read or heed what I have already publicly said would not read or heed a repetition of it. *' If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead.'' Yours truly, A. Lincoln. 138 LETTER TO PETER PAGE, 1861 LETTER TO PETER PAGE When this letter was written, the friends of the Union were in grave I fear lest the secessionists organize to prevent Lincoln's inauguration. The following letter, in response to the offer of Mr. Page and his asso- ciates to raise a fund to insure the inauguration of the new President, re- gardless of Southern interference, has never before been published. (Private) Springfield, Jany. 21st, 1861. Peter Page, Esq. Dear Sir : While an almost overwhelming amount of business and correspondence has prevented my sooner an- swering your letter of the 3d inst., you may rest assured that it has neither been forgotten nor overlooked. Permit me now to return you my heartfelt thanks for your very gen- erous offer of both personal service and pecuniary aid, to secure my inauguration. While it is a very gratifying per- sonal compliment to myself, I prize it more highly as an evidence of the public loyalty and devotion to our Govern- ment which I am confident almost unanimously pervades the people of this state. Happily, I think there is no imme- diate necessity for employing the proffered help, and while I hope the ten thousand dollars you propose to give may always be employed in the peaceful channels of business or commerce, I am pleased to have the assurance that in the event of trouble or danger, you and others stand ready to give both your lives and your fortunes to the defense and maintenance of the government and the Union. Your obedient Servant, A. Lincoln. THE FAREWELL AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS February 11, 1861 A crowd of a few hundred neighbors and friends had gathered in the rain to bid Lincoln good-bye. As he stood on the rear platform of the train SPRINGFIELD FAREWELL, 1861 139 he had not meant to make a speech, but the sight of so many who were dear to him and the feehng that he might never see them again led him to give this expression to the most sacred feeHngs of his heart. This Httle speech has a high Hterary quahty, but what gives it value is the revelation it affords of the speaker's inner life. My Friends : No one, not in my situation, can appreciate my feeling of sadness at this parting. To this place, and the kindness of these people, I owe everything. Here I have lived a quarter of a century, and have passed from a young to an old man. Here my children have been born, and one is buried. All the strange, checkered past seems to crowd upon my mind. I now leave, not knowing when or whether ever I may return, with a task before me greater than that which rested upon Washington. Without the assistance of that Divine Being who ever attended him, I cannot succeed. With that assistance, I cannot fail. Trust- ing in Him, who can go with me, and remain with you, and be everywhere for good, let us confidently hope that all will yet be well. To His care commending you, as I hope in your prayers you will commend me, I bid you an affectionate farewell. FROM A REPLY TO THE ADDRESS OF WELCOME AT INDIANAPOLIS, FEBRUARY 11, 1861 This speech is the first public expression of Lincoln's attitude towards se- cession and of his faith that the people would support him in his task of pre- serving the Union. Governor Morton had tried to draw him out by saying, "Our government, which but yesterday was the theme of every eulogy, and the admiration of the world, is to-day threatening to crumble into ruins, and it remains to be seen whether it possesses a living principle, or whether, in the fullness of time, the hour of its dissolution is at hand." The declaration that "with you is the question: Shall the Union and shall the liberties of this country be preserved to the latest generation," is prophetic of the lan- guage of the first inaugural address, which he had already prepared, and of the first call for volunteer soldiers which he was to issue two months later, after the assault upon Fort Sumter. The final sentence of the speech has been incorporated in a bronze memorial tablet at the place in Indianapolis I40 ADDRESS AT INDIANAPOLIS, 1861 where Lincoln stood. In this speech, Lincoln, as was his custom, used the language of Scripture as the surest appeal to the emotion of his hearers. Lincoln's use of Bible allusions and language is to be noted in many of his letters and in all his greater utterances. Thus, here, "The gates of hell cannot prevail against them." Illustrations elsewhere are many. Thus, the reference to Haman's gallows in the Speed letter of August 24, 1855 (p. 59) ; in the "House Divided" speech, "A living dog is better than a dead lion " (p. 68); in the message to Congress of December i, 1862, "One generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth forever " (p. 179); and in the Sanitary Fair speech of March 18, 1864 (p. 203); the Fast-day proclamation of August 12, 1861 (p. 163) employs biblical language throughout, the words of the psalmist, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," being the keynote of the document. The second inaugural (p. 214) is in the style and spirit of an Old Testament prophecy. Following this speech at Indianapolis, Lincoln stopped at Columbus, Cleveland, Buffalo, Utica, Albany, New York, Trenton, Philadelphia, and man}^ other points, appealing to the sentiment of nationality and union in the multitudes whom he addressed. Six of the speeches are given in this volume. Governor Morton and Fellow Citizens of the State OF Indiana : . . . You have been pleased to address your- self to me chiefly in behalf of this glorious Union in which we live, in all of which you have my hearty sympathy, and, as far as may be within my power, will have, one and insep- arably, my hearty cooperation. While I do not expect, upon this occasion, or until I get to Washington, to attempt any lengthy speech, I will only say that to the salvation of the Union there needs but one single thing, the hearts of a people ' like yours. When the people rise in mass in behalf of the Union and the liberties of this country, truly may it be said, "The gates of hell cannot prevail against them." In all try- ing positions in which I shall be placed, and doubtless I shall be placed in many such, my reliance will be upon you and the people of the United States ; and I wish you to remem- ber, now and forever, that it is your business, and not mine; that if the union of these states and the liberties of this people shall be lost, it is but little to an}^ one man of fifty-two years of age, but a great deal to the thirty millions of people who ADDRESS TO THE OHIO LEGISLATURE, iS6i 141 inhabit these United States and to their posterity in all com- ing time. It is your business to rise up and preserve the Union and liberty for yourselves, and not for me. I appeal to you again to constantly bear in mind that not with politi- cians, not with Presidents, not with office seekers, but with you, is the question : Shall the Union and shall the liberties of this country be preserved to the latest generations ? ADDRESS TO THE OHIO LEGISLATURE AT COLUMBUS February 13, 1861 Note Lincoln's modesty in the reference to himself: "Without a name, perhaps without a reason why I should have a name," and his faith in the people and in God. "I turn then, and look to the American people, and to that God who has never forsaken them." It is true, as has been said by the president of the Senate, that a very great responsibility rests upon me in the posi- tion to which the votes of the American people have called me. I am deeply sensible of that weighty responsibility. I cannot but know, what you all know, that without a name, perhaps without a reason why I should have a name, there has fallen upon me a task such as did not rest even upon the Father of his Country ; and so feeling, I can turn and look for that support without which it will be impossible for me to perform that great task. I turn then, and look to the American people, and to that God who has never forsaken them. Allusion has been made to the interest felt in relation to the policy of the new administration. In this I have received from some a degree of credit for having kept silence, and from others, some deprecation. I still think that I was right. In the varying and repeatedly shifting scenes of the pres- ent, and without a precedent which could enable me to judge by the past, it has seemed fitting that before speaking upon the difficulties of Ihe country, I should have gained a 142 SPEECH AT UTICJ, 1861 view of the whole field, being at liberty to modify and change the course of policy as future events may make a change necessary. I have not maintained silence from any want of real anxiety. It is a good thing that there is no more than anx- iety, for there is nothing going wrong. It is a consoling circumstance that when we look out, there is nothing that really hurts anybody. We entertain different views upon political questions, but nobody is suffering anything. This is a most consoling circumstance, and from it we may con- clude that all we want is time, patience, and a reliance on that God who has never forsaken this people. Fellow citizens, what I have said I have said altogether extemporaneously, and I will now come to a close. SPEECH AT UTICA, NEW YORK, FEBRUARY 18, 1861 In his lightest vein. Lincoln was condemned by many of his associates and by the press because of his sense of humor, but it was his sense of humor which enabled him to keep his mental balance. Ladies and Gentlemen : I have no speech to make to you and no time to speak in. I appear before you that I may see you, and that you may see me; and I am willing to ad- mit, that so far as the ladies are concerned, I have the best of the bargain, though I wish it to be understood that I do not make the same acknowledgment concerning the men. FROM THE ADDRESS TO THE NEW JERSEY SENATE, AT TRfiNTON, FEBRUARY 21, 1861 This speech is especially interesting for the boyhood incident with which the speaker enforced his point that the nation for which the men of the Revolution struggled so well must be worth preserving. How the boy Lin- coln became the owner of Weems's " Washington " is familiar to those who know the story of his life. He had borrowed the little biography and had taken it to his bed in the loft of his log cabin to read in the early morning. A ADDRESS AT TRENTON, iS6i 1 43 sudden rain in the night soaked the book and the boy had to pay for it by three days' hard labor on the owner's farm. Weems's " Washington " is not a great hterary work, but as this and other speeches show, it had an in- fluence upon Lincoln's career. ... I cannot but remember the place that New Jersey- holds in our early history. In the early Revolutionary struggle few of the states among the old thirteen had more of the battle fields of the country within their limits than New Jersey. May I be pardoned if, upon this occasion, I mention that away back in my childhood, the earliest days of my being able to read, I got hold of a small book, such a one as few of the younger members have ever seen — Weems's "Life of Washington." I remember all the ac- counts there given of the battle fields and struggles for the liberties of the country, and none fixed themselves upon my imagination so deeply as the struggle here at Trenton, New Jersey. The crossing of the river, the contest with the Hes- sians, the great hardships endured at that time, all fixed themselves upon my memory more than any single Revolu- tionary event ; and you all know, for you have all been boys, how those early impressions last longer than any others. I recollect thinking then, boy even though I was, that there must have been something more than common that these men struggled for. I am exceedingly anxious that that thing — that something even more than national independ- ence ; that something that held out a great promise to all the people of the world to all time to come — I am ex- ceedingly anxious that this Union, the Constitution, and the liberties of the people shall be perpetuated in accord- ance with the original idea for which that struggle was made, and I shall be most happy indeed if I shall be a humble instrument in the hands of the Almighty, and of this. His almost chosen people, for perpetuating the object of that great struggle. You give me this reception, as I understand, without distinction of party. I learn that this body is com- posed of a majority of gentlemen who, in the exercise of their 144 ADDRESS TO NEW JERSEY ASSEMBLY, iS6i best judgment in the choice of a chief magistrate, did not think I was the man. I understand, nevertheless, that they come forward here to greet me as the constitutionally elected President of the United States — as citizens of the United States to meet the man who, for the time being, is the repre- sentative of the majesty of the nation — united by the single purpose to perpetuate the Constitution, the Union, and the liberties of the people. As such, I accept this reception more gratefully than I could do did I believe it were tendered to me as an individual. FROM AN ADDRESS TO THE ASSEMBLY OF NEW JERSEY February 21, 1861 . . . You, Mr. Speaker, have well said that this is a time when the bravest and wisest look with doubt and awe upon the aspect presented by our national affairs. Under these circumstances you will readily see why I should not speak in detail of the course I shall deem it best to pursue. It is proper that I should avail myself of all the information and all the time at my command, in order that when the time ar- rives in which I must speak officially, I shall be able to take the ground which I deem best and safest, and from which I may have no occasion to swerve. I shall endeavor to take the ground I deem most just to the North, the East, the West, the South, and the whole country. I take it, I hope, in good temper, certainly with no malice toward any section. I shall do all that may be in my power to promote a peaceful settle- ment of all our difficulties. The man does not live who is more devoted to peace than I am, none who would do more to preserve it, but it may be necessary to put the foot down firmly. [Here the audience broke out into cheers so loud and long that for some moments it was impossible to hear Mr. Lincoln's voice.] And if I do my duty and do right you will sustain me, will you not ? [Loud cheers, and cries of "Yes, yes; we will."] Received as I am by the members JDDRESS AT PHILADELPHIA, 1861 1 45 of a legislature the majority of whom do not agree with me in political sentiments, I trust that I may have their assist- ance in piloting the ship of state through this voyage, sur- rounded by perils as it is ; for if it should suffer wreck now, there will be no pilot ever needed for another voyage. . . . ADDRESS AT INDEPENDENCE HALL, PHILADELPHIA February 22, 1861 Note the prophecy — "But if this country cannot be saved without giving up that principle, I was about to say I would rather be assassinated on this spot than surrender it." While he was saying this, Lincoln and another member of his party knew of a conspiracy to kill him on his way to Washington. Already letters of warning had reached him, and during the next four years frequent threats of assassination came to him in the mails. There was more reality than his audience imagined in his pledge, "I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by, and, if it be the pleasure of Almighty God, to die by." I am filled with deep emotion at finding myself standing in this place, where were collected together the wisdom, the patriotism, the devotion to principle, from which sprang the institutions under which we live. You have kindly suggested to me that in my hands is the task of restoring peace to our distracted country. I can say in return, sir, that all the political sentiments I en- tertain have been drawn, so far as I have been able to draw them, from the sentiments which originated in and were given to the world from this hall. I have never had a feel- ing, politically, that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence. I have often pondered over the dangers which were incurred by the men who assembled here and framed and adopted that declaration. I have pondered over the toils that were endured by the officers and soldiers of the army who achieved that independence. I have often inquired of myself what great principle or idea it was that kept this Confederacy so LINCOLN — 10 146 ADDRESS AT PHILADELPHIA, 1861 long together. It was not the mere matter of separation of the colonies from the motherland, but that sentiment in the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty not alone to the people of this country, but hope to all the world, for all future time. It was that which gave promise that in due time the weights would be lifted from the shoulders of all men, and that all should have an equal chance. This is the sentiment embodied in the Declaration of Independ- ence. Now, my friends, can this country be saved on that basis ? If it can, I will consider myself one of the happiest men in the world if I can help to save it. If it cannot be saved upon that principle, it will be truly awful. But if this country cannot be saved without giving up that principle, I was about to say I would rather be assassinated on this spot than surrender it. Now, in my view of the present aspect of affairs, there is no need of bloodshed and war. There is no necessity for it. I am not in favor of such a course ; and I may say in advance that there will be no bloodshed unless it is forced upon the government. The government will not use force unless force is used against it. My friends, this is wholly an unprepared speech. I did not expect to be called on to say a word when I came here. I supposed I was merely to do something toward raising a flag. I may, therefore, have said something indiscreet. But I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by, and, if it be the pleasure of Almighty God, to die by. FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, MARCH 4, 1861 Lincoln read this address from a platform built at the east portico of , the Capitol. Ordinances of secession had recently been adopted by seven of the Southern states. The appeal of the new President to his "dissatis- fied fellow countrymen" was variously received. The South had gone too far in its program of disunion to heed the appeal. Horace Greeley says ("An Estimate of Abraham Lincoln," p. 39) : "The man evidently believed FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 1 47 with all his soul that if he could but convince the South that he would arrest and return her fugitive slaves, and offered slavery every support required by comity or by the letter of the Constitution, he would avert her hostility, — dissolve the Confederacy, and restore throughout the Union the sway of the federal authority. There was never a wilder delusion." The North did not know Lincoln well enough to be able to form a fair >udgment of the speech. On the whole the address was well received. Public feeling was too tense to make possible at the time any critical estimate of the speech. It is an interesting fact that as Lincoln took the oath of office on this occasion the four men closest to him were Stephen A. Douglas, who held the speaker's hat, Franklin Pierce, Roger B. Taney, who administered the oath, and James Buchanan, the retiring President, the four men whom, as "Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James," he had charged with conspiring to extend slavery into the territories (" House Divided " speech of June 16, 1858, p. 73). There is no better illustration of Lincoln's literary method than is to be found in a comparison of the final paragraph of the address with the para- graph which Secretary Seward had submitted. Seward's draft is as follows : "I close. We are not, we must not be, aliens or enemies, but fellow country- men and brethren. Although passion has strained our bonds of affection too hardly, they must not, I am sure they will not, be broken. The mystic chords which, proceeding from so many battle fields and so many patriot graves, pass through all the hearts and hearths in this broad continent of ours, will yet again harmonize in their ancient music when breathed upon by the guardian angel of the nation." The idea was Seward's, but the high quality of its final literary form was Lincoln's. Fellow Citizens of the United States : In compliance with a custom as old as the government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly, and to take in your pres- ence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President "before he enters on the execution of his office." I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss thbse matters of administration about which there is no special anxiety or excitement. Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern states that by the accession of a Republican ad- ministration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most 148 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that '*I have no .purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I be- lieve I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclina- tion to do so." Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many simi- lar declarations, and had never recanted them. And, more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and em- phatic resolution which I now read : Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right of each state to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment ex- clusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the per- fection and endurance of our political fabric depend, and we de- nounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any state or territory, no matter under what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes. I now reiterate these sentiments ; and, in doing so, I only press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible, that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered - by the now incoming administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given, will be cheerfully given to all the states when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause — as cheerfully to one section as to another. There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its pro- visions : FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 1 49 No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due. It is scarcely questioned that this provision W2.s intended by those w^ho made it for the reclaiming of what v^e call fugitive slaves ; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution — to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause ''shall be delivered up," their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath .? There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by national or by state authority; but surely that difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others by which authority it is done. And should any one in any case be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it shall be kept .? Again, in any law upon this subject, ought not all the safeguards of liberty known in civilized and humane juris- prudence to be introduced, so that a free man be not, in any case, surrendered as a slave .? And might it not be well at the same time to provide by law for the enforcement of that clause in the Constitution which guarantees that "the citi- zen of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and im- munities of citizens in the several states V I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations, and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws by any hypercritical rules. And while I do not choose now I50 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, iS6i to specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be en- forced, I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both in official and private stations, to conform to and abide by all those acts which stand unrepealed, than to violate any of them, trusting to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional. It is sevent3'-two years since the first inauguration of a President under our national Constitution. During that period fifteen different and greatly distinguished citizens have, in succession, administered the executive branch of the government. They have conducted it through many perils, and generally with great success. Yet, with all this scope of precedent, I now enter upon the same task for the brief constitutional term of four years under great and peculiar difficulty. A disruption of the federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted. I hold that, in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution, the Union of these states is perpetual. Per- petuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the ex- press provisions of our national Constitution, and the Union will endure forever — it being impossible to destroy it ex- cept by some action not provided for in the instrument itself. Again, if the United States be not a government proper, but an association of states in the nature of contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it .? One party to a contract may vio- late it — break it, so to speak; but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it ? Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is per- petual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured P FIRST IN AUGUR JL ADDRESS, iS6i 151 and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen states expressly plighted and engaged that it should be per- petual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, in 1787 one of the declared objects for ordaining and estab- lishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union." But if the destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the states be lawfully possible, the Union is less per- fect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital ele- ment of perpetuity. It follows from these views that no state upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union ; that re- solves and ordinances to that effect are legally void ; and that acts of violence, within any state or states, against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolu- tionary, according to circumstances. I therefore consider that, in view of the Constitution and the laws, the Union is unbroken ; and to the extent of my ability I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the states. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part ; and I shall perform it so far as prac- ticable, unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means, or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself. In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence; and there shall be none, unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States, in any interior locality, shall be so great and universal as to prevent 152 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, iS6i competent resident citizens from holding the federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating, and so nearly impracticable withal, that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices. The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible, the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless, current events and ex- perience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised according to circumstances actually existing, and with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and af- fections. That there are persons in one section or another who seek to destroy the Union at all events, and are glad of any pre- text to do it, I will neither affirm nor deny; but if there be such, I need address no word to them. To those, however, who really love the Union may I not speak ? Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruc- tion of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it ^. Will you hazard so desperate a step while there is any possibility that any portion of the ills you fly from have no real existence ? Will you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from — will you risk the commission of so fearful a mistake ^ All profess to be content in the Union if all constitutional rights can be maintained. Is it true, then, that any right, plainly written in the Constitution, has been denied ^ I think not. Happily the human mind is so constituted that no party can reach to the audacity of doing this. Think, FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 153 if you can, of a single instance in which a plainly written provision of the Constitution has ever been denied. If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify revolution — certainly would if such a right were a vital one. But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, guaranties and prohibitions, in the Constitution, that con- troversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable to every question which may occur in practical administra- tion. No foresight can anticipate, nor any document of reasonable length contain, express provisions for all possible questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by state authority ? The Constitution does not expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery in the terri- tories ? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the territories ^ The Constitu- tion does not expressly say. From questions of this class spring all our constitutional controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the government must cease. There is no other alternative; for continuing the government is acquiescence on one side or the other. If a minority in such case will secede rather than acqui- esce, they make a precedent which in turn will divide and ruin them ; for a minority of their own will secede from them whenever a majority refuses to be controlled by such minor- ity. For instance, why may not any portion of a new con- federacy a year or two hence arbitrarily secede again, pre- cisely as portions of the present Union now claim to secede from it ? All who cherish disunion sentiments are now being educated to the exact temper of doing this. Is there such perfect identity of interests among the states 154 FIRST I N AUGUR J L JDDRESS, 1861 to compose a new Union, as to produce harmony only, and prevent renewed secession ? Plainly, the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does, of necessity, fly to anarchy or to despotism. Una- nimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissable ; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left. I do not forget the position, assumed by some, that con- stitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court; nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding, in any case, upon the parties to a suit, as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by all other depart- ments of the government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be overruled and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a diflPerent practice. At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation be- tween parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases properly brought before them, and it is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn their decisions to political purposes. FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 155 One section of our country believes slavery is right, and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong, and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute. The fugitive-slave clause of the Constitution, and the law for the suppression of the foreign slave trade, are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, cannot be perfectly cured ; and it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the sections than before. The foreign slave trade, now imper- fectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived, without restriction, in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by the other. Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot remove our respective sections from each other, nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced, and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other; but the different parts of our coun- try cannot do this. They cannot but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that inter- course more advantageous or more satisfactory after separa- tion than before ? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws 1 Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends ^. Sup- pose you go to war, you cannot fight always ; and when, after much loss on both sides, and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions as to terms of in- tercourse are again upon you. This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dis- 156 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 member or overthrow it. I cannot be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of hav- ing the national Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instru- ment itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows amendments- to originate with the people themselves, instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions orig- inated by others not especially chosen for the purpose, and which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amend- ment to the Constitution — which amendment, however, I have not seen — has passed Congress, to the effect that the federal government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the states, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amend- ments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable. The chief magistrate derives all his authority from the people, and they have conferred none upon him to fix terms for the separation of the states. The people themselves can do this also if they choose ; but the executive, as such, has nothing to do with it. His duty is to administer the present government, as it came to his hands, and to transmit it, unimpaired by him, to his successor. Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ulti- mate justice of the people ^. Is there any better or equal hope in the world ? In our present differences, is either party without faith of being in the right ? If the Almighty Ruler of nations, with his eternal truth and justice, be on 'FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 157 your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of the. American people. By the frame of the government under which we live, this same people have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief; and have, with equal wisdom, provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance, no administration, by any extreme of wicked- ness or folly, can very seriously injure the government in the short space of four years. My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step which you would never take deliberately, that ob- ject will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sen- sitive point, the laws of your own framing under it ; while the new administration will have no immediate power, if it would, to change either. If it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied hold the right side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for precipitate action. Intelli- gence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land, are still com- petent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty. In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it." I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The 158 SECRETARY SEWARD'S SUGGESTIONS, 1861 mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle field and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature. SECRETARY SEWARD'S SUGGESTIONS ENTITLED: "SOME THOUGHTS FOR THE PRESIDENT'S CONSIDERATION " j April I, 1861 The reply to Secretary Seward's bold suggestion that the executive responsibility for the conduct of the civil war be surrendered by the Presi- dent to "a member of the cabinet" shows that the new President was ready "to put the foot down firmly" as he had said to the New Jersey legislature a few weeks earlier. (See p. 144.) The declaration "If this must be done, I must do it " leaves no room to doubt President Lincoln's firmness. The publication of Seward's "Thoughts for the President's Consideration," and Lincoln's reply would probably have brought down upon the secretary's head a storm of criticism. We are told by Nicolay and Hay: "So far as is known, the affair never reached the knowledge of any other member of the Cabinet, or even the most intimate of the President's friends; nor was it probably ever again alluded to by either Lincoln or Seward. Doubtless it needed only the President's note to show the Secre- tary of State how serious a fault he had committed, for all his tireless indus- try and undivided influence continued to be given for four long years to his chief, not only without reserve, but with a sincere and devoted personal attachment." See Nicolay and Hay's "Abraham Lincoln," vol. 3, p. 449. First. We are at the end of a month's administration, and yet without a policy either domestic or foreign. Second. This, however, is not culpable, and it has even been unavoidable. The presence of the Senate, with the need to meet applications for patronage, have prevented attention to other and more grave matters. Third. But further delay to adopt and prosecute our policies for both domestic and foreign affairs would not only bring scandal on the administration, but danger upon the country. Fourth. To do this we must dismiss the applicants for SECRETARY SEWARD'S SUGGESTIONS, iS6i 159 office. But how ? I suggest that we make the local appoint- ments forthwith, leaving foreign or general ones for ulterior and occasional action. Fifth. The policy at home. I am aware that my views are singular, and perhaps not sufficiently explained. My system is built upon this idea as a ruling one, namely, that we must Change the question before the public from one UPON SLAVERY, OR ABOUT SLAVERY, for a question upon UNION OR DISUNION : In other words, from what would be regarded as a party question, to one of patriotism or union. The occupation or evacuation of Fort Sumter, although not in fact a slavery or a party question, is so regarded. Witness the temper manifested by the Republicans in the free states, and even by the Union men in the South. I would therefore terminate it as a safe means for changing the issue. I deem it fortunate that the last administration created the necessity. For the rest, I would simultaneously defend and reenforce all the ports in the gulf, and have the navy recalled from for- eign stations to be prepared for a blockade. Put the island of Key West under martial law. This will raise distinctly the question of union or disunion. I would maintain every fort and possession in the South. For Foreign Nations I would demand explanations from Spain and France, categorically, at once. I would seek explanations from Great Britain and Russia, and send agents into Canada, Mexico, and Central America to rouse a vigorous continental spirit of independence on this continent against European intervention. And, if satisfactory explanations are not received from Spain and France, l6o REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARD, 1861 Would convene Congress and declare war against them. But whatever policy we adopt, there must be an energetic prosecution of it. For this purpose it must be somebody's business to pursue and direct it incessantly. Either the President must do it himself, and be all the while active in it, or Devolve it on some member of his cabinet. Once adopted, debates on it must end, and all agree and abide. It is not in my especial province; But I neither seek to evade nor assume responsibility. NOTE IN REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARd's " THOUGHTS" Executive Mansion, April i, 1861. My dear Sir : Since parting with you I have been con- sidering your paper dated this day, and entitled *'Some Thoughts for the President's Consideration." The first proposition in it is, "First, We are at the end of a month's administration, and yet without a policy either domestic or foreign." At the beginning of that month, in the inaugural, I said : "The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the govern- ment, and to collect the duties and imposts." This had your distinct approval at the time ; and, taken in connection with the order I immediately gave General Scott, directing him to employ ever}^ means in his power to strengthen and hold the forts, comprises the exact domestic policy you now urge, with the single exception that it does not propose to abandon ,^ Fort Sumter. Again, I do not perceive how the reenforcement of Fort Sumter would be done on a slavery or a party issue, while that of Fort Pickens would be on a more national and patriotic one. REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARD, 1861 161 The news received yesterday in regard to St. Domingo cer- tainly brings a new item within the range of our foreign policy ; but up to that time we have been preparing circulars and instructions to ministers and the like, all in perfect harmony, without even a suggestion that we had no foreign policy. Upon your closing propositions — that '^whatever policy we adopt, there must be an energetic prosecution of it. " For this purpose it must be somebody's business to pursue and direct it incessantly. "Either the President must do it himself, and be all the while active in it, or "Devolve it on some member of his cabinet. Once adopted, debates on it must end, and all agree and abide" — ■ I remark that if this must be done, I must do it. When a general line of policy is adopted, I apprehend there is no danger of its being changed without good reason, or continu- ing to be a subject of unnecessary debate; still, upon points arising in its progress I wish, and suppose I am entitled to have, the advice of all the cabinet. Your obedient servant, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO COLONEL ELLSWORTH'S PARENTS Colonel Ephraim Elmer Ellsworth commanded a regiment of zouaves which he had organized in April, 1861. At Alexandria, Virginia, on May 24, 1861, where he had been sent with his troops to take possession of Arlington Heights overlooking Washington, he pulled down the Confederate flag from its staff above the Marshall House and with the flag in his hands was shot dead by the owner of the hotel. His body lay in state at the White House and later at the city hall in New York. Ellsworth had been a student in Lincoln's law office and a member of the party which came on with the President-elect to the inauguration. His death was Lincoln's first personal loss from the war. See the letter to Mrs. Bixby (p. 210), and to Fanny McCullough (p. 183). LINCOLN — II l62 LETTER TO COL. ELLSWORTH'S PARENTS, 1861 Washington, D. C, May 25, 1861. My dear Sir and Madam : In the untimely loss of your noble son, our affliction here is scarcely less than your own. So much of promised usefulness to one's country, and of bright hopes for one's self and friends, have rarely been so suddenly dashed as in his fall. In size, in years, and in youthful appearance a boy only, his power to command men was surpassingly great. This power, combined with a fine intellect, an indomitable energy, and a taste altogether military, constituted in him, as seemed to me, the best natural talent in that department I ever knew. And yet he was singularly modest and deferential in social intercourse. My acquaintance with him began less than two years ago ; yet through the latter half of the intervening period it was as intimate as the disparity of our ages and my engrossing engagements would permit. To me he appeared to have no indulgences or pastimes ; and I never heard him utter a profane or an intemperate word. What was conclusive of his good heart, he never forgot his parents. The honors he labored for so laudably, and for which in the sad end he so gallantly gave his life, he meant for them no less than for himself. In the hope that it may be no intrusion upon the sacredness of your sorrow, I have ventured to address you this tribute to the memory of my young friend and your brave and early fallen child. May God give you that consolation which is beyond all earthly power. Sincerely your friend in a common affliction, A. Lincoln. I PROCLAMATION, 1861 163 PROCLAMATION OF A NATIONAL FAST DAY August 12, 1861 BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A Proclamation Whereas a joint committee of both houses of Congress has waited on the President of the United States and re- quested him to "recommend a day of public prayer, humiha- tion, and fasting, to be observed by the people of the United States with religious solemnities, and the offering of fervent supplications to Almighty God for the safety and welfare of these states, his blessings on their arms, and a speedy restoration of peace" : And whereas it is fit and becoming in all people, at all times, to acknowledge and revere the supreme government of God ; to bow in humble submission to his chastisements; to confess and deplore their sins and transgressions, in the full conviction that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom ; and to pray with all fervency and contrition for the pardon of their past offenses, and for a blessing upon their present and prospective action : And whereas when our own beloved country, once, by the blessing of God, united, prosperous, and happy, is now afflicted with faction and civil war, it is peculiarly fit for us to recognize the hand of God in this terrible visitation, and in sorrowful remembrance of our own faults and crimes as a nation and as individuals, to humble ourselves before him and to pray for his mercy — to pray that we may be spared further punishment, though most justly deserved ; that our arms may be blessed and made effectual for the re- establishment of law, order, and peace throughout the wide extent of our country; and that the inestimable boon of civil and religious liberty, earned under his guidance and 164 LETTER TO MAJOR RAMSEY, 1861 blessing by the labors and sufferings of our fathers, may be restored in all its original excellence : Therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do appoint the last Thursday in September next as a day of humiliation, prayer, and fasting for all the people of the nation. And I do earnestly recommend to all the people, and especially to all ministers and teachers of religion, of all denominations, and to all heads of families, to observe and keep that day, according to their several creeds and modes of worship, in all humility and with all religious solemnity, to the end that the united prayer of the nation may ascend to the Throne of Grace, and bring down plentiful blessings upon our country. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed, this twelfth day of August, a.d. eigh- (L. S.) teen hundred and sixty-one, and of the indepen- dence of the United States of America the eighty-sixth. Abraham Lincoln. By the President : William H. Seward, Secretary of State., LETTER TO MAJOR RAMSEY October 17, 1861. My dear Sir : The lady bearer of this says she has two sons who want to work. Set them at it if possible. Wanting to work is so rare a want that it should be encouraged. Yours truly, A. Lincoln. MEMORANDUM, 1861 1 65 MEMORANDUM: SUGGESTIONS TO THE WIDOW OF STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS Stephen A. Douglas committed himself unreservedly to the Union when the first shot was fired upon Fort Sumter. After a conference with Presi- dent Lincoln of several hours' duration he gave out to the newspapers, on April 18, 1861, an interview pledging his support to the administration, and hurried westward to throw the weight of his vast influence upon the Union side. He addressed the Illinois legislature at Springfield and in a series of passionate Union speeches rallied his friends and followers every- where to the support of the Union cause. He died on June 3, 1861, at Chicago. After his death his two boys were frequent visitors at the White House, where they received marked attention from the President. November 27, 1861. Yesterday Mrs. Douglas called, saying she is guardian of the minor children of her late husband ; that she is being urged, against her inclination, to send them South on the plea of avoiding the confiscation of their property there, and asking my counsel in the case. I expect the United States will overcome the attempt to confiscate property because of loyalty to the government; but if not, I still do not expect the property of absent minor children will be confiscated. I therefore think Mrs. Douglas may safely act her pleasure in the premises. But it is especially dangerous for my name to be connected with the matter, for nothing would more certainly excite the secessionists to do the worst they can against the children. A. Lincoln. LETTER TO MAJOR GENERAL DAVID HUNTER In answer to a complaining letter from General Hunter. Lincoln held this answer for a month and then sent it by a speciaJ messenger with instruc- tions to deliver it only when the General should be in a good humor. The last sentence is characteristically epigrammatic. l66 LETTER TO GENERAL HUNTER, 1861 Executive Mansion, Washington, December 31, 1861. Dear Sir: Yours of the 23d is received, and I am con- strained to say it is difficult to answer so ugly a letter in good temper. I am, as you intimate, losing much of the great confidence I placed in you, not from any act or omission of yours touching the public service, up to the time you were sent to Leavenworth, but from the flood of grumbling dis- patches and letters I have seen from you since. I knew you were being ordered to Leavenworth at the time it was done ; and I aver that with as tender a regard for your honor and your sensibilities as I had for my own, it never occurred to me that you were being "humiliated, insulted, and dis- graced !" nor have I, up to this day, heard an intimation that you have been wronged, coming from any one but yourself. No one has blamed you for the retrograde move- ment from Springfield, nor for the information you gave General Cameron ; and this you could readily understand, if it were not for your unwarranted assumption that the order- ing you to Leavenworth must necessarily have been done as a punishment for some fault. I thought then, and think yet, the position assigned to you is as responsible, and as honorable, as that assigned to Buell — I know that General McClellan expected more important results from it. My impression is that at the time you were assigned to the new Western Department, it had not been determined to replace General Sherman in Kentucky; but of this I am not certain, because the idea that a command in Kentucky was very desirable, and one in the farther West undesirable, had never occurred to me. You constantly speak of being placed in command of only 3000. Now tell me, is this not mere impatience } Have you not known all the while that you are to command four or five times that many "^ I have been, and am sincerely your friend ; and if, as such, 1 dare to make a suggestion, I would say you are adopting the best possible way to ruin yourself. "Act well your part, LETTER TO SECRETARY STANTON, 1862 1 67 there all the honor lies." ^ He who does something at the head of one regiment, will eclipse him who does nothing at the head of a hundred. Your friend, as ever, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO SECRETARY STANTON Lincoln was much criticised for exposing himself to the risk of assassina- tion. He was enough of a fatahst to believe that he would live to finish his work and that precautions would avail little. Executive Mansion, January 22, 1862. My dear Sir : On reflection I think it will not do, as a rule, for the adjutant general to attend me wherever I go: not that I have any objection to his presence, but that it would be an uncompensating encumbrance both to him and me. When it shall occur to me to go anywhere, I wish to be free to go at once, and not to have to notify the adjutant general and wait till he can get ready. It is better, too, for the public service that he shall give his time to the business of his office, and not to personal attendance on me. While I thank you for the kindness of the suggestion, my view of the matter is as I have stated. Yours truly, A. Lincoln. SPEECH TO THE TWELFTH INDIANA VOLUNTEERS May 15, 1862 This regiment, under the command of Col. William H. Link was about to be mustered out of the service at the end of its enlistment. The Presi- dent's desire was to have as many of the men reenlist as possible. Hence the speech. ^ From Pope's " Essay on Man." l68 SPEECH TO INDIANA VOLUNTEERS, 1862 Soldiers of the Twelfth Indiana Regiment: It has not been customary heretofore, nor will it be hereafter, for me to say something to every regiment passing in review. It occurs too frequently for me to have speeches ready on all occasions. As you have paid such a mark of respect to the Chief Magistrate, it appears that I should say a word or two in reply. Your Colonel has thought fit, on his own account and in your name, to say that you are satisfied with the manner in which I have performed my part in the difficulties which have surrounded the nation. For your kind expressions I am extremely grateful, but, on the other hand, I assure you that the nation is more indebted to you, and such as you, than to me. It is upon the brave hearts and strong arms of the people of the country that our reliance has been placed in support of free government and free institutions. For the part which you and the brave army of which you are a part have, under Providence, performed in this great struggle, I tender more thanks — greatest thanks that can possibly be due — and especially to this regiment, which has been the subject of good report. The thanks of the nation will follow you, and may God's blessing rest upon you now and forever. I hope that upon your return to your homes you will find your friends and loved ones well and happy. . I bid you farewell. LETTER TO REVERDY JOHNSON Reverdy Johnson was a Maryland lawyer of distinction. He had been associated with Lincoln and Stanton, the Secretary of War, in an important lawsuit in Cincinnati some years before. His public career had been a brilliant one and was to continue so, for after having served as member of the Peace Congress of 1861, he became Attorney-General of the United States, U. S. Senator, and Ambassador to Great Britain. The letter is one of many in this collection which show the difficulties President Lincoln had in satis- fying his critics. Lincoln's firmness is well expressed in the last sentence. The "very excellent Union senator" referred to is probably Mr. Johnson himself, who was elected to the United States Senate in 1862. LETTER TO REVERDY JOHNSON, 1862 169 (Private.) Executive Mansion, Washington, July 26, 1862. My dear Sir: Yours of the i6th, by the hand of Governor Shepley, is receiVed. It seems the Union feehng in Louisiana is being crushed out by the course of General Phelps. Please pardon me for believing that is a false pretense. The people of Louisiana — all intelligent people everywhere — know full well that I never had a wish to touch the foundations of their society, or any right of theirs. With perfect knowl- edge of this they forced a necessity upon me to send armies among them, and it is their own fault, not mine, that they are annoyed by the presence of General Phelps. They also know the remedy — know how to be cured of General Phelps. Remove the necessity for his presence. And might it not be well for them to consider whether they have not already had time enough to do this ? If they can conceive of any- thing worse than General Phelps within my power, would they not better be looking out for it ? They very well know the way to avert all this is simply to take their place in the Union upon the old terms. If they will not do this, should they not receive harder blows rather than lighter ones .? You are ready to say I apply to friends what is due only to enemies. I distrust the wisdom if not the sincerity of friends who would hold my hands while my enemies stab me. This appeal of professed friends has paralyzed me more in this struggle than any other one thing. You remember telling me, the day after the Baltimore mob in April, 1861, that it would crush all Union feeling in Maryland for me to attempt bringing troops over Maryland soil to Washington. I brought the troops notwithstanding, and yet there was Union feeling enough left to elect a legislature the next autumn, which in turn elected a very excellent Union United States senator ! I am a patient man — always willing to forgive on the Christian terms of repentance, and also to give ample time for repentance. Still, I must save this I/O LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT, 1862 government, if possible. What I cannot do, of course I will not do, but it may as well be understood, once for all, that I shall not surrender this game leaving any available card unplayed. Yours truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT , There is no better example of Lincoln's use of a homely colloquial illus- tration than in the query, "Would you drop the war where it is, or would you prosecute it in future with elder-stalk squirts charged with rose water ?" (Private) Washington, D. C, Jul}^ 28, 1862. Sir : The copy of a letter addressed to yourself by Mr. Thomas J. Durant ^ has been shown to me. The writer appears to be an able, a dispassionate, and an entirely sincere man. The first part of the letter is devoted to an effort to show that the secession ordinance of Louisiana was adopted against the will of a majority of the people. This is probably true, and in that fact may be found some instruction. Why did they allow the ordinance to go into effect .? Why did they not assert themselves } Why stand passive and allow themselves to be trodden down by a minority ? Why did they not hold popular meetings and have a convention of their own to express and enforce the true sentiment of the state ? If preorganization was against them then, why not do this now that the United States army is present to protect them ? The paralysis — the dead palsy — of the govern- ment in this whole struggle is, that this class of men will do nothing for the government, nothing for themselves, 1 Thomas Jefferson Durant, lawyer and politician, born Philadelphia. 1817. Practiced law at New Orleans, U. S. District Attorney for Louisiana and Attorney-General of the state. LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT, 1862 171 except demanding that the government shall not strike its open enemies lest they be struck by accident ! . . . I am not posted to speak understandingly on all the police regulations of which Mr. Durant complains. If experience shows any one of them to be wrong, let them be set right. I think I can perceive in the freedom of trade which Mr. Durant urges that he would relieve both friends and enemies from the pressure of the blockade. By this he would serve the enemy more effectively than the enemy is able to serve himself. I do not say or believe that to serve the enemy is the purpose of Mr. Durant, or that he is conscious of any purpose other than national and patriotic ones. Still, if there were a class of men who, having no choice of sides in the contest, were anxious only to have quiet and comfort for themselves while it rages, and to fall in with the victorious side at the end of it without loss to themselves, their advice as to the mode of conducting the contest would be precisely such as his is. He speaks of no duty — apparently thinks of none — resting upon Union men. He even thinks it injurious to the Union cause that they should be restrained in trade and passage without taking sides. They are to touch neither a sail nor a pump, but to be merely passengers — deadheads at that — to be carried snug and dry throughout the storm, and safely landed right side up. Nay, more : even a mutineer is to go untouched, lest these sacred passengers receive an accidental wound. Of course the rebellion will never be suppressed in Louisiana if the professed Union men there will neither help to do it nor permit the govern- ment to do*it without their help. Now, I think the true remedy is very different from that suggested by Mr. Durant. It does not lie in rounding the rough angles of the war, but in removing the necessity for the war. The people of Louisiana who wish protection to person and property, have but to reach forth their hands and take it. Let them in good faith reinaugurate the national authority, and set up a state government conforming thereto under the Constitution. 172 LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY, 1862 They know how to do it, and can have the protection of the army while doing it. The army will be withdrawn as soon as such government can dispense with its presence, and the people of the state can then, upon the old constitutional terms, govern themselves to their own liking. This is very simple and easy. If they will not do this — if they prefer to hazard all for the sake of destroying the government, it is for them to consider whether it is probable I will surrender the government to save them from losing all. If they decline what I suggest, you scarcely need to ask what I will do. What would you do in my position ? Would you drop the war where it is, or would you prosecute it in future with elder-stalk squirts charged with rose water } Would you deal lighter blows rather than heavier ones .? Would you give up the contest, leaving any available means unap- plied ^ I am in no boastful mood. I shall not do more than I can ; and I shall do all I can to save the government, which is my sworn duty as well as my personal inclination. I shall do nothing in malice. What I deal with is too vast for malicious dealing. LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY Horace Greeley, then editor of the New York Tribune, was one of the greatest of American journalists. He was brilliant, but erratic, and his enthusiasms often led him to say and do unwise things. In 1861 he had favored allowing the Southern states to secede. As the Civil War progressed the movement of events was too slow to satisfy his impatient demands, and he published daily editorials under the headline "On to Richmond," in which he urged a more vigorous prosecution of the war than the condition of the Union army made possible. On August 19, 1862, he printed in the Tribuyie his sensational "Prayer of Twenty Millions of People," which charged Lincoln with being too much under the influence of the slave power. This letter, elicited by Greeley's savage attacks, is one of the best examples of Lincoln's genius for direct statement. LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY, 1862 ly^ Executive Mansion, Washington, August 22, 1862. Dear Sir: I have just read yours of the 19th instant, addressed to myself through the Nezu York Tribune. If there be in it any statements or assumptions of fact which I may know to be erroneous, I do not now and here controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here argue against them. If there be perceptible in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it, in deference to an old friend whose heart I have always supposed to be right. As to the policy I *'seem to be pursuing," as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt. I would save the Union. I would save it in the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can oe restored, the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it ; if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it ; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union ; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe that what I am doing hurts the cause; and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors, and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of 174 MEDITATION ON THE WILL OF GOD, 1S62 official duty, and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free. Yours, A. Lincoln. MEDITATION ON THE WILL OF GOD September, 1862 The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party ; and 3^et the human instru- mentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adapta- tion to effect his purpose. I am almost ready to say that this is probably true ; that God wills this contest, and wills that it shall not end yet. By his mere great power on the minds of the now contestants, he could have either saved or destroyed the Union without a human contest. Yet the contest began. And, having begun, he could give the final victory to either side any day. Yet the contest proceeds. TELEGRAM TO MAJOR GENERAL McCLELLAN October 24, 1862 General George B. McClellan, in command of the Union armies, had disappointed the President by his inactivity. He was criticised just at this time for not following up his partial victory over the Confederate army at Antietam by pursuing the enemy and reaping the fruit of the victory. The President had been tried almost to the limit of his endurance by McClellan's delays until on one occasion he expressed the wish that he might borrow McClellan's army from him, and on another he said: "I would cheerfully stand and hold McClellan's horse for him if he would only give us a vic- tory. I have just read your dispatch about sore-tongued and fatigued horses. Will you pardon me for asking what the ORDER FOR SUNDAY OBSERVANCE, 1862 175 horses of your army have done since the battle of Antietam that fatigues anything ? A. Lincoln. ORDER FOR SUNDAY OBSERVANCE November 15, 1862 The President, commander in chief of the army and navy, desires and enjoins the orderly observance of the Sabbath by the officers and men in the military and naval service. The importance for man and beast of the prescribed weekly rest, the sacred rights of Christian soldiers and sailors, a becoming deference to the best sentiment of a Christian people, and a due regard for the Divine will, demand that Sunday labor in the army and navy be reduced to the measure of strict necessity. The discipHne and character of the national forces should not suffer, nor the cause they defend be imperiled, by the profanation of the day or name of the Most High. "At this time of public distress" — adopting the words of Washington in 1776 — "men may find enough to do in the service of God and their country without aban- doning themselves to vice and immorality." The first gen- eral order issued by the Father of his Country after the Declaration of Independence indicates the spirit in which our institutions were founded and should ever be defended. "The general hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and Hberties of his country." Abraham Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ Carl Schurz, at this time brigadier general, had written the President to express the widespread anxiety which had grown out of rumors of dis- loyalty in the army. Lincoln followed up this answer — which is one of a / 176 LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ, 1862 very few expressions of his impatience or discouragement in existence — by inviting General Schurz to come to Washington and talk it over. Schurz's account of the intervievv is interesting. "He greeted me cordially as of old and bade me pull up a chair and sit by his side. Then he brought his large hand with a slap down on my knee and said with a smile: 'Now tell me, young man, whether you really think that I am as poor a fellow as you have made me out in your letter!' I must confess, this reception disconcerted me. I looked into his face and felt something like a big lump in my throat. After a while I gathered up my wits and after a word of sorrow, if I had written anything that could have pained him, I explained to him my impressions of the situation and my reasons for writing to him as I had done. He listened with silent attention and when I stopped, said very seriously : 'Well, I know that you are a warm antislavery man and a good friend to me. Now let me tell you all about it.' Then he unfolded in his peculiar way his view of the then existing state of affairs, his hopes and his apprehensions, his troubles and embarrassments, making m^ny quaint remarks about men and things. I regret I cannot remember all. Then he described how the criticisms coming down upon him from all sides chafed him, and how my letter, although containing some points that were well-founded and useful, had touched him as a terse sum- ming up of all the principal criticisms and offered him a good chance at me for a reply. Then slapping my knee again, he broke out in a loud laugh and exclaimed: 'Didn't I give it to you hard in my letter } Didn't I } But it didn't hurt, did it } I did not mean to, and therefore I wanted you to come so quickly.' He laughed again and seemed to enjoy the matter heartily. 'Well,' he added, 'I guess we understand one another now, and it's all right.' When after a conversation of more than an hour I left him, I asked whether he still wished that I should write to him. 'Why, certainly,' he answered; 'write me whenever the spirit moves you.' We parted as better friends than ever." [See " Reminiscences of Carl Schurz." N. Y., 1908.] Schurz had a conspicuous public career. There is no better estimate of Lincoln's character than in Schurz's classic monograph. Executive Mansion, Washington, November 24, 1862. My dear Sir: I have just received and read your letter of the 20th. The purport of it is that we lost the late elec- tions and the administration is failing because the war is unsuccessful, and that I must not flatter myself that I am not justly to blame for it. I certainly know that if the war fails, the administration fails, and that I will be blamed for « LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ, 1862 1 77 it, whether I deserve it or not. And I ought to be blamed if I could do better. You think I could do better; therefore you blame me already. I think I could not do better; therefore I blame you for blaming me. I understand you now to be willing to accept the help of men who are not Republicans, provided they have " heart in it." Agreed. I want no others. But who is to be the judge of hearts, or of "heart in it" ? If I must discard my own judgment and take yours, I must also take that of others ; and by the time I should reject all I should be advised to reject, I should have none left, RepubHcans or others — not even yourself. For be assured, my dear sir, there are men who have *' heart in it" that think you are performing your part as poorly as you think I am performing mine. I certainly have been dis- satisfied with the slowness of Buell and McClellan ; but before I relieved them I had great fears I should not find successors to them who would do better; and I am sorry to add that I have seen little since to relieve those fears. I do not clearly see the prospect of any more rapid move- ments. I fear we shall at last find out that the diflBculty is in our case rather than in particular generals. I wish to disparage no one — certainly not those who sympathize with me; but I must say I need success more than I need sympathy, and that I have not seen the so much greater evidence of getting success from my sympathizers than from those who are denounced as the contrary. It does seem to me that in the field the two classes have been very much alike in what they have done and what they have failed to do. In sealing their faith with their blood. Baker and Lyon and Bohlen and Richardson, Republicans, did all that men could do; but did they any more than Kearny and Stevens and Reno and Mansfield, none of whom were Republicans, and some at least of whom have been bitterly and repeatedly denounced to me as secession sympathizers ^. I will not perform the ungrateful task of comparing cases of failure. In answer to your question, "Has it not been publicly LINCOLN 12 178 ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 stated in the newspapers, and apparently proved as a fact, that from the commencement of the war the enemy was continually supplied with information by some of the con- fidential subordinates of as important an officer as Adjutant General Thomas ?" I must say ''No," as far as my knowl- edge extends. And I add that if you can give any tangible evidence upon the subject, I will thank you to come to this city and do so. Very truly your friend, A. Lincoln. FROM THE ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER i, 1862, RECOMMENDING COMPENSATED EMANCIPATION Lincoln's earnest appeal for a solution of the difficulties presented by the slavery question and the Civil War by buying the slaves with the pro- ceeds of a government bond issue was by no means a new idea. It was the British plan in the West Indies, many years before. Lincoln had introduced a bill in Congress on January 16, 1849, providing for compensated emanci- pation in the District of Columbia. In his Peoria speech, on October 16, 1854, he had said: "It was frequently spoken of by members of Congress and by citizens of Washington six years ago; and I heard no one express a doubt that a sj^stem of gradual emancipation, with compensation to owners, would meet the approbation of a large majority of the white people of the District. But without the action of Congress they could say nothing; and Congress said no." Note Lincoln's modesty where he says: "Nor do I forget that some of you are my seniors, nor that many of you have more experience than I in the conduct of public affairs. Yet I trust that, in view of the great respon- sibility resting upon me, you will perceive no want of respect to yourselves in any undue earnestness I may seem to display." At least one sentence in this message is of the same high quality as the Gettysburg address: "We shall nobly save or meanly lose the last, best hope of earth." . . . On the 22d of September last a proclamation was issued by the Executive, a copy of which is herewith sub- mitted. In accordance with the purpose expressed in the second paragraph of that paper, I now respectfully recall your attention to what may be called "compensated eman- cipation." ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 1 79 A nation may be said to consist of its territory, its people, and its laws. The territory is the only part which is of cer- tain durability. "One generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth forever." It is of the first importance to duly consider and estimate this ever enduring part. That portion of the earth's surface which is owned and inhabited by the people of the United States is well adapted to be the home of one national family, and it is not well adapted for two or more. Its vast extent and its variety of climate and productions are of advantage in this age for one people, whatever they might have been in former ages. . . . There is no line, straight or crooked, suitable for a national boundary, upon which to divide. Trace through from east to west upon the line between the free and the slave country, and we shall find a little more than one third of its length are rivers, easy to be crossed, and populated, or soon to be populated, thickly upon both sides ; while nearly all its re- maining length are merely surveyors' lines, over which people may walk back and forth without any consciousness of their presence. No part of this line can be made any more difficult to pass, by writing it down on paper or parchment as a national boundary. The fact of separation, if it comes, gives up, on the part of the seceding section, the fugitive-slave clause, along with all other constitutional obligations upon the section seceded from, while I should expect no treaty stipulation would be ever made to take its place. But there is another difficulty. The great interior region bounded east by the Alleghenies, north by the British do- minions, west by the Rocky Mountains, and south by the line along which the culture of corn and cotton meets, . . . alread}^ has above ten millions of people, and will have fifty millions within fifty years, if not prevented by any political folly or mistake. It contains more than one third of the country owned by the United States — certainly more than one million of square miles. Once half as populous as l8o ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 Massachusetts alread}^ is, it would have more than seventy- five milHons of people. A glance at the map shows that, territorially speaking, it is the great body of the republic. The other parts are but marginal borders to it, the mag- nificent region sloping west from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific being the deepest, and also the richest, in undeveloped resources. In the production of provisions, grains, grasses, and all which proceed from them, this great interior region is naturally one of the most important in the world. Ascertain from the statistics the small proportion of the region which has, as yet, been brought into cultivation, and also the large and rapidly increasing amount of its prod- ucts, and we shall be overwhelmed with the magnitude of the prospect presented. And yet this region has no sea-coast, touches no ocean anywhere. As part of one nation, its people now find, and may forever find, their way to Europe by New York, to South America and Africa by New Orleans, and to Asia by San Francisco. But separate our common country into two nations, as designed by the present rebellion, and every man of this great interior region is thereby cut oflF from some one or more of these outlets — not perhaps by a physical barrier, but by embarrassing and onerous trade regulations. And this is true, wherever a dividing or boundary line may be fixed. Place it between the now free and slave country, or place it south of Kentucky, or north of Ohio, and still the truth remains that none south of it can trade to any port or place north of it, and none north of it can trade to any port or place south of it, except upon terms dictated by a government foreign to them. These outlets, east, west, and south, are indispensable to the well-being of the people inhabiting, and to inhabit, this vast interior region. Which of the three may be the best, is no proper question. All are better than either; and all of right belong to that people and their successors forever. True to themselves, they will not ask where a line of separation shall be, but will vow rather that there shall be no such line. Nor are the marginal regions ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 181 less interested in these communications to and through them to the great outside world. They too, and each of them, must have access to this Egypt of the west, without paying toll at the crossing of any national boundary. Our national strife springs not from our permanent part, not from the land we inhabit, not from our national home- stead. There is no possible severing of this but would mul- tiply and not mitigate evils among us. In all its adapta- tions and aptitudes it demands union and abhors separation. In fact it would ere long force reunion, however much of blood and treasure the separation might have cost. Our strife pertains to ourselves — to the passing genera- tions of men ; and it cannot without convulsion be hushed forever with the passing of one generation. I do not forget the gravity which should characterize a paper addressed to the Congress of the nation by the Chief Magistrate of the nation. Nor do I forget that some of you are my seniors, nor that many of you have more experience than I in the conduct of public affairs. Yet I trust that in view of the great responsibility resting upon me you- will perceive no want of respect to yourselves in any undue earnestness I may seem to display. Is it doubted, then, that the plan I propose, if adopted, would shorten the war and thus lessen its expenditure of money and of blood ? Is it doubted that it would restore the national authority and national prosperity, and perpetuate both indefinitely } Is it doubted that we here — Congress and Executive — can secure its adoption ? Will not the good people respond to a united and earnest appeal from us ^. Can we, can they, by any other means so certainly or so speedily assure these vital objects ? We can succeed only by concert. It is not ''Can any of us imagine better V but "Can we all do better V^ Object whatsoever is possible, still the question occurs, "Can we do better.?" The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion 1 82 LETTER TO ARMY OF THE POTOMAC, 1862 Is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occa- sion.^ As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country. Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this Administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. We say we are for the Union. The world will not forget that we say this. We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We — even we here — hold the power and bear the responsibility. In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free — honorable alike in what we give and what we pre- serve. We shall nobly save or meanly lose the last, best hope of earth. Other means may succeed ; this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just — a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless. LETTER OF THANKS TO THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC, AFTER THE DEFEAT AT FREDERICKSBURG It was the President's constant thought for the soldiers and his sympa- thetic understanding of their hardships, as evidenced by this letter and many others of the kind, that gave him their personal loyalty in such a remarkable degree. So it was that they came to know him as their "Father Abraham." December 22, 1862. To THE Army of the Potomac : I have just read your commanding general's report of the battle of Fredericksburg. Although you were not successful, the attempt was not an error, nor the failure other than accident. The courage with ^ Shakespearean — "King John," Act II, Scene i. LETTER TO MISS FANNY McCULLOUGH, 1S62 183 which you, in an open field, maintained the contest against an intrenched foe, and the consummate skill and success with which you crossed and recrossed the river in the face of the enemy, show that you possess all the qualities of a great army, which will yet give victory to the cause of the country and of popular government. Condoling with the mourners for the dead, and sympa- thizing with the severely wounded, I congratulate you that the number of both is comparatively so small. I tender to you, officers and soldiers, the thanks of the nation. A. Lincoln. LETTER TO MISS FANNY McCULLOUGH December 23, 1862. Dear Fanny : It is with deep regret that I learn of the death of your kind and brave father, and especially that it is affecting your young heart beyond what is common in such cases. In this sad world of ours sorrow comes to all, and to the young it comes with bittered agony because it takes them unawares. The older have learned ever to expect it. I am anxious to afford some alleviation of your present distress. Perfect relief is not possible except with time. You cannot now realize that you will ever feel better. Is not this so ? And yet it is a mistake. You are sure to be happy again. To know this, which is certainly true, will make you some less miserable now. I have had experience enough to know what I say, and you need only to believe it to feel better at once. The memory of your dear father, instead of an agony, will yet be a sad, sweet feeling in your heart, of a purer and holier sort than you have known before. Please present my kind regards to your afflicted mother. Your sincere friend, A. Lincoln. 1 84 EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, 1863 EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION January i, 1863 In submitting to his cabinet the preliminary proclamation of emancipation during the summer of 1862, Lincoln made this explanation: "When the rebel army was at Frederick I determined as soon as it should be driven out of Maryland to issue a proclamation of emancipation. I said nothing to any one; but I made the promise to myself, and" — hesitating — " to my Maker. The rebel army is now driven out and I am going to fulfill that promise." Secretary Seward advised withholding the proclamation until the next Union victory, and it was accordingly not made public until September 22, 1862, immediately following the battle of Antietam. The invocation of Divine favor with which the proclamation closes was written by Secretary Chase. The effect of the proclamation was felt most strongly abroad where public sentiment was hostile to slavery. Lincoln had wisely waited until this, the crowning act of his administration, could be done without seriously alienating the support of the states of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri. Two days after its promulgation in September the governors of the Northern states met at Altoona and sent an address to the President : "We hail with heartfelt gratitude and encouraged hope the proclamation." The recep- tion was generally favorable, although General McClellan reported some ex- pressions of dissatisfaction among the troops under his command. BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A Proclamation Whereas, on the twenty-second day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, a proclamation was issued by the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the following, to wit : *'That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any state, or designated part of a state, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the. United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, 1863 1 85 maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom. "That the Executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by proclamation, designate the states and parts of states, if any, in which the people thereof respectively shall then be in rebellion against the United States; and the fact that any state, or the people thereof, shall on that day be in good faith represented in the Congress of the United States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified voters of such state shall have par- ticipated, shall in the absence of strong countervailing testimony be deemed conclusive evidence that such state and the people thereof are not then in rebellion against the United States." Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as com- mander in chief of the army and navy of the United States, in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do, publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the states and parts of states wherein the people thereof, respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit : Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana (except the parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James, Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the city of New Orleans), Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkeley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, 1 86 LETTER TO MANCHESTER WORKINGMEN, 1863 York, Princess Anne, and Norfolk, including the cities of Nor- folk and Portsmouth), and which excepted parts are for the present left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued. And by virtue of the power and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated states and parts of states are, and hence- forward shall be, free; and that the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons. And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defense; and I recommend to them that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for reasonable wages. And I further declare and make known that such persons of suitable condition will be received into the armed service of the United States to garrison forts, positions, stations, and other places, and to man vessels of all sorts in said service. And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington, this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand (L. S.) eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the inde- pendence of the United States of America the eighty-seventh. . t Abraham Lincoln. By the President : William H. Seward, Secretary of State. LETTER TO THE WORKINGMEN OF MANCHESTER, ENGLAND In Manchester and wherever else in England labor in the cotton mills was the chief industry, the prosecution of the American war and the conse- LETTER TO MANCHESTER WORKINGMEN, 1S63 187 quent cutting off of the cotton supply from the European markets had thrown thousands out of employment and caused great suffering among the working people. This condition was being used by the English sympathizers with the South to force the British government to a recognition of the Confederacy. John Bright, the greatest English democrat of his generation, was in that crisis the staunch friend of the Lincoln administration. The mass meeting of six thousand workingmen held in Manchester on New Year's eve to celebrate the emancipation proclamation was a remarkable demonstration of heroism on the part of men whose livelihood seemed to depend upon the success of the Confederate government and who were yet ready to lend their moral support to the Union because they believed human slavery should be abolished. On January 30, 1863, John Bright wrote to Senator Charles Sumner: "I think in every town in the kingdom, a public meeting would go by an overwhelming majority in favor of President Lincoln and of the North." In this connection read the addresses of Henry Ward Beecher in 1863 at Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and Liverpool. Executive Mansion, Washington, January 19, 1863. To THE Workingmen of Manchester : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the address and resolutions which you sent me on the eve of the new year. When I came, on the 4th of March, 1861, through a free and con- stitutional election to preside in the government of the United States, the country was found at the verge of civil war. Whatever might have been the cause, or whosesoever the fault, one duty, paramount to all others, was before me, namely, to maintain and preserve at once the Constitution and the integrity of the federal republic. A conscientious purpose to perform this duty is the key to all the measures of administration which have been and to all which will hereafter be pursued. Under our frame of government and my official oath, I could not depart from this purpose if I would. It is not always in the power of governments to enlarge or restrict the scope of moral results which follow the policies that they may deem it necessary for the public safety from time to time to adopt. I have understood well that the duty of self-preservation rests solely with the American people ; but I have at the same time been aware that favor or disfavor of foreign l88 LETTER TO MANCHESTER WORKINGMEN, 1863 nations might have a material influence in enlarging or pro- longing the struggle with disloyal men in which the country- is engaged. A fair examination of history has served to authorize a belief that the past actions and influences of the United States were generally regarded as having been bene- ficial toward mankind. I have, therefore, reckoned upon the forbearance of nations. Circumstances — to some of which you kindly allude — induce me especially to expect that if justice and good faith should be practiced by the United States, they would encounter no hostile influence on the part of Great Britain. It is now a pleasant duty to acknowledge the demonstration you have given of your desire that a spirit of amity and peace toward this country may prevail in the councils of your Queen, who is respected and esteemed in your own country only more than she is by the kindred nation which has its home on this side of the Atlantic. I know and deeply deplore the suff"erings which the work- ingmen at Manchester, and in all Europe, are called to endure in this crisis. It has been often and studiously represented that the attempt to overthrow this government, which was built upon the foundation of human rights, and to substitute for it one which should rest exclusively on the basis of human slavery, was likely to obtain the favor of Europe. Through the action of our disloyal citizens, the workingmen of Europe have been subjected to severe trials, for the purpose of forcing their sanction to that attempt. Under the circumstances, 1 cannot but regard your decisive utterances upon the ques- tion as an instance of sublime Christian heroism which has not been surpassed in any age or in any country. It is indeed an energetic and reinspiring assurance of the inherent power of truth, and of the ultimate and universal triumph of justice, humanity, and freedom. I do not doubt that the sentiments you have expressed will be sustained by your great nation ; and, on the other hand, I have no hesitation in assuring you that they will excite admiration, esteem, and LETTER TO GENERAL HOOKER, 1863 1 89 the most reciprocal feelings of friendship among the American people. I hail this interchange of sentiment, therefore, as an augury that whatever else may happen, whatever misfortunes may befall your country or my own, the peace and friendship which now exist between the two nations will be, as it shall be my desire to make them, perpetual. Abraham Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER It was because he was known as "Fighting Joe" that Lincoln felt con- strained to warn him to "beware of rashness." That the President had other reasons to fear the success of Hooker's command is clear from this letter. The tone of the army was low, and public confidence regarding the loyalty of the troops had been severely shaken. This was quickly remedied when Hooker took command. That the letter was received in the spirit the writer hoped for was proved when Hooker said : "That is just such a letterasafather might write to a son. . . . Although I think he was harder on me than I deserved, I will say that I love the man who wrote it." Executive Mansion, Washington, D. C, January 26, 1863. General : I have placed you at the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of course I have done this upon what appear to me to be sufficient reasons, and yet I think it best for you to know that there are some things in regard to which I am not quite satisfied with you. I believe you to be a brave and skillful soldier, which of course I like. I also beheve you do not mix politics with your profession, in which you are right. You have confidence in yourself, which is a val- uable if not an indispensable quality. You are ambitious, which, within reasonable bounds, does good rather than harm; but I think that during General Burnside's command of the army you have taken counsel of your ambition and thwarted him as much as you could, in which you did a great wrong to the country and to a most meritorious and hon- orable brother officer. I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the I 190 LETTER TO GENERAL ROSECRANS, 1863 government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain successes can set up dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship. The government will support you to the utmost of its ability, which is neither more nor less than it has done and will do for all commanders. I much fear that the spirit which you have aided to infuse into the army, of criticising their commander and withholding confidence from him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist you as far as I can to put it down. Neither you nor Napoleon, if he were alive again, could get any good out of an army while such a spirit prevails in it; and now beware of rashness. Beware of rashness, but with energy and sleepless vigilance go forward and give us victories. Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL WILLIAM S. ROSECRANS Brigadier General W. S. Rosecrans was at this time in command of the Army of the Cumberland. For his brilliant services at the battle of Stone River he was long afterwards brevetted major general in the regular army. After the Civil War he held many important civil positions, among them, member of Congress, minister to Mexico, and register of the treasury. Executive Mansion, Washington, March 17, 1863. My dear Sir : I have just received your telegram saying that the "Secretary of War telegraphed after the battle of Stone River, 'Anything you and your command want you can have,'" and then specifying several things you have requested and have not received. The promise of the Secretary, as you state it, is certainly pretty broad, nevertheless it accords with the feeling of the whole government here toward you. I know not a single enemy of yours here. Still the promise must have a rea- I LETTER TO GENERAL ROSECRJNS, 1S63 191 sonable construction. We know you will not purposely make an unreasonable request, nor persist in one after it shall appear to be such. Now, as to the matter of a pay- master, you desired one to be permanently attached to your army, and, as I understand, desired that Major Larned should be the man. This was denied you ; and you seem to think it was denied partly to disoblige you and partly to disoblige Major Larned — the latter, as you suspect, at the instance of Paymaster-General Andrews. On the con- trary, the Secretary of War assures me the request was refused on no personal ground whatever, but because to grant it would derange, and substantially break up, the whole pay system as now organized, and so organized on very full consideration and sound reason, as believed. There is power- ful temptation in money; and it was and is believed that nothing can prevent the paymasters speculating upon the soldiers but a system by which each is to pay certain regiments so soon after he has notice that he is to pay those particular regiments that he has no time or opportunity to lay plans for speculating upon them. This precaution is all lost if paymasters respectively are to serve permanently with the same regiments, and pay them over and over during the war. No special application of this has been intended to be made to Major Larned or to your army. And as to General Andrews, I have in another connection felt a little aggrieved at what seemed to be his implicit following the advice and suggestions of Major Larned — so ready are we all to cry out and ascribe motives when our own toes are pinched. Now as to your request that your commission should date from December, 1861. Of course you expected to gain something by this; but you should remember that precisely so much as you should gain by it others would lose by it. If the thing you sought had been exclusively ours, we would have given it cheerfully ; but, being the right of other men, we having a merely arbitrary power over it, the taking it 192 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL HOOKER, 1863 from them and giving it to you became a delicate matter and more deserving of consideration. Truth to speak, I do not appreciate this matter of rank on paper as you officers \ do. The world will not forget that you fought the battle of; Stone River, and it will never care a fig whether you rank General Grant on paper, or he so ranks you. As to the appointment of an aide contrary to your wishes, I knew nothing of it until I received your dispatch ; and the Secretary of War tells me he has known nothing of it, but will trace it out. The examination of course will extend to the case of R. S. Thomas, whom you say you wish appointed. And now be assured you wrong both yourself and us when you even suspect there is not the best disposition on the part of us all here to oblige you. Yours very truly, ' . A. Lincoln. TELEGRAM TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER, JUNE 10, 1863 The last sentence, "If he stays where he is, fret him and fret him," is prophetic of the method by which General Grant nearly two years later overwhelmed Lee and forced his surrender at Appomattox. Major General Hooker : Your long dispatch of to-day is just received. If left to me I would not go south of the Rappahannock upon Lee's moving north of it. If you had Richmond invested to-day you would not be able to take it in twenty days ; meanwhile your communications, and with them your army, would be ruined. I think Lee's army, and not Richmond, is your true objective point. If he comes toward the upper Potomac, follow on his flank and on his inside track, shortening your Hnes while he lengthens his. Fight him, too, when opportunity offers. If he stays where he is, fret him and fret him. A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT, 1S63 193 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER A characteristic dispatch in Lincoln's colloquial style. Washington, June 14, 1863, 5.50 p.m. Major General Hooker : So far as we can make out here, the enemy have Milroy surrounded at Winchester, and Tyler at Martinsburg. If they could hold out a few days, could you help them ? If the head of Lee's army is at Martinsburg and the tail of it on the plank road between Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, the animal must be very slim somewhere. Could you not break him ? A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT "I now wish to make the personal acknowledgment that you were right and I was wrong." Lincoln's ability to make this confession is one proof of his greatness. Executive Mansion, Washington, July 13, 1863. My dear General : I do not remember that you and I ever met personally. I write this now as a grateful acknowl- edgment for the almost inestimable service you have done the country. I wish to say a word further. When you first reached the vicinity of Vicksburg, I thought you should do what you finally did — march the troops across the neck, run the batteries with the transports, and thus go below; and I never had any faith, except a general hope that vou knew better than I, that the Yazoo Pass expedition and the like could succeed. When you got below and took Port Gibson, Grand Gulf, and vicinity, I thought you should go down the river and join General Banks, and when you turned northward, east of the Big Black, I feared it was a mistake. I now wish to make the personal acknowledgment that you were right and I was wrong. Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. LINCOLN 13 194 LETTER TO MRS. LINCOLN, 1863 FROM A LETTER TO MRS. LINCOLN Executive Mansion, Washington, August 8, 1863. My dear Wife : All as well as usual, and no particular trouble anyway. I put the money into the Treasury at five per cent, with the privilege of withdrawing it any time upon thirty days' notice. I suppose you are glad to learn this. Tell dear Tad poor "Nanny Goat" is lost, and Mrs. Cuthbert and I are in distress about it. The day you left, Nanny was found resting herself and chewing her little cud on the middle of Tad's bed ; but now she's gone ! The gardener kept complaining that she destroyed the flowers, till it was concluded to bring her down to the White House. This was done, and the second day she had disappeared and has not been heard of since. This is the last we know of poor "Nanny." . . . LETTER TO JAMES H. HACKETT Lincoln was embarrassed by Hackett's publication of this letter and by the savage comment which it evoked from the New York Herald, but j wrote again: "I have not been much shocked by the newspaper com- jj ments upon it. . . . I have endured a great deal of ridicule without much J malice; and have received a great deal of kindness, not quite free from j ridicule." I As far back as 1833, at New Salem, Lincoln had been a close student of * Shakespeare. John Hay, his private secretary and biographer, says of hif life in the White House: "He would there read Shakespeare for hours witl a single secretary for audience. The plays he most affected were " Hamlet/ "Macbeth," and the series of histories; among these he never tired o " Richard the Second." The terrible outburst of grief and despair int( which Richard falls in the third act had a peculiar fascination for him. I have heard him read it at Springfield, at the White House, and at the Soldiers' Home. He read Shakespeare more than all other writers together." "Addresses of John Hay," p. 334. Executive Mansion, Washington, August 17, 1863. My DEAR Sir : Months ago I should have acknowledged LETTER TO J. H. UACKETT, 1S63 195 the receipt of your book and accompanying kind note ; and I now have to beg your pardon for not having done so. For one of my age I have seen very httle of the drama. The first presentation of FalstafF I ever saw was yours here, last winter or spring. Perhaps the best compHment I can pay is to say, as I truly can, I am very anxious to see it again. Some of Shakespeare's plays I have never read ; while others I have gone over perhaps as frequently as any unpro- fessional reader. Among the latter are " Lear," " Richard III," " Henry VIII," " Hamlet," and especially " Macbeth." I think nothing equals " Macbeth." It is wonderful. Unlike you gentlemen of the profession, I think the soHloquyin " Hamlet" commencing "Oh, my offense is rank," surpasses that commencing "To be or not to be." But pardon this small attempt at criticism. I should hke to hear you pronounce the opening speech of Richard III. Will you not soon visit Washington again ^. If you do, please call and let me make your personal acquaintance. Yours trul}^ A. Lincoln. LETTER TO JAMES C. CONKLING Lincoln called this his "stump speech." It was sent to Mr. Conkling, a .Springfield lawyer, with the request that Mr. Conkling himself read it before the mass convention of "Unconditional Union" men at Springfield. Mr. Conkling had been a member of the Illinois legislature and of the first >tate central committee of the Republican party and a presidential elector n i860. As presidential elector for Illinois, he voted for Lincoln's reelec- tion in 1864. Lincoln was justly proud of this letter. It is one of the best examples of his skill in argument, and it had remarkable effect in allaying the dis- content of those who opposed the emancipation of the slaves. There are many strong sentences in it. For example: "The Father of Waters again goes unvexed to the sea," and "And then there will be some black men who can remember that with silent tongue, and clenched teeth, and steady eye, and well-poised bayonet, they have helped mankind on to this great consum- mation, while I fear there will be some white ones unable to forget that with malignant heart and deceitful speech they strove to hinder it." 196 LETTER TO J. C. CON KLIN G, 1863 Lincoln's accompanying note read in part: "You are one of the best public readers. I have but one suggestion — read it very slowly. And now God bless you and all good Union men," Executive Mansion, Washington, August 26, 1863. My dear Sir : Your letter inviting me to attend a mass meeting of Unconditional Union men, to be held at the capital of Illinois on the third day of September, has been received. It would be very agreeable to me to thus meet my old friends at my own home, but I cannot just now be absent from here so long as a visit there would require. The meeting is to be of all those who maintain uncondi- tional devotion to the Union ; and I am sure my old political friends will thank me for tendering, as I do, the nation's gratitude to those and other noble men whom no partisan malice or partisan hope can make false to the nation's life. There are those who are dissatisfied with me. To such I would say : You desire peace, and you blame me that we do not have it. But how can we attain it ^ There are but three conceivable ways. First, to suppress the rebellion by force of arms. This I am trying to do. Are you for it .? If you are, so far we are agreed. If you are not for it, a second way is to give up the Union. I am against this. Are you for it 1 If you are, you should say so plainly. If you are not for force, nor yet for dissolution, there only remains some imaginable compromise. I do not believe any compromise embracing the maintenance of the Union is now possible. All I learn leads to a directly opposite belief. The strength of the rebellion is its military, its army. That army dominates all the country and all the people within its range. Any offer of terms made by any man or men within that range, in opposition to that army, is simply nothing for the present, because such man or men have no power whatever to enforce their side of a compromise, if one were made with them. To illustrate : Suppose refugees from the South and peace LETTER TO J. C. CONKLINGy 1863 197 men of the North get together in convention, and frame and proclaim a compromise embracing a restoration of the Union. In what way can that compromise be used to keep Lee's army out of Pennsylvania ? Meade's army can keep Lee's out of Pennsylvania, and, I think, can ultimately drive it out of existence. But no paper compromise, to which the controllers of Lee's army are not agreed, can at all affect that army. In an effort at such compromise we should waste time which the enemy would improve to our disadvantage; and that would be all. A compromise, to be effective, must be made either with those who control the rebel army, or with the people first liberated from the domination of that army by the success of our own army. Now, allow me to assure you that no word or intimation from that rebel army, or from any of the men controlling it, in relation to any peace compromise, has ever come to my knowledge or belief. All charges and insinuations to the contrary are deceptive and groundless. And I promise you that if any such proposition shall hereafter come, it shall not be rejected and kept a secret from you. I freely acknowledge myself the servant of the people, according to the bond of service — the United States Constitution — and that, as such, I am responsible to them. But to be plain. You are dissatisfied with me about the negro. Quite likely there is a difference of opinion between you and myself upon that subject. I certainly wish that all men could be free, while I suppose you do not. Yet I have neither adopted nor proposed any measure which is not con- sistent with even your views, provided you are for the Union. I suggested compensated emancipation, to which you replied, you wished not to be taxed to buy negroes. But I had not asked you to be taxed to buy negroes, except in such way as to save you from greater taxation to save the Union ex- clusively by other means. You dislike the Emancipation Proclamation, and perhaps would have it retracted. You say it is unconstitutional. I think differently. I think the Constitution invests its 198 LETTER TO J. C. CONKLING, 1863 commander in chief with the law of war in time of war. The most that can be said — if so much — is that slaves are property. Is there — has there ever been — any question that, by the law of war, property, both of enemies and friends, may be taken when needed ? And is it not needed whenever taking it helps us or hurts the enemy ? Armies the world over destroy enemies' property when they cannot use it, and even destroy their own to keep it from the enemy. Civilized belligerents do all in their power to help themselves or hurt the enemy, except a few things regarded as barbarous or cruel. Among the exceptions are the massacre of van- quished foes and noncombatants, male and female. But the proclamation, as law, either is valid or is not valid. If it is not valid, it needs no retraction. If it is valid, it cannot be retracted any more than the dead can be brought to life. Some of you profess to think its retraction would operate favorably for the Union. Why better after the retraction than before the issue ? There was more than a year and a half of trial to suppress the rebellion before the proclamation issued, the last one hundred days of which passed under an explicit notice that it was coming, unless averted by those in revolt returning to their allegiance. The war has certainly progressed as favorably for us since the issue of the proclamation as before. I know, as fully as one can know the opinions of others, that some of the commanders of our armies in the field who have given us our most important successes, believe the emancipation policy and the use of colored troops constitute the heaviest blow yet dealt to the rebellion, and that at least one of these important successes could not have been achieved when it was, but for the aid of black soldiers. Among the commanders holding these views are some who have never had any affinity with what is called Abolitionism or with Republican party politics, but who hold them purely as military opinions. I submit these opinions as being entitled to some weight against the objections often urged, that emancipation and arming the blacks are unwise LETTER TO J. C. CONKLING, 1863 199 as military measures, and were not adopted as such in good faith. You say you will not fight to free negroes. Some of them seem willing to fight for you ; but no matter. Fight you, then, exclusively to save the Union. I issued the proclama- tion on purpose to aid you in saving the Union. Whenever you shall have conquered all resistance to the Union, if I shall urge you to continue fighting, it will be an apt time then for you to declare you will not fight to free negroes. I thought that in your struggles for the Union, to whatever extent the negroes should cease helping the enemy, to that extent it weakened the enemy in his resistance to you. Do you think differently .? I thought that whatever negroes could be got to do as soldiers leaves just so much less for white soldiers to do in saving the Union. Does it appear otherwise to you ? But negroes, like other people, act upon motives. Why should they do anything for us, if we will do nothing for them } If they stake their lives for us, they must be prompted by the strongest motive, even the promise of freedom. And the promise being made, must be kept. The signs look better. The Father of Waters again goes unvexed to the sea. Thanks to the great Northwest for it. Nor yet wholly to them. Three hundred miles up they met New England, Empire, Keystone, and Jersey hewing their way right and left. The sunny South, too, in more colors than one, also lent a hand. On the spot, their part of the history was jotted down in black and white. The job was a great national one, and let none be banned who bore an honorable part in it. And while those who have cleared the great river may well be proud, even that is not all. It is hard to say that anything has been more bravely and well done than at Antietam, Murfreesboro, Gettysburg, and on many fields of lesser note. Nor must Uncle Sam's web-feet be forgotten. At all the watery margins they have been present. Not only on the deep sea, the broad bay, and the rapid river, but also up the narrow, muddy bayou, and zoo MEMORANDUM, 1863 wherever the ground was a Httle damp, they have been and made their tracks. Thanks to all — for the great Republic — for the principle it lives by and keeps alive — for man's vast future — thanks to all. Peace does not appear so distant as it did. I hope it will come soon, and come to stay ; and so come as to be worth the keeping in all future time. It will then have been proved that among freemen there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet, and that they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case and pay the cost. And then there will be some black men who can remember that with silent tongue, and clenched teeth, and steady eye, and well-poised bayonet, they have helped mankind on to this great con- summation, while I fear there will be some white ones unable , to forget that with malignant heart and deceitful speech they strove to hinder it. Still, let us not be over-sanguine of a speedy, final triumph. Let us be quite sober. Let us diligently apply the means, never doubting that a just God, in His own good time, will give us the rightful result. ^r , Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. MEMORANDUM September 26, 1863 This was indorsed on a military document, immediately after the battle of Chickamauga. It is an interesting memorandum, because it shows Lincoln's mental curiosity and his leaning toward an interest in things occult. It is here published for the first time. A curious coincidence occurred in the relieving of General Negley — to wit, that the Secretary's order relieving him, and Gen. Foster's request to have him relieved were simul- taneous, and independent of each other. I do not know what Foster's reason was; but I understand Stanton's to be that Negley was disinclined to raise colored troops, and Mr. S. wanted some one who would take to it more heartily. A. Lincoln, Sept. 26, 1863. GETTYSBURG ADDRESS, 1863 201 ADDRESS AT THE DEDICATION OF THE NATIONAL CEMETERY AT GETTYSBURG November 19, 1863 The Gettysburg address was delivered in response to an invitation given to the President on November second to " set apart the cemetery grounds to their sacred use by a few appropriate remarks." The oration of the day was by Edward Everett and was two hours long. Lincoln had thought out what he was to say and at the last committed the address to paper, writing the con- cluding sentences in pencil after he reached Gettysburg. He read it slowly from two sheets of paper, making slight changes in the form of expression as he read, and showing deep feeling when he came to the words: "The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here." An audience of perhaps a hundred thousand, after standing through a program of four hours' duration, listened to hrs speech and felt disappointed that it was so short. The words "under God" in the last sentence were not in the original draft, but were spoken under the solemn impulse of the occasion. One who was present has given us this description: "The tall form of the President appeared on the stand and never before have I seen a crowd so vast and restless, after standing so long, so soon stilled and quieted. Hats were removed and all stood motionless to catch the first words he should utter, and as he slowly, clearly, and without the least sign of embarrassment read and spoke, you could not mistake the feeling and sentiment of the vast multitude before him." Another: "It seemed to me I had never seen any other human being who was so stately, and, I may say, majestic, and yet benignant. His features had a sad, mournful, almost haggard, and still hopeful expression." To Everett's note of praise for the thoughts expressed "with such elo- quent simplicity and appropriateness," Lincoln replied: "In our respective parts yesterday you could not have been excused to make a short address, nor I a long one. I am pleased to know that in your judgment the little I did say was not a failure." For accounts of the occasion, see "The Gettys- burg Address," by Maj. William H. Lambert; "Recollections of Lincoln," by Gen. James Grant Wilson in Putnam's Magazine for February, 1909; "History of the Battle of Gettysburg," by Samuel P. Bates; "Two Visits to Gettysburg," Scribner's Magazine, ]u[y, 1893 ; "Lincoln at Gettysburg," an Address, Clark E. Carr, Chicago, 1906. Fourscore and seven 3^ears ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Hberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether 202 J D DRESS TO GENERAL GRANT, 1864 that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But in a larger sense we cannot dedicate — we cannot con- secrate — we cannot hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remain- ing before us — that from these honored dead we take in- creased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion ; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain ; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom ; and that govern- ment of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. ADDRESS TO GENERAL GRANT March 9, 1864 Grant was summoned to Washington as soon as he received his appoint- ment as Lieutenant General. It was his first visit to the capital since the beginning of the war. He attended a reception at the White House in the evening and received such an ovation that he had to seek shelter behind a sofa to escape the crowd. It was the first time that Grant and Lincoln had met. The commission was delivered at noon on the next day, in the presence of the Cabinet and a few other men. The President then made the little speech which follows. Later, some one asked Lincoln's im- pression of Grant and he answered : " I hardly know what to think of him. He's the quietest little fellow you ever saw." General Grant : The nation's appreciation of what you have done, and its reliance upon you for what remains to do, ADDRESS AT SANITARY FAIR, 1864 203 in the existing great struggle, are now presented with this commission, constituting you Lieutenant General in the Army of the United States. With this high honor devolves upon you also a correspond- ing responsibility. As the country herein trusts you, so, under God, it will sustain you. I scarcely need add, that with what I here speak for the nation, goes my own hearty personal concurrence. ADDRESS ON CLOSING THE SANITARY FAIR Washington, March 18, 1864 This was one of a number of great fairs held from time to time during the war to raise money with which to provide for the comfort and happi- ness of the soldiers at the front and in the hospitals. The Christian Sani- tary Commission, which managed these affairs, was organized everywhere in the North and, largely through the efforts of the women, earned and spent millions of dollars in aid of the soldiers. I appear to say but a word. This extraordinary war in which we are engaged falls heavily upon all classes of people, but the most heavily upon the soldier. For it has been said, "all that a man hath will he give for his life"; and while all contribute of their substance, the soldier puts his Hfe at stake, and often yields it up in his country's cause. The \ highest merit, then, is due to the soldier. In this extraordinary war extraordinary developments have manifested themselves, such as have not been seen in former wars ; and amongst these manifestations nothing has been more remarkable than these fairs for the relief of suffering soldiers and their families. And the chief agents in these fairs are the women of America. I am not accustomed to the language of eulogy. I have never studied the art of paying compliments to women. But I must say, that if all that has been said by orators and poets since the creation of the world in praise of women were applied to the women of America, it would not do them 204 LETTER TO A. G. HODGES, 1864 justice for their conduct during this war. I will close by saying, God bless the women of America ! LETTER TO ALBERT G. HODGES This letter is Lincoln's expansion of the central thought in his letter to Horace Greeley (p. 172) that emancipation was a war measure justified under the Constitution by indispensable necessity. The most significant sentence as indicating Lincoln's own judgment of himself — for Lincoln was singularly averse to self-exploitation — is "I claim not to have con- trolled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me." The final sentence is his first written expression of what was to be the dominant thought in the second inaugural address. A comparison of this sentence with its exquisite expanded form in the inaugural affords a profitable study of Lincoln's ability to enrich the expression of a great thought by restate- ment. The passage to be compared begins "The Almighty has his own purposes" and closes with "The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether" (p. 216). Colonel Albert Gallatin Hodges was for many years state printer of Ken- tucky. He was at this time editor of The Commonwealth at Frankfort, Ky., originally a Whig paper, then Know-nothing, and during the Civil War a Union publication. This letterwas called forth by an interview with Colonel Hodges, Governor Bramlette, and Archibald Dixon, who protested against the enrollment of negro soldiers, but were persuaded by President Lincoln to consent whenever Kentucky should fail to furnish her quota of white men. Executive Mansion, Washington, April 4, 1864. My dear Sir : You ask me to put in writing the sub- stance of what I verbally said the other day in your pres- ence, to Governor Bramlette and Senator Dixon. It was about as follows : "I am naturally antislavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel, and yet I have never understood that the presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling. It was in the oath that I took, that I would, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not take the office without taking the oath. LETTER TO A. G. HODGES, 1864 205 Nor was it my view that I might take an oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power. I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many times and in many ways. And I aver that, to this day, I have done no official act in mere deference to my abstract feeling and judgment on slavery. I did understand, how- ever, that my oath to preserve the Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of preserving, by every indispensable means, that government — that nation, of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose the nation and yet preserve the Constitution ^ By general law, life and limb must be protected, yet often a limb must be amputated to save a life ; but a life is never wisely given to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful by becoming indis- pensable to the preservation of the Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I assumed this ground,' and now avow it. I could not feel that, to the best of my ability, I had even tried to preserve the Constitu- tion, if, to save slavery or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government, country, and Constitution, al- together. When, early in the war. General Fremont at- tempted military emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an indispensable necessity. When, a little later. General Cameron, then Secretary of War, sug- gested the arming of the blacks, I objected, because I did not think it an indispensable necessity. When, still later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I again forbade it, because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When, in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals to the border states to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the indispensable necessity for military emancipation and arming the blacks would come, unless averted by that 206 LETTER TO A. G. HODGES, 1864 measure. They declined the proposition, and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative of either surrender- ing the Union, and with it the Constitution, or laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss ; but of this I was not entirely confident. More than a year of trial now shows no loss by it in our foreign relations, none in our home popular sentiment, none in our white military force — no loss by it anyhow or anywhere. On the contrary, it shows a gain of quite one hundred and thirty thousand soldiers, seamen, and laborers. These are palpable facts, about which, as facts, there can be no caviling. We have the men, and we could not have had them without the measure. "And now let any Union man who complains of the measure, test himself by writing down in one line that he is for subduing the rebellion by force of arms ; and in the next that he is for taking these hundred and thirty thousand men from the Union side, and placing them where they would be but for the measure he condemns. If he cannot face his case so stated, it is only because he cannot face the truth." I add a word which was not in the verbal conversation. In telling this tale, I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me. Now, at the end of three years' struggle, the nation's condition is not what either party, or any man, devised or expected. God alone can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North, as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God. Yours truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT, 1S64 207 TELEGRAM TO MRS. LINCOLN April 28, 1864. Mrs. a. Lincoln, New York. The draft will go to you. Tell Tad the goats and father are very well, especially the goats. A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT Executive Mansion, Washington, April 30, 1864. Lieutenant General Grant : Not expecting to see you again before the spring campaign opens, I wish to express in this way my entire satisfaction with what you have done up to this time, so far as I understand it. The particulars of your plans I neither know nor seek to know. You are vigilant and self-reliant; and, pleased with this, I wish not to obtrude any constraints or restraints upon you. While I am very anxious that any great disaster or capture of our men in great numbers shall be avoided, I know these points are less likely to escape your attention than they would be mine. If there is anything wanting which is within my power to give, do not fail to let me know it. And now, with a brave army and a just cause, may God sustain you. Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. SPEECH IN RESPONSE TO A DELEGATION FROM THE NATIONAL UNION LEAGUE June 9, 1864 President Lincoln was renominated by a convention of all "those desiring the maintenance of the Union, the supremacy of the Constitution, and the vigorous prosecution of the war," held at Baltimore on June 8, 1864. Dis- satisfied radicals had held a Republican convention at Cleveland a week earlier to prevent Lincoln's nomination or to defeat him in the election; but they adjourned without accomplishing anything. This opposition was 208 SPEECH ACCEPTING SECOND NOMINATION, 1864 led by Horace Greeley, General John C. Fremont, and Secretary Salmon P. Chase. The nomination at Baltimore was unanimous. Lincoln's modesty in the little speech becomes almost humility. He refused to let the dignity of his place deter him from employing the simple and homely western figure of speech in the last sentence, and this quaint conclusion was greeted by his audience with prolonged laughter and applause. Gentlemen : I can only say in response to the kind re- marks of your chairman, as I suppose, that I am very grateful for the renewed confidence which has been accorded to me both by the convention and by the National League. I am not insensible at all to the personal compliment there is in this, and yet I do not allow myself to believe that any but a small portion of it is to be appropriated as a personal com- pliment. That really the convention and the Union League assembled with a higher view — that of taking care of the interests of the country for the present and the great future — and that the part I am entitled to appropriate as a compli- ment is only that part which I may lay hold of as being the opinion of the convention and of the League, that I am not entirely unworthy to be intrusted with the place which I have occupied for the last three years. But I do not allow myself to suppose that either the convention or the League have concluded to decide that I am either the greatest or best man in America, but rather they have concluded that it is not best to swap horses while crossing the river, and have further concluded that I am not so poor a horse that they might not make a botch of it in trying to swap. TELEGRAM TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT August 17, 1864. Lieutenant General Grant, City Point, Va. : I have seen your dispatch expressing your unwillingness to break your hold where you are. Neither am I willing. Hold on with a bulldog grip, and chew and choke as much as possible. A. Lincoln. SPEECH TO THE i66th OHIO VOLUNTEERS, 1864 209 FROM A SPEECH TO THE i66th OHIO VOLUNTEERS August 22, 1864 Lincoln's hold on the common people is explained by his willingness to say in all simplicity such things as "I happen, temporarily, to occupy this White House. I am a living witness that any one of your children may look to come here as my father's child has." Soldiers : . . . I almost always feel inclined, when I happen to say anything to soldiers, to impress upon them, in a few brief remarks, the importance of success in this contest. It is not merely for to-day, but for all time to come, that we should perpetuate for our children's children that great and free government which we have enjoyed all our lives. I beg you to remember this, not merely for my sake, but for yours. I happen, temporarily, to occupy this White House. I am a living witness that any one of your children may look to come here as my father's child has. It is in order that each one of you may have, through this free government which we have enjoyed, an open field and a fair chance for your industry, enterprise, and intelligence ; that you may all have equal privileges in the race of hfe, with all its desirable human aspirations. It is for this the struggle should be maintained, that we may not lose our birthright — not only for one, but for two or three years. The nation is worth fighting for, to secure such an inestimable jewel. MEMORANDUM August 23, 1864 The President wrote this depressing memorandum and carefully sealed it, and, without disclosing its contents, asked each member of the cabinet to indorse his signature upon it. In November, 1864, after a triumphant reelection, he asked Secretary Hay to open it, and Lincoln then read it aloud at the cabinet meeting. See "Abraham Lincoln, A History," by Nicolay and Hay, vol. IX, p. 251. This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this administration will not be reelected. LINCOLN — 14 2IO LETTER TO MRS. BIX BY, 1S64 Then it will be my duty to so cooperate with the President- elect as to save the Union between the election and the in- auguration ; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he cannot possibly save it afterward. A. Lincoln. FROM A RESPONSE TO A SERENADE November 9, 1864 ... I am thankful to God for this approval of the people ; but while deeply grateful for this mark of their confidence in me, if I know my heart, my gratitude is free from any taint of personal triumph. I do not impugn the motives of any one opposed to me. It is no pleasure to me to triumph over any one, but I give thanks to the Almighty for this evidence of the people's resolution to stand by free government and the rights of humanity. LETTER TO MRS. BIXBY This letter, the two inaugural addresses, the Springfield farewell, and the Gettysburg address are considered by the critics to be the best examples a of the purity and power of Lincoln's literary style. 'i| Executive Mansion, Washington, November 21, 1864. Dear Madam : I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massa- chusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle. I feel how weak and fruitless must be any words of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering to you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished LETTER TO DEACON PHILLIPS, 1864 211 memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom. Yours very sincerely and respectfully, Abraham Lincoln. LETTER TO DEACON JOHN PHILLIPS Deacon John Phillips, Sturbridge, Massachusetts, who had voted at every presidential election since 1789, was at this time 104 years old. Executive Mansion, Washington, November 21, 1864. My dear Sir : I have heard of the incident at the polls in your town, in which you acted so honorable a part, and I take the liberty of writing to you to express my personal gratitude for the compliment paid me by the suffrage of a citizen so venerable. The example of such devotion to civic duties in one whose days have already been extended an average lifetime beyond the Psalmist's limit, cannot but be valuable and fruitful. It is not for myself only, but for the country which you have in your sphere served so long and so well, that I thank you. Your friend and servant, Abraham Lincoln. MEMORANDUM December 3, 1864 On Thursday of last week, two ladies from Tennessee came before the President, asking the release of their husbands held as prisoners of war at Johnson's Island. They were put off until Friday, when they came again, and were again put off until Saturday. At each of the interviews one of the ladies urged that her husband was a religious man, and on Saturday the President ordered the release of the pris- 212 LETTER TO GENERAL SHERMAN, 1864 oners, when he said to this lady : "You say your husband is a rehgious man ; tell him when you meet him, that I say I am not much of a judge of religion, but that, in my opinion, the religion that sets men to rebel and fight against their government, because, as they think, that government does not sufficiently help some men to eat their bread in the sweat of other men's faces, is not the sort of religion upon which people can get to heaven." A. Lincoln. RESPONSE TO A SERENADE December 6, 1864 Friends and Fellow Citizens : I believe I shall never be old enough to speak without embarrassment when I have nothing to talk about. I have no good news to tell you, and yet I have no bad news to tell. We have talked of elections until there is nothing more to say about them. The most interesting news we now have is from Sherman. We all know where he went in, but I can't tell where he will come out. I will now close by proposing three cheers for General Sherman and his army. LETTER TO GENERAL WILLIAM T. SHERMAN The reference is to Sherman's famous "March to the Sea." Lincoln's willingness to give all the credit to his generals and their men is characteristic of a commander in chief whose freedom from jealousy and from self-seeking won for him the loving loyalty of the soldiers. Executive Mansion, Washington, December 26, 1864. My dear General Sherman : Many, many thanks for your Christmas gift, the capture of Savannah. When you were about leaving Atlanta for the Atlantic coast, I was anxious, if not fearful ; but feeling that you were the better judge, and remembering that ''nothing risked, nothing gained," I did not interfere. Now, the undertaking LETTER TO DR. MACLEAN, 1864 213 being a success, the honor is all yours ; for I believe none of us went further than to acquiesce. j And taking the work of General Thomas into the count, as it should be taken, it is indeed a great success. Not only does it afford the obvious and immediate military ad- vantages ; but in showing to the world that your army could be divided, putting the stronger part to an important new service, and yet leaving enough to vanquish the old opposing force of the whole, — Hood's army, — it brings those who sat in darkness to see a great light. ^ But what next ^. I suppose it will be safe if I leave General Grant and yourself to decide. Please make my grateful acknowledgments to your whole army — officers and men. ^r ^ , ^ Yours very truly, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO DR. JOHN MACLEAN The degree of Doctor of Laws conferred upon Abraham Lincoln by Prince- ton University and by Columbia was a recognition of the learning of the author of the Cooper Institute speech and the scholarship which made possible the Gettysburg address, but it was most of all a tribute to the wisdom of a great servant of the people as proved by his effort to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." Executive Mansion, Washington, December 27, 1864. My dear Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of your note of the 20th of December, conveying the announcement that the trustees of the College of New Jersey had conferred upon me the degree of Doctor of Laws. The assurance conveyed by this high compliment, that the course of the government which I represent has received the approval of a body of gentlemen of such character and intelli- gence, in this time of public trial is most grateful to me. Thoughtful men must feel that the fate of civilization upon this continent is involved in the issue of our contest. 1 Quoting Isaiah, ix, 2. 214 LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT, 1865 Among the most gratifying proofs of this conviction is the hearty devotion everywhere exhibited by our schools and colleges to the national cause. I am most thankful if my labors have seemed to conduce to the preservation of those institutions under which alone we can expect good government — and in its train, sound learning and the progress of the liberal arts. I am, sir, very truly, your obedient servant, A. Lincoln. LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT Robert Todd Lincoln, the President's eldest son, received a captain's commission in response to this request. In later years he served his country with distinction as Secretary of War and Ambassador to Great Britain. Executive Mansion, Washington, January 19, 1865. Lieutenant General Grant : Please read and answer this letter as though I was not President, but only a friend. My son, now in his twenty-second year, having graduated at Harvard, wishes to see something of the war before it ends. I do not wish to put him in the ranks, nor yet to give him a commission, to which those who have already served long are better entitled, and better quahfied to hold. Could he, without embarrassment to you or detriment to the service, go into your military family with some nominal rank, I, and not the public, furnishing his necessary means t If no, say so without the least hesitation, because I am as anxious and as deeply interested that you shall not be encumbered as you can be yourself. ^ ^ ^ ■^ ^ Yours truly, A. Lincoln. THE SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS March 4, 1865 Lincoln's own estimate of the second inaugural address is given in his letter to Thurlow Weed (p. 217). His expectation, there expressed, has been realized. It is doubtful if, with the exception of the Gettysburg address, SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1865 215 anything has been produced in America that surpasses it in clearness of style, in beauty of form, in prophetic vision, or in that "high seriousness" which Matthew Arnold deems the essence of poetry. The contrast between the occasion and that of the first inaugural is well drawn by the speaker. The appearance of the man himself had changed in the four years' interval. The lines of his face had deepened, the sunny smile that men knew so well had disappeared ; his own sorrows and those of his people had left their mark upon him until the look of "other-worldliness" had become its dominant expression. Many who watched the speaker felt, as Horace Greeley did, "that his life hung by so slender a thread that any new access of trouble or excess of effort might suddenly close his career." Fellow Countrymen : At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have -been con- stantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly de- pends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured. On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago, all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it — all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted alto- gether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war — seeking to dissolve the Union, and divide eff'ects, by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came. One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in 2l6 SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1865 the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insur- gents would rend the Union, even by war ; while the govern- ment claimed no right to do more than to restrict the terri- torial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither antici- pated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astound- ing. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God ; and each invokes his aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assist- ance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered — that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses ! for it must needs be that offenses come ; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through his appointed time, he now wills to remove, and that he gives to both North and South this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to him .^ Fondly do we hope — fervently do we pray — that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must LETTER TO THURLOW WEED, 1865 21 7 be said, "The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether." With mahce toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the na- tion's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan — to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations. LETTER TO THURLOW WEED Executive Mansion, Washington, March 15, 1865. Dear Mr. Weed : Every one hkes a compliment. Thank you for yours on my little notification speech and on the recent inaugural address. I expect the latter to wear as well as — perhaps better than — anything I have produced; but I beheve it is not immediately popular. Men are not flattered by being shown that there has been a difference of purpose between the Almighty and them. To deny it, however, in this case, is to deny that there is a God governing the world. It is a truth which I thought needed to be told, and, as whatever of humiliation there is in it falls most directly on myself, I thought others might afford for me to tell it. Truly yours, A. Lincoln. THE LAST PUBLIC SPEECH April II, 1865 This outline of Lincoln's views as to how best to restore to their proper relations with the Union the states whose attempted secession had at last been made impossible, was prepared with great care and read by the President from one of the windows of the White House. As he read he dropped the sheets of paper to the floor, and little Tad, his father's constant comrade. 21 8 LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 scrambled over the floor, picking them up and eagerly calling out for " 'nother paper." Three days later Abraham Lincoln's death ended all possibility of realizing his cherished plans for a peaceable reconstruction of the Southern states. Fellow Citizens : We meet this evening, not in sorrow, but in gladness of heart. The evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond, and the surrender of th^ principal insur- gent army, give hope of a righteous and speedy peace, whose joyous expression cannot be restrained. In the midst of this, however, He from whom all blessings flow must not be forgotten. A call for a national thanksgiving is being pre- pared, and will be duly promulgated. Nor must those whose harder part give us the cause of rejoicing be over- looked. Their honors must not be parceled out with others. I myself was near the front, and had the high pleasure of transmitting much of the good news to you ; but no part of the honor for plan or execution is mine. To General Grant, his skillful oflRcers and brave men, all belongs. The gallant navy stood ready, but was not in reach to take active part. By these recent successes the reinauguration of the na- tional authority — reconstruction — which has had a large share of thought from the first, is pressed much more closely upon our attention. It is fraught with great difficulty. Unlike a case of war between independent nations, there is no organized organ for us to treat with — no one man has authority to give up the rebellion for any other man. We simply must begin with and mold from disorganized and dis- cordant elements. Nor is it a small additional embarrass- ment that we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to the mode, manner, and measure of reconstruction. As a general rule, I abstain from reading the reports of attacks upon myself, wishing not to be provoked by that to which I cannot properl}^ offer an answer. In spite of this precau- tion, however, it comes to my knowledge that I am much censured for some supposed agency in setting up and seeking to sustain the new state government of Louisiana. LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1S65 219 In this I have done just so much, and no more than, the pubHc knows. In the annual message of December, 1863, and in the accompanying proclamation, I presented a plan of reconstruction, as the phrase goes, which I prom- ised, if adopted by any state, should be acceptable to and sustained by the executive government of the nation. I distinctly stated that this was not the only plan which might possibly be acceptable, and I also distinctly protested that the executive claimed no right to say when or whether members should be admitted to seats in Congress from such states. This plan was in advance submitted to the then cabinet, and distinctly approved by every member of it. One of them suggested that I should then in that connection apply the Emancipation Proclamation to the theretofore excepted parts of Virginia and Louisiana ; that I should drop the suggestion about apprenticeship for freed people, and that I should omit the protest against my own power in regard to the admission of members to Congress. But even he approved every part and parcel of the plan which has since been employed or touched by the action of Louisiana. The new constitution of Louisiana, declaring emancipa- tion for the whole state, practically applies the proclamation to the part previously excepted. It does not adopt appren- ticeship for freed people, and it is silent, as it could not well be otherwise, about the admission of members to Congress. So that, as it applies to Louisiana, every member of the cabi- net fully approved the plan. The message went to Congress, and I received many commendations of the plan, written and verbal, and not a single objection to it from any pro- fessed emancipationist came to my knowledge until after the news reached Washington that the people of Louisiana had begun to move in accordance with it. From about July, 1862, I had corresponded with different persons supposed to be interested [in] seeking a reconstruction of a state govern- ment for Louisiana. When the message of 1863, with the 220 LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 plan before mentioned, reached New Orleans, General Banks wrote me that he was confident that the people, with his military cooperation, would reconstruct substantially on that plan. I wrote to him and some of them to try it. They tried it, and the result is known. Such has been my only agency in getting up the Louisiana government. As to sustaining it, my promise is out, as before stated. But as bad promises are better broken than kept, I shall treat this as a bad promise, and break it whenever I shall be convinced that keeping it is adverse to pubhc interest ; but I have not yet been so convinced. I have been shown a letter on this subject, supposed to be an able one, in which the writer expresses regret that my mind has not seemed to be definitely fixed upon the question whether the seceded states, so called, are in the Union or out of it. It would perhaps add astonishment to his regret were he to learn that since I have found professed Union men endeavoring to make that question, I have purposely forborne any public expression upon it. As appears to me, that question has not been, nor yet is, a practically material one, and that any discussion of it, while it thus remains practically immaterial, could have no effect other than the mischievous one of dividing our friends. As yet, whatever it may hereafter become, that question is bad as the basis of a controversy, and good for nothing at all — a merely pernicious abstrac- tion. We all agree that the seceded states, so called, are out of their proper practical relation with the Union, and that the sole object of the government, civil and military, in regard to those states, is to again get them into that proper practical relation. I beheve that it is not only possible, but in fact easier, to do this without deciding or even considering whether these states have ever been out of the Union, than with it. Finding themselves safely at home, it would be utterly im- material whether they had ever been abroad. Let us all join in doing the acts necessary to restoring the proper prac- LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 221 tical relations between these states and the Union, and each forever after innocently indulge his own opinion whether in doing the acts he brought the states from without into the Union, or only gave them proper assistance, they never having been out of it. The amount of constituency, so to speak, on which the new Louisiana government rests, would be more satisfactory to all if it contained 50,000, or 30,000, or even 20,000, instead of only about 12,000 as it does. It is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers. Still, the question is not whether the Louisiana govern- ment, as it stands, is quite all that is desirable. The ques- tion is, will it be wiser to take it as it is and help to improve it, or to reject and disperse it .^ Can Louisiana be brought into proper practical relation with the Union sooner by sus- taining or by discarding her new state government ^. Some twelve thousand voters in the heretofore slave state of Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union, assumed to be the rightful political powxr of the state, held elections, or- ganized a state government, adopted a free-state constitu- tion, giving the benefit of public schools equally to black and white, and empowering the legislature to confer the elective franchise upon the colored man. Their legislature has already voted to ratify the constitutional amendment recently passed by Congress, abolishing slavery throughout the nation. These twelve thousand persons are thus fully committed to the Union and to perpetual freedom in the state — committed to the very things, and nearly all the things, the nation wants — and they ask the nation's recognition and its assistance to make good their committal. Now, if we reject and spurn them, we do our utmost to disorganize and disperse them. We, in effect, say to the white man : You are worthless or worse ; we will neither help you, nor be helped by you. To the blacks, we say : 222 LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 This cup of liberty, which these, your old masters, hold to your lips, we will dash from you, and leave you to the chances of gathering the spilled and scattered contents in some vague and undefined when, where, and how. If this course, discouraging and paralyzing both white and black, has any tendency to bring Louisiana into proper, practical relations with the Union, I have so far been unable to per- ceive it. If, on the contrary, we recognize and sustain the new government of Louisiana, the converse of all this is made true. We encourage the hearts and nerve the arms of twelve thousand to adhere to their work, and argue for it, and pros- elyte for it, and fight for it, and feed it, and grow it, and ripen it to a complete success. The colored man, too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and en- ergy, and daring to the same end. Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it than by running back- ward over them ? Concede that the new government of Louisiana is only to what it should be as the egg is to the fowl, we shall sooner have the fowl by hatching the egg than by smashing it. Again, if we reject Louisiana, we also reject one vote in favor of the proposed amendment to the national Consti- tution. To meet this proposition it has been argued that no more than three fourths of those states which have not attempted secession are necessary to validly ratify the amendment. I do not commit myself against this further than to say that such a ratification would be questionable, and sure to be persistently questioned, while a ratification by three fourths of all the states would be unquestioned and unquestionable. I repeat the question : Can Louisiana be brought into proper practical relation with the Union sooner by sustaining or by discarding her new state government ? What has been said of Louisiana will apply generally to other states. And yet so great peculiarities pertain to each state, and such important and sudden changes occur in the same LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1S65 223 state, and withal so new and unprecedented is the whole case, that no exclusive and inflexible plan can safely be prescribed as to details and collaterals. Such exclusive and inflexible plan would surely become a new entanglement. Important principles may and must be inflexible. In the present situa- tion, as the phrase goes, it may be my duty to make some new announcement to the* people of the South. I am con- sidering, and shall not fail to act when satisfied that action will be proper. BIBLIOGRAPHY Andrews, Mary R. S. The Counsel Assigned. The Perfect Tribute. Scribner. Arnold, Isaac N. Life of Abraham Lincoln. McClurg. Bates, David Homer. Lincoln in the Telegraph Office. Century. Beecher, Henry Ward. Addresses in England, iS6j. Binns, Henry Bryan. Abraha?n Lincoln. E. P. Duttcn. Browne, Francis F. Everyday Life of Lincoln. Browne and Howell. Carpenter, F. B. Six Months in the White House. Houghton Mifflin. Carr, Clark E. Lincoln at Gettysburg. McClurg. Hapgood, Norman. Abraham Lincoln, The Man of the People. Macmillan. Herndon,W. H., and Weik, Jesse W. Abraham Lincoln. D.Appleton. Hill, Frederick Trevor. Lincoln the Lawyer. Century. Holland, Josiah Gilbert. Life of Abraham Lificohi. Ketcham, Henry. Life of Abraham Lincoln. Burt. Lowell, James Russell. Commemoration Ode. Essay on Lincoln. Houghton Mifflin. Miller, Marion Mills. The Wisdom of Abraham Lincoln. Wessels. Moores, Charles W. Life of Abraham Lincoln for Boys and Girls. Houghton Mifflin. Morgan, James. Abraham Lincoln, The Boy and The Man. Mac- millan. Morse, John T., Jr. Abraham Lincoln. Houghton Mifflin. Nicolay, John G. A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln. Century. Nicolay, John G., and Hay, John. Abraha^n Lincoln, a History. Writings and Speeches of Abraham Lincoln. Century. Rice, Allen Thorndike. Reminiscences of Lincoln. Harpers. Schurz, Carl. Abraham Lincoln. Tarbell, Ida M. Life of Abraham Lincoln. Macmillan. Whipple, Wayne. The Story-Life of Lincoln. Winston. Whitlock, Brand. Abraham Lincoln. Small, Maynard. Whitman, Walt. Captain, My Captain. When Lilacs last in the Dooryard Bloomed. 224 Hi!